Where did the Church first go wrong?

[Dave-W]

No it doesn't work like that. Paul was an apostle like the 11. All the other followers were and are disciples. Disciples don't need replacing. Jesus chose Paul as an apostle, just as Paul says about himself.

Did you read what I wrote? Barnabas and Junia are both called apostles. (not just disciples) In fact, Barnabas is called an apostle before Saul/Paul was. Acts 14.14

 

[Guide To The Bible]

The innocuous act is directly spoken about in the scriptures, there's no theological detective work of putting 2 + 2 together. It not about the castings of lots, it's about how people act within Christianity (Jude 1:11-16). Paul also brings up the topic in Acts 20:30.

What does God say about electing kings to lead His people in 1 Samuel 8:7. The only real question for any Christian is how are your own earthly Christian leaders visibly acting like. Are they like a king David or are they more like a king Saul?

The casting of lots is OT and is not for the 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. This failure to wait on God and not act in ones own power is probably the most basic and commonly made errors all Christians make.

 

[Guide To The Bible]

Where does it say they did not wait for the Lord to provide the Holy Spirit? That is what Jesus was referrring to, not Matthias.

God never appointed the Pope. And Peter was never a Pope.

You miss read the OP I didn't say that. And although the term 'pope' wasn't coined till the 2nd century Peter was the first of that line.

 

[Guide To The Bible]

Did you read what I wrote? Barnabas and Junia are both called apostles. (not just disciples) In fact, Barnabas is called an apostle before Saul/Paul was. Acts 14.14

Luke described Barnabas as someone distinct from the Twelve. He was sent with Paul to proclaim the gospel, and in this sense, he was an apostle. He cannot be used an example of someone who received an apostleship that was the same as the Twelve or Paul and thus be used as precedent for anyone to claim a similar apostleship today:

Was Barnabas an Apostle?

There are different uses of the Greek word "apostello," and it cannot be conclusively demonstrated to which categorical use of the term Junia should fit into. Even if Junia were an apostle in the sense of having seen the risen Lord, it doesn't mean she was in authority in the Church. Therefore, for someone to conclude that Junia was a woman apostle in full authority in the Church cannot be maintained from the Scriptures:

Was Junia in Romans 16:7 a female apostle in authority? | CARM Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry

 

[Dave-W]

. Even if Junia were an apostle in the sense of having seen the risen Lord, it doesn't mean she was in authority in the Church.

Where do you get the idea that an apostle had to physically see the risen Lord?

From the process of selecting Mattias which you reject?

I find it interesting that both articles you linked to make the same mistake of filtering scripture thru their doctrines rather than letting the plain understanding of scripture form doctrine.

 

[Guide To The Bible]

Where do you get the idea that an apostle had to physically see the risen Lord?

From the process of selecting Mattias which you reject?

I find it interesting that both articles you linked to make the same mistake of filtering scripture thru their doctrines rather than letting the plain understanding of scripture form doctrine.

Mmm, well I think it's debatable, I mean what is the definition of an apostle? Where is the line drawn? If we start saying anyone can be an apostle that wouldn't be right either.

 

[faroukfarouk]

Mmm, well I think it's debatable, I mean what is the definition of an apostle? Where is the line drawn? If we start saying anyone can be an apostle that wouldn't be right either.

All the true apostles are recorded in Scripture, it seems.

 

[Guide To The Bible]

All the true apostles are recorded in Scripture, it seems.

apostle

1. each of the twelve chief disciples of Jesus Christ.
   • an important early Christian teacher or pioneering missionary.

 

[Rick Otto]

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. 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. This failure to wait on God and not act in ones own power is probably the most basic and commonly made errors all Christians make.

Sounds entirely plausible.

 

[Rick Otto]

You are trying to make much of nothing. Your theory is empty. How Popes are chosen has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the state of the Church (and it is not by drawing lots). And BTW, don't you think God could very easily make sure that His choice is the winner?

You are desperately grasping at straws to shore up your playlist convictions. You don't think God place anothe "Judas" among the most trusted few?

 

[faroukfarouk]

apostle

1. each of the twelve chief disciples of Jesus Christ.
   • an important early Christian teacher or pioneering missionary.

I see that 1 Corinthians 15.8 says: "And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time."

Seems like Paul regarded himself as the last of the apostles.

 

[JoeP222w]

You miss read the OP I didn't say that. And although the term 'pope' wasn't coined till the 2nd century Peter was the first of that line.

Can you demonstrate from scripture, where Peter, is the primary leader of the church (i.e. the Pope, even the specific term is not used)?

 

[Dave-W]

Mmm, well I think it's debatable, I mean what is the definition of an apostle?

From Strongs:

ἀπόστολος apostolos (G652)

a delegate, messenger, one sent forth with orders

1. specifically applied to the twelve apostles of Christ
2. in a broader sense applied to other eminent Christian teachers
   

 

[Guide To The Bible]

From Strongs:

ἀπόστολος apostolos (G652)

a delegate, messenger, one sent forth with orders

1. specifically applied to the twelve apostles of Christ
2. in a broader sense applied to other eminent Christian teachers

Yeah, so what or who do they mean.

For me i would say Barnabas and Junai are like second class apostles. Like second Class officers in the army.

 

[Wolf_Says]

The casting of lots is OT and is not for the 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. This failure to wait on God and not act in ones own power is probably the most basic and commonly made errors all Christians make.

Who are you to say that it is not for the Church? What would have happened had the apostles not pass down their authority to other men?

Well actually it is easy to see, the Protestant Reformation.

The Church was started by Jesus Christ, who positioned Peter as the head of the Apostles (Matthew 16:18-19)

He then later gave power to these apostles to forgive sins (John 20:23)
And ability to bind and loose, which means to bind to heaven or remove from heaven (Matthew 18:18)
And He commanded them to go and baptize all nations (Matthew 28:19)

The Church is the pillar and bulwark of truth, (1 Timothy 3:15)

So how could this be an error, that they elected a new apostle?

The anti-catholicism in this thread is astonishing to say the least. Never ceases to amaze me.

 

[Guide To The Bible]

Who are you to say that it is not for the Church? What would have happened had the apostles not pass down their authority to other men?

Well actually it is easy to see, the Protestant Reformation.

The Church was started by Jesus Christ, who positioned Peter as the head of the Apostles (Matthew 16:18-19)

He then later gave power to these apostles to forgive sins (John 20:23)
And ability to bind and loose, which means to bind to heaven or remove from heaven (Matthew 18:18)
And He commanded them to go and baptize all nations (Matthew 28:19)

The Church is the pillar and bulwark of truth, (1 Timothy 3:15)

So how could this be an error, that they elected a new apostle?

The anti-catholicism in this thread is astonishing to say the least. Never ceases to amaze me.

Matthew 16:16-19
16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon
son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in Heaven. 18 And I tell you that
you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 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.”

What Jesus meant was how the Church would be built up and that Peter’s profession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah
made Peter a rock just as Jesus had prophesied when He met Peter:

John 1:42
And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, “Thou art Simon the son of Jonah: thou shalt be
called Cephas;” which is by interpretation, a stone.

Peter’s belief in Jesus as the Messiah made him like a stone, just as Jesus had also described Himself:

Matthew 21:42
Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures: ‘The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone;
the LORD has done this, and it is marvellous in our eyes’?”

Jesus is the Cornerstone of the Church along with the Apostles and Prophets who are the foundation stones placed next to Him, upon which all Christians are placed, just as this verse also explains:

Ephesians 2:20
Together, we are his house, built on the foundation of the apostles and the prophets. And the cornerstone is Christ
Jesus himself.

After Peter died his successor was chosen by the other disciples as the new leader of the Church but this was not God’s plan as it is God alone who selects His chosen people and leaders.

 

[Dave-W]

For me i would say Barnabas and Junai are like second class apostles. Like second Class officers in the army.

Does the bible recognize "second class apostles?" If not, you are imposing your doctrines on the bible rather than the other way around.

 

[Guide To The Bible]

Does the bible recognize "second class apostles?" If not, you are imposing your doctrines on the bible rather than the other way around.

Well what's your position? Where is the line drawn for you? Are there apostles today? Are you one? Am I?

 

[Wolf_Says]

Matthew 16:16-19
16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon
son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in Heaven. 18 And I tell you that
you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 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.”

What Jesus meant was how the Church would be built up and that Peter’s profession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah
made Peter a rock just as Jesus had prophesied when He met Peter:

John 1:42
And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, “Thou art Simon the son of Jonah: thou shalt be
called Cephas;” which is by interpretation, a stone.

Peter’s belief in Jesus as the Messiah made him like a stone, just as Jesus had also described Himself:

Matthew 21:42
Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures: ‘The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone;
the LORD has done this, and it is marvellous in our eyes’?”

Jesus is the Cornerstone of the Church along with the Apostles and Prophets who are the foundation stones placed next to Him, upon which all Christians are placed, just as this verse also explains:

Ephesians 2:20
Together, we are his house, built on the foundation of the apostles and the prophets. And the cornerstone is Christ
Jesus himself.

After Peter died his successor was chosen by the other disciples as the new leader of the Church but this was not God’s plan as it is God alone who selects His chosen people and leaders.

You do not know God's plan, not a single person here on earth does. So I would like to kindly ask you to stop that assertion.

1) It was Peter, who was made the rock that Jesus built His Church on, and made Peter the earthly head of Christ's Church. Why? Because a Church needs a physical leader that they can see.

2) You are confusing why Jesus changed Peters name from Simon to Kephas. It is not that Peter's faith made him like a rock, for Peter denied Jesus 3 times, and was rebuked by Jesus 3 times when Jesus asked Peter to feed my sheep. Jesus changed Simon's name to Rock because this was who Jesus chose to be the earthly head of His Church. Hense why Peter is solely given the keys to the kingdom of Heaven.

Saying the truth that Jesus meant Peter is the rock that Jesus will build His Church on =/= I believe that Jesus is NOT the cornerstone.

Get that straight.

Going back to the original accusation, you claim that they were told to wait, and I am assuming that you mean this verse right here since this is also the same chapter that Matth'ias is selected.

Acts 1: 4-5 " And while staying with them he charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, “you heard from me, 5 for John baptized with water, but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”

Well they did not leave Jerusalem though did they? And if we read on, they were indeed baptized with the Holy Spirit, in Acts 2:1-4 "When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. 2 And suddenly a sound came from heaven like the rush of a mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. 3 And there appeared to them tongues as of fire, distributed and resting on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance."

They were also commanded, by Jesus, to go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them.

So once again, how exactly is this wrong for the Church to have done? Please show me where it states that this was wrong.

 

[Dave-W]

18 And I tell you that
you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 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.”

What Jesus meant was how the Church would be built up and that Peter’s profession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah
made Peter a rock just as Jesus had prophesied when He met Peter:

The bolded part is most germane to this discussion. Those terms, binding and loosing, were well understood in late 2nd temple period religious circles. They were as well known as the institution of discipleship. They were the basis of establishing halacha - or a discipler's method for teaching his students how to obey the 613 commands in the Torah - the books of Moses.

If an activity was "loosed" meant that it was permitted. Similarly, if an activity was "bound" meant it was forbidden. When others looked at a rabbi's halacha, they would either say it "establishes the Law" if following it properly led to proper obedience; or it "destroys the Law" if following it properly allowed someone to violate the Law in disobedience.

Our Lord gave Peter (and probably the rest of the 12) the authority to create halicha under the New Covenant, and whatever they (the 12) decided would have the backing of heaven itself.