Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticks
(Post 3125653)
I will be going to church on Sunday, not because it is Easter, but because I am obeying the command by inference to meet with the saints every first day of the week as I do every week(Acts 20:7)
By the way, they way the Apostle Paul used the word saints in his letters meant Christians, not dead people that have been "canonised" by some person declared to be the leader of the church in violation of Colosians 1:18
The word Easter actually comes from the Anglo Saxon pagan god Eostre and is also where we get the word oestrogen.
I will therefore be in church on Easter Sunday by default.
|
Eostre / Ostara was a goddess
Canonisation didnt really start till the 10th century, however by the year 100 A.D., Christians were honoring other Christians who had died, and asking for their intercession. Many people think that honoring saints was something the Church set up later, but it was part of Christianity from the very beginning. As a matter of fact, this practice came from a long-standing tradition in the Jewish faith of honoring prophets and holy people with shrines. The first saints were those people mentioned in the Gospels as being relatives friends and followers of Jesus then along came the early martyrs.
There is no 'commandment by inference' in acts 20:7 it simply talks of a meeting of christians.
Paul the Apostle? Interesting phraseology he wasnt actually a disciple of Jesus however he is venerated by christians, why? Because he shaped the christian faith as it is today, but who was he to decide what way the early church should be run? Jesus didnt say "hey dude you are to speak for me, when these eejits who i taught for 3 years get it wrong", did he?
Whose authority was he acting on? I suppose you could say God's but you have no way of proving that.
Paul made decisions about early church doctrine, that allowed the early church to be open to gentiles, about Jesus' ministry, his writings shaped the christian mass/eucharist, he especially taught about the divinity of Jesus and thats the interesting point, it could be said without him the Christian faith would ever have been no more than a troublesome Jewish Sect.
As for Colossians 1:18 this doesnt state that there shouldn't be a spiritual head of the church on earth nor does it contradict authorising Peter as the rock/head of the church. Its simply describing that all things done for God are done IN jesus Christ.
In fact there isnt anything in Pauls works in the New Testament where Paul actually denies or undermines Peter's authority over the church, though he does at one time criticise (rebuke) him for the treatment of gentile Christians.
