Protestant interpretations...

[Ginger2]

Hey JB you are back. Got a surprise for ya.

The keys.

Isa 22:22 It shows you how the keys are passed down. They not ONLY hold authority but Facillitate SUCCESSION. SUCCESSION passed form Peter to the current Pope today. LINKAGE UNBROKEN

Give her a read!

It will open alot to you. And you can see it with your own eyes. So take the blinders off and check it out.

20 ¶ And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will acall my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah:
21 And I will clothe him with thy robe, and strengthen him with thy girdle, and I will commit thy agovernment into his hand: and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah.
22 And the a key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.

Rev 3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;

23 And I will fasten him as a anail in a sure place; and he shall be for a glorious throne to his father’s house.
24 And they shall hang upon him all the glory of his father’s house, the offspring and the issue, all vessels of small quantity, from the vessels of cups, even to all the vessels of flagons.
25 In that day, saith the Lord of hosts, shall the nail that is fastened in the sure place be removed, and be cut down, and fall; and the burden that was upon it shall be cut off: for the Lord hath spoken it.

And to think…all this time I thought the Old an New Testaments prophesied Jesus.

 

[Randy_Carson]

He took the quote from the NASB.

My comment was that he intentionally chose a mistranslated version to support his position.

Ginger

Is the NASB a Catholic translation?

Again, what church do you attend?

 

[Ginger2]

Ginger-

Once again you blame the translation, but the evidence is against you. Maybe the problem is not with the scriptures but with your misinterpretation of them. See for yourself…

1 Corinthians 4:14-15 (New International Version)
14I am not writing this to shame you, but to warn you, as my dear children. 15Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.

1 Corinthians 4:14-15 (New American Standard Bible)
14I do not write these things to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children. 15For if you were to have countless tutors in Christ, yet you would not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.

1 Corinthians 4:14-15 (King James Version)
14I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.
15For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

1 Corinthians 4:14-15 (English Standard Version)
14I do not write these things to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. 15For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.

1 Corinthians 4:14-15 (American Standard Version)
14 I write not these things to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children. 15 For though ye have ten thousand tutors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I begat you through the gospel.

1 Corinthians 4:14-15 (New American Bible)
14 I am writing you this not to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children. 15 Even if you should have countless guides to Christ, yet you do not have many fathers, for I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.

1 Corinthians 4:14-15 (New American Bible)
14 I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. 15* For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.

I can’t help it if some translators mistranslated Paul’s writings. That is not what Paul wrote.

But, I can understand why you want to turn to a translation instead of looking at the actual Greek text.

Ginger

 

[Randy_Carson]

20 ¶ And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will acall my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah:
21 And I will clothe him with thy robe, and strengthen him with thy girdle, and I will commit thy agovernment into his hand: and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah.
22 And the a key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.

23 And I will fasten him as a anail in a sure place; and he shall be for a glorious throne to his father’s house.
24 And they shall hang upon him all the glory of his father’s house, the offspring and the issue, all vessels of small quantity, from the vessels of cups, even to all the vessels of flagons.
25 In that day, saith the Lord of hosts, shall the nail that is fastened in the sure place be removed, and be cut down, and fall; and the burden that was upon it shall be cut off: for the Lord hath spoken it.

And to think…all this time I thought the Old an New Testaments prophesied Jesus.

Of course, but does that mean that they prophesy Jesus exclusively?

Nope.

The office of Royal Steward was a fact in the David kingdom. Jesus is the heir to that throne, and He established Peter in that office.

Catch that? Office.

The men who hold the office of steward or prime minister may change, but the office remains.

That, dear Ginger, is the basis of Apostolic Succession.

 

[rinnie]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

This is true. The Apostles pasted their gifts through the laying on of hands. But according to the Scriptures, [SIGN]those who received the gift thru the Apostles, couldn’t pass the gift along to others.[/SIGN]
As for what “authority” God has given me, that is found in Scriptures also and affirmed in the fruit of my labors. But I will not share examples as the point of doing do would be glorify God and I fear that won’t be the result.

Ginger

Oh Ginger by all means. Please supply me with that scripture. Please!

And that Please answer this question for me. Do you believe that Jesus did indeed have the authority to pass on the Power of the Holy Spirit. If you do, then how could Jesus say what My Father has given me I now give to you.

What I am asking is either Jesus had the Power to pass it on or he didn’t. Now if he did he extended that Power to the Apostles. Now if he had it, then they had to have had it right? Now if they had ALL that God Gave to Jesus like he said then they had the Power right?

Now they said to the next Apostles What my Father has given me I now pass to you. Was Jesus not their Father? Then they continued it on down.

Now how could you say Jesus had it but the Apostles didn’t. Jesus had it or he didn’t. If you believe he indeed had it, did he lie to the apostles. Was it the same Power or not?

So bottom line if Jesus had it, the Apostles had it, if the Apostles had it the Pope has it. IF the Pope does not have it, the Apostles never had it, and Jesus never had it either. ITs as simple as that.

So you either believe the words of our Dear Lord All Power of heaven and earth has been given to me and I now give it to you. And hades will never prevail. Hades also means death you know? Hell is death. Death of the Spirit. Separation from God.

So Jesus said death will never overcome this Power I have given. So either he had the power of heaven and earth and passed it on, or he was not God.

I know he was God, I know he had the Power, and I know he kept his promise. he would not leave us orphans. He gave Peter the keys to run the Church until he returns. And Peter passed on the Power he had from Jesus and the Pope still had the keys. And the Pope has as much Power and Authority as Peter, and the bishops have as much authority as the Apostles. Because Jesus Christ is indeed the son of God and he promised me that power of the HOly Spirit would live on until he comes in glory.

 

[JohnnyBeth]

The Church gives us the Cathechism so that we may know ‘exactly’ what the Church teaches. Does this mean that we need the Catechism only? No. So you fall very short of the meaning you’re trying to invoke from that passage.

You seem to think that if you throw the word ‘Faith’ around alot, it backs up your doctrines. Faith is an act. Unless you believe God makes us believie in Him? It’s you or myself, using our own free will to submit to God and all of His power as each and everyone of those people did in those verses you just threw down on here. You basically didn’t even come close to trying to prove your side.
You honestly think that within each and everyone of those individuals, they ***didn’t have the love for God attached to their faith ***as well? The faith alone doctrine doesn’t work and very nonsensical.

The doctrines in the Bible are foolish to many people.

What does the Bible say in regard to loving God? If you understood Scripture you would not have said what you said, but you must read and understand. Doesn’t matter; here is what God has to say about us being able to begin to love Him; He must move first.

Rom.5:8-10But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath {of God} through Him. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

1Jo 4:19 We love, because He first loved us.

Again, to love God is an act in itself. Belief without love is dead. Good works automatically comes out of love. One cannot be without the other.
You guys are too hung up on the word Faith. Not surprising when you all have the final say what the Written Word is trying to teach.

God has a lot to say about “faith”; it is used 232 times in the Bible and 228 of those times is in the NT. So you may want to take issue with God on that one. If it such a major focus for God, then it is for me.

I like the phrase you used “belief without love is dead” ; that we agree on.

Grace is help from God. We have to do our part as well.

How do you define Grace in the salvific sense of the word?

Salvation is solely by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8)
Saving faith is more than only understanding the facts and mentally assenting. It is inseparable from repentance, yielding, and a supernatural desire to be obedient. Think above everthing else, that salvation is the sovereign work of God. Biblically it is defined by what it produces, not by what a person performs to get it. Works cannot or merit saving grace resulting in salvation. Rather true salvation is shaped by God will not neglect to produce the works that are the fruits(Matt. 7:17). No facet of salvation is merited by a person’s works, but it is 100% the work of God (Titus 3:5-7).

Some basic definitions of grace:

1. The exercise of love, kindness, mercy, favor; disposition to benefit or serve another; favor bestowed or privilege conferred. [1913 Webster]
2. (Theol.) The divine favor toward man; the mercy of God, as distinguished from His justice; also, any benefits His mercy imparts; divine love or pardon; a state of acceptance with God; enjoyment of the divine favor. [1913 Webster]

 

[rinnie]

Of course, but does that mean that they prophesy Jesus exclusively?

Nope.

The office of Royal Steward was a fact in the David kingdom. Jesus is the heir to that throne, and He established Peter in that office.

Catch that? Office.

The men who hold the office of steward or prime minister may change, but the office remains.

That, dear Ginger, is the basis of Apostolic Succession.

God Bless You Randy could not have said it better myself. And now my dear friend I have to leave. Got to do Gods work (well kinda of, gotta go make money for the Church. Father nabbed me again. Guess he figures it will keep me out of trouble.

So my friend I leave you Ginger. God Bless You!

 

[Randy_Carson]

I can’t help it if some translators mistranslated Paul’s writings. That is not what Paul wrote.

But, I can understand why you want to turn to a translation instead of looking at the actual Greek text.

Ginger

Heh…okay, Ginger. I’m sorry you feel you can’t trust Protestant scholarship when it comes to accurately translating virtually EVERY Protestant version of the Bible currently in print.

But I feel it is important to pin you down on this, so here goes:

From The Zondervan Parallel New Testament in Greek and English, we read that the words Paul chose in 1 Co. 4:15 are *pateras *and gennao Both the KJV and the NIV translate the former word as “fathers” and the latter as “begotten you” and “became your father” respectively.

From The Hebrew/Greek Key Study Bible, we confirm that pateras (#3962) means “father” and that gennao means “to procreate properly of the father” or “begat”.

So, the bottom line, Ginger, is that Paul calls himself the “father” of the Corinthians; we know that he means this in a spiritual sense because tells us elsewhere that he was an unmarried man. He did not father all of the Corinthians in a physical sense.

Who is wrong about this? The Protestant scholars who translated the verse?

Or you?

 

[JohnnyBeth]

Ah, the keys. Let’s take a look at what one Protestant had to say, shall we?

“So we stand here and with open mouth stare heavenward and invent still other keys. Yet Christ says very clearly in Matthew 16:19 that He will give the keys to Peter. He does not say He has two kinds of keys, but He gives to Peter the keys He Himself has, and no others. It is as if He were saying: why are you staring heavenward in search of the keys? Do you not understand I gave them to Peter? They are indeed the keys of Heaven, but they are not found in Heaven. I left them on earth. Don’t look for them in Heaven or anywhere else except in Peter’s mouth where I have placed them. Peter’s mouth is My mouth, and his tongue is My key case. His office is My office, his binding and loosing are My binding and loosing.”

What Protestant said that? Martin Luther.

(*Martin Luther, The Keys, in Conrad Bergendoff, ed. trans. Earl Beyer and Conrad Bergendoff, Luthers Works, vol. 40, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1958, p. 365-366.) *

He also states:
“What kind of a church is the pope’s church? It is an uncertain, vacillating and tottering church. Indeed, it is a deceitful, lying church, doubting and unbelieving, without God’s Word. For the pope with his wrong keys teaches his church to doubt and to be uncertain. If it is a vacillating church, then it is not the church of faith, for the latter is founded upon a rock, and the gates of hell cannot prevail against it (Matt.16:18). If it is not the church of faith, then it is not the Christian church, but it must be an unchristian, anti-Christian, and faithless church which destroys and ruins the real, holy, Christian church. (Luther’s Works, vol. 40, Church and Ministry II, The Keys, p.348) said:”

So are you prepared to believe and take all of what Luther said as being true as you did above or is this you picking and choosing? No need to answer; it is obvious.

 

[JohnnyBeth]

Is that really what the Bible taught you? Or do you misunderstand what the Bible really means?

Call No Man Your Father

Matthew 23:8-10
8"But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ (Gr. rabbi) for you have only one Master (Gr. didaskalos, kathegetes) and you are all brothers. 9And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ (Gr. patera) for you have one Father (Gr. pater), and he is in heaven. 10Nor are you to be called ‘teacher,’ (Gr. kathegetai) for you have one Teacher (Gr. kathegetes), the Christ.” (NIV)

Matthew 23:8-10
8”But be not ye called Rabbi (Gr. rabbi): for one is your Master (Gr. didaskalos, kathegetes), even Christ; and all ye are brethren. 9And call no man your father (Gr. patera) upon the earth: for one is your Father (Gr. pater), which is in heaven. 10Neither be ye called masters (Gr. kathegetai) : for one is your Master (Gr. kathegetes), even Christ.” (KJV)

Based on the preceding passage, many non-Catholics claim that the Catholic Church violates the scriptural prohibition against calling anyone “father” since its priests are commonly called “father” and the pope is referred to as the “Holy Father.” Is this really what the Bible teaches? Let’s take a closer look at Biblical examples.

Jesus Violates This Command

Luke 16:24
24So he called to him, “Father (Gr. pater) Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.”

Jesus tells a parable in which He has one of the characters speak to “Father Abraham” which would obviously be a bad example for His audience. Does Jesus contradict Himself?

Paul Violates This Command

Romans 4:1-18
1What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter?

In this passage, Paul refers to Abraham as a spiritual father eight times. This is a terrible precedent to establish if Jesus has prohibited us from using the term “father.”

1 Corinthians 4:14-15
14I am not writing this to shame you, but to warn you, as my dear children. 15Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers (Gr. pateras), for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.

In this passage, Paul refers to himself as the spiritual father of the Corinthians. This is a terrible precedent to establish if Jesus has prohibited us from using the term “father.”

Ephesians 4:11-13
11It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers (Gr. didaskalovs), 12to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.

Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, says that God has established some people as “teachers” in the Church; this appears to be a direct violation of Jesus’ prohibition against calling anyone “teacher”. Does God contradict Himself?

James Violates This Command

James 3:1
1Not many of you should presume to be teachers (Gr. didaskaloi), my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

James, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, says that not many believers should presume to be “teachers.” This implies that a few (though not many) should and would rightfully have that position. Does God contradict Himself?

James 2:21
21Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

James, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, refers to the spiritual fatherhood of Abraham. This is a terrible precedent to establish if Jesus has prohibited us from using the term “father.”

Stephen Violates This Command

Acts 7:2
2To this he replied: "Brothers and fathers, listen to me!

Randy would you like to know why Jesus said this and the context of why He said it and how it applies to believers? Why it is inappropriate to call the Pope “Holy Father” or a priest “Father”?

 

[JohnnyBeth]

JohnnyBeth-

The word “sacrament” like “trinity”, “incarnation”, “Bible” and “transubstantiation” are words used to describe concepts in a short-hand form.

Jesus established baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, confession, holy orders, marriage and healing of the sick as means of receiving grace in His Church. Today, we refer to these using the concept word “sacraments”, but that’s just for convenience.

Oh. Okay. I’m glad that’s settled.

As much as I am tempted to pick apart that which you listed above I will refrain myself and maybe another thread and another day. I believe you know that most of those you will not find in Scripture, but you are Catholic and being part of the “faithful”; you must put Church above the Word of God as I see it.

 

[Ginger2]

Uh…no. It was written late in the Apostle John’s life.

Oh. Is it necessary for us to know that Jesus is fully God and fully man? That God is three persons in one being? That public revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle? That there are 27 books in the New Testament?

I could go on, but you get the point. These are things that are necessary for us as Christians to know, and they are not recorded in scripture.

lol, another belly laugh!! :clapping:

I must have been interrupted by my kids. I was responding to a verse you didn’t write. I’ve been looking all over for it, but you didn’t quote it.

 

[JohnnyBeth]

The Church, not the Bible, is “the pillar and foundation of the truth” (cf. 1 Timothy 3:15).

And, no, the Church is not above scripture. Pillars and foundations provide support from below.

It is not foundation; it is support…big difference. Foundationis different in meaning and is not used in that passage. Hey, what does accuracy matter?

 

[JohnnyBeth]

Are you totally oblivious to what we were originally talking about? Or are you intentionally mixing apples and oranges to confuse the topic?

LOL…it seems they are masters of that and seems to me to be inherent to their belief system.

 

[Randy_Carson]

He also states:
“What kind of a church is the pope’s church? It is an uncertain, vacillating and tottering church. Indeed, it is a deceitful, lying church, doubting and unbelieving, without God’s Word. For the pope with his wrong keys teaches his church to doubt and to be uncertain. If it is a vacillating church, then it is not the church of faith, for the latter is founded upon a rock, and the gates of hell cannot prevail against it (Matt.16:18). If it is not the church of faith, then it is not the Christian church, but it must be an unchristian, anti-Christian, and faithless church which destroys and ruins the real, holy, Christian church. (Luther’s Works, vol. 40, Church and Ministry II, The Keys, p.348) said:”

So are you prepared to believe and take all of what Luther said as being true as you did above or is this you picking and choosing? No need to answer; it is obvious.

I am not a Lutheran, so there is no need for me to believe and take all of what Luther said as being true.

Curiously, modern Protestants don’t seem to pay much attention to what he said, either.

 

[JohnnyBeth]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

Could you PLEASE show me that scripture. Because either we have 2 different scriptures or something. My bible says clear YOU are Peter and to YOU I give the keys.

Or did Jesus call all of the Apostles YOU, and PETER? You show me? Thanks

By the way just because the other Apostles did not have the keys did not mean they did not have authority. According the RCC its Holy Orders that gives them the authority to administer the sacraments not the keys?

And guess what I do agree with your posting. Jesus did give Peter authority over the Church. Thats why we have a POPE and Bishops.

So whats your point?

The you is in the 2nd person sigular; the object is the"keys"; not Peter. Keys can be either plural or singular depending on the context. Jesus was talking to all the disciples, then focused on Peter and his confession, then turns to all the apostles as verse 20 clearly indicates. “I will give each of you a key to the Kingdom” would be the proper and gramatical use of the Greek. We can see on the day of Pentacost this was true and what does the key represent; the authority from heave to open or shut the door to the Kingdon via the acceptance or rejection of the gospel. In fact all have the key to the Kingdom that are in Christ. Most people do not agree with that, but it makes gramattical sense and it is what we actually know to be true. Doesn’t Matt 18 demonstrate that the loose & bind was told to a crowd while Jesus was preaching. The similarities to what He said, some verbatium, to the sermon on the mount in chapter 5 of Matthew. Jesus probaly said the same things to different crowds all the time. He doesn’t need a different message nor new material.

You have Pope because he came along centuries after the formation of the churchbased on a passage(s) taken out of context to fit a theology; at least as history shows and I and many others see it.

 

[JohnnyBeth]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

I don’t know Des, I really feel bad for her. All we are trying to do is show her the truth and she refuses to even consider what we are saying. Its like she will cut off her nose to spite her face kinda thing.

Its like her hate for the Church over powers all:shrug:

I guess we can just pray for her. I am getting to the end of my rope. Maybe you or Randy can show her better I don’t know. Maybe its just me she hates so refuses to accept anything I WRITE. I think I will back off for awhile and pray someone else can show her what our Church teaches. Good luck!

Try not to feel too much pity for her; she obviously understands the word of God.

 

[JohnnyBeth]

In 2 Thess. 2:15 AGAIN Paul reminds the Thessalonian believers that they must hold fast to the traditions that the Apostles have passed down either in writing or by WORD OF MOUTH.

The true interpretation of BOTH SS and ST is expressed in the infallible teaching of the Church the Magisterium. Infallible means that because of the DIVINE help of CHIRST HIMSELF the CHURCH cannot Teach ERROR in matters of faith.

That is and has always been the teaching of the CC!

Better go back and look at the Catholic definition of infallibility; it doesn’t say they can’t teach error; it says they are “excused from any liability” of error. Big difference and quite a twist on infallibility compared to God’s definition of infallibiliy which is the inability to make error - perfection.

 

[JohnnyBeth]

It was the Church that gave us Scripture inspired by the Holy Spirit…

• Michael

I’ll take that as a yes; at least you are being honest. What you stated is equivilent to saying that “every word that comes out of the mouth of God” came from the Church. In your world; that is probably true.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Try not to feel too much pity for her; she obviously understands the word of God.

Oh?

She’s already been refuted on Paul’s use of the term “father” in response to her “call no man father” argument.

I also demonstrated that she is wrong concerning the word “obey” in John 3:36.

So, what exactly are you basing you assessment of her “understanding” on? The fact that she is some flavor of Protestant and disagrees with Catholics?

Is that enough for you to determine that someone is orthodox in his or her theology?

How do you know that she is even Christian? She won’t say. Maybe she’s JW or Mormon…

Again, all you know is that she is anti-Catholic, and you give her your .

What assumptions should we make from this about you?