[cityonahill]

YP, You just brought up an interesting subject...this last semester in my "prison epistles" class, I was blown away to read some the facts about the Pauline letters...I can verify what you are saying.(i guess this isn't about asia leaving paul anymore...)

Such as, in 1 and 2 Timothy, there were words used that weren't around till 200 AD....now this could just have been lost in translation, but I doubt it...it's a little suspicious. The language and style of 1 and 2 Timothy is roughly 80% different to other Pauline letters. That's just a fact.

Also, "Ephesians" was not written to the church in Ephesus. It was believed to have been a general message passed around Asia Minor..."ephesus" was added after 325AD...

Regarding leadership,Philippians is considered to be definately Pauline...no debate about it! It could not have been in error...Paul's purpose in writing it was a letter of encouragement rather than correction...

In light of our discussion, I find this passage interesting...I believe it definately denotes a hierarchy of "apostles" "bishops/overseers" "deacons" and then "saints."

Philippians 1
1Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:

Overall, I believe that it was not an error to appoint "elders" or "deacons" or whatever you call it. I believe the error was in the human desire to "lead" rather than submitting to God's leadership while leading.

Leaders are practical. It's too easy to just pass the buck around and not take responsibility...We've all seen that communism isn't the best form of government. Not for a nation, and not for the church.

Question: What's the difference between a "bishop" and a "deacon"?