The Rule of faith and practice is not scripture "alone"

The Liturgist said:

That situation was resolved, as is made clear. The entire issue there is expressly stated as having been resolved at the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15. But to say that the decisions made by the Apostles as a whole at any point in Acts were incorrect, is totally unwarranted, and has the effect of undermining the authority of the inspired Epistles of the New Testament, including the one you just eisegetically quoted out of context.

I can understand why some Protestants object to Patristic authority, although I disagree as do the more sophisticated Protestant churches, the traditional Anglicans, confessional Lutherans, etc, but to deny the authority of the Apostles, whose writings are recognized by most Protestant theologians as well as the theologians of the Orthodox Church and the Assyrian Church and the Roman Catholic Church, and even the Seventh Day Adventists, to be divinely inspired, is absurd. Whatever happened to the belief that the Bible is infallible?

I would note that @WilliamC appears to have declared Acts 1:20 as erroneous.

Click to expand...

I never said , ever, that I deny what scripture was written by the apostles. That’s not a correct statement. And when I showed that Peter was to be blamed at times I was simply showing that even the apostles and the early Jewish believers had some things wrong. God even corrected Peter about the Clean and unclean referring to the Gentiles in Acts 10.

We also see that there were thousands of Jewish Christian believers that were still under the law and customs many many years after Christ death. We see that they were still keeping the whole law and customs , going to the temple, sacrificing animals, circumcising, and doing many other things that we would not consider correct in the new covenant or needed.

Here is just a sample of this. Even Paul circumcised Timothy although that was not needed as he said in other letters.

Acts 21: 17. And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. 18. And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. 19. And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. 20. And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:.. 24. Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. 25. As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication. 26. Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purifcation, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.”

Acts 16: 1. Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek: 2. Which was well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium. 3. Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek.”

jas3 said:

You still have not addressed Acts 1:20. I'll ask again, do you know the difference between a bishop and an episcopate?

Click to expand...

A bishop and overseer after the same Greek word . The Holy Ghost makes overseers from the elders

Judas was an apostle and in a function among the believers it means inspection (for relief).charge, custody, oversight, He was chosen and charged in a function to do a work, the word apostle means a chosen sent one.

jas3 said:

That still doesn't answer my question, and I find it hard to believe that you don't understand the question I'm asking.

Bishop = ἐπίσκοπος (Strong's 1985)
Episcopate = ἐπισκοπή (Strong's 1984)

These are two different words. "Bishop" refers to the man, "episcopate" refers to the position.

Click to expand...

I answered and gave the meaning of the word abd words. It doesn’t mean what you try to make it. Elders we’re simply more mature brothers in the faith and sone of them would labour more in word and doctrine and he recognized in that function and care of the saints so they were important to watch over not lord over others . They also withstood by sound doctrine the gainsayers among them.

As far as the words they are similar and refer to a function not a static title or office like the Gentile rulers.

All believers (and I literally mean ALL) have Jesus Christ in them working by his power and authority (John 15:5, Ephesians 4:15,16, Hebrews 23:20,21).

So for some to try and make a bishoprick mean a lord, controller over all in a static office is not what scripture speaks of or in the original languages and the times.

An office means a function in the body care watch over teach etc .

In the world we are to obey as much as we can towards God the rulers like kings etc and police even if they are not spiritual. But in the church we do not simply obey men in a static office who may not be spiritual and Who speak, teach or act against the word of God.

Spiritual authority flows from Christ to the body and to all the body as they function. In the spirit in the rule of faith in Christ. All have an Offuce (Romans 12), but not all have the same office.

I don’t know why you don’t understand this?