E
emmanouil
Guest
the deal for second Pope was closed with a green handshake
- Status
E
emmanouil
Guest
Did you know that an Italian was first selected to replace John Paul II.His name is Francesco Sicola. He had to turn down the job because he was too busy with his soft drink business.
I
inkaneer
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
Sorry, Calling me a DUDE does not help and I answered this before. This is poor exegesis on your part. You are inserting the word ‘Apostle’ into the scriptures where it does not exist.
Not much of a response to the scriptures presented. Who were the eleven who stood up with Peter? You have no answer for this.
Are you dense? I answered this before. Scripture does not tell us that the eleven were all Apostles. It just calls them “the eleven.” Just as in Acts 1:26 where it says Mattias was numbered among the eleven Apostles. If he was tyhe twelfth Apostle should not scripture say He was “numbered among the twelve Apostles”? Why is there still eleven APostles after Mattias is elelcted? Luke, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit goes to great lengths to not call Matthias an Apostle.
Originally Posted by inkaneer
Sorry, Calling me a DUDE does not help and I answered this before. This is poor exegesis on your part. You are inserting the word ‘Apostle’ into the scriptures where it does not exist.
Not much of a response to the scriptures presented. Who were the eleven who stood up with Peter? You have no answer for this.
Are you dense? I answered this before. Scripture does not tell us that the eleven were all Apostles. It just calls them “the eleven.” Just as in Acts 1:26 where it says Mattias was numbered among the eleven Apostles. If he was tyhe twelfth Apostle should not scripture say He was “numbered among the twelve Apostles”? Why is there still eleven APostles after Mattias is elelcted? Luke, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit goes to great lengths to not call Matthias an Apostle.
Where have you been? I already made the case and backed it with scripture. Here is an idea. Why don’t you do a little research on this thread and read what I have already posted. You can start on Page 1 with post #15. Post # 20 provides the scriptural evidenciary proof that you want. Add to that Revelation 4:4 which speaks of the 24 elders which the church has always interpreted as the 12 OT patriarchs and the 12 Apostles and Revelation 21:14 which speaks of the 12 Apostles of the lamb. We are talking of the Twelve Apostles. Jesus sent out seventy disciples which the Eastern churches call the “minor apostles”. Obviously anyone who is sent meets the criteria of being an apostle for that is what the term means. However, we are talking about Jesus’ twelve Apostles and to be included in this group one must meet two criteria. 1. He must be called by Christ and 2. he must have been sent by Christ. Judas was called by Christ but was never sent since he died before the sending of the Apostles in Mt 28:19-20. Matthias was never called by Christ nor sent by Christ. He only replaced Judas. Therefore he cannot be something that Judas never was. Paul, on the other hand was called by Christ and sent by Christ. Paul is the twelth Apostle. You can’t have 14 Apostles when scripture limits the number to only 12 as Revelation 4:4 and 21:14 clearly do. Mt 19:28 backs that up. The Church also teaches there are twelve Apostles.
I
inkaneer
Guest
Why ask me why the church does something. Here’s an idea. Why not ask the church why they do what they do. Why for instance did the church celebrate the feastday of St. Christopher and extoll his merits as the “christ bearer” and then drop him like a hot potato when they discovered St. Christopher existed only in legend and myth. Was the church right in celebrating all those centuries someone who never existed?
Not really. All I have seen is people digging in their heels. I have yet to see someone post where the Church has dogmatically stated Matthias was an Apostle. I have yet to see some show me where scripture definitely says Matthias was an Apostle. I have yet to see where anyone can show me why there can be fourteen Apostles when the Church and scripture both say there were only twelve. Now, outside of that what evidence are you speaking about?
I
inkaneer
Guest
Originally Posted by inkaneer
Nor do I know why the church says the 24 elders in Revelation 4:4 are the 12 OT patriarchs and the 12 Apostles if there are 14 Apostles. I don’t know the answer to any of this. The only thing I know is eliminating Judas as an Apostle because he was never sent and eliminating Matthias because he replaced Judas [who was not an Apostle] nor was he called or sent by Jesus and inserting Paul who was called and sent by Jesus and who Scripture, on several occasions calls an Apostle fits with the teaching of the Church that there were twelve Apostles and fits in Rev 4:4 with the 24 elders.
“And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.” [RE 21:14 RSV]
So the question is which twelve apostles’ names are on those twelve foundations? I find it hard to imagine that Paul’s name is not there but Matthias’ name is. These then are the **Twelve Apostles ** that both scripture and the Church speaks of.
But what of Matthias? If he was not the twelfth Apostle then what was he. I will cover this in my next post.
Nor do I know why the church says the 24 elders in Revelation 4:4 are the 12 OT patriarchs and the 12 Apostles if there are 14 Apostles. I don’t know the answer to any of this. The only thing I know is eliminating Judas as an Apostle because he was never sent and eliminating Matthias because he replaced Judas [who was not an Apostle] nor was he called or sent by Jesus and inserting Paul who was called and sent by Jesus and who Scripture, on several occasions calls an Apostle fits with the teaching of the Church that there were twelve Apostles and fits in Rev 4:4 with the 24 elders.
A swing and a miss. Let me clarify the issue. We are speaking of that group of people which the church and the scriptures refer to as the **Twelve Apostles **. Eleven of them are not an issue. The issue is the twelfth one. We agree that other disciples were ‘sent’ by Jesus and could technically be called apostles for that reason. I already commented that the Eastern Churches refer to the 70 disciples sent by Jesus as the “minor apostles”. But we are concerned only those individuals that comprise the Twelve Apostles that both the church and the Bible teach. The names of eleven of the Twelve Apostles we are in agreement. It is the Twelfth Apostle that we do not agree. I say it is Paul as he meets the criteria of being, 1. called by Christ and 2. sent by Christ. I say Judas was called by Christ but never sent as he committed suicide before the sending of the Apostles at the Great Commission in Mt 28:19-20. Matthias who succeeded Judas was never called by Jesus nor was he sent by Jesus. In addition, Matthias, since he succeeded Judas, cannot be an Apostle if Judas was never an Apostle. Another issue of his being the twelfth Apostle is, therefore, dependant on Judas’ eligibility. Judas is mentioned in scripture as being one of the Twelve Apostles only twice that being in Mt 10:1-4 and Luke 6:13-16. In both passages it is clear that Judas is listed as being called by Christ. I admit that Judas was definitely called to be an Apostle. But I also maintain Judas was never sent. Outside of these two passages the term Twelve Apostles is not used until Revelation 21:14. Revelation 21:14 is key here for it says:
“And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.” [RE 21:14 RSV]
So the question is which twelve apostles’ names are on those twelve foundations? I find it hard to imagine that Paul’s name is not there but Matthias’ name is. These then are the **Twelve Apostles ** that both scripture and the Church speaks of.
But what of Matthias? If he was not the twelfth Apostle then what was he. I will cover this in my next post.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
C
clmowry
Guest
Don’t forget you have to boot Barnabas out of the club to maintain your insistence on there being exactly 12 apostles as well. It’s not just Matthias you have to give the boot to.
Acts 14:14** – Paul and Barnabas
**But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd,
Acts 14:14** – Paul and Barnabas
**But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd,
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Exactly.
I gave Inkaneer that and more in post #62.
I’m still waiting for some interaction with that. :compcoff:
I
inkaneer
Guest
Matthias was a bishop. He was the very first recipient of the Apostolic Succession of Bishops that continues down to this day. The Apostles received their authority from Jesus [Acts 28:18-20]. Matthias received his from the Apostles at his election. In Acts 1:25 Peter says about Judas’ replacement:
“25 to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside, to go to his own place.” [Acts 1:25 RSV]
I emphasized the word ‘apostleship’ which I will get to but first notice that Peter says that Judas turn away from his ministry and apostleship. Indeed Judas did and for that reason was never sent by Jesus. By his “turning away” and then committing suicide Judas forfeits his place among the twelve Apostles. Matthias who was neither called nor sent by Christ cannot succceed to something Judas never was. But what about this ‘apostleship’ that Peter speaks of? What is that. The Greek word from which we derive our word 'apostle is apostole and it means ‘a sending away’ or one who is sent. It is synonamous with the word missionary which indeed the Apostles and early bishops were. Missionary is however, a rather new word derived from the Latin word emissus, past participle of emittere and according to Webster’s Dictionary its first unown use was in the seventeen century. Thus Ignatius, Polycarp, Titus, Timothy, Clement, Barnabus,etc. were all sent and thus could be considered a missionary or an apostle. But they were not the Twelve Apostles that the church and Revelation 21:14 speaks of when it says Twelve Apostles. Matthias has a ministry and probably does missionary work just as the 70 disciples that Jesus sends out in Luke 10:1 [which the Eastern Church calls the 70 minor apostles]. But is he the Twelfth Apostle of that exclusive group of Twelve Apostles? I say no. I say Paul is that Twelfth Apostle in that exclusive group of Twelve Apostles and one of those twelve foundations mention in Rev 21:14 is inscribed with the name of Paul not Matthias.
“25 to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside, to go to his own place.” [Acts 1:25 RSV]
I emphasized the word ‘apostleship’ which I will get to but first notice that Peter says that Judas turn away from his ministry and apostleship. Indeed Judas did and for that reason was never sent by Jesus. By his “turning away” and then committing suicide Judas forfeits his place among the twelve Apostles. Matthias who was neither called nor sent by Christ cannot succceed to something Judas never was. But what about this ‘apostleship’ that Peter speaks of? What is that. The Greek word from which we derive our word 'apostle is apostole and it means ‘a sending away’ or one who is sent. It is synonamous with the word missionary which indeed the Apostles and early bishops were. Missionary is however, a rather new word derived from the Latin word emissus, past participle of emittere and according to Webster’s Dictionary its first unown use was in the seventeen century. Thus Ignatius, Polycarp, Titus, Timothy, Clement, Barnabus,etc. were all sent and thus could be considered a missionary or an apostle. But they were not the Twelve Apostles that the church and Revelation 21:14 speaks of when it says Twelve Apostles. Matthias has a ministry and probably does missionary work just as the 70 disciples that Jesus sends out in Luke 10:1 [which the Eastern Church calls the 70 minor apostles]. But is he the Twelfth Apostle of that exclusive group of Twelve Apostles? I say no. I say Paul is that Twelfth Apostle in that exclusive group of Twelve Apostles and one of those twelve foundations mention in Rev 21:14 is inscribed with the name of Paul not Matthias.
I
inkaneer
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by clmowry
Don’t forget you have to boot Barnabas out of the club to maintain your insistence on there being exactly 12 apostles as well. It’s not just Matthias you have to give the boot to.
Acts 14:14 – Paul and Barnabas
But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd,
Originally Posted by clmowry
Don’t forget you have to boot Barnabas out of the club to maintain your insistence on there being exactly 12 apostles as well. It’s not just Matthias you have to give the boot to.
Acts 14:14 – Paul and Barnabas
But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd,
See post 83. Your answer is there.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
I just read post 83.
You have failed to explain WHY scripture clearly refers to Barnabas as an apostle - which brings the total to more than 12. In fact, scripture gives us a much bigger list than you have addressed.
*]Simon Peter
*]Andrew
*]James son of Zebedee
*]John
*]Philip
*]Bartholomew
*]Thomas
*]Matthew
*]James son of Alphaeus
*]Thaddaeus
*]Simon the Zealot
*]Judas Iscariot → Matthias
*]Paul
*]Barnabas
*]Andronicus
*]Junias
*]Silas
*]Timothy
*]Apollos
Was Paul a “minor” apostle? How about Barnabas? Barnabas was commissioned at the same time that Paul was commissioned. In fact, Scripture references Barnabas BEFORE the name of Paul - an literary device that suggests primacy (Peter’s name appears at the beginning of most listings of the apostles, doesn’t it?).
Acts 14:14 – Paul and Barnabas
But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd,
Gee, there is no doubt that the author is designating him to be an apostle, is there?
What about Timothy and Silas?
1 Thessalonians 1:1 – Silas and Timothy
1Paul, Silas and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace and peace to you.
1 Thessalonians 2:6
As apostles of Christ we (Paul, Silas and Timothy) could have been a burden to you, 7but we were gentle among you, like a mother caring for her little children.
These two verses suggest that Paul considered Silas and Timothy to be apostles.
You haven’t explained the references to Andronicus, Junias or Apollos, either.
I’m not sure why this bizarre idea is so important to you, but the scriptural evidence and the history of the Church do not support your pet theory.
C
clmowry
Guest
So basically because you think scripture says there were ONLY 12 apostles you simply dismiss the fact that scripture clearly calls Barnabas an apostle?
Is that the argument?
Chuck
Is that the argument?
Chuck
I
inkaneer
Guest
Thank you.
Good then according to you scripture is in error. You got 18 Apostles but Revelation 21:14 limits the number to just 12. Now I submit you don’t have a big enough shoehorn to fit 18 Apostles into Revelation 21:14. But maybe you think you so. Okay let’s see your explanation. Which of the 18 ‘apostles’ you listed are the 12 Apostles of Revelation 21:14 and are the Twelve Apostles that the church teaches? You tell me.
Allow me to repeat myself here. We are speaking of the 12 Apostles called AND sent by Jesus. The ones Revelation 21:14 calls the Twelve Apostles of the Lord and the same ones the Church calls the Twelve Apostles. Of your list, Barnabas, Andronicus, Junias, Silas, Timothy and Apollos were neither called nor sent by Jesus. Neither was Matthias. Judas was called but never sent. Paul was both called and sent by Jesus therefore Paul is the twelfth Apostle. Barnabas, Andronicus, Junias, Silas, Timothy, Apollos and Matthias were what we today would call missionaries. Missionaries are sent too aren’t they? But sent by who? Jesus or someone else? You can add to that list John Mark, Clement, Titus, Timothy Polycarp, Ignatius and probably others all were sent but not by Jesus. .
Sure they do. Both scripture and the church teaches there were twelve Apostles just as I claim. You are the one trying to claim there were 18 and contradicting both the Church and scripture. Apparently you can’t see that. Oh Well!!!
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Your assumption is that because of the twelve foundation stones, there can’t be more than twelve apostles. Where is that written?
Why can’t God assign the twelve foundation stones to the FIRST twelve, and the second row of stones to the next batch of apostles? I mean, seriously…who knows?
The problem is that you’re taking a literalist approach to what is probably a metaphor. Even if there are literally twelve stones with the names of twelve apostles on them, you have not seen them and you have no idea whose name appears on the twelfth stone. Additionally, you have not proven by this that God is limited to having twelve and only twelve apostles…all we can say is that it appears that only twelve get a foundation stone with their name on it.
I see. So, the Word of God calls them Apostles, but you want to relegate them to mere “missionary” status. I’m not buying, and neither has anyone else throughout the course of history. Is there some distinction in the Greek text which causes you to believe that “apostle” means “sent by Jesus” in one verse and “missionary” in another verse. Weird…I don’t ever recall reading those verses translated with the word “missionary” in any of the various translations that I own. Could you name a few that make this distinction, please?
Lacking such evidence, you cannot explain why Barnabas and Paul are both called “Apostles” in the same verse. There is no distinction between them in that passage. Therefore, the title, Apostle, applies to them both equally.
As for Barnabas being “sent”, are you not in error because you do not know the scriptures?
Acts 13:1-5
1In the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. 2While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” 3So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off.
**On Cyprus **
4The two of them, sent on their way by the Holy Spirit, went down to Seleucia and sailed from there to Cyprus. 5When they arrived at Salamis, they proclaimed the word of God in the Jewish synagogues. John was with them as their helper.
So, not only is Barnabas called an apostle in the Word of God, but he is clearly “sent” by God along with another guy named Saul.
I’m not contradicting scripture…I’m just not trapped by a literalist interpretation as you are. Your problem is that your theory forces you to ignore other passages of scripture.
I’ve exposed your error and provided ample supporting evidence. Readers of this thread may judge between your arguments and mine.
I
inkaneer
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
Good then according to you scripture is in error. You got 18 Apostles but Revelation 21:14 limits the number to just 12. Now I submit you don’t have a big enough shoehorn to fit 18 Apostles into Revelation 21:14. But maybe you think you so. Okay let’s see your explanation. Which of the 18 ‘apostles’ you listed are the 12 Apostles of Revelation 21:14 and are the Twelve Apostles that the church teaches? You tell me.
“And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them the **twelve names of the twelve apostles **of the Lamb.” [Rev. 21:14 RSV]
Do we see Twelve foundations? Yes. Do we see Twelve names ? Yes. Do we see Twelve Apostles? Hello, I say do we see Twelve Apostles??? That answers your question of "Where is that written?"
Originally Posted by inkaneer
Good then according to you scripture is in error. You got 18 Apostles but Revelation 21:14 limits the number to just 12. Now I submit you don’t have a big enough shoehorn to fit 18 Apostles into Revelation 21:14. But maybe you think you so. Okay let’s see your explanation. Which of the 18 ‘apostles’ you listed are the 12 Apostles of Revelation 21:14 and are the Twelve Apostles that the church teaches? You tell me.
Revelation 21:14. I suggest you read it sometime. For your benefit here it is:
“And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them the **twelve names of the twelve apostles **of the Lamb.” [Rev. 21:14 RSV]
Do we see Twelve foundations? Yes. Do we see Twelve names ? Yes. Do we see Twelve Apostles? Hello, I say do we see Twelve Apostles??? That answers your question of "Where is that written?"
Now I know you didn’t read Rev 21:14. You ought to get yourself a Bible and READ it…
No I am taking a literal approach. Twelve names of Twelve Apostles is pretty literal to me especially when the Church teaches there are Twelve Apostles too.
Really you should read my posts or if you do read them maybe comprehension is your problem. Both the church and scripture are in agreement with me that there are Twelve Apostles not the eighteen that you claim. Here is the catch. The word apostle means ‘to be sent’. The word missionary comes from the Latin word emittere which also means to send. The difference is in who does the sending. For that group that the church limits to the Twelve Apostles the sending party is Jesus Christ. Those others you mentioned were not sent by Jesus. Neither was Judas or Matthias sent by Jesus. So in a generic sense they are sent so one could call them apostles but they are not the Twelve Apostles. At least the Eastern Church differentiates the seventy that were sent [by Jesus by the way] as ‘minor apostles’ to avoid any confusion to the Twelve Apostles.I see. So, the Word of God calls them Apostles, but you want to relegate them to mere “missionary” status. I’m not buying, and neither has anyone else throughout the course of history. Is there some distinction in the Greek text which causes you to believe that “apostle” means “sent by Jesus” in one verse and “missionary” in another verse. Weird…I don’t ever recall reading those verses translated with the word “missionary” in any of the various translations that I own. Could you name a few that make this distinction, please?
He is sent by the Holy Spirit. The Twelve Apostles [including Saul/Paul] were sent by Jesus. Phillip the deacon was sent by an angel of the Lord to the Ethiopian Eunuch but he is a deacon not an Apostle. Besides, Rev 21:14 clearly states 'Twelve Apostles of the Lord" Last time I checked, the Lord was Jesus Christ not the Holy Spirit.
Well I can’t see how you can say there are 18 apostles and scripture says only 12 and still you claim you are not contradicting scripture. Big case of denial there apparently. By the way your so called evidence has been refuted.
I
inkaneer
Guest
Randy Carson:
Please respond to my prior post in post # 91 in which I wrote:
“Good then according to you scripture is in error. You got 18 Apostles but Revelation 21:14 limits the number to just 12. Now I submit you don’t have a big enough shoehorn to fit 18 Apostles into Revelation 21:14. But maybe you think you so. Okay let’s see your explanation. Which of the 18 ‘apostles’ you listed are the 12 Apostles of Revelation 21:14 and are the Twelve Apostles that the church teaches? You tell me.”
I am still waiting for you to tell me which of your 18 Apostles are the twelve Apostles of Revelation 21:14. Your answer in the prior post was totally inadequate.
Please respond to my prior post in post # 91 in which I wrote:
“Good then according to you scripture is in error. You got 18 Apostles but Revelation 21:14 limits the number to just 12. Now I submit you don’t have a big enough shoehorn to fit 18 Apostles into Revelation 21:14. But maybe you think you so. Okay let’s see your explanation. Which of the 18 ‘apostles’ you listed are the 12 Apostles of Revelation 21:14 and are the Twelve Apostles that the church teaches? You tell me.”
I am still waiting for you to tell me which of your 18 Apostles are the twelve Apostles of Revelation 21:14. Your answer in the prior post was totally inadequate.
G
guanophore
Guest
Ink, my poor misguided sibling, there is no need for us to try to “figure out” what God has already divinely revealed to us. It is our duty to accept His revelation.God has revealed that Matthias replaced Judas as one of the 12.
There are many more than 14 Apostles. The passages noting them were posted to you above.
Ink, the Church only makes dogma when there is confusion and heresy. As important to Christendom as you think you may be, the Church is not going to go to the trouble of making an infallible teaching just to correct your misguided interpretations of scripture. If you are unwilling to accept what the Church believes and teaches, this is your privilege. You may go your way in peace, and join one of the plethora of “bible churches” or start your own. It is the duty of the Church to teach and preach the Truth, and this has been done.
Many of the artists did not know what the peoples of Palestine looked like. The point is that it is the teaching of the Church that Matthias replaced Judas as one of the 12. Do you honestly believe that the Church would allow these types of representations if the Church believed otherwise?
Just because I reject your errant reasoning does not mean I claim to have all the answers. Frankly, I don’t know why God chose Matthias as one of the 12 instead of Paul. There is a great deal I accept as a matter of faith. I do seek understanding, but much of the faith of the Apostles is quite above my puny mind to comprehend.
Artwork is an expression of the Deposit of Faith. Artwork permitted in Churches cannot contradict the faith. The Eastern Church, which does not allow statues, uses only icons in the Church.
The Egyptian (Coptic) Church, which is liturgically and canonically Eastern, also received this same teaching from the Apostles, lest you think it is a “Roman” invention.
We are forbidden to judge the soul of another as bound for hell. However, I can warn you that rejecting the One Faith that has been handed down to us from the Apostles places one’s soul in grave danger of drifting into even more serious errors.
As a person baptized Roman Catholic, I am not covered by the “mantle” of the Gk. Orthodox or Coptic communions. However, I placed links here to them to demonstrate to you that all the churches founded by Apostles believe the same way on this point.
Well, you could consider embracing the teaching of the Church, who produced the Scriptures. Since the NT is Catholic, there is nothing in it that is not consistent with Catholic faith.
There are many more than 12 Apostles, but the subgroup of the 12 that Jesus trained is a special subset of those. It was to those only that He promised the thrones.
It seems you are bent on dispensing with Apostolic Succession. However, your premise is false, which almost always causes a false conclusion, as it has i this case. The reason that those who succeeded apostles were called Bishops is because the criteria given by Peter could no longer be met after the first generation of Christians. The ministry of the Bishop is called “apostolic” or an “apostolate”.
I understand that you believe this.
Ok, Ink. Whatever floats your boat. The ocean is large, and you seem to have some busy oars.
G
guanophore
Guest
There is no reason t be uncharitablel, Ink. The fact that you aer contradicting 2000 years of Christian history does not make everyone else in Christendom “dense”.
This is a good example of how people run into trouble when they take the Scriptures out of context.
God can have as many Apostles as He wants. So now it looks like you are saying that the Scriptures that refer to others as Apostles are false? This is getting further and further into left field as the days go by.
Scripture never "limits’ the Apostles. Of course the Church teaches about the 12, a special subset of His Apostles.
Here is a good read on Matthias and the other 11 Apostles.
I doubt any amount of information will do any good, if you can’t accept the instruction of the Holy Father.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Quite right G!
As 1st Corinthians 12 says,
27] Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.
28] And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues.
29] Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles?
30] Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?
There is nowhere stated that apostles will end in the gifts of the Holy Spirit to the church.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Sure it has.
Let’s review:
*]I have acknowledged that there are 12 stones and 12 names of Apostles mentioned in Rev 21:14.
*]I have no problem with the idea that the original twelve apostles get this honor and distinction in the heavenly Jerusalem.
*]I have no problem with the idea that other men (also known as apostles) will not have foundation stones with their names on them in heaven.
*]You have failed to explain adequately why scripture refers to both Barnabas and Paul as “Apostles” in the same verse.
*]You have failed to explain adequately who the eleven were that stood up with Peter on the day of Pentecost.
*]You have failed to explain adequately why the six (possibly seven) other men are referred to as Apostles in scripture are somehow only “missionaries”. (The NT was written in Greek, not Latin, btw.)
The bottom line is this: You have a pet theory about Paul and Matthias, but your theory fails to address other possible scenarios. There could have been more than twelve apostles, but only twelve receive the honor of having a foundation stone with their names on them. A careful reading of scriptures proves this to be the case, in fact.
My theory, on the other hand, explains ALL of the verses of scripture without being forced into explaining away those verses which do not fit.
You accused me previously of poor exegesis, but in fact, your approach is a classic example of eisegesis.
You may have the last word. :tiphat:
- Status