“If he did then he should know that in no place does the Holy Spirit cal NT pastors “priests,”
You really think that is properly termed theology? That is a time-wasting, nonsensical irrelevancy.
“while the use of priest is defended by the use of an etymological fallacy, since “priest” etymologically is derived from presbyteros due to imposed functional equivalence.”
And on you go with silliness intended to divert and waste a person’s intellectual energy on the question of whether a word in a language not even extant at the time of Paul is the etymological equivalent of a Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic word that he might have used.
And all, you hope, without alerting anyone to the fact that it doesn’t matter in the least.
You can only wish it was not part of "properly termed theology," but is "nonsensical irrelevancy" to your assertion that a priest has "superior knowledge of theology," but the fact is that the issue of "priests" is indeed part of theology, that of pastoral theology, which
is a branch of practical theology; it is essentially a practical science. All branches of theology, whether theoretical or practical, purpose in one way or another to make priests "the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God" (1 Corinthians 4:1). - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14611a.htm
And it is due to the theology of the priesthood of Catholicism that women priests are excluded, and the role of extraordinary ministers defined.
Moreover, the aspect of distinctively titling NT pastors "priests" is central to RC theology, as the main reason they are called priests is based upon the premise that the central act of the Church is the celebration of the Eucharist, and that ordination into the priesthood "confers on a man the power of consecrating and offering the body and blood of Christ, and of remitting and retaining sins," a priest being one who is "an authorized mediator who offers a true sacrifice in acknowledgment of God's supreme dominion over human beings and in expiation for their sins." - http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/priesthd/priesthd.htm)
As R. J. Grigaitis (O.F.S.) states while also trying to defend the use of priest - states:
"The Greek word for this office is ‘ιερευς (hiereus), which can be literally translated into Latin as sacerdos. First century Christians [such as the inspired writers] felt that their special type of hiereus (sacerdos) was so removed from the original that they gave it a new name, presbuteros (presbyter). Unfortunately, sacerdos didn't evolve into an English word, but the word priest took on its definition." http://grigaitis.net/weekly/2007/2007-04-27.html
Catholic writer Greg Dues in “Catholic Customs & Traditions, a popular guide” states,
"Priesthood as we know it in the Catholic church was unheard of during the first generation of Christianity, because at that time priesthood was still associated with animal sacrifices in both the Jewish and pagan religions."
"When the Eucharist came to be regarded as a sacrifice [after Rome's theology], the role of the bishop took on a priestly dimension. By the third century bishops were considered priests. Presbyters or elders sometimes substituted for the bishop at the Eucharist. By the end of the third century people all over were using the title 'priest' (hierus in Greek and sacerdos in Latin) for whoever presided at the Eucharist."
And this relates to the issue of Anglican priesthood as "Leo XIII in pronouncing Anglican order to be invalid did so on the basis of an argument that the sacerdotal function of priests in relation to the Eucharist was the central aspect of priesthood." - http://anglicaneucharistictheology.com/Anglican_Eucharistic_Theology/Case_Studies/Entries/2006/2/21_Saepius_Officio.html
Yet you dismiss the issue of distinctively titling NT pastors "priests" as not being part of what is "properly termed theology," but is "nonsensical irrelevancy," and which avoids the fact that the Holy Spirit never calls the pastors of the NT church "priest" ( “hiereus”), and that the only priesthood in the NT church is that of the general priesthood (hierateuma) of all believers, as they all function as priests, offering both gifts and sacrifices response to being forgiven of sins, in thanksgiving and service to God and for others. (1Pt. 2:5,9; Rm. 12:1; 15:16; Phil. 2:17; 4:18; Heb. 13:15,16; cf. 9:9)
Nor do we see the primary function of NT pastors as being that of dispensing physical food to be eaten to gain spiritual and eternal life, or the Lord's supper otherwise being manifest in Acts or the rest of the NT, interpretive of the gospels, being the "the source and summit of the Christian life," upon which all else revolves in which "the work of our redemption is accomplished."
And instead, in the only place that the Lord's supper is manifestly mentioned in the life of the church then this "feast of charity" is a communal meal in which the church is the focus as the body of Christ that needed to be recognized, by showing the Lord's death in their sharing of the communal meal. (1Cor. 11:17ff)
And if you try to argue otherwise, you will see even more how much titling NT pastors as "priests" is part of what is "properly termed theology."
A vain attempt indeed.