How do you view Matthew 16:13 through 20? What does it mean to you?

[Wannano]

Wannano:

You have some good thought here but allow me to challenge you ok? I am fairly positive you are talking about “Protestants” and that they are the ones challenging God. How do you explain that Catholics are not doing the very same thing for as I read it is quite popular now for Catholics to not believe in the Genesis account of creation and in fact belueve in evolution. The Church no longer apparently requires belief in the Biblical account of Creation and that Adam and Eve were the two people made by God from dust and bone. Is that submission?

Because the Catholic Church never taught an official position with regards to Genesis. They never infallible proclaimed that the creation account was a historically accurate account of creation.

So not real sure what you are trying to prove?

Just wanted to add that the fact She hasn’t taken an official position kind of shows to me that She isn’t challenging God. Basically, She says yep God created everything if you wanna know the fine details your gonna have to ask Him when you get there

Somehow I was under the impression that the concept of Original Sin came from the Genesis account. But I am willing to bow out.

 

[lanman87]

If the best we can do with the Bible is to bring out of it opinions of men why would Jesus leave us the Bible as our sole rule of faith?

If you read church history you will find all kinds of opinions on a wide variety of topics. Having both scripture and tradition doesn’t settle arguments. It just gives theologians something else to argue about. You have and X and a Y. Instead of just an X.

That’s why he left us faithful men with one particular man in charge to teach us, this way we wouldn’t have to try and figure it out on our own.

The problem is that many of those “faithful men” weren’t very faithful.

 

[MT1926]

Except for a few minor groups, Christianity as a whole teaches to trust in Christ, be baptized, repent, confess and overcome sin in our life, love God and love others, serve the poor and help those in need, observe the Lord’s Supper, pray, study, worship God, meet together, and to invite people to come to faith in Christ. Assuming that I’m doing/have done those things, what exactly am I not trusting/doing that Christ calls us to do?

Just wanted to say, well said I agree. I never meant to say you weren’t trusting Jesus, I was trying to make my point in the context of the thread. Basically that many claim to be trusting Christ yet disagree with what you said here. My main point was to show that we need a visible authority to help us define what it means to trust Christ. Without that authority your opinion is no better than mine or the guy that disagrees with both of us. Which basically means if Jesus didn’t leave us a visible authority here on earth then our faith is based on our man made opinion.

 

[MT1926]

Somehow I was under the impression that the concept of Original Sin came from the Genesis account. But I am willing to bow out.

How would the concept of original sin change if Genesis was read literally or allegorically?

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

Somehow I was under the impression that the concept of Original Sin came from the Genesis account. But I am willing to bow out.

How would the concept of original sin change if Genesis was read literally or allegorically?

That’s another topic and it’s my fault we deviated.

 

[MT1926]

The problem is that many of those “faithful men” weren’t very faithful.

So was Judas. All throughout the Bible we see God using unfaithful men to bring out a greater good.

So why do you think the Holy Spirit is powerless to guide Jesus Church when an unfaithful man gets in a position of authority?

Like I said in an early post, Jesus said On this Rock I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH. Sure I’ll admit the Catholic Church has had some unfaithful leaders through the years, but I know of no heresies they taught, because the Holy Spirit wouldn’t let them.

 

[lanman87]

Just wanted to say, well said I agree. I never meant to say you weren’t trusting Jesus,

Thank you. The point I’m trying to make is that we all pretty much seek to do what Jesus said to do. We have different understandings of why and how to do those things but we pretty much agree on the what. The why and how difference are the result of our human nature (as you said in another post).

 

[Wannano]

MT1926:

It just seemed to me if you are to truly trust someone you would need to trust everything they told you to do. I

Except for a few minor groups, Christianity as a whole teaches to trust in Christ, be baptized, repent, confess and overcome sin in our life, love God and love others, serve the poor and help those in need, observe the Lord’s Supper, pray, study, worship God, meet together, and to invite people to come to faith in Christ. Assuming that I’m doing/have done those things, what exactly am I not trusting/doing that Christ calls us to do?

So we agree and all these things are Biblically taught!

 

[MT1926]

So we agree and all these things are Biblically taught!

I think what we agree on is that we know that Jesus is our savior. However, I think (please tell me if I’m wrong) what we disagree on is that I believe Jesus left us successors to the Apostles who can guide us to ALL TRUTH. He left us a visible authority so we can have certainty that we know the Truth. Where as it seems to me, tell me if I’m wrong, that you guys believe the Truth really isn’t what is important, the important think is trusting in Jesus.

 

[MT1926]

Thank you. The point I’m trying to make is that we all pretty much seek to do what Jesus said to do. We have different understandings of why and how to do those things but we pretty much agree on the what. The why and how difference are the result of our human nature (as you said in another post).

Yep that’s the way I see it. However, I think Jesus desired for us to not differ on the understanding. He said I pray they be one as We are one. And St. Paul insisted that we agree on everything.

I see no way this can ever be possible without accepting the truth that Jesus left us a visible authoritative guide.

Thanks for the discussion, heading to bed now.

God Bless

 

[Gingersnaps4]

It is actually required of Catholics to believe that Adam and Eve existed, as the first ensouled humans. Whether they were created then and there or evolved before God ensouled them, has not been defined by the Church. But yes absolutely original sin was inherited from Adam and Eve.

 

[GLam1761]

Yes, (ahhhummm), I quoted it Wrong Wannano, but in
quoting it, it seems to CONTRADICT the fact that we
ought to have a Vicar of Christ on earth, doesn’t it,
but like Matt. 16:13-20, we cannot build a case on
just a few verses of Scripture!!

 

[mcq72]

Final verse.

Guy A uses Acts 10:43 to claim that we don’t need to confess to a priest because our sins are forgiven though His name.

Guy B states Acts 10:43 has nothing to do with confession. If you read this verse in the context of the Chapter it is plain to see that this is speaking of the forgiveness of sins coming through the invocation of Christ’s name when we are Baptized.

Guy C states Baptism is only symbolic and your sins aren’t forgiven in Baptism.

Guy D states Baptism isn’t even needed as a symbol.

I’m sure you see where I am going here, who is Truly Trusting Christ and how do they know?

On some things I wonder if the either/or approach is insufficient. That is there might be a difference in what we teach on an issue , but the efficacy may be the same. So while we differ on baptism , or rebirth, the efficacy, the spiritual reality on the believer might be the same.

on some issues Christ might say , “what is it to you exactly how he was baptized, I see the heart and the reality of his walk.”

or a not so much discussed anymore topic, what is it if one treats this day holy or that day holy, or if one eats this way or that way etc.

again, this applies to some issues, not all.

Paul warned about the necessity of these smaller divisions (tongue in cheek) to show then who is “right”(read legalism and false piety, or at least vain piety of some divisions)

In the end Christianity, the church, the bride, will be successful not because of being right or wrong on apparent divisive issues, but on those having a heart after God by relatioship.

 

[MT1926]

on some issues Christ might say , “what is it to you exactly how he was baptized, I see the heart and the reality of his walk.”

I would probable drop to my knees and say forgive me Lord a sinner, I am but your humble servant. I was just trying to follow and teach others the teaching of your Apostle St. Paul who taught us…

Ephesians 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all.

Forgive me for assuming this meant You did care and wanted us to teach others exactly how we are to be Baptized.

God Bless

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

So we agree and all these things are Biblically taught!

I think what we agree on is that we know that Jesus is our savior. However, I think (please tell me if I’m wrong) what we disagree on is that I believe Jesus left us successors to the Apostles who can guide us to ALL TRUTH. He left us a visible authority so we can have certainty that we know the Truth. Where as it seems to me, tell me if I’m wrong, that you guys believe the Truth really isn’t what is important, the important think is trusting in Jesus.

No I think you misunderstand us guys! We believe the Truth is ultra important. Jesus is Truth. He said: “I am the way, the truth and the life, no man cometh unto the Father but by Me.” Having a personal relationship with Jesus is complete with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. That is the truth!

 

[Wannano]

mcq72:

on some issues Christ might say , “what is it to you exactly how he was baptized, I see the heart and the reality of his walk.”

I would probable drop to my knees and say forgive me Lord a sinner, I am but your humble servant. I was just trying to follow and teach others the teaching of your Apostle St. Paul who taught us…

Ephesians 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all.

Forgive me for assuming this meant You did care and wanted us to teach others exactly how we are to be Baptized.

God Bless

And what if He says Peter himself taught you at Pentecost, why have you changed it?

 

[MT1926]

No I think you misunderstand us guys! We believe the Truth is ultra important. Jesus is Truth. He said: “I am the way, the truth and the life, no man cometh unto the Father but by Me.” Having a personal relationship with Jesus is complete with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. That is the truth!

Not saying you are wrong, just asking how do you know?

I’m having a hard time here because you keep jumping in the middle of my conversation with other people. The reason I ask you this question is because your response is in the middle of a conversation where I was asking what is the evidence for this very response that you give. If Jesus did not leave us a visible authority here on earth to tell us, yep you got it right. Other than your personal feeling, how do you know you are being guided by the Holy Spirit and you aren’t just following what you want to hear. Keep in mind we are humans, we are a fallen race. The fall being a direct result of our inner desires wanting what we want instead of what God asks.

 

[MT1926]

And what if He says Peter himself taught you at Pentecost, why have you changed it?

Why would an all knowing God ask me this question? Wouldn’t He already know that I haven’t changed anything.

There is historical evidence that Baptism has been a part of the Church from the beginning. Why would Jesus blame me for changing it.

If anything wouldn’t it be His fault for allowing the gates of Hell to prevail over His Church within years after the death of the last Apostle. After all that is what you are saying with this statement correct? It’s a matter of history that the Catholic Church has been around from the very beginning. So what you are claiming here is She added Baptism after the death of the last Apostle.

Your statements pretty much prove this entire thread. You are siding with the other two guys I am talking with, but when push comes to shove you don’t agree with them either. Why would Jesus want us to be on our own allowing so much division between His followers?

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

No I think you misunderstand us guys! We believe the Truth is ultra important. Jesus is Truth. He said: “I am the way, the truth and the life, no man cometh unto the Father but by Me.” Having a personal relationship with Jesus is complete with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. That is the truth!

Not saying you are wrong, just asking how do you know?

I’m having a hard time here because you keep jumping in the middle of my conversation with other people. The reason I ask you this question is because your response is in the middle of a conversation where I was asking what is the evidence for this very response that you give. If Jesus did not leave us a visible authority here on earth to tell us, yep you got it right. Other than your personal feeling, how do you know you are being guided by the Holy Spirit and you aren’t just following what you want to hear. Keep in mind we are humans, we are a fallen race. The fall being a direct result of our inner desires wanting what we want instead of what God asks.

Sorry. I will try to stifle.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

And what if He says Peter himself taught you at Pentecost, why have you changed it?

Why would an all knowing God ask me this question? Wouldn’t He already know that I haven’t changed anything.

There is historical evidence that Baptism has been a part of the Church from the beginning. Why would Jesus blame me for changing it.

If anything wouldn’t it be His fault for allowing the gates of Hell to prevail over His Church within years after the death of the last Apostle. After all that is what you are saying with this statement correct? It’s a matter of history that the Catholic Church has been around from the very beginning. So what you are claiming here is She added Baptism after the death of the last Apostle.

Your statements pretty much prove this entire thread. You are siding with the other two guys I am talking with, but when push comes to shove you don’t agree with them either. Why would Jesus want us to be on our own allowing so much division between His followers?

Your conclusion proves to me the ineffective method of communication that this is. Verbal dialogue would be a better use of time. To say that the Church added Baptism after the death of the last Apostle is so far from my intention that I think I have have lost all ability to communicate properly, for the very opposite is true. I am saying Baptism was there from the beginning.