Nice try, but I doubt it. Peter was exercising the Jeus-given authority to Bind and Loose.
You seem to keep conveniently ignoring Acts 1:24-25.
It’s obvious Matthias is an Apostle.
Thank you, this should bring it to a close.You seem to keep conveniently ignoring Acts 1:24-25.
It’s obvious Matthias is an Apostle.
You’re welcome!
I really don’t see where the Holy Spirit needs anyone to “fill in the hole”. What’s more I do think that Jesus, who picked the original twelve Apostles, had someone else in mind to “fill the hole”. So like the original twelve who were called By Jesus to be apostles Jesus called him and sent him and his name was Paul.
Not so. The selection of Matthias occurs after Jesus’ Ascencion. During the 40 day time period after the Resurrection that Jesus was on earth He was in control. Jesus could have picked someone to replace Judas but He didn’t. I think the reason He didn’t was because the person He wants [Paul] is not available yet.
Incorrect. I never said “numbered with” was synonymous with enrolled. What I said was other translations have it as numbered with [KJV & DR]. The RSV says “enrolled”. I also said in another post that the Greek word that is translated as “enrolled” or “numbered with” is the word Sugkatapsephizo. That word means literally to 1. be depositing a ballot in the urn (i.e. by voting for) 2. to assign one a place among or 3. to vote one a place among. And that is a long, long way from saying that Matthias becomes an Apostle.
Again I say not so. You see you doing exactly what you accuse me of doing. You are spinning Professor Hahn’s words to match your thinking. The critical part of this is the words “the replacement of one Apostle with another” Another what? Another Apostle? Another person? Please list the primary source for this “quote” of Dr. Hahn. Is it available on line? Oh Yeah, one more thing, even though, like Dr. Hahn, I am a citizen of the Steeler Nation, I really don’t like to watch football on TV.I’ll tell you what, Ink. I’ll do you a little better. You see, I don’t think you’ll agree with my exegesis no matter what. You’ve already denied Tertullian, you’ve denied St. Augustine, you’ve denied Pope Benedict, and you’ve denied the Catechism and the Church Liturgy.
In fact, you only seem to hold to the words of Scott Hahn, even bragging that you’ve listened to him instead of watching Monday Night Football (which sounds sort of like pompous boasting, but I won’t go there!).
So, what does Scott Hahn say? Well, in his Ignatius Study Bible, Scott writes:
Quote:
Peter gives free quotations from the Psalter to explain the removal (Ps. 69:25) and replacement of Judas (Ps 109:8). Psalms 69 and 109 are imprecatory psalms that curse the enemies of God and Israel. In both, the righteous man groans in agony over the treacher of the wicked. Peter reads them messianically, i.e., the suffering Psalmist prefigures the suffering and betrayal of Christ by his enemies.
Office: the Greek term refers to a position of oversight and was used in early Christianity for an episcopal office or bishopric (1 Tim 3:1). The replacement of one apostle with another is a pattern repeated in the episcopal succession of bishops from the first century to the present day (1:26; CCC 77, 860)
You see, Ink, as I mentioned in Post #38, Scott Hahn stresses the fact that the Apostles were all bishops, and that the replacement of one apostle with another prefigures the replacement of one bishop with another.
Like I said. If it was so important to have twelve Apostles for the “ushering in of the New Covenant Church at Pentecost” Then why didn’t Jesus appoint one? Matthias was not selected until right after Jesus’ Ascencion. Yet Jesus walked the face of the earth for 40 days between the Resurrection and the Ascencion. If there needed to be 12 Apostles on Pentecost who better to pick an Apostle than Jesus who picked the other Apostles? Did you ever think that Jesus would indeed pick the twelfth Apostle and that Apostle would be Paul?
Thank You very much!!!
Matthias didn’t succeed anyone. He replaced Judas.
Who wrote the scripture where Paul is called an apostle? Where is John or Andrew called an apostle in scripture? (Edit, meaning they called themselves an apostle…I know they are introduced as apostles…)
You are possibly forgetting that what John sees in Revelation 21:14 is the New Jerusalem coming down from heaven [an event which has not happened yet] and not the Church immediately post Pentecost. In addition Rev 21:14 is not the only reference to there being just 12 Apostles. Beginning in Revelation 4:4 there is repeated references to 24 elders. These 24 has been interpreted by the church as the 12 OT patriarchs and the 12 Apostles of the NT. Paragraph 1138 of the Catechism calls them, “the servants of the Old and New Covenants (the twenty-four elders),”
That still leaves open the question, if an apostle rather than a bishop was so urgently needed, of why Jesus didn’t appoint one while he was still on the earth for 40 days after the Resurrection. I mean He appointed the original ones why didn’t He replace Judas if it was so necessay to have 12 Apostles for Pentecost? Maybe He did appoint the replacement but not before Pentecost. Maybe He waited a couple of years for the right time to get the man He wanted and then selected Paul.
You seem to keep conveniently ignoring Acts 1:24-25.
‘The Protestant rejects what he does not find formally in the Scriptures.’
‘“Tradition”…was first the pure and simple transmission of the sacred deposit. It is also the explanation of this deposit, elaborated through its being lived, defended and explained generation after generation by the People of God. Scripture, the prophetic and apostolic witness to God’s plan, is explained by tradition; in this respect there is more in the Church’s word than in the text of Scripture studied philologically and understood historically.’
The Meaning of Tradition by Yves Congar, O.P.
Yes but the Catholic does not deny what he finds in scripture either. We do not operate on the Oral Tradition alone but as the APOSTLE Paultells the Thessalonians we hold onto the teachings we have received by way of the Written Tradition or by the Oral Tradition for one does not contradict the other.
P.S. - Where in scripture does it say that angels dance?
In doing my research I did ponder this passage as on the surface it does seem to say what you say. So allow me to address this right now. The issue is verse 25 which says: " 25 to take the place in this ministry and apostleship (emphasis mine) from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place." It’s that word “apostleship” that you are hanging your hat on. Well let’s look at that verse. The verse as quoted is from the RSV so let’s compare it with other translations. I will embolden key parts:
I’m sorry to disappoint but please read my last post on this very subject.
You have provided 3 translation that say the same thing. Now you have Scripture and Tradition and all other authority in the Chruch including the present Pope saying that He was an Apostle.
