Romans 1

[SoyLeche]

Paul called himself the "last"... the last "what" would come to mind. But he talked about this while referring to himself as an Apostle.

But please, if you have evidence, credible evidence, (buried in the tomb type evidence) then please present it. I have not heard of this at all.

Thought of something else - isn't it pretty well accepted that John outlived Paul? I guess I'm asking what you mean by "last" - and, also, a reference would be nice.

 

[Aqualung]

I'd say he well outlived Paul, eh, SoyLeche? *nudge nudge wink wink*

 

[nutshell]

Wow. It seems my post was pretty much overlooked, just like miracles always have been.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Thought of something else - isn't it pretty well accepted that John outlived Paul? I guess I'm asking what you mean by "last" - and, also, a reference would be nice.

Check post #6 of this thread for the reference. He made a point that he was the "last one" to have Jesus appear to him: "as to one abnormally born".

 

[Scuba Pete]

I have eye witness accouts (actually, I'd have to look them up, and I can't do that at this time) - but I would assume that this isn't enough for you. On the other hand, what types of credible evidence do you have for Peter walking on water?

Are you saying that there is NO documentation??? How bizarre!

 

[Aqualung]

Are you saying that there is NO documentation??? How bizarre!

What he's saying is that there is at least as much documentation about our Apostles doing miracles as there is for Peter doing his miracles; then he asked why you accept the latter and not the former.

 

[SoyLeche]

Are you saying that there is NO documentation??? How bizarre!

No, I'm saying there are eye witness accounts. I'm not sure what other documentation you would want. At the same time, however, I'm pretty sure that this type of documentation wouldn't be enough for you.

 

[glasgowchick]

I am not an Apostle, but as one who holds the priesthood, I have participated in the healing of the sick, the casting out of demons, the blessing of a home, and more. These experiences are very sacred to me and to those I was serving, the details of which should not be shared lightly (don't cast pearls before swine -- and I am NOT calling any of you pigs, but I expect you understand the reference).

What I'm trying to say is, miracles do happen today.

Regarding 1 Corinth. 13:8-10. These verses refer to the high status of charity. I don't see how these verses conclude that prophesy would be gone forever. The verses also mention knowledge. Has knowledge of Christ vanished or does it still exist?

The New Testament teaches that all Christians are priests.
The Old Testament had a special priesthood, but the New Testament makes all Christians priests.

1 Peter 2:5,9 - You are a holy priesthood. Who does this refer to? Those who: are elect according to Jesus' blood (1:1,2), have faith unto salvation and will receive the inheritance of heaven (1:3-5,9), are obedient children of the Father (1:14-17), are redeemed by Jesus' blood (1:18-21), are born again, having purified their souls by obeying the truth (1:22-25), make up God's spiritual house (2:5) which is the church (1 Tim. 3:15), believe in Christ (2:7), are called from darkness to light to be God's special people (2:9,10).

Revelation 1:5,6; 5:9,10 - Those who are washed from their sins in Jesus' blood and redeemed by His blood have been made priests.

Romans 12:1; Hebrews 13:15 - All Christians offer sacrifices to God.

Clearly the New Testament teaches that all Christians are priests. Where does the New Testament teach a concept of a special priesthood which includes some Christians but not all Christians?

 

[James the Persian]

Clearly the New Testament teaches that all Christians are priests. Where does the New Testament teach a concept of a special priesthood which includes some Christians but not all Christians?

You are confusing two different issues here. Pre-Christian priests were conduits to God. All Christians are priests in this sense (and we, despite having a very formal priesthood are very aware of this). Nobody needs to go through a priest to get to God - there are nospecial priests in that sense. There are priests in the New Testament, however. These are the leaders of the congregation. You may be missing this fact if you use certain Protestant English translations because they obfuscate things by using the word elder. The actual word used is presbyter, which is the root (via an old term, prester) of the word priest. A Christian priest is not above the laiety (or shouldn't be) but does serve a different role in the Church, as do deacons and bishops, all of which are found in the New Testament and the Ante-Nicene Fathers. To suggest that the fact that all Christians are priests means that there should be no priests at all is, frankly, low church Protestant theologising with no basis in Scripture, Tradition or Church history.

James

 

[glasgowchick]

Are you expecting the Apostles to be doing miracles that are on the news on a nightly basis? If you are, you're going to be disappointed. In the days of the early Apostles, most of the world had no idea who they were. Does that mean that they didn't do any miraculous acts? Just about every miracle that the apostles did which were written in the Bible has been repeated in some form or other in the last 180 or so years, including raising the dead. If you don't believe the accounts of those who witnessed them, though, there is no evidence that I can offer. I am left to wonder why you will believe 2000 year old accounts without evidence though.

Also, do you really want to debate with a Mormon whether prophecies, etc. ceased? We call it the Apostacy.

Are you expecting the Apostles to be doing miracles that are on the news on a nightly basis?

nope..

In the days of the early Apostles, most of the world had no idea who they were. Does that mean that they didn't do any miraculous acts?

are you saying your apostles do miracles in secret.

Just about every miracle that the apostles did which were written in the Bible has been repeated in some form or other in the last 180 or so years, including raising the dead.

are you saying that people have been raised from the dead in the last 180 or so ? was this a invisable resurrection.

If you don't believe the accounts of those who witnessed them, though, there is no evidence that I can offer..

and who would these witneses be..

I am left to wonder why you will believe 2000 year old accounts without evidence though

I have Gods word. what evidence do you have..?

Also, do you really want to debate with a Mormon whether prophecies, etc. ceased? We call it the Apostacy

why not, Gods word is alive and is stronger than a two edged sword..we call it the word of God.

 

[SoyLeche]

are you saying your apostles do miracles in secret.

Is is possible that Thomas, or Matthias, or any of the Apostles that are hardly mentioned in the scriptures for that matter, performed miracles? I'd say it's likely. They must have done them in secret, though, because they weren't witnessed by anyone, right? Or it could be that they weren't recorded for some reason or other. Not every miracle that has been performed is proclaimed from the rooftops. Nor should they be. Most of them are personal and very sacred to the people involved.

are you saying that people have been raised from the dead in the last 180 or so ? was this a invisable resurrection.

When did I say anything about a Ressurection? That is something very different from raising the dead. The example I'm thinking of happened in or around Nauvoo, Illinois in July, 1839. There have probably been others, but I am not aware of them.

and who would these witneses be..

I don't have the reference with me

I have Gods word. what evidence do you have..?

God's word

why not, Gods word is alive and is stronger than a two edged sword..we call it the word of God.

You can go ahead and argue all you want, but it is a subject we have gotten pretty good at defending.

 

[glasgowchick]

You are confusing two different issues here. Pre-Christian priests were conduits to God. All Christians are priests in this sense (and we, despite having a very formal priesthood are very aware of this). Nobody needs to go through a priest to get to God - there are nospecial priests in that sense. There are priests in the New Testament, however. These are the leaders of the congregation. You may be missing this fact if you use certain Protestant English translations because they obfuscate things by using the word elder. The actual word used is presbyter, which is the root (via an old term, prester) of the word priest. A Christian priest is not above the laiety (or shouldn't be) but does serve a different role in the Church, as do deacons and bishops, all of which are found in the New Testament and the Ante-Nicene Fathers. To suggest that the fact that all Christians are priests means that there should be no priests at all is, frankly, low church Protestant theologising with no basis in Scripture, Tradition or Church history.

James

Hi James, I agree with you that nobody has to go through a priest to get to God, I also agree that there are a need for people to feed Gods Flock, those who take the lead in the church, but I do believe that once we are baptised into Christ we become just as it says in 1Peter..

 

[glasgowchick]

Is is possible that Thomas, or Matthias, or any of the Apostles that are hardly mentioned in the scriptures for that matter, performed miracles? I'd say it's likely. They must have done them in secret, though, because they weren't witnessed by anyone, right? Or it could be that they weren't recorded for some reason or other. Not every miracle that has been performed is proclaimed from the rooftops. Nor should they be. Most of them are personal and very sacred to the people involved.

we are not talking about Thomas or Mathias, we are talking about LDS Apostles..

When did I say anything about a Ressurection? That is something very different from raising the dead. The example I'm thinking of happened in or around Nauvoo, Illinois in July, 1839. There have probably been others, but I am not aware of them.

So what exactly do you mean by raising the dead ? ..Jesus was raised from the dead that is called the ressurection.

I don't have the reference with me

I would like to see them when you have them.

God's word

You say Gods word yet you asked me why I believe 2000 year old accounts without evidence.

You can go ahead and argue all you want, but it is a subject we have gotten pretty good at defending.

Im not here to argue with you and you can defend all you want Im listening..

 

[SoyLeche]

we are not talking about Thomas or Mathias, we are talking about LDS Apostles..

and you seem to think that any miracles that they perform should be on the evening news. All I'm saying is that most people in the world don't know when a miracle has been performed. Usually only the people directly affected know about it.

So what exactly do you mean by raising the dead ? ..Jesus was raised from the dead that is called the ressurection.

and so were Lazarus and the daugher of Jarius, and they weren't ressurections. If you want to discuss the difference we can start another thread

I would like to see them when you have them.

I'll work on that, but the book I'm thinking about is at my parent's house in Utah, and I'm in Virginia, so I'm not sure how to get it.

You say Gods word yet you asked me why I believe 2000 year old accounts without evidence.

You asked my why I believe in Apostles today, and the answer is the same

Im not here to argue with you and you can defend all you want Im listening..

I shouldn't have brought the apostacy into this at all. Again, a topic for another thread (one that has been done)

 

[blueman]

Paul wasn't there.

Yes, but remember Saul encountered the ressurected Jesus on the road to Damascus and was therefore called to be a follower of Jesus and to go out and defend His name from that point forward. I think we today get caught up in titles and appointments and miss the real message. Jesus has called all of us to be disciples and spread the message to others that do not know or have not accepted His gift of salvation. And as we disciple and other come to Christ, we have the opportunity to become disciplers and mold those who are new to the faith, so that they may go out and share the message as well. That's what Peter and Barnabus did with John Mark and Paul did with Timothy and so on...........

 

[blueman]

God, being a spiritual being, has connection with us through Jesus and the Holy Spirit and that Spirit confirms to us the truth of His Word and salvation. God speaks to us through the Holy Spirit wh dwells in us and confirms His truth each and everyday. We have this connection through our spirit-man, not through our flesh.

 

[SoyLeche]

Yes, but remember Saul encountered the ressurected Jesus on the road to Damascus and was therefore called to be a follower of Jesus and to go out and defend His name from that point forward. I think we today get caught up in titles and appointments and miss the real message. Jesus has called all of us to be disciples and spread the message to others that do not know or have not accepted His gift of salvation. And as we disciple and other come to Christ, we have the opportunity to become disciplers and mold those who are new to the faith, so that they may go out and share the message as well. That's what Peter and Barnabus did with John Mark and Paul did with Timothy and so on...........

I agree with you, but I think the point that Aqua was making is that Paul refers to himself not only as a disciple, but as an apostle. What is the difference? Are there any Apostles today?

 

[James the Persian]

Hi James, I agree with you that nobody has to go through a priest to get to God, I also agree that there are a need for people to feed Gods Flock, those who take the lead in the church, but I do believe that once we are baptised into Christ we become just as it says in 1Peter..

And I believe the same, but I also believe that the structure of the Church as handed down by the Apostles is important, and that structure includes deacons, priests (presbyters) and bishops. Not everyone in the Church has the same role (also apparent in the New Testament) and the various clergy are, in my opinion, vitally important. That doesn't mean that we aren't all priests. I'd also suggest that the clergy should never be set above the laiety. I don't believe that they lead by authority in the sense that they lord it over the laiety, but that any authority they have comes, paradoxically, by being selfless servants to those they lead.

James

 

[Aqualung]

we are not talking about Thomas or Mathias, we are talking about LDS Apostles..

At this point, yes. But this discussion is open to debate about ALL apostles.

 

[Aqualung]

Yes, but remember Saul encountered the ressurected Jesus on the road to Damascus and was therefore called to be a follower of Jesus and to go out and defend His name from that point forward.

That doesn't change the point: HE WASN'T THERE. Somebody (I can't for the life of me remember who, now) said that To be an apostle, you had to be a person who actually witnessed Jesus's early preachings, etc., etc. That's just didn't happen with Paul, another Apostle, which completely nullifies that deffinition.

I think we today get caught up in titles and appointments and miss the real message. Jesus has called all of us to be disciples and spread the message to others that do not know or have not accepted His gift of salvation. And as we disciple and other come to Christ, we have the opportunity to become disciplers and mold those who are new to the faith, so that they may go out and share the message as well. That's what Peter and Barnabus did with John Mark and Paul did with Timothy and so on...........

He didn't call us all to be apostles, though. In fact, quite the opposite (eph 4:11).