Who's the Preist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Montie_Claunch
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Montie_Claunch

Guest
I was given this pamplet by this gentleman at school that says that we don’t need the “Sacrificeing priesthood”. That we are the preisthood. It cites the following scriptures:

1st Peter 2:5,9

Revelation 1:5,6

Matthew 20:25-28

What should I say about this next time I see him? Thanks and God bless.
 
Montie,

There is a difference between the priesthood that we all share and the priesthood to which some men are ordained. That the Apostles had special powers that regular Christians did not is found in Acts 9:14-17, in which Peter and John go down to Samaria to lay hands on the Samaritan converts so that they could receive the Holy Spirit. In the same way ancient Israel was a “priestly nation” (Exodus 19:6) but they still had their sacrificing priesthood.

I’m not sure why the writer of the pamphlet included Matthew 20:25-28 in his list of references, as it says nothing at all about a priesthood.
  • Liberian
 
Sounds like “Korah’s rebellion” all over again. (Jude 1:11; Numbers 16:1-35)
 
Liberian said:
I’m not sure why the writer of the pamphlet included Matthew 20:25-28 in his list of references, as it says nothing at all about a priesthood.
  • Liberian
Click to expand...
[SIGN]I do[/SIGN]…it’s his way of implying that the Catholic Church is in violation of that passage, which is just more a-C propaganda. Only someone who doesn’t even know a priest personally would make such an assertion (though there may be some like that…they are not the norm I have ever seen.)

Watch for him to attempt to apply it to the Pope and our bishops.

Look at what the passage says…

25: But Jesus called them to him and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them.
26: It shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must be your servant,
27: and whoever would be first among you must be your slave;
28: even as the Son of man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

In debate it’s called “a straw man argument” meaning that it has no substance but is meant to weaken the opponent’s case. In fact all it does is weaken the proponent of the arguments since it makes it plain that he has no case.
Blackie
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top