Posted on 01/15/2019 9:01:47 AM PST by Salvation
The Message of the Letter to the Hebrews
Msgr. Charles Pope • January 14, 2019 •
This week in daily Mass, we are reading from The Letter to the Hebrews, one of the most underappreciated books of the New Testament. It has long been one of my favorites from which to teach; in it we are summoned to faith in Jesus, our Savior and Great High Priest.
The opening lines in the Latin Vulgate are exquisite, particularly to those who can read and recite Latin well.
Multifáriam, multísque modis, olim Deus lóquens pátribus in prophétis. Novíssime, diébus istis locútus est nobis in Fílio. (In many and varied ways, God once spoke to our fathers through the prophets. In these last days, he has spoken to us through the Son.)
Though many doubt that St. Paul wrote Hebrews, I believe he did; it is here that we best see his priestly identity as an apostle, his deep knowledge of the Temple rituals and how they pointed to Christ and are perfected by Him.
The Letter to the Hebrews does not begin with the usual epistolary greetings and salutations, though it does end with them. Throughout, the text “sounds” more like a sermon. The audience of the letter is clearly Jewish Christians; the writer is exhorting them not to fall back on Jewish rituals, which cannot save, but rather to cling ever more closely to Christ, who alone is savior and Lord.
Hebrews was surely written before the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 A.D. (References to the Temple speak of sacrifices as still going on there.) It occurs to me that the context of Hebrews is that of the years from 65-70 A.D., a time during which wars and rumors of wars were growing. Indeed, the tragic Jewish war began in 66 A.D. The Romans had had more than enough of Jewish Messianism and uprisings. It was a horrible, bloody war that cost the lives of more than one million Jews. During this period, Jewish nationalism was on the rise, likely even among those who had become Christians.
Politics has a strong pull, and it is in this context that the author addresses his audience. In effect, his position is that they should not return to what cannot save merely out of some sense of loyalty to a doomed nation. Jesus had prophesied the tragic destruction of Jerusalem in the Mount Olivet discourse recorded in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 24 and 25, Mark 13, and Luke 21). With the war clouds gathering, this was the time to cling to Him ever more!
What follows is a quick summary of the exhortation in the Letter to the Hebrews. (In most cases I have not cited chapter and verse below because I pulled from many parts at once.)
Jesus is Lord: Particularly in the first three chapters of Hebrews, the author reminds his audience of the glory of Christ.
Jesus Christ is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His nature, upholding all things by His powerful word. Having provided purification for sins, He now sits at the right hand of the Majesty on high. Christ is far superior to the angels, as the name He has inherited is excellent beyond theirs. To which of the angels did God ever say, “You are My Son; today I have become Your Father,” or “I will be His Father, and He will be My Son”? When God brings His firstborn into the world, He says: “Let all God’s angels worship Him.”
Yes, God has subjected all things to Him, leaving nothing outside of His control. Christ is crowned with glory and honor because He suffered death so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone, bringing many sons to glory. By His death Christ destroyed him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—and freed those were held in slavery by the fear of death.
Jesus is the True High Priest: The author of the Letter to the Hebrews then goes on to describe how Jesus has a true priesthood, greater than that of the priests in the Temple.
Jesus has been counted worthy of greater glory than Moses. He is the great high priest who has passed through the heavens, entering the inner sanctuary behind the curtain. Jesus has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever in the order of Melchizedek. Indeed, God the Father says of Jesus His Son, “You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.”
If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood, why would there have been a need for another priest to appear, one in the order of Melchizedek and not in the order of Aaron?
Jesus is the Perfection that was Promised: The Letter to the Hebrews is essentially an exhortation not to leave the perfect to go back to the imperfect. The Temple and what takes place there is now no more than a movie set filled with actors playing their roles. Jesus is the true and perfect High Priest, who enters into the true and actual Holy of Holies. The Temple rituals merely point to what Jesus actually does:
Jesus is the true High Priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in Heaven and who ministers in the sanctuary and true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not man. He entered the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made by hands (that is, not of this creation).
Because every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, it was necessary for this One also to have something to offer. He did not enter by the blood of goats and calves, but He entered the Most Holy Place once for all by His own blood, thus securing eternal redemption. If the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that their bodies are clean, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself unblemished to God, purify our consciences from works of death so that we may serve the living God?
Jesus has established the New Covenant in His Blood: The author exhorts his audience not to return to the Old Covenant from the New Covenant. To this he adds this warning:
By speaking of a new covenant, He has made the first one obsolete, and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear (Heb 8:13).
Anyone who rejected the Law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think one deserves to be punished who has trampled on the Son of God, profaned the blood of the covenant that sanctified Him, and insulted the Spirit of grace?
Do not throw away your confidence; it holds a great reward. You need to persevere, so that after you have done God’s will, you will receive what He has promised.
What is the meaning of this letter for us who read it so long after the Jewish war of 70 A.D? It is simply this:
We are easily mesmerized by politics and cultural movements, exhibiting more loyalty to them that to our Savior and Lord, Jesus Christ. Distracted by modern ideas and urgencies, we forsake the message of Christ. We’ll salute Christ, but only if His message agrees with our views and priorities. The Letter to the Hebrews tell us not to give our heart to what cannot save, not to return to the obsessions of a worldly kingdom of darkness now that we have been summoned to the Kingdom of Light.
Jesus deserves your highest loyalty; He alone can save you. Put not your trust in princes and in mortal men in whom there is not help (Psalm 146:3-4). If we forsake Christ for something lesser, do we not treat lightly His blood, which sanctified us, and insult the spirit of grace? Are you worthy of Jesus Christ or are you just worthy of a political party or some popular ideologies of this passing world?
From an early Father of the Church, St Irenaeus shares comments that address some of your points:
His best-known work is Against Heresies, in which he refutes the teachings of the Gnostics. Much of his work is focused on theology, and because of this it is an excellent resource to demonstrate how Catholic beliefs can be traced back to the early Church.
On the authority of the Catholic Church
The bishops of the Catholic Church are the successors of the original apostles chosen by Jesus Christ. St. Irenaeus explains:
It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known to us throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors down to our own times, men who neither knew nor taught anything like what these heretics rave about (Against Heresies, 3:3:1).
The Catholic Church also teaches that Jesus bestowed upon St. Peter a special place among the apostles as leader of the Church, making him the first pope (Matthew 16:18). Irenaeus explains that this was the Tradition of the Church in his day:
But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the successions of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul—that church which has the tradition and the faith with which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. For with this Church, because of its superior origin, all churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world. And it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition (Against Heresies, 3:3:2).
On the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist
The Catholic Church teaches that Jesus is literally present—body, blood, soul, and divinity—in the Eucharist. That even the earliest Christians taught this is reaffirmed in the writings of Iranaeus:
He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life—flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him? (Against Heresies, 5:2).
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/apologetics-with-st-irenaeus
All are entitled to believe whatever they want, but is it the Truth?
Your comment: “I can name many doctrines that the Roman Catholic church teaches that have NO connection to the Biblical Christian faith. So, no, the Catholic Church has NOT always held the Truth of Jesus and His teachings. You don’t have an elitist, exclusive corner on the truth.”
You didn’t name them or provide proof that they are not the Truth of Jesus. Some indicate that all of the Truth comes from the Bible, yet they ignore how Jesus established His Church. The Bible itself does not support Sola Scriptura.
Why Jesus established an institutional and hierarchical Church are implicit in his reason for founding any Church at all. Jesus wanted to preserve and perpetuate his teaching, the truths about God that he came into the world to proclaim, and to provide to those whom he had saved the sacramental means to share in his divine life. In order to insure the latter, in particular, Jesus had to establish within the community of his followers the power to re-present the sacrifice of the cross by which he had saved them.
Similarly, Ignatius considered the Church to be holy. This was the case because it was in the Church that “God’s bread, which is the flesh of Christ” (Rom. 7:3), was present. Ignatius recognized that the Eucharist, celebrated within the Church, made Christians one. He believed that the faithful were gathered together to obtain a share of God’s grace through the sacrament of the Eucharist. He counseled the Ephesians “to gather together more frequently to celebrate God’s Eucharist.” He believed that it was by this more frequent Communion in the Church that “Satan’s powers [are] overthrown and his destructiveness . . . undone” (13:1) and the members of the holy Church brought closer to God in holiness.
Your comment: “We don’t have to “do it” like RCs do in order to be obedient and testify to our faith.” Then, in my humble opinion, those that believe this, ignore the specific words of Jesus that we should eat and drink His Flesh and Blood that is necessary for our salvation. It is amazing to take the Eucharist to Catholics in a hospital. Their joy is wonderful to behold.
God’s Peace be with you.
I think not for the purpose of this debate.
Any writings from the ongoing disciples of the apostles if in agreement with and verifiable by Holy Inspired Scripture are unnecessary; and if not contained in Scripture, they would be uninspired and speculative.
I realize that if Ignatius of Antioch introduced the term "catholic," it will be a use of language not previously associated with the noun meaning "summoned ones" in either the Septuagint or the Byzantine Majority textform of the NT.
The adverb καθόλου (katholou) appears but once in the NT Greek, and even then modifies the verb "to speak," not any noun or pronoun.
The idea of "Catholic Church" as a supralocal association governing independent regular gatherings of Christ-followers does not occur any place in the New Testament.
What I said previously in Post #12 stands.
Perhaps you would like to read the letters of Bishops Ignatius and Polycarp that used the name Catholic church.
I think not for the purpose of this debate.
Any writings from the ongoing disciples of the apostles if in agreement with and verifiable by Holy Inspired Scripture are unnecessary; and if not contained in Scripture, they would be uninspired and speculative.
I realize that if Ignatius of Antioch introduced the term "catholic," it will be a use of language not previously associated with the noun meaning "summoned ones" in either the Septuagint or the Byzantine Majority textform of the NT.
The adverb καθόλου (katholou) appears but once in the NT Greek, and even then modifies the verb "to speak," not any noun or pronoun.
The idea of "Catholic Church" as a supralocal association governing independent regular gatherings of Christ-followers does not occur any place in the New Testament.
What I said previously in Post #12 stands.
It was hosted not by Peter, but by James, bishop of the Church in Jerusalem. NOtice, however, that it was Peter who was granted the guiding vision.
Pertinent to the history is that the later, ut still very early Fathers looked to "theChurch of ts Peter and Paul" &Rome, which was heir place of martyrdom)as the hub signifing their fidelity and unity.
MOre later. I'm off to church!
Are you familiar with Acts?
The First Community in Jerusalem. 13When they entered the city they went to the upper room where they were staying, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James son of Alphaeus, Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James. 14All these devoted themselves with one accord to prayer, together with some women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers.l
Communal Life.* 42y They devoted themselves to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life, to the breaking of the bread and to the prayers.z 43Awe came upon everyone, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.a 44All who believed were together and had all things in common;b 45they would sell their property and possessions and divide them among all according to each one’s need.
[2:42–47] The first of three summary passages (along with Acts 4:32–37; 5:12–16) that outline, somewhat idyllically, the chief characteristics of the Jerusalem community: adherence to the teachings of the Twelve and the centering of its religious life in the eucharistic liturgy (Acts 2:42); a system of distribution of goods that led wealthier Christians to sell their possessions when the needs of the community’s poor required it (Acts 2:44 and the note on Acts 4:32–37); and continued attendance at the temple, since in this initial stage there was little or no thought of any dividing line between Christianity and Judaism (Acts 2:46).
Prayer of the Community. 23After their release they went back to their own people and reported what the chief priests and elders had told them. 24And when they heard it, they raised their voices to God with one accord and said, “Sovereign Lord, maker of heaven and earth and the sea and all that is in them, 25you said by the holy Spirit through the mouth of our father David, your servant:
‘Why did the Gentiles rageg
and the peoples entertain folly?
26The kings of the earth took their stand
and the princes gathered together
against the Lord and against his anointed.’
27Indeed they gathered in this city against your holy servant Jesus whom you anointed, Herod* and Pontius Pilate, together with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel,h 28to do what your hand and [your] will had long ago planned to take place. 29And now, Lord, take note of their threats, and enable your servants to speak your word with all boldness, 30as you stretch forth [your] hand to heal, and signs and wonders are done through the name of your holy servant Jesus.” 31* As they prayed, the place where they were gathered shook, and they were all filled with the holy Spirit and continued to speak the word of God with boldness.i
Life in the Christian Community.* 32The community of believers was of one heart and mind, and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they had everything in common. 33With great power the apostles bore witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great favor was accorded them all. 34j There was no needy person among them, for those who owned property or houses would sell them, bring the proceeds of the sale, 35and put them at the feet of the apostles, and they were distributed to each according to need.
36k Thus Joseph, also named by the apostles Barnabas (which is translated “son of encouragement”), a Levite, a Cypriot by birth,
The Need for Assistants. 1* At that time, as the number of disciples continued to grow, the Hellenists complained against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution.a 2* So the Twelve called together the community of the disciples and said, “It is not right for us to neglect the word of God to serve at table.* 3Brothers, select from among you seven reputable men, filled with the Spirit and wisdom, whom we shall appoint to this task, 4whereas we shall devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” 5The proposal was acceptable to the whole community, so they chose Stephen, a man filled with faith and the holy Spirit, also Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicholas of Antioch, a convert to Judaism. 6b They presented these men to the apostles who prayed and laid hands on them.* 7The word of God continued to spread, and the number of the disciples in Jerusalem increased greatly; even a large group of priests were becoming obedient to the faith.c
These are the beginnings of the Catholic Church and the Church was called Catholic to distinguish it from the false preaching by others. Please note that they participated in the Sacrament of the Eucharist.
I've heard of it.
Not any place in the Greek New Testament that I can find. Nor even in the DRB translation, let alone capitalized.
It is not clear what point is being made in Post #28. What interpretation is it that you are trying to show by quoting these verses?
Well I am glad that you have heard of Acts, but it seems that some hear but do not fully understand the meaning.
While you seem to reject the “Catholic” Church because it is not specifically named in the New Testament as such, perhaps one ignores the fact that Jesus founded His Church and delegated to Peter as the leader of the Apostles to go and “ Preach and Baptize” to all nations. The lack of the”Catholic” name seems to be a minor point when Christ’s Church needed to distinguish itself from the false churches that were not following the teaching of Jesus.
As Luke wrote the Gospel of Luke about Jesus, he also wrote Acts about Peter and Paul as they followed the path of Christ.Acts documented the Catholic Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Anointing of the Sick, the Appointment (ordination) of Bishops and Deacons.These Sacraments established by Christ and followed by the early Catholic Church members.
As St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict taught, we are not a “religion of the book.” We need to worship at the Holy Mass, and hear and not only read the sacred words, so that the Savior can reach our hearts through his action in his Mystical Body: through gestures, through song, through signs of peace, through sacred images, through sights and sounds and even odors. The written word is great; media resources are great; but we must go beyond them to kneel down and worship the Savior along with other citizens of the true Israel, the Church he founded.
Jesus said of His Church: “Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.” Luke 10:16
Naw.
(1) The contents of your Post #28 does not show anything about any of the churches in the area being organized as "catholic."
(2) In Acts 9:31, the two words "καθ ολης"--a preposition and and an adjective--act upon and modify the substantive clause that defines the geopolitical region of Palestine, not the subject of the sentence "εκκλησια" (singular) or "εκκλησιαι" (plural) depending on whether you are reading from the synthesized critical text or the traditional Byzantine Majority textform.
(3) In translation the phrase "καθ ολης της ιουδαιας και γαλιλαιας και σαμαρειας", translated in 1611 A.D. as "throughout all of Judea and Galilee and Samaria", has the equivalent translated meaning of "comprisingκαθ=κατα (the) entiretyολης of Judea, Galilee, and Samaria."
(4) Aside from this clause, the core words "αι εκκλησιαι ειχον ειρηνην" mean "the churches had restpeace "; nothing else.
(5) Whether one here reads "church" (as force-fed into the Vulgate by Jerome, who chose to follow the Alexandrian school of theology and its texts); or "churches" (as in the KJV/AV by the panel of excellent translators who preferred the Byzantine Majority textform selected by the Catholic scholar Desiderius Erasmus as the best text available), there is nothing here to imply at all some miraculous juxtaposition of "kath holos" and "ekklesia(i)" in the same sentence to supply any connection whatsoever of this verse with the purely figmentatious human imaginative invention of a "Catholic Church" (proper adjective and noun capitalized).
Furthermore, regarding the meaning you want to read into Acts 9:32 as Peter somehow being ordained with sole apostolic dominion over the churches comprising the Palestian area, that is pure eisegesis, and not warranted by the grammar or its context.
In actuality, while it may have already been shown to Paul through his intimate experience with the independent autonomous assembly of disciples at Damascus, and while among the Jews there were Gentile Greek-speaking proselytes, it was not apparently known to Peter at that time that Gentiles could be spiritually reborn as followers of the Christ without first becoming converted to Judaism.
Apparently, that was a stumbling block for Peter, even when confronted by God by plunging him into the conversion and regeneration experience with Cornelius and his household, that led the Apostolic brethren to restrict Peter to evangelistic efforts with existing Jewish seekers, and the purview of gospellizing of Gentiles to the more cosmopolitan and better-theologically-trained Paul as the sole apostolic proprietor of that market segment.
You will recall that, following the dispersion of the apostles from Jerusalem, Peter being stranded at Antioch, showing a reversion toward Judaism, Paul coming and observing had to publicly figuratively spank Peter before the brethren for that character-spoiling unchristian partiality (Gal. 2:11-21).
All you can safely assume from verse 32 is that, while centered in Jerusalem, Peter legitimately occupied himself with the role of an itinerant evangelist, visiting Jewish churches in and about Palestine, having apostolic credentials. Verse 32 gives him no warrant as a proto-"Pope"; only as a roaming encourager and strengthener of the local ruling elders and their congregations (see 1 Peter 5, as well as 2 Peter 3:14-18 as referring doctrine-twisting troublemakers to Paul for correction).
You attempt to stretch this "catholicism" line a bit too far--in fact way too far--in your discussion points of Post #30, in my estimation.
It's helpful to got back to Apostolic times
There's the way the Church is defined in practice by the Apostles -- Peter and his Apostolic brothers preaching on the morning of Pentecost --- one flock, one shepherd --- guided by a Council of Apostles (i.e. at Jerusalem), message and vision to Peter confirmed by the Holy Spirit --- message being sent out to all the churches under the guidance of the Apostles, and thence to the successors of the Apostles made so by the laying on of hands --- already understood as "the Church as a Whole" (Ekklesia Kata-holos) by the time of Ignatius of Antioch ---
OR--- Of course there are other ways to parse it. One would be, based on your own personal bishopless interpretation (by definition schismatic) or EVERYBODY's separate personal interpretation (which would be chaotic).
One reason why the local churches cannot be completely autonomous, is that the teachings of the Church --- that is to say, not opinions of this or that cleric, this or that theologian, but the officiai doctrines -- are authoritative; if they were not, Christ would not have told us to resolve conflicts among the brothers by listening to the Church.
The tagline is a quote from Jesus: Matthew 18:17
If the Catholic Church is not the name of the Church founded by Jesus and inspired by the Holy Spirit for over 2000 years (despite numerous heresies and schisms) until the end of times when Jesus returns, What is the name of your church that meets the standards of the church founded by Jesus Christ?
Oooops! I don't think so! More eisegesis.
Actually, Simon bar Jona had a duisturbing character feature that led him to consistently exercise his impenitent desire to exercise ambitious domineering influence even over the Master Himself (Mt. 16:21-23); even until a few hours prior to the Cross (Lk. 22:24,26).
Even once more, almost immediately after Jesus had restored Peter to his place amongst the Eleven then ascended, again when Peter was asked to simply wait not many days for the promise of The Father (the Incarnate Christ being absent, and the Holy Spirit not yet having arrived), in Their absence Peter impatiently, and without any spiritual guidance, attempted to insert himself as pro tem leader, stirring up the brethren by misinterpreting Scripture as an excuse to take command and get another Apostle appointed, not having a God-given command of any kind to select one.
No, I don't think any supra-local-assembly permanent episcopacy was ordered up by The Christ. And certainly not with Peter as its preeminent leader.
Many independent autonomous assembies of Christians, whose polity is government ny a plurality of non-sacerdotal spiritually mature elders and congregationally-selected overseers, are doing just fine without any mediators between themselves and The Father but The Man, Christ Jesus. Their worship is conducted without artful liturgy, fancy robes, or fixed formalized words repeated over and over by rote, but only in the breaking of break in the Remembrance Supper as desired and ordained in that Upper Room by the Lord Himself.
Simple and humble, my FRiend, and meek toward The God.
“As St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict taught, we are not a “religion of the book.”
Trotting put a straw man argument, are you?
God’s people are HIS, treasuring HIS eternal truth.
HIS Word contains all necessary for salvation, assurance and instruction in godliness.
HIS Word is the ultimate authority, since God speaks with authority.
Unfortunately, every church and every man gets things wrong in every age - and this is especially true of Rome.
The word of God contains everything we need to be complete in Him.
Extra Biblical revelations is not needed.
If it agrees with Scripture, it's redundant and not needed.
If it dies agrees with Scripture, then it's wrong and gets tossed.
The assertion "we are not a religion of the book" seems to me to be saying their domination over ALL of Christendom must be conceded and obeyed but when asked to prove this is God's will they find a need to at least try to substantiate the claim by appealing to the book (the Holy Bible). Quite circular reasoning for an organization that boasts it "gave" the world the Bible! Even Jesus Christ used the Scriptures to authenticate His authority.
Kinda like that Call no man father thing; right??
1After this the Lord appointed seventy-two[a] others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go. 2 He told them, “The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field. 3 Go! I am sending you out like lambs among wolves. 4 Do not take a purse or bag or sandals; and do not greet anyone on the road.
5 “When you enter a house, first say, ‘Peace to this house.’ 6 If someone who promotes peace is there, your peace will rest on them; if not, it will return to you. 7 Stay there, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house.
8 “When you enter a town and are welcomed, eat what is offered to you. 9 Heal the sick who are there and tell them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’ 10 But when you enter a town and are not welcomed, go into its streets and say, 11 ‘Even the dust of your town we wipe from our feet as a warning to you. Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God has come near.’ 12 I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for that town.
13 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. 14 But it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment than for you. 15 And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted to the heavens? No, you will go down to Hades.[b]
16 “Whoever listens to you listens to me; whoever rejects you rejects me; but whoever rejects me rejects him who sent me.”
17 The seventy-two returned with joy and said, “Lord, even the demons submit to us in your name.”
What were you trying to insert into this verse? Something about a church??
Jesus said of His Church: “Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.” Luke 10:16
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.