PacMan in quotes
<<<It depends if you believe the calling includes the conveyance. You seem to believe that the means of transfer is irrelevant (this presents a tremendous slippery slope to stop fabricated callings, FYI). I think that because the many narratives actually speak to the process, it’s not a mere formality or nominal. I think it’s an integral part of the process. I have numerous examples that point that way, and you dismiss them. That’s all you have going. So be it.>>>
There is a difference between being called and chose—and chosen and ordained. -
Matthew 22: 14 For many are called, but few are chosen.
John 15: 16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit
God is in control of the Church, and can call the shots using the Holy Ghost.
Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
<<<The dove spirit ordained him? Considering the text says nothing of the sort, I reject it.>>>
Here are the Old Testament steps that form a motif for covenant making—a person’s covenant is sealed when the Holy Ghost and makes it sealed.
1-A man is called by God Exodus (4:27)
2-The man undergoes an ordinance
3-The man becomes a son of God in an adoption covenant and is sealed ( even as a priest) by having the Holy Ghost come upon him.
Ne 10:1 Now those that sealed were, Nehemiah, the Tirshatha, the son of Hachaliah, and Zidkijah,
The New Testament version of this is—
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Jesus in the New Testament was Called by God and had the Holy Ghost (Acts 10:38) This followed a similar motif for sealing.
Jesus followed the steps that an Old Testament Priest did in getting ordained. He got called, received and ordinance(baptized), and then the Holy Ghost came on Him. But He did not have hands laid on Him to get the Holy Ghost which sealed Him as a priest unto God. Likewise the Christian is sealed by the Holy Ghost.
Joh 6:27 Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.
2Co 1:22 Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.
Eph 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.
The Dove was the Spirit coming upon Jesus after the ordination of the Father. The voice of the Father was heard saying ‘This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased…” This voice message from the Father declares that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. This is consistent with what follows Hebrews 5:4 in the fifth verse that says
Hebrews 5: 5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.
When governments were based on monarchy and inheritance, a first born son typically represents his father and has his father’s authority. To the ancients in a culture of partriarchs, becoming a ‘son’ was a great honor, and came with considerable social authority in a clan and tribe. The son of a king had even greater honor in a nation with social and legal authority. To become a Son of God would mean one would have even a larger scope of authority. A son of God will inherit a thrown.
For a Christian to be called ‘a king’, would mean that they would become kings by becoming sons of God, this is because God is the highest King. Being a Son of a King puts one in a position of authority.
<<<Remember, Acts 21:25 which is going to cause you some problems in other sphere anyway. But since you asked, I think the Father did. I see something so sacred as not putting into scripture. It didn’t need to be. To leverage any sort of argumentum ad ignorantium is not only irresponsible, but very presumptuous.
Now, what we DO know is that your interpretation is just that – an interpretation. Nothing in the text itself suggest that you arenecessarily right. Clearly, you must accept that as obvious. The critical question that all this poses, is why in the world would god leave such an important part of his gospel (authority) to the interpretation of men? I think my position is more tenable. But even disagreeing that point, I at least don’t rely on the scholastic understanding of men. I believe in prophets and apostles today whom have made it clear (not to mention the gift the spirit to confirm such a teaching – but that’s not measurable which leads to the slippery slope). Where’s your “safety valve.”
Guaranteed – if you don’t have such a safety valve, there’s no way under the sun that I’m touching your doctrinal boat. Faith does not require foolishness.
P.S. I didn’t see how Jesus’s fulfillment of righteousness was relevant to anything. There’s no disagreement there. >>>
Considering you last comment, I find it odd that you have not provided any evidence of where Jesus or his Apostles were anointed into the Priesthood like Aaron, since you are saying that being called of Aaron must include the same rites and ordinances that Aaron received when becoming honored as a Priest. And on top of this there is nothing in the New Testament showing a motif exists for the requirement of Laying on of Hands for the Priesthood. Instead there appears to be a pattern of events that show that Authority from God in the New Testament comes directly from God, with NO Laying on of Hand, and NO anointing of oil required. The Old Testament practices seems to be a teaching tool pointing to the idea that what is critical in the life of the believer is not ordinances for authority, but rather the kind of authority that comes from inspiration that comes direct from God.
I have briefly presented to you my perspective that the ordination of Levites into the Hebrew Priesthood was full of symbolic types of a fulfilled dispensation when believers would be ordained directly by God, and anointed by the Holy Ghost. As I discussed, The anointing of Kings and Priests with sacred oils represented the invocation of the Holy Ghost. The Priest and King processes of ordination with the anointing and Laying on of Hands all pointed to the critical event of having that leader ordained getting the power of the Holy Ghost.
Jesus The Christ was given the title of “The Anointed One”, yet was not given a priests anointing, but rather anointed from above directly by God with the Holy Ghost. This leads to the strong inference that Christians also can get the same anointing in the same way as Christ. And case histories in the New Testament
So why are not all LDS people anointed with oil along with the laying on of Hands as a requirement to receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost? There are many dimensions to all of these Hebrew rites—and protocols that surely are are being completely neglected in the LDS ordinances if your Hebrews 5:4 claims were to be followed through as you insist.
In the real world, Evangelical Christians fit into a role that parallels that of priests of the Old Testament in Three main areas
Evangelicals often find themselves in these roles as the Holy Ghost prompts them, situating the Christian in these priestly activities. This is evidence that Evangelicals are truly the priests to God that Peter mentions in the New Testament whose authority and abilities come from Inspiration.
The Three areas of Christian authority by Inspiration made manifest are...
1. The Holy Ghost indwelling Christians to worship.
There were two major elements to the worship in the OT.
A-Sacrifices and offerings performed by priests who were helped by Levites.
B-Singing and praising God by choirs led by Levites. Cf. 1Chr.23:27-32.
In the NT as priests we offer spiritual sacrifices. I Pteter 2:5.
a Our bodies as living sacrifice Rom.12:l
b Our monitory offerings as sacrifice Phil.4:18;
c Our good works and sharing Heb. 13:16
d Fruits of our lips-sacrifices of praise Heb. 13:15.
e We also sing praises to God as individuals and as groups when ever and where ever possible (Eph. 5:18-20; I Cor.14:16).
2.The Holy Ghost Prompts Christians to be witnesses on an every day basis.
-OT Priests were custodians and teachers and preachers of the law as the following passages illustrate. Neh. 8:9; 2 Chr.15:3; Jer. 18:18; Eze.7:26; Note the following verses. Hos.4:6 & Mal.2:7. Preaching, teaching etc. are part of witnessing.
Evangelical Christians are big on witnessing. This is because the Holy Ghost prompts them to do so because it is the companion of the Christian. We see this very same kind of witnessing activity recorded in the New Testament.
Acts 1:8; Mk.3:14; I Pet.2:9, - Life style witnessing at home I Pet.3:1,2.
Eph. 4-6 is all about the life style of a believer.
-Warning every man Col.1:28, - Being a debtor Rom.1:14
-As far as I can Rom l:15, - Woe to me if I preach not I Cor. 9:l6
We are responsible for this generation. Their blood shall be required of us Eze.3:l8.
3. Warfare. Old Testament Priests were involved in Warfare and protecting the Nation of Israel.
Num. 10:8f; 31:6; Dt.20:2.
Evangelical Christian are often involved in warfare, -- Spiritual Warfare. Christians often feel prompted by the Sprit to stand against evil forces in our world.
In the New spiritual warfare is required of all believers.
-Srtive with me… Rom.15:30-32;
-That you may able to stand against the viles of the devil Eph.6:10-18;
Js. 4:7; I Pet.5:9;
Evangelicals bear the evidence by their fruit. They enjoy the companionship of the Holy Ghost, and are prompted to fill the roles of Priests to God.-The fruits created from fulfilling these roles suggest strongly that Evangelicals have Authority from God. Some Evangelical have received their gifts of the Spirit by the laying on of Hand by Elders in Evangelical Churches, other directly from God without the rite.
There is evidence that they have received their anointings from above, and that they are the Sons of God.
Edited by Hick Preacher, 27 November 2010 - 12:19 AM.