Quick Question

[JPPT1974]

Ok, I agree...but He was in the temple.., about His Fathers business.

At least God knew where He was
Even though losing Him had to be
A parent's worst nightmare.

 

[PETE_]

Did you read the same verse I read? It's Luke 2:49, and it indicates he was both asking, and answering. If they were amazed at His answers, as the verse indicates, it is not only because they were surprised at His learning, but also that they were hearing things they had not previously considered, or thought of in the context of the discussion. You may deny that all you wish, but it will not change the truth, that Him who gave them the Law now stood among them, and if you think you would not learn at the feet of Christ, you must ask yourself in Whom it is (or perhaps "whom") you believe.

When a teenager shows up in a college class, do you think the professors are amazed? They are not going to learn from the teen, they are there to teach the teen. They will be amazed that the teen is so far ahead of the norm for that age. I think that is the case with Jesus. His wisdom was far ahead of children of that age. His relationship to God was so good that He knew His Father's business and what He should be doing at that time. We just are not told of Him imparting any new revelation until He begins His ministry.

 

[MbiaJc]

A quick look at the Scriptures shows us that the age of 30 was considered an age of maturity for teaching, leadership, and respect. No less than seven times in Numbers chapter four (vv. 3, 23, 30, 35, 39, 43, 47) the Law states:

" ... from thirty years and upward even to fifty years old, everyone who entered the service for work in the tent of meeting."

The wording varies only by tense in each of those verses in chapter four. It is reiterated in I Chronicles 23:3 when a census of the Levites age 30 and above was conducted. It is further noted in II Chronicles 31:16 that the portions of the offerings allotted the priests and Levites were distributed through the heads of families aged 30 and above. Obviously, a significance of maturity, accountability, and a level of trust was placed on Israeli men once they achieved the age of 30. It is of further significance, I believe, that recent studies of male psychological and emotional development place true maturity among men at age 26-28. God knew that long before man figured it out.

Additionally, Joseph, who was a type for Christ, King David, and even King Saul all "came of age" at 30. Joseph " ... was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh, king of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh and went through all the land of Egypt ..." as prime minister. Saul and David both began their reigns at age 30 (I Samuel 13:1, 2 Samuel 5:4). Clearly, from abject adherence to the Law and the Writings by Jewish society, had Jesus attempted to minister before age 30, He would have been rejected as immature and unqualified.

I believe that is your answer.

And

Bingo, you got it right, thanks

 

[MbiaJc]

Dont call me brother, this isnt a Baptist meet and greet, and I was not puffing myself up. If some old guy who hates young people on an internet forum thinks im a genious or not doesnt really matter to me.

Boasting would be taking the things he said and showing him where he was wrong.

Paul was educated BTW, to answer your question. I wanted to know where he studied the principles of Hermeneutics and other vital Word Study policies to speak on matters. Because if he hasnt than he is telling us what others ahve told him, which is exactly what he is accusing others of doing.

This is something you mon called daddy sent professionals will never understand. No man has taught me. My Bible tells me I have no need that man teach me, because I have the HOLY SPIRIT to teach me.

I do not hate any one especially young people. I do not hate the educated that education hasn't made a fool of . I have raised four kids all have a College degree. I have one Doctor, one Master in textile engineering, one with a bachlor of Fire Science, one with a Bachelor of Criminal Justice. Neither of which has let their education make a fool out of them.

On one side it is a sad thing to see a twenty one year old, with the attude you have, yet on the other(see below). You don't even know the hounor of being called brother, sad.

Thanks for your reproach:

1Pe 4:14 If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the Spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.

 

[MbiaJc]

I agree that pastors should be educated(we all should be seeking more knowledge), but there are more ways to get education than going to school. My father knows more about the Bible than most pastors I know. But he reads and studies 20-30 hours a week, and has been doing so for the last 40 years. Not having a degree from such and such college or seminary does not in itself mean that one is uneducated.

Pete is a man of knowledge, wisdon and understanding.

 

[JacobHall86]

This is something you mon called daddy sent professionals will never understand. No man has taught me. My Bible tells me I have no need that man teach me, because I have the HOLY SPIRIT to teach me.

I do not hate any one especially young people. I do not hate the educated that education hasn't made a fool of . I have raised four kids all have a College degree. I have one Doctor, one Master in textile engineering, one with a bachlor of Fire Science, one with a Bachelor of Criminal Justice. Neither of which has let their education make a fool out of them.

On one side it is a sad thing to see a twenty one year old, with the attude you have, yet on the other(see below). You don't even know the hounor of being called brother, sad.

Thanks for your reproach:

1Pe 4:14 If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the Spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.

Yea, except that the Bible doesnt say that education is bad, simply that THe Holy Spirit will guide you. I know what it means to be called brother, and I also know what it means for someone to call you it when they are trying to pretend some sort of "friendly" situation when that is not their intent..

And you have totally quoted that verse out of context. Thanks for proving my point.

 

[MbiaJc]

I find it very sad that we all find it absolutely necessary for cardio-vascular surgeons to have an abundance of “head knowledge” but that many Christians do not hold their pastors to the same standard, as though their profession is less important and mere “heart knowledge” is good enough.

I don’t believe that very many Christians would place their confidence in a cardio-vascular surgeon who did not have an abundance of both “head knowledge” and “heart knowledge,” and I most certainly would not place my confidence in a pastor who did not have an abundance of both.

Luke, the gentleman who wrote more of the New Testament (by word count) than any other contributor, was a polylingual medical doctor who possessed a wealth of both Hellenistic and Semitic knowledge in addition to his knowledge of medicine.

The Apostle Paul was one of the most brilliant and well educated people of the day possessing a vast knowledge of the cultures and peoples to whom he brought the gospel of Christ and he applied this knowledge to both his preaching and the writing of his epistles.

The Apostle John was an exceptionally well educated polylingual business man who owned and operated a fleet of fishing boats and his father was a personal friend of the high priest indicating that he and his family were of the privileged, well-educated class.

Mark, the writer of the gospel that bears his name, was a polylingual son of a very wealthy woman also belonging to the privileged, well-educated class.

God does not pour medical knowledge into the heads of those whom He calls to be cardio-vascular surgeons, and he does not pour Biblical, linguistic, cultural, social, or any other kind of knowledge into the heads of those whom He calls to be pastors. Rather he blesses both with the opportunity to get the necessary education. If the former bypasses his call to get an education, he is sent to prison for practicing medicine without a license; if the latter bypasses his call to get an education, much too often the congregation looks the other way.

The call to be a cardio-vascular surgeon necessarily includes the call to an outstanding education; the call to be a pastor, a man who is responsible for the very hearts and souls of the members of his congregation and holds their eternal destiny in his hands, also necessarily includes the call to an outstanding education. When a man is called be become a cardio-vascular surgeon he does not run out and buy a set of scalpels—he first learns his profession. I expect nothing less from a pastor—indeed, I expect very much more!

1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Why did Jesus not go to the School Of The Sons Of The Prophets to get his twelve Apostles?

 

[JimfromOhio]

Spiritual knowledge is better than fleshual knowledge. Intellectical people often use pride when the rely on their ability rather than rely on God's grace who gave them the ability to discern.

 

[MbiaJc]

It is true that there are a few passages in which persons other than the original twelve seem to be designated as apostles. But from the beginning of the Church until of late, no one has ventured on that account to regard Barnabas, Silas, Timothy, and Titus, as apostles, in the official sense of the word. The word "deacon," means, a domestic, sometimes a secular officer, sometimes any minister of the Church; sometimes the lowest order of church officers. Because Paul and Peter call themselves "deacons," it does not prove that their office was to serve tables. In like manner the word "apostle" is sometimes used in its etymological sense "a messenger," sometimes in a religious sense, as we use the word "missionary;" and sometimes in its strict official sense, in which it is confined to the immediate messengers of Christ. Nothing can be plainer from the New Testament than that neither Silas nor Timothy, nor any other person, is ever spoken of as the official equal of the twelve Apostles. These constitute a class by themselves. They stand out in the New Testament as they do in all Church history, as the authoritative founders of the Christian Church, without peers or colleagues.




This is an intresting claim. I have not heard anyone claim to have seen the resurrected Christ before now. Paul's experience was quite amazing compared to the original apostles chosen by Christ Himself.

Your argument doesn't hold water. First, I know of no place where Paul or Peter calls themselves Deacons. Each called themself an Elder when they were around sixty years old. And to deny that Barnabas, Andronicus, Junias, Epaphroditus, Silas and Timothy as Apostles is simply denying the plain word of God. I think Titus also was an Apostle, but one can't proved it in the word of God.

 

[JimfromOhio]

For 3 years, Jesus taught His Disciples who became Apostles after His death. What kind of education did Jesus gave them? Reading the Gospels and the Letters, I have come to conclusion that Jesus taught them Spiritual matters. John 14:26-27 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid. The Holy Spirit dwells in me with all the power and gifts of God, necessary to enable me to walk the noble, spiritual, Son-like life with God. I can have GREAT knowledge but if I don't have spiritual wisdom, my knowledge is worthless.

 

[JimfromOhio]

I find it interesting how people are viewing "deacons". Deacons are basically "servants" of a local church. This gift is the most common and perhaps very important because Peter encourages those who render service to do it "with the strength God provides, so that in all things God may be praised through Jesus Christ" (1 Pet. 4:11). The deacons are to work with the elders who are stewarding Church's physical activities. The main job for the elders and deacons is the "stewardship" of the local church especially under the "gift of administration". Everything belongs to God, the elders are to live in faithful stewardship of all that God has entrusted to them. Elders are our spiritual stewardship who are looking for members to work with the deacons to meet the spiritual as well temporal needs of the Church's spiritual in from God's perspective.

This also includes helping the widows and other ministries within a local church. 1 Corinthians 12:28 is amplified in Romans 12:7, 8 by the gifts of contributing, giving aid, showing mercy and perhaps also rendering service. The ministry's objective is to meet the emotional and spiritual needs of the afflicted people in practical ways while at the same time, Glorify God. God has a plan. God has a will. More are being saved through special ministries that are able to reach out to those who needs to hear that God is with them. Ministry is an ideal for all Christians; the image of Christ (Phil. 2:5-7; Mark 10:45) has been extended to the Christian church as a whole.

I will be watching this thread.

 

[PETE_]

Your argument doesn't hold water. First, I know of no place where Paul or Peter calls themselves Deacons. Each called themself an Elder when they were around sixty years old. And to deny that Barnabas, Andronicus, Junias, Epaphroditus, Silas and Timothy as Apostles is simply denying the plain word of God. I think Titus also was an Apostle, but one can't proved it in the word of God.

DEACON
diakonos NT:1249, (Eng., "deacon"), primarily denotes a "servant," whether as doing servile work, or as an attendant rendering free service, without particular reference to its character.


1 Cor 3:5
5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
KJV

2 Cor 3:6
6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
KJV

2 Cor 6:4
4 But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses,
KJV

1 Tim 3:8
8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;
KJV


Same greek word just translated differently

 

[JacobHall86]

DEACON
diakonos NT:1249, (Eng., "deacon"), primarily denotes a "servant," whether as doing servile work, or as an attendant rendering free service, without particular reference to its character.


1 Cor 3:5
5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
KJV

2 Cor 3:6
6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
KJV

2 Cor 6:4
4 But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses,
KJV

1 Tim 3:8
8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;
KJV


Same greek word just translated differently

The ESV and the NASB use the word servant, not minister. Bad comparison.

 

[JimfromOhio]

"ministers" does not mean teacher but rather serving.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Why did Jesus not go to the School Of The Sons Of The Prophets to get his twelve Apostles?

The truth?

Natural Man = An intelligent Christian man with a fine university and seminary education who has devoted his life to serving His Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, but lost the ability to discern spiritual things because he loved the Bible enough to study it in the languages in which God chose to inspire it.

Spiritual Man = A not-too-bright ignorant fisherman who doesn’t have enough education to know how ignorant he really is, a man who isn’t able to discern between the Holy Spirit and other spirits.

When God chose whom He did to pen the New Testament, why did He choose only men who were very well educated for their day and at least three who were brilliant and exceptionally well educated in both the Semitic and Hellenistic cultures, a VERY rare thing in the first century?

 

[PETE_]

The ESV and the NASB use the word servant, not minister. Bad comparison.

have no idea what you man by bad comparison. Since the word deacon denotes servant that is a better translation. He is saying he is a servant or deacon of God.

 

[PETE_]

"ministers" does not mean teacher but rather serving.

 

[JacobHall86]

Oh, my bad, I thought you were equating ministering to pastoring.

 

[JimfromOhio]

Each called themself an Elder when they were around sixty years old.

Were they "elders" because of their age?

Actually, they were Apostles (Apostleship was a greater spiritual gift than eldership in terms of "teaching").

In the book of Hebrew, it talks about the great apostle, Christ. You know what apostle means? "Sent one," and after Christ, and you would say Christ is capital APOSTLE, as the Great ‘APOSTLE’. Then you have the twelve, they are ‘Apostle.’ And then you have Andronicus, Junias and the whole bunch--Barnabas, and they are 'apostle' which means a broad word, is like "servant," "sent one." We can look at 'apostles' in an official capacity or an unofficial one without the "Apostle" gifts. Andronicus and Junias and those were "sent ones" they were like missionaries, there is a sense in which today, some of us are "sent ones". Apostle (with capital A) out of due season and in a very special way, then plus a lot of other apostles (in lower case 'a'). In Ephesians 2:20 says the church is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets. Hebrews 3:1 [ Jesus Greater Than Moses ] Therefore, holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your thoughts on Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest whom we confess. The gifts and title of Apostleship are significant enough to be declared, along with prophets, as the foundation of the church (Eph. 2:20).

From: Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology: Apostle
Apostles and the Spirit The primary function of the apostles was to witness to Christ. The Twelve had intimate knowledge of his life, and a wider group had been witnesses to his resurrection. Their commissioning by the risen Lord to worldwide witness (Ac 1:8), however, was incomplete without the anointing of the Spirit. Only after Pentecost were they empowered by the Spirit for their ministry of word and deed. Their witness to Christ was not only empowered, but also guided and validated by the Spirit (John 14:26). Thus, their full apostolic vocation was realized only in the Spirit (John 14-17). Paul viewed apostleship as a gift of the Spirit (1 Co 12:28), which was often accompanied by miraculous signs and mighty works (2 Co 12:12). Such signs and wonders, however, were clearly secondary to the apostolic functions of preaching and teaching. Apostolic Authority Having direct knowledge of the incarnate Word, and being sent out as authorized agets of the gospel, the apostles provided the authentic interpretation of the life and teaching of Jesus. Because their witness to Christ was guided by the Spirit (John 15:26-27), the apostles' teaching was considered normative for the church. They were regarded as the "pillars" (Gal 2:9) and "foundation" (Eph 2:20; cf. Rev 21:14) of the church, and their teaching became the norm for Christian faith and practice. The deposit of revelation transmitted by the apostles and preserved in its written form in the New Testament thus forms the basis of postapostolic preaching and teaching in the church. Paul uses the word "apostle" in more than one sense. At times he employs the term in the broader sense of messenger or agent (2 Col 8:23; Php 2:25). More often, however, Paul uses the term to refer to those who had been commissioned by the risen Lord to the apostolic task. Included in this category are the Twelve (although he never explicitly applies the title of apostle to them as a group), Peter (Gal 1:18), Paul himself (Rom 1:1; 1 Col 1:1; 9:1-2; 15:8-10; Gal 2:7-8), James the brother of Jesus (Gal 1:19; cf. Acts 15:13), Barnabas (1 Col 9:1-6; Gal 2:9; cf. Acts 14:4, 14), and possibly others (Ro 16:7). In addition to understanding apostleship in terms of its basis in a divine call, Paul views the life of an apostle as being one of self-sacrificial service that entails suffering (1 Col 4:9-13; 15:30-32; 2 Col 4:7-12; 11:23-29).

 

[MbiaJc]

The truth?

Natural Man = An intelligent Christian man with a fine university and seminary education who has devoted his life to serving His Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, but lost the ability to discern spiritual things because he loved the Bible enough to study it in the languages in which God chose to inspire it.

Spiritual Man = A not-too-bright ignorant fisherman who doesn’t have enough education to know how ignorant he really is, a man who isn’t able to discern between the Holy Spirit and other spirits.

When God chose whom He did to pen the New Testament, why did He choose only men who were very well educated for their day and at least three who were brilliant and exceptionally well educated in both the Semitic and Hellenistic cultures, a VERY rare thing in the first century?

You didn't answer my question, all you are doing is dodging the question, with part truths. The only one of the Apostles that had a formal education was Paul and Luke the Phicisian. The rest were acording to the Sanhedrin they were unlearned ignorant men.

You are still not giving any scripture to prove your point either putup or shutup.