A living Apostle answers the question...

[sojourner]

I asked, "Who gives that authority?"
You answered:

God of course.

But that's what the other churches say, too. If you're going to question and judge their authority, then you're going to have to question and judge your own authority. If you think you're the only ones with whom God's really playing ball, it's no wonder you've garnered the kind of judgment from others that you think is unfair. You've brought that on yourselves. You can't claim God's playground for your own and make everyone play by your rules. Why? Because God doesn't play that way. God'll just open another playgroung across town and invite everyone, as God has always done.

 

[sojourner]

Anyone can claim to be a christian. Not everyone can have authority from God.

This is just plain bad theology. Anyone who perceives him or herself as chosen calls him or herself "Christian." It is baptism, not ordination, that grants authority. Ordination builds upon the foundation of baptismal authority. Some baptized people are called out of their baptismal ministry to a special ministry. All the apostolic laying-on-of-hands does is recognize what God has already set in place.

All...repeat...all Christians have authority from God, by virtue of their baptism. If you're going to admit that any people may call themselves "Christian," then you're going to have to admit that any who are Christian may have authority...cause that's how it works. Authority is not a privilege...it's a specific call from God.

 

[sojourner]

Humanity on its own may prismate God, but when God clarifies doctrines to his prophet his light can come nicely into focus.

No one humans has the machninery to properly focus that light. There are too many filters built in. We were meant to act in community, sharing what we have with others. That's the only way we can see the light in its wholeness. Relationship is where God clarifies the light.

 

[sojourner]

Either way, Jesus organized the Twelve and in doing so established a church organization with a single governing body.

And many folks say (and there are records) that those Twelve recognized that authority in others, and laid their hands on them in succession. That's the history of the apostolic succession. That those successors are called "bishop" is a moot argument, because "bishop" is a human, not a Godly, construct. James, the brother of Jesus, was Bishop of Jerusalem. And obviously, he was counted among the Twelve in authority.

 

[SoyLeche]

All...repeat...all Christians have authority from God, by virtue of their baptism. If you're going to admit that any people may call themselves "Christian," then you're going to have to admit that any who are Christian may have authority...cause that's how it works. Authority is not a privilege...it's a specific call from God.

Again, we're not going to "have to" do anything of the sort. We're going to just disagree with you about what "authority" is and means and move on.

 

[sojourner]

I've never claimed that uniformity negates confusion. I'm claiming that non-uniformity implies contradiction and causes confusion.

My question is, "Why is contradiction such a bad thing?"

 

[sojourner]

There is a difference between someone receiving an office of priesthood through some formal procedure and having God actually honor that office of authority. It makes no sense to me to believe that God would honor and sanction the authority of two men who preach differing and opposing doctrines, both in the name of God. At most only one of them can properly claim to teach with authority from God.

How? All the formal procedure does is recognize what God has already done in the person. Why does it not make sense to you? Is not God bigger than you? Can God not accomplish things that you are unable to wrap your miniscule human mind around? That's why we call God "omnipotent."

 

[sojourner]

Again, we're not going to "have to" do anything of the sort. We're going to just disagree with you about what "authority" is and means and move on.

Then some are going to disagree with you about being Christian. Live with it.

 

[SoyLeche]

Then some are going to disagree with you about being Christian. Live with it.

Only if their definition of the word "Christian" is moronic - IMHO.

Anyone who thinks that questions of authority should be a defining aspect of whether or not someone is "Christian" has not thought through what they are trying to say - and are probably just doing so in order to exclude a certain group from their "club". I'm fine with being excluded from their "club", but I'm going to point out to them every time that their "club" is a subset of Christianity, not the whole of it.

 

[sojourner]

Only if their definition of the word "Christian" is moronic - IMHO.

Anyone who thinks that questions of authority should be a defining aspect of whether or not someone is "Christian" has not thought through what they are trying to say - and are probably just doing so in order to exclude a certain group from their "club". I'm fine with being excluded from their "club", but I'm going to point out to them every time that their "club" is a subset of Christianity, not the whole of it.

And you would be right to do that! But you also must consider your own "club" a "subset of Xy...and not the whole." And that includes considering that God may grant the same authority to other subsets. It makes no sense to give one little group all the authority. Otherwise, those other subsets are not "real" subsets, and you all are just fooling yourselves by saying that "anyone can be a Christian." The LDS is not the modern version of the Levites, with a corner on the market of who may enter the Holy of Holies. That curtain was rent asunder a long, long time ago.

 

[SoyLeche]

And you would be right to do that! But you also must consider your own "club" a "subset of Xy...and not the whole." And that includes considering that God may grant the same authority to other subsets. It makes no sense to give one little group all the authority. Otherwise, those other subsets are not "real" subsets, and you all are just fooling yourselves by saying that "anyone can be a Christian." The LDS is not the modern version of the Levites, with a corner on the market of who may enter the Holy of Holies. That curtain was rent asunder a long, long time ago.

In case you haven't noticed - I do recognize that.

And, no, that doesn't mean that I have to recognize that God may grant the same authority ot other subsets. Authority isn't a defining charactoristic of who is and isn't a Christian. Belief in the supremacy of Christ is the only requirement in the way I define Christianity.

 

[Polaris]

And many folks say (and there are records) that those Twelve recognized that authority in others, and laid their hands on them in succession. That's the history of the apostolic succession. That those successors are called "bishop" is a moot argument, because "bishop" is a human, not a Godly, construct. James, the brother of Jesus, was Bishop of Jerusalem. And obviously, he was counted among the Twelve in authority.

Show me where in the NT James is referred to as a Bishop and you'll have a valid point. I believe he was an Apostle. The successor of an Apostle should be an Apostle. Again Bishops are not Apostles. They are two different offices, and without the Apostleship the Bishopric is void. A body without a head cannot live.

 

[sojourner]

In case you haven't noticed - I do recognize that.

And, no, that doesn't mean that I have to recognize that God may grant the same authority ot other subsets. Authority isn't a defining charactoristic of who is and isn't a Christian. Belief in the supremacy of Christ is the only requirement in the way I define Christianity.

I guess you didn't read my post which asserts that authority is given at baptism? All Christians carry the same authority by virtue of their baptism. And, I think that most Christians are baptized, in some form or other. An apostle, or bishop, has no more authority than I have. But they are called to a certain specific ministry to which I may not be called. That's all.

Even if you choose to define Christianity by your definition above, then, ir that's what it means to "be a Christian," by simple virtue of proclaiming that, a person has the same authority as any other Christian person, regardless, as you say, of what "subset" they "belong to." Authority and belonging to "the club" go hand-in-hand.

 

[Polaris]

My question is, "Why is contradiction such a bad thing?"

Contradiction leads to confusion and contention. But more importantly contradiction requires at least one of the parties to be wrong. Pure truth will not contradict itself. God is not a God of contradiction and confusion.

 

[SoyLeche]

I guess you didn't read my post which asserts that authority is given at baptism? All Christians carry the same authority by virtue of their baptism. And, I think that most Christians are baptized, in some form or other. An apostle, or bishop, has no more authority than I have. But they are called to a certain specific ministry to which I may not be called. That's all.

Even if you choose to define Christianity by your definition above, then, ir that's what it means to "be a Christian," by simple virtue of proclaiming that, a person has the same authority as any other Christian person, regardless, as you say, of what "subset" they "belong to." Authority and belonging to "the club" go hand-in-hand.

I read it, and I disagree. That doesn't mean that I can't consider us both Christians.

Authority and belonging to "the club" do in many cases go hand-in-hand. That means nothing since I've already said that "the club" is not the whole that in many cases it is pretending to be.

We have largely varying beliefs about what "authority" entails. That's fine. It isn't a defining issue anyway.

 

[Polaris]

How? All the formal procedure does is recognize what God has already done in the person. Why does it not make sense to you? Is not God bigger than you? Can God not accomplish things that you are unable to wrap your miniscule human mind around? That's why we call God "omnipotent."

Let me repeat myself:

It makes no sense to me to believe that God would honor and sanction the authority of two men who preach differing and opposing doctrines, both in the name of God.

Do you disagree? If so, please explain how this statement is wrong (an example would be helpful).

 

[sojourner]

Show me where in the NT James is referred to as a Bishop and you'll have a valid point. I believe he was an Apostle. The successor of an Apostle should be an Apostle. Again Bishops are not Apostles. They are two different offices, and without the Apostleship the Bishopric is void. A body without a head cannot live.

Show me where in the NT Moroni, golden plates, or Joseph Smith are referred to and we'll talk. Otherwise, don't hold me hostage to the NT.

 

[sojourner]

Contradiction leads to confusion and contention. But more importantly contradiction requires at least one of the parties to be wrong. Pure truth will not contradict itself. God is not a God of contradiction and confusion.

Not always. Sometimes it leads to enlightenment. Contradiction does not "require" that one party "be wrong." It merely requires a difference of perspective.

 

[sojourner]

I read it, and I disagree. That doesn't mean that I can't consider us both Christians.

Authority and belonging to "the club" do in many cases go hand-in-hand. That means nothing since I've already said that "the club" is not the whole that in many cases it is pretending to be.

We have largely varying beliefs about what "authority" entails. That's fine. It isn't a defining issue anyway.

If you're a Christian, I'm a Christian, the Archbishop of Canterbury is a Christian, and the Prophet is a Christian, then we all have the same Christian authority.

 

[sojourner]

Let me repeat myself:

It makes no sense to me to believe that God would honor and sanction the authority of two men who preach differing and opposing doctrines, both in the name of God.

Do you disagree? If so, please explain how this statement is wrong (an example would be helpful).

People do not preach on their own. They preach by the authority of God, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit moves where it will...not where we will.