Relationship with Jesus

Originally posted by jaywill
The sole purpose of E.H. Broadbent's [b]"The Pilgrim Church" was to prove that from first century AD down through 19th century there have always been Christians who have had a vital relationship with the resurrected Christ. They were usually off the traditional mainstream - pilgrims on the earth.[/b]

I maintain that this is BS, that the concept of a 'relationship with Jesus' is a modern theological
convention and that any claim to the contrary by necessity engages in revisionist history.

So, let's hear it. Let's see a few of the main thesis statements of Broadbent's proof.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio
Originally posted by jaywill
[b]The sole purpose of E.H. Broadbent's [b]"The Pilgrim Church" was to prove that from first century AD down through 19th century there have always been Christians who have had a vital relationship with the resurrected Christ. They were usually off the traditional mainstream - pilgrims on the earth.[/b]

I maintain ...[text shortened]... hear it. Let's see a few of the main thesis statements of Broadbent's proof.

Nemesio[/b]

Your comment is that a relationship with Jesus is utterly foriegn to the Bible. Is it not?

Then to disprove it the first place one should go is the Bible. Is that not true?

Originally posted by Nemesio
Originally posted by jaywill
[b]The sole purpose of E.H. Broadbent's [b]"The Pilgrim Church" was to prove that from first century AD down through 19th century there have always been Christians who have had a vital relationship with the resurrected Christ. They were usually off the traditional mainstream - pilgrims on the earth.[/b]

I maintain ...[text shortened]... hear it. Let's see a few of the main thesis statements of Broadbent's proof.

Nemesio[/b]

"...you will know that I am in you and you are in me..."

"....when two or three are gathered in my name there will I be amongst them..."


Sounds like a relationship to me.

Originally posted by Nemesio
Originally posted by jaywill
[b]The sole purpose of E.H. Broadbent's [b]"The Pilgrim Church" was to prove that from first century AD down through 19th century there have always been Christians who have had a vital relationship with the resurrected Christ. They were usually off the traditional mainstream - pilgrims on the earth.[/b]

I maintain ...[text shortened]... hear it. Let's see a few of the main thesis statements of Broadbent's proof.

Nemesio[/b]

I sight as my source the entire book of Romans, and excellent piece of apologetics by St. Paul😛

"He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit" (1 Cor. 6:17)


This means that the human spirit and the Divine Spirit which is the Lord become one united and blended spirit. That is a very close relationship.

" ... Christ in you the hope of glory" (Col. 1:27)

The hope of the Christ of the splendid radiant expression of the divine is Christ in them. Christ lives in them and one day will be the glorious manifestation radiating from them. A very close relationship.

" ... the Son of God Who loved me and gave Himself up for me." (Gal. 2:20)

This is personal. Christ the Son of God loved Paul and gave Himself up for Paul. He loved each of us and died for us. Only a God-man could do this. And it represents that He wants a very intimate relationship.


" ... do you not know that Jesus Christ is in you, unless you are disapproved?" (2 Cor. 13:5)

Paul reminds the Corinthian Christians that Jesus Christ lives in them.
The indwelling of Jesus Christ as the life giving Spirit represents a very close relationship.


" the last Adam [Christ] became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)


What could be more of a relationship than a person with the life that is given to him. This is not the bios life or the psyche life. This is the divine and eternal life which is Christ Himself. The life giving Spirit means the Christ giving Spirit or the God giving Spirit. This is a very subjective relationship. And it is an eternal one.


"Jesus answered and said to him, If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make an abode with him." (John 14:23)

The Father and the Son will come to make an abode with the lover of Jesus. This is a very intimate relationship with the Triune God. And of course that means a relationship with Jesus Christ.

" No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing, but I have called you friends, for all that things which I have heard from My Father I have made known to you." (John 15:15)

Here the relationship between Jesus an His disciples is upgraded from servants or slaves to friends.

But we will see that after the resurrection the relationship gets deeper than just friends. It becomes one of a brotherhood under the same Father with the same divine life.

After His resurrection:

" Jesus said to her, Do not touch Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brothers and say to them, I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God." (John 20:17)


The relationship with His disciples is one of brothers.

"The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you" (2 Tim. 4:22)

This is Paul's final word in the New Testament. The last word is often the most important word. He reminds Timothy that the Lord Jesus Christ is with his human spirit. This is the most intimate relationship between the believer and the Lord Jesus.

Do not forget Timothy. The Lord is with your spirit.

I could go on and on and on. It was tremendously incorrect for Nemesio to proclaim that a relationship with Jesus is "utterly foreign to the Bible".

I think Nemesio must be utterly foriegn to the Bible. Let's see if he will acknowledge his mistake or try to vindicate it.

The relationship of Jesus is such that He looks beyond one's faults and sees one's needs. His love is so deep. It is hard to come to the simplicity of the realization that He just wants us.

More than what we can do or can give, He just wants us.

He comes into a person as the Holy Spirit. The symbol for the Holy Spirit is a dove. A dove is such a gentle creature. And Christ is strong yet gentle. He is powerful enough to subdue me with His love. Yet He did so as a gentleman and not through coercion.


A dove is easily frightened away. Christ will not come crashing into you disregarding your free will. Christ will not coerce you against your free will.

When you read the gospels your heart can be touched with the love of Christ. He is still the same today. He looks beyond your faults and sees your needs.

The hymn writer really knew what s/he was writing when the song was written "What a Friend We Have in Jesus."


He is the Great Physician and skillful doctor. Christ can untie complicated knots of life. I highly recommend Him.

Originally posted by jaywill
I could go on and on and on.

I think we all agree on this.

God became a man so that man might become God in life and nature but not in the Godhead.


He became like us so that we might become like Him.

The relationship is one of mingling, synthesis, blending, incorporation, and union. That is the divine and the human interwoven into one - a mutual indwelling of God and humanity.

What a relationship !

Originally posted by SwissGambit
I think we all agree on this.

Actually, it isn’t just the case that he COULD go on and on; he DOES go on and on.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
Actually, it isn’t just the case that he COULD go on and on; he DOES go on and on.

Hey, somebody new may come to the forum and read it for the first time.

Don't discourage them.

Originally posted by jaywill
I could go on and on and on. It was tremendously incorrect for Nemesio to proclaim that a relationship with Jesus is "utterly foreign to the Bible".

I think Nemesio must be utterly foriegn to the Bible. Let's see if he will acknowledge his mistake or try to vindicate it.

Okay, Jaywill. First let's agree that nowhere in the Bible does St Paul, St John, St James, St
Peter, St Jude or Jesus say that the key to a well-formed faith is in relationship with Jesus.
The word 'relationship,' one so key to your theological perspective, is completely absent in
the Christian Scriptures.

Now, let's go through your quotations. They fall into two categories.

1) Irrelevant.

"... the Son of God Who loved me and gave Himself up for me." (Gal. 2:20)

Yes. St Paul viewed Jesus' actions as sacrifice, that Jesus was the Paschal Lamb for the sins
of the world. Of this, there can be no debate or question. While this doesn't exclude a post-
Resurrection relationship, it certainly doesn't necessarily entail one. We're looking for positive
proof that Jesus wants His believers to 'have a relationship with Him.'

"the last Adam [Christ] became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)

Again, the notion of sacrifice, even one that liberates all Creation from the stain of sin doesn't
necessarily entail relationship. We want necessity.

"No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing, but I have called you friends, for all that things which I have heard from My Father I have made known to you." (John 15:15)

Now, naturally, Jesus had a relationship with His Disciples. I'm not disputing that Sts John,
Matthew, James, James, Peter, Philip, &c &c &c didn't know Jesus or didn't have a relationship
with Him. But this is the pre-Resurrection Jesus. His followers needed to have a relationship
with Him. I was talking about the followers of Jesus after the NT period. This passage
is a conversation between Jesus and the Disciples, not an instruction for Jesus' future followers.
What are some of those instructions? To keep God's commandments, to attend to those in
need, to avoid hypocrisy of theological thought, to be pure of mind and heart, &c &c. Lots of
instructions, but no mention of having a relationship.

"Jesus said to her, Do not touch Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brothers and say to them, I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God." (John 20:17)

I find it amusing that you can believe that the author of this passage equated Jesus with God,
when He Himself says that He will ascend to His God, but not to digress....

Like above, it's clear that Jesus established a relationship with His Disciples. Only a fool would
argue otherwise. However, such closeness with His contemporaries doesn't entail that a future
believer (a post-Resurrection/post-Ascension one) need to be His brothers. Indeed, St Paul
never says 'Brothers and sisters of Christ,' but 'Brothers and sisters in Christ.'

This leads us to the second category of quotations.

2) Misinterpreted.

"He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit" (1 Cor. 6:17)
" ... Christ in you the hope of glory" (Col. 1:27)
" ... do you not know that Jesus Christ is in you, unless you are disapproved?" (2 Cor. 13:5)
"Jesus answered and said to him, If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make an abode with him." (John 14:23)
"The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you" (2 Tim. 4:22)

Clearly, St Paul thought that the Christ was going to have a continuing presence in the lives
of believers. But what does that entail? Your response is naturally, 'a relationship, of course!'
But that word and the concepts which typically define 'relationship' as between individuals is
conspicuously absent. So, did St Paul mean something else?

St Paul always speaks of Christ being with or in or within a person, and when he is
being more explicit, he always says 'with your spirit.

This ties in with the notion of being 'born from above.' For St Paul, a person 'within whom the
spirit of Christ dwells' is a believer. A person who has Christ in his heart, will also have Him
on His lips and in His understanding. Christ, for St Paul, then is not a person with whom to
have a relationship, but a means by which one is transformed to the higher, Godly calling.
For St Paul, believers now have a mediator between God and humankind, and the believer can
imbibe that mediator, and consequently be opened to truths hitherto unavailable to humankind.
Through that indwelling (not relationship), the fruits of the spirit can blossom, first in the hearts
of believers, and then in the lives of believers, sowing the metaphorical seeds of faith within
the fields of the world.

My summary is concordant with St Paul's teaching (though it only summarizes a small portion
of it) and doesn't involve the 'R-word' that was sooooo important, that St Paul fails to mention
it even once.

Now, having offered my rebuttal to your claim, I'm going to ask you this: Rather than spout
out a few more irrelevant or misinterpreted Biblical citations, try addressing my specific claims
directly. Keep in mind that you didn't actually respond to my initial post (to see 'a few of the
main thesis statements of Broadbent's proof'😉, but that's okay. You offered what you took to
be evidence of the basic claim. Rather than ignoring what I wrote and just ranting and raving,
address specifically what I wrote. Otherwise, it's just cat and mouse where you make these
sweeping claims based on the tiniest excisions of Scripture (not even full verses!) and I have
to keep putting these verses in context that demonstrates how your claims are false.

Give it a try. Engage in a discussion rather than the 'on and on and on' soliloquies. I
think a good place to start (rather than Scripture) is with your definition of what a relationship
is, and then how a relationship with Jesus ought to look like, and then support it with Scripture.
But that's just my suggestion (you know, that you offer concrete definitions of the terms being
bandied about, and how those definitions are realized on a practical level). Take it or leave it.

Nemesio

Originally posted by jaywill
The hymn writer really knew what s/he was writing when the song was written "What a Friend We Have in Jesus."

Are you trying to goad me into becoming a raving lunatic? You could not have picked a more
insipid, meaningless, vapid, vacuous, banal hymn. I mean, short of 'Jesus loves me this I know...,' you couldn't have gotten more trite. I mean, the guy couldn't rhyme anything
except 'prayer,' 'there,' 'bear,' 'care,' and so on. What a joke! And you don't even know if
it's a man or a woman who wrote a hymn that means so much to you?!? You ought to be
ashamed.

Here's a man's hymn, requiring more than an 11-year-old's grasp of English to write.

The Church’s one foundation Is Jesus Christ her Lord,
She is His new creation By water and the Word.
From heaven He came and sought her To be His holy bride;
With His own blood He bought her And for her life He died.

She is from every nation, Yet one o’er all the earth;
Her charter of salvation, One Lord, one faith, one birth;
One holy Name she blesses, Partakes one holy food,
And to one hope she presses, With every grace endued.

The Church shall never perish! Her dear Lord to defend,
To guide, sustain, and cherish, Is with her to the end:
Though there be those who hate her, And false sons in her pale,
Against both foe or traitor She ever shall prevail.

Though with a scornful wonder Men see her sore oppressed,
By schisms rent asunder, By heresies distressed:
Yet saints their watch are keeping, Their cry goes up, “How long?”
And soon the night of weeping Shall be the morn of song!

’Mid toil and tribulation, And tumult of her war,
She waits the consummation Of peace forevermore;
Till, with the vision glorious, Her longing eyes are blest,
And the great Church victorious Shall be the Church at rest.

Yet she on earth hath union With God the Three in One,
And mystic sweet communion With those whose rest is won,
With all her sons and daughters Who, by the Master’s hand
Led through the deathly waters, Repose in Eden land.

O happy ones and holy! Lord, give us grace that we
Like them, the meek and lowly, On high may dwell with Thee:
There, past the border mountains, Where in sweet vales the Bride
With Thee by living fountains Forever shall abide!
---Samuel J. Stone

Nemesio or anyone else too lazy to read my rebuttal, this is not written for you. This is written for those who care enough to have a substantial analysis of these arguments.

====================================
Okay, Jaywill. First let's agree that nowhere in the Bible does St Paul, St John, St James, St Peter, St Jude or Jesus say that the key to a well-formed faith is in relationship with Jesus.
====================================

Aside from Nemesio's old fashion Catholic habit of refering to these Christian brothers as St. this or St. that, (all believers in Jesus are saints (1 Cor. 1:2)), his concepts are wrong.

The specific word "communion" or "fellowship"certainly means relationship.

Paul - "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the FELLOWSHIP of the Holy Spirit be with you all." (2 Cor. 13:14)

The fellowship of the Holy Spirit is the fellowship with Jesus in His pneumatic form for "the Lord is the Spirit" (2 Cor. 3:17). That is a subjective spiritual intimacy with Jesus Christ.

John - " ... that you may have fellowship with us, and indeed our fellowship with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ." (1 John 1:3)

John and the 11 apostles may be departed. But the Father and His Son are touchable and experiencible even to this moment by the saved. The saved down through the centries are called to have fellowship with the Father and the Son. This is certainly a relationship.

James - Says that the Father "brought us forth". How does Nemesio expect that the Father who begot us would not want to have a relationship with us. Furthermore James holds of Abraham as a model to Christians, calling him "a friend of God"..

Abraham, says James, had a friendly relationship with God. James expects that Christians would follow Abraham's example of friendship with God. Jesus is God incarnate as a man.

James furthermore speaks of the Holy Spirit indwelling the believers and envying on behalf of their love and devotion. "The Spirit, whom He has caused to dwell in us, longs to envy." (James 4:5)

The indwelling Holy Spirit longs to envy for a deeper relationship with which the Christian would give up loving the world to love God.

Peter - "You have tasted that the Lord is good." (1 Peter 2:3)

This indication of a most personal and intimate relationship. The believes have tasted in a most subjective way that the Lord is good.

And Peter says the Christians are the people of God's own possession ( 1 Pet. 2:9)

Peter says Christ suffered in order to bring us to God (1 Pet. 3:18)[/b] That is of course for a close relationship. Why else would Christ want to bring us to God?

Jude - " ... building up yourselves upon your most holy faith, ppraying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God." (Jude 20,21)

No one can pray in the Holy Spirit without having an intimate relationship with God. And keeping oneself in the love of God strongly implies preserving and nuturing a personal relationship of communion and fellowship with God. Jesus Christ is God the Son (Heb.1:8)

======================================
The word 'relationship,' one so key to your theological perspective, is completely absent in the Christian Scriptures.
===================================

This lie is more likely a reflection of Nemesio's non-existent relationship with Christ. That the word "relationship" is not found in English translations has no bearing. I have no read ALL English translations.

However. communion and fellowship indicate a relationship. And a small sample of the usage "fellowship" above proves that it is normal for disciples to enjoy this intimate interaction with Jesus Christ.

Nemesio seems to want to define all Christian experience by his own spiritual poverty.

I'll submit this and continue.

=======================================
Now, let's go through your quotations. They fall into two categories.

1) Irrelevant.

"... the Son of God Who loved me and gave Himself up for me." (Gal. 2:20)

Resurrection relationship, it certainly doesn't necessarily entail one. We're looking for positive proof that Jesus wants His believers to 'have a relationship with Him.'
======================================

Incorrect. The context of Paul's reminder that Christ loved him and gave Himself up for him is the motivation for Paul to allow Christ to live in him at that moment:

"It is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me; and the life which I NOW live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith of the Son of God Who loved me and gave Himself up for me." (Gal. 2:20)

Paul is motivated to stand upon the truth that in Christ he too was crucified. He no longer lives the life of a Christless EGO. The life that his EGO now lives is actually the resurrected Christ living in him, one with him, in fellowship with him, and in communion with him. He allows this phenomenon to take place because he is touched by the degree to which Christ loved him and died for Him.

==========================================
"the last Adam [Christ] became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)

Again, the notion of sacrifice, even one that liberates all Creation from the stain of sin doesn't
necessarily entail relationship. We want necessity.
========================================

This passage is less about sacrifice and more about life impartation. Nemesio has a kind of one note idealogy. He knows something about Jesus dying on the cross and sees not too much more. So he reads the Paschal Lamb into verses which actually emphasize something other than atonement.

In this case "Last Adam" certainly the death of Jesus. But "life giving Spirit" means the giving of a totally intimate relationship with Jesus. He becomes our divine life. What could be more subjective to a person than his life.

In addition to the life one was naturally born with, now Christ in resurrection becomes to the believer "a life giving Spirit" to give that person God, to give that person Christ Jesus, and to give that person an "organic" life relationship in oneness with Jesus.


================================
"No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing, but I have called you friends, for all that things which I have heard from My Father I have made known to you." (John 15:15)

Now, naturally, Jesus had a relationship with His Disciples. I'm not disputing that Sts John,
Matthew, James, James, Peter, Philip, &c &c &c didn't know Jesus or didn't have a relationship with Him. But this is the pre-Resurrection Jesus. His followers needed to have a relationship
with Him. I was talking about the followers of Jesus after the NT period.
==========================================

The teaching of John 14 through 17 is not for the 12 disciples only. It includes all the disciples throughout church history.

For example: "Jesus answered and said to him, if ANYONE [my emphasis] ... if ANYONE loves Me, he will keep My word and, and My Father will love him, and We [Father and Son] will come to him and make an abode with him." (John 14:23)

1.) ANYONE includes more than just the twelve disciples.

2.) There is no closer possible relationship then the Triune God imparting Himself INTO the believers to make them His abodes to ABIDE in them - "We will come to him and make an abode with him"

How can Nemesio say that God can do that without our having a relationship with God. Jesus is God the Son (Heb. 1:8)

Furthermore in chapter 15, where we see the quote about slaves and friends, the word about abiding as a branch in Himself as the True Vine applies to all disciples throughout the church age:

"Abide in Me and I in you" (15:4)

"I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing." (15:5)

"He who abides" is NOT restricted to only the 12 disciples. It refers to ANYONE down through church history who seeks to enjoy such a relationship.

The true vine with its abiding branches is not something that died or went away after Jesus physically left and the 12 disciples all died. The true vine with its abiding branches continues until today and throughout eternity.

The picture of the life of the vine flowing into the branches to cause them to bear fruit could only be viewed as a most intimate relationship between vine and branches.

"As the Father has loved Me, I also have loved you; abide in My love." (15:9)

The exhortation is to all disciples to abide in Him and to abide in His love. How can that be done without a relatioship. Nemesio's idea of a relationshipLESS Christian life is absurd.

=====================================
This passage
is a conversation between Jesus and the Disciples, not an instruction for Jesus' future followers.
What are some of those instructions? To keep God's commandments, to attend to those in
need, to avoid hypocrisy of theological thought, to be pure of mind and heart, &c &c. Lots of
instructions, but no mention of having a relationship.
===================================

Here Nemesio shoots himself in the foot. He wants to hold only the 12 original disciples to the responsibility to keep the commandments of Jesus.

However the Apostle John also reminds the congregation of believers to keep the Lord's commandments. And these commandments are coming mostly from His internal and indwelling leading.

"He who says, I know Him, and does not keep His commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in this one; But whoever keeps His word, truly in this one the love of God has been perfected. In this WE know that we are in Him." (1 John 2:4,5)

The word "we" there would include John, one of the 12, and his audience of diciples most likely all if not most of which we OTHER than the twelve original disciples.

===================================
"Jesus said to her, Do not touch Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brothers and say to them, I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God." (John 20:17)

I find it amusing that you can believe that the author of this passage equated Jesus with God,
==========================================

The author of this passage plainly told us that the Word was God in his prologue. He furthermore recorded that Jesus said He was the I AM , the God who appeared to Moses in the bush and even predated the existence of Abraham - the eternal God.

The fact that John was faithful to include other sayings of Jesus argue for John's candor. He was not afraid to include difficult or potentially problematic sayings of Jesus.

=================================
when He Himself says that He will ascend to His God, but not to digress....
===============================

God is Father - Son - Holy Spirit. Speaking as a man under the submission of the Father, Jesus, the Son, spoke of the ascension to the Father.

==================================
Like above, it's clear that Jesus established a relationship with His Disciples. Only a fool would
argue otherwise.
======================================

Nemesio totally misses that the relationship Jesus has with the Father He prays that all the disciples of His might co-share in.

"Father, concerning that which you have given Me, I desire that they also be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory, which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world." (John 17:24)

The intimate relatioship that the Son of God enjoys with the Father, He prays that His "brothers" also would be perfected into. That is that they may be where He is.

This thought is also conveyed in chapter 14: - "In My Father's house are many abodes. If it were not so I would have told you; for I go to prepare place for you." (14:2)

Jesus says here that if it were not possible for the disciples to enjoy the intimate relationship He had with the Father He would have told them already up front. But instead He goes to prepare a place for them as well. This is not a mansion in heaven. This is a place in the Father as a living abode. And He goes to prepare it by dying on the cross and coming again to the disciples in resurrection:

" ... for I go and prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I am coming again and will receive you to Myself, so that where I am you also may be." (14:3)

And of course the ingular form of the noun ABODES as in (in My Father's house there are many ABODES"😉 occurs in verse 23. In verse 23 Jesus and His Father will come to the lover of Christ and make their ABODE with him. The many disciples within whom the Father and Son make their abode become the "many abodes" in the Father's house.

The Father's house is an organic and living building of redeemed and regenerated human beings abiding in God and God abiding in them. This of course is a mutual relationship.

Nemesio's compliant is reduced to soggy ashes. It is totally destroyed.

==========================
However, such closeness with His contemporaries doesn't entail that a future believer (a post-Resurrection/post-Ascension one) need to be His brothers.
=======================================

Speak for yourself. Why do you think John wrote all of this? It was not to put up the twelve on pedestal. It was direction and instruction for future disciples to come into the church.

...

==========================
However, such closeness with His contemporaries doesn't entail that a future believer (a post-Resurrection/post-Ascension one) need to be His brothers.
=======================================

Speak for yourself. Why do you think John wrote all of this? It was not to put up the twelve on pedestal. It was direction and instruction for future disciples to come into the church.

Many aspects of the discussion in John 14 throughout the end of the book are for the benefit and guidance of future disciples. And one only needs consult John's epistles to confirm this. He continues in the same flavor, same spirit, same concepts, and same tone with his audience and readers.

So if you want to exempt yourself on excuses, then speak only for yourself. "I don't have to have a relationship with Jesus because that was only intended for the twelve disciples!"

Nonsense.

=====================================
Indeed, St Paul
never says 'Brothers and sisters of Christ,' but 'Brothers and sisters in Christ.'
==============================

Good point. Brothers and sisters in the sphere of the living Christ. Family members in the realm of this living Christ. And you say there is no relationship ? Nonsense.


Some skeptics seem to want it both ways. The instructions of Jesus are only for the 12 apostles. But on the other hand all the other disciple, who to them are not responsible to live for any of these teachings are to be condemned for being bad Christians.

They need too make up their mind whether to hold us to a different standard or the same standard. They can't just choose which one is convenient for their criticisms.