Question on Matthew 5:29

[tgGodsway]

So does Luke, who demonstrates that when Peter spoke, all conversation ended. All that was left to do was to decree what had been decided and ratified by the Holy Spirit.

Their lack of silence speaks volumes.

Please sight me the scripture you refer to because I don’t know what you are talking about.

 

[tgGodsway]

Jesus expected His Word to be taught in all generations. Not just in the first.

This is why I said, the Apostles left us a divine record that would not corrupt in (each) generation since the 1st. century. They must have known something about tradition and it’s frailty.

 

[tgGodsway]

Boettner mixed lies with truth very well. But the bottom line is that he lied throughout his book.

naaaa… I’m sorry, I don’t believe you De_Maria. … we don’t need to banter back and fourth any more. Let’s agree to disagree and call it a day.

 

[De_Maria]

De_Maria:

Jesus expected His Word to be taught in all generations. Not just in the first.

This is why I said, the Apostles left us a divine record that would not corrupt in (each) generation since the 1st. century. They must have known something about tradition and it’s frailty.

Jesus Christ left us His Word in His Teachings and the Church as it’s sole interpreter because He knew the fickelness of human nature which would attempt to interpret His Word in ways that He never intended. The Church wrote the New Testament.

 

[johnnykins]

OH my - the Bible has surely been shown to be totally corrupt when read on its own with mere private interpretation. All 10,000+/- protestant denominations attest to that.

It’s not so much that Protestants don’t want a Pope as much as they each want to be the Pope - and make their own idiosyncratic private interpretations.

 

[tgGodsway]

After all, the pope and the cardinal- bishops are all practically infallible when they speak doctrine, I’m told. But anyone else (outside your teaching circle) is viewed as having less impartation of the Holy Spirit than them. What else could it be? This is a pride mistake.

You evaded my point altogether. I did not challenge the spirituality of Catholic teachers. But you assume they alone have revelation from God. I don’t. We too have the very same Holy Spirit residing in our hearts. We too draw near to Him in prayer and supplication. We too hear His voice and obey… We too understand 1st. Cor. 2:15 when we make judgments about all things and is NOT judged (accurately) by anyone. This is why I say the Protestants are just one slice of the pie, but so are the Catholics. The pie is so much grander than your parameters or mine.

 

[Gorgias]

Gorgias:

So does Luke, who demonstrates that when Peter spoke, all conversation ended. All that was left to do was to decree what had been decided and ratified by the Holy Spirit.

Their lack of silence speaks volumes.

Please sight me the scripture you refer to because I don’t know what you are talking about.

You’re unfamiliar with the “council of Jerusalem”? It’s described in Acts 15:

After much debate had taken place, Peter got up and said to them…

The whole assembly fell silent, and they listened while Paul and Barnabas described the signs and wonders God had worked among the Gentiles through them…

After they had fallen silent, James responded…

After Peter speaks, the debate is over. His position carries.

 

[De_Maria]

You evaded my point altogether.

Hm?

I did not challenge the spirituality of Catholic teachers.

You said:
After all, the pope and the cardinal- bishops are all practically infallible when they speak doctrine, I’m told. But anyone else (outside your teaching circle) is viewed as having less impartation of the Holy Spirit than them.

But you assume they alone have revelation from God.

We believe that the Catholic Church, alone, is assured of and Teaches an infallible understanding of God’s Word.

I don’t think that’s the same thing as what you claim we assert.

I don’t. We too have the very same Holy Spirit residing in our hearts.

Agreed. But so do the Catholic laity, the Catholic Saints and the Catholic Priests. None of which are considered infallible, either. So, what’s your point? That everyone who has the Holy Spirit residing in their hearts is infallible?

We too draw near to Him in prayer and supplication.

True.

We too hear His voice and obey…

That is the one we are discussing and debating, isn’t it. We don’t consider it obedient to deny God’s Word. And we believe that Protestants deny God’s Word when they interpret it in contradiction to the instrument that He appointed to Teach His Word. Namely, the Catholic Church. Basically, if you disobey the Catholic Church, you disobey God, because God speaks through her.

We too understand 1st. Cor. 2:15 when we make judgments about all things and is NOT judged (accurately) by anyone.

You believe it of each and every Protestant. And yet, you disagree with each other.

Whereas, we believe that God has appointed ministers for His people, who impart to us, His Will. We believe these are all members of the Magisterium.

This is why I say the Protestants are just one slice of the pie, but so are the Catholics. The pie is so much grander than your parameters or mine.

Whom do you include in your pie? People who deny the efficacy of Baptism, people who deny the Real Presence, people who deny that men must strive for holiness, people who believe that one may sin at will and still be saved, etc. etc.?

Scripture Teaches that Doctrine is very important and denounces idea that one can believe anything they want and still be saved. And Scripture doesn’t have some kind of list which it denotes as the “essentials” that we must believe and ignore everything else. Here is what Scripture says:

1 Timothy 1:3As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Matthew 18:17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

Scripture does not Teach the idea you are espousing.

 

[tgGodsway]

Wow, this is the way you read scripture?..Did they fall silent because they were taught Peter was a pope and gets the last word, or, because of the many truthes all of the apostles spoke? If you say because Peter was a pope,… on what scriptural bases? … There is nothing here!

 

[Gorgias]

Did they fall silent because they were taught Peter was a pope and gets the last word, or, because of the many truthes all of the apostles spoke? If you say because Peter was a pope,… on what scriptural bases?

It was Peter – to whom “all authority on heaven and earth” had been given. They fell silent when he began to speak, and they remained silent after he spoke. That’s not just a “scriptural basis” – that’s the actual word-for-word description in Scripture!

Sorry if you don’t like it, but that’s literally what it says! “There’s nothing here”?!? There’s everything there!

 

[De_Maria]

Wow, this is the way you read scripture?..

Why do you think they fall silent?

Did they fall silent because they were taught Peter was a pope

The first Pope. They were witnesses to the event when Jesus said:

Matt 16:18-19 You are Peter and on this Rock, I will build my Church. I will give you the keys to the Kingdom of heaven. What you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven and what you tie down on earth will be tied down in heaven.

and gets the last word,

Precisely, they were also witnesses to the day when Jesus said to Peter, “Feed my sheep”. (John 21:17).

or, because of the many truthes all of the apostles spoke?

They fell silent and quit debating AFTER St. Peter had his say:

Acts 15:7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, …12 Then all the multitude kept silence, …

If you say because Peter was a pope,… on what scriptural bases?

See above. Add to that,

Luke 22:31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: 32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.

Matthew 17:27 Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.

… There is nothing here!

Lol! You’re turning a blind eye to all that is there because it doesn’t fit your narrative.

 

[tgGodsway]

There is no doubt Peter was commissioned as an Apostle. But connecting the scriptural dots to say he was promoted to a new position called chief bishop, which is actually not a higher position than Apostle, is all too unconvincing. None of the above scriptures say what you say it says. No other voices confirm what you say it says… Just because Jesus said to Peter, “feed my sheep,” doesn’t mean that ONLY Peter was to feed His sheep based on many other passages. You argue from silence here. You infer without solid bible teaching on the subject. Please show me the detailed teaching about the office of Pope from the inner circle of Apostles. Show me any teaching from them on this. It just doesn’t exist and you know it. But look… we can agree to disagree De_Maria. It’s okay with me.

 

[De_Maria]

There is no doubt Peter was commissioned as an Apostle. But connecting the scriptural dots to say he was promoted to a new position called chief bishop, which is actually not a higher position than Apostle, is all too unconvincing. None of the above scriptures say what you say it says. No other voices confirm what you say it says… Just because Jesus said to Peter, “feed my sheep,” doesn’t mean that ONLY Peter was to feed His sheep based on many other passages.

Did He say it to anyone else? If not, why do you claim that Jesus didn’t select St. Peter as Chief Bishop over His Church?

You argue from silence here.

Actually, that’s you. I’ve provided several verses which single St. Peter out as Jesus’ selection to run the Church. You have provided nothing which says, “Although I have singled out Peter, I don’t actually mean it for him, alone.”

You infer without solid bible teaching on the subject.

On the contrary, we’ve got the most solid Bible Teaching. We have the Teaching from the author of the New Testament. The Catholic Church.

Please show me the detailed teaching about the office of Pope from the inner circle of Apostles. Show me any teaching from them on this.

The Catholic Church provides it. The Apostles were the first Catholics.

It just doesn’t exist and you know it. But look… we can agree to disagree De_Maria. It’s okay with me.

You can disagree with the truth as much as you like. Oh, by the way, why do you think that Jesus provided a coin, from a fish’s mouth, which would pay for His own and for St. Peter’s taxes and not any of the other Apostles?

 

[irenaeuslyons]

Wow, this is the way you read scripture?..Did they fall silent because they were taught Peter was a pope and gets the last word, or, because of the many truthes all of the apostles spoke? If you say because Peter was a pope,… on what scriptural bases? … There is nothing here!

Have you ever considered that from Matthew to Revelation, Peter is mentioned 155 times and all other apostles combined are 130 times. Peter is always listed first but for two obvious exceptions to the rule (1Cor 3:22; Gal 2:9).

Mt. 16:16; Mk. 8:29; Jn. 6:69 - Peter is first among the apostles to confess the divinity of Christ.
Mt. 16:17 - Peter alone is told he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation from God the Father.
Mt. 16:18 - Jesus builds the Church only on Peter with the other apostles as the foundation and Jesus as the Head.
Mt. 16:19 - Only Peter receives the keys, which represent authority and dynastic succession to his authority.
Jn. 21:15-17 - Jesus tells Peter to “feed my lambs” “tend my sheep” “feed my sheep”. Peter feeds all, including apostles.
Mt. 17:24-25 - Peter is asked for Jesus’ tax. Peter is the spokesman for Jesus. He is the Vicar of Christ.
Gal. 1:18 - Paul spends fifteen days with Peter before beginning his ministry, even after Christ’s Revelation to Paul.
Acts. 1:20-26 – By word of Peter, a new bishop/apostle is chosen by lots under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Acts. 5:1-6 – Peter passes judgment on Ananias and his wife for their incorrect behavior as disciples.
Acts. 15:7-12 – Peter resolves a doctrinal issue. After Peter spoke, all were silent. Paul and Barnabas speak in support.

 

[Gorgias]

Please show me the detailed teaching about the office of Pope from the inner circle of Apostles.

Just because they hadn’t yet coined the term “pope” doesn’t mean that Peter didn’t hold the office with which Jesus entrusted him. In Scripture, nonetheless!

Oh, by the way, why do you think that Jesus provided a coin, from a fish’s mouth, which would pay for His own and for St. Peter’s taxes and not any of the other Apostles?

Like as in, “they weren’t on the payroll yet”?!?!?

 

[tgGodsway]

Did He say it to anyone else? If not, why do you claim that Jesus didn’t select St. Peter as Chief Bishop over His Church?

My goodness De_Maria. … your way of reasoning is unreasonable. Was Peter the only one who fed sheep?.. Was he the only one who taught people, as a shepherd? In acts 5:17-20 we learn that all the apostles taught the gospel. This means they were all feeding God’s sheep not just one select Apostle. Paul was accused of teaching false doctrine in Acts 21:27-28. Of course we know it wasn’t false doctrine. Paul again tells the Corinthian Church that he teaches everywhere in every church. 1st. cor. 4:17. This is also called feeding sheep. So when Jesus said to Peter, “feed my sheep” it must be understood from the standpoint of all scripture. Scripture interprets scripture. Other scriptures, as I’ve just mentioned above, show us that it wasn’t Peter alone who fed sheep.

 

[tgGodsway]

Hey, … you must think I’m anti- Peter. I love Peter! Peter is one of twelve Apostles. This group of 12 is a special class of foundational Apostle. But you’ve got to be kidding me if you think doctrine is made by counting how many times the word Peter is mentioned in comparison to Paul or others. This is first year seminary ignorance with all respect.

Show me chapter and verse talking about the papacy. … show me any Apostle teaching the details of the papacy. Show me any Apostle or gospel writer informing their readers of the papacy. Show me ANY information about a coming papacy from the Old Testament. Acts? Revelation? Anything from the founders of the Christian faith.

 

[De_Maria]

De_Maria:

Did He say it to anyone else? If not, why do you claim that Jesus didn’t select St. Peter as Chief Bishop over His Church?

My goodness De_Maria. … your way of reasoning is unreasonable.

I don’t think so.

Was Peter the only one who fed sheep?.. Was he the only one who taught people, as a shepherd?

He was the only one whom Jesus singled out and instructed to feed His Sheep.

In acts 5:17-20 we learn that all the apostles taught the gospel. This means they were all feeding God’s sheep not just one select Apostle.

Interesting that you would bring us there. What else happened in Acts 5? And why didn’t it happen with all the Apostles present?

Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost,

To whom was Ananias speaking? to God? to the Holy Spirit? or to someone else?

Paul was accused of teaching false doctrine in Acts 21:27-28. Of course we know it wasn’t false doctrine. Paul again tells the Corinthian Church that he teaches everywhere in every church. 1st. cor. 4:17. This is also called feeding sheep. So when Jesus said to Peter, “feed my sheep” it must be understood from the standpoint of all scripture. Scripture interprets scripture. Other scriptures, as I’ve just mentioned above, show us that it wasn’t Peter alone who fed sheep.

If you understand according to the standpoint of all Scripture, then you must understand that St. Paul was Teaching under the authority of St. Peter. Because it was to St. Peter that the ministry to the Gentiles was first given.

Acts 15:7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

Protestants believe that Saul was “THE” vessel by which the Gentiles would be converted. But he was not. He is only “A” vessel. The Catholic Church is the main vessel for Teaching God’s Commands and St. Peter was the ruler of the Catholic Church which Jesus Christ had appointed.

 

[tgGodsway]

Oh, by the way, why do you think that Jesus provided a coin, from a fish’s mouth, which would pay for His own and for St. Peter’s taxes and not any of the other Apostles?

This is like saying, Why did Jesus blind ONLY Paul on the road to Damascus and then restored his sight. You see, Jesus did this only to Paul and that proves that Paul is a Pope!..
Can you see your logic in this kind of statement? Why did Jesus tell Nicodemus ONLY, he must be born again… He did not teach it this way to any other person including Peter. I wonder if this means Nicodemus is in some kind of special class of privilege, because of the narrative in John 3?

 

[De_Maria]

De_Maria:

Oh, by the way, why do you think that Jesus provided a coin, from a fish’s mouth, which would pay for His own and for St. Peter’s taxes and not any of the other Apostles?

This is like saying, Why did Jesus blind ONLY Paul on the road to Damascus and then restored his sight.

Who restored his sight? I know it was God, but through whose intercession?

And, who gave St. Peter the coin? Was it another Apostle? Or was it the Shepherd and Bishop of our souls?

You see, Jesus did this only to Paul and that proves that Paul is a Pope!..

On the contrary, this was done to St. Paul only as a metaphor. But it has been done to all of us who have turned to Christ.

You, probably, are one of those who always believed. Therefore the Scripture applies to you, “blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.”

But that is not the case with me. I had the same experience which Saul underwent. Scales fell from my eyes and one moment I didn’t believe and the next, I could see God’s hand in everything.

Can you see your logic in this kind of statement? Why did Jesus tell Nicodemus ONLY, he must be born again…

That’s not what He said. He said that anyone who wants to enter the Kingdom of Heaven must be born again.

Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

He did not teach it this way to any other person including Peter. I wonder if this means Nicodemus is in some kind of special class of privilege, because of the narrative in John 3?

St. Nicodemus is recognized as one of our saints. So, yes. But, it is to St. Peter that Jesus said, “I give YOU (singular) the keys to the Kingdom of heaven.” He did not, as the Protestants imply, say, “I give ya’ll, everyone standing here, the keys to the Kingdom of heaven.” Look it up in your favorite concordance.