Questioning the reformation!

[ReverendRV]

The True Church is founded on Christ alone.
Not Peter.
All Christians are blessed.
Change Peter’s name to Herbert.
Christ was saying thou art Peter “little stone” to differentiate between little stone and Christ the Rock.

Does he want to talk to you about the Protestant Reformation? That's the OP...

 

[Arial]

Reformation?
Where does the Bible say have a reformation? “Bible only authority” therefore the so-called reforms had “no” authority!

Well---the coming of the new covenant was a major reformation in its fulfillment of the old covenant by Jesus.

You say that the Bible is the only authority and the RCC says it is a higher authority that the Bible, and the only authority on Bible interpretation. The Reformation was a breaking away from the many heresies of the RCC having enforced their heresies when they said they were the only interpretive authority. The Reformation returned the doctrines of Christ's church, not the RCC, back to the foundation that the apostles laid with Christ as the chief cornerstone as opposed to the RCC being the chief cornerstone. In the process of the RCC replacing Christ as the chief cornerstone, they also replaced the apostles with their own popes, and bishops, and cardinals etc, and with a mighty heavy hand forced the people to bow to them.

 

[Arial]

Is it possible both views go a little to the extreme?

I would need to know in what way you consider the Reformation as going to extremes. It is quite possible that in some ways they did, as people tend to do that. In their zeal they get ahold of a bone and won't quit until until it is chewed to smithereens.

Case in point: In the age of enlightenment when the historic doctrines of the protestant church began to be dismantled and replaced with no doctrine but moral teachings, the Fundamentalists arose to combat this. As time went by that morphed into churches that were so legalistic and overbearing, the gospel all but disappeared and it too was replaced in fundamentalism with a strictly moral Christianity.

 

[TB2]

.

 

[atpollard]

Brother? What kind is brother?

Not an apostle?

Matt 10:2
2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;

3 Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus;

4 Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.

James was an apostle but not the son of Mary and Joseph!

Thanks

I am almost certain that James (of the Jerusalem Council in Acts) is the author of the letter "James" and not the brother of John (son of Zebedee) ... making him James, the brother of Jesus and not James, the son of Thunder (Apostle).

 

[Arial]

the coming of the new covenant was a major reformation in its fulfillment of the old covenant by Jesus.

the coming of the new covenant was a major reformation in its fulfillment of the old covenant by Jesus.

You have to take what I said and refute it not something you change it into.
If Christ fulfills the old covenant, there is no need for it any longer. So why does the RCC try to keep it alive with them put the place of dispensing grace. Their priests, and popes, and bishops, and many intercessors between man and God.

 

[donadams]

There is more than one use of the term "apostle" in the NT. Apostle simply means (1) messenger; apostle can also be in reference to (2) one of the twelve; apostle can also designate (3) those who witnessed the resurrected Christ, who Christ bodily appeared to after His resurrection.

#3 includes those like the apostle Paul as well as James the brother of Jesus (see, 1 Cor 15.3-5)

2 Tim 1.1
Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, in keeping with the promise of life that is in Christ Jesus

Do you think James is a biological brother of Jesus?

 

[donadams]

I am almost certain that James (of the Jerusalem Council in Acts) is the author of the letter "James" and not the brother of John (son of Zebedee) ... making him James, the brother of Jesus and not James, the son of Thunder (Apostle).

Biological brother of Jesus?

 

[TB2]

Paul don’t qualify as an apostle but he is an apostle

?

 

[TB2]

Of course there is only one God and one savior and Jesus Christ is our salvation not only a doctrine to be believed but also a sacrificial lamb Jn 1:29 and our salvation in His person

Amen!

but we are talking about who governs the church on earth since Christ ascended to heaven!

Scripture says Church founded on Jesus first and secondarily apostles and prophets. As far as "governance" goes, we don't see much of a developed ecclesiastical structure in the first century. The church met in various homes.

 

[TB2]

Mark 6:1-3 [New Jerusalem Bible]

1 Leaving that district, he went to his home town, and his disciples accompanied him.​

2 With the coming of the Sabbath he began teaching in the synagogue, and most of them were astonished when they heard him. They said, 'Where did the man get all this? What is this wisdom that has been granted him, and these miracles that are worked through him?​

3 This is the carpenter, surely, the son of Mary, the brother of James and Joset and Jude and Simon? His sisters, too, are they not here with us?' And they would not accept him.​

Anticipating the discussion on "brother" = "cousin" or "step-brother", why did the translators of the "most widely used" Catholic Bible choose to say "brothers" if they knew that the Greek really meant something different? Mark SAID brothers, so the translators said BROTHERS. It is "tradition" that says "Tain't so".

Embrace your traditions with my blessings if that is what your conscience and the Spirit say is right even after reading the WORD. As a Particular Baptist, "Individual Soul Liberty" (people answer to God, not to other people) is a big deal to me and other Baptists. I only demand the same "Soul Liberty" to follow my conscience and the Spirit and the WORD by rejecting tradition. God will judge us, not men.

Yes, and even Jewish historian Josephus attests to James the leader of the Jerusalem church being Jesus's brother.

 

[atpollard]

Not an apostle according to acts 1 but according to Christ!
Thanks

I am probably a heretic for thinking this, but it always fascinated me that MEN decided one way to replace the missing "Apostle" and Jesus seems to have chosen another way to replace the missing Apostle. How typical of Jesus, the Apostles and ... well, US in general.

 

[fastfredy0]

Yes, I think so.

MEN chose Matthias.
GOD chose Paul.

Maybe God used men to chose Matthias ... or maybe men have "free will" to chose Matthias.
@TB2

 

[TB2]

Maybe God used men to chose Matthias ... or maybe men have "free will" to chose Matthias.
@TB2

I'm not sure we can see Matthias as "man's choice." There was precedent for the use of lots in OT. See also Prov 16.33 where outcome of lots belongs to the Lord. After the Spirit comes though we don't see lots used again. Everything seems to be done by prayer.

 

[Arial]

Who did christ appoint the kingdom?

All who are given to Him by the Father. The very ones that believe in the sufficiency of His person and work.

And the triple office to teach and sanctify and govern the church till He returns?

The offices of the church given by Paul---shepherds, teachers, bishops, elders, overseers (no pope , no cardinal, no priest in there) are the governing structure of individual congregations. And the RCC borrowed the title of bishop then applied it to their organization, and uses it now as though they authenticate the Bible and the Bible authenticates them. Just like calling Peter the first pope.

 

[fastfredy0]

I'm not sure we can see Matthias as "man's choice."

Well, we know men chose Matthias .... we don't know all the causes that went into their decision.

There was precedent for the use of lots in OT.

I know people used lots to decide things and God determines the decision of a lot (or coin flip, whatever) ... but I don't know of any biblical reason to use such a process.

After the Spirit comes though we don't see lots used again. Everything seems to be done by prayer.

I suppose so.
Hmmm ... should I turn left or right ... I pray on it ... how does one get the answer from that prayer?

 

[TB2]

know people used lots to decide things and God determines the decision of a lot (or coin flip, whatever) ... but I don't know of any biblical reason to use such a process.

There was precedent in the OT. In Acts 1 we also see they consulted God in prayer before casting lots.

23 So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24 Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” 26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.

I suppose so.
Hmmm ... should I turn left or right ... I pray on it ... how does one get the answer from that prayer?

We see the Spirit directing and guiding them in Acts in a variety of different ways.

 

[fastfredy0]

There was precedent in the OT. In Acts 1 we also see they consulted God in prayer before casting lots.

23 So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24 Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” 26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.

Again, I know they did such a thing ... I don't know of any scripture saying it was an appropriate way to make decisions. Now Proverbs says there is wisdom in the council of many so that would be an example of scripture supporting the decision making process.

We see the Spirit directing and guiding them in Acts in a variety of different ways.

The spirit definitely guides ... the methodology of said guidance is a mystery to me (save scripture).

 

[donadams]

Yes. (See post #70)

No this James is the brother of John
Matt 10:2
Not biological brothers of Jesus,
Jesus was the only begotten of the father and only born of Mary!

Thanks

 

[TB2]

Where does it say biological bothers?

"Biological brothers" is of course a modern term, so we wouldn't find something so anachronistic. But the verses I cited make clear that Mary and Joseph's family (of which Jesus was a part) included sibling brothers to Jesus. Other sons born to Mary and Jospeh.