Cheryl Schatz

NN,
You said:

You are quite right about what word Paul uses (epikaleoe) and what its meaning was in Roman empire jurisprudence (e.g. “to appeal”). However, to make this appeal, Paul had to have authority/claim as a Roman colonial citizen. Many others would not have had the authority/right to do this.

Once again you are making the “claim” that the Greek word for claim means authority and this is not correct. Why do you continue to do this?

The word is not used in the Acts text. I was simply pointing out the fact that the right to make a claim upon the rulership does not negate that rulership.

But because your “claim” is that the meaning of authority is in the Acts text, your claim that rulership does not negate rulership is invalid from the text you are claiming proves this.

Again, I have made no claim that hierarchy is necessitated by this passage. I merely point out that this passage is not incompatible with the idea of hierarchy.

It isn’t necessitated and there isn’t even a breath of hierarchy in the passage which is why hierarchists seem to avoid the passage.

So are you going to share your personal view? What position do you hold to?