Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

D&C 7 - The power and keys of ministry


Recommended Posts

Would someone clarify this section.

In a communication with Peter, the verses say "If I will that he tarry till 
I come, what is that to thee? For he desired of me that he might bring souls 
unto me, but thou desiredst that thou mightest speedily come unto me in my 
kingdom. I say unto thee, Peter, this was a good desire; but my beloved has 
desired that he might do more, or a greater work yet among men than what he 
has before done. Yea, he has undertaken a greater work; therefore I will 
make him as flaming fire and a ministering angel; he shall minister for those 
who shall be heirs of salvation who dwell on the earth. And I will make thee 
to minister for him and for thy brother James; and unto you three I will give 
this power and the keys of this ministry until I come
".

How would John be a minister to all the earth and Peter would be a minister 
for James and John?

What is "this power and the keys of this ministry" that these 3 have and is 
it different from the power and keys held by the First Presidency of the LDS 
church?

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, jonah747 said:

Would someone clarify this section.

In a communication with Peter, the verses say "If I will that he tarry till 
I come, what is that to thee? For he desired of me that he might bring souls 
unto me, but thou desiredst that thou mightest speedily come unto me in my 
kingdom. I say unto thee, Peter, this was a good desire; but my beloved has 
desired that he might do more, or a greater work yet among men than what he 
has before done. Yea, he has undertaken a greater work; therefore I will 
make him as flaming fire and a ministering angel; he shall minister for those 
who shall be heirs of salvation who dwell on the earth. And I will make thee 
to minister for him and for thy brother James; and unto you three I will give 
this power and the keys of this ministry until I come
".

How would John be a minister to all the earth and Peter would be a minister 
for James and John?

What is "this power and the keys of this ministry" that these 3 have and is 
it different from the power and keys held by the First Presidency of the LDS 
church?

This prophecy and commission was fulfilled when Peter — the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Meridian-Day Saints — and James and John conferred the Melchizedek Priesthood on Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdrey. It is by the conferral of this priesthood authority that Joseph and Oliver were duly authorized and empowered to establish and preside over the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

This prophecy and commission was fulfilled when Peter — the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Meridian-Day Saints — and James and John conferred the Melchizedek Priesthood on Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdrey. It is by the conferral of this priesthood authority that Joseph and Oliver were duly authorized and empowered to establish and preside over the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

I believe also that Peter's dispensational head keys (for lack of a better description) were given to Joseph as head of the last dispensation.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

I believe also that Peter's dispensational head keys (for lack of a better description) were given to Joseph as head of the last dispensation.

I’ll do some investigation on that point and get back to you.

Link to comment
On 3/14/2024 at 1:02 PM, teddyaware said:

This prophecy and commission was fulfilled when Peter — the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Meridian-Day Saints — and James and John conferred the Melchizedek Priesthood on Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdrey. It is by the conferral of this priesthood authority that Joseph and Oliver were duly authorized and empowered to establish and preside over the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

What is meant by the First Presidency having the "power and keys of the ministry" and how
is it similar to that of Peter, James, and John in their day?

Link to comment
On 3/14/2024 at 11:29 AM, ZealouslyStriving said:

I believe also that Peter's dispensational head keys (for lack of a better description) were given to Joseph as head of the last dispensation.

We might have to make a distinction between "being the head of a dispensation" and "being given the keys of the First Presidency".

Adam was the head of the first dispensation. He also has presiding authority over all successive dispensations (under the direction of Jesus).

Enoch probably was the head of his dispensation. As was Noah. Who was next? Was it Abraham? Did Moses? Or was Moses operating within the Abrahamic dispensation?

Jesus was head of the dispensation of the Meridian of Time ( thank you @teddyaware ). His authority came directly from God the Father (Elohim). He meekly submitted to baptism for formal membership in His own church by John the Baptist who was the forerunner or the Elias of the dispensation (preparing the way for the Messiah). Confirmation was done with the Sign of the Dove (affirmed by the Holy Ghost, a member of the Godhead).

What transpired on the Mount of Transfiguration? Were keys delegated? To Peter, James and John? Any to Jesus Himself?

I believe Joseph Smith was directly called to be the head of the dispensation of the Fullness of Times by Jesus. Peter, James and John came to  restore the Melchizedek Priesthood.

Next is the Millenial dispensation presided over by Jesus.

Question: did every dispensation have a forerunner or an Elias to prepare the way? I have read that Joseph Smith was the Elias to prepare the way for the Second Coming. Did the Adamic dispensation have a forerunner? It would be ironic if it was Lucifer that helped trigger the Fall.

Link to comment
On 3/16/2024 at 7:33 AM, jonah747 said:

What is meant by the First Presidency having the "power and keys of the ministry" and how
is it similar to that of Peter, James, and John in their day?

I think it's partially explained in Doctrine and Covenants 27, which is a revelation given to Joseph Smith in August 1830.  The section talks about the "keys" that were given, and in verses 12-14 it says: 

"And also with Peter, and James, and John, whom I have sent unto you, by whom I have ordained you and confirmed you to be apostles, and especial witnesses of my name, and bear the keys of your ministry and of the same things which I revealed unto them;  Unto whom I have committed the keys of my kingdom, and a dispensation of the gospel for the last times; and for the fulness of times, in the which I will gather together in one all things, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth;  And also with all those whom my Father hath given me out of the world."  (Doctrine and Covenants 27:12–14)

As for how that is similar to Peter, James, and John in their day, I'll quote part of a discussion I had on this message board with marineland, back on July 4, 2021:

"It’s evident from scripture that Peter was called as the chief apostle.  It was to him that Jesus gave the “keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 16:18-19), and Peter is the one who  received the vision of taking the gospel to the Gentiles (Acts 10, Acts 15:7), and Paul reported to Peter after his vision (Gal 1:18). 

"And it is also evident from scripture that Peter, James, and John had a special function in the New Testament church, similar to how we understand the First Presidency of the church today.  Peter, James, and John were singled out for many special privileges and blessings, such as witnessing the raising of the daughter of Jairus from the dead (Mark 5:37), witnessing the appearance of Moses and Elijah at the mount of transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9), and of the suffering of Christ in Gethsemane (Mark 14:32-33)."

Link to comment
On 3/17/2024 at 7:05 PM, InCognitus said:

"It’s evident from scripture that Peter was called as the chief apostle.  It was to him that Jesus gave the “keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 16:18-19), and Peter is the one who  received the vision of taking the gospel to the Gentiles (Acts 10, Acts 15:7), and Paul reported to Peter after his vision (Gal 1:18). 

Thank you.  By the way, you have a good memory if you can recall what you 
posted 3 years ago.

I have always understood Matthew 18:1-3,18 as showing Jesus gave the keys 
to all the disciples. Based on Galatians 2:8, I would say Paul did not regard 
Peter as his leader. It was Paul whom God had primarily chosen to bear the 
message to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15). He did not first report his vision
account to Peter. It was to all the apostles (Acts 9:27). It might have also
been to Ananias and to the other disciples in Damascus but the scripture
does not explicitly say that.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, jonah747 said:

I have always understood Matthew 18:1-3,18 as showing Jesus gave the keys 
to all the disciples.

Except the context shows that Jesus was talking directly to Peter for receiving the "keys":  "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.  And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."  (Matthew 16:18–19)

Then in the next verse he switches his speaking to all the disciples:  "Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ." (Matthew 16:20)

And Peter, holding the keys, could direct all the apostles in doing the binding and loosing.

6 hours ago, jonah747 said:

Based on Galatians 2:8, I would say Paul did not regard 
Peter as his leader.

I don't see anything in Galatians 2:8 that would indicate that Paul did not regard Peter as his leader.

6 hours ago, jonah747 said:

It was Paul whom God had primarily chosen to bear the 
message to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15). He did not first report his vision
account to Peter. It was to all the apostles (Acts 9:27).

Apparently "the apostles" in Acts 9:27 refers to Peter and James only.  Because Paul explicitly says that he didn't see any of the other apostles at that time except Peter and James, and he specifically went "to see Peter":

Galatians 1:14–20:

14 And profited in the Jews’ religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.
15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace,
16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:
 17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.
18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.
19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother.
20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.
 

Edited by InCognitus
Link to comment
On 3/19/2024 at 11:58 AM, InCognitus said:

Except the context shows that Jesus was talking directly to Peter for receiving the "keys":  "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.  And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."  (Matthew 16:18–19)

Yes. The conversation in Matthew 16 is to Peter.  The conversation in Matthew 18 is to the disciples.
The keys are the binding and the loosing.

On 3/19/2024 at 11:58 AM, InCognitus said:

I don't see anything in Galatians 2:8 that would indicate that Paul did not regard Peter as his leader.

By the same token, I don't see Paul or Peter elevated above each other or any other disciple
or apostle.

On 3/19/2024 at 11:58 AM, InCognitus said:

Apparently "the apostles" in Acts 9:27 refers to Peter and James only.  Because Paul explicitly says that he didn't see any of the other apostles at that time except Peter and James, and he specifically went "to see Peter":

Galatians 1:14–20:

Acts 9:27 and Galatians 1:14:20 may refer to different appearances.

"But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had
seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at
Damascus in the name of Jesus".

So I would say that, as a minimum, Acts 9:27 would include Barnabas (another apostle), Peter,
and James.

Galatians 1:14-20 mentions a visit to Peter but does not indicate the specifics of their meeting.
As I mentioned before, I suspect that Ananias and the other disciples in Damascus would have
heard about Paul's (Saul's) vision and conversion before any apostles in Jerusalem. I'm not sure
where Barnabas was when he heard Paul's account and before he brought him to Jerusalem.

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, jonah747 said:

Yes. The conversation in Matthew 16 is to Peter.  The conversation in Matthew 18 is to the disciples.
The keys are the binding and the loosing.

Actually, the "keys" are to authorize and "direct" the binding and loosing, which may be done by others.   

"What Are Priesthood Keys?;The keys of the priesthood are the rights of presidency, or the power God gives to man to govern and direct the kingdom of God on the earth (see Matthew 16:15–19). Priesthood keys are necessary to direct the preaching of the gospel and the administration of the ordinances of salvation and exaltation."

So the disciples being told to bind and loose in Matthew 18 doesn't prove they hold the keys for doing so, it just means they were directed and authorized to do so under the direction of someone who holds the keys.

17 minutes ago, jonah747 said:
On 3/19/2024 at 9:58 AM, InCognitus said:

I don't see anything in Galatians 2:8 that would indicate that Paul did not regard Peter as his leader.

By the same token, I don't see Paul or Peter elevated above each other or any other disciple
or apostle.

Then why did Paul report to Peter?

20 minutes ago, jonah747 said:

Acts 9:27 and Galatians 1:14:20 may refer to different appearances.

Paul makes it very clear he is talking about the very same event as Acts chapter 9 in Galatians 1:14-20, as he describes his vision (verse 16) and explains what he did immediately following.

24 minutes ago, jonah747 said:

"But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had
seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at
Damascus in the name of Jesus".

So I would say that, as a minimum, Acts 9:27 would include Barnabas (another apostle), Peter,
and James.

Barnabas wasn't made an apostle until the same time as Paul when they were ordained and set apart together (Acts 13:1-3).  And neither one of them is ever referred to as an apostle until Acts 14:14. 

Furthermore, Paul says in Galatians 1:19 that "other of the apostles saw [he] none, save James the Lord's brother".  So if you are saying Barnabas was also an apostle that he saw, then Paul is not telling the whole truth (and Paul says "I lie not" - verse 20).

So no, Barnabas couldn't have been included as an apostle in Acts 9.

27 minutes ago, jonah747 said:

Galatians 1:14-20 mentions a visit to Peter but does not indicate the specifics of their meeting.
As I mentioned before, I suspect that Ananias and the other disciples in Damascus would have
heard about Paul's (Saul's) vision and conversion before any apostles in Jerusalem. I'm not sure
where Barnabas was when he heard Paul's account and before he brought him to Jerusalem.

Galatians 1:14-20 isn't just a "visit" to Peter.  Paul specifically says, "I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter".   In other words, that was the determined purpose of his visit.  Paul was reporting to Peter.

Link to comment
On 3/21/2024 at 4:26 PM, InCognitus said:

So the disciples being told to bind and loose in Matthew 18 doesn't prove they hold the keys for doing so, it just means they were directed and authorized to do so under the direction of someone who holds the keys.

Under the direction of someone who holds the keys was Jesus. He was the one doing the giving
in Matthew 18.  If healing or casting out a demon from a possessed person are examples of this
binding and loosing, then women can perform this too under the authority of Christ.

On 3/21/2024 at 4:26 PM, InCognitus said:

Then why did Paul report to Peter?

I am not privy to why or what was the entire scope of the report.

On 3/21/2024 at 4:26 PM, InCognitus said:

Barnabas wasn't made an apostle until the same time as Paul when they were ordained and set apart together (Acts 13:1-3).  And neither one of them is ever referred to as an apostle until Acts 14:14. 

Furthermore, Paul says in Galatians 1:19 that "other of the apostles saw [he] none, save James the Lord's brother".  So if you are saying Barnabas was also an apostle that he saw, then Paul is not telling the whole truth (and Paul says "I lie not" - verse 20).

So no, Barnabas couldn't have been included as an apostle in Acts 9.

Made an apostle by whom?

On 3/21/2024 at 4:26 PM, InCognitus said:

Galatians 1:14-20 isn't just a "visit" to Peter.  Paul specifically says, "I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter".   In other words, that was the determined purpose of his visit.  Paul was reporting to Peter.

What was Paul reporting to Peter and to no one else before?

Link to comment
9 hours ago, jonah747 said:

Under the direction of someone who holds the keys was Jesus. He was the one doing the giving
in Matthew 18.  

Jesus was teaching them how to do things so they could minister in the church after his departure.  

9 hours ago, jonah747 said:

If healing or casting out a demon from a possessed person are examples of this
binding and loosing, then women can perform this too under the authority of Christ.

That's not an example of binding and loosing.  The context of Matthew 18:18 is for how to handle trespasses and church members who don't abide by the order of the church.  There is no place in the Bible where we have any examples of a person "binding" or "loosing" a demon with that language.  Even so, how exactly would the statement, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" pertain to a demon?   Would demons be "bound in heaven"?   I've heard of other Christian groups taking this phrase out of context and using it for other purposes.  It seems to be a popular thing to do these days.

As for women casting out demons, do you have a verse in the Bible showing where a woman did this?

9 hours ago, jonah747 said:

Made an apostle by whom?

The text doesn't provide that information.

9 hours ago, jonah747 said:

What was Paul reporting to Peter and to no one else before?

The text doesn't provide that information.  But what is more important is why Paul would include this information in his epistle to the Galatians.  Paul seems to be on the defensive in Galatians chapter 1, and he is explaining his authority.   Regarding these verses (Galatians 1:10-20), the Jerome Biblical Commentary explains:

“The Judaizers had apparently accused Paul of having derived his message not from Christ, but from other preachers, and of having watered it down for the Gentiles by eliminating the obligation of circumcision.  His reply is to reaffirm the divine origin of his apostolic commission and to explain his relations with the mother church of Jerusalem.”  (The Jerome Biblical Commentary, ed. Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland E. Murphy, 1968, p. 2:238)

Apparently Paul going to Peter was important to him explaining his understanding of the gospel (which he received "by the revelation of Jesus Christ") and his authority as an apostle.

Link to comment
On 3/23/2024 at 8:10 PM, InCognitus said:

That's not an example of binding and loosing.  The context of Matthew 18:18 is for how to handle trespasses and church members who don't abide by the order of the church.

Does an LDS bishop of a local ward able to handle this on his own authority or would he need authority
granted to him by one of the 15 apostles?

On 3/23/2024 at 8:10 PM, InCognitus said:

There is no place in the Bible where we have any examples of a person "binding" or "loosing" a demon with that language.  Even so, how exactly would the statement, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" pertain to a demon?   Would demons be "bound in heaven"?   I've heard of other Christian groups taking this phrase out of context and using it for other purposes.  It seems to be a popular thing to do these days.

As for women casting out demons, do you have a verse in the Bible showing where a woman did this?

I don't know how it would apply to a demon and I don't have an example of a woman
casting out a demon in the Bible. While I don't advise going out of our way to search
for demons, I see that this ability is given to believers, but prayer is very important
(Mark 9:29)

"And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; 
they shall speak with new tongues
" (Mark 16:17).

On 3/23/2024 at 8:10 PM, InCognitus said:

The text doesn't provide that information.  But what is more important is why Paul would include this information in his epistle to the Galatians.  Paul seems to be on the defensive in Galatians chapter 1, and he is explaining his authority.   Regarding these verses (Galatians 1:10-20), the Jerome Biblical Commentary explains:

“The Judaizers had apparently accused Paul of having derived his message not from Christ, but from other preachers, and of having watered it down for the Gentiles by eliminating the obligation of circumcision.  His reply is to reaffirm the divine origin of his apostolic commission and to explain his relations with the mother church of Jerusalem.”  (The Jerome Biblical Commentary, ed. Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland E. Murphy, 1968, p. 2:238)

Apparently Paul going to Peter was important to him explaining his understanding of the gospel (which he received "by the revelation of Jesus Christ") and his authority as an apostle.

I can't speculate why Paul went to see Peter.  Maybe a Catholic would say he went to
kiss the ring.

Who ordained Paul and Barnabas to the apostleship?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, jonah747 said:

Does an LDS bishop of a local ward able to handle this on his own authority or would he need authority
granted to him by one of the 15 apostles?

A bishop is given priesthood keys as part of his calling.  Those keys are bestowed upon him by those in authority to do so, as directed by the one who holds all the keys (the prophet).

1 hour ago, jonah747 said:

I don't know how it would apply to a demon and I don't have an example of a woman
casting out a demon in the Bible.

Then why did you bring it up?  And why do some Christian groups assume they can do this today?

1 hour ago, jonah747 said:

While I don't advise going out of our way to search
for demons, I see that this ability is given to believers, but prayer is very important
(Mark 9:29)

"And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; 
they shall speak with new tongues
" (Mark 16:17).

In the context of that verse it also says "They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them" (Mark 16:18).  One of those specific things happened to the apostle Paul (Acts 28:3-6).  I've heard of snake handling Christians too (and some of them aren't very good at it because some have died:   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_handling_in_Christianity).

Do you think all of those things apply to all believers, or does this mean that when special circumstances arise (like with the apostle Paul) they will be protected?  If the latter, then certainly it isn't expected that ALL believers would be casting out devils, and this certainly wouldn't be proof that anyone could do it.

1 hour ago, jonah747 said:

I can't speculate why Paul went to see Peter.  Maybe a Catholic would say he went to
kiss the ring.

But you do see that Paul had a good reason for mentioning that he went to "see Peter".  It was to establish his authority as an apostle.

1 hour ago, jonah747 said:

Who ordained Paul and Barnabas to the apostleship?

Now you really sound like theplains (and the other users associated with him), because he likes to ask the same questions, and over and over again, even after they have already been answered. 

I answered this in my last response.  "The text doesn't provide that information".

Edited by InCognitus
Link to comment
On 3/25/2024 at 2:11 PM, InCognitus said:

Then why did you bring it up?  And why do some Christian groups assume they can do this today?

I was just indicating that Christ, in Mark 16:17 gave that as a sign, which I believe can apply to
both men and women having authority to cast out devils.  I am not aware of Christian groups
who claim they do this today. But I have heard of it in Catholicism.

On 3/25/2024 at 2:11 PM, InCognitus said:

In the context of that verse it also says "They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them" (Mark 16:18).  One of those specific things happened to the apostle Paul (Acts 28:3-6).  I've heard of snake handling Christians too (and some of them aren't very good at it because some have died:   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_handling_in_Christianity).

Do you think all of those things apply to all believers, or does this mean that when special circumstances arise (like with the apostle Paul) they will be protected?  If the latter, then certainly it isn't expected that ALL believers would be casting out devils, and this certainly wouldn't be proof that anyone could do it.

I think this ability is there for all believers.  But that does not mean they were going out of their
way to search for opportunities to do so.  They are special circumstances as you said.

On 3/25/2024 at 2:11 PM, InCognitus said:

But you do see that Paul had a good reason for mentioning that he went to "see Peter".  It was to establish his authority as an apostle.

The text doesn't say if establishing authority was the reason he went.

The Lord said to Ananias, "Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my 
name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: For I will shew him 
how great things he must suffer for my name's sake
".

Ananias knew that Jesus had given Paul authority.

I don't know exactly all what the Lord said to Paul but I think it was something 
similar. Acts 9:27 gives us a little peek into it.

"But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how 
he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had 
preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus
".

So by the same token, Barnabas and the other apostles knew Christ had commissioned
Paul to preach the gospel. I view this as authority too.  There is no need for anyone
to say, "I approve, you are now authorized".

That is why I don't think Paul was seeking to establish his authority with Peter, James,
Barnabas, or the other disciples in Damascus or Jerusalem. He was only revealing details 
of his encounter. Paul was already preaching the gospel to the Jews in Damascus in 
Christ's authority (Acts 9:20-22).

There is an incident recorded in Luke's gospel.

"... And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; 
and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. And Jesus said unto him, Forbid 
him not: for he that is not against us is for us" (Luke 9:49-50).

This unknown person was performing these so-called exorcisms with Christ's authority.
He did not need to establish his authority by going to Peter, John, or the others.

On 3/25/2024 at 2:11 PM, InCognitus said:

Now you really sound like theplains (and the other users associated with him), because he likes to ask the same questions, and over and over again, even after they have already been answered. 

I answered this in my last response.  "The text doesn't provide that information".

With ChatGPT and other forms of AI, anyone can almost sound and look like anyone. As for asking
questions, it's almost impossible to ask questions that have not been asked before.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
On 3/27/2024 at 8:02 AM, jonah747 said:

I was just indicating that Christ, in Mark 16:17 gave that as a sign, which I believe can apply to
both men and women having authority to cast out devils.  I am not aware of Christian groups
who claim they do this today. But I have heard of it in Catholicism.

I realize you “believe” this, but scripture doesn’t directly support that view.  As for other Christian groups claiming they can do this, see the following web links:

Pro:
https://heavens-beauty.com/?page_id=2435

https://www.cornerstonemountainassembly.com/ministries/intercessory-prayer-friday-7-00-pm/pages/have-mercy-on-me-o-lord

https://jesuschristislordmdc.net/a_prayer_against_demons_of_incest__rape_and_petefilia__10_25_12

Con:

https://www.equip.org/articles/matthew-1818-binding-satan-prayer/

https://thewartburgwatch.com/2010/04/09/a-“bind”-a-day-keeps-satan-away/

https://theharborchurch.net/binding-and-rebuking-satan

https://www.gty.org/library/questions/QA150/does-the-bible-teach-that-christians-can-bind-satan-and-demons

https://www.brazospointe.com/pickspointe/2019/5/9/can-we-rebuke-or-bind-satan

As for whether one can simply call upon the name of Jesus and cast out devils, that certainly didn’t work for the seven sons of Sceva:

Acts 19:13-16, “Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth.  And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so.   And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?  And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded.”  (Acts 19:13–16)

On 3/27/2024 at 8:02 AM, jonah747 said:

I think this ability is there for all believers.  But that does not mean they were going out of their
way to search for opportunities to do so.  They are special circumstances as you said.

Obviously this ability doesn’t apply for all believers, or there wouldn’t be Christians dying from snake bites like the Wikipedia article showed.  There must be something more to it than simply believing you can do it.

On 3/27/2024 at 8:02 AM, jonah747 said:
On 3/25/2024 at 12:11 PM, InCognitus said:

But you do see that Paul had a good reason for mentioning that he went to "see Peter".  It was to establish his authority as an apostle.

The text doesn't say if establishing authority was the reason he went.

I didn’t say the text said that Paul went to Peter to establish authority.  I said that the Galatian church was obviously questioning Paul’s authority, and in his letter to the Galatians Paul included his visit to Peter in his defense as part of the way that he was establishing his authority.  Paul going to see Peter obviously meant something to Paul in that regard, or else why mention it in his defense against their distrust of his authority?

On 3/27/2024 at 8:02 AM, jonah747 said:

The Lord said to Ananias, "Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my 
name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: For I will shew him 
how great things he must suffer for my name's sake
".

Ananias knew that Jesus had given Paul authority.

Obviously, Ananias knew that Jesus had “chosen” Paul for that purpose, but being chosen is just the first step, because Paul hadn’t been ordained and given authority yet:

“Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.”  (John 15:16)

On 3/27/2024 at 8:02 AM, jonah747 said:

I don't know exactly all what the Lord said to Paul but I think it was something 
similar. Acts 9:27 gives us a little peek into it.

"But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how 
he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had 
preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus
".

So by the same token, Barnabas and the other apostles knew Christ had commissioned
Paul to preach the gospel. I view this as authority too.  There is no need for anyone
to say, "I approve, you are now authorized".

That is why I don't think Paul was seeking to establish his authority with Peter, James,
Barnabas, or the other disciples in Damascus or Jerusalem. He was only revealing details 
of his encounter. Paul was already preaching the gospel to the Jews in Damascus in 
Christ's authority (Acts 9:20-22).

There’s a big difference between people preaching boldly about their experience with coming to Christ and being specifically commissioned by Christ to preach the gospel.  Otherwise, why was Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas specifically called and set apart for that purpose in Acts 6:5-6?  And why were Paul and Barnabas set apart for that purpose in Acts 13:1-3?   Why was that even necessary if, as you believe, he already had that “authority”?

On 3/27/2024 at 8:02 AM, jonah747 said:

There is an incident recorded in Luke's gospel.

"... And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; 
and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. And Jesus said unto him, Forbid 
him not: for he that is not against us is for us" (Luke 9:49-50).

This unknown person was performing these so-called exorcisms with Christ's authority.
He did not need to establish his authority by going to Peter, John, or the others.

This has nothing to do with Paul’s defense of his authority to the people at Galatia.  Obviously Paul had his reasons for mentioning that he went to see Peter, and it had something to do with him establishing the fact that he was a true apostle of Jesus Christ.

On 3/27/2024 at 8:02 AM, jonah747 said:

With ChatGPT and other forms of AI, anyone can almost sound and look like anyone. As for asking
questions, it's almost impossible to ask questions that have not been asked before.

Asking questions that you have discussed in prior threads (using the same language) is just one of the tells.  But asking the same question over and over in the same thread after it has already been answered in the same thread is a greater tell.  For example, you asked:

On 3/23/2024 at 8:01 AM, jonah747 said:

Made an apostle by whom?

And I answered:

On 3/23/2024 at 6:10 PM, InCognitus said:

The text doesn't provide that information.

Then you asked the very same question again (ignoring my prior answer):

On 3/25/2024 at 10:42 AM, jonah747 said:

Who ordained Paul and Barnabas to the apostleship?

That’s a typical behavior of theplains, and one of the many reasons I know you are the same person (and there are other reasons).

Link to comment
On 4/7/2024 at 3:07 AM, InCognitus said:

As for whether one can simply call upon the name of Jesus and cast out devils, that certainly didn’t work for the seven sons of Sceva:

Acts 19:13-16, “Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth.  And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so.   And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?  And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded.”  (Acts 19:13–16)

Obviously this ability doesn’t apply for all believers, or there wouldn’t be Christians dying from snake bites like the Wikipedia article showed.  There must be something more to it than simply believing you can do it.

Faith, prayer, and calling upon Christ for help is important. Ultimately it is his will 
as to whether you will drive out the demon in the end or not. Not all have the ability 
as you mentioned but I don’t see Mark 16:17 excluding women.
 

On 4/7/2024 at 3:07 AM, InCognitus said:

I didn’t say the text said that Paul went to Peter to establish authority.  I said that the Galatian church was obviously questioning Paul’s authority, and in his letter to the Galatians Paul included his visit to Peter in his defense as part of the way that he was establishing his authority.  Paul going to see Peter obviously meant something to Paul in that regard, or else why mention it in his defense against their distrust of his authority?

Ok. So I think we agree that Peter did not authorize Paul.
 

On 4/7/2024 at 3:07 AM, InCognitus said:

Obviously, Ananias knew that Jesus had “chosen” Paul for that purpose, but being chosen is just the first step, because Paul hadn’t been ordained and given authority yet:

“Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.”  (John 15:16)

Paul had been ordained and authorized by Christ when he saw him on the road to Damascus. 
This is before his baptism. In a similar way, John the Baptist was called from the womb; 
baptized with the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:15).
 

On 4/7/2024 at 3:07 AM, InCognitus said:

There’s a big difference between people preaching boldly about their experience with coming to Christ and being specifically commissioned by Christ to preach the gospel.  Otherwise, why was Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas specifically called and set apart for that purpose in Acts 6:5-6?  And why were Paul and Barnabas set apart for that purpose in Acts 13:1-3?   Why was that even necessary if, as you believe, he already had that “authority”?

Acts 6:5-6 is about being set apart for assisting the widows. It was not about Stephen 
and the other six being commissioned to preach the gospel. It should also be noted the 
seven were not chosen by the Twelve.  They were chosen by a multitude of disciples and 
accepted by the Twelve. Did only the Twelve pray and lay their hands on the seven or 
did they all, with the multitude of disciples, participate in prayer and in the laying
on of hands?  I would say the latter.

This would not preclude the seven from also preaching.  Later we see others dispersed 
by persecution preaching the gospel as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch (Acts 11:19). 
There is no formal sending out or commissioning by Peter, James, or John.

In Acts 8:14, it is the apostles who send (commission) Peter and John to those in 
Samaria.

In Acts 13:1-3, Paul and Barnabas are commissioned by the Holy Ghost in Antioch to go 
to a specific area. There is no involvement by Peter, James, or John to ordain them or 
grant them authority or lay hands on them.  These are other prophets of God that the
Holy Ghost spoke to.

As a personal note, I do not have to be commissioned by any of my church leaders to 
boldly preach the gospel in my city’s downtown during the busiest time of day. Jesus 
has already given us the great commission.
 

On 4/7/2024 at 3:07 AM, InCognitus said:

This has nothing to do with Paul’s defense of his authority to the people at Galatia.  Obviously Paul had his reasons for mentioning that he went to see Peter, and it had something to do with him establishing the fact that he was a true apostle of Jesus Christ.

We don't know the reasons why, but there is nothing to indicate Paul sought ordination 
or authority from Peter.  I think it is more in line with Paul telling Peter what Christ
had revealed to him.  This is similar to Peter's visit and preaching to Cornelius and 
his household. Peter was not seeking authority from those he told (Acts 11:1-18).  He 
was just recounting what the Lord had told him.
 
"Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the 
Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?"

"When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then 
hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life".

 

On 4/7/2024 at 3:07 AM, InCognitus said:

That’s a typical behavior of theplains, and one of the many reasons I know you are the same person (and there are other reasons).

I hope you don't let that mistaken thought hurt our conversations.

Link to comment
On 4/9/2024 at 9:21 AM, jonah747 said:

Faith, prayer, and calling upon Christ for help is important. Ultimately it is his will 
as to whether you will drive out the demon in the end or not.

Of course it comes down to whether or not it is God's will or not, but in the situation with the seven sons of Sceva, it's obviously more than just that, because the demons didn't recognize their authority at all (i.e. "And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?")   It's as if the demons were saying, "who are you to command me?  You have no authority over me."  (Even though they were commanded in the name of Jesus).

On 4/9/2024 at 9:21 AM, jonah747 said:

Not all have the ability 
as you mentioned but I don’t see Mark 16:17 excluding women.

Given that the context of Mark 16:17 shows that those words were spoken to the eleven apostles (see verse 14), I don't see how you can make that assumption.  That's pure speculation.

On 4/9/2024 at 9:21 AM, jonah747 said:

Ok. So I think we agree that Peter did not authorize Paul.

Don't try to twist my words.  

Paul going to see Peter obviously meant something to Paul in trying to prove his authority to the Galatians, or otherwise he wouldn't have mentioned it in his defense regarding the validity of his apostleship,

On 4/9/2024 at 9:21 AM, jonah747 said:

Paul had been ordained and authorized by Christ when he saw him on the road to Damascus. 

Oh really?  Can you show me where the text says that Paul was ordained by Christ on the road to Damascus?

On 4/9/2024 at 9:21 AM, jonah747 said:

Acts 6:5-6 is about being set apart for assisting the widows. It was not about Stephen 
and the other six being commissioned to preach the gospel. It should also be noted the 
seven were not chosen by the Twelve.  They were chosen by a multitude of disciples and 
accepted by the Twelve. Did only the Twelve pray and lay their hands on the seven or 
did they all, with the multitude of disciples, participate in prayer and in the laying
on of hands?  I would say the latter.

This would not preclude the seven from also preaching.  Later we see others dispersed 
by persecution preaching the gospel as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch (Acts 11:19). 
There is no formal sending out or commissioning by Peter, James, or John.

In Acts 8:14, it is the apostles who send (commission) Peter and John to those in 
Samaria.

In Acts 13:1-3, Paul and Barnabas are commissioned by the Holy Ghost in Antioch to go 
to a specific area. There is no involvement by Peter, James, or John to ordain them or 
grant them authority or lay hands on them.  These are other prophets of God that the
Holy Ghost spoke to.

As a personal note, I do not have to be commissioned by any of my church leaders to 
boldly preach the gospel in my city’s downtown during the busiest time of day. Jesus 
has already given us the great commission.

None of this answers the question.  If the authority to do these things is simply assumed by a believer because they believe in Christ, why then were they ordained and set apart to do those very things they were called to do?  And where did the people who ordain them get their authority to call them and ordain them?  

On 4/9/2024 at 9:21 AM, jonah747 said:

We don't know the reasons why, but there is nothing to indicate Paul sought ordination 
or authority from Peter.  I think it is more in line with Paul telling Peter what Christ
had revealed to him.

But then why would Paul find it important to say he went to Peter to tell him of his experience, when Paul was trying to establish his authority as an apostle of Jesus Christ to the saints at Galatia?  How would conversing with Peter help his case?

On 4/9/2024 at 9:21 AM, jonah747 said:

I hope you don't let that mistaken thought hurt our conversations.

It doesn't hurt anything, and I'm not mistaken.  It helps me to know where you're coming from.

Link to comment
On 4/11/2024 at 1:21 PM, InCognitus said:

Given that the context of Mark 16:17 shows that those words were spoken to the eleven apostles (see verse 14), I don't see how you can make that assumption.  That's pure speculation.

Mark 16:17 says “And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall   
they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues”.

Which of these only applies to men?

Matthew 28:18-20 says “And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is 
given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, 
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am 
with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen”.

Which of these only applies to men?

In Luke 11, when Jesus is speaking to his disciples, he said "Ask and it will be 
given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For 
everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the 
door will be opened".

Are women excluded because they are not present?

Addressing his disciples in Matthew 18, Jesus said "And he said: “Truly I tell you, 
unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom 
of heaven. Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest 
in the kingdom of heaven. And whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me”
.

Is this teaching solely applicable to men given the absence of women in this setting?

On 4/11/2024 at 1:21 PM, InCognitus said:

Paul going to see Peter obviously meant something to Paul in trying to prove his authority to the Galatians, or otherwise he wouldn't have mentioned it in his defense regarding the validity of his apostleship,

He likely understood that Peter held a position of leadership, evident from his role 
as the primary speaker on the Day of Pentecost. This situation might bear resemblance 
to Joseph Smith recounting to his father his vision of seeing Heavenly Father and 
Jesus Christ in the sacred grove.

“The first thing that I can recollect was a voice speaking unto me, calling me by name. 
I looked up, and beheld the same messenger standing over my head, surrounded by light 
as before. He then again related unto me all that he had related to me the previous 
night, and commanded me to go to my father and tell him of the vision and commandments 
which I had received. I obeyed; I returned to my father in the field, and rehearsed 
the whole matter to him. He replied to me that it was of God, and told me to go and 
do as commanded by the messenger.

This situation brings to mind Muhammad and his role as the prophet of Islam. He 
initially doubted his encounter with a divine messenger until he was persuaded by 
his wife and uncle.

Muhammad's wife, uncle, and Joseph Smith's father lacked the spiritual qualification 
from God to confirm the vision.

On 4/11/2024 at 1:21 PM, InCognitus said:

Oh really?  Can you show me where the text says that Paul was ordained by Christ on the road to Damascus?

Acts 9:15-20 - “But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel 
unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: 
For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake. And Ananias 
went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother 
Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath 
sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. 
And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight 
forthwith, and arose, and was baptized. And when he had received meat, he was 
strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus. 
And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.

There is no authority required by Peter for Paul to preach.

On 4/11/2024 at 1:21 PM, InCognitus said:

None of this answers the question.  If the authority to do these things is simply assumed by a believer because they believe in Christ, why then were they ordained and set apart to do those very things they were called to do?  And where did the people who ordain them get their authority to call them and ordain them? 

I think the aspect of ordination applies primarily to individuals seeking a formal 
role within the church structure, such as serving as an elder or teacher. However, 
if my aim is solely to share the gospel with the urban population downtown, ordination 
is not necessary. What's crucial is remaining faithful to the teachings of the Word.

On 4/11/2024 at 1:21 PM, InCognitus said:

But then why would Paul find it important to say he went to Peter to tell him of his experience, when Paul was trying to establish his authority as an apostle of Jesus Christ to the saints at Galatia?  How would conversing with Peter help his case?

As previously stated or mentioned in an earlier post, there's no evidence suggesting 
Paul sought authority from Peter, James, or John. He had already begun preaching the 
gospel in Damascus following his conversion.

Link to comment
8 hours ago, jonah747 said:

Mark 16:17 says “And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall   
they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues”.

Which of these only applies to men?

Matthew 28:18-20 says “And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is 
given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, 
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am 
with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen”.

Which of these only applies to men?

In Luke 11, when Jesus is speaking to his disciples, he said "Ask and it will be 
given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For 
everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the 
door will be opened".

Are women excluded because they are not present?

Addressing his disciples in Matthew 18, Jesus said "And he said: “Truly I tell you, 
unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom 
of heaven. Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest 
in the kingdom of heaven. And whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me”
.

Is this teaching solely applicable to men given the absence of women in this setting?

There is a difference between Jesus talking to “disciples” in a generic sense, and the twelve disciples that he chose and ordained as apostles and gave them power.  All followers of Christ are disciples, but not all are chosen to be his apostles, and you shouldn’t confuse the two.  As it says in Matthew 10:

“And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease…..  These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”  (Matthew 10:1, 5-6)

The verses above don’t apply to all disciples, but only to the twelve that Jesus chose and ordained.  And it is dangerous to take verses out of context like you did, where you assume that the same authority applies to everyone, or you may end up just like the seven sons of Sceva thinking you have authority that the demons didn't recognize at all (i.e. "And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?")  

And it is quite clear that in both Mark 16:17 and Matthew 28:18-20, Jesus is only speaking to the “eleven” apostles:

“Afterward he appeared unto the eleven… And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world….”  (Mark 16:14-15)

“Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain… And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying… Go ye therefore, and teach all nations…”  (Matthew 28:16-19)

I’m not saying that Jesus couldn’t command others (including women) to do the same thing (I certainly believe he has at different times), but you can’t make that call just from reading those verses out of context.  

8 hours ago, jonah747 said:

He likely understood that Peter held a position of leadership, evident from his role 
as the primary speaker on the Day of Pentecost.

This still doesn’t explain why Paul thought it was important to say that he went to see Peter when he was trying to establish his authority to the saints at Galatia, some of which were accusing him of teaching a different gospel than Christ taught so that his message would appeal to the Gentiles. 

8 hours ago, jonah747 said:

This situation might bear resemblance 
to Joseph Smith recounting to his father his vision of seeing Heavenly Father and 
Jesus Christ in the sacred grove.

“The first thing that I can recollect was a voice speaking unto me, calling me by name. 
I looked up, and beheld the same messenger standing over my head, surrounded by light 
as before. He then again related unto me all that he had related to me the previous 
night, and commanded me to go to my father and tell him of the vision and commandments 
which I had received. I obeyed; I returned to my father in the field, and rehearsed 
the whole matter to him. He replied to me that it was of God, and told me to go and 
do as commanded by the messenger.

This situation brings to mind Muhammad and his role as the prophet of Islam. He 
initially doubted his encounter with a divine messenger until he was persuaded by 
his wife and uncle.

Muhammad's wife, uncle, and Joseph Smith's father lacked the spiritual qualification 
from God to confirm the vision.

You post offhand and offtrack red-herring comments like the above, and you wonder how it is that I know you are the same person as theplains, marineland, TheTanakas, and telenetd.  How could anyone ever question it?   The quote you posted is from Moroni’s fourth visit to Joseph Smith, not the first vision, by the way.

8 hours ago, jonah747 said:
On 4/11/2024 at 11:21 AM, InCognitus said:

Oh really?  Can you show me where the text says that Paul was ordained by Christ on the road to Damascus?

Acts 9:15-20 - “But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel 
unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: 
For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake. And Ananias 
went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother 
Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath 
sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. 
And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight 
forthwith, and arose, and was baptized. And when he had received meat, he was 
strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus. 
And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.

There’s no mention of ordination at all in the passage above.  Do you want to try again?  Ananias laying hands on Paul to heal him (by restoring his sight) is not an ordination. 

8 hours ago, jonah747 said:

There is no authority required by Peter for Paul to preach.

Again, there is a big difference between us going out on our own and sharing and preaching the gospel message with others (we all can do that), and a person who is called and set apart and ordained as an official representative of Christ’s church to preach the gospel.   There is order in Christ’s church.  

Jesus said to his twelve apostles, “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.”  (John 15:16).  “And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach, And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils” (Mark 3:14–15).  “Then he called his twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases.  And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick.”  (Luke 9:1–2)

As Paul taught to the Ephesians, “And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers” (Ephesians 4:11), and not all are apostles or called by the church and set apart to preach the gospel (1 Corinthians 12:28-29).

If there was no authority required by Peter to preach, then why do the verses I quoted above say that Jesus gave them the authority to do just that?  When Paul had his vision, he rightly preached what he learned and what he witnessed to others, just as any of us would.  But he wasn’t authorized as an official representative of Christ’s church until he was called and sent out later (as Acts 13:1-3 partially shows).  And this is the very thing that Paul was trying to establish in his letter to the Galatians in his defense of his authority as an apostle of Jesus Christ.

8 hours ago, jonah747 said:
On 4/11/2024 at 11:21 AM, InCognitus said:

None of this answers the question.  If the authority to do these things is simply assumed by a believer because they believe in Christ, why then were they ordained and set apart to do those very things they were called to do?  And where did the people who ordain them get their authority to call them and ordain them? 

I think the aspect of ordination applies primarily to individuals seeking a formal 
role within the church structure, such as serving as an elder or teacher.

This is just wrong.  This isn’t something that an individual “seeks”.  Remember, Jesus said “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you”.   Paul wrote to Titus that there “are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:  Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake” (Titus 1:10–11).  Those are among the kind of people who “seek” to preach to others.  And in the same letter, Paul told Titus to “set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee” (Titus 1:5).   These offices are not sought by the individuals, nor are they assumed simply by believing one has the authority, rather they are appointed and ordained by those who are in authority, the God chosen leaders of the church.

8 hours ago, jonah747 said:

As previously stated or mentioned in an earlier post, there's no evidence suggesting 
Paul sought authority from Peter, James, or John. He had already begun preaching the 
gospel in Damascus following his conversion.

As explained above, there is a big difference between Paul preaching of his conversion and his vision experience to others (the mere turn around of his attitude toward Christ’s church would definitely get attention and be a witness to the power of Christ on its own), and Paul being called to the ministry as he was later on.  The former requires no authority, but the latter definitely does as the verses I listed above demonstrate.

Link to comment
On 4/14/2024 at 1:36 AM, InCognitus said:

There is a difference between Jesus talking to “disciples” in a generic sense, and the twelve disciples that he chose and ordained as apostles and gave them power.  All followers of Christ are disciples, but not all are chosen to be his apostles, and you shouldn’t confuse the two.  As it says in Matthew 10:

“And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease…..  These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”  (Matthew 10:1, 5-6)

If we follow your line of thought, you are limiting certain teachings of Christ to only 
those he directly addressed.

Let's examine Mark 16:17 alongside a selection of other verses.

“And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; 
they shall speak with new tongues”.

Is this only for the twelve apostles he was directly speaking to? Would it exclude the 
fifteen current LDS apostles today because he was not speaking to them?

Then there’s the speaking in new tongues. 

Do LDS female missionaries speak with new tongues under the influence of Satan because 
Jesus was not speaking to them in Mark 16:17?

Then there’s Luke 9:49-50.  

“And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we 
forbad him, because he followeth not with us. And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: 
for he that is not against us is for us”.

This authority came to an unnamed individual from God.  He was not numbered among the 
twelve.

Then there’s the seventy.

“After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two 
before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come. And the seventy 
returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy 
name” (Luke 10:1,17).

If we follow your line of thought, it suggests Jesus didn’t choose and ordain all the 
quorums of the LDS Seventies because there’s no record of him speaking to them 
individually or collectively. It’s also like you’re suggesting some of Jesus’ teachings 
only count for those who were physically present with him, which could exclude people 
of today. If we apply that same reasoning to the Sermon on the Mount, then it would not 
have any relevance for modern times. 

In 1 Corinthians 12:7-11, it discusses certain gifts granted by the Holy Spirit to both 
men and women, such as the ability to heal, perform miracles, prophesy, discern spirits, 
speak in different tongues, and interpret tongues. It’s important to note these gifts 
come directly from the Holy Spirit and are not conferred by the fifteen LDS apostles.
 

On 4/14/2024 at 1:36 AM, InCognitus said:

The verses above don’t apply to all disciples, but only to the twelve that Jesus chose and ordained.  And it is dangerous to take verses out of context like you did, where you assume that the same authority applies to everyone, or you may end up just like the seven sons of Sceva thinking you have authority that the demons didn't recognize at all (i.e. "And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?")  

Every disciple of Christ possesses that authority. However, the seven sons of Sceva 
were not authentic followers.  

In Matthew 17:15-20, there's an incident where the disciples struggled to cast out a 
demon, yet they weren't overcome by it.
 

On 4/14/2024 at 1:36 AM, InCognitus said:

And it is quite clear that in both Mark 16:17 and Matthew 28:18-20, Jesus is only speaking to the “eleven” apostles:

“Afterward he appeared unto the eleven… And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world….”  (Mark 16:14-15)

“Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain… And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying… Go ye therefore, and teach all nations…”  (Matthew 28:16-19)

I’m not saying that Jesus couldn’t command others (including women) to do the same thing (I certainly believe he has at different times), but you can’t make that call just from reading those verses out of context.

What verses in the New Testament show the authority LDS women have from Christ that 
is not conferred upon them by LDS men?
 

On 4/14/2024 at 1:36 AM, InCognitus said:

This still doesn’t explain why Paul thought it was important to say that he went to see Peter when he was trying to establish his authority to the saints at Galatia, some of which were accusing him of teaching a different gospel than Christ taught so that his message would appeal to the Gentiles.

The assumption that Paul was seeking Peter’s authority is speculative. As previously 
mentioned, Paul had been preaching the gospel prior to his encounter with Peter.  
I'll include additional comments later on as you brought it up again.
 

On 4/14/2024 at 1:36 AM, InCognitus said:

The quote you posted is from Moroni’s fourth visit to Joseph Smith, not the first vision, by the way.

How was Joseph Sr. qualified to affirm that what Joseph Jr. had seen and heard was from 
God?
 

On 4/14/2024 at 1:36 AM, InCognitus said:

There’s no mention of ordination at all in the passage above.  Do you want to try again?  Ananias laying hands on Paul to heal him (by restoring his sight) is not an ordination. 

Ananias had not ordained Paul. Paul was called [ordained] of God (Romans 1:1, 
1 Corinthians 1:1). In a similar way, John the Baptist was called [ordained] from the 
womb; baptized with the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:15).
 

On 4/14/2024 at 1:36 AM, InCognitus said:

Again, there is a big difference between us going out on our own and sharing and preaching the gospel message with others (we all can do that), and a person who is called and set apart and ordained as an official representative of Christ’s church to preach the gospel.   There is order in Christ’s church.

Imagine being personally called, set apart, and ordained as an official representative 
of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints by Joseph Smith himself. What 
distinguishes your gospel message from mine?
 

On 4/14/2024 at 1:36 AM, InCognitus said:

When Paul had his vision, he rightly preached what he learned and what he witnessed to others, just as any of us would.  But he wasn’t authorized as an official representative of Christ’s church until he was called and sent out later (as Acts 13:1-3 partially shows).  And this is the very thing that Paul was trying to establish in his letter to the Galatians in his defense of his authority as an apostle of Jesus Christ.

Earlier, I shared two sources indicating Paul was called by God to preach.

Whom do you think authorized him as an official representative of Christ’s church?

Who bestowed the authority upon the unnamed person to cast out demons in Luke 9:49-50?
 

On 4/14/2024 at 1:36 AM, InCognitus said:

This is just wrong.  This isn’t something that an individual “seeks”.  Remember, Jesus said “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you”.

Jesus chose and ordained Paul as he chose and ordained the twelve.
 

On 4/14/2024 at 1:36 AM, InCognitus said:

And in the same letter, Paul told Titus to “set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee” (Titus 1:5).   These offices are not sought by the individuals, nor are they assumed simply by believing one has the authority, rather they are appointed and ordained by those who are in authority, the God chosen leaders of the church.

1 Corinthians 12:28 and Ephesians 4:11 offer various insights into these roles.

“And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly 
teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities 
of tongues”.

“And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, 
pastors and teachers”.

Elders could be viewed as teachers and pastors.  But there are evangelists and teachers 
outside an officially recognized church building.  These would be home churches or 
those who decide to participate in the Great Commission.  As long as I interpret and 
share the scriptures accurately and responsibly, I don't feel the need for someone like 
Peter or Paul to formally authorize my home Bible studies or approve of my involvement 
in missionary work to unreached people.

Except for the singular instance of commissioning seventy disciples to travel in pairs 
to places Jesus intended to visit himself (Luke 10:1), the New Testament church did not 
establish quorums of seventies or a hierarchy of high priests.
 

On 4/14/2024 at 1:36 AM, InCognitus said:

As explained above, there is a big difference between Paul preaching of his conversion and his vision experience to others (the mere turn around of his attitude toward Christ’s church would definitely get attention and be a witness to the power of Christ on its own), and Paul being called to the ministry as he was later on.  The former requires no authority, but the latter definitely does as the verses I listed above demonstrate.

You've highlighted the importance of Paul meeting with Peter on multiple occasions. Do 
you believe this encounter marks the moment when Paul was called and granted authority 
for the ministry by Peter? If not, which other individuals do you believe were involved 
in calling Paul to the ministry and authorizing him?

Link to comment
4 hours ago, jonah747 said:

If we follow your line of thought, you are limiting certain teachings of Christ to only 
those he directly addressed.

There’s a difference between “teachings of Christ” and directives given by Jesus to the men he called to represent him.  And I’m saying that it is dangerous to take verses out of context and assume that if Jesus says something to one person, then it applies to all.  The context generally gives us clues about how the teachings or directives apply.

4 hours ago, jonah747 said:

Let's examine Mark 16:17 alongside a selection of other verses.

“And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; 
they shall speak with new tongues”.

Is this only for the twelve apostles he was directly speaking to? Would it exclude the 
fifteen current LDS apostles today because he was not speaking to them?

Then there’s the speaking in new tongues. 

Do LDS female missionaries speak with new tongues under the influence of Satan because 
Jesus was not speaking to them in Mark 16:17?

We know from other verses that these gifts of the spirit apply to other people as well (Acts 2:1-18, 1 Corinthians 12-14).  So this doesn’t help your case for trying to make Mark 16:17-18 apply to everyone.

Do you drink poison and handle snakes?  If not, why don’t you apply Mark 16:17-18 the same way to those items?

4 hours ago, jonah747 said:

Then there’s Luke 9:49-50.  

“And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we 
forbad him, because he followeth not with us. And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: 
for he that is not against us is for us”.

This authority came to an unnamed individual from God.  He was not numbered among the 
twelve.

The Bible doesn’t say how the person in Luke 9:49-50 received his authority.  So, we can treat this example in one of two ways:  Do we do what you are doing, and assert that the person received the authority directly from God by believing he had the authority without any biblical support whatsoever?  Or do we look at the rest of the Bible and see that this same “power” was given by ordination to others, like the way it was given to apostles and elders all through the New Testament?  I say the biblical approach is much more reasonable.  But I understand why you might prefer the non-biblical approach, because otherwise how will you support any claims to authority?

4 hours ago, jonah747 said:

In 1 Corinthians 12:7-11, it discusses certain gifts granted by the Holy Spirit to both 
men and women, such as the ability to heal, perform miracles, prophesy, discern spirits, 
speak in different tongues, and interpret tongues. It’s important to note these gifts 
come directly from the Holy Spirit and are not conferred by the fifteen LDS apostles.

But this goes against your whole argument, because Paul goes on to explain that not everyone has each of these gifts given to them.   He compares the church to a body that has many members.  The body has ears, eyes, a nose, etc., and every member is different.  He even points out that not all are apostles or prophets or teachers or workers of miracles or have the gift of healing, as you assume by taking Mark 16 out of context.

And the fact that these gifts come from the Holy Spirit doesn’t negate that some of them are bestowed through blessings of ordination, like what Paul wrote to Timothy:  “Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.”  (1 Timothy 4:14)

4 hours ago, jonah747 said:

Every disciple of Christ possesses that authority.

Except you have no scripture to back up that claim.  It’s a non-Biblical idea, made-up to try to legitimize the schisms from Catholicism.

4 hours ago, jonah747 said:

However, the seven sons of Sceva 
were not authentic followers.  

Yes, they were not authentic followers because they tried to assume they had authority simply by believing.  They believed they could cast out demons in the name of Jesus, but they couldn’t.  Isn’t that the same approach you are taking?

4 hours ago, jonah747 said:
On 4/13/2024 at 11:36 PM, InCognitus said:

There’s no mention of ordination at all in the passage above.  Do you want to try again?  Ananias laying hands on Paul to heal him (by restoring his sight) is not an ordination. 

Ananias had not ordained Paul. Paul was called [ordained] of God (Romans 1:1, 
1 Corinthians 1:1). In a similar way, John the Baptist was called [ordained] from the 
womb; baptized with the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:15).

To be “called” is not the same as being “ordained”.  As Jesus said, “many are called, but few are chosen” (Matt 22:14).  And none of the verses you provided say that Paul was ordained by God.  In fact, Romans 1:1 shows that Paul refers to being set apart unto the gospel of God, which recalls a situation similar to the incident in Acts 13:1-3 where Paul and Barnabas were set apart for the ministry.

As for 1 Corinthians 1, it says Paul was “called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God”.  We can again look to Acts 13:1-3 and see that both Paul and Barnabas were called by the Holy Ghost and “set apart… for the work whereunto I have called them”, and they were ordained by the laying on of hands. This was definitely “through the will of God”.  

Do you want to try again?

4 hours ago, jonah747 said:

Earlier, I shared two sources indicating Paul was called by God to preach.

Whom do you think authorized him as an official representative of Christ’s church?

Who bestowed the authority upon the unnamed person to cast out demons in Luke 9:49-50?

All of this has already been addressed earlier in my post.

4 hours ago, jonah747 said:

Jesus chose and ordained Paul as he chose and ordained the twelve.

Jesus called Paul.  But do you have a verse that says Jesus ordained Paul?  No. 

Did Paul “seek” the calling?  On the contrary, he was preaching against Jesus until he was set straight.  

4 hours ago, jonah747 said:

1 Corinthians 12:28 and Ephesians 4:11 offer various insights into these roles.

“And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly 
teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities 
of tongues”.

“And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, 
pastors and teachers”.

Elders could be viewed as teachers and pastors.  But there are evangelists and teachers 
outside an officially recognized church building.  These would be home churches or 
those who decide to participate in the Great Commission.  As long as I interpret and 
share the scriptures accurately and responsibly, I don't feel the need for someone like 
Peter or Paul to formally authorize my home Bible studies or approve of my involvement 
in missionary work to unreached people.

So who gets to be the one to decide if you are interpreting and sharing the scriptures accurately?  You?  You say you don’t need someone like Peter or Paul to authorize your teachings, but how would you know?  You teach that Jesus ordained Paul without a shred of scriptural support.  You teach that Mark 16:17-18 applies to everyone instead of just the eleven individuals that Jesus was addressing (with the snake handling and poison drinking included), which is contrary to what Paul taught later in 1 Corinthians 12.  

This kind of thinking leads to what Paul referred to as being “tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine”, and he explained that the very thing that prevents that from happening is the authorized leadership that you seem to reject. As he explains in Ephesians 4:11-14:

  • “And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers” 
  • And why did he give them?  “For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ”
  • And how long did he intend for us to have them?  “Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ”
  • And what does this prevent?  “That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” 

Are we in the unity of the faith yet?

4 hours ago, jonah747 said:

You've highlighted the importance of Paul meeting with Peter on multiple occasions. Do 
you believe this encounter marks the moment when Paul was called and granted authority 
for the ministry by Peter? If not, which other individuals do you believe were involved 
in calling Paul to the ministry and authorizing him?

It doesn’t matter what I think about Paul meeting with Peter.  What matters is why did Paul feel the need to include his going to meet with Peter in his defense, to the Galatians, for his authority as an apostle of Jesus Christ?  It seems like such an incidental thing to include unless it meant something to Paul in his defense of his authority, for that is what Paul was trying to establish.

Edited by InCognitus
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...