On the Job Training
Oh, duh, thanks, well, at least I was close... :smilewinkgrin:
Last edited by a moderator:
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
On the Job Training
Paul is not a "NT model' for education. His purpose in his education was not for the ministry it was to be a Pharisee. And there is no indication that God called him because of it. The disciples had none other than OJT. Having said that I believe God calls men with a boat load of education and some with little to none, one just the same as the other.
I also believe a pastor should pursue all the education that is reasonable and within his grasp.
Paul's education and knowledge of the scriptures served him well, since he wrote nearly 1/2 of the New Testament. No one said or suggested he was called because of his education. He was chosen from the womb, before his education.
How about Paul's exegetical efforts, for example a righteous man lives by faith alone. Are we to study to show ourselves approved, rightly dividing the word of truth. Did not Paul tell us to model him? As for me, Paul is a model of a disciple of Christ, who continued to study and to explain God's word.
Van said:Paul had training as a Pharisee, so well studied Pastors are certainly modeled in the NT.
RevM said:Paul is not a "NT model' for education.
Our bylaws do not state either position. Over the years, we have never denied anyone participation in the Lord's Supper. There is a minority position in our congregation of closed, but open is practiced. It has never been an issue of division.So is your church open or closed communion?
So you are saying Luke and Acts together contain more writings than the other three Gospels, Romans, the Epistles, Jude, letters of Peter and John, Hebrews, and Revelation?Just to be fair to the facts... Paul did not write nearly 50% of the NT. In fact, the majority was written by Luke (good friend of Paul)
And also to be fair, I think the way it was stated was very well said... "well studied Pastors are certainly modeled in the NT."
I mean what I said, Luke-Acts is the majority of the NT (like 30%). It was meant to be jovial since it had nothing to do with this thread. But it is still true. Luke (assuming Lukan authorship for Luke-Acts) makes up the majority of the NT. And if Luke also had a hand in Hebrews (as either the author or amanuensis) then that adds further.So you are saying Luke and Acts together contain more writings than the other three Gospels, Romans, the Epistles, Jude, letters of Peter and John, Hebrews, and Revelation?
...
I might need to be corrected, ....
which is under Luke's 35% or soPaul wrote 13 of the 27 books of the NT, or nearly half of the New Testament books. However, based on word count Paul wrote only 31% of the New Testament.
Which translation, or manuscript, is being used for the word count? Who has the time to count those words? Who decided? Why?