challenge question, who can answer this

[climer97007]

because the bible is very open to interpretation.

I like what the Ethiopian Eunoch says in Acts 8:34-35:

“The eunuch asked Philip, “Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?” Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.”

At least the eunuch had the humility to understand that he needed an interpreter of Holy Scripture. Today, the vice of Pride has a stranglehold on the hearts of many who are often times unaware.

Only by the grace of God,

Gene

 

[rinnie]

Dear inchrist101

Sorry i am going to start this and then i will get back to you. It has been one of those days.

First about what happened to you, in my opinion it wasnt fair, I love the Catholic Church but i can say there are alot of thing that go on that we not not God would have done. Some people are treated differently than others. Im sorry and as much as i love my church and religion it the truth. I dont know why some people do what they do. I guess give some people authority and thats what happens. Many of times i felt my church betrayed me also. We wont go there. But all in all I know GOd has his reasons. And he will help us.

Second i think im picking up what you are laying down about scripture. ANd again i agree. Its not a matter of who is right or who is wrong and yes when we teach or try to help we need to be kind and nice not accuse. Like in this script no i cant get a answer that makes sense to me. i may never get one. Maybe i will. But dont beat me up if i dont see it how you do. Even if im wrong dont crucify me , God dont want that. I think thats what you are telling me there and i agree. be compassionate, patient with me and if it comes to it agree it disagree. Gotta go. be back

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

It’s interesting that whenever I pray to GOD for guidance someone like you pops up and confirms that GOD has lead us where he wants us to be.

How do you know that that communication is from God?

Is it due to the resultant “fruits” that your choice has shown? Please consider that, from the Catholic viewpoint, you are being kept out of most full communion with the Body of Christ in exchange for the “comforts” of being in the denomination that you find pleasure in.

I can see how Satan would trade people doing great good in the world to their fellow men in exchange for having a “hook” in those who stay away from most full communion with Christ’s Church. It is the inability to give up one’s “freedom of choice to find comfort instead of truth” that if hung onto habitually will drag one to hell.

Catholics don’t condemn you to hell for being non-Catholic. They describe the effects of choosing the “comfy church” to the Church.

Not trying to be sarcastic but I’m always open to a good spirited discussion and willing to admit if I’m wrong.

You obviously are well versed in Catholic doctrine but if you believe that anyone outside the Catholic church has no connection with Jesus and is in deep trouble then you are sadly mistaken.

If you choose to not be in fullest communion with the Church, the Body of Christ, then your chances of salvation are diminished by the vehemence of that choice. Being a “registered parishoner” is not what it means to be a Catholic. We are all Catholics to some extent, all of humanity, but we are at various distances from being in fullest communion with her.

How do you support your position that it’s acceptable to not do as God has said to do and be reasonably assured of your salvation?

It seems when I try to reach out to Catholics I’m told I’m going to hell for being a Protestant. I never even considered myself a Protestant. I’m very neutral.

Your “reaching out” consists of what? Trying to tella Catholic that they don’t NEED to be as in communion with the Body of Christ as they are? Can you see how that might be seen as a very odd statement?

I can see both sides many times and I think in some cases we will need to wait for GOD to clarify.

But to suggest that GOD will only reveal the truth to the Catholic church is ridiculous.

The “Catholic Church” is THE Church, and your “churches” are subsets of the Body of Christ which MAKE people be in lesser communion with the Church than those who acknowledge that there is ONE Church of Christ.

All “private revelation”, which is what you really mean when you say “reveal the truth”, must be checked against that revealed to The Church, which no non-Catholic denomination will do, as it obviates the reason for existence.

You see this as ridiculous because you consider all denominations as equal within the “Body of Christ”, and consider the “Catholic Church” as just another denomination. This is the basic underlying error.

All Christians who decide to give their life to Christ will find the truth.

This is simply not true, unless you mean by “give their life to Christ” that they are to do everything that God has told us to do, which, since you have been told to take your “questions” to the Church, and yet refuse to do so, which suggests that that is NOT what you mean by “giving their life to Christ”.

Why because Jesus promised a helper to us in the HOLY SPIRIT. The HOLY SPIRIT isn’t just for the apostles and the HOLY SPIRIT doesn’t speak to just the pope on matters of faith. The HOLY SPIRIT guides all Christians to the truth.

How can it be that the Holy Spirit would give one “truth” to one denomination and another “truth” to another denomination, such that those “truths” contradict each other?

If those people are relying on communications from a supposedly divine source, and the source of those communications CAN’T be verifiably known to BE divine, how is this “guarantee” for getting INFALLIBLY KNOWN TRUTH, which we DO have as Christians, given to us?

Who would you trust: Yourself, who we’ve just shown is not infallible, or the Church who is the authorized Body of Christ from which all truth in faith and morals comes?

How did Jim Jones’ followers do with their “private revelations” of truth from their “Holy Spirit”?

All Christians will eventually find the truth via the Holy Spirit, but not necessarily in this life from private revelations from what they suppose to be the “Holy Spirit”.

 

[inchrist101]

Dear inchrist101

Sorry i am going to start this and then i will get back to you. It has been one of those days.

First about what happened to you, in my opinion it wasnt fair, I love the Catholic Church but i can say there are alot of thing that go on that we not not God would have done. Some people are treated differently than others. Im sorry and as much as i love my church and religion it the truth. I dont know why some people do what they do. I guess give some people authority and thats what happens. Many of times i felt my church betrayed me also. We wont go there. But all in all I know GOd has his reasons. And he will help us.

Second i think im picking up what you are laying down about scripture. ANd again i agree. Its not a matter of who is right or who is wrong and yes when we teach or try to help we need to be kind and nice not accuse. Like in this script no i cant get a answer that makes sense to me. i may never get one. Maybe i will. But dont beat me up if i dont see it how you do. Even if im wrong dont crucify me , God dont want that. I think thats what you are telling me there and i agree. be compassionate, patient with me and if it comes to it agree it disagree. Gotta go. be back

Rinnie - GOD Bless you. If at the end of the day we agree to disagree that’s OK. It doesn’t bother me. I may disagree but I still and ultimately would never dismiss it as a possibility. That’s how we learn and strengthen one another.

PEACE!!!

 

[rinnie]

inchrist101

ok, im back here is what i found and hopefully it will help.
sometimes you just have to read it and read it, other times it will click right away. I pray that the Good Lord will give me the grace to explain it right and you will get a little of my point.

here it is. the ccc helps me alot.

Okay this is from the book but im trying to make it short. hope i dont screw it up.

From the get go Jesus picked his 12 to do his work. He gives them the authority to preach the Kingdom of God and to heal. they remain associated forever with Christs Kingdom, for thru them he directs his Church. now read this part a couple of times. think about it, Here it is

AS MY FATHER APPOINTED A KINGDOM FOR ME, SO DO I APPOINT FOR YOU THAT YOU MAY EAT AND DRINK AT MY TABLE IN MY KINGDOM AND SIT ON THRONES JUDGING TWELVE TRIBES OF ISRAEL.

NOW THIS PART IS NEXT TO AND VERY VERY IMPORTANT

Simon Peter holds the first place in the college of the twelve. JESUS ENTRUSTED A UNIQUE MISSION TO HIM. THRU A REVELATION FROM THE FATHER PETER HAD CONFESSED YOU ARE THE CHRIST THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD. OUR FATHER THEN, ( THEN ARE YOU WIITH ME) now right after this was what Jesus said. You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. CHRIST THE LIVING STONE THUS ASSURES HIS CHURCH BUILT ON PETER OF VICTORY OVER THE POWERS OF DEATH. SEE because of the faith Peter confessed made him the unshakeable rock of the church. Then you know the rest he said in black white i give you the keys. then remember right before Jesus went back to heaven he said PETER FEED MY SHEEP.

I know this will come to you. It may take time, But i promise you it will. You are a Catholic, You will always be, its in you I can feel it. And you will come back to the church someday. You belong there. I understand you got screwed over its not fair. But God knows where you belong and he knows you will come home some day. But remember just like the protocal son you will always be welcomed home. By your Father, I pray i dont upset you i never meant to do that. But once you are Catholic you will always be, you may not practice the religion in lets say (my church) but you are still Catholic. And when you do come back you will be even a better example to the faith i feel it. Remember you cant take the Holy Spirit out of you soul its in there. Take Care. One more last point on Peter getting the church remember what Jesus said FLESH AND BLOOD DID NOT REVEAL THIS TO YOU . Another wards what i get out of that is I didnt tell you it was the Holy Spirit, See what i mean, If you dont thats okay too. By the way my kids always tell me im crazy anyway, So if you think im a nut thats okay. Have a good one

 

[inchrist101]

Rinnie good stuff. OK now here’s my take and let’s agree that we will ponder over one another’s response.

First I believe Peter was special. I believe Jesus knew this. Peter obviously was bold to preach at Pentecost. Now on this rock. We all know what he said. What I always come back to is this. Is the church built on Peter or Jesus? Obviously Jesus. Now go back to the original Greek and look at the 2 words used for this conversation. You are Petra (greek for small stone or pebble) and on this Petros (Boulder or Big Rock) I will build my church. Two different words are used here Rinnie. Jesus looks at Peter and calls him Petra, then uses Petros referring to himself. Almost like saying you (Peter) are a little pebble and on this gigantic rock or boulder (me/Jesus) I will build my church and the gates of hell will never prevail against it. Some theologians try to say it was done for style but I respectfully disagree. Jesus said this on purpose to make the contrast between he and Peter. This is why he re-named him from Simon to Petra. For this purpose.

Now for the rest I don’t think Jesus was addressing Peter singularly. The rest of the Apostles were there and I think he addressed them as the first members of the church. So think of it this way. I will give you (the church) the keys to Heaven and whatever you (the church) bind and loose on earth will be bound and loosed in Heaven. Then HE reminded the apostles not to tell anyone HE was the Christ. Now the position of the Apostles as first members of HIS church makes sense with regard to the verse in Revelation that you quoted. Jesus church is the new covenant. The Apostles were the first leaders of it so it would make sense that they govern the 12 tribes of Israel and the 144,000.

Anytime Jesus is addressing the Apopstles you have to substitute the church for you. He breathed on them and said receive the power of the Holy Spirit. Whatever you (the church) forgive will be forgiven in Heaven and whatever you (the church) don’t forgive will not be forgiven in Heaven. Don’t we all receive the power of the Holy Spirit when Baptised? Yes. According to the Our Father don’t we have the power to forgive? Yes. Jesus in fact tells us that if we don’t forgive how can God forgive us. We ask GOD for forgiveness in the Our Father not the Priests. Aren’t we members of Jesus church after confessing and getting baptized? Yes. Now go forth (you the church) and make disciples baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and I will always be with you. The Apostles weren’t the only ones that went forth. After Pentecost they all (meaning the church) went forth practicing what they had been taught. That’s why so many churches started to form even in the face of so much persecution. Christianity spread like wild fire. Not just because of the Apostles but because of all church members.

Now one final point. In a discussion with the mother of James and John (Matthew 20-28) a request is made to place each one on the left and right side of Jesus when he comes into HIS Kingdom. Now Jesus responds. You have heard how the Pagans Lord it over one another exercising authority. That will not be so among you. Whosoever wants to be great must be your servant etc. etc. This was the Orthodox church’s chief objection to Marcellinus when he first assumed the office of the Papacy. He took on the title Pontificus Maximus and then ultimately went by Pope. Pontificus Maximus was by the way the same title attributed to Caesar. The Orthodox church argued the same point I do which was Jesus said no Lordship. Marcellinus then countered with the whole on this rock argument. Hence the Great Schism. So if there is no lordship then there can be no pontificus maximus hence there can be no pontiff or Pope. I see the whole thing as one large political structure which I believe is counter to what Jesus wanted.

I don’t attribute anything special to Peter for being first in almost all the lists. I believe he is first because that’s the order Jesus called them in. Again not saying Peter is not special. I’ve read some really good books regarding church history that give a good account of the events leading up to the reformation. I don’t like the splits. But deep down I still see us as one church. Our salvation is based on Jesus and Jesus only. All other teachings are secondary that have no impact on salvation. I know plenty of Current Catholics that do not believe in many teachings but stay because that’s how they were brought up. Not implying anything here but I have yet to find many Catholics outside these boards who read the Bible let alone believe in everything they are taught. Forgive me if I sound critical but it’s very true.

PEACE

 

[holdencaulfield]

Look I don’t care what it says in Greek. Christ makes it quite clear that he is the Church, however he will build his Church on St. Peter.

“And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.” (Matthew 16:18)

Yes I know Christ uses a different word for rock the second time, however why would he refer to a rock on the ground. We don’t know of any church that was built there. Furthermore, why would He give St. Peter the nickname “Peter” meaning Rock just randomly, if St. Peter was not this Rock. Just to trick people, I really doubt it.

 

[fbl9]

hi inchrist101 sorry to barge in:the reason you gave for Jesus changing Simon’s name to Peter basically is flawed in that leaving St Peter;s name as Simon would have accomplished the same thing.from the KJV bibleST Matthew ch 16:19 and I will give unto -thee- the keys of the kingdom…thee is singular not plural be careful in changing the words that are written in scripture that can lead to many mistakes as we are well aware of this.

 

[JRKH]

Look I don’t care what it says in Greek. Christ makes it quite clear that he is the Church, however he will build his Church on St. Peter.

“And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.” (Matthew 16:18)

Yes I know Christ uses a different word for rock the second time, however why would he refer to a rock on the ground. We don’t know of any church that was built there. Furthermore, why would He give St. Peter the nickname “Peter” meaning Rock just randomly, if St. Peter was not this Rock. Just to trick people, I really doubt it.

Jesus did not speak Greek. He spoke aramaic. It is my understanding that in aramaic there is only one word for rocka and it does not denote size. So when Jesus spoke the words it was “Thou art Rock and upon this rock I will build My Church.”

Peace
James

 

[rinnie]

inchrst101

Ok bud got to go get things for work on thur. They are saying snow tommorow and its my day off but i wont drive in it. So ball and chain is taking me now. SO wont be home till late. Will read tommorow what you wrote and get back to you tommorow. Then i will have time to really read and be able to respond, take care God Bless

 

[holdencaulfield]

Jesus did not speak Greek. He spoke aramaic. It is my understanding that in aramaic there is only one word for rocka and it does not denote size. So when Jesus spoke the words it was “Thou art Rock and upon this rock I will build My Church.”

Peace
James

Oh yes you caught me there. Sorry . I don’t know what language this portion was written in however Greek or Aramaic, however the point you just made proves it doesn’t matter.

 

[VARC]

If you do a good review of church history as I’ve done simply to learn where from we came then you will find many interesting facts about the development of the church over the many centuries since it first started in Jerusalem at Pentacost. To save time and space, basically when Constantine took over Rome and declared Christianity to be accepted he ended up appointing 5 arch-bishops to oversee the 5 major Roman provinces including Rome herself. After assuming the title Pontificus Maximus the Arch-Bishop of Rome met with much scrutiny from the remaining 4 arch-bishops which resulted as we all know in the great schism.

PEACE and GOD Bless

“A good review of church history”???I’m not a catholic but I can tell you that this is a ridiculously simplistic and false “review” of church history.

I can only assume that the “5 Roman provinces” of which you speak are the 5 Patriachates of the Catholic Church. Let me assure you that Constantine didn’t appoint any of those patriarchs. Neither St Alexander of Alexandia, St Sylvester of Rome, Eustathius of Antioch, nor Macarius of Jerusalem were appointed by the Roman Emperor.

FYI Constantinople was not even a Patriarchate at that time

 

[inchrist101]

hi inchrist101 sorry to barge in:the reason you gave for Jesus changing Simon’s name to Peter basically is flawed in that leaving St Peter;s name as Simon would have accomplished the same thing.from the KJV bibleST Matthew ch 16:19 and I will give unto -thee- the keys of the kingdom…thee is singular not plural be careful in changing the words that are written in scripture that can lead to many mistakes as we are well aware of this.

That’s OK. Just barge in gently and don’t yell at me. I respectfully disagree. Let’s say that Jesus spoke armaic (spelling??) Oh well. If there’s only one word for rock in Armaic then why did the Matthew choose to use 2 different words. After all he was there and we weren’t. Maybe Jesus gestured to all of them and of course we didn’t see it. Why not say you are petra and on this petra I will build my church? Make it really clear that there can be no mistaking who the rock is. As far as thee being singular. Yes it is 2nd person singular. But Jesus may have been speaking to Peter symbolically. It’s not like he dropped a set of keys in Peter’s hands. So singular in that Jesus was referring to one church. Matthew was there and we weren’t. Interesting he didn’t just flat out tell us.

Bottom line is, none of us were there and we don’t know if Jesus was pointing to Peter or to himself when he made the statement. Further support for the Gospel writers to use petra and petros.

Of course only my honest opinion. We may need to wait for GOD to clarify this one

 

[inchrist101]

Jesus did not speak Greek. He spoke aramaic. It is my understanding that in aramaic there is only one word for rocka and it does not denote size. So when Jesus spoke the words it was “Thou art Rock and upon this rock I will build My Church.”

Peace
James

Then again I ask why did Matthew use 2 different words. Why not say you are peter and upon you peter I will build my church? Or just say you are petra and upon this petra I will build my church?

 

[The_GreyPilgrim]

Then again I ask why did Matthew use 2 different words. Why not say you are peter and upon you peter I will build my church? Or just say you are petra and upon this petra I will build my church?

To answer this you must understand Matthew’s obvious mistake in the grammer of his Greek.

As already established Jesus didn’t speak Greek in the exchange but Aramaic. The only word in that language for “rock” was “kephas”. In Aramaic there would have been no distinction between Peter’s name and the church’s foundation.

As far as the different Greek names used Matthew didn’t have much of a choice. Jesus was speaking of a foundation stone, so petra would certainly be the right choice; but petra is a feminine noun, and so it could not have served as Simon’s new name. A male could not adopt a feminine name; the name would have to be adapted, be given a masculine form. Thus, Matthew, guided by the Spirit, did something that was obvious and practically necessary: he used the masculine form, Petros, to render Peter’s name Kephas.

 

[fbl9]

hi inchrist101 if it seemed as if i was yelling sorry but if i were to yell my words would have been all caps just so you know fro next time.according to the preface in my bible(a revsion of the Challoner-Rheims Version edited by catholic scholars under the patronage of the episcopal committee of the confraternity of christian doctrine)St Matthew wrote originally in the Aramaic language , his text was then translated into greek shortly before or after his death.or a least before the end of the first century. i am no scholar on this issue. the question still remains why the name change.or perhaps you were refering to my last statement i meant all of us are aware of what happens(me and you)when you thought i was yelling again sorry if i seem that way.

 

[Preacher_Vern]

Ok here it is guys. Can someone give me a straight answer. How can any religion, that goes by the bible not believe in the catholic church.

That same question can be ask of any church, its how you want to beleve in the word of God that matters, and all church’s or religions can’t get on the same page. It would be nice if we all could beleve in the same way but that will never happen in our time.

 

[inchrist101]

To answer this you must understand Matthew’s obvious mistake in the grammer of his Greek.

As already established Jesus didn’t speak Greek in the exchange but Aramaic. The only word in that language for “rock” was “kephas”. In Aramaic there would have been no distinction between Peter’s name and the church’s foundation.

As far as the different Greek names used Matthew didn’t have much of a choice. Jesus was speaking of a foundation stone, so petra would certainly be the right choice; but petra is a feminine noun, and so it could not have served as Simon’s new name. A male could not adopt a feminine name; the name would have to be adapted, be given a masculine form. Thus, Matthew, guided by the Spirit, did something that was obvious and practically necessary: he used the masculine form, Petros, to render Peter’s name Kephas.

OK I understand that. But that just re-affirms my point that Matthew was trying to denote 2 different entities in his use of the Words Petra and Petros. Think of it this way. Could Jesus have said “you are Peter and on this Rock” now pointing back to himself I will build my church. Matthew seeing this knows Jesus is the Rock and not Matthew. Peter’s letter now makes sense given that he calls all Christians living stones built up into a spiritual household with the Jesus as the cornerstone. Peter pretty much affirms that Jesus is the Rrock and not himself. He categorizes us with him as stones.

 

[inchrist101]

hi inchrist101 if it seemed as if i was yelling sorry but if i were to yell my words would have been all caps just so you know fro next time.according to the preface in my bible(a revsion of the Challoner-Rheims Version edited by catholic scholars under the patronage of the episcopal committee of the confraternity of christian doctrine)St Matthew wrote originally in the Aramaic language , his text was then translated into greek shortly before or after his death.or a least before the end of the first century. i am no scholar on this issue. the question still remains why the name change.or perhaps you were refering to my last statement i meant all of us are aware of what happens(me and you)when you thought i was yelling again sorry if i seem that way.

Oh no no no. I did not think you were yelling and forgive my response if I implied anything to the contrary. Just trying so hard to understand the Bible. Thanks for being so kind in your response

GOD Bless.

 

[2ndGen]

Then again I ask why did Matthew use 2 different words. Why not say you are peter and upon you peter I will build my church? Or just say you are petra and upon this petra I will build my church?

The terms petra/petros do not exist in the Koine Greek (which is the Greek used to write the New Testament).

So Jesus couldn’t have said big/little rock.

Here is The Aramaic Translation of Matthew 16:18
“I am also telling you that you are the Rock [Peter]
and on this rock I am building my Church,
and the doors of sheol cannot draw it in.”

It’s not in the Aramaic language nor even in the Koine Greek used by The Apostles.

So that belief that Jesus used small rock or big rock is fundamentally (pun intended) wrong.

Plus, my native speaking Greek friend told me the translation in ancient (Koine) Greek…rock means rock means rock means rock.