• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Christians - priesthood authority

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
corrupt_preist said:
the conclusion i reached

it doesn't matter, what matters is that it is my commitment to God and to Christ, they care about me, not which pool i decide to get splahsed in
Hi, Preist.

I think your commitment to God and to Christ is the most important thing.

But I find it odd that you don't believe it matters who baptizes you or how they do it. It apparently mattered to Jesus. He went specifically to John, who had the authority to perform this sacred ordinance. Why don't you think He just stopped someone outside of His house and said to them, "Hey, come in here a minute, will you? I just drew some water out of my family's well. Could you sprinkle some on me, please? I'll tell you the words I want you to say. See, I'm really busy and my Father won't care who does it or how it's done."

I mean, why are you being baptized in the first place? If you don't care about who, where, or how, why do you even see it as important at all? I mean God does know the condition of your heart already. What will being dunked or sprinkled do for you? Just some food for thought, and please don't think I'm not happy that you've decided to get baptized. I just think it would be a good idea for you to stop to consider why you're doing it -- in light of why the scriptures say you should be doing it.

Kathryn
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Scott1 said:
I think you might be right... there are not many Lutherans or other non-Catholic Christians on this forum who might agree with us.

My take on this comes from Matt. 10:1,40 - Jesus declares to His apostles, "he who receives you, receives Me, and he who rejects you, rejects Me and the One who sent Me." Jesus freely gives His authority to the apostles....
Yes, He most definitely gave His authority to the Apostles. But He didn't give it to "all believers." So we apparently agree on that point.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
StewpidLoser said:
Where's the scriptural basis that says, "only an authorized priest can baptise anyone and have it 'count' in God's eyes"?
I'm not aware of any scriptures that specifically state that only someone who is authorized to baptize can do so, but there are numerous scriptures describing the organization of the early Church and stressing that individuals must be ordained to certain priesthood callings and offices. That's why the ordinances of the Savior's gospel (baptism being the first) must be performed by one who has been given the authority to do so.

For instance John 15:16 states, "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you and ordained you."

To me that means that regardless of our desires, authority is also necessary.

And Hebrews 5:4 clarifies that "...no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron."

Aaron had to be ordained. He didn't just decide that it would be nice to have the power his brother, Moses, had. We're talking about God's power and the authority He gives men to use that power, the power to act in His name. Don't you see that power as being important enough that God would want to safeguard it, and not allow just anyone to use it?
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
corrupt_preist said:
i don't think that in him naming a few people who can do this, he was implying tha tno one else can do it

why would jesus deny people the ability to baptise others into following him? its like saying that these people are more worthy of this power, even though we are all equal in fellowship .... highlighting the word "equal" :eek:

C_P
Jesus Christ actually organized a Church prior to the end of His ministry. There were specific offices in that Church for a purpose. With no logical organization and with everyone assuming equal authority to preside, what would happen? Here's how Paul explained it:

Ephesians 4:11-15 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ.

If He had just wanted us to all be able to perform baptisms, marriages, bless and annoint the sick, prepare and bless the sacrament (i.e. Eucharist, communion, the Lord's Supper or whatever you might call it), He wouldn't have gone to the trouble of authorizing certain individuals to do these things. We wouldn't even need another person to baptize us. We could just dunk ourselves, couldn't we?
 

Snowbear

Nita Okhata
Katzpur said:
I'm not aware of any scriptures that specifically state that only someone who is authorized to baptize can do so, but there are numerous scriptures describing the organization of the early Church and stressing that individuals must be ordained to certain priesthood callings and offices. That's why the ordinances of the Savior's gospel (baptism being the first) must be performed by one who has been given the authority to do so.
Where do the scriptures outline the so-called "ordinances of the Savior's gospel?"
Who "authorized" John the Baptist, who was baptizing long before the first Christian churches started.
Katzpur said:
For instance John 15:16 states, "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you and ordained you."
Taken in context, Jesus is talking to His disciples, including ALL of us who believe in Him and call Him the friend Who laid down His life for ALL of His friends...
John15:9-17]9 “As the Father loved Me, I also have loved you; abide in My love. 10 If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love.
11 “These things I have spoken to you, that My joy may remain in you, and that your joy may be full. 12 This is My commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends. 14 You are My friends if you do whatever I command you. 15 No longer do I call you servants, for a servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I heard from My Father I have made known to you. 16 You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you. 17 These things I command you, that you love one another.
Katzpur said:
And Hebrews 5:4 clarifies that "...no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron."

Aaron had to be ordained. He didn't just decide that it would be nice to have the power his brother, Moses, had. We're talking about God's power and the authority He gives men to use that power, the power to act in His name. Don't you see that power as being important enough that God would want to safeguard it, and not allow just anyone to use it?
Again, taken in context, looks to me like it's talking about the power of the high priesthood in the church. No, no man is supposed to take the power of the high priesthood without being called by God. It still does not say that only high priests can baptise...
Hebrews 5:1-4]1 For every high priest taken from among men is appointed for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins. 2 He can have compassion on those who are ignorant and going astray, since he himself is also subject to weakness. 3 Because of this he is required as for the people, so also for himself, to offer sacrifices for sins. 4 And no man takes this honor to himself, but he who is called by God, just as Aaron was.
Where do you get from those 2 out of context verses that I, as a believer, cannot baptize by water another believer in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit?
 

Snowbear

Nita Okhata
Katzpur said:
If He had just wanted us to all be able to perform baptisms, marriages, bless and annoint the sick, prepare and bless the sacrament (i.e. Eucharist, communion, the Lord's Supper or whatever you might call it), He wouldn't have gone to the trouble of authorizing certain individuals to do these things. We wouldn't even need another person to baptize us. We could just dunk ourselves, couldn't we?
The performing of marriage ceremonies and baptisms are duties appointed to church leaders by men. Please show me where the scripture says that only pastors and priests can "bless and annoint" (...what do you mean by this?) the sick. Please show me where Jesus said only ordained priests can serve communion.
 

Snowbear

Nita Okhata
glasgowchick said:
..The faith is on the one being baptized not the baptizer..
Yep, since being baptized is "the answer of a good conscience toward God"
1Peter3 21 There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him.
 

Mike182

Flaming Queer
Katzpur said:
Hi, Preist.

I think your commitment to God and to Christ is the most important thing.

But I find it odd that you don't believe it matters who baptizes you or how they do it. It apparently mattered to Jesus. He went specifically to John, who had the authority to perform this sacred ordinance. Why don't you think He just stopped someone outside of His house and said to them, "Hey, come in here a minute, will you? I just drew some water out of my family's well. Could you sprinkle some on me, please? I'll tell you the words I want you to say. See, I'm really busy and my Father won't care who does it or how it's done."

I mean, why are you being baptized in the first place? If you don't care about who, where, or how, why do you even see it as important at all? I mean God does know the condition of your heart already. What will being dunked or sprinkled do for you? Just some food for thought, and please don't think I'm not happy that you've decided to get baptized. I just think it would be a good idea for you to stop to consider why you're doing it -- in light of why the scriptures say you should be doing it.

Kathryn
well, jesus chose his best friend whom he loved completely to baptise him

so whats the problem with me doing the same thing? but it would be a bit innapropriat to get someone you don't know to do it
 

Aqualung

Tasty
StewpidLoser said:
Where do the scriptures outline the so-called "ordinances of the Savior's gospel?"
Well, in such passages as where it says, "you must believe and be baptised to be saved, but if you do not believe you can't be saved." Or, "you must be born of water and of the spirit to enter into the kingdom of heaven," and other such passages. And of course when Jesus commands his followers, "do this in rememberance of me."

StewpidLoser said:
Who "authorized" John the Baptist, who was baptizing long before the first Christian churches started.
His authorisation came from being an aaronic priest.
 

Snowbear

Nita Okhata
Aqualung said:
Well, in such passages...
OK. haven't heard them called that before.
Aqualung said:
His authorisation came from being an aaronic priest.
OK. Had to dig for that one, but found it in the Chronicles.
But..... I still don't find where only priests are allowed to baptize.
 

Quiddity

UndertheInfluenceofGiants
StewpidLoser said:
I still don't find where only priests are allowed to baptize.
StewpidLoser, in the OT not everybody was able to do rituals or enter the temple. This is just one example of many. For one to conclude that somehow that was completely done away with because of the new covenant is very difficult to conclude. I'm assuming you at least believe that God seems to sepearate some (Apostles) and give them something the others don't have. Otherwise, why not just talk to all, while not even choosing anybody? That is a clear sign that Christ intended to work thru a few for the sake of all.

~Victor

 

Mike182

Flaming Queer
Victor said:
StewpidLoser, in the OT not everybody was able to do rituals or enter the temple. This is just one example of many. For one to conclude that somehow that was completely done away with because of the new covenant is very difficult to conclude. I'm assuming you at least believe that God seems to sepearate some (Apostles) and give them something the others don't have. Otherwise, why not just talk to all, while not even choosing anybody? That is a clear sign that Christ intended to work thru a few for the sake of all.

~Victor
either that, or, maybe his other apostles were busy that evening, wrongfully blessing the sick, and casting out demons that they really aren't allowed to

ok, this may seem like a silly question, but if ONLY these twelve were annointed with the power to baptise, why, when they are now dead, are OTHERS allowed to do this?

what gives them the "authority"? how can you tell that someone has been annointed with the power to baptise?

i accept that john was an aaronic priest, but what gives aaronic priests the authority to baptise?
 

Quiddity

UndertheInfluenceofGiants
corrupt_priest said:
ok, this may seem like a silly question, but if ONLY these twelve were annointed with the power to baptise, why, when they are now dead, are OTHERS allowed to do this?
Good question. Here are some verses that can help.

Acts 1:15-26 - the first thing Peter does after Jesus ascends into heaven is implement apostolic succession. Matthias is ordained with full apostolic authority and replacing Judas. The necessity to have apostolic succession in order for the Church to survive was understood by all. God never said, "I'll give you leaders with authority for about 150 years, but after the Bible is compiled, you are all on your own."

Acts 6:6 - apostolic authority is transferred through the laying on of hands (ordination). This authority has transferred beyond the original twelve apostles as the Church has grown.

2 Cor. 1:21-22 - Paul writes that God has commissioned certain men and sealed them with the Holy Spirit as a guarantee.

Hope this will suffice. By the way in the Catholic Church the common folk is also allowed to baptize in case of death.

~Victor
 

Aqualung

Tasty
corrupt_priest said:
ok, this may seem like a silly question, but if ONLY these twelve were annointed with the power to baptise, why, when they are now dead, are OTHERS allowed to do this?
Not only those twelve had the power to baptise. Baptism is a lower preisthood ability. The apostles were given the higher preisthood.
C_P said:
i accept that john was an aaronic priest, but what gives aaronic priests the authority to baptise?
God.
 

Snowbear

Nita Okhata
Victor said:
Otherwise, why not just talk to all, while not even choosing anybody? That is a clear sign that Christ intended to work thru a few for the sake of all.
Actually, I believe He DOES talk to all... through His Word, through answered prayer, through the works of others. I also believe He chooses some for specific roles, as Paul says to the Romans (Ch 12), such as speaking in tongues, teaching, mercifulness, encouragement..... nothing about who baptizes. I firmly believe that if a Christian wants to be baptized into the Faith, any trusted Believer can perform the act. Would you deny new Believers baptism because they don't trust a priest enough to perform the rite?
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
StewpidLoser,

You obviously believe in the priesthood of all believers, and do not accept the idea that there is a line of authority in Christ's Church. The Bible doesn't outline what, specifically, certain priesthood holders can do, and since you also believe in the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, it would be pointless for me to argue this point any further. You keep on saying that anybody can baptize, but you haven't supported your position any better than I have supported mine. The problem, from where I stand, is that you don't accept my sources as valid. Consequently, we have to stick strictly to the Bible. And based on what it alone says, we could argue this point literally forever.
 

Snowbear

Nita Okhata
Katzpur said:
StewpidLoser,

You obviously believe in the priesthood of all believers, and do not accept the idea that there is a line of authority in Christ's Church.
You are more wrong than you will ever know.
Katzpur said:
The problem, from where I stand, is that you don't accept my sources as valid.
The only sources you have quoted are biblical. But you are correct in that I do not accept the additional sources of the mormon writings as authoritative.

I don't keep saying, "Anyone can baptize," but keep asking where the scripture says that, "No, anyone cannot baptize and have it count in God's eyes."
 

Quiddity

UndertheInfluenceofGiants
StewpidLoser said:
Actually, I believe He DOES talk to all... through His Word, through answered prayer, through the works of others. I also believe He chooses some for specific roles, as Paul says to the Romans (Ch 12), such as speaking in tongues, teaching, mercifulness, encouragement..... nothing about who baptizes. I firmly believe that if a Christian wants to be baptized into the Faith, any trusted Believer can perform the act. Would you deny new Believers baptism because they don't trust a priest enough to perform the rite?
I never said he didn't. My point and LDS point is that authority was given only to a selected few.

~Victor
 

Mike182

Flaming Queer
Victor said:
My point and LDS point is that authority was given only to a selected few.
and my point is that through prayer, and love for God, and the deeds of others, we are all also selected to be apart of jesus's church, and as such we can baptise others into faith

i don't think we're gonna make any ground shaking conclusions, other than the simple conclusion that we cannot agree on this ;)

we've all got scripture, and we've all got valid arguments, so i respectfully withdraw from the debate :) it was taking up too much brainpower anyway

C_P
 

Aqualung

Tasty
corrupt_priest said:
and my point is that through prayer, and love for God, and the deeds of others, we are all also selected to be apart of jesus's church,
True
corrupt_priest said:
and as such we can baptise others into faith
Not true.

corrupt_priest said:
i don't think we're gonna make any ground shaking conclusions, other than the simple conclusion that we cannot agree on this ;)
Yeah, me either, since it's pretty vague about baptism. But perhaps you would like to adress other priesthood authorities.
 
Top