Interpreting the Bible on delegation of Authority

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by Armando, Nov 20, 2003.

  1. Armando

    Armando
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    0
    Seems to me that one of the major issue that divides Catholics and Non-catholics has to do with what we Catholics beleive is the final authority.

    We clearly see that the Apostles were sent in "FULL" representation of our Lord (Full authority). We read in:


    Lk 10,16 He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.

    Matt 10,40 He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

    And Matt 18,18, Matt 16,19


    Now, Christ, Our Lord, was sent by the Father to bring salvation to the world (Mediator). And in

    John 20, 21 as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.


    we read that, Our Lord is passing this Authority to the apostles. Is it fair to say that the apostles were mediators, thru Christ, as well?

    We also see that the apostles exercised this authority. For instance, the power of forgive sins is given to the apostles in:


    John 20,22 - Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained


    This power of forgiving sins is exercised by Paul in:


    2 Cor 2, 10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ


    The power to condemn, tie the sin.


    1 Cor 5,4 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.


    By forgving and condemning, Paul is exercising the power of mediating.

    Why is it to hard to understand, then, the RCC doctrine, that it is thru Christ that all Authority has been passed down to the Church, and it is Christ the one is forgiven our sins, thru the priest, as Paul said "In the person of Christ" (confession).

    Thanks
    Armando
     
  2. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Here is where you falter. It is through the process of "making disciples"
    whereby the authority Jesus gave to HIS disciples, whom we now call Apostles, is likewise passed on to "whosoever believeth" the word of God and acts accordingly. THEREFORE BY BELIEVING AND ACTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WORD OF GOD WE ALL BECOME DISCIPLES AND RECEIVE THE AUTHORITY THAT JESUS HANDED TO THE ORIGINAL 11, in the same manner that Jesus gave them the authority, Jesus words likewise give each of us who believe in Him that same authority. We do not need a "priesthood" or an "official apostolic succession" to have the Authority of God the Son handed down through time. We have it by believing in Jesus who is the Son of God, the Messiah!

    In other words, any person who hears the word of God and believes in God is given full right and authority to act upon that word and thus are disciples of the Christ having the same authority that Jesus gave to each of the original disciples. Therefore every believer who is a "doer of the word" is a Priest in the kingdom of God and has the same priestly authority that the original 11 received from Jesus. That is how the church grows exponentially.

    So Armando, we do not need the Catholic Church Legalism that you espouse in order to have the authority that Jesus gave to the original 11 Disciples. What you teach is subservience to the church and not devotion and obedience of the Christ. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.
     
  3. trying2understand

    trying2understand
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    3,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    You are reading something into Matt28:18-20 that the text does not bear out.

    Jesus's words give authority to the Apostles - that's as far as you can take it with this text however.
     
  4. trying2understand

    trying2understand
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    3,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    BTW, in another thread, we have an IFB claiming that Jesus is only Spirit now that He has ascended to Heaven.

    And you don't that Jesus (seeing that kind of free wheeling - soul liberty - make it up as you go along - Bible interpreting coming) would see the need for an earthly teaching authority to interpret Scripture? :D
     
  5. SpiritualMadMan

    SpiritualMadMan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,734
    Likes Received:
    0
    Armando,

    Peace.

    I think that one of the issues in this (hopefully limited of scope) thread is that as a Protestant I firmly believe that I, too, am a King and Priest unto my God.

    -and-
    It is apparent, at least to me, that the wording in the previous verses in Revelation chapter 1 are directed at the entire church, not just the leaders.

    And, it is *still* present tense not Revelatory future tense.

    So, for a protestant, it is possible to go directly into the Fathers Throne room and in Jesus Name obtain mercy.

    Again this is to the entire church not just the leaders.

    As regards to the ability of an Apostle to forgive sins in Jesus Name...

    In a sense that is the same thing as the Charismatics Binding and Loosing.

    But, the premier strength of the Gospel of Christ is that whosoever will may come. And, no other human acquiesnce is required.

    Salvation is a transaction between one person and their God, through Jesus.

    What does Paul teach about this?
    It doesn't not say any other humans intervention is required. Only Faith and Confession.

    The Thayer says this about the confession:
    Obviously, it *could* be to a priest. But, as long as it is **PUBLIC** it counts.

    Faith and Belief are tightly allied and Thayer says this about them:
    As for apostolic succession: My view is that it is a Spiritual Succession by the manifest Presence of the holy Spirit of God... NOT a Physical One.

    And, that sin in the life of an 'apostle' would quench the Spirit and make his passing an anointing of his office to another null and void.

    Also, it can not be a closed succession. Ie., only through the path of Rome. Because even Jesus said that if a man is not against me he is for me... I know I'm stretching here. [​IMG]

    But, it seems to me that it would not be in Jesus' best interests in the spreading of the Gospel to put all 'His Eggs' in one basket.

    I submit that the RCC's sins in the past broke any hope of an Apostolic succession because God's Spirit would have surely lifted under such egregious infractions against His Children.

    Also, God is no respecter of persons... Just because you have a title doesn't mean God is going to honor it.

    The heart *MUST* be right in God's Eyes.
     
  6. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    You are reading something into Matt28:18-20 that the text does not bear out.

    Jesus's words give authority to the Apostles - that's as far as you can take it with this text however.
    </font>[/QUOTE]That is why one must be able to think things through. Don't be ignorant of what Jesus is saying. He is not limiting his instruction to the original 11 only! Jesus knows that they, the first disciples, have a very limited range, the Mediterranian region and the middle east at best, and a "short life", limited to 120 years, and that they cannot possibly get to the whole world making disciples. However, they can make disciples, who make disciples, who make disciples, thus broadening the church exponentially.

    If the authority that Jesus gave to the original 11 did not accompany his words into those who were made into disciples, the church would have died in the second generation. It is that simple.

    So the authority of Jesus that he gave to the first disciples is passed to all who become disciples through belief in Jesus the Son of God, the messiah. The church cannot survive without that authority being handed down to each new disciple.

    Truly, no organization survives when responsibility is not accompanied by authority.

    The church thrives by the passing of Jesus' authority to all who will accept the responsibility to be "little Jesus's". Those are called "disciples of the Christ", and their authority is the very same authority that Jesus gave to his first disciples.

    Discipleship is a matter of faith! Not legalism!
     
  7. CatholicConvert

    CatholicConvert
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2001
    Messages:
    1,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    SMM --

    Interesting moniker you have.

    As for apostolic succession: My view is that it is a Spiritual Succession by the manifest Presence of the holy Spirit of God... NOT a Physical One.

    But that breaks the covenantal paradigm of the earthly and physical Church. There is a physical covenant kingdom on earth. Regardless of its spiritual condition, it is the kingdom.

    In a covenant, there can only be ONE covenantal head over the family. This is the strongest argument pointing to the papacy rather than the 5 heads of Eastern Orthodoxy or the thousands of "heads" of Protestantism.

    No body has more than one head. Our Lord used "body anaology" in describing the Church. Therefore, there can only be one head and one leader. And he descends from the office of St. Peter, that which we call the Pope.

    Brother Ed
     
  8. SpiritualMadMan

    SpiritualMadMan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,734
    Likes Received:
    0
    But, the priesthood that Jesus brought forth was NOT in the old order but in an entirely different form.

    In fact one might argue that Jesus, being after the order of Melchesidek, whose 'template' (if you will) had no beginning or end, that the priesthood of Christ has no definable line of succession.

    Ie., It's an open order whereby by *any* may join by conformance with the previously described initiation rite.

    All of Hebrews 7 is interesting...

    Back to the free access of *all* Christians
    Again Peter is talking to the whole church not just the leadership.

    And, again in
    Also, lets look at
    -and-
    The word used to call Peter is Petros. The word used to described the Rock upon which the church is to be built is Petra... The same Rock used in 1st Corinthians.

    So, Jesus, not Peter is the Rock, the ONLY Rock upon which the church was ever to be built.

    Look at
    First, the kingdom of heaven has *never* been a physical kingdom otherwise Jesus' servants would have fought the Cross! Jesus said so Himself.

    Secondly, the 'thee' can as easily be translated unto your own. Could mean family, church, or disciples. Could be used to either refute or support your 'cause'. [​IMG]

    Thirdly, keys are also information required to unlock and understand the Kingdom of Heaven, a Spiritual Kingdom.

    I would also like for you to consider this passage:
    Tradition holds that this Philip was an apostle. But, look at this
    Hmmmmm It couldn't have very well been an apostle if the apostles are clearly stated as having stayed in Jerusalem.

    If the Catholic premise of apostolic succession is true then all the Ethiopan converts were 'illegitimate' in the Lord and couldn't be saved because it would take only someone authorized by apostolic succession to 'confirm' them.

    We know from history that the Ethiopian went home and shared the gospel and it was accepted. So, all those converts weren't really converts and died lost in their sins?
     

Share This Page

Loading...