Jesus appointed PETER! Catholics read the Bible differently

[AlegreFe]

I started posting this reply post in MariaG’s thread that asked “Name one church teaching that contradicts the bible” or worded something along those lines;… but I decided to start a new thread for this since it talks about the interpretation and teaching of the Church as how Jesus wanted it to be because that is how His Father in Heaven wanted it!

kujo313:

Peter was fallable.

Peter is infallable only when it pertains to Faith & Morals!!
Peter is not impecable just as neither are we. We are all sinners just as Peter and Paul and all the other apostles were sinners.

The Catholic Church if full of sinners just as any Protestant church is. No one is free of sin. We are susceptible to sin because of the concupiscence of Original Sin. But the Catholic Church is the BEST and ONLY Hospital for Sinners!

When a shepherd is leaving for any reason and leaves that job to someone else as to take his place because the original shepherd will not be there physically what would that shepherd say? What would he tell that other person?

15 When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.” He said to him, "Feed my lambs."
16 A second time he said to him, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.” He said to him, "Tend my sheep."
17 He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, “Do you love me?” And he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” Jesus said to him, "Feed my sheep." John 21:15-17

WE are the lambs & sheep that Jesus talks about here in these verses. Peter is my shepherd here on earth (Vicor of Christ) and Jesus is my ultimate shephard in heaven! Jesus is the one High Priest but he works through the Ministerial Priest here on earth. Just as God had appointed a King in the OT because the people wanted someone physical on earth, so did Jesus appoint a Vicor or shephard here on earth.

Please read these verses in Matthew;

13 When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea
Philippi he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the
Son of Man is?”
14 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist, others
Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”
15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
16 Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah,
the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon
son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to
you, but my heavenly Father.
18 And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this
rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld
shall not prevail against it.
19 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.” Matt 16:13-19

Peter is INFALLIBLE here when Jesus asked “who do you say that I am?” Why is he infallible here? Because God the Father revealed the answer to Simon Peter! When it comes to Faith & Morals the Church never fails! Why? Because God is on her side!

Those verses (Matt 16:13-19) are very clear to me as some other ones are too. Some verses are not so clear unless you read the full context or the WHOLE BIBLE! That is why we need the Magisterium of the Church to make things clear to us. God did not leave us alone here on earth to “tend” to ourselves. He left us Peter so that HE can “tend” to us and “feed” us the Word of God in “word” as in Scripture, and in “flesh” as in the Eucharist which is Jesus Christ in Body, Blood, Soul & Divinty!! You talk about a personal relationship with Jesus? Well we have Jesus in Body, Blood, Soul & Divinity! We have Jesus in the Word in Scripture.

 

[AlegreFe]

The WORD of God is revealed to us in a Trinitarian way;

• 1. Sacred Scripture
• 1. Sacred Tradition
• 1. Magisterium (church teaching/doctrine) (“Doctrine” is the same as “Teaching”)

You got the bible because the Catholic Church put it together for you. You got the word Trinity from the Catholic Church. You believe in the Trinity yet that word does not appear in the bible. I thought you only go by the bible; “Sola Scriptura” … what happened to that? The word Trinity is not in the bible. Then why do you believe in it? This is a rhetorical question of course because I know why you believe in the Trinity. Because it is in the bible! Church teachings or doctrine (same thing) will never contradict the bible! The Trinity is in the bible but the word is not. So you have to “look for it” in other ways. Just as the church interprets the bible through God’s eyes, she looks at the bible “on the whole.” She doesn’t only look at one verse at a time. The church looks at the verses in full context. It will appear as though some verses contradict Church teachings but not when you look at the “whole bible” or “whole book” or “whole chapter.”

 

[AlegreFe]

No matter how much one argues about bible interpretation, “Sola Scriptura” is NOT in the bible.

I challenge any Non-Catholic to look for “Sola Scriptura” in the bible. I know those words won’t be there. But tell me, where in the bible does it talk about “Bible Alone?”

Once you do not find “Bible Alone” in the bible then all the other arguements that a Protestant or Non-Catholic person has just falls or crumbles right in your hand and no longer stands on its own. It just doesn’t work. No matter what arguement you have about a subject, it is wrong because no where in the bible does it say that you can interpret the bible by yourself. You need the Church to teach you. You need the Church to interpret the Word for you.

Catholic Christians can discern when we read the bible! Why? Because we have the Church behind us. We have the Catechism of the Catholic Church to guide us!

 

[AlegreFe]

If anyone tries to give the scripture verse from 2nd Timothy then I will put my previous entry that I posted in Maria’s thread.

I will just post it here for anyone who hasn’t gone in Maria’s thread yet;

2 Tim 3:16-17
16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for
teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in
righteousness,
17 so that one who belongs to God may be competent,
equipped for every good work.

The operative word here is “useful.” It doesn’t say “sufficient” for teaching. And it doesn’t say that you can teach yourself either. The next verse, 17, says that if you belong to God you can be competent. Well in my Catholic understanding you can only belong to God if you are baptized into the Catholic church. Even if one is baptized in a Protestant church (which makes you my brother/sister in Christ), they are still separated from Peter, the first Bishop of Rome which means, POPE! Do not be separated from Peter. If you are then you will be scattered like sheep without a shepherd. So many Protestant churches are scattered like sheep without a shepherd. There are over 30,000 denominations of Protestantism.

It would be better to read the previous verses in 2nd Timothy;

2 Tim 3:10-15
10 You have followed my teaching, way of life,
purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance,
11 persecutions, and sufferings, such as happened to me
in Antioch, Iconium, and Lystra, persecutions that I endured.
Yet from all these things the Lord delivered me.
12 In fact, all who want to live religiously in Christ
Jesus will be persecuted.
13 But wicked people and charlatans will go from bad to
worse, deceivers and deceived.
14 But you, remain faithful to what you have learned and
believed, because you know from whom you learned it,
15 and that from infancy you have known (the) sacred
scriptures, which are capable of giving you wisdom for
salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

Read verses 10 & 14 again. Paul is telling Timothy that he learned a way of life from him. He also says that Timothy followed his teachings and faith from him too. That sounds like he would’ve learned a lot more than just scripture to me. The most important thing here is that he had to learn it from someone. He learned it from Paul who learned it from Peter.

From whom do the Protestants learn? Are those people in succession of Peter? I don’t think so. Martin Luther broke from Peter and started his own church. Then it all started from there. He was still too “Catholic” for some, so others started their own churches too.

Okay now look at verse 15… it says “from infancy.” To me that means the Old Testament Scriptures. They did not have the NT yet. That should also tell you that they did not have a bible yet either. So “bible alone” did not exist.

Paul even wrote about Tradition!
2 Thess 2:15
15 Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the
traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or
by a letter of ours.

Scripture as we have it today (NT) did not exist back then. So they did NOT go by Bible Alone! Their “Scripture” was the Old Testament. And their “Teachings” were from the Apostles and the disciples that were appointed by Jesus and the Apostles.

 

[GregoryPalamas]

You have a couple of different issues together in these posts. I don’t know if that will confuse your cases or not. Nevertheless, I find no fault with your teaching or your reasoning.

CDL

 

[CactusJack]

Alegre…

Just wanted to clarify something here, if I may…

You said that Paul learned from Peter…

Don’t want to be a nit picker here, but this is very
important…

Paul made it very clear that He learned of Jesus
Christ and God’s plans from No man, but directly
from the Holy Spirit.

He also had to take the position, at the church of
Antioch, of bringing Peter back into line, for Peter
was slipping back into legalism.

Peter’s humble spirit accepted Paul’s rebuke…

I’m sure Paul learned much from Peter also, as
time went on, but Paul is quite adamant about
Who taught him… The Holy Spirit ! ! !

Grace and Peace,

Cactus Jack

 

[Scott_Waddell]

Also I would add that while Paul received direct revelation, that same revelation directed Paul to visible and legitimate Church authorities.

Scott

 

[NonDenom]

Peter is infallable only when it pertains to Faith & Morals!! Peter is not impecable just as neither are we. We are all sinners just as Peter and Paul and all the other apostles were sinners.

Hi All
Mat 10:33 But whosoever, shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

Now I’m not saying that Peter went to hell, but I think that this proves that he could be wrong when it comes to faith and or morals.
In Him and Only Him

 

[JoeyWarren]

NonDenom:

Hi All
Mat 10:33 But whosoever, shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

Now I’m not saying that Peter went to hell, but I think that this proves that he could be wrong when it comes to faith and or morals.
In Him and Only Him

You are saying that in a sense, but you forget all of the events from John 20:19 and on…

 

[exoflare]

NonDenom:

Hi All
Mat 10:33 But whosoever, shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

Now I’m not saying that Peter went to hell, but I think that this proves that he could be wrong when it comes to faith and or morals.
In Him and Only Him

This is a strawman. The Pope was never considered to be sinless, as has already been stated numerous times on these forums. Impeccable and infallable are two different things.

So how does the verse you just quoted relate to Peter declaring a teaching to the whole church on faith and morals? THIS is the scope of the Pope’s infallibility, as it has always been.

 

[AlegreFe]

CactusJack:

Alegre…

Just wanted to clarify something here, if I may…

You said that Paul learned from Peter…

Don’t want to be a nit picker here, but this is very
important…

Paul made it very clear that He learned of Jesus
Christ and God’s plans from No man, but directly
from the Holy Spirit.

He also had to take the position, at the church of
Antioch, of bringing Peter back into line, for Peter
was slipping back into legalism.

Peter’s humble spirit accepted Paul’s rebuke…

I’m sure Paul learned much from Peter also, as
time went on, but Paul is quite adamant about
Who taught him… The Holy Spirit ! ! !

Grace and Peace,

Cactus Jack

Thanks so much CJ! I read that somewhere but couldn’t remember. Thanks, I stand corrected.

 

[AlegreFe]

NonDenom:

Hi All
Mat 10:33 But whosoever, shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

Now I’m not saying that Peter went to hell, but I think that this proves that he could be wrong when it comes to faith and or morals.
In Him and Only Him

First off, did you read my first post? Peter denied Jesus three times. Jesus asked Peter if he loved Him three times. Three times Peter said YES! And Peter knows that Jesus knows this already. But Jesus wants for Peter to say it to Him so that Jesus can tell Peter to tend and feed His sheep. We are His sheep! I feel bad for the goats. This is also a way for Peter to make it up to Jesus; three times for each time he denied Jesus. Peter repented not long after he denied. You must not be a compassionate and forgiving person. Just an opinion on my part based on this post only. So I might be wrong about that.

I would also like to refer you to these passages; Matt 16:13-19

13 When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea
Philippi he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the
Son of Man is?”
14 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist, * others
Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”
15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
16 Simon Peter said in reply, "You are the Messiah,
the Son of the living God."
17 Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon
son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to
you, but my heavenly Father.
18 And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this
rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld
shall not prevail against it.
19 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."

That says plenty as far as the Catholic Church is concerned! Peter is the first Bishop of Rome; the first Pope. Where ever Peter is, there is the Church.

Those verses also tell me that those “people” were wrong because they are fallible and rely on the “flesh” for their answers. Peter relied on the “spirit” for his answer and therefore for that matter he is infallible.

 

[JoeyWarren]

AlegreFe:

Thanks so much CJ! I read that somewhere but couldn’t remember. Thanks, I stand corrected.

Paul eventually went to Peter to verify that the doctrine that he was teaching was aligned with the teaching of the whole church. Let’s not forget that very important fact.

 

[CactusJack]

JoeyWarren…

Amen… Paul, indeed, discovered from Peter, and
the other apostles, that his doctrine aligned with
theirs… This was marvelous beyond imagination!

Paul’s ministry was the first “Spirit” taught
ministry and was bolstered by St. John in his
1st epistle to the saints, the 2nd chapter…

John writes…

“26 I write you these things about those who would deceive you.
27 As for you, the anointing that you received from Him remains in you, so that you do not need anyone to teach you. But His anointing teaches you about everything and is true and not false; just as it (the anointing) taught you, remain in Him.”

In my many years on this planet I have learned a
few things… One of those things I have
learned is that when one is drawn into the Life
of God, through Jesus Christ, one finds himself or
herself being assailed by many doctrines.

Before I was a committed believer it’s as if there
were no problems, spiritually speaking. I was
just going along, in darkness, unconcerned with
my soul and unconcerned about the souls of
others.

However, things changed when I finally woke up,
spiritually, at the age of 28. Those seeds which
had been planted in my soul in 16 years of
Catholic school and at home and at Mass began to
sprout. Suddenly I KNEW Jesus was real and He
was active in the world, in His people, the church.

This is when the battle really began for my mind
and my soul and my affections. A hunger for the
scriptures welled up in me and it is still there 33
years later.

The reality of heaven, hell, sin, Christ’s sacrifice,
the Spirit’s presence, my brothers and sisters in
Christ, my need to stay remain in Him, the
Great Commission… all of these things came into
sharp focus.

And I discovered the truth of John’s words, quoted
above… Many times, when studying scripture
I knew, that I knew them to be true. The Holy
Spirit, promised to me at confirmation back in the
1950’s, was truly my Teacher and my Guide!

All of God’s people are promised to have the
presence of the Holy Spirit, the anointing, to lead
and guide. Simple, uneducated and illiterate people
like Peter. Highly educated, arrogant and driven
people like Paul.

God is no respector of persons. He doesn’t call
the equipped. He equips the called!

Blessings,

Cactus Jack

 

[Paulus]

AlegreFe:

If anyone tries to give the scripture verse from 2nd Timothy then I will put my previous entry that I posted in Maria’s thread.

I will just post it here for anyone who hasn’t gone in Maria’s thread yet;

2 Tim 3:16-17
16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for
teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in
righteousness,
17 so that one who belongs to God may be competent,
equipped for every good work.

The operative word here is “useful.” It doesn’t say “sufficient” for teaching. And it doesn’t say that you can teach yourself either. The next verse, 17, says that if you belong to God you can be competent. Well in my Catholic understanding you can only belong to God if you are baptized into the Catholic church. Even if one is baptized in a Protestant church (which makes you my brother/sister in Christ), they are still separated from Peter, the first Bishop of Rome which means, POPE! Do not be separated from Peter. If you are then you will be scattered like sheep without a shepherd. So many Protestant churches are scattered like sheep without a shepherd. There are over 30,000 denominations of Protestantism.

It would be better to read the previous verses in 2nd Timothy;

2 Tim 3:10-15
10 You have followed my teaching, way of life,
purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance,
11 persecutions, and sufferings, such as happened to me
in Antioch, Iconium, and Lystra, persecutions that I endured.
Yet from all these things the Lord delivered me.
12 In fact, all who want to live religiously in Christ
Jesus will be persecuted.
13 But wicked people and charlatans will go from bad to
worse, deceivers and deceived.
14 But you, remain faithful to what you have learned and
believed, because you know from whom you learned it,
15 and that from infancy you have known (the) sacred
scriptures, which are capable of giving you wisdom for
salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

Read verses 10 & 14 again. Paul is telling Timothy that he learned a way of life from him. He also says that Timothy followed his teachings and faith from him too. That sounds like he would’ve learned a lot more than just scripture to me. The most important thing here is that he had to learn it from someone. He learned it from Paul who learned it from Peter.

From whom do the Protestants learn? Are those people in succession of Peter? I don’t think so. Martin Luther broke from Peter and started his own church. Then it all started from there. He was still too “Catholic” for some, so others started their own churches too.

Okay now look at verse 15… it says “from infancy.” To me that means the Old Testament Scriptures. They did not have the NT yet. That should also tell you that they did not have a bible yet either. So “bible alone” did not exist.

Paul even wrote about Tradition!
2 Thess 2:15
15 Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the
traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or
by a letter of ours.

Scripture as we have it today (NT) did not exist back then. So they did NOT go by Bible Alone! Their “Scripture” was the Old Testament. And their “Teachings” were from the Apostles and the disciples that were appointed by Jesus and the Apostles.

Martin Luther broke from Peter and started his own church.

Nope, Luther tried to reform the Church and got excommunicated for his efforts. As for Carlstadt and Zwingly(sp?), they went completely past Luther.

Catholics read the Bible differently…
Yes, you do.
The main thing is is John 3:16-18.
Paulus

 

[JoeyWarren]

Paulus:

Catholics read the Bible differently… Yes, you do.
The main thing is is John 3:16-18.
Paulus

What does this passage have to do with the subject of the post? If you want to start a new thread on John 3:16-18 please do, we will do our very best to entertain you and your thread. God bless.

 

[AlegreFe]

Paulus:

Nope, Luther tried to reform the Church and got excommunicated for his efforts. As for Carlstadt and Zwingly(sp?), they went completely past Luther.

I’m sorry but you’re mistaken. The first thing that Luther discovered was that Johann Tetzel was ‘selling indulgences.’ Yes that was the case but Luther could’ve just gone to the church with a complaint. But instead he wrote his 95 theses, broke from the church that Jesus built and started his own ‘man made’ Luthern church.

That is why the Council of Trent happened too. The false selling of indulgences was banned. Councils are called when there is a conflict such as the one Luther started.

Martin Luther had a problem with death and purgatory. That is why he started his church. He was deathly afraid of purgatory.

I think you could start another thread about Luther if you want but please don’t invade my thread with this “off-topic” topic.

 

[AlegreFe]

JoeyWarren:

Paul eventually went to Peter to verify that the doctrine that he was teaching was aligned with the teaching of the whole church. Let’s not forget that very important fact.

Can you tell me where I can find that please? I have a Protestant brother and brother-in-law. My b-in-law puts down Peter so much and puts Paul on a pedestal. Not that I wouldn’t put Paul there but I wouldn’t knock down Peter in the process the way that my brother-in-law does.

 

[AlegreFe]

GregoryPalamas:

You have a couple of different issues together in these posts. I don’t know if that will confuse your cases or not. Nevertheless, I find no fault with your teaching or your reasoning.

CDL

You’re right Greg. My main concern is this doctrine on “Sola Scriptura.” So I guess we can have that here. I tried to edit my first post with a clear question but the “edit” button is now gone. So I will post my challenge here.

Find one thing in the bible that supports or teaches “Sola Scriptura” or “bible alone.”

 

[MariaG]

AlegreFe:

Can you tell me where I can find that please? I have a Protestant brother and brother-in-law. My b-in-law puts down Peter so much and puts Paul on a pedestal. Not that I wouldn’t put Paul there but I wouldn’t knock down Peter in the process the way that my brother-in-law does.

Acts Chapter 15. The council of Jeruselum. There was disagreement on whether or not Gentiles needed to be circumcized. Paul and Barnabuas went to Jeruselum to get clarification. After Peter spoke on the issue, there was no more discussion. Issue settled.

God Bless,
Maria