How can that which was grafted become the main vine? The graft either becomes incorporated into the vine or kills it and takes over.
Both “presbyteros”, priest and “episcopos”, bishop occur in the New Testament in numerous places...But more important is the question not of terminology but of function...The foundational verse for Christian priesthood is "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me" (Luke 22:19)...This establishes Christian ministerial priesthood: men consecrated to offer the sacrifice of Christ to their flock.
With all due respect, Alex, that is pure nonsense. I don't even want to go into this, because it would be tangential the topic, but suffice it to say that Chrstian priesthood evolved.
The Greek word for priest, Alex, is ἱερεύς (hierus), and you know that. One way or another, the word appears in the NT 30 times. It is a title for the one who offers sacrifices (the one who was to burn incense, as per Luke 1:9), and the priest's office or priesthood, is known as ἱερατεία (hierateia).
The difference is that the New Testament writers associated the terms priest(hood) with Jewish priest(hood), and did not think of their Apostles, and later of their elders (seniores in Latin translations, i.e. seniors) as being a "continuation" of Aaronic priesthood.
The ealriest Christians *and that certainly includes the Apostles) were still Jews, and in Judaism the priesthood is associated only with the Temple in Jerusalem and was an inherited tribal brithright and not a temporal appointment.
Clearly, then, no ordinary Jew, unless he was a Levi, could pretend to be a priest, and as far as I know, none of the 13 was a Levi. But anyone could offer thanks. That doesn't make one a priest!
Thus, offering thanks (as rabbis do at Seder) is not to be confused with offering sacrifice, or confusing rabbis with priests.
The fusion of the Christian presbyters with priestly fucntions of offering an actual sacrifice is a later development in the Church and not part of the pre-Jamnia Church.
Early Christians, being Jews, were not offering sacrifices, as that would have been contrary to their Jewish religious beliefs, and probably sufficient reason to be stoned to death.
That's why they call the Eucharist the "breaking of the bread" and do not speak of it as a "sacrifice" anywhere in the New Testament.
Of course, as the manuscript dates get closer and closer to the second century, so do New Testament concepts begin to change and attain their more familiar derived Christian meaning. That's why it is only in 1 Pet 2:5 that we see introduction of the "spiritual priesthood" and "spiritual sacrifice" (how convenient).
As for prebyteros not meaning "elder", you know you are not telling thew truth, Alex, because you know Greek (as well as Kolo, by his own admission). You know, then, that presbys means elderly and that the one who is presbys is older then the rest. Therefore, the Latin translation of presbyteros as senior is spot on!
As for episkopos not meaning "senior" you are right. Epi simply means "over" and skopos means "watchmen" — therefore, an "over-seer," or a Latin (literal) equivalent "super-visor" (from vision), one who is put in charge to make sure all tings are done right, a manager, one charged with overseeing things, a senior member in a work group.
Neither term means a "priest" directly or indirectly, and does not imply priestly duties. Priesthood was limited to the Temple in Jerusalem. Having a clear contextual picture of the environment in which the early church operated is crucial to unbderstahding how things evolved, Alex. Sometimes, the reality does not match the official truth or the myth that was either created or took hold on its own.
The early Christians attended service in synagogues (until they were thrown out of them, most probably following Jamnia's rejection of Christianity as a Jewish sect, at the end of the first century). You don't think they were making Eucharistic sacrifices in the synagogues, do you!?!
Paul never talks about making Eucharistic sacrifices. Why do you think that is, Alex? Neither does Mark, Matthew or John.
Christianity evolved. It's not something that just happened. The Church on day one in 33 AD would not have been the Catholic Church as we know it, theologically, ecclesiastically or ritually. Neither would its elders be the kind of hierarchy we see today. It's apples and oranges.
That is for Hebrew priests, who are in your colorful language, "killed and taken over". Our priests are presbyters.
“That’s why it is only in 1 Pet 2:5 that we see introduction of the “spiritual priesthood” and “spiritual sacrifice” (how convenient).”
I think that was a very Jewish idea Peter offered...
Hsa 6:6 For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings.
Psa 50:14 “Offer to God a sacrifice of thanksgiving, and perform your vows to the Most High,
Psa 50:23 “The one who offers thanksgiving as his sacrifice glorifies me; to one who orders his way rightly I will show the salvation of God!”
Psa 116:17 I will offer to you the sacrifice of thanksgiving and call on the name of the Lord .