Men were chosen by the CLERGY and laity, but did they receive their appointment/ordination from those, or did they receive an imposition of hands from those with Apostolic authority, who received their authority from the authority of the ‘whole’ Church?
Do tell how a church gave their authority from 500 miles away? And I request an exact source please. I contend the whole church means just that. The church that sent them ie the church that met in the home of Aquila and Priscilla consented. How did this work according to your theory? And rest assured, it is YOUR theory. I have never come across anything that suggests anything like you are saying so I think it is ok to ask for a source.Men were chosen by the CLERGY and laity, but did they receive their appointment/ordination from those, or did they receive an imposition of hands from those with Apostolic authority, who received their authority from the authority of the ‘whole’ Church?
The first problem is the use of the word priest. There is a Greek word for priest. It does not refer to any of the three fold ministry. There is a word for presbyter as well. They are not the same word.
Priest and presbyter. Two seperate words. What you will find is an attempt to say that priest comes from presbyter but that never occured in the Bible itself.
**pres·by·ter (przb-tr, prs-)
n.
a. A teaching elder in the Presbyterian Church.
- A priest** in various hierarchical churches.
b. A ruling elder in the Presbyterian Church.
3. An elder of the congregation in the early Christian church.
Now, what differences are there between Acts and Hebrews? Two different authors, using words synonymous with each other.Take a concordance and look up Acts 14:13 or any of the verses that it appears, although it is usually high priest that is especially found in Hebrews.
The apostles absolutely appointed people. Everyone knows that. But they did not appoint everyone. If it stated that only apostles or bishops can appoint, the Catholics would have provided that verse a long time ago. It does not exist. Paul had hands laid on him but his apostleship came from God. We have no evidence for a linear laying on of hands being necessary. Its completely absent from the New Testament and early church history as well. Clement does not teach that. The Didache does not teach that. It just aint there…
It’s called DOCTRINE. You have to read in context and with a desire to fit your theology to scriptures, as opposed to the other way around. There was one Church in many locations, that’s the whole Church. This cannot be denied evident by the writings of instruction and corrections to various Churches, ALL teaching the same things.Do tell how a church gave their authority from 500 miles away? And I request an exact source please. I contend the whole church means just that. The church that sent them ie the church that met in the home of Aquila and Priscilla consented. How did this work according to your theory? And rest assured, it is YOUR theory. I have never come across anything that suggests anything like you are saying so I think it is ok to ask for a source.
From what i can see, all the biblical passages relating to the Apostles, Bishops, Presbyters and deacons say that they were “sent” or were “ordained” by someone who was sent. The only people who were not “sent” or ordained seem to be the ones who were spreading false teaching. So what i want to know is if you do not have Apostolic succession who “sent” you and therefore how can you be a pastor?
The consent of the whole church means what again? Im looking for the answer. Consent of the whole church means…doctrine? Elaborate please. Please use Clement or the Didache in your answer to show your view in context.It’s called DOCTRINE. You have to read in context and with a desire to fit your theology to scriptures, as opposed to the other way around. There was one Church in many locations, that’s the whole Church. This cannot be denied evident by the writings of instruction and corrections to various Churches, ALL teaching the same things.
Now, please provide a source showing the laity laid hands upon anyone and ordained them.
Wait did you just say they taught the SAME things? What about the seven churches in Revelation? Some of them were teaching false doctrines…right?It’s called DOCTRINE. You have to read in context and with a desire to fit your theology to scriptures, as opposed to the other way around. There was one Church in many locations, that’s the whole Church. This cannot be denied evident by the writings of instruction and corrections to various Churches, ALL teaching the same things.
Now, please provide a source showing the laity laid hands upon anyone and ordained them.
I do not believe in the term ordination Prodigal. We do not use it. We do use the word ordain but it is a verb indicating the setting apart. This could take awhile to explain. I do use it when talking to others though to try to clarify. I believe that the elders of the church, and the laity/three fold ministry is still blurred at this time laid hands. Yes.It’s called DOCTRINE. You have to read in context and with a desire to fit your theology to scriptures, as opposed to the other way around. There was one Church in many locations, that’s the whole Church. This cannot be denied evident by the writings of instruction and corrections to various Churches, ALL teaching the same things.
Now, please provide a source showing the laity laid hands upon anyone and ordained them.
You don’t realize the practical use, seemingly to validate Protestantism is the form the early Church used. I believe in the one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. You’re the one challenging Catholic beliefs here, provide the sources and the proof and then when it’s responded too, it would be nice to see you respond to those points raised.Show me anywhere where the word priest, and there is a word for priest, is used in regards to the office of bishop, presbyter, or elder. It never does.
Paul received it directly from God. He said so. I never said that people should not lay hands but you and I both know how the concept of Apostolic Succession has little practical use. Let me ask you, how many churches does the Catholic Church say has VALID apostolic succession? Careful, look it up before you answer…
No, you won’t use anything that might possibly confirm the Catholic view, or so it seems.I do not believe in the term ordination Prodigal. We do not use it. We do use the word ordain but it is a verb indicating the setting apart. This could take awhile to explain. I do use it when talking to others though to try to clarify. I believe that the elders of the church, and the laity/three fold ministry is still blurred at this time laid hands. Yes.
I am not doing anything of the sort. Words matter and I am just trying to be specific. We use the Bible and you cannot expect me to twist it. I am precise with words because they have meaning. Now lets move on to the content.No, you won’t use anything that might possibly confirm the Catholic view, or so it seems.
Joh 15:16 You have not chosen me: but I have chosen you; and have appointed you, that you should go and should bring forth fruit; and your fruit should remain: that whatsoever you shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
The Greek for appointed is ‘tithēmi’.
G5087
τίθημι
tithēmi
tith’-ay-mee
A prolonged form of a primary word θέω theō (which is used only as an alternate in certain tenses); to place (in the widest application, literally and figuratively; properly in a passive or horizontal posture, and thus different from G2476, which properly denotes an upright and active position, while G2749 is properly reflexive and utterly prostrate): - + advise, appoint, bow, commit, conceive, give, X kneel down, lay (aside, down, up), make, ordain, purpose, put, set (forth), settle, sink down.
You are merely using semantics to validate your view.
Ok, let’s move on. Show me where anyone, in scriptures, desired an office/appointment and received the imposition of hands from any other than an already existing authority. Or, show me, in scriptures, where anyone desired an appointment/office that assumed it on their own and was recognized by the others.There is a seperate word for priest in the NT. I will not use it in relation to the three fold ministry. I find it personally objectionable because the Bible does not do it. I understand it is how you use the term but its not what the Bible teaches.
We can’t see eye to eye on this. Best to move on to the rest of content if you will.
Yes, words matter and definitions of words specifically define a word. You don’t believe in ‘ordinations’, do you believe in 'appointed? If you believe in appointed, do you believe the definition of ‘appointed’?I am not doing anything of the sort. Words matter and I am just trying to be specific. We use the Bible and you cannot expect me to twist it. I am precise with words because they have meaning. Now lets move on to the content.
I do not expect anyone to ‘twist’ the Bible and don’t appreciate the insinuation that this is what I requested, because I assure you, I am not twisting the word.We use the Bible and you cannot expect me to twist it.
Okay I will answer this one and then please answer my question about what churches the Catholic Church recognizes as having valid orders.Ok, let’s move on. Show me where anyone, in scriptures, desired an office/appointment and received the imposition of hands from any other than an already existing authority. Or, show me, in scriptures, where anyone desired an appointment/office that assumed it on their own and was recognized by the others.