Tell me something, PGYanke, would you as such a would-be prophet try to elevate your credentials as a prophet if you were tempted to put together a resume'? Would you try to place your personal authority on par with God's voice & impulses & leadings?
Really?
Is there a reason you're making this about me?
Or would you simply go the humble way & recognize that you're simply a mouthpiece...a mere servant-agent who has about as much authority as the apostle Paul, who billed himself as both a prisoner and bond-servant (slave) of the Lord?
How he described himself depended on the point he was trying to make at the time. You have to look at these things in context. Here's something else he said: "I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel" (1 Cor. 4:14–15). In addition to prisoner and bond-servant, he also described himself as father to his children in faith.
See...this is the corner you've painted yourself into...
Ok... if you say so.
If a boss went on vacation -- and left detailed written instructions -- plus said he'd be "present" in other ways while gone...of course, there would be a derived authority with steward-managers in place while he was "gone"...
But bottom line...nothing these steward-managers could say -- no matter how much they might correctly point to their getting their derived authority from THE BOSS -- will contradict the ULTIMATE Boss' written directives. The written Word will always be the baseline of comparison.
Typically, when the boss leaves, he leaves directives and the instruction: "You're in charge until I get back." I agree that the written directives must not be contravened, however, sometimes the manager has to explain how best to interpret the boss's meaning in light of their responsibilities.
What? Don't we all agree that God spoke thru Paul? Didn't Paul give us a good chunk of the NT? Why would the Bereans need to have a baseline (the Old Testament) to check to see if what Paul said was so?
Because St Paul opened the Scriptures to them as Christ did for His Disciples on the road to Emmaus. What you miss here is that St Paul spoke new meaning into the old Scripture. They searched the Scripture to see if what he said was true. The Church does the same. She proclaims Christ and explains Scripture. We can go to Scripture to find the same truths when understood under her teaching just as the Bereans understood under St Paul's teaching. Those who challenge the Church on this point are as Bereans who read Scripture for themselves and come back to tell St Paul he's wrong in his interpretation.
We need to have a recognized "bottom-line" authority.
On that we can agree. You don't give a hint on your profile page of your denomination. Let's just say you are a Baptist... by what authority would a Presbyterian come to share their own interpretation with you? Outside of the Church, this authority doesn't exist and it has brought disunity, division and confusion. Certainly, this isn't what Christ prayed for us in John 17:21.
Oh, and Btw, as far as popes, alleged "heads" of the church, and the like, the last time I looked Paul in Ephesians & Colossians referenced JESUS CHRIST SOLA as the HEAD of the Church. And Jesus further said He would be with us ALWAYS (Matt. 28:20). And, finally, the OT process of speaking thru prophets was done away with because Jesus is our ever-Present, ever-living prophet...or do you just take some scissors like the Mormons do and virtually cut out Heb. 1:1-2 from your Bible?
Last I checked it wasn't Christ in the flesh visiting the Corinthians, Bereans and Thessalonians. It was the men appointed by Christ who came in His Name to preach, teach and baptize. By your argument, you invalidate the commission of the Apostles... if Christ is with each of us always and as an ever-living prophet, then the Apostles are superfluous. You expand the universe of the conversation too far. In Hebrews, you have the writer (assumed to be St Paul) explaining their priestly role in service to Christ. As he said elsewhere, some were given to be Apostles, some prophets, and some pastors and teachers. We all have our roles to play and they are not all the same with the same gifts.
You may have an earthly "daddy," but you only have one true Father [...do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven." Matt. 23:9...so stop setting up rival 'fathers' to the one]
Rebuttal here.
Stop promoting the nonsensical "competition" to Jesus Christ as THE LIVING REVELATION, as the HEAD of the CHURCH, and as the Living Mediator for the church. And stop belittling His Word as the bottom-line, baseline authoritative Word.
The Church isn't a rival for Christ, She is His Bride joined in the Marriage Feast of the Lamb which was Christ's Sacrifice on the Cross. We are bound by a family bond in the spirit of adoption in the New Covenant (Rom 8:15). We are the Body of Christ (1 Cor 12) carrying on His mission of salvation to all of the world. We do not compete with Christ, we submit to His Holy Will until He comes to take us home.
Nice catch! (Not copied and pasted, I hope ;-D )
Let's cut to the heart of Jesus' comments about authority and servant-leadership.
Did He not emphasize servant-leaders vs. institutional hierarchical ones?
As for authority, it's plain as day in His Word...Jesus said: 12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God. (John 1:12-13)
The word for "right" there in the Greek is exousia -- authority. (Our authority rests in receiving our "heir" status as children of God)
C'mon. Tell us. If you inherited your father's business, Did He absolutely NEED to give you some hierarchical status? Oh, sure, to a couple of sons he might give special roles in the family biz; but All receive the "authority" as heirs.
THAT is Jesus' plain words in John 1:12-13.
Last I checked it wasn't Christ in the flesh visiting the Corinthians, Bereans and Thessalonians. It was the men appointed by Christ who came in His Name to preach, teach and baptize.
Hmmm...I guess you must stay out of the book of Revelation then, eh? (Who made the rounds to those seven churches? See Revelation 3)
See this is the basic problem of too much of that which calls itself a "Christ-based" church...
Too many people either want to reduce Jesus to...
...yesteryear (vs. Matt. 28:20..."lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the age.")
...or they want to reduce His omnipresence to only "the right Hand of God" -- almost making Jesus either a Deist-type of God or somebody who 100% delegates things...
They certainly aren't comfortable with a Jesus Christ who actually visits -- Himself -- local churches. (Hence, the ignorance or illiteracy of recognizing Revelation 3)
They certainly aren't comfortable with a Jesus Christ who still serves as THE LIVING PROPHET -- THE LIVING REVELATION. Hence, those folks either never quote Hebrews 1:1-2 -- or they outright militate against it. They certainly don't address the text directly in its plain language.
Hence, we see a constant "roller derby" approach to elbowing God/Jesus/Holy Spirit out of the way and substituting Him with men.
You & others are just like people prior to the time of King Saul. They looked around @ other tribes & wanted a flesh-and-blood king just like they had. God's reaction? 7 And the LORD told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. (1 Sam. 8:7)
Israel dethroned God as their king; elevating Saul instead. The same thing is true today with those who would make mere men as their "heads" of churches; as their "fathers"; as their "prophets"; etc.
Ironically, we'll probably wind up in this conversation actually citing the same Biblical verses -- but approaching it from distinct emphases...The two verses I am thinking of are:
15 The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments, 16 for, “Who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ. (1 Cor. 2:15-16)
27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him. (1 John 2:27)
IOW, you seem to emphasize that God can do "end runs" about Scripture to teach man; and these men are indeed our teachers to others. Well, of course He can. Who are we as humans to tell a Sovereign God what He can or can't do? But the evidence is on your end to prove that He actually/regularly does these "end runs" around His written word. My "take" is that when Jesus and the Holy Spirit speaks to us, it's the same basic stuff you find as part of the "whole counsel of God" in the written word that Paul referenced (Acts 20:27).
The above just says we know the mind of Christ. The apostle Paul indeed talks about the Holy Spirit illuminating our minds. And John emphasized how the Holy Spirit gives us an anointing that teaches us -- to the extent that some of us don't even need human teachers per 1 John 2:27.
The distinction in emphasis seems to me: You keep wanting to place the focus on what men do or say @ the behest of God. I keep placing the focus on how Jesus and the Holy Spirit says/does directly to men -- and that He hasn't 100% delegated either speaking to men ... or through men.
Do you see my point? You want to seemingly glorify the outward temple of flesh and blood, His Church; I say that the "glory" of that temple -- and indeed a glory is there & real -- is WHO the Indweller is...the Holy Spirit (see 2 Cor. 3).