Acts chapter 13… i believe… Saul’s name changed to Paul during the time Paul had the imposition of hands.Timothy 1-6, “For this reason, I remind you to stir into flame the fift of God that you have through the imposiiton of my hands”. Paul was not one of the 12 apostles,so was Paul ordained by Peter? or other apostles? or was it Christ himself who ordained Paul? Thankyou!
Somebody already posted Acts 13…account of Paul’s ordination…by the elders of Antioch.Timothy 1-6, “For this reason, I remind you to stir into flame the fift of God that you have through the imposiiton of my hands”. Paul was not one of the 12 apostles,so was Paul ordained by Peter? or other apostles? or was it Christ himself who ordained Paul? Thankyou!
In Gal 1 too… International Version (NIV)Paul calls himself an Apostle because he was called directly by Christ himself while on the road to Damascus.
***He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” He said, “Who are you, sir?” The reply came, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. Now get up and go into the city and you will be told what you must do.” ***(Acts 9:4-6)
The successors to the Apostles are the bishops, but Apostles are those who were called directly by Christ. Paul calls himself an Apostle in the opening verses of Ephesians, Colossians, and 2 Timothy.
-Tim-
Somebody already posted Acts 13…account of Paul’s ordination…by the elders of Antioch.
Do you know who founded the Church at Antioch?
In addition, Paul also submits himself…recounted by him in Gal 1 and 2:
Gal 1…3 yrs after his conversion…this is what he says…17 I did not go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went into Arabia. Later I returned to Damascus.
18 Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas** and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother. 20 I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie.
In Gal 2…Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain. 3 Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was**
pablope,
Actually the laying on of hands is not presented in scripture as ordination. It was simply a blessing for a special mission used for a variety of purposes.
Ordination was not evolved until the third century. Up to that time there was no ordination according to the historians. This is what the Catholic scholars say.
Rob
Hi Submariner Rob…pablope,
Actually the laying on of hands is not presented in scripture as ordination. It was simply a blessing for a special mission used for a variety of purposes.
Ordination was not evolved until the third century. Up to that time there was no ordination according to the historians. This is what the Catholic scholars say.
Rob
Paul was quite special in the sense that He was sent by the Risen Christ, not ordained by another Apostle.Timothy 1-6, “For this reason, I remind you to stir into flame the fift of God that you have through the imposiiton of my hands”. Paul was not one of the 12 apostles,so was Paul ordained by Peter? or other apostles? or was it Christ himself who ordained Paul? Thankyou!
Thank you! Its got commentary for every passage of Scripture, and its continually growing!Thank you all for your wisdom. COPELAND 3 thanks for the website to TA Bible it looks greart!!
Really? Which Catholic scholars are those? On the contrary, ordination began in the upper room with Jesus, and was continued by the Apostles when Matthias replaced Judas.pablope,
Actually the laying on of hands is not presented in scripture as ordination. It was simply a blessing for a special mission used for a variety of purposes.
Ordination was not evolved until the third century. Up to that time there was no ordination according to the historians. This is what the Catholic scholars say.
Rob
randy,Timothy 1-6, “For this reason, I remind you to stir into flame the fift of God that you have through the imposiiton of my hands”. Paul was not one of the 12 apostles,so was Paul ordained by Peter? or other apostles? or was it Christ himself who ordained Paul? Thankyou!
The Apostles had no successors (except for Judas). They were not replaced. Bishops, i.e., governors of local churches existed during and after the presence of apostles. There was a bishop of Rome before Peter arrived. He met the local church members when he went to Rome, and there was a leader, bishop, of the Roman church before Peter arrived.Paul calls himself an Apostle because he was called directly by Christ himself while on the road to Damascus.
***He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” He said, “Who are you, sir?” The reply came, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. Now get up and go into the city and you will be told what you must do.” ***(Acts 9:4-6)
The successors to the Apostles are the bishops, but Apostles are those who were called directly by Christ. Paul calls himself an Apostle in the opening verses of Ephesians, Colossians, and 2 Timothy.
-Tim-
Yes, this is how Apostolic ordination is done. It commissions the recipient with Holy Orders- authorization for the journey to care for the flock.Actually scholars say that laying on of hands was not some kind of ordination but rather a blessing before a mission or a general blessing depending on the circumstances.
There are many circumstances related to the laying on of hands, ordination being only one. Another is the transmission of the Holy Spirit (confirmation) to believers.Here is Father Raymond Brown to explain…
"1. Antioch church sends Barnabas and Saul; Mission to Cyprus and SE Asia monor (Acts 13;1-14:28)
In this context of prayer and fasting, hands are laid on Barnabas and Saul. We should not
anachronistically speak of this as an ordination; it is a commissioning by the church of Antioc for a mission that is often counted as the first Pauline journey and dated to AD 46-49."
Raymond Brown, Introduction to the New Testament, P 303, Imprimatur.
But it looks like the antioc church were the ones to lay hands on Paul. No mention of ordination in the NT.
Rob
Rich, I don’t think your assertions can be supported by the Scripture, or history. It is curious reading a post by someone who claims to be Catholic, yet rejects the Catholic faith.The Apostles had no successors (except for Judas). They were not replaced. Bishops, i.e., governors of local churches existed during and after the presence of apostles. There was a bishop of Rome before Peter arrived. He met the local church members when he went to Rome, and there was a leader, bishop, of the Roman church before Peter arrived.
Rich,The Apostles had no successors (except for Judas). They were not replaced. Bishops, i.e., governors of local churches existed during and after the presence of apostles. There was a bishop of Rome before Peter arrived. He met the local church members when he went to Rome, and there was a leader, bishop, of the Roman church before Peter arrived.
a·nach·ro·nism (-nkr-nzm)randy,
Actually scholars say that laying on of hands was not some kind of ordination but rather a blessing before a mission or a general blessing depending on the circumstances. Here is Father Raymond Brown to explain…
"1. Antioch church sends Barnabas and Saul; Mission to Cyprus and SE Asia monor (Acts 13;1-14:28)
In this context of prayer and fasting, hands are laid on Barnabas and Saul. We should not
anachronistically speak of this as an ordination; it is a commissioning by the church of Antioc for a mission that is often counted as the first Pauline journey and dated to AD 46-49."
Raymond Brown, Introduction to the New Testament, P 303, Imprimatur.
But it looks like the antioc church were the ones to lay hands on Paul. No mention of ordination in the NT.
Rob
ordination - the status of being ordained to a sacred officeordination - the status of being ordained to a sacred officepablope,Hi Submariner Rob…
Actually no…when you see passages like that in Acts 13…and in Tim 1-6…those refer to ordination…the imposition of hands on the head…the tradition from the Apostles.
This has actually its roots from the Jews…Moses to Joshua…in Numbers 27…
18 And the Lord said to Moses: “Take Joshua the son of Nun with you, a man in whom is the Spirit, and lay your hand on him; 19 set him before Eleazar the priest and before all the congregation, and inaugurate him in their sight…22 So Moses did as the Lord commanded him. He took Joshua and set him before Eleazar the priest and before all the congregation. 23 And he laid his hands on him and inaugurated him, just as the Lord commanded by the hand of Moses.
This is the method of transferring authority…and apostolic succession…directed by God to Moses…and understood by the Jews…and practiced by the Apostles…and practiced and method practiced by the CC today…since the time of the Apostles.