It is the intention of this section to introduce that the emphasis of the text of scripture is on the oversight of souls (individuals) not the oversight of an organization as one would expect in a business corporation. Unfortunately, some translations use the word “ordained” which is used today in an ecclesiastical sense. In commenting on the problem of authority in Diotrephes recorded in 3 John, Robert Grant writes, “…the situation is one in which the organization of the communities was not determined. It reflects, in fact, the need for a clearly defined structure.”He believed in the transition from apostles, prophets, and teachers to bishops and deacons in an official capacity and that the Didache, writing compiled in the latter half of the first century, is evidence of a necessary movement to develop its organization. Most of the older and more recent studies maintain that there is no break in practice or doctrine and that John’s Revelation, written in 96 AD and the Epistle of Clement would not have been more than a few months apart. Comparing both the New Testament and the early church Fathers, it is believed that the church organization had ordained bishops who were to be respected and obeyed.
This book has advocated for a simple plan to equip the saints through the gifted men of Ephesians 4 and that these gifts were contemporary with each other and peculiar to the last days. Since this was the work of the Holy Spirit, there was no hierarchy ordaining one to an office of power. The only pattern has Paul sending co-workers who had spiritual gifts to various cities to equip the saints while selecting and preparing shepherds to continue while they moved on to other cities. Furthermore, the text requires the consistent application of all gifts for the same purpose and duration. They are listed together in Ephesians 4 and their work of teaching overlapped. Since Titus was to teach like the elders are to teach and since they were given the responsibility to “ordain” elders, then they have the same responsibility and work until shepherds take over.
Therefore, we are left with another necessary conclusion. If there is such a thing as congregational oversight of elders, then there must be also a congregational oversight of evangelists before the elders were appointed and an appointment by those same evangelists. Given the task of Titus as teacher and pattern setter, if he had the power to ordain elders to a position of authority, then he had to have been in a position of authority to grant it. Among those who espouse this view, we must admit that in the context of local church organizations, it is a reasonable conclusion.
However, nothing in the Bible shows that God’s design was to grant congregational oversight to either evangelists or elders. By “congregational,” I mean a local institution arranged as a corporate business entity. Though both are to teach, neither were to occupy an official position in an organization. If one considers the possibility that oversight is applied to individuals rather than a corporate body, then elders oversee souls as the Bible specifies. That can be accomplished without any congregational arrangement but if they are given the oversight of the business affairs of the local church organization, then there is an official position of authority and a title of office to go with it. To get there, however, it must be proven that the ekklesia is something other than a family of individuals under the oversight of spiritual shepherds who labor among them day by day.