J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
Which a priest presides over. Hence why Jesus said, “Do this in My Memorial.” Like it or not, the Eucharist is a sacrifice.
Last edited:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
The Apostolic Churches would disagree with that assessment, from where you get the NT.We would be like the people of Israel and be able to open the book and see the Priest office clearly appointed and defined. The fact we can’t do that speaks volumes
L
lanman87
Guest
But if it was written, as it is in the Old Testament, then it would make your case much easier. It would be more than, “It is this way because we say it is”.The Apostolic Churches would disagree with that assessment, from where you get the NT.
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
Back to our original topic, who preaches a different Gospel on salvation? Considering the traditional understanding of salvation and the role works play in the Gospel, it’s safe to say which side did this.
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
Even when it was in the Old Testament, you had your Korahs, your Jeroboams. And in the NT, we see it as well.But if it was written, as it is in the Old Testament, then it would make your case much easier.
From my side, that’s your exact argument.It would be more than, “It is this way because we say it is”.
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
For the majority of Christdendom, that has been the case.Yes, but they don’t institute a priesthood.
Only 500 years was there an issue.
M
mcq72
Guest
Lol…touche…yet said epistles do not cover the all that the CC has written up to now, the “all” lanman alludes to. I mean otherwise we totally agree and do according to said letters.You’ve never read the Pastoral Epistles?
L
lanman87
Guest
No, our argument is that the Catholic Priesthood was a development and not an apostolic teaching.From my side, that’s your exact argument.
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
From your interpretation of Scripture, no less. So that is a similar argument.No, our argument is that the Catholic Priesthood was a development
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
Which leads to another thorn, the Epistles never claimed they had ALL the instructionsLol…touche…yet said epistles do not cover the all that the CC has written up to now, the “all” lanman alludes to
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
M
mcq72
Guest
Correct but essentials for sure, not like there were many. So OT was superfluos needlessly?Which leads to another thorn, the Epistles never claimed they had ALL the instructions
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
Some essentials, not ALL essentials.Correct but essentials for sure
M
mcq72
Guest
Of course, so in post before Calvary is insufficient (or only materially sufficient), and now so to His written Word?Some essentials, not ALL essentials.
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
And the crux of it continues. Where in Scripture does it claim sufficiency?and now so to His written Word?
M
mcq72
Guest
The crux,even insufficiency, is not in Calvary nor in the written Word of God, but in the heart of man. Truth is absolute but the reception of it conditional, being in the eyes of the beholder, who will find what it seeks. The grace is in what we choose to seek. Otherwise it is a rock we trip over, or as you say, a crux.And the crux of it continues. Where in Scripture does it claim sufficiency?
If any church says Calvary or His written Word are insufficient, don’t be surprised if some come to see or find said church insufficient also.
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
They have all that the Providence of God decreed be written for future generations. Just as the Old Testament does. It just seems to me that if God was careful enough to describe in detail the creation and duties of the Levitical Priesthood in God breathed written form, for all generations to be able to read and understand, then He would surely do the same for His Church. If He had created a separate priesthood for His church then it would have been included in the New Testament text. It would be just as clear for us as it was the Israel.Which leads to another thorn, the Epistles never claimed they had ALL the instructions
Historically, the Priesthood developed over time. The church offices started out as overseers of local congregations and over time developed into a separate priesthood, with special vestments, who become mediators of God’s grace. That concept is never found in the New Testament writings, which is why it is rejected by Evangelicals.
J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
For 1500 years this was not believed.They have all that the Providence of God decreed be written for future generations.
The Apostolic Churches have it from the Scriptures. Did either of you not see the link I posted?If He had created a separate priesthood for His church then it would have been included in the New Testament text. It would be just as clear for us as it was the Israel
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
Yes, the Catholic side. Which added a priesthood to mediate between God and Man and made Grace only accessible by the work of the Priest instead of a through a personal faith relationship with Christ.Considering the traditional understanding of salvation and the role works play in the Gospel, it’s safe to say which side did this.
L
lanman87
Guest
Link didn’t work.Did either of you not see the link I posted?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.