Posted on 12/17/2014 4:04:52 PM PST by Salvation
Where in the New Testament are "priests" mentioned?
Full Question
The New Testament mentions three categories of Church leaders: bishops, presbyters, and deacons. So how can the Catholic Church justify its office of "priest"? The New Testament writers seem to understand "bishop" and "presbyter" to be synonymous terms for the same office (Acts 20:17-38).
Answer
The English word "priest" is derived from the Greek word presbuteros, which is commonly rendered into Bible English as "elder" or "presbyter." The ministry of Catholic priests is that of the presbyters mentioned in the New Testament (Acts 15:6, 23). The Bible says little about the duties of presbyters, but it does reveal they functioned in a priestly capacity.
They were ordained by the laying on of hands (1 Tm 4:14, 5:22), they preached and taught the flock (1 Tm 5:17), and they administered sacraments (Jas 5:13-15). These are the essential functions of the priestly office, so wherever the various forms of presbuteros appear--except, of course, in instances which pertain to the Jewish elders (Mt 21:23, Acts 4:23)--the word may rightly be translated as "priest" instead of "elder" or "presbyter."
Episcopos arises from two words, epi (over) and skopeo (to see), and it means literally "an overseer": We translate it as "bishop." The King James Version renders the office of overseer, episkopen, as "bishopric" (Acts 1:20). The role of the episcopos is not clearly defined in the New Testament, but by the beginning of the second century it had obtained a fixed meaning. There is early evidence of this refinement in ecclesiastical nomenclature in the writings of Ignatius of Antioch (d. A.D. 107), who wrote at length of the authority of bishops as distinct from presbyters and deacons (Epistle to the Magnesians 6:1, 13:1-2; Epistle to the Trallians 2:1-3; Epistle to the Smyrnaeans 8:1-2).
The New Testament tendency to use episcopos and presbuteros interchangeably is similar to the contemporary Protestant use of the term "minister" to denote various offices, both ordained and unordained (senior minister, music minister, youth minister). Similarly, the term diakonos is rendered both as "deacon" and as "minister" in the Bible, yet in Protestant churches the office of deacon is clearly distinguished from and subordinate to the office of minister.
In Acts 20:17-38 the same men are called presbyteroi (v. 17) and episcopoi (v. 28). Presbuteroi is used in a technical sense to identify their office of ordained leadership. Episcopoi is used in a non-technical sense to describe the type of ministry they exercised. This is how the Revised Standard Version renders the verses: "And from Miletus he [Paul] . . . called for the elders [presbuteroi]of the church. And when they came to him, he said to them . . . 'Take heed to yourselves and all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you guardians [episcopoi], to feed the church of the Lord.'"
In other passages it's clear that although men called presbuteroi ruled over individual congregations (parishes), the apostles ordained certain men, giving them authority over multiple congregations (dioceses), each with its own presbyters. These were endowed with the power to ordain additional presbyters as needed to shepherd the flock and carry on the work of the gospel. Titus and Timothy were two of those early episcopoi and clearly were above the office of presbuteros. They had the authority to select, ordain, and govern other presbyters, as is evidenced by Paul's instructions: "This is why I left you in Crete . . . that you might appoint elders in every town as I directed you" (Ti 1:5; cf. 1 Tm 5:17-22).
So says you. And by what authority?
The words of Scripture are indeed the words of God as given to the apostles by the Holy Spirit.
Psalm 119:89 Your word, LORD, is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens.
לְעוֹלָם יְהוָה-- דְּבָרְךָ, נִצָּב בַּשָּׁמָיִם.
Forever, LORD, your word stands in heaven.
בַּשָּׁמָיִם (lə·‘ō·lām) means "forever", not "eternal." It will last from the time uttered forever.
I can't even imagine how anyone would think that forever means eternal. /s
>>It will last from the time uttered forever.<<
Who would have ever thought but that God just made them up when He spoke them through the writers? /s
No, so says the scripture...Authority is required to believe the scriptures without adding false interpretation??? I don't think so...That's why so many people leave your religion...They start reading the bible and realize the bible and your religion are at serious odds with each other...In fact, a complete contradiction...
Fine, the argument is the same, as since priest came to be the English word for hiereus and yet is used then it negates the distinction the Holy Spirit made by never giving the title hiereus to presbuteros. Priest should have been become the word for presbuteros. You have gained zero yardage on that desperate play, and are still in your own end zone on this and our other issues.
BTW, we are talking about common usage, not Bible translations. If you look at the Catholic New American Bible you will see that they use presbyter as the translation.
Commendably, but which translation is typically frowned upon or rejected by trad. RCs such as we debate here. It has been a long time, like never, that i saw the NAB recommended by a RC here. Can you find some?
No, what happened is that the title of presbuteros was given to heireus.
Part of the problem is the different experience that Catholics and Protestants have. Catholics have had a continual and daily experience with the presbyteral priesthood. When they hear the word "priest" the first thing they think of is the Catholic presbyteral priesthood. Protestants have been catechized to disassociate the Catholic presbyteral priesthood from the New Testament presbyterate. When they hear the word "priest" the first thing they think of is the sacerdotal priesthood. Thus when we see the headline of the article of this thread, "Where in the New Testament are 'priests' mentioned?", we see two different things. Catholics see the headline and see "Where in the New Testament are '[presbyteral] priests' mentioned?" Protestants see the same headline and see "Where in the New Testament are '[sacerdotal] priests' mentioned?"
Catholics are well aware of the distinction between their own priests and those of the Temple, even if English uses the same terms. Protestants, rejecting the Catholic priesthood as a continuation of the NT presbyterate, insists that the use of the one term implies an identification of the presbyterate with the Temple priesthood, something that Catholics never claim.
English is filled with words that have more than one meaning. One example is "man." Feminists insist that it only means males despite the standard usage that also recognizes it to mean a human being or human race. An intelligent person can distinguish its meanings from context. For good or ill English usage has given two meanings to "priest." Catholics are aware of the distinction. Protestants cannot insist that Catholics drop a usage that they have used for over thousand years. All that is needed is a reminder of the distinction.
“Show me in Scripture where it says that the Bible existed as a coeternal book with God.”
Already did so we will have to agree to disagree.
“Yes, all Scripture is God-breathed but he did this in time.”
If you buy and e-book and decide to print it a month later does that mean it didn’t exist until you printed it? Time doesn’t exist with God he is eternal.
God also breathed into Adam to give him life but he did not exist from all eternity.”
At what point did our soul begin? Your thinking too much flesh you must think Spirit.
Ephesians 1:4 New International Version (NIV)
4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love
Romans 8:29 New International Version (NIV)
29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.
Ephesians 2:10 New International Version (NIV)
10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
Jeremiah 1:5 New International Version (NIV)
5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
before you were born I set you apart;
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”
Psalm 139:15-16 New International Version (NIV)
15 My frame was not hidden from you
when I was made in the secret place,
when I was woven together in the depths of the earth.
16 Your eyes saw my unformed body;
all the days ordained for me were written in your book
before one of them came to be.
Pinging myself to it.
Pet, if you don't trust yourself to properly interpret the Bible, who DO you trust for that?
The church established by Jesus Christ.
The church established by Jesus Christ.
OK, if you say so. You have a whole lot more faith in your fellow man than I do. I would be worried that they might make a mistake, and if they did, then I would get shafted.
The churches founded by Jesus Christ are never based in Rome... and trust should be in God, through the inspiration of His Holy Spirit. All the smells and bells of the Roman cult can do is try to make people feel good and keep sinners closed to His leading.
The church is the body of believers, not some large cult self-proclaimed to be the sole source of contact with Him, by calling on His mother. She's dead, Pete!
The Holy Spirit joins us into the family, and seals us into life everlasting. We become joint heirs with Christ, and are given all the power necessary to grow and prosper. He is our High Priest, and the only intercessor needed. Jesus is the rock on which His churches founded, and Peter is only one of the first to follow Him.
David called on the Rock, long before Jesus came into Peters life...
Psalm 28: To you, Lord, I call;
you are my Rock,
do not turn a deaf ear to me.
For if you remain silent,
I will be like those who go down to the pit.
2 Hear my cry for mercy
as I call to you for help,
as I lift up my hands
toward your Most Holy Place. ...
The word "church" as rendered in the New Testament comes from the Greek term ekklesia which is formed from two Greek words meaning "an assembly" and "to call out" or "called out ones." In summary, the New Testament church is a body of believers who have been called out from the world by God to live as his people under the authority of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 1:22-23). This group of believers or "the body of Christ" began in Acts 2 on the Day of Pentecost through the work of the Holy Spirit and will continue to be formed until the day of the rapture of the church.
My faith is in Jesus Christ, that he will guide his church as he promised. I prefer this rather than trusting in a presumed infallibility of one's own interpretation. The divisions among Protestants shows that this is a failed model.
Yes and yes, but note that what i exclude is not that believers could be called heireus, which includes presbuteros, but that of presbuteros being called (as ordained) by the same title as Temples priests, denoting a separate distinctive class of sacerdotal heireus, like as in the OT, but which NT presbuteros are never distinctively called. They only ordained presbuteros”/"episkopos."
Catholics are well aware of the distinction between their own priests and those of the Temple, even if English uses the same terms. Protestants, rejecting the Catholic priesthood as a continuation of the NT presbyterate, insists that the use of the one term implies an identification of the presbyterate with the Temple priesthood, something that Catholics never claim.
Rather, my objection is that while RCs claim a distinction between their own priests and those of the Temple, yet they they are claiming to be a separate distinctive class of sacerdotal heireus, as their primary and unique function is to offer sacrifice for sins, that of the Eucharist, "through which the work of our redemption is accomplished."
While Rome also recognizes the priesthood of all believers, it makes distinction btwn that and those formally called priests, for akin to the Levitical Temple priesthood,
they unite the votive offerings of the faithful to the sacrifice of Christ their head, and in the sacrifice of the Mass they make present again and apply, until the coming of the Lord, the unique sacrifice of the New Testament, that namely of Christ offering himself once for all a spotless victim to the Father."49 From this unique sacrifice their whole priestly ministry draws its strength (CCC 1566)
And it identifies itself with the unique sacerdotal ministers of the Temple, even if there is a distinction in how it sees itself offering atoning sacrifice:
The liturgy of the Church, however, sees in the priesthood of Aaron and the service of the Levites, as in the institution of the seventy elders,11 a prefiguring of the ordained ministry of the New Covenant. Thus in the Latin Rite the Church prays in the consecratory preface of the ordination of bishops: (1541)
But again, in Scripture this unique sacerdotal function is not set forth as the primary or unique function of presbuteros, and who are never even described as distinctively blessing and dispensing bread in the life of the church as their ordained function, while pray and preaching are, by which souls are nourished and built up. (Acts 6:3,4; 1 Timothy 4:6; 2Tim. 4:2)
English is filled with words that have more than one meaning. One example is "man." Feminists insist that it only means males despite the standard usage that also recognizes it to mean a human being or human race.
A specious argument, for while there are words which depend upon context to determine specificity, there are other words which are specific. And which zâkâr is for male (Gn. 17:12) and which heireus is, only being used for Jewish or pagan sacerdotal clergy, and never for NT clergy as as a distinctive class. Thus for someone to call a female zâkâr would be akin to distinctively calling NT presbuteros heireus.
Protestants, rejecting the Catholic priesthood as a continuation of the NT presbyterate, insists that the use of the one term implies an identification of the presbyterate with the Temple priesthood, something that Catholics never claim.
Rather, Catholics, by making the Catholic priesthood as a continuation of the NT presbyterate, which they make as one which distinctly sacrificially offered "the unique sacrifice of the New Testament, that namely of Christ offering himself once for all a spotless victim to the Father," attributing a unique sacerdotal function to the NT presbyterate, thus ignoring the distinction the Spirit made by not once distinctively calling presbuteros.
bump
My faith is in Jesus Christ, that he will guide his church as he promised. I prefer this rather than trusting in a presumed infallibility of one's own interpretation. The divisions among Protestants shows that this is a failed model.
If your faith is in Jesus Christ, there is no need to have faith in a church. I was led to real faith in Jesus Christ by the Navigators, whose motto is "to know Christ and to make Him known."Of all the people I met, I only knew the denominational background of one person, because he was a Southern Baptist,US Army chaplain. They did, however, all have "faith" in Jesus Christ, and I have never met a more Godly group of people in my life. True 24/7 disciples of Jesus Christ. Did they have different opinions about various issues? Of course they did, but were UNITED in the only issue that matters: the plan of salvation. If one does not have the plan of salvation right, it doesn't matter what else they might have right. It is too important an issue, for me to trust someone else's opinion on it. If you trust others to interpret scripture for you, then you still have more faith in your fellow man than I do.
It means they trust God to lead them thru their fallible discernment to determine Rome is worthy of implicit assent that means they are not to trust God to their lead them thru their fallible discernment to ascertain the veracity of RC teaching, as Rome is their supreme authority.
Which is why they censure us for interpreting Scripture, under the premise that an infallible magisterium is essential to correctly know which writings etc. are of God, as well as their assuredly correct meaning.
Which is novel, but Rome has presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares.
Yet in real life what is official RC teaching, as well as their meaning, or aspects of them, often are subject to variant RCs interpretation, as is interpreting the interpreters, that of lower levels of magisterial teaching. Resulting in various sects.
That is what is behind the infallible smokescreen.
You are correct Cynical B. You win a cookie. 😊 My Freeper buddy and I went to a catholic wedding in Tagum City a few months ago. We both marveled at all the graven images we saw, in direct opposition to the Word of God. Amazing isn't it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.