I want to see if ἐπισκοπὴν (translated office in the ASV) can signify an office of apostle established prior to (or, apart from) Peter’s questionable rule in Acts 1:21, 22 (NET). The Hebrew word is peqûddâh in his quotation from Psalm 109:8b (ASV): And let another take his office (NIV: place of leadership; NET: job). The first occurrence of peqûddâh is in Numbers: Now the head of all the Levitical leaders was Eleazar son of Aaron the priest. He was appointed over (peqûddâh) those who were responsible for the sanctuary[1] (Septuagint: καθεσταμένος φυλάσσειν τὰς φυλακὰς τῶν ἁγίων; literally, “set down to keep watch [or, form into tribes] the watchers [or, those watching] of the holy [Acts 26:10 (NET) of the saints]).
The peqûddâh of Eleazer in Hebrew clearly referenced those who carried around, set up and tore down the items that made up the Tabernacle: The appointed (peqûddâh; Septuagint, ἡ ἐπίσκεψις ἡ φυλακὴ) responsibilities of the Merarites included the frames of the tabernacle, its crossbars, its posts, its sockets, its utensils, plus all the service connected with these things, and the pillars of the courtyard all around, with their sockets, their pegs, and their ropes.[2] The appointed responsibility (peqûddâh; Septuagint, ἐπίσκοπος) of Eleazar son of Aaron the priest is for the oil for the light, and the spiced incense, and the daily grain offering, and the anointing oil; he also has the appointed responsibility (peqûddâh; Septuagint, ἐπισκοπὴ) over all the tabernacle with all that is in it, over the sanctuary and over all its furnishings.[3]
Though the word ἐπισκοπὴν doesn’t occur in the Greek translation of Numbers 3:32 in the Septuagint, “a watcher of the watchers of the holy (or, saints)” sounds very much like what Ms. Eldridge feared a contemporary apostle would do. This is especially true if I consider that in the New Testament φυλακὰς had a dual meaning. There was the benign meaning: Now there were shepherds nearby living out in the field, keeping guard (φυλάσσοντες φυλακὰς) over their flock at night.[4] And there was a less benign meaning: they will seize you and persecute you, handing you over to the synagogues and prisons[5] (φυλακάς). I persecuted this Way, Paul confessed, even to the point of death, tying up both men and women and putting them in prison[6] (φυλακὰς).
In 1 Timothy ἐπισκοπῆς was translated to the office of overseer (NET, but a footnote acknowledged that the Greek is “to oversight”). This saying is trustworthy: “If someone aspires to the office of overseer (ἐπισκοπῆς, another form of ἐπισκοπή), he desires a good work.”[7] The word translated aspires is ὀρέγεται (a form of ὀρέγομαι) and desires is ἐπιθυμεῖ (a form of ἐπιθυμέω), but good is καλοῦ (a form of καλός). It is a beautiful good work as opposed to a pious good work, the φυλακὰς of the beautiful shepherd as opposed to that of the prison guard. What follows then is the legislation that creates the office of overseer (or, oversight), the qualifications of the ἐπίσκοπον (1 Timothy 3:2-7 NET).
The overseer (ἐπίσκοπον, a form of ἐπίσκοπος) then must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, an able teacher, not a drunkard, not violent, but gentle, not contentious, free from the love of money. He must manage his own household well and keep his children in control without losing his dignity. But if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for the church of God? He must not be a recent convert or he may become arrogant and fall into the punishment that the devil will exact. And he must be well thought of by those outside the faith, so that he may not fall into disgrace and be caught by the devil’s trap.
If these men die the common death of all men, Moses said of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, or if they be visited (pâqad) after the visitation (peqûddâh) of all men; then the LORD hath not sent me.[8] The Greek word ἐπισκοπή also carries this idea of visitation. If you had only known on this day, Jesus wept and prophesied over Jerusalem, even you, the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. For the days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and surround you and close in on you from every side. They will demolish you – you and your children within your walls – and they will not leave within you one stone on top of another, because you did not recognize the time of your visitation (ἐπισκοπῆς, another form of ἐπισκοπή) from God.[9] I urge you, Peter wrote, as foreigners and exiles to keep away from fleshly desires that do battle against the soul, and maintain good conduct among the non-Christians (ἔθνεσιν, a form of ἔθνος), so that though they now malign you as wrongdoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God when he appears (ἐν ἡμέρᾳ ἐπισκοπῆς, KJV and ASV, in the day of visitation).[10]
Taken together I would say that the itinerant ἀπόστολος is an ἐπίσκοπος, one who fills the ἐπισκοπῆς, the office of overseer clearly authorized by legislation in 1 Timothy 3:2-7. What is not at all clear is that the ἐπίσκοπος is necessarily an ἀπόστολος. Watch out for yourselves, Paul said to the elders (πρεσβυτέρους, a form of πρεσβύτερος) of the church at Ephesus,[11] and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers (ἐπισκόπους, another form of ἐπίσκοπος), to shepherd the church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son.[12] Does that sound like Paul was addressing fellow apostles? Or was he functioning as a watcher of the watchers of the saints? I’m prepared to say that a πρεσβύτερος is an ἐπίσκοπος, but is he an ἀπόστολος?
By the way, the word Son was added by the translators. The Greek is διὰ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ ἰδίου. The note in the NET reads: “Or ‘with his own blood’; Grk ‘with the blood of his own.’ The genitive construction could be taken in two ways: (1) as an attributive genitive (second attributive position) meaning ‘his own blood’; or (2) as a possessive genitive, ‘with the blood of his own.’ In this case the referent is the Son, and the referent has been specified in the translation for clarity. See further C. F. DeVine, ‘The Blood of God,’ CBQ 9 (1947): 381-408.”
A πρεσβύτερος is an ἐπίσκοπος who could be appointed by men like Titus (Titus 1:5-9 NET):
The reason I left you in Crete was to set in order the remaining matters and to appoint elders (πρεσβυτέρους, a form of πρεσβύτερος) in every town, as I directed you. An elder must be blameless, the husband of one wife, with faithful children who cannot be charged with dissipation or rebellion. For the overseer[13] (ἐπίσκοπον, a form of ἐπίσκοπος) must be blameless as one entrusted with God’s work, not arrogant, not prone to anger, not a drunkard, not violent, not greedy for gain. Instead he must be hospitable, devoted to what is good, sensible, upright, devout, and self-controlled (ἐγκρατῆ, a form of ἐγκρατής). He must hold firmly to the faithful message as it has been taught, so that he will be able to give exhortation in such healthy teaching and correct those who speak against it.
Yet Peter called the glorified Christ an ἐπίσκοπος: For you were going astray like sheep but now you have turned back to the shepherd and guardian (ἐπίσκοπον, a form of ἐπίσκοπος) of your souls.[14] It would be handy to ignore the circumstances of Peter’s legislation and consider an ἀπόστολος a special class of ἐπίσκοπος as he described him (Acts 1:21, 22 NET):
…one of the men who have accompanied (συνελθόντων, a form of συνέρχομαι) us during all the time the Lord Jesus associated with us, beginning from his baptism by John until the day he was taken up from us…
While I think that an ἀπόστολος is a special class of ἐπίσκοπος, I’m not convinced these words establish the class. Paul was not one of the men who accompanied the disciples beginning from his baptism by John until the day he was taken up from them, but he clearly claimed to be an ἀπόστολος in his signature at the beginning of the letter to the Romans (Romans 1:1 NET): From Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle (ἀπόστολος), set apart for the gospel of God. Yet Paul admitted that his apostleship was questioned by some (1 Corinthians 9:1, 2 NET): Am I not free? Am I not an apostle (ἀπόστολος)? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? If I am not an apostle (ἀπόστολος) to others, at least I am to you, for you are the confirming sign of my apostleship (ἀποστολῆς, a form of ἀποστολή) in the Lord.
It seems possible and even likely that Peter’s legislation was accepted as legitimate at the time. So I’m left with a decision: Is Peter’s legislation in Scripture because it is legitimate? Or is it there to show the folly of acting apart from the Holy Spirit? I think it demonstrates the folly of acting apart from the Holy Spirit. Ms. Eldridge seemed to assume that if it was spoken by an apostle and in the book of Acts it is legitimate.[15]
The following shows us the requirements of the replacement for Judas:
Acts 1:21-26, “Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become A WITNESS WITH US OF HIS RESURRECTION.”
Have I not seen (ἑόρακα, a form of ὁράω) Jesus our Lord? Paul asked rhetorically. Jesus, after his resurrection, appeared (ὤφθη, another form of ὁράω) to Cephas [Peter], Paul wrote to the Corinthians, then to the twelve [apparently accepting Matthias as one of them]. Then he appeared (ὤφθη, another form of ὁράω) to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared (ὤφθη, another form of ὁράω) to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as though to one born at the wrong time, he appeared (ὤφθη, another form of ὁράω) to me also.[16]
Could seeing the resurrected Lord Jesus distinguish an ἀπόστολος as a special class of ἐπίσκοπος? I think this was Ms. Eldridige’s actual point. She seemed to ignore the requirements Peter proposed to become a witness of his resurrection together with us, and highlighted A WITNESS WITH US OF HIS RESURRECTION instead. “The apostles claimed to be eyewitnesses,” she continued. I’ll pick that up in the next essay.
[9] Luke 19:42-44 (NET) The words from God were added by the translators.
[11] Acts 20:17 (NET)
Pingback: Fear – Numbers, Part 4 | The Gospel and the Religious Mind
Pingback: Apostles and Prophets, Part 1 | The Gospel and the Religious Mind
Pingback: My Reasons and My Reason, Part 6 | The Gospel and the Religious Mind