posted
Yes, there is even a denomination of Christians whose name means eldership. At one time in American history, it was one of the largest denominations. King George therefore called the American Revolution the Presbyterian Revolution.
Yet, there is far less consensus on eldership among Presbyterians than most are aware. For example, the Westminster Assembly refused 1 Tim 5:17 as a proof text for ruling and teaching elders. Selden and Lightfoot, the greatest Hebraists of that era, were both against it in the present accepted context.
Samuel Miller wrote a book about the divine warrant of the ruling eldership in the 1800’s. That book was refuted by Thomas Witherow of Ireland, James P Wilson of Philadelphia, and Thomas Smyth of Charleston, SC. Peter C Campbell of Scotland also answered Miller’s book. By “answered,” I mean he demolished the theory of dual eldership.
Another anomaly which strikes me is that in many of the Presby writings, even to this day, the word “minister” refers to the teaching elder. The word, of course, means servant or deacon, which is regarded by them as a “lower” office. This despite the admonition of our Lord that we must all be deacons in order to be "great" in the Kingdom.
All elders are to be apt to teach, btw.
Yet another strange thing: If 1 Tim 5:17 envisions ruling elders, why are not ruling elders paid the double honor, so prescribed?
Email this page to someone.
