Favorite Bible Character Besides Jesus

[IACOBVS]

Jonathan, David's lover

 

[atpollard]

God created bishops, elders, and deacons. Not a deep hierarchy one must admit but a hierarchy nonetheless. And I still vote for saint Peter the first Pope

Could you point to a verse where God created bishops, elders and deacons?

I am familiar with 1 Corinthians 12:28 NASB And God has [fn]appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then [fn]miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues. where 'God appointed' some to specific positions. I am also familiar with Titus 1:5 NASB For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you, where Paul is instructing Titus to 'appoint' elders.

If you have something more specific in mind, I am always happy to learn something new. I know you have references from the Apocrapha that I am unfamiliar with and wondered if there was something in there.

***

On the subject of Peter, I like him, too and think that he also gets unfair criticism a lot of he time. Like when he looks at the waves and starts to sink, I hear a lot about our need for faith, but not a lot about the fact that none of the other 11 were willing to swing their big size 12 sandals over the side of the boat. I bet a lot of watchers had a lot of advice for how the doers could have done it better.

Then there was Peter's bold pledge that he was ready to die with Jesus, and Jesus correct prophecy that Peter would deny him. I hear a lot about the details on how a teenage servant girl chance Peter away from the campfire at the High Priest's house. What I see was Peter having a really bad day. Yet through it all, Peter made good on his promise to die with Jesus. One does not charge a squad of marines and cut the ear off the leader and expect to survive that encounter. Only Jesus intervention prevented Peter making good on his boast.

So I am with you. Peter is all right in my book.
Now I don't know about that whole Pater Familias thing, Peter as head of the family is a pretty Roman concept for a Jewish Fisherman. I will not say anything bad about your honoring the passing of the mantle, but I don't think that I am ready to swallow all of the tradition over scripture. I sort of like the way the 5 Solas fit on me (personally). When we see JC, we can ask him (If we don't already know). Either way, I'd like to hear Peter tell the story about hauling in the net full of fish alone when those other men (plural) could not drag it. I bet that was impressive to see.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Could you point to a verse where God created bishops, elders and deacons?

...

Holy Tradition tells me about the role of the Bishop in his diocese. It is very ancient holy Tradition - from a Christian perspective - dating from the first century and being contemporary with some of the writings of the new testament and there is also the use of "elder" and "overseer" in Greek to designate what we (meaning English speaking Catholics) call priests and bishops. I could quote a passage here but I am hesitant to do so because I do not want to debate Presbyterian and Baptist/Congregationalist ecclesiology and I do not want to debate it because I went through the exercise in some considerable detail when I left the Presbyterian church and eventually chose to enter the one holy catholic and apostolic church which is in communion with the successor of saint Peter who is the pope in Rome. And yes, I am being naughty and slightly provocative by phrasing it the way I did

 

[popsthebuilder]

Holy Tradition tells me about the role of the Bishop in his diocese. It is very ancient holy Tradition - from a Christian perspective - dating from the first century and being contemporary with some of the writings of the new testament and there is also the use of "elder" and "overseer" in Greek to designate what we (meaning English speaking Catholics) call priests and bishops. I could quote a passage here but I am hesitant to do so because I do not want to debate Presbyterian and Baptist/Congregationalist ecclesiology and I do not want to debate it because I went through the exercise in some considerable detail when I left the Presbyterian church and eventually chose to enter the one holy catholic and apostolic church which is in communion with the successor of saint Peter who is the pope in Rome. And yes, I am being naughty and slightly provocative by phrasing it the way I did

But who said to call none Rabi?

 

[psalms 91]

And He sent out the 70 same number as the Sanhedrin and the church was based in Jerusalem back thenm as well, not one mention of a pope, and definitely nothing about Peter being infallible

 

[MoreCoffee]

But who said to call none Rabi?

A bishop is not a rabbi. Bishops are pastors of the faithful, leaders who lead by example and by self sacrifice when necessary. Of course bishops are fallible and sin prone as are nearly all of the faithful and some have been terrible disappointments even wicked like Judas Iscariot the apostle chosen by the Lord Jesus Christ. No one ought to expect perfection from another human being with the exception of the Lord Jesus - he was perfect in every way yet even he chose an apostle who betrayed him proving false to his words expressing faith in Jesus.

 

[popsthebuilder]

A bishop is not a rabbi. Bishops are pastors of the faithful, leaders who lead by example and by self sacrifice when necessary. Of course bishops are fallible and sin prone as are nearly all of the faithful and some have been terrible disappointments even wicked like Judas Iscariot the apostle chosen by the Lord Jesus Christ. No one ought to expect perfection from another human being with the exception of the Lord Jesus - he was perfect in every way yet even he chose an apostle who betrayed him proving false to his words expressing faith in Jesus.

So to you, Rabbi and Bishop aren't synonyms?

Both don't refer to religious leaders and teachers?

episkopos*means (literally) overseer

And Rabbi means master so though they aren't perfectly synonymous, I'm certain the reference within scripture is to hierarchy of men, whom we are to regard as equal.

 

[MoreCoffee]

So to you, Rabbi and Bishop aren't synonyms?

Yes, that is correct. I do not think of rabbi and bishop as synonymous concepts. A rabbi is a religious teacher. Specifically a Jewish religious teacher. A bishop pastors the flock of God and his primary role is to serve the faithful. He teaches but he is not their teacher. Their teacher is Jesus. A bishop helps the faithful to grow into maturity as Christians but their helper is the Holy Spirit.

Both don't refer to religious leaders and teachers?

Bishops lead like a shepherd leads but the one shepherd of the faithful is Jesus and the bishops follow him and because they too are sheep they lead only by being among the first to follow Jesus.

episkopos*means (literally) overseer

Yes, episkopos means "overseer". I mentioned that in my post saying "there is also the use of "elder" and "overseer" in Greek to designate what we (meaning English speaking Catholics) call priests and bishops.". Of course "priest" came into the English language from German "priester" and into German from Latin "presbyter" and into Latin from Greek "presbyteros" and bishop came into English from Latin "episcopus" which came from Greek "episkopos" meaning overseer.

And Rabbi means master so though they aren't perfectly synonymous, I'm certain the reference within scripture is to hierarchy of men, whom we are to regard as equal.

If by "we" you mean people who hold to presbyterian and congregational views of church government then yes, you are right but for people who hold to episcopal views of church government then no the roles are not the same nor equal no more so than a stand for a plant pot is the same as a chair - both are furnishings but nobody would confuse the one for the other.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Yes, that is correct. I do not think of rabbi and bishop as synonymous concepts. A rabbi is a religious teacher. Specifically a Jewish religious teacher. A bishop pastors the flock of God and his primary role is to serve the faithful. He teaches but he is not their teacher. Their teacher is Jesus. A bishop helps the faithful to grow into maturity as Christians but their helper is the Holy Spirit.


Bishops lead like a shepherd leads but the one shepherd of the faithful is Jesus and the bishops follow him and because they too are sheep they lead only by being among the first to follow Jesus.


Yes, episkopos means "overseer". I mentioned that in my post saying "there is also the use of "elder" and "overseer" in Greek to designate what we (meaning English speaking Catholics) call priests and bishops.". Of course "priest" came into the English language from German "priester" and into German from Latin "presbyter" and into Latin from Greek "presbyteros" and bishop came into English from Latin "episcopus" which came from Greek "episkopos" meaning overseer.

If by "we" you mean people who hold to presbyterian and congregational views of church government then yes, you are right but for people who hold to episcopal views of church government then no the roles are not the same nor equal no more so than a stand for a plant pot is the same as a chair - both are furnishings but nobody would confuse the one for the other.

That seems intellectually dishonest, and presupposes Christians as right and Jews as wrong.

All are equal. So a Rabbi and a bishop who are both leaders and teachers are much more similar than your comparison to a pot and a chair or what have you.

Perhaps if it wasn't written that Jacob and Israel will be reconciled unto GOD, and that their seed has been spread to all nations; then you might have a valid point.

 

[MoreCoffee]

That seems intellectually dishonest, and presupposes Christians as right and Jews as wrong.

All are equal. So a Rabbi and a bishop who are both leaders and teachers are much more similar than your comparison to a pot and a chair or what have you.

Perhaps if it wasn't written that Jacob and Israel will be reconciled unto GOD, and that their seed has been spread to all nations; then you might have a valid point.

Judaism is partly right and partly wrong just as Islam, Hinduism, animism, witchcraft, and every other human religion is partly right and partly wrong. Christianity is also partly right and partly wrong but in the case of Christianity the rightness and wrongness has to do with the degree to which people in the religion defect from the teaching of Christ and I say this because the teaching of Christ is wholly right and not wrong in any part. The one holy catholic and apostolic church is as right as it is possible to be but its bishops, priests, deacons, and members are human and prone to error and also prone to sin and wickedness which means that despite God saying that the church is spotless she is also filled with people who are spotty. The spotlessness of the church is her dowry from God to make her a pure bride for God the Son. It is because of these things that I am a Christian and not a Jew or a Muslim or a Hindu or any of the other human religions of the world. It is also because of these things that I am a Catholic (which is the same thing as saying I am a Christian) and it is one of the many reasons why I like saint Peter so much. He is a wonderful example of what it means for a flawed human being to be in the spotless bride of Christ by the grace of God despite his mistakes.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Judaism is partly right and partly wrong just as Islam, Hinduism, animism, witchcraft, and every other human religion is partly right and partly wrong. Christianity is also partly right and partly wrong but in the case of Christianity the rightness and wrongness has to do with the degree to which people in the religion defect from the teaching of Christ and I say this because the teaching of Christ is wholly right and not wrong in any part. The one holy catholic and apostolic church is as right as it is possible to be but its bishops, priests, deacons, and members are human and prone to error and also prone to sin and wickedness which means that despite God saying that the church is spotless she is also filled with people who are spotty. The spotlessness of the church is her dowry from God to make her a pure bride for God the Son. It is because of these things that I am a Christian and not a Jew or a Muslim or a Hindu or any of the other human religions of the world. It is also because of these things that I am a Catholic (which is the same thing as saying I am a Christian) and it is one of the many reasons why I like saint Peter so much. He is a wonderful example of what it means for a flawed human being to be in the spotless bride of Christ by the grace of God despite his mistakes.

So Bishop and Rabbi?

There is currently no church without spot.

Christianity is more than Catholicism, and the city of gold is a testament to its own error. I'm not getting into the reasons why the arcc is the whore of Babylon, but it is safe to say that they don't only have a spot, but have caused the defilement of the masses.

The writings ascribed to St. Peter are profound and edifying. But that has nothing to do with the misdirection of the "church", or it's pride.

 

[MoreCoffee]

So Bishop and Rabbi?

Bishops are not rabbis. Bishops are not teachers or sages or wise men even though a good bishop is a teacher and sagely and has wisdom because a bishop is Christ's minister. A rabbi is a teacher who teaches from the accumulated writings of other rabbis who have annotations recorded in the Talmud and in other Rabbinic books in use among Jews a good rabbi teaches what the wisdom of rabbinic Judaism teaches and he rejects Jesus as messiah rejects the Blessed and Holy Trinity preferring a religion that has more in common with Islam than it has with Christ and his Church. And even though the Catholic Church seeks to deal well and fairly with Judaism and Islam it is nonetheless true that Catholicism is true and godly in ways in which neither Judaism nor Islam are able to be.

There is currently no church without spot.

The Church is spotless and always has been and always will be because she is the bride of Christ right now and always was and always will be his bride. But some confuse the Church with the folly of men and the errors of her members in their walk through the world. Jesus had no difficulty declaring that his church would never be overcome and never lose the light of truth that he is to her. He had no difficulty calling her spotless, wrinkle free, and beautiful. But people today concentrate on what they see with their fallen senses and think reality is what they perceive in their sin-trained thinking. Reality is not what the world thinks it is. That is why the world is so pleased to witness fault and failing among the people of God and why the world wants to proscribe the morals and beliefs of every individual living on the earth. For the world "heaven" and "hell" are imaginary, god is an invisible imaginary friend, and prayer, angels, truth, and godliness are all either imaginary or optional or just opinions.

Christianity is more than Catholicism, and the city of gold is a testament to its own error. I'm not getting into the reasons why the arcc is the whore of Babylon, but it is safe to say that they don't only have a spot, but have caused the defilement of the masses.

The Catholic Church is called Catholic because she extends through time as well as geography and contains every saint who ever lived and ever will live as well as all who are living now and struggling towards the perfection of beauty that God in his grace has given to the saints in Christ. Never make the mistake of seeing the Church as the world sees. Never accept the fallen divisions created by error prone people as the "norm that is to be used for norming everything".

The writings ascribed to St. Peter are profound and edifying. But that has nothing to do with the misdirection of the "church", or it's pride.

Saint Peter said "I do not know him" and he said "yes Lord I love you" be also said "you are the Christ the Son of the living God" from one man came mistaken perception and profound truth. Fallible human utterance and infallible divine truth. I think well of saint Peter because the profound divine truth triumphs over the fallible human utterance.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Bishops are not rabbis. Bishops are not teachers or sages or wise men even though a good bishop is a teacher and sagely and has wisdom because a bishop is Christ's minister. A rabbi is a teacher who teaches from the accumulated writings of other rabbis who have annotations recorded in the Talmud and in other Rabbinic books in use among Jews a good rabbi teaches what the wisdom of rabbinic Judaism teaches and he rejects Jesus as messiah rejects the Blessed and Holy Trinity preferring a religion that has more in common with Islam than it has with Christ and his Church. And even though the Catholic Church seeks to deal well and fairly with Judaism and Islam it is nonetheless true that Catholicism is true and godly in ways in which neither Judaism nor Islam are able to be.


The Church is spotless and always has been and always will be because she is the bride of Christ right now and always was and always will be his bride. But some confuse the Church with the folly of men and the errors of her members in their walk through the world. Jesus had no difficulty declaring that his church would never be overcome and never lose the light of truth that he is to her. He had no difficulty calling her spotless, wrinkle free, and beautiful. But people today concentrate on what they see with their fallen senses and think reality is what they perceive in their sin-trained thinking. Reality is not what the world thinks it is. That is why the world is so pleased to witness fault and failing among the people of God and why the world wants to proscribe the morals and beliefs of every individual living on the earth. For the world "heaven" and "hell" are imaginary, god is an invisible imaginary friend, and prayer, angels, truth, and godliness are all either imaginary or optional or just opinions.


The Catholic Church is called Catholic because she extends through time as well as geography and contains every saint who ever lived and ever will live as well as all who are living now and struggling towards the perfection of beauty that God in his grace has given to the saint in Christ. Never make the mistake of seeing the Church as the world sees. Never accept the fallen divisions created by error prone people as the "norm that is to be used for norming everything".


Saint Peter said "I do not know him" and he said "yes Lord I love you" be also said "you are the Christ the Son of the living God" from one man came mistaken perception and profound truth. Fallible human utterance and infallible divine truth. I think well of saint Peter because the profound divine truth triumphs over the fallible human utterance.

Made it partly through your response.

It isn't worth trying to show you the error of your words. You wouldn't care to hear.

If you believe the doctrine of the Trinity to be salvific then there is no reason for us to attempt to discuss the finer details of the pure congregation. Your division itself, of both man and GOD, is a sign of your very own misdirection, yet you proclaim your church is the one and only church of GOD.

so then what are the different branches of the vine? what are the different limbs that comprise the body? Would you have us think it is the "catholoc" church alone?

Pride is a cloud and disease.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Made it partly through your response.

It isn't worth trying to show you the error of your words. You wouldn't care to hear.

If you believe the doctrine of the Trinity to be salvific then there is no reason for us to attempt to discuss the finer details of the pure congregation. Your division itself, of both man and GOD, is a sign of your very own misdirection, yet you proclaim your church is the one and only church of GOD.

so then what are the different branches of the vine? what are the different limbs that comprise the body? Would you have us think it is the "catholoc" church alone?

Pride is a cloud and disease.

Perhaps it is because you did not manage to complete reading my response that you have formed an erroneous opinion about my beliefs and the meaning of the words that you did read. It is true that I believe that there is one holy catholic and apostolic church not many churches that all have equal rights to call themselves holy catholic and apostolic and they cannot be one if there are many unless one conceives of the church as some kind of image of the Blessed Trinity in plurality of churches and unity of CHURCH but I do not conceive of the church of God in that way. The church is a union of many in one body but the many are individuals not churches and the one is the body of the Lord Jesus Christ. The saints in Christ are not all in communion with the Catholic Church and are not always in communion with the Catholic Church but they are all contained within her insofar as their beliefs and practices as well as their hearts and minds are in communion with God because to be in communion with God is to be in the Catholic Church even if one's union with the Catholic Church is imperfect - the imperfection being due to separation from her and possibly also holding beliefs contrary to the teaching of Christ which is the teaching of the Catholic Church. I do not think that other Christians cease to be Christians by not being in full communion with the Catholic Church I think that Baptists, Lutherans, many Pentecostals, and all other people professing genuine faith in Christ who are in denominations or independent bodies are Christians if they hold to the Nicene creed and do so without distorting it into heresy. And I do think that belief in the Holy Trinity is fundamental to orthodox christian faith. I do not think that everybody who is a Christian need have equal theological knowledge nor need everybody attend the same liturgical worship yet to know and then reject Jesus as God and messiah and to knowingly reject the Holy Trinity does place one outside of the communion of the one holy catholic and apostolic church. That is why no faithful Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist etcetera knowingly rejects Jesus as messiah and God nor do any knowingly reject the Holy Trinity. Knowledge carries responsibility as saint Paul argues regarding the Law. One who knows that Jesus is messiah according to the scriptures and rejects it or one who knows that Jesus is God according to the scriptures and rejects it or one who knows that God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and knowingly rejects it rejects the foundation of Christian faith and thus ought not call him/her self Christian and ought not claim to be among God's elect. Such people may claim to be Jehovah's witnesses or Christadelphians or Muslims or Jews or something else but they cannot accurately claim the name Christian.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Perhaps it is because you did not manage to complete reading my response that you have formed an erroneous opinion about my beliefs and the meaning of the words that you did read. It is true that I believe that there is one holy catholic and apostolic church not many churches that all have equal rights to call themselves holy catholic and apostolic and they cannot be one if there are many unless one conceives of the church as some kind of image of the Blessed Trinity in plurality of churches and unity of CHURCH but I do not conceive of the church of God in that way. The church is a union of many in one body but the many are individuals not churches and the one is the body of the Lord Jesus Christ. The saints in Christ are not all in communion with the Catholic Church and are not always in communion with the Catholic Church but they are all contained within her insofar as their beliefs and practices as well as their hearts and minds are in communion with God because to be in communion with God is to be in the Catholic Church even if one's union with the Catholic Church is imperfect - the imperfection being due to separation from her and possibly also holding beliefs contrary to the teaching of Christ which is the teaching of the Catholic Church. I do not think that other Christians cease to be Christians by not being in full communion with the Catholic Church I think that Baptists, Lutherans, many Pentecostals, and all other people professing genuine faith in Christ who are in denominations or independent bodies are Christians if they hold to the Nicene creed and do so without distorting it into heresy. And I do think that belief in the Holy Trinity is fundamental to orthodox christian faith. I do not think that everybody who is a Christian need have equal theological knowledge nor need everybody attend the same liturgical worship yet to know and then reject Jesus as God and messiah and to knowingly reject the Holy Trinity does place one outside of the communion of the one holy catholic and apostolic church. That is why no faithful Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist etcetera knowingly rejects Jesus as messiah and God nor do any knowingly reject the Holy Trinity. Knowledge carries responsibility as saint Paul argues regarding the Law. One who knows that Jesus is messiah according to the scriptures and rejects it or one who knows that Jesus is God according to the scriptures and rejects it or one who knows that God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and knowingly rejects it rejects the foundation of Christian faith and thus ought not call him/her self Christian and ought not claim to be among God's elect. Such people may claim to be Jehovah's witnesses or Christadelphians or Muslims or Jews or something else but they cannot accurately claim the name Christian.

Soooo....who are you insinuating is guilty of any of those things? To think the different branches of the vine are different Catholics is kinda gross. You can't honestly think Catholics make up the entirety of the body of Christ. That goes against plain scripture. You contradict yourself by saying if one doesn't deny Christ then they are orthodox church, but then you already said only the Catholics comprise the one church. So Jesus the Son and Christ of GOD isn't the Savior and Messiah of all to you; only Catholics? The Holy Spirit of GOD didn't utterly fill the temple that was the man Jesus the Christ for the glorification and declaration of GOD to all nations; only the golden city? And what is to happen to the city of gold, Jacob, Egypt, Israel? Im sure you know there destinations aren't the same. Do you understand the whore of Babylon to be the ancient rcc? Not than none can't repent, but you seem to be claiming some pretty proud proclamations. Are you not aware that the lowest will be lifted up, and the rich and those who occupy the lofty seats will be abased? You know history repeats itself right? If GOD did to whom HE chose, what HE did for their knowing misdirection, then how much more severe do you think the rebuke of Babylon will be?

I tell you now that you need to consider that those who do not deny Christ/ the Holy Spirit of GOD; aren't against GOD.


Lastly; I understand the Trinity doctrine quite well; I don't take well to the part where man/ creation/ son is lifted up to status of eternal father while still physical mortal created man, but I do understand that His vessel was filled to the capacity with the Spirit of GOD. One can describe GOD as three separate people that only make the fullness of GOD when combined if they want, but when they say it must be believed as one must believe in Christ (salvific), well that just can't be concluded honestly from scripture whatsoever.

Why not come on out with whatever you're hinting around about so we can discuss it openly.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Soooo....who are you insinuating is guilty of any of those things? ....

No one here. I try not to insinuate. I prefer blunt statement to subterfuge.

 

[MoreCoffee]

...Do you understand the whore of Babylon to be the ancient rcc? ...

I understand the whore who site astride seven hills and rules the nations to be ancient pagan Rome. The empire that conquered the nations and held them in her thrall forcing them to worship her emperor and who persecuted Christians to be the "whore of Babylon" but I can see that you've swallowed some bad thing that makes you think and speak ill of the Catholic Church so I shall leave the matter at that. If you want to complain about Catholic theology then okay but be sure you know what it is before you complain because it never helps anybody to hold on to misconceptions as if they were the truth when they are not.

 

[popsthebuilder]

I understand the whore who site astride seven hills and rules the nations to be ancient pagan Rome. The empire that conquered the nations and held them in her thrall forcing them to worship her emperor and who persecuted Christians to be the "whore of Babylon" but I can see that you've swallowed some bad thing that makes you think and speak ill of the Catholic Church so I shall leave the matter at that. If you want to complain about Catholic theology then okay but be sure you know what it is before you complain because it never helps anybody to hold on to misconceptions as if they were the truth when they are not.

I specified the ancient rcc and you know that.

I have absolutely nothing against practicing Catholics which you should also recall.

 

[NewCreation435]

God created bishops, elders, and deacons. Not a deep hierarchy one must admit but a hierarchy nonetheless. And I still vote for saint Peter the first Pope

These are offices to help the church have order and structure. I had a man come up to me one time and give me a chart which showed the deacons of the church (this was a Baptist church) at the top of the structure and then everyone else below them. He was very proud of the power he thought he had. A lot of Baptist churches are like that with deacons acting like they are the final authority. The word deacon actually means servant. I told the man who showed me the chart to flip his chart around and then he would have it right. He didn't seem to like that idea at all.

 

[Andrew]

Joseph would be my favorite, his story of forgiveness is so remarkably easy to understand.
When I first started reading the bible it was at THIS story that the bible really start to make sense to me.
As for N.T. I would have to say Peter, he reminds me of myself how he would constantly ask questions and at the same time be a defensive know it all, when inside he was weak in faith but God fearing enough to hold fast for the Lord.


Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk