Cheirotoneó: to vote by stretching out the hand, to appoint
Original Word: χειροτονέω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: cheirotoneó
Phonetic Spelling: (khi-rot-on-eh'-o)
Definition: to vote by stretching out the hand, to appoint
Usage: I elect by show of hands, choose by vote, appoint.
HELPS Word-studies
5500 xeirotonéō – properly, stretch out the hands
to commission (send forth).
[
5500 (
xeirotonéō) literally means, "'I stretch out the hand,' thus expressing agreement with a motion, then, 'I elect by show of hands' [of popular vote]), 'I elect' " (Souter); properly, 'to vote by stretching out the hand' (practised in the assembly, so Athenian, Lucian, Plutarch)" (
Abbott-Smith).]
Our modern understanding of appoint is different than this word. Expressing agreement with an idea is not the same as establishing a hierarchical authority structure conveying subsequent authority to grant or deny power.
In our modern understanding (or at least mine), you cannot appoint someone unless you have the authority to grant authority, and likewise to take that appointment back from the person. This is not how scripture portrays the appointment of these elders.
The proper understanding would be simple acknowledgement of those already operating in the faithfulness by which they are now recognized.
presbuteros: elder
Original Word: πρεσβύτερος, α, ον
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: presbuteros
Phonetic Spelling: (pres-boo'-ter-os)
Definition: elder
Usage: elder, usually used as subst.; an elder, a member of the Sanhedrin, an elder of a Christian assembly.
HELPS Word-studies
4245 presbýteros – properly, a
mature man having seasoned judgment (experience); an
elder.
The NT specifies elders are
men. (The feminine singular,
presbytera, never occurs in the Bible.)
[The feminine plural,
presbyteras, occurs in 1 Tim 5:2. It refers to
aged women, i.e. not women with an official church office or title.]
I'm a major stickler for going to God's word to obtain the definition, and to examine myself to see if my understanding is hindered or twisted away from His definition. If it is, I immediately cut away the excess, make my definition conform to His, and go from there.
So to answer Steve's question of:
His age and maturity make him an elder. An officially recognized "elder" in the ecclesia would be one of those grey headed old men that the fellow believers affirm is both old and wise, as well as aligning with the list of criteria for a recognized "elder". Despite having a smidgen of grey in my beard, I do not count as an elder no matter how handsome and wise I am. I am prevented from being recognized as an elder because I'm not a wise old man yet,
EVEN if I met the other criteria. You can't call a 20 year old an elder even if they meet the other criteria. To do so would be to throw out all the context and historical usage of the word "elder". Let's be careful to not get into minutia about the list of criteria and neglect to consider the base word. An elder is
first and foremost an
old man, grey with wisdom.
Where do you find that Paul has a delegated power? Didn't he simply agree with the believers in Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch about their choices in the best old men?
They either are or aren't old men, they either are or aren't conformed to the list of qualifications set forth. Although I doubt this constitutes authority but rather describes a man of character. And since this isn't a "position" of power, is there anything to appoint in the western meaning of appoint? No. There's only a comparison to a Godly standard and to check to see if the dude has wrinkles and isn't a stupid young buck.
I imagine it might have looked somewhat like this:
Paul: "Let's see, we have a handful of old dudes here, who all meets this short list of requirements? 5? Ok local body of believers, these guys are your old guys? Barnabas and I agree, these seem like fine old dudes, you guys should continue listening to their wisdom. Carry on." They
xeirotonéō-ed (agreed with or voted alongside the church) to
recognize these old dudes as being in their proper
function as a presbuteros
.
I can't get behind the idea that Paul showed up in all his God given glory and might and said, "Ok church, here's your new leaders, I pick Bob, Chuck, and Dave. Why? Because God gave me the almighty priestly power and authority to assign people to this power and position over you"
While I agree with your overall sentiment and the heart behind your position, I take exception to the idea that Paul had some divinely appointed power to appoint leaders.
Additionally I find no real merit to the idea that these are "positions" that are appointed with power and authority but merely functions of people gifted or otherwise naturally and inherently more disposed to operate in a certain way. Nobody appoints an old man as an old man. He simply is one. He might be recognized for his wisdom and honor, but nobody gives him some special title that conveys authority and power over any other.
I could be making a mountain of a molehill or misunderstanding the men here, if so I apologize if I'm accidentally misconstruing your position. I just don't like that word "appoint". The connotation is much more officious and power conveyance than I think scripture bears out.
Now I'm wondering if I should just delete or possibly eat crow... I've eaten it before, been a while, could always use a refresher in the taste I suppose...