How can people believe Peter is the rock but still not be Catholic?

[Gofer]

You seem not to notice that the three fold order of bishop, priest and deacon has no pope/supreme pontiff.

Names, names, names. Our pope is a bishop. He just has bigger responsibilities.

And the title “pope” was first given to the Pope of Alexandria, who still holds it. It was restricted in the West to the Pope of Rome by the Pope of Rome (how convenient).

Names, names, names.

Btw, Eusebius uses the word “throne” only when refering to the Cathedra of Jerusalem, and not Rome.
Most humble Peter and John.

[/QUOTE]

 

[tqualey]

Dear willi8,

I have really been trying to keep up … but, I guess age is catching up with me.

Let me try a response or two and see if this help with understanding as we maintain Christian Charity.

I think we have to look at what it is we mean to do when we try and ‘prove’ something. While there is mathematical proof, a legal proof and a logical proof, there is no such thing as a religious proof. Demanding ‘proof’ for a religious matter can actually “prove” to be misleading (just look at all of the Protestant “proofs” about the meaning of the Bible and the various different interpretations from each denominations and even within the same denomination. If nothing else, we must walk carefully in the area of “proof”.

Sometimes the simplest explanation really does answer the question. Throughout the Old Testament, God promised a Savior. But, prior to the birth of Christ, this promise from God remained unfulfilled. Does this mean that we lack proof of God’s Faithfulness? I do not think so: look at how He: kept His promises to Moses and Saul and David. Everything that was promised was delivered.

During the approximate 33 years Christ spent on earth we only have small glances into His Private Life. He was: born in extreme poverty to a Virgin, escaped death at the hands of Herod by fleeing to Egypt, returned on the death of Herod, and then we don’t heard about him until He is lost in Jerusalem. The next event is that He is starting His Public Life by gathering disciples and changing water into wine. Does this mean that we lack proof that He is God? I do not think so: look at how He: did physically impossible things (changed water into wine) knew about the people he would call to be his disciples, fulfilled the previous promises that were made (blind see, deaf hear, dead raised and the poor have the gospel taught to them) and he also taught as one having authority – and not like the teachers of the Temple.

In the course of Christ’s Public Ministry, He spoke about the Father as a distinct Personality and the Father spoke of Jesus (“This is My Son, listen to Him.”) Christ also spoke about the Holy Spirit and how it was necessary for Him to leave (Ascended into heaven 40 days after He rose form the dead) so the Holy Spirit would come to prepare for the actual birth of the Church. Prior to His death, Christ set many elements into place for the continuation of His Plan until He comes in Glory this Second Time. Does this mean that we lack poof that He is God? I do not think so. Look at how He:: prepared Peter to take over as leader of the Apostles, prepared the others for their role in the Ministry, for the descent of the Holy Spirit and how these Apostles went about preaching the Good News after Pentecost. And remember, on Pentecost, the Holy Spirit did not deliver a Book!

While God could have chosen for Jesus to provide for our salvation in an infinite number of ways, He chose this way: that men would need to come to a knowledge of Jesus through the men He appointed and in the way these men designed (“Whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven, whatever is loosed on earth is loosed in heaven.”) We now move our focus form the focused search for “proof” to a simple believe in the words of Christ. We look around and see where His words have come to pass and all of humanity rejoices because of this. During the first 300 years of Christ’s Church – the Catholic Church – there were multiple errors and thousands of people willing to spread them – with Arius being the biggest challenge. But, St. Paul warned about those who would try to destroy the Cross of Christ – and, he knew what he was talking about. Error has been around since Christ –but, this does not mean that there was an abandonment of the Church by Christ – this would mean that He would have broken His words (“I will not leave you orphans.”) The Catholic Church condemned the apostasy of Arius and those who came before this Catholic Priest, and all of the ones who came after him. This is really a matter of just reading history – to look at what others did. The Catholic Church as consistently taught what it teaches now. No one else can lay claim to these elements: founded by Christ, Himself, gave authority directly to the Apostles (and to their successors) and promised that the Gates of Hell would not prevail against it (Note: He did not say “The Gages of Hell would ultimately fail.” At each step of the way the Holy Spirit is guiding his Holy Father so that error does not get into the Church.

I hope I have added some clarification and produced more ‘light’ then ‘heat’ in this matter.

Have a blessed day

 

[JRKH]

Dear willi8,

I have really been trying to keep up … but, I guess age is catching up with me.

Let me try a response or two and see if this help with understanding as we maintain Christian Charity.

I think we have to look at what it is we mean to do when we try and ‘prove’ something. While there is mathematical proof, a legal proof and a logical proof, there is no such thing as a religious proof. Demanding ‘proof’ for a religious matter can actually “prove” to be misleading (just look at all of the Protestant “proofs” about the meaning of the Bible and the various different interpretations from each denominations and even within the same denomination. If nothing else, we must walk carefully in the area of “proof”.

Sometimes the simplest explanation really does answer the question. Throughout the Old Testament, God promised a Savior. But, prior to the birth of Christ, this promise from God remained unfulfilled. Does this mean that we lack proof of God’s Faithfulness? I do not think so: look at how He: kept His promises to Moses and Saul and David. Everything that was promised was delivered.

During the approximate 33 years Christ spent on earth we only have small glances into His Private Life. He was: born in extreme poverty to a Virgin, escaped death at the hands of Herod by fleeing to Egypt, returned on the death of Herod, and then we don’t heard about him until He is lost in Jerusalem. The next event is that He is starting His Public Life by gathering disciples and changing water into wine. Does this mean that we lack proof that He is God? I do not think so: look at how He: did physically impossible things (changed water into wine) knew about the people he would call to be his disciples, fulfilled the previous promises that were made (blind see, deaf hear, dead raised and the poor have the gospel taught to them) and he also taught as one having authority – and not like the teachers of the Temple.

In the course of Christ’s Public Ministry, He spoke about the Father as a distinct Personality and the Father spoke of Jesus (“This is My Son, listen to Him.”) Christ also spoke about the Holy Spirit and how it was necessary for Him to leave (Ascended into heaven 40 days after He rose form the dead) so the Holy Spirit would come to prepare for the actual birth of the Church. Prior to His death, Christ set many elements into place for the continuation of His Plan until He comes in Glory this Second Time. Does this mean that we lack poof that He is God? I do not think so. Look at how He:: prepared Peter to take over as leader of the Apostles, prepared the others for their role in the Ministry, for the descent of the Holy Spirit and how these Apostles went about preaching the Good News after Pentecost. And remember, on Pentecost, the Holy Spirit did not deliver a Book!

While God could have chosen for Jesus to provide for our salvation in an infinite number of ways, He chose this way: that men would need to come to a knowledge of Jesus through the men He appointed and in the way these men designed (“Whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven, whatever is loosed on earth is loosed in heaven.”) We now move our focus form the focused search for “proof” to a simple believe in the words of Christ. We look around and see where His words have come to pass and all of humanity rejoices because of this. During the first 300 years of Christ’s Church – the Catholic Church – there were multiple errors and thousands of people willing to spread them – with Arius being the biggest challenge. But, St. Paul warned about those who would try to destroy the Cross of Christ – and, he knew what he was talking about. Error has been around since Christ –but, this does not mean that there was an abandonment of the Church by Christ – this would mean that He would have broken His words (“I will not leave you orphans.”) The Catholic Church condemned the apostasy of Arius and those who came before this Catholic Priest, and all of the ones who came after him. This is really a matter of just reading history – to look at what others did. The Catholic Church as consistently taught what it teaches now. No one else can lay claim to these elements: founded by Christ, Himself, gave authority directly to the Apostles (and to their successors) and promised that the Gates of Hell would not prevail against it (Note: He did not say “The Gages of Hell would ultimately fail.” At each step of the way the Holy Spirit is guiding his Holy Father so that error does not get into the Church.

I hope I have added some clarification and produced more ‘light’ then ‘heat’ in this matter.

Have a blessed day

Very well said:thumbsup:

Peace
James

 

[tqualey]

Dear n2thelight,

Sorry it took me so long to respond to your post - we were ‘invaded’ by our four grandchilden… and we’ve been having an exhaustingly good time.

I think your concerns about terms (Pope, Holy Father, Vicar of Christ, etc.) were adequately adressed by writers more insightful then me.

Basically, I think the ‘take home message’ is that Christ founded His Chruch on Peter as an ‘on-going concern’. This Church was intended (from all eternity) to last until Christ claims His Bride at His Second Coming.

God gave us wonderful minds. When Christ told the Apostles to “…make disciples of all nations…” (Matt 28:19) it was the start of something ‘big’. One of the problems was that the Apostles had no idea just how big it was going to be. God was slowly revealing His Plan for man’s salvation in measured steps - so that we could more easily understand our role at this time. Look what happened when the Apostles tried to do what it was that they were doing - in the face of a growing number of believers - Acts 6 identifies they could not do it! So, under the inspiraiton of the Holy Spirit, they appointed Deacons to do particular tasks while the Apostles preached the Word of God. Imagine that: Chirst did not have one Deacon in the group of Apostles - and after He Ascends into Heaven, the Apostles begin to make changes!

But, fear not, just look at the way Acts 6 describes Stephen and how he received special blessings from God, inspiration from the Holy Spirit at his ‘trial’ and the vision of Christ during his execution. In addition to this, he prayed for those who were murdering him. My idea is that adding Deacons was a move totally inspired and supported by God. Other changes have also been God inspired - and this is where Tradition comes in. Recall, Scripture was not intended to provide all informaiton (John 21:25).

Times change, but the message of Christ remains the same. And, if you look, the teaching of Christ are fully contained in the teachings of the Catholic Church. If you have any concerns about this, look at this:

Christ said:

1-Baptism is necessary for salvation - the CC baptizes all
2-Let the little children come to me - the CC baptizes infants
3-You (priests) Forgive men’s sins - the CC has Confession
4-Unless you eat My Flesh you have no life - the CC has Holy Communion
5-Receive the Holy Spirity - the CC has Confirmation.
6-Do this in rememberance of Me - the CC has an ordained priesthood.
7-Bind and lose as necessary - the CC has the authority and uses it to make whatever changes are necessary to meet the needs of the People of God in a changing world - but, note: the message of Christ does not change.

Add to all this is an organization that has lasted the test of time (about 2,000 years) teaching the same doctrines as taught by Christ. Look at the Protestant Chruches whose origins are about 1500 years after Christ, where doctrines and interpretations of Scripture change on a regular basis, and where divisions continiue to happen.

To my way of thinking, there is this preponderance of evidence pointing to the Catholic Church as the One, True Church by which we are to join with Christ. Every other group really rests on the the clay feet of humans and the traditions of men. Just look at it for yourself.

Best wishes,

 

[willi8]

Dear willi8,

I have really been trying to keep up … but, I guess age is catching up with me.

Let me try a response or two and see if this help with understanding as we maintain Christian Charity.

I think we have to look at what it is we mean to do when we try and ‘prove’ something. While there is mathematical proof, a legal proof and a logical proof, there is no such thing as a religious proof. Demanding ‘proof’ for a religious matter can actually “prove” to be misleading (just look at all of the Protestant “proofs” about the meaning of the Bible and the various different interpretations from each denominations and even within the same denomination. If nothing else, we must walk carefully in the area of “proof”.

Sometimes the simplest explanation really does answer the question. Throughout the Old Testament, God promised a Savior. But, prior to the birth of Christ, this promise from God remained unfulfilled. Does this mean that we lack proof of God’s Faithfulness? I do not think so: look at how He: kept His promises to Moses and Saul and David. Everything that was promised was delivered.

During the approximate 33 years Christ spent on earth we only have small glances into His Private Life. He was: born in extreme poverty to a Virgin, escaped death at the hands of Herod by fleeing to Egypt, returned on the death of Herod, and then we don’t heard about him until He is lost in Jerusalem. The next event is that He is starting His Public Life by gathering disciples and changing water into wine. Does this mean that we lack proof that He is God? I do not think so: look at how He: did physically impossible things (changed water into wine) knew about the people he would call to be his disciples, fulfilled the previous promises that were made (blind see, deaf hear, dead raised and the poor have the gospel taught to them) and he also taught as one having authority – and not like the teachers of the Temple.

In the course of Christ’s Public Ministry, He spoke about the Father as a distinct Personality and the Father spoke of Jesus (“This is My Son, listen to Him.”) Christ also spoke about the Holy Spirit and how it was necessary for Him to leave (Ascended into heaven 40 days after He rose form the dead) so the Holy Spirit would come to prepare for the actual birth of the Church. Prior to His death, Christ set many elements into place for the continuation of His Plan until He comes in Glory this Second Time. Does this mean that we lack poof that He is God? I do not think so. Look at how He:: prepared Peter to take over as leader of the Apostles, prepared the others for their role in the Ministry, for the descent of the Holy Spirit and how these Apostles went about preaching the Good News after Pentecost. And remember, on Pentecost, the Holy Spirit did not deliver a Book!

While God could have chosen for Jesus to provide for our salvation in an infinite number of ways, He chose this way: that men would need to come to a knowledge of Jesus through the men He appointed and in the way these men designed (“Whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven, whatever is loosed on earth is loosed in heaven.”) We now move our focus form the focused search for “proof” to a simple believe in the words of Christ. We look around and see where His words have come to pass and all of humanity rejoices because of this. During the first 300 years of Christ’s Church – the Catholic Church – there were multiple errors and thousands of people willing to spread them – with Arius being the biggest challenge. But, St. Paul warned about those who would try to destroy the Cross of Christ – and, he knew what he was talking about. Error has been around since Christ –but, this does not mean that there was an abandonment of the Church by Christ – this would mean that He would have broken His words (“I will not leave you orphans.”) The Catholic Church condemned the apostasy of Arius and those who came before this Catholic Priest, and all of the ones who came after him. This is really a matter of just reading history – to look at what others did. The Catholic Church as consistently taught what it teaches now. No one else can lay claim to these elements: founded by Christ, Himself, gave authority directly to the Apostles (and to their successors) and promised that the Gates of Hell would not prevail against it (Note: He did not say “The Gages of Hell would ultimately fail.” At each step of the way the Holy Spirit is guiding his Holy Father so that error does not get into the Church.

I hope I have added some clarification and produced more ‘light’ then ‘heat’ in this matter.

Have a blessed day

Thank you very much for your thoughtful reply. You have added some clarification on the matter, and I am always greatful to those who produce ‘light’ rather than ‘heat’. I agree with much of what you said, however, there are still some things which I don’t agree with. I will not go into those matters now, simply because I do not have the time needed to reply and comment on so many posts. I have noticed that I am falling behind with my school work by trying to research the history of the Early Fathers. Rather, I would like to know of a good book which covers the succession from Peter to Linus and so forth. If you would recommend one, I would appreciate it. If I have a question or doubt, I will most likely ask or comment on Sundays. Thanks again for your insight. You and some others have been very respectful, while others seem only interested in boasting and increasing their self-esteem. These will be found in all religions, but is the meek who will truly represent the Lord…THANKS

 

[tqualey]

Dear willi8,

Since you asked… My recommendation is: “The Essential Catholic Survival Guide” by Staff of Catholic Answers, 2005, Catholic Answers, San Diago ISBN I-888992-8I-6

And, in an effort to leave no stone unturned… here is a link that will come in handy - and, to make sure you do not lose too much time looking for this treasure - and taking you away from your school work… here is a link from Amazon wih a discount! amazon.com/Essential-Catholic-Survival-Guide/dp/1888992816

Now, this book is NOT a substitute for an after dinner brandy. It will take some time and effort. But, if you are sincerely interested in knowing more about how different issues have developed over the course of time… and how these differences exist to this present day… and what those truly serching need to examine - well, this is the book for you!

Best wishes,

 

[centurion210]

Willi8,

Another good book is The Early Papacyby Adrian Fortescue. It covers from the beginning up to the Synod of Chalcedon in 451. It is short but is loaded with information which you can further verify for yourself, if you wish.

John

 

[tqualey]

Hi, willi8

I came across a very interesting post last night that I would like to share. In your search of LDS scholars, you may be interested in looking at this link:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3922717&postcount=2

This will take you to another section on Catholic Answers where apparently there are some issues on LDS’s initial prophecies from Joseph Smith as recorded in LDS records.

If you have not seen this before, it is worth a look. If you have seen this before - maybe you can provide an explantion. My focus is not ‘stumping’ people, but rather presenting information. How you ultimately handle this is your focus.

Best wishes,

 

[awantz]

For example, CRAIG L. BLOMBERG

( CONTEMPORARY BAPTIST)

“The expression ‘this rock’ almost certainly refers to Peter, following immediately after his name, just as the words following ‘the Christ’ in verse 16 applied to Jesus. The play on words in the Greek between Peter’s name (Petros) and the word ‘rock’ (petra) makes sense only if Peter is the Rock and if Jesus is about to explain the significance of this identification” [New American Commentary: Matthew, 22:252].

The guy who preached at my church about a month ago is not Catholic, but he said, “I believe that Peter was the first pastor.”

 

[tqualey]

Dear awantz,

I seem to recall an expression about, “…the journey of 1000 miles begins with the first step…”.

It may be that you just witnessed that ‘first step’.

Best wishes

 

[awantz]

Dear awantz,

I seem to recall an expression about, “…the journey of 1000 miles begins with the first step…”.

It may be that you just witnessed that ‘first step’.

Best wishes

Maybe, but he had a lot of wrong/ negative thoughts about/ towards the Catholic Church that I corrected him on.

 

[Always_For_Him]

Maybe, but he had a lot of wrong/ negative thoughts about/ towards the Catholic Church that I corrected him on.

awantz,
That is exactly why non-C’s believe the things that they do about the Catholic Church. No-C’s spout their beliefs and opinions as if they are Truth and non-C’s believe them as they are Truth. Then they continue to spread said opinions and beliefs at Truth and then those people belive them as Truth, and so forth. If each individual would have researched the Truth FIRST before spreading what they have been told/taught as “truth”, they would have learned that that/those “truths” were not “truths” at all, but wrong, misleading, untrue, false, and that the Catholic Church is right on what it teaches in regards to that/those subject(s). I am grateful that you recognized what he was saying was wrong/negative thoughts and didn’t let his wrong/negative thoughts be “truth” to you. At this point, you know how to correct those wrong/negative thoughts with everyone that you hear them from. Thank you for your honest defense of our faith. I know that had to be somewhat difficult for you. You were lead to speak the Truth and lead here to learn the Truth. I hope you can feel the guidance of the Holy Spirit as he takes you on a journey that you probably never thought you would be going on. Again, I look forward to reading your posts.
Kristie

 

[willi8]

Hi, willi8

I came across a very interesting post last night that I would like to share. In your search of LDS scholars, you may be interested in looking at this link:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3922717&postcount=2

This will take you to another section on Catholic Answers where apparently there are some issues on LDS’s initial prophecies from Joseph Smith as recorded in LDS records.

If you have not seen this before, it is worth a look. If you have seen this before - maybe you can provide an explantion. My focus is not ‘stumping’ people, but rather presenting information. How you ultimately handle this is your focus.

Best wishes,

The question or issue you brought up is valid and deserves a valid response. Here is a link which will present some info on the subject. lightplanet.com/mormons/response/qa/false_prophesies.htm#jl

There is also a link in the article displaying some of the many prophecies Joseph Smith made which came to pass. This might be of some interest to you.

By the way, thanks for the book recommendation. I should be getting it shortly. I will also be looking into the “Early Papacy” book that John recommended. I just need to make time to get them read.

 

[tqualey]

Dear willi8,

Thank you for responding - and glad you liked the book recommendations.

I went to the link you provided and found it divided into three sections (one per author). The first two essentially dismissed the criticism as being just anit-Mormon and went on to discuss prophets and their statements in the Bible. The third, however, made an effort to address the criticism.

The specific prophecies that are said to be false or incorrect by critics are typically based on hearsay or unreliable sources or are based on incorrect interpretations of what is said. There is no reliable evidence to say that Joseph Smith fails any sound test based on Deut. 18:22.

There is one common argument based on an official source from Joseph Smith. Many critics use Doctrine and Covenants 84:2-5 to say that Joseph was a false prophet. This section about the last days predicts that a temple would be built in Missouri “in this generation” - and has not yet been fulfilled. The critics almost always overlook the related revelation in Doctrine and Covenants 124:49-51, in which the Lord explains why the task is on hold and not required of his servants at the moment.

The effort however is equally dismissive - and can be distilled into three items: (1) incorrect interpretations by non-Mormons, (2) non-Mormons lack a reliable test for the evidence presented, and (3) not enough time has been given for the prophecy(ies) to be fulfilled.

As a non-Mormon, any criticism I offer may be just viewed as that coming from a non-Mormon (the ad hominem approach). But, looking at the material presented in a dispassionate manner, I think you will agree that the author’s efforts to refute the criticsm just falls short of the goal. Ultimately, the test of any activity is what it produces (Matt 7:16 “By their fruits you will know them…”).

Polygymy has been an issue since the founding. One of the most spectacular aspects of Christianity is its recognition of the role of women. Having a group of wives does not allow a man to be committed to the one wife that Christ spoke about. (Mark 10 spends time going over God’s plan for marriage - and multiple wives does tremendous violence to this concept.)

When you look at the validity of a prophecy - look at where it is going.

Best wishes,

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

See Eph 2:20 Peter is only one of the stones, rocks in the foundation. In the Shepard of Hermas, the Son of God is the Bedrock and gate to the church. My basic understanding, combining all the texts related to this is Jesus is the Bedrock which one digs down to in that part of the world. Jesus is also the cornor stone the first stone laid in the foundation. Rest of the foundation is a Composite foundation of rocks or stones. We simply see Peter as one of those rocks or stones just like each of the prophets who came before the apostles themselves are part of the foundation stones.

bibleplaces.com/images/Mudbricks_on_stone_foundation_at_Derbe,_tb_n010101.jpg

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[tqualey]

Good morning, Daniel Marsh,

What an interesting picture you included with your post. Actually, yours was the first picture I had seen in a post - just did not realize that such an approach was possible.

In my judgment, the use of Eph 2:20 does not really seem to address the issue.

So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the holy ones and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the capstone.(Eph 2:19-20)

The thrust of the Chapter in Ephesians is to show how both Jew and Gentile - both following Christ have been joined into one community with peace. (Hopefully, my one sentence summary did not do too much violence to the Scripture.)

Peter is not singled out in your reference. Actually, as you can see: the reference is including all of those who are part of God’s Plan for our Salvation and summarized as, “…apostles and prophets…”.

Actually, I think anyone would be hard pressed to identify Peter as just “one of the boys” when the entiere New Testament is identified. Even the trio of Peter, James and John - the group that was most privledged in Jesus’ company, still acknowledges Peter’s leadership. Then there’s that annoying, “keys to the Kingdom” quote (Matt 16 ) and “Do you love me more then these?..feed my sheep” (John 21 ).

As I see it, one of the difficulties of using non-Scriptural sources to refute Scriptural sources is that one is always coming up a bit shy of the mark. While the Shepherd is of interest, Christ only addressed Himself as the cornerstone (Matt 21:42) - and Christ then made Peter (the Rock) as the foundation (Matt 16:18). Unless I have missed something here - this is the only pun Christ told (how is that for Divine comedy? )

We simply see Peter as one of those rocks or stones just like each of the prophets who came before the apostles themselves are part of the foundation stones.

While seeing all of us - all of God’s People - as part of the ‘rocks or stones’ in the building of God’s Kingdom is certainly a good approach. To cover over the one Apostle that was simply singled out by Christ Himself to be the leader of the Church - is to miss the point of the New Testament message. That messaage is:

Christ has prepared our Salvation in the manner He has selected.
Christ actually chose to die on the Cross.
Christ actually chose to build a Church on a very weak human being - who would be lead by the Holy Spirit.
Christ actually chose to have His Church carry on when He gave the Great Commission - it did not end with the Original Twelve.
Christ actually chose that each of us would in some way be dependent on each other - through Christ and His Church - to come to Him.
Christ actually chose Peter - and his successors - and they represent Our Lord’s on-going Plan of Salvation for each of us.

Arguing otherwise, really does pit the traditions of men aginst the Will of God.

Best wishes

 

[mercygate]

See Eph 2:20 Peter is only one of the stones, rocks in the foundation. In the Shepard of Hermas, the Son of God is the Bedrock and gate to the church. My basic understanding, combining all the texts related to this is Jesus is the Bedrock which one digs down to in that part of the world. Jesus is also the cornor stone the first stone laid in the foundation. Rest of the foundation is a Composite foundation of rocks or stones. We simply see Peter as one of those rocks or stones just like each of the prophets who came before the apostles themselves are part of the foundation stones.

bibleplaces.com/images/Mudbricks_on_stone_foundation_at_Derbe,_tb_n010101.jpg

http://www.bibleplaces.com/images/Mudbricks_on_stone_foundation_at_Derbe,_tb_n010101.jpg

Can’t quarrel with any of that other than to say that Peter and the other Apostles (not WITHOUT Peter, if you take Our Lord seriously) are essential to Christ’s Church.

So where’s Peter?

 

[willi8]

Dear willi8,

Thank you for responding - and glad you liked the book recommendations.

The effort however is equally dismissive - and can be distilled into three items: (1) incorrect interpretations by non-Mormons, (2) non-Mormons lack a reliable test for the evidence presented, and (3) not enough time has been given for the prophecy(ies) to be fulfilled.

As a non-Mormon, any criticism I offer may be just viewed as that coming from a non-Mormon (the ad hominem approach). But, looking at the material presented in a dispassionate manner, I think you will agree that the author’s efforts to refute the criticsm just falls short of the goal. Ultimately, the test of any activity is what it produces (Matt 7:16 “By their fruits you will know them…”).

Polygymy has been an issue since the founding. One of the most spectacular aspects of Christianity is its recognition of the role of women. Having a group of wives does not allow a man to be committed to the one wife that Christ spoke about. (Mark 10 spends time going over God’s plan for marriage - and multiple wives does tremendous violence to this concept.)

When you look at the validity of a prophecy - look at where it is going.

Best wishes,

Hey Tom,
Sorry about the confusion on the articles. I meant for you to read just the third one by Jeff Lindsay. You said that the article was dismissive, but I didn’t see it as such. The article deals with essentially two things: First, Joseph Smith should be held to the same rules as the the ancient Prophets concerning prophecy. Second, was a possible explanation of Joseph’s prophecy in the Doctrine and Covenants.

With the first premise, the author mentions that many well known prophets in the Bible have made prophecies which did not come to pass. Simply said, would anyone dare calling these men false prophets? If not, why should the standard change for Joseph. He also mentioned some of the many valid prophecies from Smith which helps to confirm his prophetic calling.

Concerning Smiths prophecy in D&C 84, Lindsay simply makes reference to the fact that our Lord used the phrase “This generation” referring to the great calamaties preceding the second coming (Matt 24:29-34) Was this prophecy from the Christ false? Of course not. Rather, one would analyze what exactly our Lord meant when he said, “This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled”. Also remember, that Joseph said that he received his revelation from Jesus Christ, therefore, making the words in D&C the Lord’s not Joseph’s.

These arguements by Lindsay are, I believe, sufficient to not conclude that Smith was a false prophet strictly based on D&C 84

Tom, I just have one question. What did you mean by, “When you look at the validity of a prophecy - look at where it is going.”?

• Take Care…

 

[tqualey]

Hi, willi8,

Tom, I just have one question. What did you mean by, “When you look at the validity of a prophecy - look at where it is going.”?

There are several areas to look at:
1- Christ guided His Apostles to not engage in the games that the Pharisees played (Matt 16:6-12) because He wanted them to be focused on pleasing God and not men.

2- Christ wept over Jeursalem in an effort (Luke 19:41) show His Love for God’s Chosen People who have rejected Him - and to predict the end.

3- Christ predicted Peter’s denial (Matt 26:34) not to humiliate him but to show Peter that He knew what would happen and prayed that Peter would be strong and would turn to strengthen the other Apostels.

The point of prophecy is not like someone who jumps to the end of a novel to find out that ‘the butler did it!’ but rather, what changes will these people make in their lives as a result of this prophecy.

Just where is it that God wants them to go with this new information?

Best wishes,

 

[tqualey]

Hi, willi8,

I ended my response yesterday a bit early… meant to include this in it…

In sticking with this thread concerning Peter being the rock… what do Mormons believe about the Apostles - and Peter in particular (specific to Matt 16:18) when Christ founding His Church on this sinful, boastful, cowardly, loud-mouth, sometimes inept, fisherman?

Best wishes,