Conference yukon::christian_v7

    Hi Jay,
    
    (By the way, your name sounds familiar -- are you with the Rdb support
    group in the Springs?  I'm with the Chicago Production Systems Resource
    Center, formerly called the TP Resource Center)
    
>    I know I am showing my ignorance here...:-)
    
    Someone (many-a-one) has well said, "The only stupid question is the
    one you don't ask."  One thing I like about this conference is that we
    can ask questions and share our understanding.  The matter of following
    certain names (when all we often have is a first name) in the New
    Testament _can_ be confusing.
    
>    Luke was Paul's doctor?
    
    Luke, referred to as "the beloved physician", was a companion/
    co-laborer with Paul on some of his journeys (and author of the gospel
    and the book of Acts).  I've never heard that he was "Paul's doctor",
    but it certainly isn't outside of the realm of possibility.
    
>    Was the James from the book James written by Jesus's brother?
    
    It is usually accepted that James "the author" was one of Jesus'
    brothers, who came to believe on him after his death and resurrection.
    (A little more on this at the end of this reply.)
    
>    The 'disciple who Jesus loved' was John --he was Not Jesus's bother?
    
    This is correct -- John, 'disciple who Jesus loved', was the brother of
    James (the sons of Zebedee--Matt 4:21 and other references).  This
    James is usually thought to be other than the James referred to below.
    
>    Mark was actually written by Peter as told to Mark?
    
    I have heard that some feel that Peter dictated to Mark.  While this is
    certainly possible, it is an extra-biblical tradition.
    
>    Matthew (the book) was written by the tax collector? 
    
    Correct (or, as some in this conference might say, "spot on").
    
>    Could the orignal disciples read or write? (If they couldn't, it sure
>    						didn't get in the way)
    
    The education of the aposles (prior to their real education by the
    Lord) is undocumented in the Scriptures.  Perhaps someone else can
    comment on the historical aspects of education in Israel during the
    period.
    
>    Later on in one of the Gospels, it talks about Jesus's mother and
>    some other people (Joses ? ect.) "his family" waiting for him. Are
>    these other people his other brothers?
    
    Different religions vary in their opinions on this matter.  Some hold
    that Jesus was an only child.  I feel that the Scriptures teach that
    Jesus was the first child of Mary, but not the only.
    
    Mark L

    Thanks Mark (still reading through your reply). Great info!
    
    It's also true that the Gospels were written VERY late in the apostles
    lives?
    
    Yes, I work here in the Springs (Belfast west!) doing Rdb support. Is it
    *not* a good thing you remember my name? :-)
    
    Jay

>    It's also true that the Gospels were written VERY late in the apostles
>    lives?
    
    Hmm.  My memory gets a little rusty here regarding the dates the
    Gospels were written.  I do remember that John was the last of the 4 to
    be written.  Historically, I have heard that the apostle John was
    commissioned by the church to write it (to supply a somewhat different
    perspective than that of the 3 "synoptic" Gospels), and that it was
    written fairly late in his life.
    
    Mark L.

>    It is usually accepted that James "the author" was one of Jesus'
>    brothers, who came to believe on him after his death and resurrection.
>    (A little more on this at the end of this reply.)
    
    That is interesting. He lived with Jesus and wasn't convinced. He 
    probably figured "He can't be, He's my brother". :-) Seriously, I'd
    hate to be his younger brother! "Jesus always obeyed and didn't whine"
    ect. why can't you be like that?" 

    
    
    > Why can't you be like that?
    
      Cute..:-) " and look at your Brother Jesus, he does great in water
    polo and all the other sports :-) :-)

re:education

In recent times, at least, every Jewish man at least knows how to read and write
Hebrew.  It's considered necessary in order to be able to read God's law.  The
"Bar Mitzvah" is a celebration of the first public reading of the Torah by a
young man.  I believe the same was true in Jesus' day:  even if they had no
further education, they know how to read and write Hebrew, and knew the Torah.

re: when written

It's safe to say that none of them were written soon after Jesus' death.  Some
number of years (more than 10) passed before the Gospels were set on paper.

Paul

    re: 127.5
    
    In my 15 years as a water polo player, I never realized that Jesus
    played.  The sport and its players have become much less reputable
    since His days.
    
    - Don Randall

Hi Jay,

Thought I'd add some too...

The apostles are listed in Matthew 10:2-4, Mark 3:16-19, Luke 6:14-16 and 
Acts 1:13 (omitting Judas iscariot, of course).

One apostle is sometimes called Thaddeus (Matthew and Mark), and sometimes 
called Judas, son of James (Luke and Acts).

Acts 1:15-26 records how the apostles drew lots (an accepted way then of 
seeking God's choice of alternatives) to see who would replace Judas 
Iscariot, Matthias being selected (but not heard of further).

It was an accepted thing to sell oneself to be a slave, in order to raise 
the money to train as a doctor - this could have been Luke's position.  The 
link is in Colossian 4:14.

I am not aware of any indication that the apostles were illiterate, other
than in Acts 4:13, where they are recorded as 'unschooled, ordinary men'.  
How limited this makes their education I'm not sure.

Jesus' half brothers and sisters are referred to by name in Matthew 13:55
and Mark 6:3 (James, Joses, Judah, and Simon, and his sisters ... ), and 
without their names, in Matthew 12:46-47 and Mark 3:31-32.
- their father was Joseph, rather than God Himself, so they were half-siblings.

James, the original apostle, and brother of John, is executed by Herod, in 
Acts 12:2.  Later, James the LORD's half-brother seems to come to a place 
of respect in the fellowship, as he's mentioned a few times, particularly 
in what is know as the council at Jerusalem (Acts 15:13) etc.  In Galatians 
1:19, he is explicitly referred to as "the LORD's brother", a distinction 
which isn't given to, for instance, Peter, in the preceding verse.


							- Andrew

    Very good ( and interesting) info. It clears up alot of things.
    
    Jay

    .18  
    
    In the first Chapter of Acts you will find that there were 12
    apostles, because Judas was replaced fairly quickly after his suicide,
    hmmm... let me see if I can find that.. just a second ... shift to
    online Bible program ...
    
    
    Acts 1:20  For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation
               be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick 
               let another take.
     21  Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time
         that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
     22  Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was
         taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his
         resurrection.
     23  And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed
         Justus, and Matthias.
     24  And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of
         all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,
     25  That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which
         Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.
     26  And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias;
         and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
    
    Nancy

    So Nancy:
    
    (How are you doing by the way?!!)  Are you saying that Matthias was the
    number twelve apostle and not Judas? 
    
    -Jack

    ! (How are you doing by the way?!!)  Are you saying that Matthias was the
    ! number twelve apostle and not Judas? 
    		Ding ding ding, corect, You WIN!
    
       There were more than twelve apostles. As pointed out, an apostle was
    one who saw Jesus (and recognized him for who He was), after his
    resurrection. Some stick to the fact that they must have been followers
    of Jesus prior to his death, but I can not find anything that requires
    this. Saul was an exception - a blessed one.
    
    PDM
    
    

> So, I guess, an answer from me, is that, No
> Judas was NOT an apostle, but was a disciple.
    
    Matthew 10:2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; ...
      4 ...Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
    
    Mark 14:10 And Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve, went unto the chief
      priests, to betray him unto them.
    
    Luke 6:13 And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples:
        and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles;
     16 ... and Judas Iscariot, which also was the traitor.
    
    Each of these gospels identify Judas as being named as one of the
    twelve apostles.
    
    Mark L.

    Interesting discussion...
    
    Markel points out that the Disciples were called apostles prior to the
    ascension.  However, the criteria set forth to replace Judas in
    Acts 1 is that you were to have witnessed the ascended Jesus.  Do you
    think this really conflicts?  I don't.  
    
    BTW, was Judas Iscariot the brother of James?  
    
    Nancy
    
    

RE:    <<< Note 246.24 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" >>>

       
   . Markel points out that the Disciples were called apostles prior to the
   . ascension.  However, the criteria set forth to replace Judas in
   . Acts 1 is that you were to have witnessed the ascended Jesus.  Do you
   . think this really conflicts?  I don't.  
   

     My understanding is they were disciples (learners) while Christ was
     with them. At some point they became apostles (sent ones) prior to
     His ascension (I believe it is described in John)


 
  .  BTW, was Judas Iscariot the brother of James?  
    
   
     John was the brother of James (sons of Zebbedee)..then there was James,
     the son of Alphaeus.




 Jim    
    

    The reason I ask...
    
    Acts 1:10  And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went
               up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
     11  Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into
         heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven,
         shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
     12  Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet,
         which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey.
     13  And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where
         abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas,
         Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon 
         Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James.
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    
    I wondered if this was Judas Iscariot, since his suicide is
    discussed later in the same chapter.
    
    Nancy
    

    Luke 6:15  Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon
               called Zelotes,
     16  And Judas the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, which also was
                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
         the traitor.
    
    Now you know why I don't use the NIV without comparing it to other
    the KJV.... there are other inconsistencies.
    
    Nancy
    

 Judas the brother of James is also identified in Matthew 10 as Lebbaeus whose
 surname was Thaddaeus...somewhere around here (home) I have a tape explaining
 all of that, but I don't know where it is..





 Jim

When you finally figure out who the Apostles actually are, you may
find yourself unable to remain a Protestant.

As a Christian (and protestant) who holds his Roman Catholic brothers and sisters
in the highest respect while disagreeing with them, I'm surprised and very 
offended by .31.

God bless you, John.

Richard.

I did say "may", and I didn't say anything about Roman Catholics.

Some people, when encountered with historical and biblical evidence
about the Apostles and their present day successors, find it necessary
to become Greek Orthodox, Polish National Catholic, Anglican, etc.

/john

    Re: .32
    
    From you're node, ULYSSE, I take it you're from Valbonne.  Maybe it's a
    cultural thing but help me understand why you were so offended by .31. 
    Although I didn't fully comprehend the reply, I chuckled at it because
    it is the same kind of sarcasm I tend to use in my own humor.  I read
    it kind of in the same context as this kind of sarcastic humor.
    
    Pat:  Hey Mike, I want to be your friend.
    
    Mike: With friends like you who needs enemies?!
    
    I don't know, I guess things like this just don't bother me. 
    
    Now, to ask yet another question.  The epistle of James was written by
    Jesus brother and not James the brother of John and the son of Zebedee,
    correct?  So we have two Judas' and two or James we're dealing with
    here.
    
    -Jack

	! When you finally figure out who the Apostles actually are, you may
	! find yourself unable to remain a Protestant.
    
    	    I assume your are talking about Apostolic succession?
    	    John, I am an apostle of Jesus, in as much as I follow the
    	    teachings of Christ, believe entirely in His Godhood and
    	    am commanded, "go out and make believers of all men."
    	    The laying on of the hands is a big doctrinal issue, worthy
    	    of its own topic. Let us keep it out of this one.
    	    I too am a little disappointed that you would make this
    	    comment, and cause some (me) to think sinful thoughts.
    
    	    Thank you for your thought, but I must decline.
    	    I disagree with too many practices of the Catholic church.
    	    I would list a few, but I doubt that would serve any positive
    	    purpose.
    
    PDM

    ! cultural thing but help me understand why you were so offended by .31. 
    	Doctrinal issue (alert!)   Catholics believe that there has been
        since Petros (NOT PRETRA, "ON THIS ROCK") and the other apostles,
        an unbroken chain of succession apostles. This means only those
    	persons have the power or keys of conversion, enlightenment and
    	authority in heaven and earth to save.
    	  (blood pressure pause  - I often have to pause when I see such
    	   disdainful things pontificated by the world church.)
    
    ! Although I didn't fully comprehend the reply, I chuckled at it because
    ! it is the same kind of sarcasm I tend to use in my own humor.  I read
    	Course joking or harmful joking hurts others. Even if it "feels"
       ok to you, the effect on the other person could be damaging.
       WHAT if - just what if, that other person did not take your
       comment as humorous, but was insulted and hurt? Would you know.
       Probably not, the person would quietly distance him/herself from you.
       You may never know why.
    
    
	! Now, to ask yet another question.  The epistle of James was written by
        ! Jesus brother and not James the brother of John and the son of Zebedee,
        ! correct? 
    
    	   It it truly not clear. Some believe not, but my current
    	   understanding leads me to think otherwise.  It is a mute point
           really in the schema of things anyway who wrote it.  The message
    	   is what is really important. Concentrate on that. (We get hung up
           on things like this and it causes dissention and bitterness. Satan
           loves it though.)
    
       PDM
    

             <<< Note 246.33 by COVERT::COVERT "John R. Covert" >>>
                  -< Don't be so easily offended; it's a sin >-

    so isn't presumption.

    I never connected .31 with apostolic succession.  Never even occured to
    me.  Now I understand what John what getting at with the remark. 
    Thought he was making a sarcastic remark of some kind.
    
    I guess I come to John's defense because although I too don't agree
    with apostolic succession, John has been a great ally of mine in other
    various conferences regarding various subjects.  
    
    John, I appreciate your entries as I believe they stimulate learning,
    quality conversation, and even arguments in soapbox.  Keep up the good
    work!
    
    PDM.,
    
    I appreciate your admonishment toward me on speaking properly and at
    the proper time.  One area I have been trying to work on is conveying
    intent to others in a sensitive and professional manner.  Things that
    tend to offend or hurt others simply role off my back.  This can be a
    gift but it can also be a curse!
    
    -Jack

    Jack,
    
    
    !                   One area I have been trying to work on is conveying
    ! intent to others in a sensitive and professional manner.  Things that
    ! tend to offend or hurt others simply role off my back.  This can be a
    ! gift but it can also be a curse!
    
    	This is a pill I had to take too. It is my nature NOT to be
        emotional or sympathetic. I constantly struggle with my sinful nature
        to be caring and considerate towards others.
    	  ITS TOUGH! - for me.
    
        Yours in Christ,
    	   PDM

	re. Apostles

	I'm not sure what the origins of this "you must have seen the risen 
Lord to be an apostle" doctrine. It's unfounded really. 

	Apostle means sent one. The Lord was the chief Apostle. Then there were
the 12 apostles. Then there are other apostles like Silas, Barnabas and 
Timothy. All are apostles, ie. sent ones. Perhaps the Lord will send you forth
to become a sent one also.

ace

    "Come follow me and I will make you fishers of men."
    
    I was taught that an apostle was somebody physically chosen by Jesus to
    follow him.  The tweve as they fished, collected taxes, and Saul on the
    road to Damascus.   A disciple on the other hand hears the message and
    with gladness studies to show thyself approved.
    
    I'm not saying I'm right but that was what I was taught!
    
    -Jack

    Ace, if you were to re-read Acts Chapter 1, that will tell you where 
    the philosophy came from...   I myself see it there.
    
    Nancy

RE:                      <<< Note 127.32 by AIMHI::JMARTIN >>>

       
   . I was taught that an apostle was somebody physically chosen by Jesus to
   . follow him.  The tweve as they fished, collected taxes, and Saul on the
   . road to Damascus.   A disciple on the other hand hears the message and
   . with gladness studies to show thyself approved.
    
    
     Matthew 10 calls the 12 "disciples"..the greek word as I understand it
     means "learners"..the 12 were then, as you and I are now, learners.
     When the teaching was through, and the furterance of the kingdom was
     left in their hands, they became "apostles" or sent ones.

     My understanding is that the word for missionaries  comes from the root
     of the word for apostles, as missionaries are indeed sent ones, but 
     on a slightly different scale than the 11 or 12.  




 Jim

RE:    <<< Note 127.33 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" >>>



   . Ace, if you were to re-read Acts Chapter 1, that will tell you where 
   . the philosophy came from...   I myself see it there.
    
    
    Problem is, Acts 14:14 identifies Barnabas as an apostle..I do not believe
    he met the criteria in Acts 1, thus while being referred to as an apostle,
    it was more in a missionary sense as opposed to the meaning given to the
    12.  My understanding, of course.





 Jim

    I believe that the scriptures point to a difference between the 12
    "original" apostles (with Matthias replacing Judas, and with Paul as an
    "untimely" addition with a particual mission to the gentiles), and
    others who were "sent out" ones.  "Apostles" is listed first in the
    place of the gifts in the church (Eph. 4:11)
    
    re: disciples.  A disciple is a follower/learner.  Jesus had many
    disciples besides the 12 who were named as apostles (see Luke 6:13,
    John 6:60,66).  He also sent out the 70 with very similar "empowerment"
    as the 12 apostles (Luke 9:1ff, Luke 10:1ff).
    
    Mark L.

    Is apostleship listed as one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit?
    
    

>Is apostleship listed as one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit?

The gift of the Holy Ghost is one gift with seven parts:  Reverence,
Adoration, Wisdom, Understanding, Knowledge, Counsel, and Divine Strength.

This gift brings forth the fruits of the spirit: love, joy, peace, patience,
kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.  See
Galatians 5:22-23.

/john

	re.34

Why yes, that's it! 

Missionaries are sent ones, and may be considered apostles as well. Though
I emphasize that the 12 apostles are unique, as is the chief Apostle (the Lord).
Perhaps we can refer to them (missionaries) as junior apostles.

Nancy, I suppose if Acts 1 were the only reference to apostles then what
else could we conclude? But if we examine the references to apostles in the
NT then we see apostles other than the 12. 

Did I offend you?

regards,
ace

    Ace... Not at All... I guess I should have been more clear in my
    statement in that I meant in reading ACTS 1, it's not incomprehensible
    to see where one could draw that conclusion...
    
    Thanks for the information.

Now that it's morning again on the right-hand side of the Atlantic, I got back into the 
Conference.  I see that I completely misunderstood John's comment.  I'm usually
the first to giggle at the jokes that appear in these discussions, but look at
John's comment as I may, it doesn't seem funny.  It must be cultural as someone
said. I think it's time for me to shut up, as I learn a lot from John's
contributions here and I've no wish to erect any barriers.

On the subject of apostles, I guess this is one of those things where you can be
completely convinced there were only 12, or completely covinced that more than
12 people count as apostles.  I thought "apostolos" meant someone who was sent, 
which could be quite a range of people - where are our Greek scholars on this?

By the way, I looked up Judas in my reference books and found there are no less
than six different ones in the NT...

Richard.

 Judas was a rather popular name back then.  I think we'd be hard pressed
 to find too many of them today.





 Jim

    Re: qualifications for apostles
    
    In addition to the section of Acts 1, a reading of I and II
    Corinthinans can add additional information, as some at Corinth were
    challenging Paul's "apostleship", and Paul answers those charges.
    For example, I Cor. 9, II Cor 12:11-12.
    
    Mark L.

    -1
    
    Oh, so I've got to look it up Mark?  :-) :-)  Use that nifty online
    program, would ya? :-) :-)
    
    Nancy

    OK, OK...
    
1Corinthians 9:1 Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus 
    Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord? 
  2 If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you: for the 
    seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord. 
  3 Mine answer to them that do examine me is this, 
  4 Have we not power to eat and to drink? 
  5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other 
    apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? 
  6 Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working? 
    
2Corinthians 12:11 I am become a fool in glorying; ye have compelled me: for I 
    ought to have been commended of you: for in nothing am I behind the very 
    chiefest apostles, though I be nothing. 
 12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in 
    signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds. 
    
    Also of interest:
    
1Corinthians 15:6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at 
    once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are 
    fallen asleep. 
  7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 
  8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. 
  9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an 
    apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 
    
    Mark L.