Prodigal's Isle

[Socrates4Jesus]

PROS: Please continue to give your testimony of how you first learned you were to become an Apostle.

PAUL: It is well know that I, along with the Jewish authorities, was convinced that I ought to do all that was possible to oppose the name of Jesus of Nazareth. And that is just what I did in Jerusalem. On the authority of the chief priests I put many of the saints in prison, and when they were put to death, I cast my vote against them. Many a time I went from one synagogue to another to have them punished, and I tried to force them to blaspheme. In my obsession against them, I even went to foreign cities to persecute them.

On one of these journeys I was going to Damascus with the authority and commission of the chief priests. About noon, as I was on the road, I saw a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, blazing around me and my companions. We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.” (He called me by my previous name, Saul, which He later changed to Paul.)

Then I asked, “Who are you, Lord?”

“I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” the Lord replied. “Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen of me and what I will show you. I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.”

PROS: Thank you, Apostle, for telling your sincere and inspiring story. I don’t suppose anyone would question your right to be an Apostle, not even Peter.

SOC: Objection!

JUDGE: Sustained. Prosecutor, please keep your opinions to yourself.

PROS: Withdrawn, your honor. Would you say, Apostle, that God chose you as His witness to the Gentiles?

PAUL: Yes, that is what Jesus said. Though, as I admitted, it’s a privilege I most certainly do not deserve!

PROS: The sincerity of your humility is without question, Paul. I’m sure many would disagree, and say Jesus knew what He was doing by choosing you.

PAUL: He knows best. I’m always amazed that He chooses the weak and the foolish of the world to shame those who are mighty and wise in their own eyes.

PROS: Indeed! Tell me, Apostle, are you aware that the defendant chose Matthias as the Apostle to replace Judas?

PAUL: Yes, I’ve heard the account from Peter himself, but I was not an eyewitness to it.

PROS: No matter. I’m sure Peter’s own account was accurate. Are you aware of what method he said he employed to chose the Apostolic Successor?

PAUL: He said he had the Apostles draw straws to determine whether Matthias or the other candidate was God’s choice.

PROS: Only Matthias and one other? Why not any others?

PAUL: They were the most likely candidates. I believe Peter quoted the Psalms and said, “It is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”

PROS: So Peter suggested that an Apostle must be one who was a follower of Jesus prior to our Lord’s crucifixion. Isn’t that what he said?

PAUL: Yes, that’s what he said.

PROS: Tell me, then, Paul. Did Jesus not choose you.

PAUL: Yes.

PROS: But you were not a follower of Jesus before or immediately after His crucifixion?

PAUL: No, I’m ashamed to say I was an enemy of Christ, and a murder of those who followed Him; I was the worst of sinners.

PROS: And despite this God chose you.

PAUL: Yes.

PROS: So when Peter gave God the choice of choosing between Matthias and the other candidate, he did not give God the option of choosing you, did he?

PAUL: No, of course not. I was at that time his enemy, though I now consider him a dear friend.

PROS: Yes, you are no hostile witness. But the truth be told, Peter’s criteria was against the will of God.

SOC: Objection! Your honor, the witness for the prosecution cannot pretend to speak for God!

PROS: Your honor, he and Apostle chosen by God for the very purpose of being His spokesman!

JUDGE: Objection, overruled.

PROS: Apostle Paul, you said that Peter told the other Apostles, and later he told you, that an Apostle must be one who followed Jesus before His crucifixion and resurrection, isn’t that so?

PAUL: Yes.

PROS: But afterward, he laid hands on you and confirmed that Jesus himself had chosen you to be His witness to the Gentiles, correct?

PAUL: That’s correct.

PROS: And since you neither knew nor followed Jesus before His passion on the cross, Peter’s method of choosing an Apostle did not apply to you. Is this fair to say?

PAUL: That’s fair, as you say.

PROS: But if Peter had advised the drawing of three straws, one for Matthias, the second for the other candidate, and the third for a candidate still unknown to the Apostles, perhaps they would have drawn the third straw. If so, they might have waited for God to reveal YOU as His choice.

SOC: Objection, argumentative!

JUDGE: Sustained. Prosecutor, let’s stick to the facts and not speculation of what might have been.

PROS:Very well, your honor. Apostle Paul, would you say that Peter’s method of choosing a successor to Judas left God no option to choose you?

PAUL: Yes, I’d agree with that.

PROS: No further questions, your honor.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

PC:

This is damning testimony! It’s our duty as councilors for the defendant Peter to cross examine Paul. But i’m at a loss as to what to ask the witness on the stand. How do you think we should question him?

 

[paul_c]

You the Pope, John the writer of Revelation Jesus the Father and the Holy Spirit all need to get together and change Johns vision or start adding names to the foundation.

Acts 1- 1 The former account I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach, 2 until the day in which He was taken up, after He through the Holy Spirit had given commandments to the apostles whom He had chosen, 3 to whom He also presented Himself alive after His suffering by many infallible proofs, being seen by them during forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.

You make a lot of claims against me for pointing out your misrepresentation of what Jesus said to Paul and Ananias. I didn’t judge you the scripture judged you. Is it presumptuous of me or John being lead by the HS that wrote their are 12 names on the foundation of the wall. I simply point to what the scripture says. Their is not 11 or 13 or 50 or 1000 or 10,000 names on the foundation but 12, so if you have a problem with that take it up with the author of the scriptures. Jesus never told Paul or Ananias anything other than restoring Pauls vision. He Jesus indicated nothing about the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Other than stating Paul is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. If you have a problem with it take it the the author of scripture. If scripture does not enhance the catholic position take it up with the catholic church or the author of the scriptures. Do I make myself clear? You are attacking a reader of scripture for reading scripture. Acts 1:2 says that Jesus chose “whom He had chosen” Did Jesus chose Matthias? Jesus did make a choice and careful examination of that choice and the events that took place don’t exactly fit your presentation.

I’m not misreprestenting at all what happened. Let’s go through Acts 9:
1 Now Saul, still breathing murderous threats against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest
2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, that, if he should find any men or women who belonged to the Way, 2 he might bring them back to Jerusalem in chains.
3 On his journey, as he was nearing Damascus, a light from the sky suddenly flashed around him.
4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?”
5
He said, “Who are you, sir?” The reply came, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.
6
Now get up and go into the city and you will be told what you must do.”

Now we all know that Saul was persecuting the Church, not Jesus Directly, since Jesus was in heaven. But the Church is the Body of Christ so to persecute the Church is to persecute Jesus.

7 The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, for they heard the voice but could see no one.
8 Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing; so they led him by the hand and brought him to Damascus.
9 For three days he was unable to see, and he neither ate nor drank.
10 There was a disciple in Damascus named Ananias, and the Lord said to him in a vision, “Ananias.” He answered, “Here I am, Lord.”
11 The Lord said to him, “Get up and go to the street called Straight and ask at the house of Judas for a man from Tarsus named Saul. He is there praying,
12 and (in a vision) he has seen a man named Ananias come in and lay (his) hands on him, that he may regain his sight.”
13 But Ananias replied, “Lord, I have heard from many sources about this man, what evil things he has done to your holy ones in Jerusalem.
14 And here he has authority from the chief priests to imprison all who call upon your name.”
15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for this man is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before Gentiles, kings, and Israelites,
16 and I will show him what he will have to suffer for my name.”

So Jesus called Saul to a role as a missionary. He never says that Paul is to be counted as an Apostle or to replace Judas as one of the 12 now does he? That is simply your fabrication to further your theological abstract.

17 So Ananias went and entered the house; laying his hands on him, he said, “Saul, my brother, the Lord has sent me, Jesus who appeared to you on the way by which you came, that you may regain your sight and be filled with the holy Spirit.”
18 Immediately things like scales fell from his eyes and he regained his sight. He got up and was baptized,
19 and when he had eaten, he recovered his strength. He stayed some days with the disciples in Damascus,
20 and he began at once to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.

So Ananias, representing the Church in Damascus, carries out the Lord’s orders and baptizes him. This is a discrete action. it doesn’t say that when the scales fell out of his eyes, he recieved the holy spirit. It says he was baptized. There is significance in that statement. Notice, before he goes to proclaim Jesus, he spends some days with the members of the Church in Damascus, He did not go out alone.
21 All who heard him were astounded and said, “Is not this the man who in Jerusalem ravaged those who call upon this name, and came here expressly to take them back in chains to the chief priests?”
22 But Saul grew all the stronger and confounded (the) Jews who lived in Damascus, proving that this is the Messiah.
23 After a long time had passed, the Jews conspired to kill him,
24 but their plot became known to Saul. Now they were keeping watch on the gates day and night so as to kill him,
25 but his disciples took him one night and let him down through an opening in the wall, lowering him in a basket.
Notice, he stayed a long time in Damascus, preaching the gospel before being forced to leave.

to be continued.

 

[paul_c]

26 When he arrived in Jerusalem he tried to join the disciples, but they were all afraid of him, not believing that he was a disciple.
27 Then Barnabas took charge of him and brought him to the apostles, and he reported to them how on the way he had seen the Lord and that he had spoken to him, and how in Damascus he had spoken out boldly in the name of Jesus.
28 He moved about freely with them in Jerusalem, and spoke out boldly in the name of the Lord.
29 He also spoke and debated with the Hellenists, but they tried to kill him.
30 And when the brothers learned of this, they took him down to Caesarea and sent him on his way to Tarsus

Note, that Paul was not frelancing when he went back to Jerusalem but wanted to be accepted as a member of the Church, a situation which Barnabas, who was eventually also recognized as an Apostle, facilitated. by bringing Paul to the Apostles, which at this point also included Matthias.

And notice when Paul got into trouble with the Hellenists, it was the Chruch that sent him to Tarsus for his safety. In Acts 10, Barnabas will retrieve Paul and bring him to Antioch. and it is the chruch in Antioch that sends them on their Apostolic missions. and in Acts 15, Paul’s role ot the gentiles is further defined by the church

So you can see clearly that Paul is always operating under the auspices and leadership of the Catholic Church from the point where Ananius baptized him to the point were he is recognized as an Apostle himself.

As for the 12 apostles recognized in Revelations as providing the foundation, You are being highly presumptious Who are you to decide that Paul is deserving of a spot? Do you think he himself would try to claim it? What is your criteria? Paul was a very, very Great Apostle, but that fact in itself means nothing in terms of John’s revelation. And it certainly does not mean that St. Peter erred in replacing Judas with Matthias. There is no linkage between the two points. Clearly Barnabas was called an Apostle as well in Acts 14:14 so even if Matthias hadn’t been added, there still would have been at least 13 Apostles to fit into the 12 slots if your theory was correct. Which it clearly can not be.

 

[michaelsmth626]

Thanks for saying so, Michael, but i was making no point; just asking questions.

The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

(Revelation 21:14)

Yes, i find the passage you cite fascinating. Also fascinating are these words:

Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”

(Matthew 19:28)

Do you think, Michael, that the Apostles were not looking for a continuing line of successors? Do you think, perhaps that they were not looking that far into the future, but just trying to keep their number to 12 in order for there to be 12 ready to rule on Christ’s return?

The passive evidence threw out their writings suggest they knew they were appointed. Acts 1-2 indicates from the start Jesus did the selecting, not to mention the Gospels.
The larger picture I see indicates they also spoke of an equality between them and those that are grafted into the kingdom, the equality being the HS. They spoke of those that have received Jesus and their message to continue in the truth. They spoke of Spirit leading and guiding them as it had also been demonstrated in themselves. The foundation stones 12 will never be replaced just as the 12 tribes gates will never be replaced God is building a kingdom and demonstrating threw the word and careful instruction what it will look like. If you will every single born of the Spirit believer that has died is in effect the next stone layed upon one of the 12 and those stones also produce more stones that are permanently placed on those and the building continues even to day. These are the successors or fruit or wheat or the body of believers. At the top of the wall are those of us today that still live the workmen. If you followed Rev CH 12 as I posted it earlier with this picture in your mind, you see that after the wall was established in the 12 fill in the gaps between the gates Satan was cast out of the sanctuary outside the wall and gates. He can not penetrate the gates or wall but the attack continues against the workmen at the top of the wall today. He uses what ever weapon he can muster against these workmen, these workmen when they die will become the next stones to be layed in place. Satan continually attacks them to prevent them from adding more workmen to the task. Adding more successors from the Apostles foundation that was layed by Jesus.

You can see from the map below that the camp of Israel in the wilderness is a picture of what John discribes in Rev 21, without the wall of course. It takes exactly 12 to fill the gaps between the camps or gates.
http://www.biblenews1.com/wmap/Israelcamp.gif

The next phase in the picture will be when Satin is put way, the stones of the wall “post Jesus believers” and the people of the gates “pre Jesus believers” will all be resurrected around the Throne of God, we will all be placed according to our place and time just as the HS has called and placed us, just as we were layed into the wall or gate. We will be able to trace every single step of the HS from Adam to the last living workman. Their will be 12 tribes and their descendants spread behind them, there will be 12 Apostles with their descendants spread behind them. Then we will know as we have been known. To be know by God is to become a living stone the stones will now know “see” by their placement just as we were known by God. Like wise I believe that the same will be done for those that did not receive the HS. The original sin will be used instead of the HS, that sin the spirit of antichrist will be seen as it passed threw the ages effecting first Cain to the very last antichrist. Everyone all neatly lined up in perfect order or disorder. Our sins will not be seen or remembered any more all we will see is finished work of God. Like wise nothing but path of sin will be seen in the gathering together of the unsaved, nothing good will be seen or remembered.

Their were and are only 12 Apostles. And woo to him that encroaches on an other mans property or moves a boundary stone.
12 + 12 is 24 ------ 24 elders perhaps 12 Apostles and 12 Sons of Jacob? The new and the old covenant.
I long to see that day that I might know just where the LORD has grafted me into the kingdom of God.
I ask you now do you see a church founded on Peter the rock? Or do you see the kingdom of God?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

The passive evidence threw out their writings suggest they knew they were appointed. Acts 1-2 indicates from the start Jesus did the selecting, not to mention the Gospels.
The larger picture I see indicates they also spoke of an equality between them and those that are grafted into the kingdom, the equality being the HS. They spoke of those that have received Jesus and their message to continue in the truth. They spoke of Spirit leading and guiding them as it had also been demonstrated in themselves. The foundation stones 12 will never be replaced just as the 12 tribes gates will never be replaced God is building a kingdom and demonstrating threw the word and careful instruction what it will look like. If you will every single born of the Spirit believer that has died is in effect the next stone layed upon one of the 12 and those stones also produce more stones that are permanently placed on those and the building continues even to day. These are the successors or fruit or wheat or the body of believers. At the top of the wall are those of us today that still live the workmen. If you followed Rev CH 12 as I posted it earlier with this picture in your mind, you see that after the wall was established in the 12 fill in the gaps between the gates Satan was cast out of the sanctuary outside the wall and gates. He can not penetrate the gates or wall but the attack continues against the workmen at the top of the wall today. He uses what ever weapon he can muster against these workmen, these workmen when they die will become the next stones to be layed in place. Satan continually attacks them to prevent them from adding more workmen to the task. Adding more successors from the Apostles foundation that was layed by Jesus.

You can see from the map below that the camp of Israel in the wilderness is a picture of what John discribes in Rev 21, without the wall of course. It takes exactly 12 to fill the gaps between the camps or gates.
http://www.biblenews1.com/wmap/Israelcamp.gif

The next phase in the picture will be when Satin is put way, the stones of the wall “post Jesus believers” and the people of the gates “pre Jesus believers” will all be resurrected around the Throne of God, we will all be placed according to our place and time just as the HS has called and placed us, just as we were layed into the wall or gate. We will be able to trace every single step of the HS from Adam to the last living workman. Their will be 12 tribes and their descendants spread behind them, there will be 12 Apostles with their descendants spread behind them. Then we will know as we have been known. To be know by God is to become a living stone the stones will now know “see” by their placement just as we were known by God. Like wise I believe that the same will be done for those that did not receive the HS. The original sin will be used instead of the HS, that sin the spirit of antichrist will be seen as it passed threw the ages effecting first Cain to the very last antichrist. Everyone all neatly lined up in perfect order or disorder. Our sins will not be seen or remembered any more all we will see is finished work of God. Like wise nothing but path of sin will be seen in the gathering together of the unsaved, nothing good will be seen or remembered.

Their were and are only 12 Apostles. And woo to him that encroaches on an other mans property or moves a boundary stone.
12 + 12 is 24 ------ 24 elders perhaps 12 Apostles and 12 Sons of Jacob? The new and the old covenant.
I long to see that day that I might know just where the LORD has grafted me into the kingdom of God.
I ask you now do you see a church founded on Peter the rock? Or do you see the kingdom of God?

Yes, but please let me ask you this: When David was chosen King by God, through the laying on of hands of Samuel the prophet, he was from the tribe of Benjamin, correct?

 

[michaelsmth626]

Yes, but please let me ask you this: When David was chosen King by God, through the laying on of hands of Samuel the prophet, he was from the tribe of Benjamin, correct?

David was the eighth and youngest son of Jesse from the tribe of Judah.

There are other maps that depict to arangement differently than the one I posted.
I like this one because it has Judah and the Levites placed facing the Temple entrance.

Yes, but please let me ask you this: When David was chosen King by God, through the laying on of hands of Samuel the prophet, he was from the tribe of Benjamin, correct?

David was the eighth and youngest son of Jesse from the tribe of Judah.

There are other maps that depict to arrangement differently than the one I posted.
I like this one because it has Judah and the Levite’s placed facing the Temple entrance.

By the way I would like to know where the Apostles names go on this map in especially Peter, Paul James and John? and of course perhaps Matthius.
their are only 12 gaps between the gates.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

dear Soc.

Clement is recognized as the fourth, after Cletus/Anacletus. As you know there are different presentations of the sequence of the very first bishops of Rome in the sources.
Is that the question you want to explore ?

P7:

Not sure what i want to explore. Just stepped out of the tent and am surveying the virgin scenery. I suppose we could hike in any direction you choose so that you teach me, on the trail of Church History. It seems Clement believe in a succession of bishops. Trying to find out how early this witness is.

Can you tell me, was it Clement who first penned the word Pope, or was it a later Church Father?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

David was the eighth and youngest son of Jesse from the tribe of Judah.

There are other maps that depict to arangement differently than the one I posted.
I like this one because it has Judah and the Levites placed facing the Temple entrance.

So then, would you say that as God’s chosen King David was, not only a man after God’s own heart, but also the ruler of the tribe of Benjamin?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Great that we seem to agree that the above argument on which many protestant brothers seem to found the teaching authorities of their magisteriums, or of themselves, appear flawed.

Let me reformulate your questions: what can be the decision-making organ in the Church ? …

Thank you for trying to help, but your reformulation is not my intention. You are getting ahead of me, for what i want to know at the moment is this: Do you believe that God reveals His will to only a select few, or to as many as who will accept such revelation? For example, does the parishioner in the pew have as much access to God’s wisdom as the Pope in Peter’s seat?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

I must say that this is a very long thread, I have just spent the last few days reading every post. I have a few notes which may help:

@Socrates4Jesus:

It seems that you not only delight in dialog, but also in being on the island, which is a suggestion that could also be made of Gilligan. …

Sir, i can see you are a prophet, for you know things about me that i don’t even know myself! But i’m reminded of Jesus’ warning:
“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them.”

(Matthew 715-16)

Therefore, i think it prudent to test your spirits to see if they are from God. What proof can you give me that you do indeed have access to wisdom from God regarding my state of mind that i don’t even have myself? Can you predict my future in detail, as the prophets of the past? Can you tell me something nobody else but i know about myself? If not, then how can you claim you know me better than i know myself?

 

[michaelsmth626]

So then, would you say that as God’s chosen King David was, not only a man after God’s own heart, but also the ruler of the tribe of Benjamin?

Again we see the same scenario repeated the first King was Saul he came from the tribe of Benjamin. If the scholars of scripture were on the ball they should have know that this did not line up with the prophesy about Judah. Saul was chosen by the people not unlike Peters choice about Matthius. David was chosen by the LORD not unlike Jesus choice with Paul. Are you beginning to see a pattern here also?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Again we see the same scenario repeated the first King was Saul he came from the tribe of Benjamin. If the scholars of scripture were on the ball they should have know that this did not line up with the prophesy about Judah. Saul was chosen by the people not unlike Peters choice about Matthius. David was chosen by the LORD not unlike Jesus choice with Paul. Are you beginning to see a pattern here also?

Perhaps, but i’m wondering something else. I take it from your answer that you believe that David was chosen by God as the head of the tribe of Benjamin. But i’m wondering this: Do you believe this man after God’s own heart was also chosen as head of all of the 12 Jewish tribes?

 

[michaelsmth626]

Perhaps, but i’m wondering something else. I take it from your answer that you believe that David was chosen by God as the head of the tribe of Benjamin. But i’m wondering this: Do you believe this man after God’s own heart was also chosen as head of all of the 12 Jewish tribes?

I’ll say it one more time before I have to leave for a while.
Saul was from the tribe of Benjamin
David was from the tribe of Judah
Both held sway over all the clans men.
Saul was elected by the pepole
David was elected by God, Samuel sought the LORDS choice right to David.
The elected king Saul is never referred to as the throne of God
Gods choice David is always referred to as the throne of God.

IMHO
Peters choice Mattias is the same as the peoples choice for Saul
Jesus choice of Paul is the same as Gods choice of David

The very same pattern is being repeated in Peters choice as opposed to Jesus choice.
As it was with the first King of Israel.
The NT is very much the same as the OT we see both the strengths and weaknesses of the key players. The scriptures are testifying for themselves. There is no guess work here.

When will people ever get it into their heads that men do not elect other men into the kingdom. The kingdom is not theirs to give. We are all guest sent a personal invitation “the HS” threw the gospel or promise of the seed of Abraham to attend. We are all elected by God, none of us have the right to even be considered a guest let alone become a son, because of our sins, but yet we have entered in. Now what right do you or I or the church have inviting in my own guest? ABSOLUTELY NONE!

It makes no difference whether the 12 clans men heads wanted David or not.
If they received him they receive the gift of God, if the reject him they reject the gift of God.
If that head of the clan rejected the gift, it is his alone, it does not effect the members of the clan unless they chose to follow the clan head instead of God.
Gods election stands it is not dependent on the will of men.
The Holy Spirit in the NT is the same as I have been saying it is sent by the LORDS ELECTION ALONE.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

I’ll say it one more time before I have to leave for a while.
Saul was from the tribe of Benjamin
David was from the tribe of Judah
Both held sway over all the clans men.
Saul was elected by the pepole
David was elected by God, Samuel sought the LORDS choice right to David.
The elected king Saul is never referred to as the throne of God
Gods choice David is always referred to as the throne of God.

IMHO
Peters choice Mattias is the same as the peoples choice for Saul
Jesus choice of Paul is the same as Gods choice of David

The very same pattern is being repeated in Peters choice as opposed to Jesus choice.
As it was with the first King of Israel.
The NT is very much the same as the OT we see both the strengths and weaknesses of the key players. The scriptures are testifying for themselves. There is no guess work here.

When will people ever get it into their heads that men do not elect other men into the kingdom. The kingdom is not theirs to give. We are all guest sent a personal invitation “the HS” threw the gospel or promise of the seed of Abraham to attend. We are all elected by God, none of us have the right to even be considered a guest let alone become a son, because of our sins, but yet we have entered in. Now what right do you or I or the church have inviting in my own guest? ABSOLUTELY NONE!

It makes no difference whether the 12 clans men heads wanted David or not.
If they received him they receive the gift of God, if the reject him they reject the gift of God.
If that head of the clan rejected the gift, it is his alone, it does not effect the members of the clan unless they chose to follow the clan head instead of God.
Gods election stands it is not dependent on the will of men.
The Holy Spirit in the NT is the same as I have been saying it is sent by the LORDS ELECTION ALONE.

OK, let me know when you are ready to answer my question.

 

[pneuma07]

P7:

Not sure what i want to explore. Just stepped out of the tent and am surveying the virgin scenery. I suppose we could hike in any direction you choose so that you teach me, on the trail of Church History. It seems Clement believe in a succession of bishops. Trying to find out how early this witness is.

Can you tell me, was it Clement who first penned the word Pope, or was it a later Church Father?

dear soc.

in Clement’s epistle to Corinthians the word Pope does not appear penned.
this term, meaning father, would come eventually to be restricted to the bishop of Rome.
In the oriental orthodox church, as distinct from eastern orthodox church, you find this title attributed to the bishop of Alexandria.

Clement’s witness on apostolic succession is very precious since it belongs to the first post-apostolic generation, comes from an insider, and was even considered as a book candidate to the Canon.

The very fact that Rome was addressed to settle a disputation in a local church which was outside Italy, and even outside the western part of the empire, speaks a lot about
the very special consideration the roman church was held in within the first post-apostolic generation.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

dear soc.

in Clement’s epistle to Corinthians the word Pope does not appear penned.
this term, meaning father, would come eventually to be restricted to the bishop of Rome.
In the oriental orthodox church, as distinct from eastern orthodox church, you find this title attributed to the bishop of Alexandria.

Clement’s witness on apostolic succession is very precious since it belongs to the first post-apostolic generation, comes from an insider, and was even considered as a book candidate to the Canon.

The very fact that Rome was addressed to settle a disputation in a local church which was outside Italy, and even outside the western part of the empire, speaks a lot about
the very special consideration the roman church was held in within the first post-apostolic generation.

Did Clement advocate the Papacy, albeit by a different name? Is there a link to one of his epistles that we might use to discuss this more intelligently?

 

[paul_c]

Michaelsmth626:

Your discussion of Saul vs David being a precursor for Matthias vs Paul is hugely flawed.

First of all, Saul, the first king of Israel, was not picked by the people, he was picked by God, See 1 Samuel 10…
Saul was eventually replaced by David because Saul overstepped his bounds and tried to offer sacrifices as if he was a priest.

Secondly, Paul never replaced Matthias, he augmented him. Matthias has never been shown to be unfaithful to his position. Like most of the Apostles, we don’t have much in the way of recorded history of his actions. Like all the apostles, he was spreading the word of God, outside the glare of publicity until he was eventually martyred.

Also, you are way too absorbed with the details of Revelation. As an apocolyptic work, the imagery is what is important. For instance, you don’t get hung up with the thought that Jesus has 7 eyes and 7 horns, because he is described that way in Revelations, do you? The Apostles teachings are the foundation of heaven. The israelites were the gates by which the word of God entered the world, hence they are termed the Gates… It wasn’t meant to imply that there was a meritocracy to having your name on the wall. To try to use Revelations to disprove the mission of the Catholic church is to misunderstand the book totally. It was written in the face of Church persecution to give the faithful hope.

By the way, if the Revelation of the 24 elders is as you say, wouldn’t John have seen himself there as one of the Apostles?

 

[paul_c]

Did Clement advocate the Papacy, albeit by a different name? Is there a link to one of his epistles that we might use to discuss this more intelligently?

I sent you th elink to his epistle to the Corithians earlier. if you can’t find it, simply Google " Pope Clement’s epistle to the Corinthians." In this letter, written in 96 Ad or thereabouts, he demonstrates Papal authority by settling a dispute in Corinth.

 

[paul_c]

Socrates,
by the way, your lengthy courtroom analogy was fraught with error that comes from your preconcieved notion that Paul should be the 12th apostle, not Matthias.

1. Saul was not renamed Paul by Jesus. No where in scripture is this stated,. Paul is simply the Greek version of Saul. When he was working among the gentiles, it was probably easier to go by the Greek version of the name. Just like Cephas is the Hebrew version of Peter, yet among the Greek speakers, he was always known as Peter. but when Paul speaks of him, he always calls him Cephas.
2. there is nothing , other than one line that was supposed to be taken as imagery in Revelations, that limited the church to 12 apostles for all times. In fact, we know they had at least 14 in place by the time of the Council of Jerusalem was held in 49Ad, and probably several more.
3. You have no reason to believe that Peter made an error in filling the 12th Apostle slot wiht Matthias. certainly if he had, there would have been some mention of it in scripture, right?