Have you noticed ...

[MoreCoffee]

Have you noticed how nearly everybody named in the new covenant scriptures either is a Christian or becomes a Christian. Virtually all of them are regarded as saints by the Catholic Church. It's interesting that the unnamed are often (maybe even usually) not Christians and/or never become Christians.

 

[visionary]

Have you noticed how nearly everybody named in the new covenant scriptures either is a Christian or becomes a Christian. Virtually all of them are regarded as saints by the Catholic Church. It's interesting that the unnamed are often (maybe even usually) not Christians and/or never become Christians.

Of, course... that is what the story is all about. As far as being a saint in the Catholic Church.. where is James the Just, the brother of Yeshua?

 

[Alithis]

Of, course... that is what the story is all about. As far as being a saint in the Catholic Church.. where is James the Just, the brother of Yeshua?

hes not in rome's church .hes in the one headed by the lord JEsus

 

[MoreCoffee]

Of, course... that is what the story is all about. As far as being a saint in the Catholic Church.. where is James the Just, the brother of Yeshua?

He is referred to as saint James the less to distinguish him from saint James the apostle of the Lord.

 

[visionary]

hes not in rome's church .hes in the one headed by the lord JEsus

He was leader of the counsel in Jerusalem who made the final say on Acts 15.

 

[Alithis]

He was leader of the counsel in Jerusalem who made the final say on Acts 15.

well then,. he certainly wasn't part of rome's church then - as it did not exist for the better part of 400 years

 

[psalms 91]

Yup

 

[MoreCoffee]

He was leader of the counsel in Jerusalem who made the final say on Acts 15.

You are right that he was the host and titular leader in that council and he was one of the participants in framing the letter from the council to the gentile churches yet the council was set to rights by the testimony of saint Peter and given clear and compelling testimony about the gentile churches by saint Paul and in tuth every apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ had greater authority than he.

 

[MoreCoffee]

well then,. he certainly wasn't part of Rome's church then - as it did not exist for the better part of 400 years

The Church in Rome already existed when the letter to the Romans was written in 56 AD.

 

[psalms 91]

No, a governing council existed in Jerusalem of which Peter was not the head

 

[MoreCoffee]

No council was called the Rock upon which the Lord Jesus Christ builds his Church but saint Peter was.

 

[psalms 91]

nope rock as in little stone had nothing to do with the church interms of what you claim

 

[Josiah]

He was leader of the counsel in Jerusalem who made the final say on Acts 15.

Acts 15 does not identify the "James". He could not have been James Son of Zebedee since he had been killed, but he COULD have been James the Lesser. Many however believe he was James the brother of Jesus (rather than one of the 12 Apostles) but the TEXT does not state.... it simply refers to the leader of the Council as "James." What IS certain is that it's NOT Peter, Peter is not the head of the church at this time.


As to the opening post.... sorry, I don't understand what point is attempting to be made.



Pax


- Josiah

 

[visionary]

Acts 15 does not identify the "James". He could not have been James Son of Zebedee since he had been killed, but he COULD have been James the Lesser. Many however believe he was James the brother of Jesus (rather than one of the 12 Apostles) but the TEXT does not state.... it simply refers to the leader of the Council as "James." What IS certain is that it's NOT Peter, Peter is not the head of the church at this time.


As to the opening post.... sorry, I don't understand what point is attempting to be made.



Pax


- Josiah

History does verify..

 

[Alithis]

No, a governing council existed in Jerusalem of which Peter was not the head

if it wasnt so terribly serious ..it would be funny how they squease in thos ambiguious
little lies..but lies they still are.

 

[visionary]

Eusebius, citing Clement (in the sixth book of his Insitutions) says that Peter, James, and John chose James the Just (Yeshua's brother) as the first bishop of Jerusalem. (2:1:3) Citing Hegesippus and Clement: The martyrdom of James the Just was the immediate cause of the Roman destruction of Jerusalem. (2:23:19) and then later on stated Yeshua's cousin Simeon was chosen as the second bishop of Jerusalem after the death of James the Just (Yeshua's brother) (3:11:1)

 

[visionary]

James the brother of the Lord (Galatians 1:19)

 

[visionary]

James was called "bishop of bishops, who rules Jerusalem, the Holy Assembly of Hebrews, and all assemblies everywhere" (Clement of Rome)

 

[MoreCoffee]

James was called "bishop of bishops, who rules Jerusalem, the Holy Assembly of Hebrews, and all assemblies everywhere" (Clement of Rome)

Your quote is highly questionable. It is not regarded as coming from the hand of Clement. It comes from a time long after Clement was martyred.

 

[MoreCoffee]

---

Eusebius, citing Clement (in the sixth book of his Insitutions) says that Peter, James, and John chose James the Just (Yeshua's brother) as the first bishop of Jerusalem.

---

(2:1:3) Citing Hegesippus and Clement: The martyrdom of James the Just was the immediate cause of the Roman destruction of Jerusalem. (2:23:19) and then later on stated Yeshua's cousin Simeon was chosen as the second bishop of Jerusalem after the death of James the Just (Yeshua's brother) (3:11:1)

The words in red above do not appear to come from any work of Eusebius that I can identify. They are not present in the sixth book of his Ecclesiastical History and I know of no work called "Institutions" from his hand. Can you provide a more accurate source for this allegation?