Jesus Disolved the Priesthood?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JoeyWarren
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JoeyWarren

Guest
Did Jesus do away with the Priesthood? Well according to Kevan he did?
40.png
Kevan:
I Under the new covenant the priesthood is done away and we have access into the Holy of Holies (the inner sanctum of the temple) through our high priest, Jesus Christ (Hebrews 10:19). He is the mediator between God and men (1 Tim 2:5). That is the Protestant belief, and it differs quite a bit from the Jewish belief.
1st: God instituted a priesthood.

2nd: That priesthood is encapsulated in the the “Law”(The Torah)(The Pentatuch) .

3rd. Jesus came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets.

4th: The New Testament and Covenant is the fulfillment of the Old.

5th: No where that I can find in the New Testament did Jesus dissolve what his father started.

6th: Other evidence for the priesthood in the bible dictates otherwise…
 
That is a major problem that non-catholics have with us. They believe that Jesus did away with the priesthood God established.

There is no clear explicit or implicit scripture that supports this belief.

If Jesus did away with the priesthood, he also did away with the need for a physical church as well.

If there is no need for a priesthood and there is no need for a physical church, then there is no need to gather at least once a week and have someone preach to me. I don’t need the fellowship of other christians if Jesus is the one mediator. I can just as easily stay at home and pray to Jesus and use the tithe to cloth the naked, feed the hungry, visit the sick, and visit the imprisoned directly…what do you think?
 
So far, everything posted is 100% what I believed as a Protestant.

Unfortunatly, without anyone left in charge & everyone able to interpret scripture on their own supposedly under the guidance of the Holy Spirit results in thousands of opinions & different denominations. How could it not? And since Jesus’ last words before he went to heaven was his desire that we be unified - how could this be what he had in mind?

So I accepted that Jesus established a Church - and that Church tells me that there IS a Priesthood.
 
  1. Who is this Kevan person?
  2. The whole book of Hebrews is about Christ’s High Priesthood in the order of Melchiezedek. So, he didn’t abolish the priesthood, rather he remade it in the form of a more ancient kind that prefigured the Eucharist–an unbloody sacrifice of bread and wine, while fulfilling the bloody sacrifices of the Temple on Calvary.
  3. The word Presbyter is just another word for priest.
 
40.png
Della:
Who is this Kevan person?
😃 Meeee!

I didn’t mean to open a debate when I made that remark about the priesthood. Obviously the topic lies at the base of Catholic theory and it would require more keystrokes than most of us have to spare.

The purpose of my remark was to differentiate my belief not from Catholicism, but from Old Testament Judaism. I had prefaced it by pointing out that the veil of the temple was torn from top to bottom when the Lord died for our sins, and Hebrews explains it by saying that we now have boldness to go into God’s presence in the name of our high priest, Jesus.
The word Presbyter is just another word for priest.
Ehhh, yes and no.

On the yes side, the English word “priest” did descend from the Greek “presbyteros.”

On the no side, however, the two words don’t overlap at all in the Bible.

“Presbyter” translates from Greek into the English word “elder.” (The optometrist says I have “presbyopia.”) It just means “old.” “Priest” (cohen in Hebrew, hiereus in Greek) means… well, it means “priest.” Priest is an ancient concept referring to a minister who mediates between the people and the gods.

They are two totally different words in Greek and Hebrew and, in Israel, they referred to two different sets of people. For instance, Mark 14:43 mentions “the chief priests and the scribes and the elders.” There are many verses in the Old Testament regarding the elders and it is certain that they were not priests.

Can you defend the claim that an elder in the New Testament is a priest? Maybe you can, maybe not. But one argument you cannot use is the relationship between the two English words, because that relationship didn’t exist in apostolic times. Only the Greek and Hebrew could matter back then.

(Note: it is not necessary to know Greek and Hebrew to understand the Bible. English works just fine; it just takes a little longer sometimes.)
 
The common understanding of non-liturgical Protestants is NOT that Christ ‘dissolved’ the Priesthood but that He fulfilled it. He IS the Great High Priest of the Christian Faith and all who are in Christ share in His Priesthood. There is not a hierarchy of priesthoods in this view–all believers being ‘little priests’ because of the priesthood of all believers, whilst ordained priests are slightly-bigger priests and the bishops and the pope are bigger priests yet, with the biggest priest of them all being Jesus Himself. Rather–and I am not supporting this view simply analyzing it for clarity–because we are all part of Christ’s body, we all share in His communicable attributes, including His priesthood. When the Pope went to Finthen Army Airfield , I was stationed in Wakernheim at the time–the two places are like a mile or so apart. We had a Protestant Christian coffeehouse over at FAAF, and I believe it was during a Bible study over there that the issue of the priesthood of all believers came up. The fellow conducting the Bible study said something to the effect that “Catholics don’t believe this; if they did, that Pope fellow would have to stand aside and let whoever wanted to up on that altar to do their Mass”. Little trivia tidbit to amuse the Catholics.
 
Hebrews 7

1For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;

2To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;

3Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

4Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.

5And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:

6But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises.

7And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better.

8And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.

9And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham.

10For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him.

11If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?
**
12For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

13For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.

14For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

15And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest,

16Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.

17For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
**
18For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.

19For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.

20And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest:

21(For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec:)
**
22By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.
**
23And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death:
**
24But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
**
25Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.

26For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;

27Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

28For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.

This is the text where us protestants see the Jewish Presthood as ending.
 
1 Peter 2
4As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him— 5you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6For in Scripture it says:
“See, I lay a stone in Zion,
a chosen and precious cornerstone,
and the one who trusts in him
will never be put to shame.” 7Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe,
“The stone the builders rejected
has become the capstone,” 8and,
“A stone that causes men to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall.” They stumble because they disobey the message—which is also what they were destined for.
9But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. 10Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.
 
Go to the Catholic Answers Homepage… click on SHOP at the top of the screen

Go to new items

down about 6 items is the CD version of the debate on Priests.

Click on… give it a look

Buy it… it is worth it to hear an ex-priest say there is no priesthood in the NT… and a convert (Akins) prove scripturally that the priesthood (the ministerial Priesthood) is founded scripturally, and is alive and well.
 
i would like to say it also, most “bible-believing” protestants don’t say that the priesthood is dissolved, but that we are now all priests in the order of Melchizideck (sp? didn’t look it up). the veil was torn and we all can now enter into the holy of holies. most protestants however don’t know that the catholic church believes in the priesthood of all believers but that certain members of that priesthood are called to be leaders…to lead in worship and sacrifice (no blood sacrifices other than participating in the one sacrifice for all time) and in the governing of his body. in the didache, this “chief priest” can actually be translated as “president” or the presiding elder. this person does have different duties than the other “priests” (as in the rest of us who are part of the priesthood of all believers) and are ordained by God and other elder “presidents” or elders or priests to perform these extra duties for the service of the rest of us. they are servants not rulers. i believe this is taught by the church but very few protestants (let alone catholics) really understand this. protestants do the exact same thing but they don’t use the word priest. they ordain people to perform different duties.
 
Romans 15:16

that I might be a minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering of the Gentiles might be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

The word used here is "hierourgeo" (to act as a priest).
 
When Jesus was addressing the 12 he said in Matthew 20:26

But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;

This is pre reference to Peter being the leading priest of the other 11.
 
40.png
Kevan:
On the yes side, the English word “priest” did descend from the Greek “presbyteros.”
Thank you. That’s all I meant to convey. 😉
On the no side, however, the two words don’t overlap at all in the Bible.
“Presbyter” translates from Greek into the English word “elder.” (The optometrist says I have “presbyopia.”) It just means “old.” “Priest” (cohen in Hebrew, hiereus in Greek) means… well, it means “priest.” Priest is an ancient concept referring to a minister who mediates between the people and the gods.
They are two totally different words in Greek and Hebrew and, in Israel, they referred to two different sets of people. For instance, Mark 14:43 mentions “the chief priests and the scribes and the elders.” There are many verses in the Old Testament regarding the elders and it is certain that they were not priests.
Can you defend the claim that an elder in the New Testament is a priest? Maybe you can, maybe not. But one argument you cannot use is the relationship between the two English words, because that relationship didn’t exist in apostolic times. Only the Greek and Hebrew could matter back then.
(Note: it is not necessary to know Greek and Hebrew to understand the Bible. English works just fine; it just takes a little longer sometimes.)
Well, if it could and/or couldn’t be, either or, translated as “priest” or not, then the Catholic claim is just as valid as yours. Yes?

Besides, the NT is a product of the Church, not the other way around, so I think the Church might have an inkling into the meaning of the Greek and the Hebrew.

And how about my 2nd point? About the priesthood of Melchiezedek? Once again keeping firmly in mind the plain historical fact that the NT grew out of the Church instead of the mistaken idea some have that the Church was formed by the NT.

And thirdly, and importantly, the Bible is not a proof-text for any Church teaching or practice. Rather, the Bible is the support and witness to the Church, not the other way around.
 
40.png
Della:
Besides, the NT is a product of the Church, not the other way around, so I think the Church might have an inkling into the meaning of the Greek and the Hebrew.
Well, take a look at the Catholic sources and see what the inklings say about the Greek and Hebrew. They will say the same thing I said. Ancient languages say what they say, and evangelical PhDs work alongside atheist PhDs with no difficulty when it comes to studying those languages.
And how about my 2nd point? About the priesthood of Melchiezedek?
Excellent point. I’m just not interested in the topic of Catholic priesthood, so I didn’t bother with it.
And thirdly, and importantly, the Bible is not a proof-text for any Church teaching or practice. Rather, the Bible is the support and witness to the Church, not the other way around.
Yeah, I know; somebody else said that in another thread somewhere…
 
40.png
Della:
And thirdly, and importantly, the Bible is not a proof-text for any Church teaching or practice. Rather, the Bible is the support and witness to the Church, not the other way around.
Be careful della, some of these non-catholics actually believe that the bible was put together by the Holy Spirit in an action of “going to all the scrolls that were inspired, collecting them and depositing them in one person’s lap” or they believe that some rogue rebel protestant during the early years did this same action. They refuse to acknowledge history. All they really care is that they have the bible now and how it came to them is not the issue, but what it contains. “IGNORANCE IS BLISS” for these.
 
40.png
flameburns623:
He IS the Great High Priest of the Christian Faith and all who are in Christ share in His Priesthood. There is not a hierarchy of priesthoods in this view–all believers being ‘little priests’ because of the priesthood of all believers.
no hierachy? This is where you have to step back and take in the big picture of the bible and see what Jesus commissioned:

He selected 12 out of all the deciples to be apostles.
He chose Simon(now called Peter) to be the head apostle. And the apostles appointed others to be disciples, deacons, bishops, etc etc etc.

Furthermore, your taking one truth and creating another Korah Rebellion so look at this scripture:

1 Corinthians 12:27-31
27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular. 28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities F46 of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? 30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

There appears to a hierarchy of the assignments?

And this scripture:

Ephesians 4:11
And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

So are we all really priests? Spiritually maybe yes. Literally NO!

Jesus gave the apostles powers that he did not give others, so all cannot not truely be priests.

<><
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top