Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: fortheDeclaration
James say that the elders of the church should pray over one who is ill

And annoint them, requiring physical presence. It points to a distinct function, the members ofthe household could not do themselves. Justin Martyr's Apology, written in the 2nd century shows that priests and deacons had distinct roles as well.

The point about "house churches" is not that they were someone's house,-- they were at times, -- but that they functioned as a Church, to the point that St. Paul asks people to not eat there, but rather eat in theor own homes.

'priest' has a far different modern connotation then does elder or even presbyterian.

When you read priests annointing the sick or giving communion or teaching the gospel, that is exactly the connotation that is also modern. "Elder" has a connotation of old age. Where is any reference to age about the Priests in the New Testament? Would you translate "Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the old men of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord"?

Reading 1 Peter as referring to all believers is nowhere in 1 Peter. In particular, "Royal priesthood" cannot be squared with this Protestant notion. If all believers are royal priestshood, who are their subjects?

6,388 posted on 05/12/2006 11:54:06 AM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6364 | View Replies ]


To: annalex
James say that the elders of the church should pray over one who is ill And annoint them, requiring physical presence. It points to a distinct function, the members ofthe household could not do themselves. Justin Martyr's Apology, written in the 2nd century shows that priests and deacons had distinct roles as well.

All the members of the church could pray for a sick person.

The elders of the church were called in because they were men of God who were well schooled in prayer being 'elders' of the church.

This is an issue of maturity not office per se

The point about "house churches" is not that they were someone's house,-- they were at times, -- but that they functioned as a Church, to the point that St. Paul asks people to not eat there, but rather eat in theor own homes.

He is talking about the 'love' feast that followed the Lord's supper.

It seemed that some had more then others and it was not a true case of fellowship (1Cor.11:20-22)

'priest' has a far different modern connotation then does elder or even presbyterian. When you read priests annointing the sick or giving communion or teaching the gospel, that is exactly the connotation that is also modern. "Elder" has a connotation of old age. Where is any reference to age about the Priests in the New Testament? Would you translate "Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the old men of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord"?

See, you are making a theological application based on the word 'Priest' which has the connotation of a special 'clergy' class.

That clergy class does not exist in the New Testament.

Various offices exist such as Pastor (elder) and teachers, but they are not Priests in that they have any special access to God based on their office.

Here is a footnote in the Roman Catholic NAS.

In case of sickness a Christian should ask for the presbyters of the church, i.e. those who have authority in the church. They are to pray over the person and annoint with oil. oil was used for medicinal purposes in the ancient world.

So far, we have no disagreement.

However in a following footnote, it states, The results of prayer and annointing are physical health and forgiveness of sins. The Roman Catholic Church (Council of Trent, Session 14) declared that this annointing of the sick is a sacrament, instituted by Christ and promulgated by blessed James the apostle'

Ryrie writes that from this came the Roman Catholic of unction or last rites.

Yet, the purpose of the calling of the elders is healing, not dying.

Reading 1 Peter as referring to all believers is nowhere in 1 Peter. In particular, "Royal priesthood" cannot be squared with this Protestant notion. If all believers are royal priestshood, who are their subjects?

There are no subjects!

A royal priesthood is referring to the fact that we are related by the new birth to the King of Kings, the Lord Jesus Christ.(Eph.5:30)

Now, as a priest is someone who has access to God.

No Christian needs anyone to go to God for him, he has direct access to God through Christ Himself (Jn.16:23-24)

Now 1Pet 2:5 is talking about all believers, who are 'holy priesthood'.

Our great High Priest is Christ Himself who makes intercession for us (Heb.4:14-15), hence all believers can come 'boldly to the throne of grace to obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need (Heb.4:16).

Christ is the only mediator necessary (1Tim.2:5).

I do find it interesting that you just ignore what the passage says in 1Pet.2:5,9 about the 'priesthood' of every believer.

While thre are different spiritual gifts in the body of Christ (Eph.4) every Christian is a priest, one who has access to the throne of God through Christ.

6,415 posted on 05/12/2006 3:17:59 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth? (Gal.4:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6388 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson