Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think that a huge part in understanding Scripture is that there has always been a speaking through the Scriptures to different types of people and that is dependent on time and season
I just don’t think that Peter was speaking to every individual as being called a priest
Mat 23:37**O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Mat 23:38**Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Mat 23:39**For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Weird how they're not even mentioned in the epistles. Nor are they mentioned in Acts, as Paul is traveling on his missionary journey. He is never said to perform a Mass.
I guess "weird" is a subjective thing. I'm sorry you find it weird, but many of us don't.
The term "mass" probably did not come about until the 6th or 7th century and is based on a Latin word (not Greek), so it would definitely not appear in the New Testament.
Since Christianity is the fulfillment of the Hebrew religion, the existence of a Priesthood has always been assumed and needed no exposition or explanation. The Old Testament provided enough of that.
Rather, the burden is on those who reject the Priesthood to explain where in Scripture or Tradition it has been abolished.
There was no priesthood separate from the people in the New Testament church. None was needed. The priesthood became obsolete when Jesus died on the cross.
The New Testament never uses the term priest to describe a pastor or elder in the church. There is no official priesthood in the New Testament church. All Christian’s are priests. The reason for this is very clear: Jesus Christ himself has become a permanent priest for us and the Old Testament priesthood is now obsolete. (Hebrews 7:23–25)
Christ is now the one and only high priest between us and God. He is our mediator. (1 Tim. 2:5).
I think that a huge part in understanding Scripture is that there has always been a speaking through the Scriptures to different types of people and that is dependent on time and season
I just don’t think that Peter was speaking to every individual as being called a priest
Mat 23:37**O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Mat 23:38**Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Mat 23:39**For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Actually, the 'we' is those to whom he is writing, who though they are Jews who have been displaced in the dispersion (1 Peter 1:1), they are also believers in Jesus Christ. And the context preceding 2:5 makes it pretty clear that Peter is saying that believers are also priests.
The universal priesthood of the believer is one of the distinctions between the dispensation of Israel and the dispensation of the church. In the dispensation of Israel only a male from the tribe of Levi could be a priest. But in the dispensation of the church every believer is a priest. The Gospels (you quoted Matthew) though written during the dispensation of the church are set during the dispensation of Israel. The Church-age didn't begin until 50 days after the resurrection of Jesus.
Well, I'm not going to argue the matter. You can look into it more if you want to.
There was no priesthood separate from the people in the New Testament church. None was needed. The priesthood became obsolete when Jesus died on the cross.
The New Testament never uses the term priest to describe a pastor or elder in the church. There is no official priesthood in the New Testament church. All Christian’s are priests. The reason for this is very clear: Jesus Christ himself has become a permanent priest for us and the Old Testament priesthood is now obsolete. (Hebrews 7:23–25)
Christ is now the one and only high priest between us and God. He is our mediator. (1 Tim. 2:5).
Which Church Fathers or theologians prior to Martin Luther do you use to support your belief?
I think that a huge part in understanding Scripture is that there has always been a speaking through the Scriptures to different types of people and that is dependent on time and season
I just don’t think that Peter was speaking to every individual as being called a priest
Mat 23:37**O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Mat 23:38**Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Mat 23:39**For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Peter doesn’t address his letter to elders, though I’m sure they would have been included. He is writing to the elect pilgrims. That would be Christians who had been scattered because of persecution.
1 Peter 1:1
1Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,
To the pilgrims of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 2 elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ:
Which Church Fathers or theologians prior to Martin Luther do you use to support your belief?
None. My beliefs are based on the Scriptures. I understand yours are based on Catholic tradition. We will have to agree to disagree. No sense in arguing about it. It’s a waste of both our times. I will continue to post Scriptures to you, but it’s up to you what you do with them.
I do, however, like to read the ante-Nicene fathers now and then. I find them interesting, but I recognize they did not write by inspiration the way the Apostles did. Who was the first church father to write about a priesthood separate from the universal priesthood of believers?
To the pilgrims of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 2elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ:
Peter is writing to Christians (the elect) who have been scattered through Asia Minor because of persecution.
"As for the 'universal priesthood', on which Protestantism relies in its denial of the special priesthood, it may be said that Catholics also believe in a universal priesthood; this, however, by no means excludes a special priesthood but rather presupposes its existence, since the two are related as the general and the particular, the abstract and the concrete, the figurative and the real. The ordinary Christian cannot be a priest in the strict sense, for he can offer, not a real sacrifice, but only the figurative sacrifice of prayer. For this reason the historical dogmatic development did not and could not follow the course it would have followed if in the primitive Church two opposing trains of thought (i.e. the universal versus the special priesthood) had contended for supremacy until one was vanquished. The history of dogma attests, on the contrary, that both ideas advanced harmoniously through the centuries, and have never disappeared from the Catholic mind. As a matter of fact the profound and beautiful idea of the universal priesthood may be traced from Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho 116), Irenæus, (Against Heresies IV.8.3.), and Origen ("De orat.", xxviii, 9; "In Levit.", hom. ix, 1), to Augustine (City of God XX.10) and Leo the Great (Sermo, iv, 1), and thence to St. Thomas (Summa, III, Q. lxxxii, a. 1) and the Roman Catechism. And yet all these writers recognized, along with the Sacrifice of the Mass, the special priesthood in the Church. The origin of the universal priesthood extends back, as is known, to St. Peter, who declares the faithful, in their character of Christians, 'a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices', and 'a chosen generation, a kingly priesthood' (1 Peter 2:5, 9). But the very text shows that the Apostle meant only a figurative priesthood, since the 'spiritual sacrifices' signify prayer and the term 'royal' (regale, basileion) could have had but a metaphorical sense for the Christians. The Gnostics, Montanists, and Catharists, who, in their attacks on the special priesthood, had misapplied the metaphor, were just as illogical as the Reformers, since the two ideas, real and figurative priesthood, are quite compatible. It is clear from the foregoing that the Catholic clergy alone are entitled to the designation 'priest', since they alone have a true and real sacrifice to offer, the Holy Mass." - from New Advent, Priesthood
You are right about the universal priesthood of believers. But I’m wondering who the first church Father was that wrote about a separate priesthood. Do you know?
There was no priesthood separate from the people in the New Testament church. None was needed. The priesthood became obsolete when Jesus died on the cross.
Could you explain where the Bible says this? Or is this just another one of your "facts" without evidence?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
