Clearly your study of history on this matter has left out a few centuries! Once Jesus changed the name of Simon bar Jonah everyone called him Peter.Some might say the ultimate cherry pick.I dont know at the moment but I think “rock” referencs Christ and God 39 times in the bible, and only Him, save for this one 3rd century Catholic application.
Christ is also referenced as both petros and petras.
That he was called Cephas or rock or stone does not change the initial understanding by earliest fathers on said verse.Clearly your study of history on this matter has left out a few centuries! Once Jesus changed the name of Simon bar Jonah everyone called him Peter.
Do you not follow his reasoning… “not Catholic,” “perform,” “protestants” have differences, ergo three wrongs makes them right.BINGO!! Therefore, not a valid Christian denom.
That he was not really a Rock, grafted into Christ?That he was called Cephas or rock or stone does not change the initial understanding by earliest fathers on said verse.
Actually not!Saint Paul says nothing about indignation and proper belief, but from partaking unworthily, which he later explains as carnality towards others members of the body/ congregation.
St. Paul does not leave the Breaking of the Bread to 20th and 21st centuries’ speculations!27 Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. (1 Corinthians 11)
Yes understand this and feel it still supports my post. No one denies the 12 foundations that the apostles are, and as noted in Revelation. But it is 12, not Peter on Christ and then the eleven on Peter. It is twelve with no further distinction between the 12. (Yet do not deny the fitting man made term of Peter being first amongst equals).And Jesus grafted Peter into Himself, and the foundation He built and of which He is the cornerstone. The presence of Jesus as cornerstone does not negate the remainder of the foundation of Apostles and Prophets.
How could he WikiLeaks were not around then!St.Martin did not teach transubstantiation
Nor “Alexa”How could he WikiLeaks were not around then!
From this exchange we can understand that it is not as clear cut as you surmise; some believe one way, others other ways, some in no ways at all–by attempting to glue it altogether with “to each his own” or “I believe all find their way to God” or “God calls people to different understandings” is simply the rational of schism claiming to come from Divine Inspiration (the Holy Spirit).I believe that Scripture is all truth and leads everybody to truth no matter what side of the christian church you are on.
Yes, but was addressing the partaking of communion unworthilyActually not!
He explains it right then and there as not observing the Breaking of the Bread as participation of the actual Flesh/Body and Blood of Jesus:
A foundation is flat, not piled one upon another. All of the Apostles and Prophets that were made into the foundation are grafted into Christ. Peter had certain roles and responsibilities that were not given to anyone else.But it is 12, not Peter on Christ and then the eleven on Peter.
I find it odd, as well as “prince of the Apostles”. But Peter is more prominent in many ways in the Gospels, and this is a reflection of how he was regarded. He is always listed first - given the spot of primacy. My reading of Peter is that he was a deeply humiliated/humble man and I think he would have happily knocked some of those medieval Popes off their thrones with a heavy staff!Yet do not deny the fitting man made term of Peter being first amongst equals
All this fiddling with the Greek is so silly. The conversation was in Aramaic, where there is no distinction! Cephas = Rock.Yes grafted, even born of , Petras. Peter is Petros, but not Petras.
Nor to 12 th cetury terms or Greek philosophy…what i espouse has been also since the beginning, not just 21 c or even reformation.St. Paul does not leave the Breaking of the Bread to 20th and 21st centuries’ speculations!
Yet, most of those who stand outside of the Church must legitimize their beliefs by rejecting the Catholic Church as the Church Founded by God and placing their (any group but the Catholic Church) as the “true” church of God. In essence, they deny the Catechism of the Catholic Church’s acceptance of their trek in Jesus.but since we are in a journey there are various paths to the fullness of the faith.
Ummm, precisely what the phrase implies…first, even prominent.But Peter is more prominent in many ways in the Gospels, and this is a reflection of how he was regarded. He is always listed first
This is fully correct!not everybody in the catholic church is going to make it into the Kingdom of God.
All the validly baptized are members of the Church of Christ and also the catechumens. Do you mean the Catholic Church when you state “outside of the Church”?those who stand outside of the Church
1249 Catechumens "are already joined to the Church, they are already of the household of Christ, and are quite frequently already living a life of faith, hope, and charity."48 "With love and solicitude mother Church already embraces them as her own."49
1267 Baptism makes us members of the Body of Christ: …
It’s a sign of desperation and empty superiority complex. Remember what the warning was?:Honestly, I have been here for a long time, and never had a member brag about reading the posts with colleagues and mocking the deficiencies of the other members. If this is Christlike behavior, I am unfamiliar with it.
St. James further expands on wisdom in this manner:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written: I will catch the wise in their own craftiness. 20 And again: The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. 21 Let no man therefore glory in men. (1 Corinthians 3)
As God, let the foolish contend with their “wisdom.”8 Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners: and purify your hearts, ye double minded. 9 Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned into mourning, and your joy into sorrow. 10 Be humbled in the sight of the Lord, and he will exalt you. (St. James 4)
It is the greatest anomaly in reason: they understand this fact; they quote the fact; they even use Scriptures to promote the fact as sound (‘not of the fold’ or ‘a different gospel’ or false teacher/prophets) yet they actually project it towards the one Church Founded by Christ and attempt to hold her as suspect.Interestingly, all the denominations and invalid Christian sects were founded by men. It’s a historical fact.