Ask A Protestant

  • Thread starter Thread starter grantklentzman1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ArchStanton said:
in this passage he compares them to the rebellion of Korah and their subsequent punishment
Click to expand...
He also compares them to Cain (Gen 4:5-8) and those that followed Balaam (Numbers 22:5-7, 2 Peter 2:15) . What all three of them had in common was their motivation to rebel against God. They were all dissatisfied with the place thy occupied as so they engaged in rebellion against God.

Jude wasn’t talking about people claiming to be priest but were not. He was talking about people who 8 Yet in like manner these people also, relying on their dreams, defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious ones.
 
I have shown you the verses but I am not sure you have had time to digest them.
 
ArchStanton said:
I have shown you the verses but I am not sure you have had time to digest them.
Click to expand...
Jude was using an Old Testament example of rebellion (actually three) to make a point. He wasn’t saying that we still have a Levitical Priesthood and still have Priest in the New Covenant.
 
lanman87 said:
Jude was using an Old Testament example of rebellion (actually three) to make a point. He wasn’t saying that we still have a Levitical Priesthood and still have Priest in the New Covenant.
Click to expand...
You have gone from not seeing the verse in Jude, to not seeing the connection with Numbers [Korah], to your own personal interpretation in a matter of minutes.

It makes me wonder if you are here to learn or to argue points. I mentioned several other verses [ James 5:14-15; John 20:23; 2 Cor 5:18] as examples…and a warning has value! [Jude]

Blessings!
 
Last edited:
ArchStanton said:
It makes me wonder if you are here to learn or to argue points.
Click to expand...
I just gave out what I was taught when asked to explain my views. You replied and I’ve further tried to explain my views.

As for your other three versus. James 5:14-15 used the word Elder, an Elder is not a Priest, they are a leader or overseer. They do not offer sacrifices or mediate. 2 Cor 5:18 is speaking about the duty of all Christians, not a specific priesthood. John 20:23 is saying that the Apostles had the ability to declare that someone has been someone forgiven or have not been forgiven. Only God forgives sins. What this is saying is that as then went out preaching the Gospel and people responding in faith and repentance they could confidently tell them “Your sins are forgiven” and if they rejected the message they could confidently tell them they haven’t been forgiven.

As Dallas Theological Seminary Professor Ron Rhodes put it…

Only God can judicially forgive sins committed against Him (Mark 2:7). All John 20:23 is saying is that when people respond positively to the gospel and accept it, we have the right to declare to them, “Your sins are forgiven,” based on the promise of Jesus. Likewise, when people respond negatively to the gospel and reject it, we have the right to declare to them, “Your sins are not forgiven,” based on the promise of Jesus. We are simply declaring or announcing heaven’s verdict regarding what will happen if people respond one way or the other in regard to Christ. Further, the context of the verse indicates that this declarative power is not limited to some select group (like priests), but every Christian has this right. After all, every single believer is a priest before God (1 Peter 2:5,9).
 
Last edited:
ArchStanton said:
You have gone from not seeing the verse in Jude, to not seeing the connection with Numbers [Korah], to your own personal interpretation in a matter of minutes.
Click to expand...
Hi there.

With all due respect that paragraph is a bit unfair. And also what followed as a personal attack. Unless you can respond with a reference from some Vatican source it is pretty much your own personal interpretation as well. And even then it can be argued to be a personal interpretation.

Maybe just keep it civil and realise it can all be pretty much argued to be “what we understand from it” as lanman is doing.

Regards
 
Last edited:
Can you show me an example in Acts or any other New Testament book of someone going to a Priest in order to confess their sins?

The New Testament call all believers Priest (1 Peter 2, 5 & 9), who offer spiritual sacrifices. We no longer go to Priest for physical sacrifices.

In the Levitical Priesthood only Priest had access to the the throne of Grace.

However, now we all, as Priest under the Great High Priest, have access to the Throne of Grace directly, without the need of someone between us and God. Hebrews 4:16
 
If you read the posts prior, you would see that the verse in Jude was not ‘obvious’ as well as the connection to Numbers… I don’t mind conversation, but when an answer comes out rapidly to some ‘new’ line of thought,…

Blessings!
 
It does not excuse the cheap shot of claiming personal interpretation (as is done so many times here) without realising the elephant in the room which in this case is rather large and obvious. I am sure you understand. And then questioning a posters willing to learn just because it is not “that obvious”.
 
Last edited:
ArchStanton said:
You have gone from not seeing the verse in Jude, to not seeing the connection with Numbers [Korah], to your own personal interpretation in a matter of minutes.
Click to expand...
I’ve read some other Catholic apologist say that this verse is a “hint” that there was a Priesthood. I would say that they are having an association fallacy. Thinking that because Jude used this example of Korah and his group wanting to be Priest under the Levitical Priesthood that a priesthood existed when Jude wrote this letter and that people where attempting to be these “new priest” without God’s calling or blessing.

Unless you can show that Jude was specifically speaking about a current priesthood then this argument is full of speculation and has no merit.
 
Do you honestly not get what I was saying? Come on… that is the question of a new poster. But okay. I will play along. Should I post it point wise? The thing about personal interpretation that you so brazenly accused someone of.
 
lanman87 said:
As Dallas Theological Seminary Professor Ron Rhodes put it…

Only God can judicially forgive sins committed against Him (Mark 2:7). All John 20:23 is saying is that when people respond positively to the gospel and accept it, we have the right to declare to them, “Your sins are forgiven,” based on the promise of Jesus. Likewise, when people respond negatively to the gospel and reject it, we have the right to declare to them, “Your sins are not forgiven,” based on the promise of Jesus. We are simply declaring or announcing heaven’s verdict regarding what will happen if people respond one way or the other in regard to Christ. Further, the context of the verse indicates that this declarative power is not limited to some select group (like priests), but every Christian has this right. After all, every single believer is a priest before God (1 Peter 2:5,9).
Click to expand...
Ambrose of Milan

We saw the prince of priests coming to us, we saw and heard him offering his blood for us. We follow, inasmuch as we are able, being priests, and we offer the sacrifice on behalf of the people. Even if we are of but little merit, still, in the sacrifice, we are honorable. Even if Christ is not now seen as the one who offers the sacrifice, nevertheless it is he himself that is offered in sacrifice here on earth when the body of Christ is offered. Indeed, to offer himself he is made visible in us, he whose word makes holy the sacrifice that is offered ( Commentaries on twelve Psalms of David 38:25 [A.D. 389 ]).
 
ArchStanton said:
I have no need of conversation after the second ‘play’

Blessings!
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I knew you understood! I’m not in a playful mood either.

Do you mind if I take part in other topics here on this thread that have not been resolved?

Take care!
 
Last edited:
ArchStanton said:
Ambrose of Milan
Click to expand...
Something being believed almost 400 years after the birth of Christ doesn’t mean it was believed by Jude or was taught by the Apostles. Ambrose is showing that a Priesthood developed during the first 300-400 years of the church, not that a separate priesthood was the intention of the Apostles or part of the Gospel message.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top