Who presided the council of Jerusalem?

[PJM]

James was the BISHOP of Jerusalem; WHILE Peter was the POPE for the Universal Church; it is notable that it WAS PETER who made the defining and FINAL decision.

May God guide your path

Patrick

 

[MT1926]

Could you ask him why he is using Acts 10 as his defense against Peter’s Authority in Acts 15?

Read Acts 10. This is the Chapter where God gives Peter, and only Peter, a vision to lead the Church into allowing Gentiles to be Baptized. I’m not seeing the point he is trying to make?

As for the we/they analogy I can’t see where he is going with that. Could you ask him to expand on his thought process

 

[Reuben_J]

Good and reasonable post.

A good question: How did James become the leader of the Jerusalem Church and who appointed James to that role?

I may add: was the Jerusalem Church a local or universal Church?

Maybe the key to understand this is the term or role rather, of being the presider. Can it be similar to today’s chairman of a meeting? Or does a presider has to be the leader of the apostles?

Looking at how prominent Peter’s role in the Acts is, I agree that James was more of a leader of the Jewish sect of the Christian Church at Jerusalem.

 

[Cathoholic]

I made a mistake here. Please forgive me DM_P.

DM_P.

How can you support this?

Cathoholic:

You will just have to take my word for it.

Then I went to state . . .

The next time you are at a Confirmation ceremony, Chrism Mass, etc., just ask your Bishop at the reception afterward. He will tell you.

.

I wasn’t paying close enough attention and now I see YOU were the OP here.

Sorry. I thought this might just be a poster attempting to disrupt the thread.

Right now I am sort of out of commission (see here). I’ll maybe get back here in the next few days and give you a better answer.

Right now I can do an Android device (from bed), but I really need to be able to sit up better so I can go in the other room and get to my computer (which has my reference info., at least much MORE reference info than my Android tablet).

No promises but I’ll see what I can do for you then.

 

[MamasBoy33]

If this is the official position of the church on this, how then can i argue Peter’s primacy from this verse? Does this reduce the argument of Peter’s primacy?

Can i recommend a great teaching on this.
Its from Tim Staples and its called "The Shocking Truth About the Pope and the Church Fathers "- …
This cd is Amazing

 

[guanophore]

It appears that James has ultimate authority ( I have reached the decision ), but that would only be apparent, however, because he is speaking to the Jewish community at Jerusalem. He says “…we should not trouble those Gentiles… we should write to them…” Since James is the leader of the Jewish Christians, while Peter has been directed to go to the Gentiles, eventually in Rome: “that I should be the one through whom the Gentiles would hear the message”

Actually it was James who was in the wrong, but was corrected by the testimony of the other Apostles. James was a separatist, and his idea that all Christians first needed to become Jews, separating Jews and Gentiles and compelling Christians to follow the Laws of Moses was splitting the Church.

12For before that some came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them who were of the circumcision. 13And to his dissimulation the rest of the Jews consented, so that Barnabas also was led by them into that dissimulation. 14But when I saw that they walked not uprightly unto the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all: If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as the Jews do, how dost thou compel the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? Gal. 2.

It was James who needed to change his mind, in light of what the others’ testified. He was pursuaded that the Judaic law did not need to be imposed upon the converts. He had to take the lead to correct it, because he had been the lead in promulgating Judiazing.

 

[DM_P]

No worries my friend. Glad if you could give me those references. It will help me a lot

 

[mattp0625]

Not so much

Step 1 - the apostles and ancients gathered

Step 2 - there was “much disputing”

Step 3 - after much disputing, Peter rose up and spoke, issuing his answer regarding circumcision and the Jewish law

Step 4 - After Peter spoke, everyone “held their peace”

Step 5 - James, as the local bishop, refers to Peter’s testimony and agrees to implement it

Step 6 - The council issues the decree

Step 7- Paul and Baranabas are chosen to relay the authoritative decree to Antioch (the other center of Christianity at the time)

Notice this is not sola scriptura

Notice this decree was binding on all Christians

This is not Protestant at all

This does not negate the primacy of Peter