Wednesday afternoon: destructive storms

Started by Richard Johnson, August 19, 2009, 05:41:51 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

swbohler

Rev. Stoffregen,

I am not an apostle as Paul was.  I was not called immediately by Christ.  I have not seen His resurrected body.  I have not been taught directly by Him.  Do you claim these things for yourself?

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: Steverem on August 24, 2009, 11:26:08 AM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on August 24, 2009, 11:20:45 AM
Quote from: Steverem on August 24, 2009, 11:04:45 AM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on August 24, 2009, 10:53:52 AM
Quote from: Steverem on August 24, 2009, 10:43:56 AM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on August 24, 2009, 10:30:09 AM
The passage from Romans 14 sounds like respecting the bound conscience of the other. We could very easily change esteeming a day or not and eating or not with supporting committed homosexual relationships or not.

That might be the single most inane thing I've ever heard you argue, Brian--and that is saying a lot.  We could just as easily change "esteeming a day or not" with "having sexual relations with farm animals" or any number of other perversions--but that wouldn't make any sense, because that's not what Paul is talking about.  And, as is made clear in the start of that same letter to the Romans, Paul would never have made such an assertion, and would've found your argument ridiculous (not to mention offensive).

This is why many here argue you don't take the Bible seriously--you are taking a clear statement, and adding to it an agenda that was never intended.  It is a bastardization of Scripture, and it is offensive.
Relations with farm animals is not what the ELCA is talking about either with its reference to "bound conscience" -- yet some keep bringing that in. Forgetting about that added agenda, do you agree or not with my statement that Christians felt free to change some of God's laws?

Not my point.  Taking Paul's comment about "esteeming a day or not" and saying that you could easily change that to "supporting committed relationships" is inherently stupid.  You could change it to just about anything, but that's not what Paul was talking about.  You are taking a very specific reference, and extending it to practices clearly not intended by the very author you are quoting.  In fact, he explicitly speaks against such practices in the very letter you are citing.  Not only is it a bad exegetical argument, it's a bad legal one, and would be laughed out of court.
Didn't you read that I said to forget about that added issue. When Paul talks about days and eating, is he changing some of God's laws?

Paul was given a directive from God in a vision on such matters.  Do you want to describe to us your "rooftop experience" where God explicitly told you he wanted you to change the 2,000 year-old teaching of the Church catholic and to "re-imagine" the words of Paul and countless others?
I think you have Paul mixed up with Peter. It took three visions before Peter was partly convinced to go to a Gentile's house.
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: swbohler on August 24, 2009, 12:30:37 PM
Rev. Stoffregen,

I am not an apostle as Paul was.  I was not called immediately by Christ.  I have not seen His resurrected body.  I have not been taught directly by Him.  Do you claim these things for yourself?
I believe that we all have been sent with a message. According to Luther's explanation of the third article, we have all been called by the Holy Spirit to faith. Paul said that he saw a flash of light -- not a body. There have been moments when I was certain that I was in the presence of Christ -- and I know I am when we gather in his name and when we receive the sacrament. I have been taught directly by Christ -- his words are recorded i the gospels.
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

Steverem

Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on August 24, 2009, 01:38:21 PM

I think you have Paul mixed up with Peter. It took three visions before Peter was partly convinced to go to a Gentile's house.

Mea culpa.  Yes, of course I meant Peter.

Mike Bennett

Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on August 24, 2009, 01:40:59 PM
Quote from: swbohler on August 24, 2009, 12:30:37 PM
Rev. Stoffregen,

I am not an apostle as Paul was.  I was not called immediately by Christ.  I have not seen His resurrected body.  I have not been taught directly by Him.  Do you claim these things for yourself?
I believe that we all have been sent with a message. According to Luther's explanation of the third article, we have all been called by the Holy Spirit to faith. Paul said that he saw a flash of light -- not a body. There have been moments when I was certain that I was in the presence of Christ -- and I know I am when we gather in his name and when we receive the sacrament. I have been taught directly by Christ -- his words are recorded i the gospels.

This thread has taken an amazingly weird turn - Brian now denying St Paul's apostleship, which is clearly and adamantly claimed by St Paul and recognized by the Church for 2000 years.   Or, if we won't buy that, saying that he's just as much an apostle as St Paul. 

Mike Bennett
"What peace can there be, so long as the many whoredoms and sorceries of your mother Jezebel continue?"  2 Kings 9:22

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: Mike_Bennett on August 24, 2009, 01:48:39 PM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on August 24, 2009, 01:40:59 PM
Quote from: swbohler on August 24, 2009, 12:30:37 PM
Rev. Stoffregen,

I am not an apostle as Paul was.  I was not called immediately by Christ.  I have not seen His resurrected body.  I have not been taught directly by Him.  Do you claim these things for yourself?
I believe that we all have been sent with a message. According to Luther's explanation of the third article, we have all been called by the Holy Spirit to faith. Paul said that he saw a flash of light -- not a body. There have been moments when I was certain that I was in the presence of Christ -- and I know I am when we gather in his name and when we receive the sacrament. I have been taught directly by Christ -- his words are recorded i the gospels.

This thread has taken an amazingly weird turn - Brian now denying St Paul's apostleship, which is clearly and adamantly claimed by St Paul and recognized by the Church for 2000 years.   Or, if we won't buy that, saying that he's just as much an apostle as St Paul. 
Not once have I denied Paul's apostleship. The word apostle is used in two ways in scriptures. Specifically, it refers to the Twelve. Paul was not one of the Twelve. More generally, and the meaning of the Greek word, it is anyone sent with a message. Paul uses it of Epaphrotitus in Philippians 2:35 (translated "messenger" in NRSV). Both Paul and Barnabas are called "apostles" in Acts 14:14. I think that it is being used with its general meaning -- one sent with a message.

I've argued in sermon and newsletter articles that we have put too much emphasis on being "disciples" -- a word that means "learner" or "student" without emphasizing that we have also been commissioned by Jesus to be people who go out with a message -- the general meaning of the word "apostle".
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

hillwilliam

Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on August 24, 2009, 01:40:59 PM
Quote from: swbohler on August 24, 2009, 12:30:37 PM
Rev. Stoffregen,

I am not an apostle as Paul was.  I was not called immediately by Christ.  I have not seen His resurrected body.  I have not been taught directly by Him.  Do you claim these things for yourself?
I believe that we all have been sent with a message. According to Luther's explanation of the third article, we have all been called by the Holy Spirit to faith. Paul said that he saw a flash of light -- not a body. There have been moments when I was certain that I was in the presence of Christ -- and I know I am when we gather in his name and when we receive the sacrament. I have been taught directly by Christ -- his words are recorded i the gospels.

You said that the words recorded in the gospels were those of the writers of the gospels not Jesus? As usual you want it both ways. Did Christ really say that or was it just what the gospel writers wanted you to hear?

One of the many ways that the revisionists are leading many away from the faith of the OHCAC.

James Gustafson

#112
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on August 24, 2009, 02:03:26 PM
Quote from: Mike_Bennett on August 24, 2009, 01:48:39 PM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on August 24, 2009, 01:40:59 PM
Quote from: swbohler on August 24, 2009, 12:30:37 PM
Rev. Stoffregen,

I am not an apostle as Paul was.  I was not called immediately by Christ.  I have not seen His resurrected body.  I have not been taught directly by Him.  Do you claim these things for yourself?
I believe that we all have been sent with a message. According to Luther's explanation of the third article, we have all been called by the Holy Spirit to faith. Paul said that he saw a flash of light -- not a body. There have been moments when I was certain that I was in the presence of Christ -- and I know I am when we gather in his name and when we receive the sacrament. I have been taught directly by Christ -- his words are recorded i the gospels.

This thread has taken an amazingly weird turn - Brian now denying St Paul's apostleship, which is clearly and adamantly claimed by St Paul and recognized by the Church for 2000 years.   Or, if we won't buy that, saying that he's just as much an apostle as St Paul. 
Not once have I denied Paul's apostleship. The word apostle is used in two ways in scriptures. Specifically, it refers to the Twelve. Paul was not one of the Twelve. More generally, and the meaning of the Greek word, it is anyone sent with a message. Paul uses it of Epaphrotitus in Philippians 2:35 (translated "messenger" in NRSV). Both Paul and Barnabas are called "apostles" in Acts 14:14. I think that it is being used with its general meaning -- one sent with a message.

I've argued in sermon and newsletter articles that we have put too much emphasis on being "disciples" -- a word that means "learner" or "student" without emphasizing that we have also been commissioned by Jesus to be people who go out with a message -- the general meaning of the word "apostle".

General meaning of the word Apostle?  Are you really trying to claim equality with the age of the Apostles by calling yourself an Apostle?  The only general term for Apostle that I am aware of is to be one of Jesus' disciples whom Jesus had chosen and spoken to directly.  I don't think you get to redefine the age of the Apostles to include us, I believe the last Apostle was when the last eyewitness passed away, not when the last missionary is sent.  But the idea that we can think of ourselves as equals to the Apostles would go a long way towards explaining to me how it is that some of us think we get to redefine scripture to meet our expectations.

FatherWilliam57

#113
In fairness to Brian, perhaps it would be helpful to use a small English convention to clear up some of the confusion.  Most would agree there is a difference, in written English, between "catholic" (universal) and "Catholic" (Roman Christians).  St. Luke uses the term "Apostles" as a technical term to specifically reference the Twelve.  The term "apostles" itself literally means "one who is sent."  Paul was commissioned and sent, even though he wasn't named in Luke's Gospel (although he was named later in Acts).  I would hope that the pastors on this forum are apostles, sent by God, to preach and teach the Good News, and that all parishioners understand that their mission to "make disciples" in everyday life also includes them within the general meaning of that term.  (And please do not ask me to go back to the Hebrew term "sheliack," that is for someone else to tackle as my Hebrew is completely rusted out.
The Rev. William B. Henry, Jr.
Interim Pastor, St. Peter's Lutheran Church, Evans City, PA
"Put on the whole armor of God."

James Gustafson

I recognize the difference between Paul and the remaining 11 (or twelve with the replacement Matthias), however, Brian here directly compared his experience to the experience of Paul, so he specifically meant to compare his authority to the Apostolic age authority of Paul's, so I took him at his example.  They, on the other hand seem to have required a different requirement; "us—one of these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection" (Acts 1:-22)

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: hillwilliam on August 24, 2009, 02:12:56 PM
You said that the words recorded in the gospels were those of the writers of the gospels not Jesus? As usual you want it both ways. Did Christ really say that or was it just what the gospel writers wanted you to hear?
The writers of the gospels wrote down words of Jesus (sort of). It is usually thought that Jesus spoke in Aramaic or possibly Hebrew. His words in the New Testament are written in Greek. Some where in the retelling and writing of Jesus' words, they were translated from Aramaic to Greek. So, except for a few Aramaic words, like "Abba," what we have are translations of Jesus' words. In some cases they are very accurate translations of his words. In other cases they be more like a paraphrase of his words. Then, for most of us, we rely on an English translation of the Greek translation of Jesus' Aramaic words. While the quotes from Jesus may not be exactly his words, they express the meaning of his words. They are the words God wants us to hear.

I have no problems with saying, as I did last Sunday, "Jesus said:" and then read the lesson from John 6 from an English translation.
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

swbohler

Rev. Stoffregen,

For a world-renowned ELCA exegete and Bible scholar (as we hear here often), you surely seem to forget a lot of Scripture passages.  Yes, on the road to Damascus Paul sees a bright light and no direct reference is made to Paul seeing Jesus' body. But Paul DOES tell us that he did indeed see the resurrected Jesus (1 Corinthians 15:8, if you have forgotten where to find it).  Have you seen the resurrected Jesus?  Paul tells us that he received his teaching directly from Jesus, and not from any man (Galatians 1); can you say this too?  By the way, this Galatians claim is right after Paul calls himself "an apostle, not through men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him from the dead" -- not insignificant and totally destructive to your claim of being an apostle in the same sense as Paul, I should think.

Brian Stoffregen

#117
Quote from: James Gustafson on August 24, 2009, 03:11:06 PM
I recognize the difference between Paul and the remaining 11 (or twelve with the replacement Matthias), however, Brian here directly compared his experience to the experience of Paul, so he specifically meant to compare his authority to the Apostolic age authority of Paul's, so I took him at his example.  They, on the other hand seem to have required a different requirement; "us—one of these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection" (Acts 1:-22)
In Acts 1 they are using the specific definition of "apostle" = one of the Twelve. You only quoted one part of the requirement for replacing Judas among the Twelve. Acts 1:21-22a: "So one of the men who have accompanied us during al the time that the Lord went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us." Paul did not meet this requirement, yet he is called an "apostle". We have no record that Barnabas met these requirements, yet he is called an "apostle". The same is true of Epaphroditus. These men were not with Jesus from his baptism to his ascension, they did not witness the resurrection in the same way the eleven did. (Paul's encounter with the risen Jesus is quite different than the reports in the gospels.) Yet, they are called "apostles".

Why shouldn't people today compare their experiences to that of Paul's? If "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever" (Heb 13:8), it seems to me that we should expect to have the same experiences with Jesus as first century believers did -- and all other believers since then and into the future. I do not compare my authority with that of Paul's. I've said it before, I do not ever expect that my writings will ever be deemed authoritative by the church as Paul's are.
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

Brian Stoffregen

Quote from: swbohler on August 24, 2009, 03:21:38 PM
Yes, on the road to Damascus Paul sees a bright light and no direct reference is made to Paul seeing Jesus' body. But Paul DOES tell us that he did indeed see the resurrected Jesus (1 Corinthians 15:8, if you have forgotten where to find it).  Have you seen the resurrected Jesus?
Not in the way Paul did, but I have talked with church members who have seen a bright light which they are certain was the resurrected Jesus.

QuotePaul tells us that he received his teaching directly from Jesus, and not from any man (Galatians 1); can you say this too?
Yes, there have been many moments of sudden insights that I believe came directly from God. There have been times when the Spirit was speaking through me. (Many more times when I'm left struggling on my own.)

QuoteBy the way, this Galatians claim is right after Paul calls himself "an apostle, not through men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him from the dead" -- not insignificant and totally destructive to your claim of being an apostle in the same sense as Paul, I should think.
What do you think Paul means by calling himself "an apostle"?
I flunked retirement. Serving as a part-time interim in Ferndale, WA.

swbohler

Rev. Stoffregen,

You ask what I think Paul means when he calls himself an apostle.  Read Galatians: that'll answer your question pretty well, I should think.

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk