Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Everlasting priesthood

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by BJ BEAR View Post

    Luther moved those books to a separate sections based on their historical acceptance and his measure of how well they presented the gospel of the true Christ.
    He original sought to remove them.. but that was not politically correct.

    The topic of moving books of the Bible has never interested me too much because the Bible started out on scrolls and even the most recent were written individually.
    Indeed. The point isn't that he moved them.. that was only a matter of political correctness.. He didn't think they should have been in the Bible in the first place.. HIS Measure of the Gospel of the true Christ is what is in question.. Is Luther infallible on his opinions? Or could he been mistaken.. especially on his expressions of 'Faith alone'.. could he be one of those to whom the writer of 2nd peter says'
    "...just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.
    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” -- George Carlin

    We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideals of Christianity, our movement is Christian. - Adolf Hitler

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post

      Anybody who's ever bothered to read the REAL bible could do THAT without a second thought: it's the Levitical Priesthood.
      So are you saying the KJV is not a REAL bible?
      “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” -- George Carlin

      We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideals of Christianity, our movement is Christian. - Adolf Hitler

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by oceancoast View Post
        So are you saying the KJV is not a REAL bible?
        Joe Smith had his "INSPIRED VERSION" that was "Better than the KJV". Surely as a supporter of Joe and the LDS, you'd want to use HIS VERSION???

        If not, why not??

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by oceancoast View Post
          He original sought to remove them.. but that was not politically correct.
          I've heard that but what is your primary source evidence? The people that usually post that type of statement are Roman Catholic, but I don't recall them providing primary source evidence. Again, I will point out that Luther translated more books than are considered canonical by Rome. Without primary source evidence for your claim it would take some strenuous mental gymnastics to reconcile the claim with the reality.

          Originally posted by oceancoast View Post
          Indeed. The point isn't that he moved them.. that was only a matter of political correctness.. He didn't think they should have been in the Bible in the first place.. HIS Measure of the Gospel of the true Christ is what is in question.. Is Luther infallible on his opinions?
          I'm not sure what you intend to say in your first sentence but reading political correctness into history is an anachronism.

          Luther's measure of the gospel is Scripture's presentation of the gospel in the narrow sense. The gospel in the narrow sense is what God has done in the person and work of Christ for all men.

          Anyone who has ever read Luther knows he was as fallible as all other men who are not God incarnate, and *he* knew it better than anyone and wrote and spoke of it.


          Originally posted by oceancoast View Post
          Or could he been mistaken.. especially on his expressions of 'Faith alone'.. could he be one of those to whom the writer of 2nd peter says'
          "...just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.
          The evidence for whether Luther and the rest of the church from Adam and Eve to the last man that will be is correct on faith alone is there in black and white from Genesis through Revelation.

          It was always by the freely given promise of God, beginning in Genesis 3:15. The only right way to receive a promise, especially a promise from God, is to receive it by faith. In other words, the right way to receive a freely given promise, especially the promise of God, is to believe it.

          Although that is simple and easy to understand and there is a lot more evidence in the OT for it lets fast forward to the NT to see how Jesus put it in simple and easy to understand terms. Jesus put in categorical terms. He told His disciples in John 14:6, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except by Me." Since our choice, will, and work is not Jesus then they are not the way, the truth, and the life and no one comes to the Father by them.

          The Apostle Paul, who you quoted above also put it in simple terms, so simple that anyone who understands that 2-1=1 can understand it. He wrote, "For by grace have you been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.
          For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." Ephesians 2:8-10 NKJV.

          In any two category question, in this case the categories are faith and works, when one is excluded, in this case works, the answer is the remaining category alone, in this case it is faith alone. Using different words and a longer set up in a letter to Christians he didn't know Paul presented the same logic and conclusion in Romans 3:9-28.
          ​​​​
          James is sometimes misunderstood because people overlook or don't remember that he wrote in 1:18, "Of His own will He brought us forth by the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of His creatures,"NKJV. Using different words that is the same reasoning and conclusion in more compact form as that of the Apostle Paul in Ephesians 2:8-9 and Romans 3:28.

          It is to those already created in Christ Jesus, or in the words of James, have been brought forth by the word of God, that is, the saved, the justified, to which he was speaking in chapter 2. In other words, James was telling the intended recipients of his letter substantively the same thing as Paul in Ephesians 2:-10. Just follow the pronouns in James 2, "*I* will show *you* my faith by my works," etc.

          The justified do just works. The unjustified do not do good works to be justified.
          Last edited by BJ BEAR; 12-09-18, 04:54 AM. Reason: Typo
          Test all things and praise God from whom all blessings flow!

          Peace,
          BJ -Bear
          VDMA (1 Peter 1:25)
          WELS

          Comment


          • #95
            Hi Oceancoast,

            Thus far in this sub thread I have only addressed the historicity of Christianity from friendly sources, Scripture, and not friendly sources, Josephus and Tacitus.

            Tacitus would have been a young child at the time of the great fire during the reign of Nero. Whether he remembered the circumstances and views of that event or whether his recounting of it was based on another source his inclusion of them is evidence of their historicity.

            I didn't look up which ever manuscript of Annals Of Imperial Rome is considered the earliest. So without doing that and seeing in which language that surviving manuscript is written in I am willing to entertain for the sake of argument your assertion of "chrestian" as a reasonable English transliteration.

            That being said, it is the immediate context which determines how a word is being used. Therefore, translating it into English as, "useful," is excluded in the context of the fire and the, "malicious rumor." In that context it is likely to be more accurately translated as, "kind ones," or, "good ones." Despite the persecution of the Christians they did not pick up arms or revolt.

            Words based upon xrhstos appear multiple times in Scripture. Some of the forms of the word were given their own lexical entry so there are more than a few instances of its use, including in phrases like the kindness or goodness of God, and my yoke is easy or gentle. Check them out.

            It isn't consistent to claim Tacitus wrote X and only X in support of your claim while asserting conspiracy with regard to Josephus and the Scriptural witness.

            The kind of history we are talking about is prophesied and witnessed to by friend and foe as demonstrated above but there are still more witnesses by friend and foe. For example, there is the extra Biblical witness of the early Christian writers, and among the writings of the Jewish people who didn't receive Jesus as the Messiah there is mention that for the forty years prior to the destruction of the temple the Shekinah glory did not appear.

            I'll finish this reply later, but for the record I am not LCMS. See my Sig.

            As confessional Lutherans we say the same things in the same way with regard to the doctrines found in the Book of Concord, but beyond that there are some differences.
            Test all things and praise God from whom all blessings flow!

            Peace,
            BJ -Bear
            VDMA (1 Peter 1:25)
            WELS

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by BJ BEAR View Post
              Hi Oceancoast,

              Thus far in this sub thread I have only addressed the historicity of Christianity from friendly sources, Scripture, and not friendly sources, Josephus and Tacitus.

              Tacitus would have been a young child at the time of the great fire during the reign of Nero. Whether he remembered the circumstances and views of that event or whether his recounting of it was based on another source his inclusion of them is evidence of their historicity.

              I didn't look up which ever manuscript of Annals Of Imperial Rome is considered the earliest. So without doing that and seeing in which language that surviving manuscript is written in I am willing to entertain for the sake of argument your assertion of "chrestian" as a reasonable English transliteration.

              That being said, it is the immediate context which determines how a word is being used. Therefore, translating it into English as, "useful," is excluded in the context of the fire and the, "malicious rumor." In that context it is likely to be more accurately translated as, "kind ones," or, "good ones." Despite the persecution of the Christians they did not pick up arms or revolt.

              Words based upon xrhstos appear multiple times in Scripture. Some of the forms of the word were given their own lexical entry so there are more than a few instances of its use, including in phrases like the kindness or goodness of God, and my yoke is easy or gentle. Check them out.

              It isn't consistent to claim Tacitus wrote X and only X in support of your claim while asserting conspiracy with regard to Josephus and the Scriptural witness.

              The kind of history we are talking about is prophesied and witnessed to by friend and foe as demonstrated above but there are still more witnesses by friend and foe. For example, there is the extra Biblical witness of the early Christian writers, and among the writings of the Jewish people who didn't receive Jesus as the Messiah there is mention that for the forty years prior to the destruction of the temple the Shekinah glory did not appear.

              I'll finish this reply later, but for the record I am not LCMS. See my Sig.

              As confessional Lutherans we say the same things in the same way with regard to the doctrines found in the Book of Concord, but beyond that there are some differences.
              Hi Beej, I just saw this though not the conversation earlier

              Actually,, early Christians may originally have been called "Chrestians"--"goody-goodies." As a contemptuous pun. I think he told me that a few old manuscript copies had "Chrestians" in it, but that was thought to be a misspelling so scribes changed it to "Christian". Interesting....but whatever, it was changed to Christian, which is much better, don't you think?
              "I am tired of being treated like a mushroom--they keep me in the dark and feed me manure!" (reasons why a Mormon was leaving the LDS church)
              "What people don't realize is how much religion costs. They think faith is a big electric blanket, when of course, it is the cross."--Flannery O'Connor
              "I am a Missouri Synod Lutheran--NOT REFORMED/CALVINIST. PLEASE learn the difference."
              "The truth may hurt for a little while, but a lie hurts forever."--anonymous
              "If Jesus isn't THE WAY, then there is nothing else."--Bob

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Bonnie View Post

                Hi Beej, I just saw this though not the conversation earlier

                Actually,, early Christians may originally have been called "Chrestians"--"goody-goodies." As a contemptuous pun. I think he told me that a few old manuscript copies had "Chrestians" in it, but that was thought to be a misspelling so scribes changed it to "Christian". Interesting....but whatever, it was changed to Christian, which is much better, don't you think?
                Yes. Thanks for the post, more information may come shortly.
                Test all things and praise God from whom all blessings flow!

                Peace,
                BJ -Bear
                VDMA (1 Peter 1:25)
                WELS

                Comment


                • #98
                  Hi Bonnie,

                  I took a quick peek at the LXX and to no surprise xrhstos is used to describe the Lord. This is a case of a rose is a rose by any other name.

                  Here are two examples from the LXX for the convenience of those interested. Substitute xrhstos where the word good is used.

                  Psalm 25:8 KJV,"Good and upright is the Lord: therefore will He teach sinners in the way."

                  Psalm 34:8 KJV, "O taste and see that the Lord is good: blessed is the man that trusted in Him."
                  Test all things and praise God from whom all blessings flow!

                  Peace,
                  BJ -Bear
                  VDMA (1 Peter 1:25)
                  WELS

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by dberrie2000 View Post Could any Lutheran explain to us what priesthood this is a reference to?

                    Exodus 40:15 ---King James Version (KJV)
                    15 And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office: for their anointing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations.
                    Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post
                    Anybody who's ever bothered to read the REAL bible could do THAT without a second thought: it's the Levitical Priesthood.

                    BUT in case you missed it, Abram's actions in regard to Melchizedek ESTABLISHED the existence of a GREATER Priesthood than that of LEVI (Heb 7).
                    I agree with your statements.

                    So--the next time someone makes the claim there is no more Levitical priesthood--would you point that out to them?

                    Exodus 40:15 ---King James Version (KJV)
                    15 And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office: for their anointing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations.

                    Bump for Bonnie

                    Comment


                    • [QUOTE=dberrie2000;n5719206]I agree with your statements.

                      So--the next time someone makes the claim there is no more Levitical priesthood--would you point that out to them?

                      I already do. When the REALITY comes, then the Shadow is of no further use. THE LAW, however, is eternal.



                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post
                        I already do. When the REALITY comes, then the Shadow is of no further use. THE LAW, however, is eternal.
                        That's fine, Bob--but the specific scripture did not say anything about the Law--but identified the priesthood as "everlasting"--as you yourself identified it:

                        Originally posted by dberrie2000 View Post Could any Lutheran explain to us what priesthood this is a reference to?
                        Exodus 40:15 ---King James Version (KJV)
                        15 And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office: for their anointing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations.

                        Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post Anybody who's ever bothered to read the REAL bible could do THAT without a second thought: it's the Levitical Priesthood.
                        BUT in case you missed it, Abram's actions in regard to Melchizedek ESTABLISHED the existence of a GREATER Priesthood than that of LEVI (Heb 7).
                        So--how is an "everlasting priesthood" of no further use?





                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by dberrie2000 View Post
                          So--how is an "everlasting priesthood" of no further use?
                          When it's ministrations under an OBSOLETE covenant are no longer valid.





                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post
                            When it's ministrations under an OBSOLETE covenant are no longer valid.
                            How does an obsolete covenant somehow make something "everlasting" no longer valid?

                            Are you claiming the God of the OT is no longer valid?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by dberrie2000 View Post

                              How does an obsolete covenant somehow make something "everlasting" no longer valid?

                              Are you claiming the God of the OT is no longer valid?
                              PSST!!! God Made a BETTER WAY!!! You should get to know Him.

                              Comment


                              • Oceancoast,

                                Continuing on...

                                The prophesied history fulfilled publicly and recorded or noted by friend and not friend is not run of the mill history. For example, the prophecy in Genesis regarding the sceptre being removed was fulfilled by Herod when he usurped the throne. Everyone who paid attention to what was taught in Scripture knew that signaled the time of the Messiah. After the coming of the wise men even Herod knew it and he consulted with the priests to get information on the Messiah.

                                This common knowledge that it was the time of the Messiah is reflected in the questions asked of John the Baptist by those sent by the Pharisees, for example, "Why then do you baptize, if you are not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?" John 1:25 LITV. The same can be said of the common man, for example, "Philip finds Nathaniel and said to him, We have the one of whom Moses wrote in the Law and the Prophets, Jesus the son of Joseph, from Nazareth." The other prophecies of the Messiah were also fulfilled in the person and work of Christ.

                                What many Gentiles in the west call the Christian religion is the Jewish religion. Salvation is of the Jews. Claims by unbelievers of Mithraism are irrelevant and anachronistic.

                                This reply is a continuation of the demonstration of the historicity and the correctness of the Judeo-Christian religion. The Evangelical or Lutheran faith is a reflection of that faith, that is, the norming norm is Scripture. The normed norm is the Book of Concord.

                                I don't know what you think is the dogma of the Trinity but most people readily recognize that Scripture was written before the fourth century. For a right understanding of what the term Trinity encompasses the see the three ecumenical creeds, the Apostle's Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed. If you want to see evidence from the OT regarding the Trinity then see the thread on this board started by dberrie2000 titled The One Being.

                                The Evangelicals did not codify a canon. Citing other canons won't change that and there was no one codified canon in Luther's day just as there is no one codified canon today. The people claiming that Luther wanted to remove books from the Bible are viewing the matter anachronistically from an ill informed and prejudiced perspective. Homolegomena and antilegomena are terms that reflect the manner in which the church received the books rather than a classification invented and used.

                                It is odd that a person would claim, "Given the Bible contains no first person testimony," when first person testimony began at Moses. Or did you mean to write that as unbeliever you reject the eye witness testimony presented in Scripture? Eye witness testimony is not hearsay. It seems you are the one mistaking your subjective perspective for objective reality.

                                I can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the prophecies regarding the Messiah came true in the person and work of Jesus of Nazareth through Scripture and the historical writings and references of Jew and Gentile.

                                The eye witnesses and the other faithful were freed of their slavery because of every man's fear of death through the life, death, and resurrection of the true Christ for the sins of all men. Unlike other men they did not pick up arms to try and preserve their lives or under the pretense of advancing their cause.

                                He that believed and was baptized //into the true Christ// will be saved. He that believed not //in the true Christ// is condemned already, Mark 16:16.

                                *** The double slashes were used because there are no brackets on the keyboard I am using.
                                Test all things and praise God from whom all blessings flow!

                                Peace,
                                BJ -Bear
                                VDMA (1 Peter 1:25)
                                WELS

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X