Originally Posted by CiB
The point is that the visible church is not infallible because it is composed of both regenerate & unregenerate members. As such, the councils of the visible church are not infallible either. The Jerusalem Council is different (& irrelevant) because it had apostolic authority which no council since has possessed.
So, are you saying the apostles were infallible, whereas Timothy and Titus and everyone else they ordained were not? Did all the apostles have to be alive? They could have convened an infallible council in AD 90 (while John was still alive,) but not in AD 100?


Originally Posted by CiB
What Pilgrim is saying is that the Jerusalem Council was unique. It is not repeatable & not a clear paradigm for the resolution of disputes regarding doctrine & practice in the post-apostolic era.
Is this based on scripture or on opinion? I ask sincerely.

Originally Posted by CiB
The elders/presbyters/bishops, which are the office ordained perpetually in the church for the preaching, teaching, & maintaining true doctrine in the post-apostolic era, are to do so according to the teachings of the apostles contained in Scripture, since the apostles are no longer with us.
Well, I actually agree with this, but it seems, to me, your previous statements do not. If you and I interpret scripture differently and call each other heretics, how do we settle this dispute? Matthew 18:17 provides the answer. Jesus says to take it to the church…ie. the elders/presbyters/bishops you just mentioned. Is the command of Jesus irrelevant?


Originally Posted by CiB
All you do is push the question back another step. No mere man is infallible, & no council of mere men is infallible. Only God is infallible, & His Spirit speaks through Scripture.
You just got through implying that the apostles were infallible, and now you’re telling me no mere man is infallible, only God. Which is it? And mere men wrote scripture, by the way, inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit can inspire men to write scripture and can inspire men to hold a council during a certain period of time, yet can’t inspire “the elders/presbyters/bishops” charged with “preaching, teaching, & maintaining true doctrine in the post-apostolic era” to hold a council in the post-apostolic era?