10 FACTS about the Council of Jerusalem

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

amadeus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2008
23,234
33,177
113
81
Oklahoma
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Folks:

I'd like to pull this all together and talk about my point I am trying to make. I suspect everyone will be angered and disagree. But hey... So be it.
My sincere apologies for continuing or extending the derailment of your thread.

There is absolutely no reason to suspect the Church is not a spiritual entity. The Body of Christ AKA the bride is made up of many members. Not those of one denomination or non denominational Church. It depends on who is speaking the truth.
And God is always speaking the truth, so anyone who is speaking what He is telling them is right there. Of course there are also those on the other side, the ones who speak lies as if they were the truth. I wish I could honestly say that I had never been guilty. Hopefully I have not been lately.

The Church is spiritual, yet there is a physical and earthly Church that is established. Jesus and Peter spoke of its govt structure but Paul really laid down the hierarchy.
There is an earthly part as well as a spiritual part. This is so for man himself. The earthly part is our responsibility as stewards, but it is not the most important part to God. Is it not so also with the church/Church? The church can have an important part in showing a person the Church. So both are important and there is an order according to God in both, but man often goes his own way in establishing order instead of seeking God's order in all of it.


So I respect the earthly Church anfd its government. And frankly... Historically speaking I don't habe too much problem with the structure of the Catholic Church. The framework for such a large entity is not wrong. I have a problem with such terms as "Pope". But its small beans.
I also would have little problem with the structure of the Catholic Church so along as they did not insist that others acknowledge it to be somehow superior simply because they say that is. If they were to say that God made it so and worked only to explain that in answer to the questions of interested people, I might even lose my little problem with it.

This is about the Council at Jerusalem. A careful reading of it proves many beliefs about it to be wrong. I have documented them and have not been satisfied with objections.
It seems that the primary objections to your original 6 [rather than 10] facts were Catholic objections, but unfortunately that was something you probably already expected. I read them over and found no problem with what you wrote, but I guess I don't have that particular kind of a bias. I am sure that I am biased in a way, but NOT in that way.

The Church is not greater than the doctrine of Christ. The earthly and spiritual Church MUST follow what was laid down by Jesus, Paul, Peter and John and the rest of the apostles.

Who had greater authority at the council? Well.. Who won? Peter was on Paul's side so Peter and Paul won. Peter was nothing more than an advocate for Paul during the council ao Paul really was the sole victor.

But it isn't about Paul. Never was... His doctrine won and his doctrine camw from Christ.

What I am concerned with iisthe belief that Paul couldn't do anyrhing unless the Church said he could. No... PAUL AT THE TIME WAS THE CHURCH! The Church never had authority over him.
Indeed, Paul had his own connection with God. It not the men in Jerusalem or any church group that inspired him to write what he wrote. It was God.
In short... Doctrine dictates the Church. The Church cannot dictate doctrine.
I would say rather that Jesus is the Head and he is only one who should be directing the rest of the Body.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pia

FHII

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2011
4,833
2,500
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
My sincere apologies for continuing or extending the derailment of your thread.
It happens... I've derailed threads too. I don't necessarily mind it as this isn't a peer reviewed journalistic type forum. Its a "discussion" forum. I also don't mind if folks want to stay on topic... This time I decided to.

Of course there are also those on the other side, the ones who speak lies as if they were the truth. I wish I could honestly say that I had never been guilty. Hopefully I have not been lately.

To me there is a difference in speaking lies and being in error. The latter is ignorance; the former is deception. Even in thread I was in error in believing Paul carried out the orders and delivered the verdict. He never did as I pointed out that Judas and Cilas did. While I didn't speak the truth, I was not purposely doing so. I suspect you aren't one to purposely deceive others.

It seems that the primary objections to your original 6 [rather than 10] facts were Catholic objections, but unfortunately that was something you probably already expected
I figured some of our resident Catholics wouldn't agree. But I also suspected many non Catholics wouldn't agree either.

Indeed, Paul had his own connection with God.
And I have a hard time understanding why people don't see that. I see it every time someone claims Paul needed confirmation or permission to preach. There was Ananias... But he was there to lift a curse. He never told Paul his mission, and if he did (which isn't mentioned) its because Jesus told Ananias what Paul's mission was.

What if the council said no? Everything about Paul's character tells me he would've kept on preaching the same message.

As I said... I beleve Paul wanted the Council's blessing... But he didn't need it.

I would say rather that Jesus is the Head and he is only one who should be directing the rest of the Body.
Absolutely! However he did give the directions through holy men.

Thanks for the kind words and encouragement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amadeus and pia

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
21,655
3,591
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
"God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged." Rom 3:4
So then disagree! Only God gives the increase!
Winning is not edifying when we only tear down and never build up. I do not post in order to win. If that were my purpose I would lose even if I won. If I lose and someone is edified, I give God the glory.
And the fact still remains that you only want to have a one-sided conversation - where YOU get to make false statements and you won't even discuss the possibility that you might be wrong.

Why, then, are you on a "discussion" board??
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
21,655
3,591
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
On and on you go. I will leave you with your answers which are no answers for anyone who is really hungry and thirsty for the kingdom and righteous of God. There really are more important things.

The Pharisees who opposed Jesus led the way that you lead and it has nothing to do with doctrine. What happened in the 15th century happened before when Jeroboam became king of the northern 10 tribes of Israel. It was wrong both times, but it did not have to be.

"The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun." Ecc 1:9
No, my Biblically-ignorant friend - the Pharisees weren't part of Christ's Church.
BIG difference . . .

the plain fact is that you throw around monikers like "Body of Christ" and "Church" - only, you don't have a clue what they are.
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
508
113
73
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
How could Paul not need the council's blessing when he was part of the council? Who said any of the apostles went to the council to get a blessing? Is that a verse somewhere?
Paul was not disconnected from the institutional church. His gospel was the same as the other apostles. It's another Calvinistic false dichotomy (Paul v.s. the other apostles) which is completely unbiblical.

Why the "us v.s. them" (non-Catholics v.s. Catholics) mentality? We have 2000 years of consistent development and you get squirmish when we correct errors? As if you don't?

Wounds to unity

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:
Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

Toward unity

820 "Christ bestowed unity on his Church from the beginning. This unity, we believe, subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time."277 Christ always gives his Church the gift of unity, but the Church must always pray and work to maintain, reinforce, and perfect the unity that Christ wills for her. This is why Jesus himself prayed at the hour of his Passion, and does not cease praying to his Father, for the unity of his disciples: "That they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be one in us, . . . so that the world may know that you have sent me."278 The desire to recover the unity of all Christians is a gift of Christ and a call of the Holy Spirit.279
Catechism of the Catholic Church
Catholicism is not formally anti-Protestant.
 
Last edited:

amadeus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2008
23,234
33,177
113
81
Oklahoma
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It happens... I've derailed threads too. I don't necessarily mind it as this isn't a peer reviewed journalistic type forum. Its a "discussion" forum. I also don't mind if folks want to stay on topic... This time I decided to.
I am glad to hear this. Some people get upset when someone derails their thread. I try not to do it, but sometimes circumstances and the Spirit of God dictate a tangent from the straight line is needed. Sometimes on the other hand people are hung up on one theme and insist on pressing it wherever they can squeeze it in...

To me there is a difference in speaking lies and being in error. The latter is ignorance; the former is deception. Even in thread I was in error in believing Paul carried out the orders and delivered the verdict. He never did as I pointed out that Judas and Cilas did. While I didn't speak the truth, I was not purposely doing so. I suspect you aren't one to purposely deceive others.
No, like you, in spite of what some here may say, I do not purposely mislead people and I do not purposely misstate things as in a lie. Then again when I have been error in my knowledge I have said things that later I came to realize were wrong. This last type of error may technically according to some be a lie but I hope I would always be slow to point it out to someone without good cause. What is good cause? I would say it is following the lead of the Holy Spirit. For example I disagree with my old pastor on a few points, but he now suffers from dementia and is under attack from others. My job is to support him. I will not needlessly try to correct him on every point without good reason. God will provide the good reason if it exists...

I figured some of our resident Catholics wouldn't agree. But I also suspected many non Catholics wouldn't agree either.
Some of the non-Catholics probably steered clear because of the heavy Catholic involvement.

And I have a hard time understanding why people don't see that. I see it every time someone claims Paul needed confirmation or permission to preach. There was Ananias... But he was there to lift a curse. He never told Paul his mission, and if he did (which isn't mentioned) its because Jesus told Ananias what Paul's mission was.
Just so! Paul was a "chosen vessel" to bear the Lord's name to the gentiles. His direction was to come from God as our direction comes from God. This doesn't exclude listening to others, but we must be able to walk with God alone much of the time. Even the best of brothers in the Lord can give us bad advice. We must recognize that and the way to do that is through the Holy Ghost... at least as I see it.
What if the council said no? Everything about Paul's character tells me he would've kept on preaching the same message.
Yes...
"For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance." Rom 11:29

As I said... I beleve Paul wanted the Council's blessing... But he didn't need it.
It was like my wife and I choosing to marry each other and wanting her aunt's blessing. Her aunt had been her primary care giver for several years, but she was a "----" and we both knew she would probably never give it and she did not to her dying day... it wasn't because did not give her the opportunity. We'll celebrate 46 years next month and we know we did the right thing in the eyes of God.

Absolutely! However he did give the directions through holy men.
Agreed!
Thanks for the kind words and encouragement.
Give God the glory!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FHII

amadeus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2008
23,234
33,177
113
81
Oklahoma
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
And the fact still remains that you only want to have a one-sided conversation - where YOU get to make false statements and you won't even discuss the possibility that you might be wrong.

Why, then, are you on a "discussion" board??
Everyone who still has an "old man" striving for the dominion at times wants to have a one-side conversation. This includes you as well as me. That is one reason you go to confession periodically, isn't it, because you have pursued something when you should not have?

I discuss the possibility of being wrong on a regularly basis with God and with other people even though that possibility may not be openly mentioned. It has been through other people in the past that I have been led to change what I believe even though they may never have realized it.

But... having a conversation with anyone until we both agree is an unlikely and/or unusual end result in any case. Pressing a person to continue in conversation with Him to make His point is not what Jesus did... and should not be what we do... as I see it. Quitting a conversation is NOT always the same as quitting God, is it?

People listened to Jesus because they saw something special in his words, but at least once they told Him to go away. He certainly did not dispute the issue but went on to other places and people.

I am on the discussion board to share and to receive, but it is still my choice when to share and what to receive and when to end a conversation. I am certainly not here to press a person when he wants to back away... whatever his reasons.
There is a time to speak and a time to remain silent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbyrd009

amadeus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2008
23,234
33,177
113
81
Oklahoma
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No, my Biblically-ignorant friend - the Pharisees weren't part of Christ's Church.
BIG difference . . .
You certainly missed my point.
the plain fact is that you throw around monikers like "Body of Christ" and "Church" - only, you don't have a clue what they are.
Well again we are in disagreement.
 

bbyrd009

Groper
Nov 30, 2016
33,943
12,082
113
Ute City, COLO
www.facebook.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States Minor Outlying Islands
But... having a conversation with anyone until we both agree is an unlikely and/or unusual end result in any case.
i've been studying this, turns out the def of "Euphrates" includes "divided," although that is hard to find, buried in the "phrates" part i guess. The gist seems to be that conversation reveals dividedness, although it is tempting to believe that it creates it; it also destroys it too.

The dichotomy is reflected upon in "answer a fool according to his folly," "don't answer a fool according to his folly" i guess
iow choose who you are having discussions with well, and see when you are not really having a discussion but rather being trampled upon, etc
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
21,655
3,591
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Everyone who still has an "old man" striving for the dominion at times wants to have a one-side conversation. This includes you as well as me. That is one reason you go to confession periodically, isn't it, because you have pursued something when you should not have?

I discuss the possibility of being wrong on a regularly basis with God and with other people even though that possibility may not be openly mentioned. It has been through other people in the past that I have been led to change what I believe even though they may never have realized it.

But... having a conversation with anyone until we both agree is an unlikely and/or unusual end result in any case. Pressing a person to continue in conversation with Him to make His point is not what Jesus did... and should not be what we do... as I see it. Quitting a conversation is NOT always the same as quitting God, is it?

People listened to Jesus because they saw something special in his words, but at least once they told Him to go away. He certainly did not dispute the issue but went on to other places and people.

I am on the discussion board to share and to receive, but it is still my choice when to share and what to receive and when to end a conversation. I am certainly not here to press a person when he wants to back away... whatever his reasons.
There is a time to speak and a time to remain silent.
And a time to run.
Got it.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
21,655
3,591
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You certainly missed my point.

Not at all.
YOU, like most anti-Catholics are always referring to us as "Pharisees" because it's easier than facing the truth of Scripture.
Well again we are in disagreement.
Yes, we are.
The difference is that I'm willing to have a discussion about it - and you're not.
 

amadeus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2008
23,234
33,177
113
81
Oklahoma
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
i've been studying this, turns out the def of "Euphrates" includes "divided," although that is hard to find, buried in the "phrates" part i guess. The gist seems to be that conversation reveals dividedness, although it is tempting to believe that it creates it; it also destroys it too.

The dichotomy is reflected upon in "answer a fool according to his folly," "don't answer a fool according to his folly" i guess
iow choose who you are having discussions with well, and see when you are not really having a discussion but rather being trampled upon, etc
I guess we all miss it at times according to that proverb. I certainly do.
 

bbyrd009

Groper
Nov 30, 2016
33,943
12,082
113
Ute City, COLO
www.facebook.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States Minor Outlying Islands
I guess we all miss it at times according to that proverb. I certainly do.
ha me too, we tend to be forgiving to a fault sometimes i guess, even if truth is nonetheless revealed anyway.
prolly another way to put those is "when you dance with the devil the devil don't change; the devil changes you"
 
  • Like
Reactions: amadeus

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
21,655
3,591
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Well go ahead and run then, but be different than Ahimaaz the son of Zadok and carry a proper message.
I wasn't talking about ME, Amadeus.
I was talking about YOU . . .
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
21,655
3,591
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Even when it's time to be silent?
It's never time to be silent at the beginning of a conversation.

Listen - YOU made a false claim.
I responded - then, you refused to respond.

That's running from a conversation . . .
 

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,779
113
53
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Ok....now I am pissed

Ha