Antecedent Will, Clarity of St. Paul, Access to Apostolic Tradition

I May Feel Like Exonerating Mike Gendron, But I Won't Admire Him · A Comment of Mine Sparked a Debate · Which Went On ... and Was Censored? · Continuing · Carolina Jackson Continued · Antecedent Will, Clarity of St. Paul, Access to Apostolic Tradition

Carolina Jackson

@carolinajackson7621

@hglundahl Hello Hans,
1. I don't know what God's "antecedent will" is.
2. 1 John 5, 1. Of course "born of God" means eternal security! A person born of God has been cleansed of his/her sins.
3. Ephesians 1, 12-14 is OSAS 100%, since the verses show the whole process from believing, receiving the Holy Spirit as deposit, & getting to the day of redemption.
4. Romans 8, 38-39. I don't understand why u say it cannot apply individually.
5. Romans 11, 29: "irrevocable"... those called cannot lose the salvation.
6. John 6, 47: OSAS very clearly. And the idea of a "state of grace" is not biblical. God has never said that. That is man-made.
7. John 3, 36: OSAS very clearly; those who reject him were never said.
8. 1 John 5, 13. Collectively? That idea has nothing to do with the meaning of the verse: believing in Jesus brings saving faith.
9. John 5, 24 has nothing to do with obeying but with believing & being saved for ever.

God cannot give someone the free gift of salvation & then take away that gift. That would make him a lier.

@hglundahl MORE ON OSAS:
"It would seem to me, that if our salvation was at risk due to sins we commit, the Bible would give very clear and explicit details as to what sins result in the loss of salvation. There would have to be a breakdown of which sins need to be confessed and repented of, and which sins result in salvation being lost and require a person to get re-saved. But, there is no such list.

The Bible nowhere describes anyone getting re-saved. The Bible nowhere teaches how to get re-saved. The Bible nowhere outlines under what circumstances a person needs to be re-saved. Don’t you think, with as important as these would be if salvation could be lost, that the Bible would give explicitly clear instructions?

Salvation “lost and found” individuals insist that grievous sins and apostasy result in salvation being lost. But, who gets to define which sins are grievous (Matthew 5:21-28)? And, what degree of apostasy is required? Is salvation lost due to doubt / lack of faith, or does it require an actual denial of Christ?
The complete absence of what would be crucially important instructions could salvation be lost is, in fact, powerful evidence that salvation cannot be lost.
Eternal salvation is wholly a work of God, for no human can save himself. Eternal salvation is described in Isaiah 51:6 when the Lord God says through Isaiah, “My salvation will be forever.”

@hglundahl u make a great point when u say that when Jude wrote his book, Revelation has not been written yet.
Jude said that the faith was given ONCE to the saints.
So, what then?
Let's define what Jude means by faith: the gospel of JC.
Revelation does not add anymore doctrines for salvation. Revelation is prophecy, nothing that concerns believers regarding their redemption.
So, yes, the faith was complete within the NT.
Anything else is confusing word of man, & nothing more than that.
Compare the complicated pathway for salvation as formulated by the CC with the simplicity of the gospel: "Believe in the Lord Jesus & u will be saved".
Come out of the deceiving. Come to the light of Jesus.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

@carolinajackson7621 1. I Tim. 2:3b,4 in the sight of God our Saviour, 4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

2. 1 John 5, 1. "A person born of God has been cleansed of his/her sins."

The previous ones.

3. Ephesians 1, 12-14 "is OSAS 100%, since the verses show the whole process from believing, receiving the Holy Spirit as deposit, & getting to the day of redemption."

If you had picked verse 11, you could have made a case all believers were predestined.

But it could also mean St. Paul is here limiting the scope to those predestined.

Anyway, the verses you picked have non-indicative moods. Moods that convey the idea of "in order to" ...

4. Romans 8, 38-39. I don't understand why u say it cannot apply individually.

It certainly applies individually to some, and to those St. Paul is specifically thinking of. But it applies collectively to the "us" of which such predestined souls visibly belong, the Church.

5. Romans 11, 29: ""irrevocable"... those called cannot lose the salvation."

Without repentance. not irrevocable. 278. ametamelétos

The context is not about the salvation of an individual, but about the vocation of the Jewish nation.

6. John 6, 47: "OSAS very clearly. And the idea of a "state of grace" is not biblical. God has never said that. That is man-made."

Saying "everlasting life" means "eternal security" is manmade.

7. John 3, 36: "OSAS very clearly; those who reject him were never said."

Intellectual belief is not the only condition, as per 21 of same chapter. Ceasing to do the truth is a possibility.

8. 1 John 5, 13. "Collectively? That idea has nothing to do with the meaning of the verse:"

It says "you" and not "thou" ... he's not just adressing each and every individual believer, but in immediate context a Church of such. This is the issue with lots of pretended OSAS prooftexts.

"believing in Jesus brings saving faith."

If we act on it, which we can start to do and then cease to do. See the shallow ground or the ground with the weeds.

9. John 5, 24 "has nothing to do with obeying but with believing & being saved for ever."

that he who heareth my word, echoes Matthew 7:24,25, confer verses 26,27.

"It would seem to me, that if our salvation was at risk due to sins we commit, ... But, there is no such list."

Exodus 20, Deuteronomy 5, Matthew 19. Ten Commandments. Definition of mortal sin: breaking one of the ten in an important matter with full insight and will.

Furthermore, when it comes to what constitutes an important matter, it makes sense for this to be left to local bishops, for instance as VII forbids stealing, and the matters when this is important would include quantity, where monetary values have changed, motivation, where getting food without theft may be more challenging in some areas than others, common usage, where taking the train or bus without paying is seen with different severities ...

"The Bible nowhere describes anyone getting re-saved."

II Cor. chapter 2 include a formerly incestuous man granted pardon after doing penance. Presumably he would have been already baptised, already saved from previous sins, prior to the offense falling on the radar of the Church in Corinth.

"The Bible nowhere teaches how to get re-saved."

John 20:21 to 23.

"But, who gets to define which sins are grievous (Matthew 5:21-28)"

Jesus in Matthew 5 gives a very thorough definition of interior sins being mortal, not just external actions.

Who decides? The Church. [Matthew 18:17] That means, in the first instance, the Apostles [Matthew 18:18] and later their successors.

"And, what degree of apostasy is required? Is salvation lost due to doubt / lack of faith, or does it require an actual denial of Christ?"

Again an excellent reason to leave it to the Church, since a certain phrase in one context may be perfectly fine and in another may have acquired the connotation of being synonymous with apostasy.

Actually, even voluntary doubt is mortal sin and needs to be confessed, see interior sins as per Matthew 5.

"Eternal salvation is described in Isaiah 51:6 when the Lord God says through Isaiah, “My salvation will be forever.”"

The verse is more like eternal security after apocalyptic events, like after Armageddon or after one's own death, than about justification never being lost while one lives on earth.

"Let's define what Jude means by faith: the gospel of JC."

Faith means everything that Jesus has revealed. Some truths are less necessary when not dealing with apocalyptic events, and are therefore not imminently necessary for every faithful to know and believe, only to believe if he knows them, but the fact there would be an "apocalypse" (modern sense) is in Matthew 24 and parallel passages.

The point is, the faith was given in another format than the NT books. Before the NT books. Jude just defined Tradition.

"the simplicity of the gospel: "Believe in the Lord Jesus & u will be saved"."

The Catholic Church can put it as simply as that when doing missionary work, it will still need complications when you actually live it.

Carolina Jackson

@hglundahl yes, eternal life is eternal life with God in heaven. What else could it mean? The gospel should it simple both for a tribal person & for a believer, but tge CC complicates everything.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@carolinajackson7621 "yes, eternal life is eternal life with God in heaven."

It doesn't say "will have" but "have" ... already.

"What else could it mean?"

The life of God, Who lives eternally, already in Earth living in us.

"The gospel should it simple both for a tribal person & for a believer,"

Why? The Old Covenant was anything but simple.

"but tge CC complicates everything."

Not beyond necessity.

And not beyond what many Evangelical "churches" do once you "are saved" ...

@carolinajackson7621 Case in point, Frederick Clement, By The Book Ministries, said:

"when you're 8:22 grasping something so tight you don't 8:24 want to let it go it's probably not good 8:27 for you"

In context, it was probably not good for that person, namely lesbian attraction, but the general principle doesn't hold, and isn't a good key to determining when someone else needs to repent.

It was on the video about Frank Turek and the female LBGTQ student.

Carolina Jackson

@hglundahl hello Hans, I am very behind in answering r comments. I have several unanswered... Be patient. Have not read the last 4 or so. Sorry about that.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@carolinajackson7621 Happens!

Carolina Jackson

@hglundahl Hans:
"There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day." (John 12, 38)

..."the very Words"
We will be judged according to the Word of God, not to the CCC.

Yes, the gospel of JC is simple: "Believe in the Lord J & u will be saved".
The false teachers who have made the gospel virtually unrecognizable bc of the many layers of requirements will be accountable for that.

I don't know what u mean by this:

ME: the CC complicates everything."

YOU: Not beyond necessity.
And not beyond what many Evangelical "churches" do once you "are saved"

THERE is no "necessity" of complicating the gospel. Those who do it, will be judged.

@hglundahl i dont understand r point about Mathew 28, 20. That command is for the whole body of Christ. It has nothing to do with apostolic tradition.

The verse in 2 Timothy, about the "chane" in the teaching has nothing to do with an authorized person authorizing others. The verse is about TEACHING, NOT AUTHORIZING.

"All things I have taught u" does involve what Paul taught Timothy orally, from what we don't have any records.
BUT Paul was not gonna contradict himself & teach different things orally or in written form. Paul didn't teach other doctrines orally. And even if he had done it, we would not have them.
That verse is not a license to fabricate stuff.
I don't know what u mean by this either:
"Most Protestants would agree with us about these two items back then, just say it changed later."

I don't follow "protestants". I follow Christ

@hglundahl YOU:

"...God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Tim 3, 16)."

ho tou Theou anthropos - I take it it means a specific class set apart for the service of God, not every believer.

1. do u mean Scripture is not for every believer?
2. Do u mean Scripture does not accomplish those things in every believer?

3. Are u a servant of God? I am!

@hglundahl Acts 20: 32
"Now I commit you to God and to the word of his grace, which can build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified."

That was Paul's farewell address in Mileto. He commends the believers to God & the Word, not to any church.

Hans, this is pretty simple: open the Word of God & believe it. Unfiltered. I would recommend u start re-reading the whole NT, little by little, to see what God has for the true believer.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@carolinajackson7621 Hi, I saw and respond to 3 comments of yours.

You misconstrue Acts 20. See verse 17: And sending from Miletus to Ephesus, he called the ancients of the church.

In other words, it was the whole Church of Miletus that he commended to God, not an individual believer. In fact, he was not adressing all the believers, he was just adressing the clergy and asking them to forward it to non-clergy believers.

You misconstrue II Tim 2, in verse 2 it says the same commend to faithful men, which means that Timothy was going to authorise them about that message.

""All things I have taught u" does involve what Paul taught Timothy orally, from what we don't have any records."

From which we don't have any records in the Epistles of St. Paul. Big difference from no records at all.

"BUT Paul was not gonna contradict himself & teach different things orally or in written form. Paul didn't teach other doctrines orally."

St. Paul's oral teaching certainly does not (present tense, yes, it still exists) contradict his epistles, but it may very well contradict a hasty reading of them.

And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation; as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.

II Peter 3:15,16

"And even if he had done it, we would not have them."

That idea is not in the Bible.

"That verse is not a license to fabricate stuff."

We reject as spurious your claim that the tradition we call apostolic is fabricated, it is also contradictory to Matthew 28:20. First I will give the full context, from verse 16, because you pretended "That command is for the whole body of Christ." when it was for a special class of believers, and "It has nothing to do with apostolic tradition." when it clearly has:

16 And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. 17 And seeing him they adored: but some doubted. 18 And Jesus coming, spoke to them,

Some doubted is probably a reference to doubting Thomas. Either way, the words were adressed to the Eleven, i e the Twelve minus Judas the Traitor. Not to the 72. Not to all believers in general.

saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.

Meaning, whatever He promises, He can keep.

19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

One Apostolic Church for all nations, not various national or even smaller denomination. And also, nations as nations, not just individuals as individuals, must be taught and baptised.

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:

So, His original order was, not for "all things you will have written down" but all things Jesus had commanded them, i e the kind of thing you pretend to be inaccessible. To us, now.

So, if the totality of Jesus' teaching, beyond the written texts, is inaccessible to us, the order would have some day had to change. Some generation would have been unlike the Apostles and not have access to His full assistance in keeping all truth intact.

What generation would that be? The first one after the Apostles died? No:

and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

No generation at all. The totality of what Jesus taught orally really still is accessible. If you pretend the CC fabricates about it, look up other Churches that make a similar claim. Orthodox. Copts. Armenians. Assyrians. Syriacs.

"1. do u mean Scripture is not for every believer?"

Scriptural truth and readings in Church, yes. Scriptural text, read on one's own, no. Pretty easy to figure out if you know that papyrus scrolls were expensive, and codices (which within some centuries became the standard version of Christian Bibles, as opposed to collections of scrolls) even more so. Driving a rolls royce is not like riding the bus, and owning Bible texts in the ancient world would have been equivalent to RR, only the Gideons very recently made it somewhat more comparable to riding a bus.

"2. Do u mean Scripture does not accomplish those things in every believer?"

Yes, St. Paul states this effect about someone who belongs to a category known as "man of God" ...

"3. Are u a servant of God? I am!"

Because you are a believer? No.

If we look at II Tim 2, verse 24 makes it clear this is a special class: But the servant of the Lord must not wrangle: but be mild towards all men, apt to teach, patient,

Not all believers are apt to teach, and wrangling and lack of mildness are not sins that deprive you of salvation, directly.

Carolina Jackson

@hglundahl GM, Hans. Just a simple question: U are alive in 2024 & have access to God's Word with r fingertips. Does 2 Timothy 3, 18-19 apply to YOU in its entire or not? Thks.

@hglundahl The Great Commission was not meant just for the original disciples. In Acts, it says persecution caused the church in Jerusalem to scatter, and “[t]hose who had been scattered preached the word wherever they went" (Acts 8:4).”

That early Church modeled that as new believers were discipled, they in turn preached the gospel and discipled others. This is because all believers are called to be ambassadors for Christ (2 Corinthians 5:20) and to be ready “to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have (1 Peter 3:15).”

This means every obedient follower of Jesus is called to participate in His Great Commission.

U r right that Paul was addressing only the elders in Mileto, but that does not mean the rest of the believers should have gotten a different comebdation.

Anyhow, the divide & the deceiving are worse than I thought.
So, the all-powerful CC is telling the faithful that not all verses about Scripture apply to everyone the same. Lie.
The CC is telling the faithful that not everyone is a disciple or servant of Christ. Lie.
A Catholic person told me once that John 16, 8-13 doesnt apply to every believer either. Lie.

Jesus never established those categories. Not with the new covenant, where every believer is a priest.
The CC has been keeping the faithful in bondage for centuries, & lying to them.
But many pple are seeing the deceiving. I wish u were one of them, Hans. Go to the feet of Jesus, confess your sins & ask Him to be your Savior. Open the NT & read, little by little, what the Lord has for the beluevers. Ask Him to guide you as u read His Word unfiltered. Unminipulated
God bless you, Hans.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@carolinajackson7621 You mean II Tim 3:16, 17?

Verse 16 is not about you or me, it's in general. Verse 17, no I am not furnished to every good work, I can not plant a church or give faithful confirmation, very unlike St. Timothy as well as bishops today.

Acts 8 starts like this:

1 And at that time there was raised a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all dispersed through the countries of Judea, and Samaria, except the apostles. 2 And devout men took order for Stephen's funeral, and made great mourning over him. 3 But Saul made havock of the church, entering in from house to house, and dragging away men and women, committed them to prison. 4 They therefore that were dispersed, went about preaching the word of God.

Doesn't sound like all believers were scattered, since devout men were there for St. Stephen's funeral.

They that were scattered had been prominent in Jerusalem already, i e had been clergy.

"This is because all believers are called to be ambassadors for Christ (2 Corinthians 5:20)"

Looked up the verse: For Christ therefore we are ambassadors, God as it were exhorting by us. For Christ, we beseech you, be reconciled to God.

A few verses earlier it says of St. Paul: Wherefore henceforth, we know no man according to the flesh. And if we have known Christ according to the flesh; but now we know him so no longer. ... But all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Christ; and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation.

St. Paul being clergy, the idea all believers are ambassadors for Christ doesn't hold.

"This means every obedient follower of Jesus is called to participate in His Great Commission."

Mostly by supporting the clergy, though.

"U r right that Paul was addressing only the elders in Mileto, but that does not mean the rest of the believers should have gotten a different comebdation."

You forget that "all believers" are here only adressed collectively, so to speak as the Church of Miletus.

"So, the all-powerful CC is telling the faithful that not all verses about Scripture apply to everyone the same."

I could figure that one out even if I somehow weren't Roman Catholic.

Therefore as the church is subject to Christ, so also let the wives be to their husbands in all things
[Ephesians 5:24]

Wives are one class of the faithful. Bonus, the Church as a collective was mentioned too.

"John 16, 8-13 doesnt apply to every believer either. Lie."

Starting John 16, These things have I spoken to you, that you may not be scandalized. leads back to ... start of 14 Let not your heart be troubled. You believe in God, believe also in me. which comes after predicting the denial of Peter in 13, which begins as follows:

Before the festival day of the pasch, Jesus knowing that his hour was come, that he should pass out of this world to the Father: having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them unto the end And when supper was done, (the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray him,
[John 13:1-2]

So, we are dealing with clergy, the twelve and the host. We are not dealing with all believers. How do I know it is the twelve and their host? Matthew 26:

16 And from thenceforth he sought opportunity to betray him. 17 And on the first day of the Azymes, the disciples came to Jesus, saying: Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the pasch? 18 But Jesus said: Go ye into the city to a certain man, and say to him: the master saith, My time is near at hand, with thee I make the pasch with my disciples. 19 And the disciples did as Jesus appointed to them, and they prepared the pasch. 20 But when it was evening, he sat down with his twelve disciples.

The only people present were Jesus, the twelve disciples, the host.

"Jesus never established those categories."

Matthew 9:37—10:2 Then he saith to his disciples, The harvest indeed is great, but the labourers are few. Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he send forth labourers into his harvest. And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities. And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, ...

These were not all believers:

Matthew 4:25 And much people followed him from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judea, and from beyond the Jordan.

Here is yet another category, which Jesus made:

And after these things the Lord appointed also other seventy-two: and he sent them two and two before his face into every city and place whither he himself was to come
[Luke 10:1]

I think you are the one who has more problem with a filter through which you read the NT. Plus you are contradicting yourself, as you explain Acts 8:17 as Peter's very own and uniquely personal possession of the keys being needed for Samaritans. If Gentiles, Samaritans and even Jews needed his presence, that makes him a special category.

I wouldn't deny that, I would only include his successors too.

"The CC has been keeping the faithful in bondage for centuries, & lying to them."

If you mean in accepting clergy as clergy, the NT would be part of the lie. Part of the bondage. And so would Jesus, if He's the Jesus of the NT. You are fairly close to making the Communist case against Christianity.

Carolina Jackson

Hans-Georg Lundahl I forgot to say that Paul didn't commend those elders to a higher bishop. No such a thing is mentioned in the Word. Ignatius from Antioch started that erroneous idea. (I have not read r last comment yet)

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@carolinajackson7621 Miletus was under the bishop of Ephesus. Precisely as Beroea under Thessalonica (first bishop of which was St. Timothy).

Considering St. Ignatius was second successor to St. Peter and disciple's disciple of St.John, why would he be wrong and you righ?

Carolina Jackson

@hglundahl "Go & make disciples, baptizing them..."
it doesn't say go & make "disciples & subdisciples".
U say u are not a disciple.
I assume u r baptized.
??????

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@carolinajackson7621 Before answering, I will correct myself. St. Timothy wasn't the first bishop of Thessalonica, but of Ephesus. Probably one of the elders in Acts 20, whether he was already bishop, or became so on this occasion when St. Luke was absent, or even became so on a later occasion.

It doesn't say "go & make "disciples & subdisciples". " You are right on that one.

It also doesn't say "go and make disciples" ... it says μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, which means "teach all the nations" ... bishops are useful when it comes to teaching nationwide.

In II Tim 2:2 St. Paul tells St. Timothy to make disciple-teachers and therefore also through them subdisciples if you will.

So, even if "disciples and subdisciples" weren't mentioned in Matthew 28, the were part of the plan.

I missed

three of her comments previous to above, will now post them together:

Carolina Jackson

@hglundahl Hans, if u don't don't think that Scripture accomplish in every believer what it says it does in 2 Tim 3, 18, then u r limiting the power of God's Wod. That would be heretical.

Nowhere in the NT do we see a hierarchy among bishops. Ignatius had no righr to come up with that.
The fact that he is chronologically closer to the disciples than us does not give him that right.

@hglundahl Acts 8, beginning:

"On that day a great persecution broke out against the church in Jerusalem, and ALL EXCEPT THE APOSTLES were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. Godly men buried Stephen and mourned deeply for him. But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off both men and women and put them in prison.
THOSE WHO had been scattered preached the word wherever they went.

@hglundahl so, Paul says we are all ambassadors, but that idea does not support itself?
Hans, if u r not an ambassador for Christ, what are you then???? Pls, tell me bc I don't really know what else a Christian can be.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@carolinajackson7621 I missed three, catching up.

Underlining "all except the apostles" doesn't mean there were only 12 Christians left in Jerusalem, both because there were Christians left to mourn for St. Stephen and because there were people left for Saul to persecute.

I am a citizen of Sweden, but not the ambassador of Charles XVI Gustav. As a Christian, I am foremost a citizen of Heaven and of the Catholic Church.

"then u r limiting the power of God's Wod."

It's not a question of the power, but of authorisation. Orders are not given by Bible reading, but by imposition of hands.

"Nowhere in the NT do we see a hierarchy among bishops."

You aren't looking for it.

"Ignatius had no righr to come up with that."

You have no reason to assume he did.

"The fact that he is chronologically closer to the disciples than us does not give him that right."

The fact that he's chronologically closer to The Disciples than your type of Christians makes it much more probable he is right than that your type of Christians are.

You are appealing to a principle saying "if it's not explicitly in the Bible, it's wrong, it wasn't there in the NT Church etc" ... but that principle itself is not in the NT or elsewhere, like in the OT, and you can't live it. "The Holy Spirit convicted me of selfishness" is no where in the NT.

@carolinajackson7621 PS, St. Paul didn't say "we are all ambassadors" ... the "we" refers to St. Paul.

Carolina Jackson

@hglundahl Timothy is included in the we, since both Paul & Timothy are mentioned at the beginning of the letter.
But again, if Paul & Timothy are ambassadors of Christ, we all are bc with the New Covenant there are no categories or hierarchies among believers. Whatever Paul says of himself is for everyone. In vers 17, it says that whoever is in Christ is a new creature.
Hans, u seem to be an intelligent person. Don't believe those lied, pls.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@carolinajackson7621 Thanks for mentioning St. Timothy.

"with the New Covenant there are no categories or hierarchies among believers"

This, you have very consistently failed to show even one proof text for. It's a human tradition.

A new creature is a citizen of heaven, but not every citizen is an ambassador.

Carolina Jackson

@hglundahl there is no need for proof text to prove something that God never said: hierarchies & categories among believers.

You have NOT proved those categories exist. The only offices of the NT are elders (also called presbyteros or bishops) & deacons. 1 Timothy & Titus describe what kind of persons they had to be.

IT NEVER SAYS they are a special group for whom the Word of God or the Holy Spirit work differently. That's not only a falsehood but also a heresy bc it limits the reach & effectiveness of the Word.

False teachers who have taught those things will be held accountable.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@carolinajackson7621 There are needs to proof text what you claim God has said, namely absence of hierarchies.

If I have not proven the categories exist to you I'm sorry, but you have eyes and do not see, have ears but do not hear.

It's abundantly clear from the NT, starting with Gospels both before the Crucifixion and after the Resurrection.

"elders (also called presbyteros or bishops) & deacons."

So, "elder" is the straight translation of "presbyteros" ... the word we in Catholic Bibles often translate as priests. Bishop is the transscription of "episcopos" ...

Some have supposed that in the NT "presbyteros" and "episcopos" were interchangeable. Even a Catholic writer once agreed to that, otherwise you already have three offices, not just two.

But even if they were interchangeable, you still have three offices, according to the Catholic writer in question, there were different categories within the actual class of bishops, and then these ceased and only the term bishop was raised to refer to them. In the NT, these classes of bishops would be "Apostle", "Evangelist" perhaps also "Prophet" ... though the term is probably referring to people with the gift of prophecy irrespectively of whether they were bishops or not.

St. Paul shows he was what we call a bishop by II Timothy 1:6 which says For which cause I admonish thee, that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee, by the imposition of my hands.

St. Paul also shows St. Timothy was what we would call a bishop by I Timothy 5:22 which says Impose not hands lightly upon any man, neither be partaker of other men's sins. Keep thyself chaste.

St. Paul had become what we call a bishop in Acts 13. Three first verses read: 1 Now there were in the church which was at Antioch, prophets and doctors, among whom was Barnabas, and Simon who was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manahen, who was the foster brother of Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. 2 And as they were ministering to the Lord, and fasting, the Holy Ghost said to them: Separate me Saul and Barnabas, for the work whereunto I have taken them. 3 Then they, fasting and praying, and imposing their hands upon them, sent them away.

If Simon Niger was Simon Peter being there incognito, St. Paul was ordained by one of the original 12, and if not, the group of bishops in Antioch had their episcopal consecration from the 12, probably from St. Peter (who was the first bishop of Antioch before being the first bishop of Rome).

The first bishops had their power from Jesus, John 20:21—23. And Jesus meant these to have successors, see Matthew 28:20, and before you repeat offend in pretending the words are directed at all faithful, the audience mentioned in Matthew 28 for this occasion is in verse 16 identified as "the eleven" ...

You are inventing things when you pretend that there are no distinctions between the faithful. But you are right that when it comes to the own personal sanctification, the Holy Spirit (or the state of grace) works exactly the same for a bishop and a layman.

"a heresy bc it limits the reach & effectiveness of the Word."

Sts Paul and Barnabas were not told to read the Scriptures, one laid hands on them. Some things the written word was not meant to provide. Also, the words of ordination are words of Christ, which we have by Tradition.

"False teachers who have taught those things will be held accountable."

Matthew 28:20 shows, there cannot be even one century (actually not even one day) in which all of the Church was heeding on any given point false teachers. As all Christians in 500 AD or in 700 AD agreed to there being a hierarchy, this cannot be a heresy.