Att vara tillsynsman enligt Första Timotheosbrevet 3:1-7 : En grekisk-romersk ledarskapsinstitution

Sammanfattning: The ecclesiological offices of bishop, priest and deacon holds center stage in the Church of Sweden and many other churches of our time. These offices are often legitimized by references to their scriptural heritage in the New Testament. There is certainly a linguistic connection between “bishop” and the Greek word ἐπίσκοπος, between “priest” and πρεσβύτερος and between “deacon” and διάκονος. The possible connection in meaning between each pair of words is far from obvious, however. Therefore, in this study I investigate what these words meant in their original context.  The purpose of the study is to contribute to the understanding or the function of ἐπίσκοπος according to First Timothy. The research question posed; What knowledge can be obtained in regard to this function and the requirements for becoming an ἐπίσκοπος according to 1 Tim 3:1-7? The study is divided into three parts. The first part surveys current research regarding the three Pastoral Epistles, with a focus on 1 Tim. The second part reviews current research on institutionalization in the Corpus Paulinum. Margret MacDonalds socio-historical study of Institutionalization in the Pauline and deutero-Pauline writings is particularly important. In addition, I review Berger and Luckmanns theory about the social construction of reality alongside Max Weber’s theory about routinized charisma. The third part of the study is a textual analysis of 1 Tim 3:1-7. I conclude that the central theme in 1 Tim 3:1-7 is the position (office or function) of ἐπισκοπή and not the person ἐπίσκοπος. An understanding of ἐπίσκοπος must therefore be consistent with one´s construal of ἐπισκοπή. It is argued that ἐπισκοπή is an institutionalized form of leadership with strong parallels in Greek-Roman moral philosophy. The institution described in 1 Tim 3:1-7 has apparently become quite fixed. Given the Greek-Roman parallels, that institution seems to contain a hierarchical and authoritarian form of leadership – legitimized by moral excellence. Further, 1 Tim 3:1-7 bears no witness to any specifically Christian innovations in leadership.