Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Oh yeah that's right Jesus is forever butting in whenever someone in the church makes a mistake!The problem with your theory is quite simple: Jesus never said a word against this.
I never said that?The Holy Spirit did not reject the Church on account of it.
No, it was all after Pentecost. Please at least get that right.None of the Apostles spoke against it. Remember, God outright killed Ananias and Sapphira right before Peter, and God revealed the sheet with non-kosher foods before Peter. God performed healings, etc., all after this choosing of Matthias.
God must be constantly telling you all day long then, that you keep making mistakes.If it was an error, God would have so indicated. He didn't. So it wasn't.
You're grasping at straws.
It was because Jesus chose Paul not Matthias.Where the Church first fatally erred was when it had a hand in executing people, and that first happened in 385 AD. Before that, the division of the Church into fragments and the merciless anger between Christians was error.
We see in the time of the Apostles that various local churches were already fighting and bickering and doing evil to each other.
Any of those points could be called the place where the church first erred.
What you pointed to: the drawing of lots for Matthias cannot possibly in any reasonable sense be called an error.
is there a denial here that one has ever prayed and left something to God's Providence?With Paul! For the umpteenth time.
It didn't, though. That was all Emperor Theodosius. St. Ambrose of Milan, who was at the time the most influential bishop in the Western church, certainly more powerful than the Roman archbishop, objected with great moral outrage to the execution of Priscillian.
Now Theodosius was later made a saint, probably because he did eventually outlaw the Pagan religion, but the first ten years of his reign were not brilliant from a Christian perspective. Recall how St. Ambrose had to barricade himself and his laity in a church in Milan to prevent it from being taken over by the Arians at the command of Theodosius.
Oh it was state policy!? Well that makes it all okay then.Well, to be fair, the Dissolution of the Monasteries was a state policy more than an ecclesiastical policy. There is mich reason to suspect that the majority of bishops would have preferred it had the Crown not done that.
I think you're reading into the text too much. Jesus tells them "not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father" I see the waiting contrasted with the departing Jerusalem but nothing is about choosing a new disciple so why assume that was a part of the waiting?
is there a denial here that one has ever prayed and left something to God's Providence?
On the basis of scripture I think it is reasonable to conclude that Peter was a bit clutzy at times and did not always get it right. That is why we love him. We relate to him. Does that mean we must conclude that he was wrong here. No, I don't think so. Peter was fallible, however there is not strong evidence (beyond whatever is in these 30 odd pages) to sustain that argument. It is a supposition, or a hypothesis that needs to be tested. There is no compelling reason to conclude that the 11 made a poor choice, or that they acted outside the will of God.Peter made a wrong interpretation of prophesy. The choice made by the fallible Apostles as to which of the few fallible disciples who were available was a poor decision, compared to Jesus' perfect choosing of Paul from every person available on Earth. This fulfilled the the prophesy.
In your opinion Who could make a better choice the Apostles or Jesus?On the basis of scripture I think it is reasonable to conclude that Peter was a bit clutzy at times and did not always get it right. That is why we love him. We relate to him. Does that mean we must conclude that he was wrong here. No, I don't think so. Peter was fallible, however there is not strong evidence (beyond whatever is in these 30 odd pages) to sustain that argument. It is a supposition, or a hypothesis that needs to be tested. There is no compelling reason to conclude that the 11 made a poor choice, or that they acted outside the will of God.
Yes.Do you mean: "Have I ever prayed and left something to God's Providence?"
I'm doing it right now. In fact I've got several on the go.Yes.
The church went wrong when academics came along and sought to study and explain scripture/ build doctrines around their great academic minds, rather than stick to the core essentials of first century Christianity. Simple faith and complete reliance on the Holy SpiritNot many consider where it first began to go wrong for the church:
Acts 1:4 On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: “Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about.
Jesus gave the Apostle this one command just before His Ascension but in that 10 days the apostles chose by votes and lot, and also apart from Gods’ instructions, to replace Judas with Matthias:
Acts 2:26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.
This seemly innocuous act carried over and into the Christian faith the Jewish priesthood practice of drawing lots and started an unofficial man made tradition of voting and drawing lots to replace the disciples after they had died, including Peter and which has continued until this day with each new selection of Pope. However, this was never God’s intention as it is God alone who selects His chosen people as proven by the fact that Jesus chose Paul shortly afterwards to be the replacement apostle:
1 Corinthians 15:9
For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
The casting of lots is OT and is not for the Church because it is a man made system that is open to corruption and is the problem at the centre of the Catholic Church. If they had of waited on God as they were instructed by Jesus to do, then after the day of Pentecost Paul would have been added to their number. The choice made by the fallible Apostles as to which of the few fallible disciples who were available was a poor decision, compared to Jesus' perfect choosing of Paul from every person available on Earth.
This failure to wait on God and not to act in ones own power is probably the most basic and commonly made errors all Christians make daily.
Peter made a wrong interpretation of prophesy. The choice made by the fallible Apostles as to which of the few fallible disciples who were available was a poor decision, compared to Jesus' perfect choosing of Paul from every person available on Earth. This fulfilled the the prophesy.
This still is out of context with the waiting that Jesus instructed. The text doesn't even hint at disobedience. The author (Luke) puts in effort to show us the credentials of Matthias and the reasons for selecting another, this suggests he agrees with the result.
To suggest that this was in disobedience with God would require some sources otherwise it's just guess work. Siting that Paul was supposed to be this replacement is not credible because scripture doesn't show us this. If you want to make your argument credible then show us in scripture where it says this.
Good we all agree it is OK that we are all willing to pray about the outcome of a contingency and then let it happen. Which is good as the Apostles apparently agreed also. So it is not really about drawing lots which places a contingent decision on His Providence. The claim is that it was wrong to even start that ball rolling by vetting disciples because they were given a command to hang around Jerusalem for the Comforter.I'm doing it right now. In fact I've got several on the go.
How do you know they were not instructed to do so? Christ was with them for 40 days after His resurrection and the Gospels tell us very little of what Jesus taught them over that period.You've missed the main point, it wasn't so much the instruction to wait but the fact they cast lots and selected a replacement when they were never instructed or taught to either.
If that were true then why didn't Peter just say that Jesus had told them that they should cast lots for a replacement, instead Peter quotes Isaiah and mistakenly thinks he should be the one to fulfil that prophesy but that's not how prophesy works.How do you know they were not instructed to do so? Christ was with them for 40 days after His resurrection and the Gospels tell us very little of what Jesus taught them over that period.
You'll need to provide evidence to support this claim.There's a biblical precedent for it as well with choosing leaders
Not many consider where it first began to go wrong for the church:
Acts 1:4 On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: “Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about.
Jesus gave the Apostle this one command just before His Ascension but in that 10 days the apostles chose by votes and lot, and also apart from Gods’ instructions, to replace Judas with Matthias:
Acts 2:26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.
This seemly innocuous act carried over and into the Christian faith the Jewish priesthood practice of drawing lots and started an unofficial man made tradition of voting and drawing lots to replace the disciples after they had died, including Peter and which has continued until this day with each new selection of Pope. However, this was never God’s intention as it is God alone who selects His chosen people as proven by the fact that Jesus chose Paul shortly afterwards to be the replacement apostle:
1 Corinthians 15:9
For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
The casting of lots is OT and is not for the Church because it is a man made system that is open to corruption and is the problem at the centre of the Catholic Church. If they had of waited on God as they were instructed by Jesus to do, then after the day of Pentecost Paul would have been added to their number. The choice made by the fallible Apostles as to which of the few fallible disciples who were available was a poor decision, compared to Jesus' perfect choosing of Paul from every person available on Earth.
This failure to wait on God and not to act in ones own power is probably the most basic and commonly made errors all Christians make daily.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?