Is there salvation outside the Catholic Church?

[BreadOfLife]

Youre still deflecting. New testament koine greek is what is being discussed. Not what words became later. The n.t. greek word for priest isn't presbuteros or episkopos. Seems like a fact you just don't want to deal with. Thats your problem not mine.

No - YOU'RE deflecting because you refuse to accept how languages work.
Virtually EVERY language is like a living organism that is constantly changing and expanding. This is what Etymology is ALL about.

Presbuteros ise used some 47 times oin the New Testament.
Episkopos is used only FIVE times. As I explained before - EVERY Bishop (Episkopos) is still a Priest (Presbyter) - but NOT ever Priest is a Bishop.

And WHY do you refuse to answer the question about James 15??
If we are ALL ministerial priests - then WHY did James differentiate between those who will pray over the sick person and those who will CALL upon them??

 

[Yehren]

Wrong. Greek grammarians are the authority on n.t. koine greek.

What they don't know is the etymology of the English word "priest." And that's what etymologists are for.

When we talk about the greek n.t. we need to use first century greek lexicons. Who cares what the word became thousands of years later?

English-speakers. You all have this completely backwards.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Wrong. Greek grammarians are the authority on n.t. koine greek. When we talk about the greek n.t. we need to use first century greek lexicons. Who cares what the word became thousands of years later? You all have this completely backwards.

And YOU refuse to accept the fact that synonyms exist.

The Word Adelphos is used in the New Testament a whopping 344 times.
Adelphos means "brother" - and according to YOUR narrow logic - it can ONLY mean uterine sibling.

HOWEVER, of the 344 times we see the use of the word “Adelphos” and all its variations –
- Only 41 cases (12%) where "adelphos" clearly or probably refers to a family sibling.
- 47 cases (14%) where "adelphos" may or may not refer to a family sibling.
- Finally, there are a whopping 256 cases (74%) where "adelphos" cannot or almost certainly does not refer to a family sibling.

Adelphos is used in place of brother, step brother, half brother, cousin, uncle, nephew, friend, fellow believer, neighbor, fellow countryman, etc.

So - according to the Koine Greek of the NT - Adelphos has at least TEN synonyms.
BUT - according to YOUR rules - "Presbuteros" can only mean "Elder".

Your unschooled logic is etymologically and liguistically bankrupt . . .

 

[Nondenom40]

No - YOU'RE deflecting because you refuse to accept how languages work.
Virtually EVERY language is like a living organism that is constantly changing and expanding. This is what Etymology is ALL about.

Presbuteros ise used some 47 times oin the New Testament.
Episkopos is used only FIVE times. As I explained before - EVERY Bishop (Episkopos) is still a Priest (Presbyter) - but NOT ever Priest is a Bishop.

And WHY do you refuse to answer the question about James 15??
If we are ALL ministerial priests - then WHY did James differentiate between those who will pray over the sick person and those who will CALL upon them??

You fail to understand simple greek words. Seems you know what a greek word is when it suits you. When it doesn't its duh, whats greek? You obviously haven't studied this. Its not debatable in the n.t. Priest is not episkopos or presbuteros. Lets see the n.t. greek where either of those two words are translated priest in the english. If you can't get this much right, theres no sense going forward.

 

[Nondenom40]

What they don't know is the etymology of the English word "priest." And that's what etymologists are for.



English-speakers. You all have this completely backwards.

And as i've said. Who cares what the word means today? If you want to study the bible knowing the authors intention you need to know what he wrote, in the language he wrote it. In the case of the bible that would be koine greek. In the bible, priest isn't either presbuteros or episkopos. No amount of wiggling is going to change that.

 

[Yehren]

And as i've said. Who cares what the word means today?

English speakers care. Etymology is about how words got here. And that's what you're rebelling against. The meaning is not what you were told, and no amount of wiggling is going to change that.

 

[Nondenom40]

English speakers care. Etymology is about how words got here. And that's what you're rebelling against. The meaning is not what you were told, and no amount of wiggling is going to change that.

Well then we do bible study two very different ways. You want to know what a word means now. Thats not gonna get you very far when it comes to accuracy. If you want to know what new testament words mean, get a lexicon and find out what the koine greek means, not websters.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You fail to understand simple greek words. Seems you know what a greek word is when it suits you. When it doesn't its duh, whats greek? You obviously haven't studied this. Its not debatable in the n.t. Priest is not episkopos or presbuteros. Lets see the n.t. greek where either of those two words are translated priest in the english. If you can't get this much right, theres no sense going forward.

Once again - you're making up your own rules based on your abject ignorance of languages.

This is the same problem you anti-Catholics have with Petros (small stone) and Petra (massive stone) in Matt. 16:18.
You don't understand that the word "Petros" HAD to be used because it was referring to a man. "Petra" is a feminine worse and could NOT be used to describe Simon. Jesus didn't use Greek anyway. He spoke Aramaic and called Simon "Kepha", which simply means "Rock". That's why Paul refers to him as "Cephas" - NOT "Petros" in his letters.

Tell you what - show me an extrabiblical example of the word "Presbuteros" - PRIOR to the first century.
CAN you do that?

 

[Yehren]

Yehren says:
English speakers care. Etymology is about how words got here. And that's what you're rebelling against.

Well then we do bible study two very different ways.

If you use Bible study for etymological analysis, then yes. We use it for different purposes. But that would explain a lot of things.

You want to know what a word means now.

That's a dictionary. Etymology is when you want to learn how the word got here.

If you want to know what new testament words mean, get a lexicon and find out what the koine greek means, not websters.

I'm wondering if you even know what "koine Greek" (it's capitalized) means.

 

[Nondenom40]

Yehren says:
English speakers care. Etymology is about how words got here. And that's what you're rebelling against.

Students of the bible want to know what the writers thought. Not what 21st century americans think.

I'm wondering if you even know what "koine Greek" (it's capitalized) means.

I know exactly what it means. Do you know what a lexicon is? I'm thinking not.

 

[Nondenom40]

Once again - you're making up your own rules based on your abject ignorance of languages.

This is the same problem you anti-Catholics have with Petros (small stone) and Petra (massive stone) in Matt. 16:18.
You don't understand that the word "Petros" HAD to be used because it was referring to a man. "Petra" is a feminine worse and could NOT be used to describe Simon. Jesus didn't use Greek anyway. He spoke Aramaic and called Simon "Kepha", which simply means "Rock". That's why Paul refers to him as "Cephas" - NOT "Petros" in his letters.

Tell you what - show me an extrabiblical example of the word "Presbuteros" - PRIOR to the first century.
CAN you do that?

You keep moving the goalposts. Typical catholic tactic. And who cares if Jesus spoke aramaic? The Holy Spirit inspired the writers to write in greek right? Not aramaic. You love your strawmen arguments don't you?

 

[Yehren]

I know exactly what it means.

Apparently, you don't. You're obviously confused and annoyed that the words you expected to be one thing, turned out to be other things.

Do you know what a lexicon is?

It's not what you were told, apparently...

A lexicon, word-hoard, wordbook, or word-stock is the vocabulary of a person, language, or branch of knowledge (such as nautical or medical). In linguistics, a lexicon is a language's inventory of lexemes.
Lexicon - Wikipedia

I'm thinking not.

Hang in there, looks like you're going to be seeing a lot of things for the first time.

 

[Yehren]

You keep moving the goalposts. Typical catholic tactic. And who cares if Jesus spoke aramaic? The Holy Spirit inspired the writers to write in greek right? Not aramaic. You love your strawmen arguments don't you?

Actually, a few Aramaic words and phrases are in the NT, such as "Eli Eli lema sabachthani."

 

[Nondenom40]

Apparently, you don't. You're obviously confused and annoyed that the words you expected to be one thing, turned out to be other things.



It's not what you were told, apparently...

A lexicon, word-hoard, wordbook, or word-stock is the vocabulary of a person, language, or branch of knowledge (such as nautical or medical). In linguistics, a lexicon is a language's inventory of lexemes.
Lexicon - Wikipedia



Hang in there, looks like you're going to be seeing a lot of things for the first time.

Wikipedia? lol. Maybe i expect too much from some people? I'm not annoyed about anything. I know what the n.t. says. Apparently you'd rather know what 21st century americans think instead of the biblical authors. Again, not my problem.

 

[Nondenom40]

Actually, a few Aramaic words and phrases are in the NT, such as "Eli Eli lema sabachthani."

I never said there weren't ANY aramaic words in the n.t. But the Holy Spirit inspired the writers to pen the n.t. in koine greek, not aramaic. Unless you have that elusive extant copy of the n.t. in aramaic? Didn't think so.

 

[epostle]

There is no justification for abolishing The New Testament Priesthood. No amount of linguistic gymnastics or word games can change the biblical/historical reality of ministerial priests. To rule out ministerial priests because there is a common priesthood is a false dichotomy to the extreme. The Bible never does that. It's a tradition of men. That's what this silly discussion boils down to. "Man of God" is title is a title clearly distinct from, and part of, the common priesthood.

There is the relationship: the Scriptures are a tool for "teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness," but who is to use this tool for these purposes? That is, who has the authority to teach, reproof, correct, and train others in righteousness? The "man of God" has this authority.

But, who is the "man of God?" You may wish to claim this title for all in the common priesthood, but a short survey of Scripture's use of the title will reveal that this, too, is a privileged title that cannot be simply taken upon oneself:

Moses - "This is the blessing with which Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death." (Deut. 33:1)

"Then the people of Judah came to Joshua at Gilgal; and Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite said to him, 'You know what the LORD said to Moses the man of God in Kadesh-barnea concerning you and me.'" (Josh. 14:6)

The Angel of the Lord - "Then the woman came and told her husband, 'A man of God came to me, and his countenance was like the countenance of the angel of God, very terrible; I did not ask him whence he was, and he did not tell me his name...' Then Manoah entreated the LORD, and said, 'O, LORD, I pray thee, let the man of God whom thou didst send come again to us, and teach us what we are to do with the boy that will be born.'" (Jud. 13:6, 8)

Samuel - "The servant answered Saul again, 'Here, I have with me the fourth part of a shekel of silver, and I will give it to the man of God, to tell us our way.'" (1 Sam. 9:8)

Elijah - "And she said to Elijah, 'What have you against me, O man of God? You have come to me to bring my sin to remembrance, and to cause the death of my son!'" (1 Kings 17:18)

Elisha - "And she went up and laid him on the bed of the man of God, and shut the door upon him, and went out... When Elisha came into the house, he saw the child lying dead on his bed." (2 Kings 4:21, 32)

David - "According to the ordinance of David his father, he appointed the divisions of the priests for their service, and the Levites for their offices of praise and ministry before the priests as the duty of each day required, and the gatekeepers in their divisions for the several gates; for so David the man of God had commanded." (2 Chr. 8:14)

St. Timothy - "But as for you, man of God, shun all this; aim at righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness." (1 Tim. 6:11)

Contrary to the opinion that the "man of God" can be any Christian without distinction, Scripture itself will not allow such an interpretation, insisting that the "man of God" is a figure of authority, either commissioned by God directly through Divine Intervention (such as Moses or the Angel), or appointed by another holder of authority (such as Samuel, David, Elisha, and St. Timothy).

From this very brief survey of the phrase "man of God" (there are perhaps a dozen or so more passages), we see that what holds true for "pastors" holds true for the "man of God": it is a title of authority that can in no way be taken upon oneself, but rather, it is bestowed upon a man by a higher authority. A man must be called by God to hold this title of "man of God."

But there is another objection here: you will say, "I have been called by God to be a pastor." Very well, let us take another look at Scripture to measure your claim.
Biblically, there is only one way to become a legitimate ambassador of Christ, or "pastor": by appointment from a superior. This can be done in two ways:
1) being commissioned by a legitimate ambassador (apostolic succession), or
2) being called directly by God.

We saw examples of this in Scripture already: Ss. Timothy and Titus were appointed to their positions of authority by succession, Moses was appointed to his position directly by God, with no human mediation.

As to the first method, apostolic succession comes through the laying on of hands in ceremony: "Hence I remind you to rekindle the gift of God that is within you through the laying on of my hands... guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us." (2 Tim. 1:6, 14)
When St. Paul imposed his hands on St. Timothy, he passed on a legitimate apostolic authority, "entrusted" the "truth" to him, and imparted the gift of "the Holy Spirit" for the safekeeping and preservation of the Gospel.

As has already been said, only a superior can do this, and not an inferior, since an inferior cannot pass on what he does not already possess.
By What Authority - A Challenge to Protestant Pastors

 

[Yehren]

I never said there weren't ANY aramaic words in the n.t.

Now, you realize there are.

But the Holy Spirit inspired the writers to pen the n.t. in koine greek, not aramaic.

I guess Jesus just didn't get the word, um?

 

[Yehren]

Wikipedia? lol.

I can see you're surprised, again. That's what a "lexicon" is.

From the Cambridge Online Dictionary

lexicon
noun [ C ]
language specialized uk
/ˈlek.sɪ.kən/ us
/ˈlek.sɪ.kən/

(a list of) all the words used in a particular language or subject, or a dictionary

Maybe i expect too much from some people?

Or not enough of yourself. One of those.

I'm not annoyed about anything. I know what the n.t. says.

Normally, we capitalize it. And often, no punctuation marks. Hence "NT."

Apparently you'd rather know what 21st century americans think

Apparently, you still don't get it. The etymology of the word long precedes 21st century Americans. (notice we capitalize "American" also)

 

[ScottA]

There is no justification for abolishing The New Testament Priesthood. No amount of linguistic gymnastics or word games can change the biblical/historical reality of ministerial priests. To rule out ministerial priests because there is a common priesthood is a false dichotomy to the extreme. The Bible never does that. It's a tradition of men. That's what this silly discussion boils down to. "Man of God" is title is a title clearly distinct from, and part of, the common priesthood.

There is the relationship: the Scriptures are a tool for "teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness," but who is to use this tool for these purposes? That is, who has the authority to teach, reproof, correct, and train others in righteousness? The "man of God" has this authority.

But, who is the "man of God?" You may wish to claim this title for all in the common priesthood, but a short survey of Scripture's use of the title will reveal that this, too, is a privileged title that cannot be simply taken upon oneself:

Moses - "This is the blessing with which Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death." (Deut. 33:1)

"Then the people of Judah came to Joshua at Gilgal; and Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite said to him, 'You know what the LORD said to Moses the man of God in Kadesh-barnea concerning you and me.'" (Josh. 14:6)

The Angel of the Lord - "Then the woman came and told her husband, 'A man of God came to me, and his countenance was like the countenance of the angel of God, very terrible; I did not ask him whence he was, and he did not tell me his name...' Then Manoah entreated the LORD, and said, 'O, LORD, I pray thee, let the man of God whom thou didst send come again to us, and teach us what we are to do with the boy that will be born.'" (Jud. 13:6, 8)

Samuel - "The servant answered Saul again, 'Here, I have with me the fourth part of a shekel of silver, and I will give it to the man of God, to tell us our way.'" (1 Sam. 9:8)

Elijah - "And she said to Elijah, 'What have you against me, O man of God? You have come to me to bring my sin to remembrance, and to cause the death of my son!'" (1 Kings 17:18)

Elisha - "And she went up and laid him on the bed of the man of God, and shut the door upon him, and went out... When Elisha came into the house, he saw the child lying dead on his bed." (2 Kings 4:21, 32)

David - "According to the ordinance of David his father, he appointed the divisions of the priests for their service, and the Levites for their offices of praise and ministry before the priests as the duty of each day required, and the gatekeepers in their divisions for the several gates; for so David the man of God had commanded." (2 Chr. 8:14)

St. Timothy - "But as for you, man of God, shun all this; aim at righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness." (1 Tim. 6:11)

Contrary to the opinion that the "man of God" can be any Christian without distinction, Scripture itself will not allow such an interpretation, insisting that the "man of God" is a figure of authority, either commissioned by God directly through Divine Intervention (such as Moses or the Angel), or appointed by another holder of authority (such as Samuel, David, Elisha, and St. Timothy).

From this very brief survey of the phrase "man of God" (there are perhaps a dozen or so more passages), we see that what holds true for "pastors" holds true for the "man of God": it is a title of authority that can in no way be taken upon oneself, but rather, it is bestowed upon a man by a higher authority. A man must be called by God to hold this title of "man of God."

But there is another objection here: you will say, "I have been called by God to be a pastor." Very well, let us take another look at Scripture to measure your claim.
Biblically, there is only one way to become a legitimate ambassador of Christ, or "pastor": by appointment from a superior. This can be done in two ways:
1) being commissioned by a legitimate ambassador (apostolic succession), or
2) being called directly by God.

We saw examples of this in Scripture already: Ss. Timothy and Titus were appointed to their positions of authority by succession, Moses was appointed to his position directly by God, with no human mediation.

As to the first method, apostolic succession comes through the laying on of hands in ceremony: "Hence I remind you to rekindle the gift of God that is within you through the laying on of my hands... guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us." (2 Tim. 1:6, 14)
When St. Paul imposed his hands on St. Timothy, he passed on a legitimate apostolic authority, "entrusted" the "truth" to him, and imparted the gift of "the Holy Spirit" for the safekeeping and preservation of the Gospel.

As has already been said, only a superior can do this, and not an inferior, since an inferior cannot pass on what he does not already possess.
By What Authority - A Challenge to Protestant Pastors

On the contrary, for the most part it is what you are saying that is the teachings of men. And where Christ has specifically made some priests by spiritual gifts, He has also made all who are born of the spirit of God kings and priests:

Revelation 1:4-6
"Grace to you and peace from Him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven Spirits who are before His throne, 5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth.
To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood, 6 and has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen."

As for "correction", and those who claim their own authority:

John 7:18
"He who speaks from himself seeks his own glory; but He who seeks the glory of the One who sent Him is true, and no unrighteousness is in Him."

 

[ScottA]

And WHY do you refuse to answer the question about James 15??
If we are ALL ministerial priests - then WHY did James differentiate between those who will pray over the sick person and those who will CALL upon them??

That is a complete misrepresentation of James. James did not "differentiate" in the way that you describe, but he described the scope and power of prayer, not just given to "ministerial" priests, but rather what is available to the "natural man."

If anything, James refers to "the elders of the church", not as having greater authority, but as appointed servants.