If a person was given the Authority to Bind or Loose anything in Heaven or on Earth he evidently must have infalibility on his side

[ufamtobie]

(Isaiah 22: 22) I will place the KEY of the house of David on Eliakim’s shoulder; when he OPENS, no one shall SHUT when he SHUTS no one shall OPEN. I will fix him like a peg in a sure spot, to be a place of honor for his family.

(Matt. 16: 17-19) And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. I will give you the KEYS to the Kingdom of Heaven. Whatever you BIND on earth shall be BOUND in heaven; and whatever you LOOSE on earth shall be LOOSED in heaven.

Re: Circumcsion was a law of that every male child must be circumcised. Peter loosed the law of circumcision. Now we men don’t need to be circumcised.

Protestants, Fact show that God throughout the Old and New Testaments always had a LEADER to govern his people. One who has been given such Authority to BIND or LOOSE anything in heaven or on earth MUST have the power of infallibilty on his side, don’t you think?

Protestants, or do you believe everyone of us has the power to bind and loose anything in heaven or on earth? … The answer to that is NO! Here is the proof, (Matt 16: 17-19) Jesus Christ is only talking to Peter “The Rock” Jesus point to Peter, Jesus, did not mentioned no other Apostles name, and all the 12 were there at the time. In other words if Jesus Christ wanted all of them to have this Authority he would of mentioned all their names, but Our Lord did not, again, only to Peter was given this Authority and to his Successors to be.

Protestants, Imagine Jesus Christ giving us all the KEYS to bind or loose anything in heaven or on earth, lets say i bind this such and such and you loose this same such and such, there would be CHAOS. We all know that Jesus Christ does not work in Chaos, but in ORDER, in LEADERSHIP a Kingdom devided against itself will not stand.

Many Protestants say the Bible is all we need. True the Bible is very very important one MUST read the Bible daily and follow it’s Teachings. Importantly one must not add or subtract as did Martin Luther. My point is that Jesus Christ did not leave the Bible, fact is that the Bible was written years years…later and to top it off it was written by the earlie Church Fathers whom themselves were Catholics:thumbsup: Jesus Christ LEFT his Church to us and a LEADER to govern with AUTHORITY and his name is PETER, UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH. Eventually Jesus knew that Peter would die and Jesus Christ knew there would have to be SUCCESSORS of Peter to Govern his People/Church throughout the centuries to the present day, again Jesus Works in Leadership.

Protestants, now what Church is the ONLY Church that claims that they have the Successor of Peter? Or more importantly who has the DOCUMENTS THAT CAN PROVE THIS CLAIM OF SUCCESSION from PETER to the present POPE?

Now if i were you, I would jump, do all that I can to become a Member of that Church.

Jesus Bless you on your Journey Home

Ufamtobie

 

[Isa_Almisry]

(Isaiah 22: 22) I will place the KEY of the house of David on Eliakim’s shoulder; when he OPENS, no one shall SHUT when he SHUTS no one shall OPEN. I will fix him like a peg in a sure spot, to be a place of honor for his family.

(Matt. 16: 17-19) And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. I will give you the KEYS to the Kingdom of Heaven. Whatever you BIND on earth shall be BOUND in heaven; and whatever you LOOSE on earth shall be LOOSED in heaven.

As I have posted on many threads, this interpretation of Isaiah is of recent vintage, and apparently the brain child of Protestants who have swam the Tiber, but perhaps held their hermeneutics in a water tight container.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=263227
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=4027068&highlight=Eliakim#post4027068
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3308235&highlight=Eliakim#post3308235
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3288748&highlight=Eliakim#post3288748http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3278963&highlight=Eliakim#post3278963

Re: Circumcsion was a law of that every male child must be circumcised. Peter loosed the law of circumcision. Now we men don’t need to be circumcised.

Actually the Council of Jerusalem, under St. James the Brother of God, did that. In Acts 15:18 JAMES says “I judge.”

Protestants, Fact show that God throughout the Old and New Testaments always had a LEADER to govern his people. One who has been given such Authority to BIND or LOOSE anything in heaven or on earth MUST have the power of infallibilty on his side, don’t you think?

Evidently you haven’t read Judges , e.g. 21:25.

Infallibility, hmmm. Was Moses infallible? Why did he not enter the Promised Land?

Was David infallible? What about the wife of Uriah?

Was Solomon infallible? What about him worshipped his wives’ gods.

etc.

You might think he MUST have the power of infallibility, but what the Vatican says, it does not follow. Only under the most extreme and rare of circumstances, we are told, does the pope of Rome (whom you are hinting at, I suppose) speak ex cathedra (which you are hinting at). But then, we can’t get a consistent list of ex cathedra statements, or guidelines of which were issued before 1870.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Protestants, or do you believe everyone of us has the power to bind and loose anything in heaven or on earth? … The answer to that is NO! Here is the proof, (Matt 16: 17-19) Jesus Christ is only talking to Peter “The Rock” Jesus point to Peter, Jesus, did not mentioned no other Apostles name, and all the 12 were there at the time. In other words if Jesus Christ wanted all of them to have this Authority he would of mentioned all their names, but Our Lord did not, again, only to Peter was given this Authority and to his Successors to be.

Protestants, or do you believe everyone of us has infallibilty? … The answer to that is NO! Here is the proof, (Matt 16: 21-23) Jesus Christ is only talking to Peter “The Rock” Jesus point to Peter, Jesus, did not mentioned no other Apostles name, and all the 12 were there at the time. In other words if Jesus Christ was rebuking all of them he would of mentioned all their names, but Our Lord did not, again, only to Peter was given this rebuke and to his Successors who contradicted the Lord.

Protestants, Imagine Jesus Christ giving us all the KEYS to bind or loose anything in heaven or on earth, lets say i bind this such and such and you loose this same such and such, there would be CHAOS. We all know that Jesus Christ does not work in Chaos, but in ORDER, in LEADERSHIP a Kingdom devided against itself will not stand.

Only problem: the Vatican exercises this “infallibility” so rare, we are told, that chaos goes on. Witness what has been going on since Vatican II. What did you say about a Kingdom divided against itself.

Many Protestants say the Bible is all we need. True the Bible is very very important one MUST read the Bible daily and follow it’s Teachings. Importantly one must not add or subtract as did Martin Luther. My point is that Jesus Christ did not leave the Bible, fact is that the Bible was written years years…later and to top it off it was written by the earlie Church Fathers whom themselves were Catholics:thumbsup: Jesus Christ LEFT his Church to us and a LEADER to govern with AUTHORITY and his name is PETER, UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH. Eventually Jesus knew that Peter would die and Jesus Christ knew there would have to be SUCCESSORS of Peter to Govern his People/Church throughout the centuries to the present day, again Jesus Works in Leadership.

Yes, successors. They are called bishops. And the one in Rome isn’t the only one.

Protestants, now what Church is the ONLY Church that claims that they have the Successor of Peter?

Only? You have three (used to be four) who claim to succeed Peter in Antioch. We have one, Patriarch Ignatius IV, 162nd successor of St. Peter in his original see (the Throne of which the Vatican celebrated on February 22), who still confesses St. Peter’s confession, where the believers were first called Christians (Acts 11:26), and whose Patriarch, St. Ignatius I, gives us the first recorded use of the term “Catholic Church,” in his letter to a Church that woud be in the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, New Rome.
antiochpat.org/
antiochian.org/
orthodoxwiki.org/List_of_Patriarchs_of_Antioch

And since none other than Pope St. Gregory the Great claimed that the Pope (the original, btw) and Patriarch of Alexandria also sits on a Petrine See through St. Mark, we can claim him too (btw, you have two, used to be three, who claim Alexandria, but they are not allowed to use the title “pope” which has been attached to that See long before Rome took the title). His divine beatitude, Pope Theodore II now presides there, according to St. Gregory, as the 124th successor of St. Peter.
greekorthodox-alexandria.org/index.php?module=content&cid=001003

Or more importantly who has the DOCUMENTS THAT CAN PROVE THIS CLAIM OF SUCCESSION from PETER to the present POPE?

Good question, as the weeding out of anti-popes has muddeled Rome’s list a bit, Look up Pope John XVI, for instance. Look at the lists above for Antioch and Alexandria. Btw, all those patriarchs who claim Antioch for you all claim to succeed St. Meletius Patriarch of Antioch: the line of the patriarch that Rome recognized (and ordained St. Jeroem) died out.

Now if i were you, I would jump, do all that I can to become a Member of that Church.

Yes, why don’t you all?

Jesus Bless you on your Journey Home

Ufamtobie

And Jesus bless you.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Protestants, or do you believe everyone of us has infallibilty? … The answer to that is NO! Here is the proof, (Matt 16: 21-23) Jesus Christ is only talking to Peter “The Rock” Jesus point to Peter, Jesus, did not mentioned no other Apostles name, and all the 12 were there at the time. In other words if Jesus Christ was rebuking all of them he would of mentioned all their names, but Our Lord did not, again, only to Peter was given this rebuke and to his Successors who contradicted the Lord.

That makes me think, Isa. I had never thought of it this way before but it’s a fascinating rebuttal of the Roman Catholic claims of the papacy. If Christ saying “thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven” applies to Peter and to all of his successors exclusively in the Roman papacy in the form of infallibility, indefectibility, etc…then does not “Get thee behind me, Satan!” also apply to Peter, and to all of his successors in the Roman papacy?

The same logic would be applied in both instances. Christ makes a statement about Peter, and it applies to all of his successors.

 

[ufamtobie]

As I have posted on many threads, this interpretation of Isaiah is of recent vintage, and apparently the brain child of Protestants who have swam the Tiber, but perhaps held their hermeneutics in a water tight container.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=263227
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=4027068&highlight=Eliakim#post4027068
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3308235&highlight=Eliakim#post3308235
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3288748&highlight=Eliakim#post3288748http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3278963&highlight=Eliakim#post3278963

Actually the Council of Jerusalem, under St. James the Brother of God, did that. In Acts 15:18 JAMES says “I judge.”

Evidently you haven’t read Judges , e.g. 21:25.

Infallibility, hmmm. Was Moses infallible? Why did he not enter the Promised Land?

Was David infallible? What about the wife of Uriah?

Was Solomon infallible? What about him worshipped his wives’ gods.

etc.

You might think he MUST have the power of infallibility, but what the Vatican says, it does not follow. Only under the most extreme and rare of circumstances, we are told, does the pope of Rome (whom you are hinting at, I suppose) speak ex cathedra (which you are hinting at). But then, we can’t get a consistent list of ex cathedra statements, or guidelines of which were issued before 1870.

Isa,

Actually the Council of Jerusalem, under St. James the Brother of God, did that. In Acts 15:18 JAMES says “I judge.”

Isa, Evidently you must of skipped over** (Act 15: 6 -7) The Apostles and the presbyters accordingly convened to look into the matter. After much discusion, PETER took the FLOOR and said to them: "Brothers, you know well enough that from the early days God “SELECTED ME” from your number to be the ONE from whose LIPS the gentiles would hear the message of the gospel and believe. God, who who reads the hearts of men, showed his approval by granting the Holy Spirit to them just as he did to us. He made no distinction between them and us, but purified their hearts by means of faith also. Why then, do you put God to the test by trying to place on their shoulders of theses converts a yoke which niether we nor our fathers could bear?**

Isa, who made the assembly fall into SILENCE, WHO took the FLOOR was it James, or was it PETER? … Isa, lets read further a bit …CONTINUATION of ** Peter goes on to say inACTS 15: 11-12) Our belief is rather that we are saved by the favor of the Lord Jesus and so are they. AT THAT THE WHOLE ASSEMBLY FELL SILENT.**

Isa, it was after Hearing from Peter “THE ROCK” who instilled in their MINDS and HEARTS that James judged, for Peter already JUGDED IT in his mind concerning Circumcision before James, and James knew that Peter Judge it already in his Heart for PETER IS THE ONLY ONE WHO HOLDS THE keys TO BIND or LOOSE WHATEVER! Therefore James then agreed with Peter Re: Circumcision,

The answer is: It was PETER WHO TOOK THE FLOOR, IT WAS PETER WHO SILENCED THE ASSEMBLY REGARDING CIRCUMCISION AND NOT JAMES. AMEN

Isa, you must remember that all of the Apostels are JUDGES, and these Judges will Judge the 12 tribes of Juda. But as it is there is One above all the other JUDGES in Authority and Holds the KEYS to the Kingdom here, and and it is PETER, the ONE who SILENCED the assembley of Judges. Amen…

Isa, Re: “INFALABILITY” All the Popes from Peter to Pope Benedict XVI all are SINNERS like you and I and the man down the street and we all can sin and go to Hell…When the Catholic Church teaches that the Popes are INFALABLE it is only INFALABLE by it’s Teachings of the Church…Moral Teachings and decision making like that of Circumcision, ETC…

Isa, Lets say Pope Benedict the XVI or any other Pope in the past killed a person out of hatred and never confessed it. His chances of going to hell is like any other murderer.

Isa, Now how does the Catholic Church come up with INFALBILITY… Well we must read what Jesus said to Peter in: (Matt 16: 19) I will ENTRUST to you the KEYS of the Kingdom of Heaven. Whatever you DECLARE BOUND on EARTH SHALL be BOUND in HEAVEN; whatever you DECLARE LOOSE on EARTH SHALL be LOOSED in HEAVEN.

Isa, the point is, if One was given the KEYS to the Kingdom of Heaven, to bind or loose WHATEVER!!! then SURELY Jesus Christ gave Peter and his Successors the Power of infalability regarding again Only that of the TEACHING of Christ and his Church to changes WHATEVER here and their. Amen

Evidently you haven’t read Judges , e.g. 21:25.

Infallibility, hmmm. Was Moses infallible? Why did he not enter the Promised Land?

Was David infallible? What about the wife of Uriah?

Was Solomon infallible? What about him worshipped his wives’ gods.

etc.

Isa, as for David, Soloman, and perhaps a few POPES as well, Moses too, and I see that you are beaten around the BUSH Here is where all you Protestants get CONFUSED on INFALABILITY/KEYS Those with the Infalability/Keys are men WHO PERSONALY FALL at times and commit error, these here are personal faults The Catholic Church cannot ERROR for Jesus Says in: (Matt: 16: 18) I for my part declare to you, you are Rock,’ and on this Rock I will build my Church, and THE JAWS OF DEATH SHALL NOT PREVAIL AGAINST IT. AMEN!

Isa, Evidently you have not read THOU SHALT NOT JUDGE OR THOU WILL BE JUDGED. AMEN… You are judging these men above pointing out their PERSONAL WEAKNESSES and not pointing out their strenghs which made these Men, Great Men of GOD WHO SHARE THE KINGDOM OF GOD. Just as you try to point the weaknesses of the MEN in the Catholic Church but not the CATHOLIC church itself which can’t and will NEVER ERROR.

God Bless you on your Journey Home

Ufamtobie

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Isa,

Isa, Evidently you must of skipped over** (Act 15: 6 -7)**
No, just gone around this topice several times on several threads. Thought I’d be short and sweet.

Btw, did you skip Galatians 2:11-21?

The Apostles and the presbyters accordingly convened to look into the matter. After much discusion, PETER took the FLOOR and said to them: "Brothers, you know well enough that from the early days God “SELECTED ME” from your number to be the ONE from whose LIPS the gentiles would hear the message of the gospel and believe. God, who who reads the hearts of men, showed his approval by granting the Holy Spirit to them just as he did to us. He made no distinction between them and us, but purified their hearts by means of faith also. Why then, do you put God to the test by trying to place on their shoulders of theses converts a yoke which niether we nor our fathers could bear?

now you are trying to read things into to, no doubt to try to explain the embarassment the the Council CONTINUED after St. Peter spoke:SS. Paul and Barnabas spoke, then St. James spoke and issued the decision.

,

for Peter already JUGDED IT in his mind concerning Circumcision before James, and James knew that Peter Judge it already in his Heart for PETER IS THE ONLY ONE WHO HOLDS THE keys TO BIND or LOOSE WHATEVER!

Don’t beg the question, please.

Therefore James then agreed with Peter Re: Circumcision,

Post hoc, ergo prompter hoc is a fallacy you know.

The answer is: It was PETER WHO TOOK THE FLOOR, IT WAS PETER WHO SILENCED THE ASSEMBLY REGARDING CIRCUMCISION AND NOT JAMES. AMEN

Hold on there, your Amen is a little premature: SS Paul and Barnabas went on to testify and witness, St. James went on to quote St. Peter and then make a scriptural arguement and then ST JAMES judged, and St. James’ decision was embodied in the encycle issued in the name of all the Apostles (no special mention of St. Peter), the elders and the brethren.
Now you can say your Amen.

Isa, you must remember that all of the Apostels are JUDGES, and these Judges will Judge the 12 tribes of Juda. But as it is there is One above all the other JUDGES in Authority and Holds the KEYS to the Kingdom here

here where?

, and and it is PETER, the ONE who SILENCED the assembley of Judges.

Who then went on talking (SS Paul, Barnabas, James).

Amen…

Amen.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Isa, Re: “INFALABILITY” All the Popes from Peter to Pope Benedict XVI all are SINNERS like you and I and the man down the street and we all can sin and go to Hell…When the Catholic Church teaches that the Popes are INFALABLE it is only INFALABLE by it’s Teachings of the Church…Moral Teachings and decision making like that of Circumcision, ETC…

Like in Galatians 2?

Isa, Lets say Pope Benedict the XVI or any other Pope in the past killed a person out of hatred and never confessed it. His chances of going to hell is like any other murderer.

Isa, Now how does the Catholic Church come up with INFALBILITY.

“come up with” your words

… Well we must read

into

what Jesus said to Peter in: (Matt 16: 19) I will ENTRUST to you the KEYS of the Kingdom of Heaven. Whatever you DECLARE BOUND on EARTH SHALL be BOUND in HEAVEN; whatever you DECLARE LOOSE on EARTH SHALL be LOOSED in HEAVEN.

1. In the Fathers the references to the promise of Matthew 16:19, are of frequent occurrence. Almost invariably the words of Christ are cited in proof of the Church’s power to forgive sins. The application is a natural one, for the promise of the keys is immediately followed by the words: “Whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth”, etc. Moreover, the power to confer or to withhold forgiveness might well be viewed as the opening and shutting of the gates of heaven. This interpretation, however, restricts the sense somewhat too narrowly; for the remission of sins is but one of the various ways in which ecclesiastical authority is exercised. We have examples of this use of the term is such passages as August., “De Doctrina Christi”, xvii, xviii: “Quid liberatius et misericordius facere potuit. . .nisi ut omnia donaret conversis. . .Has igitur claves dedit Ecclesiae suae ut quae solveret in terra soluta essent in coelo” (How could He [Christ] have shewn greater liberality and greater mercy. . .than by granting full forgiveness to those who should turn from their sins. . .He gave these keys to His Church, therefore, that whatever it should remit on earth should be remitted also in heaven) (P.L., XXIV, 25; cf. Hilary, “In Matt.”, xvi, P.L., IX, 1010).

It is comparatively seldom that the Fathers, when speaking of the power of the keys, make any reference to the supremacy of St. Peter. When they deal with that question, they ordinarily appeal not to the gift of the keys but to his office as the rock on which the Church is founded.
newadvent.org/cathen/08631b.htm

Isa, the point is, if One was given the KEYS to the Kingdom of Heaven, to bind or loose WHATEVER!!! then SURELY Jesus Christ gave Peter and his Successors the Power of infalability regarding again Only that of the TEACHING of Christ and his Church to changes WHATEVER here and their. Amen

potuit, decuit ergo fecit is another fallacy.

Isa, as for David, Soloman, and perhaps a few POPES as well, Moses too, and I see that you are beaten around the BUSH Here is where all you Protestants

Protestants? I haven’t been a Protestant for quite some time.

get CONFUSED on INFALABILITY/KEYS

comes from seeing the explanations of/for it.

Those with the Infalability/Keys are men WHO PERSONALY FALL at times and commit error, these here are personal faults The Catholic Church cannot ERROR for Jesus Says in: (Matt: 16: 18) I for my part declare to you, you are Rock,’ and on this Rock I will build my Church, and THE JAWS OF DEATH SHALL NOT PREVAIL AGAINST IT. AMEN!

Isa, Evidently you have not read THOU SHALT NOT JUDGE OR THOU WILL BE JUDGED. AMEN…

I’ve read it several times. I’ve also read James 5:19-20.

You are judging these men above pointing out their PERSONAL WEAKNESSES and not pointing out their strenghs which made these Men, Great Men of GOD WHO SHARE THE KINGDOM OF GOD. Just as you try to point the weaknesses of the MEN in the Catholic Church but not the CATHOLIC church itself which can’t and will NEVER ERROR.

You presented the premise that the leader must by necessity have infallibility. I just pointed out that scripture doesn’t bear you out. For instance Moses let Israel divorce from the hardness of hearts, as Our Lord points out.

God Bless you on your Journey Home

Thanks, but I’m only trying to cleam the home now. I came Home a couple of decades ago.

 

[ufamtobie]

Like in Galatians 2?

“come up with” your words

into

1. In the Fathers the references to the promise of Matthew 16:19, are of frequent occurrence. Almost invariably the words of Christ are cited in proof of the Church’s power to forgive sins. The application is a natural one, for the promise of the keys is immediately followed by the words: “Whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth”, etc. Moreover, the power to confer or to withhold forgiveness might well be viewed as the opening and shutting of the gates of heaven. This interpretation, however, restricts the sense somewhat too narrowly; for the remission of sins is but one of the various ways in which ecclesiastical authority is exercised. We have examples of this use of the term is such passages as August., “De Doctrina Christi”, xvii, xviii: “Quid liberatius et misericordius facere potuit. . .nisi ut omnia donaret conversis. . .Has igitur claves dedit Ecclesiae suae ut quae solveret in terra soluta essent in coelo” (How could He [Christ] have shewn greater liberality and greater mercy. . .than by granting full forgiveness to those who should turn from their sins. . .He gave these keys to His Church, therefore, that whatever it should remit on earth should be remitted also in heaven) (P.L., XXIV, 25; cf. Hilary, “In Matt.”, xvi, P.L., IX, 1010).

It is comparatively seldom that the Fathers, when speaking of the power of the keys, make any reference to the supremacy of St. Peter. When they deal with that question, they ordinarily appeal not to the gift of the keys but to his office as the rock on which the Church is founded.
newadvent.org/cathen/08631b.htm

potuit, decuit ergo fecit is another fallacy.

Protestants? I haven’t been a Protestant for quite some time.

comes from seeing the explanations of/for it.

I’ve read it several times. I’ve also read James 5:19-20.

You presented the premise that the leader must by necessity have infallibility. I just pointed out that scripture doesn’t bear you out. For instance Moses let Israel divorce from the hardness of hearts, as Our Lord points out.

Thanks, but I’m only trying to cleam the home now. I came Home a couple of decades ago.

…
Isa,

Protestants? I haven’t been a Protestant for quite some time.

On the contrary those who Protest against the Catholic Church are Protestants.

I’ve read it several times. I’ve also read James 5:19-20.

Isa yes, I have read James 5: 19-20, and it is you Isa, that is straying from the Truth. and I am only trying to bring you back to the Truth. Amen.

You presented the premise that the leader must by necessity have infallibility. I just pointed out that scripture doesn’t bear you out. For instance Moses let Israel divorce from the hardness of hearts, as Our Lord points out.

Isa, FYI Moses was not given the Keys to Bind Or Loose… Isa, you can argue all you want and scream it on top of the highest hill and you will only be fighting again Jesus Christ and His Catholic Church.

Isa, You don’t want Peter and His Successors to have the KEYS TO BIND AND LOOSE ANYTHING in the kingdom of GOD. The devil does not want you to come to this knoweldege because if you do you will have the True/Full Grace of Jesus Christ and become Catholic.

Thanks, but I’m only trying to cleam the home now. I came Home a couple of decades ago.

Yes, try to clean your home for it is much in need of cleaning. And bring it back/yourself to the True Church Of Jesus Christ and that is The Catholic Church. AMEN…

Isa, lets not talk about this subject no more so i am telling YOU God Bless you. I hope you find your journey home to the Catholic Faith ASAP …FYI that is why Jesus Christ has you here at this Catholic Site and that is to become Catholic wether you know it or not. Because you won’t find me in an arab orthodox website for I don’t need to go there I have the True Church already. BYE AMEN…PS I hope that AMEN was not to short for you, for AMEN CAN NEVER BE SHORT.

Ufamtobie

 

[Isa_Almisry]

…
Isa,

On the contrary those who Protest against the Catholic Church are Protestants.

When I converted I swore my belief and my embrace of the “One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.” I’ve pursued that since then.

Isa yes, I have read James 5: 19-20, and it is you Isa, that is straying from the Truth. and I am only trying to bring you back to the Truth. Amen.

I know you only intend good.

Isa, FYI Moses was not given the Keys to Bind Or Loose… Isa, you can argue all you want and scream it on top of the highest hill and you will only be fighting again Jesus Christ and His Catholic Church.

You’re the one who made the claim “Fact show that God throughout the Old and New Testaments always had a LEADER to govern his people. One who has been given such Authority to BIND or LOOSE anything in heaven or on earth MUST have the power of infallibilty on his side, don’t you think?” Not I.

Isa, You don’t want Peter and His Successors to have the KEYS TO BIND AND LOOSE ANYTHING in the kingdom of GOD. The devil does not want you to come to this knoweldege because if you do you will have the True/Full Grace of Jesus Christ and become Catholic

I became Catholic in that I have been chrismated, I am becoming Catholic as I am trying to make use of that charism.
St. Peter’s successor Patriarch Ignatius IV has the Office of the Keys. I depend on that everytime I go to confession.

Yes, try to clean your home for it is much in need of cleaning.

Of that I don’t deny.

And bring it back/yourself to the True Church Of Jesus Christ and that is The Catholic Church. AMEN…

Conversion in the sense of repentance.

Isa, lets not talk about this subject no more

as you like.

so i am telling YOU God Bless you.

and God bless you and all those who know you.

I hope you find your journey home to the Catholic Faith ASAP …FYI that is why Jesus Christ has you here at this Catholic Site and that is to become Catholic wether you know it or not.

I might mention that I went to a High School run by the Resurrectionist Fathers.

Because you won’t find me in an arab orthodox website for I don’t need to go there I have the True Church already.

You might learn something. That’s why I’m here.

BYE AMEN…PS I hope that AMEN was not to short for you, for AMEN CAN NEVER BE SHORT.

Amen.

Ufamtobie

 

[Robbinson]

That makes me think, Isa. I had never thought of it this way before but it’s a fascinating rebuttal of the Roman Catholic claims of the papacy. If Christ saying “thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven” applies to Peter and to all of his successors exclusively in the Roman papacy in the form of infallibility, indefectibility, etc…then does not “Get thee behind me, Satan!” also apply to Peter, and to all of his successors in the Roman papacy?

The same logic would be applied in both instances. Christ makes a statement about Peter, and it applies to all of his successors.

Not quite - the problem is you are equating “infallibility” with “impecability”. The Church doctrine of infallibility is that Peter (and his successors) are guided and protected by the Holy Spirit in error on issues of Spiritual and Moral guidance and interpretation. It doesn’t mean that everything Peter did or his successor’s do is impeccible (correct). In fact, as you point out, Peter made many errors during his earthly ministry. But after Christ’s death, he was protected from making spiritual or moral errors as has been the Church. That is what God/Jesus meant by giving Peter the keys to the kingdom and with the apostles the ability to bind on earth and heaven and to forgive sins.

Blessings,

Brian

 

[ronald_g_w]

(

Matt 16: 17-19) Jesus Christ is only talking to Peter “The Rock”
.
PETER, UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH. .
quoted from first post

If you were to understand the above scripture reading from about verse 13 you will see that the Savior is not saying that Peter is the Rock upon which he will build his church, but it is the REVELATION that Peter recieved. “Thou art the Christ, the son of the living God.” It is upon the ROCK of REVELATION that JESUS CHRIST has built his Church therefor if you belong to the Lords Church it must be a church that recieves Revelation

 

[Robbinson]

(
If you were to understand the above scripture reading from about verse 13 you will see that the Savior is not saying that Peter is the Rock upon which he will build his church, but it is the REVELATION that Peter recieved. “Thou art the Christ, the son of the living God.” It is upon the ROCK of REVELATION that JESUS CHRIST has built his Church therefor if you belong to the Lords Church it must be a church that recieves Revelation

This has been debated since the reformation. Actually, the more “natural” reading is that Christ is in fact referring to Peter as the rock (proper gramatical reading in both the english translations and most scholars, including many Protestant scholars, would concur this is true of the Greek as well). That being said, a reading that this refers to the either Christ himself as the Rock or the confession/fact that He is the Messiah is at least a possible (if less natural reading). Of course, Peter’s authority does not rest solely on this passage (though it is an important one) but also on the fact that he was given the “keys to the kingdom” and the power to bind in heaven what he binds on earth.

Blessings,

Brian

 

[ronald_g_w]

This has been debated since the reformation. Actually, the more “natural” reading is that Christ is in fact referring to Peter as the rock (proper gramatical reading in both the english translations and most scholars, including many Protestant scholars, would concur this is true of the Greek as well). That being said, a reading that this refers to the either Christ himself as the Rock or the confession/fact that He is the Messiah is at least a possible (if less natural reading). Of course, Peter’s authority does not rest solely on this passage (though it is an important one) but also on the fact that he was given the “keys to the kingdom” and the power to bind in heaven what he binds on earth.

Blessings,

Brian

Thanks for your thoughts
For me it does not make sence that, Matt 16:18 …and the gates of hell shall not prevail against IT. ? For me it is more logical that the gates of hell will not prevail against revelation from God rather than a man who could fall. I am not disputing Peters authority or the keys given to him, He was deffinetly the senior Apostle.
Here is a subtle word play upon “Peter” ( Greek petros = small rock) and “rock” (Greek petra = bedrock) Christ is the Stone of Israel. 1 Cor 10:4

 

[ronald_g_w]

In fact, as you point out, Peter made many errors during his earthly ministry. But after Christ’s death, he was protected from making spiritual or moral errors as has been the Church. That is what God/Jesus meant by giving Peter the keys to the kingdom and with the apostles the ability to bind on earth and heaven and to forgive sins.

Blessings,

Brian

After Christ’s death the Apostles “Peter” had the gift of the Holy Ghost who taught them (Revelations) it is upon this rock that the Lord would build his church, Thus allowing Peter and the other apostles to speak with the utmost authority on subjects related to the building of the Lords Kingdom.