Secure Eternal Salvation

[post]

he rest of the people were a general priesthood of believers.

show me that in the Law?

Christ is our High priest not after Levi, but after Melchizedek.

 

[post]

it's an earthly body with no earthly head.

wow, lol at 'we want a king like the nations around us'

it's a spiritual body, and Christ is the head.
ask Peter.
ask Paul.
ask Christ.

'rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious'
'strike the Shepherd, and the sheep will scatter'
'My kingdom is not of this world'
'hope that is seen is no hope'
​

 

[BreadOfLife]

previously discussed.
Christ is the head of His church ((Colossians 1:18))

Jesus is absolutely the Head of Gis Church.
HOWEVER - Here transferred power to His inner circle (Matt. 16:18, Matt. 18:15-18. Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

Hr told Peter to:
"Feed my lambd" (John 21:15)
"Tend my sheep" (John 21:16)
"Feed my sheep" (John 21:17)
These are the duties of a SHEPHERD.

This is precisely why Paul refers to those "OVER you in it the Lord" (1 Thess. 5:12) and those "Ellders who RULE well" (1 Tim. 5:17 ) being worthy of respect and DOUBLE HONOR.

Stop cherry-picking verses and start STUDYING the Word.

 

[BreadOfLife]

James mentions 'elders' not priests.
however:

pray one for another
(James 5:16)​

using your private definition, all are ministerial priests, with Christ our High Priest

James uses the word, "Presbyter".
Open up your dictionary. "Presbyter" and are synonyms - both in definition and etmologically.

When you read Pauls description of the Ministry of Reconciliation in 2 Cor. 2:10 and 2 Cor. 5:18-20, you see the CONTEXT of what James was talking about.

 

[BreadOfLife]

show me that in the Law?

Christ is our High priest not after Levi, but after Melchizedek.

Melchizedek IS an OT type of Christ.
And so is Aaron the High Proiest.
And so is Joseph.
And so is David.

Jesus has MANY OT Types, BUT - as I explained to you before - the NT fulfillment is ALWAYS mmore glorious and perfect than the OT Type - wuthout exception. This is also true with the Levitical Priesthood (OT) and the Ministerial Priesthood (NT).

 

[Illuminator]

James mentions 'elders' not priests.
however:

pray one for another
(James 5:16)​

using your private definition, all are ministerial priests, with Christ our High Priest

BoL did not use a private definition. Elders and priests are the same thing, contrary to your private definition.

...the three-fold model of the priesthood which was in use at the time of Aaron was carried over into the New Testament and thus we find there also a high priest, ministerial priests, and universal priests. In the New Testament age the high priest is Jesus Christ (Heb. 3:1), the ministerial priests are Christ’s ordained ministers of the gospel (Rom. 15:16), and the universal priests are the entire Christian people (1 Peter. 2:5, 9).

So the Bible clearly states that all Christians are priests (1 Peter 2:5, 9), as the Catholic Church clearly teaches for all who bother to read its teachings, see Catechism of the Catholic Church 1141-4, 1268, 1305, 1535, 1547, 1591-2 on the common priesthood. But the Bible also said the same thing about the Israelites (Ex. 19:6), yet this did not prevent there from being a separate, ministerial priesthood even before the Law of Moses was given (Ex. 19:22, 24).

Furthermore, since the top, Old Testament office of high priest corresponds to Jesus, the New Testament high priest, and since the bottom, Old Testament universal priesthood corresponds to the New Testament universal priesthood, the middle, ministerial priesthood in the Old Testament corresponds to a middle, ministerial priesthood in the New Testament.

This priesthood is identical with the office of elder. In fact, the term “priest” is simply a shortened, English version of the Greek word for “elder” — presbuteros — as any dictionary will confirm. This is any some Old Catholic translations render the word as “priests” where Protestant Bibles have “elder.” For example, in the Douay-Rheims Bible (the Catholic equivalent of the King James Version) we read:

“For this cause I left thee in Crete, that thou shouldst set in order the things that are wanting, and shouldst ordain priests in every city, as I also appointed thee” (Titus 1:5).

“Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the Church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil, in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith shall save the sick man; and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him” (James 5:14-15).​

We also see in the New Testament that the functions of the Old Testament elder — who served in the synagogue — have been fused with the functions of the Old Testament priest — whose served in the temple.

We can see the fusion of the two concepts in Romans 15:15-16. In the New International Version of this passage, we read:

“I have written you quite boldly on some points, as if to remind you of them again, because of the grace God gave me to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles with the priestly duty [literally, “the priestly work”] of proclaiming the gospel of God, so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.”​

Paul tells us that because he has been given a calling as a professional minister of Christ, he has a priestly work of preaching the gospel so that the Gentiles may be an offering — a sacrifice to God. This is not something only he has. Every elder in every church has that same “priestly work” of preaching the gospel. So Paul here conceives of the office of the New Testament minister as a priestly office. Notice that the hearers of the gospel in this passage are not depicted as priests, but as the sacrifice to God. Paul draws a distinction between himself and his work of preaching the gospel, and his readers and their duty of hearing it. It is the minister, not the congregation, who is here pictured as priest.

A second passage revealing the fusion of the offices of Old Testament elder and Old Testament priest is Revelation 5:8, where we read:

“And when he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.”

Here we have the twenty-four heavenly elders (presbyteroi) depicted as offering incense to God in bowls, just as the Old Testament priests did with their own gold incense bowls (Num. 7:84-86).

It is especially important to note that this was a function only priests could perform, as indicated a few chapters later, in Numbers 16, which records the story of Korah’s rebellion. This story concerns precisely the issue which is before us today: Whether the fact that all believers are priests means that there is no ministerial priesthood. Korah said it does mean that, and he gathered a rebellion against Moses and Aaron to usurp the priesthood from them. Numbers 16 says:

“Now Korah . . . and Dathan and Abiram . . . took men; and they rose up before Moses, with a number of the people of Israel, two hundred and fifty leaders of the congregation, chosen from the assembly, well-known men; and they assembled themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said . . . ‘You have gone too far! For all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the LORD is among them; why then do you exalt yourselves above the assembly of the LORD?’ When Moses heard it, he fell on his face; and he said . . . ‘In the morning the LORD will show who is his, and who is holy . . . Do this: take censers . . . put fire in them and put incense upon them before the LORD tomorrow, and the man whom the LORD chooses shall be the holy one. You have gone too far, sons of Levi! . . . s it too small a thing for you that the God of Israel has separated you from the congregation of Israel . . . would you seek the priesthood also? Therefore it is against the LORD that you and all your company have gathered together; what is Aaron that you murmur against him?'” (Num. 16:1-11).

After this you can guess what happened. The men loaded up their censers and tried to offer incense before the Lord, but God caused the earth to open its mouth and swallow up Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, then he caused fire to come out of the Tabernacle and swallow up the two hundred and fifty men offering incense, showing that they were not to be priests, not the ones to offer incense, even though God had said that in one sense the whole congregation were priests.

Thus, in the Old Testament God was willing to kill people that are not priests who offer incense to him. So when we see the elders (presbyteroi) doing so in his heavenly temple, we must infer that they are priests. A fusion of the office of elder and priest has taken place.
https://jimmyakin.com/library/the-office-of-new-testament-priest

 

[Eternally Grateful]

1 Cor. 3:11 – Jesus is called the only foundation of the Church, and yet in Eph. 2:20, the apostles are called the foundation of the Church. Similarly, in 1 Peter 2:25, Jesus is called the Shepherd of the flock, but in Acts 20:28, the apostles are called the shepherds of the flock. These verses show that there are multiple metaphors for the Church, and that words used by the inspired writers of Scripture can have various meanings. Catholics agree that God is the rock of the Church, but this does not mean He cannot confer this distinction upon Peter as well, to facilitate the unity He desires for the Church.
The Biblical Church - Scripture Catholic

Your anti-Peter animus defies Scripture and all of Christian history. Protestantism has no unity, it's an earthly body with no earthly head.
THE PRIMACY OF PETER - Scripture Catholic

1751How can you claim Tertullian, Ignatius and Justin Martyr as your "brothers" when you rail against what they wrote, ??? as indicated in post #1751. You are either a phony or just plain ignorant. Your question is a non -sequitur and a derailer to the subject at hand, because you got caught in a lie and are trying to change the topic, typical anti-Catholic methodology.

1 Cor. 3:11 – Jesus is called the only foundation of the Church, and yet in Eph. 2:20, the apostles are called the foundation of the Church. Similarly, in 1 Peter 2:25, Jesus is called the Shepherd of the flock, but in Acts 20:28, the apostles are called the shepherds of the flock. These verses show that there are multiple metaphors for the Church, and that words used by the inspired writers of Scripture can have various meanings. Catholics agree that God is the rock of the Church, but this does not mean He cannot confer this distinction upon Peter as well, to facilitate the unity He desires for the Church.
The Biblical Church - Scripture Catholic

Your anti-Peter animus defies Scripture and all of Christian history. Protestantism has no unity, it's an earthly body with no earthly head.
THE PRIMACY OF PETER - Scripture Catholic

1 cor 3. NO OTHER FOUNDATION can one lay. Other than Jesus

Jesus is also called the CORNERSTONE. (A cornerstone is the chief foundation stone, the only stone by which the building is layer)

Peter is called 1 of the many foundation stones (the stones for which the walls are layer on stone by stone) Of course all of these foundations stones were layer against and according to the CORNERSTONE (any building architected understand this, especially in Roman days)

What’s funny is Peter (song with James and John) wer given the jews as their apostles. In Jerusalem and Judaea.

On the Other Hand, Paul was given the rest of the Roman Empire. The gentiles All guy his little Lonesome.

I guess when peter wrote his letter to his church in rome (opps, that was paul wasn’t it?? Silly me)

Anti peter?

I am not anti Peter. If anything, people who puff him up as something he is not are anti Peter. And I am pretty sure he would not like all the attention you all give him, especially where he is now.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

James mentions 'elders' not priests.
however:

pray one for another
(James 5:16)​

using your private definition, all are ministerial priests, with Christ our High Priest

Yep. Hit it on the head..

I like the term private definition. As apposed to private interpretation the term they use

I so pray people listen with open minds and see the truth here

 

[Marymog]

James does not defer to Peter's judgment.
Stop worshipping men and women and read the rest of the passage.
James points to scripture, not Peter, as the authority by which they should decide, and when they write the letter it says that 'it seemed good to the Spirit' not it seemed good to Peter.

James replied, “My brothers, listen to me. 14 Simeon has related how God first looked favorably on the Gentiles, to take from among them a people for his name. 15 This agrees with the words of the prophets,

Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

 

[Marymog]

excuse me, But the post you mentioned did not prove a thing.

The facts are. Paul served the gentiles before peter even knew. If peter was the head and kingpin. God forget to tell him about paul

Jesus told Paul he was the "kingpin": And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

 

[post]

James replied, “My brothers, listen to me. 14 Simeon has related how God first looked favorably on the Gentiles, to take from among them a people for his name. 15 This agrees with the words of the prophets,

Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

did you catch the part where

1. Peter is one of many giving their opinions and evidences (("after much discussion" v.7))
2. all became silent hearing Paul & Barnabas also give testimony ((v.12))
3. then James, leading the entire assembly, cites Peter's comments and tests it against scripture ((v.15))
4. and finally James, not Peter, gives judgement & recommends the action that the entire council take ((vv. 19-21))

 

[post]

Jesus told Paul he was the "kingpin": And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

previously discussed.

Now this name of Peter was given him by the Lord, and that in a figure, that he should signify the Church. For seeing that Christ is the rock, Peter is the Christian people. For the rock is the original name. Therefore Peter is so called from the rock; not the rock from Peter; as Christ is not called Christ from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. ‘Therefore,’ he saith, ‘Thou art Peter; and upon this Rock’ which thou hast confessed, upon this Rock which thou hast acknowledged, saying, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, will I build My Church;’ that is upon Myself, the Son of the living God, ‘will I build My Church.’ I will build thee upon Myself, not Myself upon thee. For men who wished to be built upon men, said, ‘I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas,’ who is Peter. But others who did not wish to be built upon Peter, but upon the Rock, said, ‘But I am of Christ.’ And when the Apostle Paul ascertained that he was chosen, and Christ despised, he said, ‘Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?’ And, as not in the name of Paul, so neither in the name of Peter; but in the name of Christ: that Peter might be built upon the Rock, not the Rock upon Peter.

- Augustine ((from On Matthew, sections 1-4))​

 

[post]

and universal priests.

please define this in the OT

 

[post]

Melchizedek IS an OT type of Christ.
And so is Aaron the High Proiest.
And so is Joseph.
And so is David.

Jesus has MANY OT Types, BUT - as I explained to you before - the NT fulfillment is ALWAYS mmore glorious and perfect than the OT Type - wuthout exception. This is also true with the Levitical Priesthood (OT) and the Ministerial Priesthood (NT).

please show in the OT law how "all are universal priests" as you declared

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Jesus told Paul he was the "kingpin": And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

You ignored the truth

Paul was in charge of the truth In Rome

Peter was in charge of the church in Jerusalem.

Paul had a match larger area of application. But even paul did not go alone, he refused, Because he understood,’

Peter shared with James and John.

paul also rebuked peter. Which proved peter had no real authority over the church as a whole

You also ignore the fact the Jesus called peter a small stone, and said on this boulder he will build his church

The boulder is Jesus, more literally the fact that you are christ the son of the living God.

Jesu sis the chief cornerstone. A cornerstone was the largest stone in the building. it is also the stone in which the whole foundation is laid on.

Peter, the smaller stone, was just one of the smaller stone.

You people love to build doctrines on 1 verse. Its like your fathers looked for one verse to support their truth and stood by it.

Scripture is more than one verse.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

previously discussed.

Now this name of Peter was given him by the Lord, and that in a figure, that he should signify the Church. For seeing that Christ is the rock, Peter is the Christian people. For the rock is the original name. Therefore Peter is so called from the rock; not the rock from Peter; as Christ is not called Christ from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. ‘Therefore,’ he saith, ‘Thou art Peter; and upon this Rock’ which thou hast confessed, upon this Rock which thou hast acknowledged, saying, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, will I build My Church;’ that is upon Myself, the Son of the living God, ‘will I build My Church.’ I will build thee upon Myself, not Myself upon thee. For men who wished to be built upon men, said, ‘I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas,’ who is Peter. But others who did not wish to be built upon Peter, but upon the Rock, said, ‘But I am of Christ.’ And when the Apostle Paul ascertained that he was chosen, and Christ despised, he said, ‘Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?’ And, as not in the name of Paul, so neither in the name of Peter; but in the name of Christ: that Peter might be built upon the Rock, not the Rock upon Peter.

- Augustine ((from On Matthew, sections 1-4))​

Where did you find this bro? Its amazing their own leader and father wrote this.

 

[Pearl]

christ is not here on earth governing the church Peter and the apostles and their successors are

Jesus is alive in those who love him and he is living in his Church by the power of his Holy Spirit within us. Not so much your branch of it perhaps because it seems you would rather follow men's teaching - Peter was a mere man as have been all those who came after him - but those who are followers of the Way as they were called in the bible before they started being called Christians. We call ourselves born because we were born of God's spirit as adults and prefer to be lead by the Holy Spirit.

 

[farouk]

The OP seems to teach salvation by works. Romans 8 and Ephesians 2 seem to counter this.

 

[post]

Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us.

notice how he says of these who have become polluted,

"as you really are unleavened, for Christ our Pascha has been sacrificed"

we ought certainly to strive to make our earthly lives match the truth of the life we have been granted in the spirit, but 1 Corinthians 5:7 does not say the reality is that they are leavened, but that they really are unleavened: the cause of it being the sacrifice of Christ.

since we are not saved by our works, neither can our works preserve us, any more than it could be possible that Christ Himself become polluted - for it is His purity by which we are accounted pure, that is "you really are unleavened" therefore purge out the leaven. this is wholly opposed to the idea that we become unleavened by purging out the leaven in ourselves: we became unleavened through faith in Him who has no leaven and made Himself our propitiation.

i can only be lost if Christ Himself fails - that Good Shepherd who carries me on His shoulder, does He stumble? and if He does not, then i will arrive at His sheepfold even if i am lame, not because i have walked but because He has borne me.

 

[BreadOfLife]

please show in the OT law how "all are universal priests" as you declared

God told Moses on Mt. Sinai:
Exod. 19:4-6
‘You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.”

Where do you think Peter gets this language from??
1 Pet. 2:5
...you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

As I keep having to remind you - NT fulfillments are ALWAYS mmore glorious and perfect than their OT Types - wuthout exception.