Sola Scriptura is True

[dj_dave]

SORRY I MEANT,

יְהֹוָה Jehovah, pr. name of the supreme God amongst the Hebrews. The later Hebrews for some centuries before the time of Christ, either misled by a false interpretation of certain laws ( Ex. 20:7; Lev. 24:11)or else following some old superstition, regarded this name as so very holy: that it might not even be pronounced. (see Philo, Vit. Mosis t.iii. p.519, 529)…DO YOU REALLY THINK GOD DOES NOT WANT **HIS NAME **KNOWN? See Ex 9:6; Ps 91:14; John 17:6;26; Ezek 38:18-23—*“‘And it must occur in that day, in the day when Gog comes in upon the soil of Israel (SPIRITUAL ISRAELGalatians 6:16.),’ is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah, ‘that my rage will come up into my nose. 19 And in my ardor, in the fire of my fury, I shall have to speak. Surely in that day a great quaking will occur in the soil of Israel. 20 And because of me the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the wild beasts of the field and all the creeping things that are creeping on the ground and all mankind that are upon the surface of the ground will be bound to shiver, and the mountains will actually be thrown down and the steep ways will have to fall, and to the earth even every wall will fall.’ 21 “‘And I will call forth against him throughout all my mountainous region a sword,’ is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. ‘Against his own brother the sword of each one will come to be. 22 And I will bring myself into judgment with him, with pestilence and with blood; and a flooding downpour and hailstones, fire and sulphur I shall rain down upon him and upon his bands and upon the many peoples that will be with him. 23 And I shall certainly magnify myself and sanctify myself and make myself known before the eyes of many nations; and they will have to know that I am Jehovah.’

 

[PJM]

“The things in the heavens” are not for angels, angels are not ransomed by Christ’s blood. Rather, they are the humans bought with the Lamb’s blood to be “a kingdom and priests” with Christ in the “new heavens.” These have already been fully declared righteous through the blood of Christ. In addition, Jehovah has been making peace with “things upon the earth,” those humans who will become a part of the righteous “new earth.” (Revelation 5:9,10; 2 Peter 3:13) Ephesians 1:9, 10.

[This name [Jehovah] was created in the 13th. Century and is not found in any Greek text. Pjm] I DID NOT POST THE ABOVE! This is my Comment on it.Pjm]

do you say "Hallelujah? notice the last 3 letters…The word hallelujah occurring in Psalms is a Hebrew request for a congregation to join in praise. It can be translated as “Praise Yah, you people”, and is usually worded in English contexts as “Praise ye the Lord” or “Praise the Lord”. This is not a direct translation, as Yah represents the first two letters of YHWH, the Hebrew personal name for God, and not the title “lord”.[1]

***Friend, please understnad. My note was a clairifaction not a critism! This is what I was taught in a course I took:

"
Where did the name Jahova Witness originate?

1. It’s origin starts in the 13th Century.

1. Thy took the Hebrew name for God, YEHWEH, and substituted “ADONI” which means Lord, because the Jewish people would never utter aloud the name of their God.

1. NOTE: Today they write “God” as “G- D”

1. In “Old English” a “Y” was today’s “J” and “W” was today’s “V”.

1. In German “Y” = “jaho” and “V” = “va.”

This name “Jahova" never appeared in any of the Greek Translations.

---

Pjm

In the Hebrew Bible hallelujah is actually a two-word phrase, not one word. The first part, hallelu, is the second-person imperative masculine plural form of the Hebrew verb hallal.[2] However, “hallelujah” means more than simply “praise Yah”, as the word hallel in Hebrew means a joyous praise, to boast in God, or to act madly or foolishly.[3] The second part, Yah, is a shortened form of the name of God YHWH, sometimes rendered in English as “Yahweh” or “Jehovah”.

By long tradition, in Jewish culture the Tetragrammaton is not pronounced; when read, the word Adonai is substituted where יְהֹוָה appears in the text, and the vowels of the latter word are inserted in the text as is done when similar substitutions occur. Concerning the substitution of the name Adonai for God’s name, the 19th century Hebrew scholar Gesenius wrote:[2]

יְהֹוָה Jehovah, pr. name of the supreme God amongst the Hebrews. The later Hebrews for some centuries before the time of Christ, either misled by a false interpretation of certain laws ( Ex. 20:7; Lev. 24:11)or else following some old superstition, regarded this name as so very holy: that it might not even be pronounced. (see Philo, Vit. Mosis t.iii. p.519, 529)…DO YOU REALLY THINK GOD DOES NOT WANT HIS MANE KNOWN? See Ex 9:6; Ps 91:14; John 17:6;26; Ezek 38:18-23—*“‘And it must occur in that day, in the day when Gog comes in upon the soil of Israel (SPIRITUAL ISRAELGalatians 6:16.),’ is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah, ‘that my rage will come up into my nose. 19 And in my ardor, in the fire of my fury, I shall have to speak. Surely in that day a great quaking will occur in the soil of Israel. 20 And because of me the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the wild beasts of the field and all the creeping things that are creeping on the ground and all mankind that are upon the surface of the ground will be bound to shiver, and the mountains will actually be thrown down and the steep ways will have to fall, and to the earth even every wall will fall.’ 21 “‘And I will call forth against him throughout all my mountainous region a sword,’ is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. ‘Against his own brother the sword of each one will come to be. 22 And I will bring myself into judgment with him, with pestilence and with blood; and a flooding downpour and hailstones, fire and sulphur I shall rain down upon him and upon his bands and upon the many peoples that will be with him. 23 And I shall certainly magnify myself and sanctify myself and make myself known before the eyes of many nations; and they will have to know that I am Jehovah.’

Do you say JESUS? That is his name as much as Jehovah is God’s name.
nobody knows the correct pronounciation of God’s name --Also no one knows the correct pronounciation of Jesus, JEHU; JEHOASH; JEHOHANAN;JEHOIAKIM; JEHOSHAPHAT
and hundreds of others.

Again friend, no critism intended, just a point od clarification. Truly sorry if I upset you:blush:

Love and prayers,

Pat

 

[dj_dave]

I was not mad at you…look at my original post…I said “His Mane” instead of his “Name”.…Now, I know that Jesus was “the lion from the tribe of Judah” …but, I’m pretty sure he didn’t have a "mane " either…:

 

[jlhargus]

You are mistaken, 1 Cor 10:12 if Christ established the Roman Catholic Church, why is it that we look in vain in the Holy Bible for such expressions most current among her, such as trinity, purgatory, mass, immortal soul, lent, novenas, indulgences, penances, holy water, veneration of Mary, the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption of Mary, etc.?

JL: You are mistaken, 1Cor10:12, If Christ established the Watchtower Society, why is it that we look in vain in the Holy Bible for such expressions most current among her, such as two gods, one mighty and one almighty, polytheism, annihilation, body is the soul, sheol=gravedom, pray only in name of Jehovah, no transfusions, 1914 generation millions now living will never die, Christ returned invisibly in 1914, two hopes heavenly and earthly, editor of WT is Jehovah God, Can’t read and understand bible without Watchtower Magazine the name Jehovah, “a god”, why don’t we find in the Bible anyone who counts their time in preaching on a slip of paper and are assigned record cards of activity, to GAUGE their spirituality, magazine sales people, etc.?

also, If Christ Jesus and his apostles did indeed establish the Roman Catholic Church, then why is it that we look in vain, from Matthew through the Apocalypse or Revelation, for any mention whatsoever of the Holy Father, or a pope, a college of cardinals, archbishops, metropolitans, patriarchs, monsignors, right reverends, priests, abbots, monks and nuns?

JL: Also, if Christ Jesus did indeed establish the WT then why is it that we look in vain, from Matthew through the Apocalypse or Revelation, for any mention whatsoever of the President of the WT, Governing Body, District Overseers, Circuit Overseers, Pioneers, Auxiliary Pioneers, Bethelites, Kingdom Halls?

also, Recall a truth that Jesus Christ expressed: “Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it; whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it.” .—Matthew 7:13,14.

also consider:
Matt. 16:18, JB: “I now say to you: You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church. And the gates of the underworld can never hold out against it.” (Notice in the context [vss. 13,*20] that the discussion centers on the identity of Jesus.)

Whom did the apostles Peter and Paul understand to be the “rock,” the “cornerstone”?

JL: Yes Christ is indeed the cornerstone, and capstone and Head of the Church no doubt about that. Whom did Christ our Rock name Rock in Jn1:46 and say to the one he named Rock, you are Rock and on this rock I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH?
dj dave;5628914:

Acts 4:8-11, JB: “Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, addressed them, ‘Rulers of the people, and elders! . . . it was by the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, the one you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, BY THIS NAME AND BY NO OTHER that this man is able to stand up perfectly healthy, here in your presence, today. This is the stone rejected by you the builders, but which has proved to be the keystone

“cornerstone,” NAB].’”

JL: Whom did Christ name Rock and say on this rock I will build MY Church? Did you notice in your post BY THIS NAME AND BY NO OTHER. You will also notice in [Act4:8-12; 10 … it was by **THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST

the Nazarene, THE ONE YOU CRUCIFED, whom God raised from the dead, BY **THIS NAME **AND BY **NO OTHER **that this man is able to stand up perfectly healthy 11 He is " 'the stone you builders rejected, which has become the CAPSTONE. 12 ****SALVATION IS FOUND IN NO ONE ELSE, for **THERE IS NO OTHER NAME **UNDER HEAVEN **GIVEN TO MEN **BY WHICH WE MUST BE SAVED."] Scholars know Jehovah is not the correct name of God, Yahweh, would be more correct to say. You would have thought if Jesus returned invisible in 1914 that he would have at lest know the correct name of God. Yet the only NAME OF GOD given to men by which we must be saved is Jesus Christ, who is our LORD AND GOD. Jn20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, MY LORD AND MY GOD. Jude 1:25 To the only wise GOD OUR SAVIOUR, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen. Lk1:46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in GOD MY SAVIOUR. Titus2:13 LOOKING FOR that blessed hope, and THE GLORIOUS APPEARING of THE GREAT GOD and OUR SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST;] NO OTHER NAME UNDER HEAVEN GIVEN TO MEN BY WHICH WE MUST BE SAVED, SALVATION IS FOUND IN NO ONE ELSE. - Bold print and caps added by me. -

Do you say JESUS? That is his name as much as Jehovah is God’s name.
nobody knows the correct pronounciation of God’s name --Also no one knows the correct pronounciation of Jesus, JEHU; JEHOASH; JEHOHANAN;JEHOIAKIM; JEHOSHAPHAT
and hundreds of others. ect.

 

[jlhargus]

1Pet. 2:4-8, JB: “ Set yourselves close to him [the Lord Jesus Christ] so that you too . . . may be living stones making a spiritual house. As scripture says: See how I lay in Zion a precious cornerstone that I have chosen and the man who rests his trust on it will not be disappointed. That means that for you who are believers, it is precious; but for unbelievers, the stone rejected by the builders has proved to be the keystone, a stone to stumble over, a rock to bring men down.”*Eph. 2:20, JB: “You are part of a building that has the apostles and prophets for its foundations, and Christ Jesus himself for its main cornerstone.”
dj dave;5628914:

Did the other apostles view Peter as having primacy among them?

JL: Paul used Rock for Peter in several places in scripture. Cephas the anglicized spelling of the Aramaic kepha, is used to refer to Peter in Jn1:42, 1Cor 1:12, 3:22, 9:5, 15:5 and Gal 2:9. If the Aramaic word kepha was translated instead of anglicized as Cephas it would be translated Rock, in fact the New American Bible does translate Mt 16:18 "you are Rock and on this rock I will build my church

Luke 22:24-26, JB: “A dispute arose also between them [the apostles] about which should be reckoned the greatest, but he said to them, ‘Among pagans it is the kings who lord it over them, and those who have authority over them are given the title Benefactor. This must not happen with you.’”

(If Peter were the “rock,” would there have been any question as to which one of them “should be reckoned the greatest”?)

JL: Then why do you have a PRESIDENT, and a GOVERNING BOARD?

Before Pentecost the apostles seemed to take in very little Jesus taught them, they were like immature babes in Christ. Everthing went in one ear and out the other. They didn’t understand he would rise again, though they were told before hand he would. Why should we expect them to understand Peter’s leadership roll, Peter didn’t seen to understand at that time either. they were not mature till Pentecost. They only understood the things Christ taught them after being confirmed by the Holy Spirit when he came on them at Pentecost and brought to their rememberance all Christ said and did. Just as we are strengthened to become mature in faith by laying on of hands in the sacrament of Confirmation.
dj dave:

Since Jesus Christ, the head of the congregation, is alive, does he need successors?

JL: Actually THE MAN Jesus Christ who is our High Priest and King does not have nor need successors, as he ever lives A MAN who is our MEDIATOR and KING in David’s line. Why does the WT have a succession of presidents and governing body, plus congregation ministers?
dj dave:

Heb. 7:23-25, JB: “Then there used to be a great number of those other priests [in Israel], because death put an end to each one of them; but this one [Jesus Christ], because he remains for ever, can never lose his priesthood.

It follows, then, that his power to save is utterly certain, since he is living for ever to intercede for all who come to God through him.”

Rom. 6:9, JB: “Christ, as we know, having been raised from the dead will never die again.”

JL: Notice Rm6:9 Christ (WHO IS A MAN) raised from the dead will never die again, also Hb7:24** this one [Jesus Christ], because he remains for ever, can never lose his priesthood**.] Jesus Christ is A MAN, he remains for ever, the MAN Jesus Christ our King, High Priest and Mediator. [1Tm2:5 For there is one God and one MEDIATOR between God and men, the MAN Christ Jesus,] Hb8:6 But THE MINISTRY JESUS HAS RECEIVED is as SUPERIOR to theirs as the covenant of which HE IS MEDIATOR is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises. Act17:31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the MAN he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead."] Sorta contradicts the WT’s, THE MAN Jesus Christ was annihailated when he died and then raised Michael.

Eph. 5:23, JB: “Christ is head of the Church.”

JL: Yes, notice not Michael, according to your doctrine this should read, " Micheal is head of the Church", but THE MAN Jesus Christ is head of the Church or kingdom of God in the line of David. Just as the kings in David’s line Christ appoints ministers to see his will is carried out. Just as in the Davidic kimgdom, which is a type or foreshadowing of the new regenerated spiritual Davidic Kingdom of God, the new Israel, the Church. the King appoints a First Minister by giving of the key, so Peter is First Minister in the new regenerated Davidic Kingdom by giving of the keys.

[Isa22:19 I will drive you from your station 20 I will call my servant Eliakim 21 I will commit your government to his hand he shall be a father to the people of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah 22 And the key of the house of David will I lay on his shoulder so he shall open and none shall shut he shall shut and none shall open] Eliakim will be the new Prime Minster and called father of Jerusalem, in the Davidic Kingdom, he will succeed Shebna. So in the regenerated spiritual Kingdom of David, of which Christ is now king, Peter is will be appointed Prime Minister and called father=pope in the new Jerusalem=Church. The keys indicate the holder has authority over the other royal ministers (or apostles) as they do not receive keys, also indicates the head office has successors. When the office is vacant it is filled by the King in David’s line, who is Christ, with another by giving of the keys. Jesus alluded to this passage when giving the keys to Peter, Mt 16. Incidentally if Christ is King in David’s line, his mother, which all generations will call blessed, is Gebirah (Queen Mother) 1Kings 2:19. From Solomon the son of David, who built a house for God, there was an office of queen mother in the Dividic Kingdom, the type and foreshadowing of the regenerated spiritual Kingdom. The king Christ, the Son of David, is building a habitation for God of living stones.

 

[jlhargus]

I BELIEVE THERE IS NO “THE” (Definite Article) IN GREEK THERE…TRANSLATERS ADD AN “A”…1 Timothy 2:5 (Wycliffe New Testament)

*For one God and one mediator is of God and of men, a *man Christ Jesus,

By his sacrifice of a perfect human body with out sin The apostle Paul declares that there is “one mediator between God and men, a man, Christ Jesus, who gave himself a corresponding ransom for all”—for both Jews and Gentiles. (1Ti 2:5,*6) He mediates the new covenant between God and those taken into the new covenant, the congregation of spiritual Israel. (Heb 8:10-13; 12:24; Eph 5:25-27) Christ became Mediator in order that the ones called “might receive the promise of the everlasting inheritance” (Heb 9:15); he assists, not the angels, but “Abraham’s seed.” (Heb 2:16) He assists those who are to be brought into the new covenant to be ‘adopted’ into Jehovah’s household of spiritual sons; these eventually will be in heaven as Christ’s brothers, becoming a part with him of the seed of Abraham. (Ro 8:15-17, 23-25; Ga 3:29) He has transmitted to them the promised holy spirit, with which spirit they are sealed and are given a token of what is to come, their heavenly inheritance. (2Co 5:5; Eph 1:13,*14) The total number of those who are finally and permanently sealed is revealed in Revelation 7:4-8 as 144,000.

JL: Give me a break. Even if “a man” was used, what is “a man”? isn’t it still A MAN who is our mediator? Get real.

You didn’t notice how the WT immediatelly diverts your attention from the fact our mediator is A MAN “the man Jesus Christ or if you like “a man” Jesus Christ?

Note the WT smoke screen “TRANSLATERS ADD AN “A”. What translaters? I can count 16 bible versions that say, “the man” and 4 that say, human. The WT finds one that says “a man” and immediatelly diverts attention before you realize “a man” is still MAN. You evidently fail for it, otherwise you would not have posted it.

[1Tm2:3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants ALL MEN to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the MAN Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom FOR ALL MEN—the testimony given in its proper time.] We are brought into convenant family relationship with God thru baptism. Notice God want ALL MEN to be saved, Christ gave himself for ALL MEN not just 144,000.00.

 

[Bill_Pick]

JL: Then why do you have a PRESIDENT, and a GOVERNING BOARD?

Before Pentecost the apostles seemed to take in very little Jesus taught them, they were like immature babes in Christ. Everthing went in one ear and out the other. They didn’t understand he would rise again, though they were told before hand he would. Why should we expect them to understand Peter’s leadership roll, Peter didn’t seen to understand at that time either. they were not mature till Pentecost. They only understood the things Christ taught them after being confirmed by the Holy Spirit when he came on them at Pentecost and brought to their rememberance all Christ said and did. Just as we are strengthened to become mature in faith by laying on of hands in the sacrament of Confirmation.

JL: Actually THE MAN Jesus Christ who is our High Priest and King does not have nor need successors, as he ever lives A MAN who is our MEDIATOR and KING in David’s line. Why does the WT have a succession of presidents and governing body, plus congregation ministers?

JL: Notice Rm6:9 Christ (WHO IS A MAN) raised from the dead will never die again, also Hb7:24** this one [Jesus Christ], because he remains for ever, can never lose his priesthood**.] Jesus Christ is A MAN, he remains for ever, the MAN Jesus Christ our King, High Priest and Mediator. [1Tm2:5 For there is one God and one MEDIATOR between God and men, the MAN Christ Jesus,] Hb8:6 But THE MINISTRY JESUS HAS RECEIVED is as SUPERIOR to theirs as the covenant of which HE IS MEDIATOR is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises. Act17:31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the MAN he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead."] Sorta contradicts the WT’s, THE MAN Jesus Christ was annihailated when he died and then raised Michael.

JL: Yes, notice not Michael, according to your doctrine this should read, " Micheal is head of the Church", but THE MAN Jesus Christ is head of the Church or kingdom of God in the line of David. Just as the kings in David’s line Christ appoints ministers to see his will is carried out. Just as in the Davidic kimgdom, which is a type or foreshadowing of the new regenerated spiritual Davidic Kingdom of God, the new Israel, the Church. the King appoints a First Minister by giving of the key, so Peter is First Minister in the new regenerated Davidic Kingdom by giving of the keys.

[Isa22:19 I will drive you from your station 20 I will call my servant Eliakim 21 I will commit your government to his hand he shall be a father to the people of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah 22 And the key of the house of David will I lay on his shoulder so he shall open and none shall shut he shall shut and none shall open] Eliakim will be the new Prime Minster and called father of Jerusalem, in the Davidic Kingdom, he will succeed Shebna. So in the regenerated spiritual Kingdom of David, of which Christ is now king, Peter is will be appointed Prime Minister and called father=pope in the new Jerusalem=Church. The keys indicate the holder has authority over the other royal ministers (or apostles) as they do not receive keys, also indicates the head office has successors. When the office is vacant it is filled by the King in David’s line, who is Christ, with another by giving of the keys. Jesus alluded to this passage when giving the keys to Peter, Mt 16. Incidentally if Christ is King in David’s line, his mother, which all generations will call blessed, is Gebirah (Queen Mother) 1Kings 2:19. From Solomon the son of David, who built a house for God, there was an office of queen mother in the Dividic Kingdom, the type and foreshadowing of the regenerated spiritual Kingdom. The king Christ, the Son of David, is building a habitation for God of living stones.

Dave you forget this one " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

 

[jlhargus]

This is evident from Jesus’ next words: “Truly I say to you, whatever you shall bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” (Matt. 18:18, New American Standard Bible; see also NW, Ro, The New Testament by C. B. Williams) Though some Bible versions render this verse in a way that suggests that the heavenly action occurs after the earthly decision, noted Bible translator Robert Young said that it literally should be: “shall be that which has been bound (already).”

[SIGN]Matthew 18:18 (New International Version)
18*"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be[a]bound * in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be** loosed in heaven***. *Footnotes: Matthew 18:18 Or have been [/SIGN]

JL: Peter received the keys and power to bind and loose apart from the other apostles in Mt16:18-19, then as a group all the apostles including Peter received the power to bind and loose as a collective union, Mt18:18, when speaking for the whole Church on matters of faith and morals.

As far as bind and loose, **“literally should be: “shall be that which has been bound (already).” ** I much perfer that as it makes a stronger point of infalliblity. Heaven literally guarantees Peter alone or in union with the others in council, will ONLY (infallibly) bind and loose what has already been bond or loosed in heaven. The Holy Spirit will guide them into all truth.

 

[PJM]

You are mistaken, 1 Cor 10:12 if Christ established the Roman Catholic Church, why is it that we look in vain in the Holy Bible for such expressions most current among her, such as trinity, purgatory, mass, immortal soul, lent, novenas, indulgences, penances, holy water, veneration of Mary, the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption of Mary, etc.?

A wee bit of common sense would allow one to realize that any instituation that is 2,000 years old would evolve from what it was [very small] to what it is [the largest Christian Church in the World]. The Apostles were largely uneducated or undereducated. Which itself proves Divine Inspiration. Read Mt. 18:15-18 and Mt. 16:15-19] then to that clear, and concise mandate add these as additional evidence of the Primacy and The Singular Church.

**Luke 10:16 “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

Mark 3: 13 “And he went up on the mountain, and called to him those whom he desired; and they came to him. 14 And he appointed twelve, to be with him, and to be sent out to preach and have authority to cast out demons: Simon whom he surnamed Peter; James the son of Zebedee and John the brother of James, whom he surnamed Bo-anerges, that is, sons of thunder; Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Cananaean, and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.”

Mt. 28: 18 “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

Mt. 18: 15 "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; [SINGULAR] and if he refuses to listen even to the church, [SINGULAR] let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you [SINGULAR] bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Romans 13: 1 “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.”**

**1 John 4: 4 Little children, you are of God, and have overcome them; for he who is in you is greater than he who is in the world. They are of the world, therefore what they say is of the world, and the world listens to them. We are of God. Whoever knows God listens to us, and he who is not of God does not listen to us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.

2nd. Cor. 9: 13 “Under the test of this service, you will glorify God by your obedience in acknowledging the gospel of Christ,”**

***Eph. 2:19 19 So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, * in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; [singular] in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit."

Eph. 4: 4 “There is one body [One Church] and one Spirit, [One set of beliefs] just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, 5 one Lord,[One God] one faith, [One set of doctrine and dogma] one baptism, By water in the Trinity] 6 one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all. 7 But grace was given to each of us according to the measure of Christ’s gift. 8 Therefore it is said, “When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men.”

Eph. 5: 23 Christ is the head of the church [singular] , his body, [singular]

1 Cor. 14: 12 “ So with yourselves; since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church. [singular]

Eph. 3: 9 “And to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things; 10 that through the church [singular] the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places. This was according to the eternal purpose which he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord
**

I hope friend that you love Jesus sufficiently to actually Listen to what He [GOD] is saying:shrug:

Love and prayers,

 

[dj_dave]

JL: Paul used Rock for Peter in several places in scripture. Cephas the anglicized spelling of the Aramaic kepha, is used to refer to Peter in Jn1:42, 1Cor 1:12, 3:22, 9:5, 15:5 and Gal 2:9. the Aramaic word kepha was translated instead of anglicized as Cephas it would be translated Rock, in fact the New American Bible does translate Mt 16:18 "you are Rock and on this rock I will build my church

[SIGN]4073. petra 4074 >>

---

a (large mass of) rock
Original Word: πέτρα
Transliteration: petra
Phonetic Spelling: (pet’-ra)
Short Definition: rock

Word Origin
a prim. word
Definition
a (large mass of) rock
NASB Word Usage
rock (10), rocks (3), rocky (2).

NAS Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible with Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries
Copyright © 1981, 1998 by The Lockman Foundation
All rights reserved Lockman.org

rock.

Feminine of the same as Petros; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively) – rock. [/SIGN]

[SIGN]4074. Petros 4075 >>

---

“a stone” or “a boulder,” Peter, one of the twelve apostles
Original Word: Πέτρος
Transliteration: Petros
Phonetic Spelling: (pet’-ros)
Short Definition: Peter

Word Origin
a noun akin to petra, used as a proper name
Definition
“a stone” or “a boulder,” Peter, one of the twelve apostles
NASB Word Usage
Peter (150), Peter’s (5).

NAS Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible with Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries
Copyright © 1981, 1998 by The Lockman Foundation
All rights reserved Lockman.org

Peter, rock.

Apparently a primary word; a (piece of) rock (larger than lithos); as a name, Petrus, an apostle – Peter, rock. Compare Kephas. [/SIGN]

I am aware that some say Jesus spoke in Aramaic and in that language the same word ke′pha is used in each instance. BUT, let it be noted that in his expression “on this rock” Jesus used a feminine demonstrative pronoun, translated “this,” which he would not have done had he meant that Peter is the rock on which his congregation was to be built. It was, no doubt, because this feminine demonstrative pronoun made it apparent that Jesus intended to distinguish between Peter and the rock on which his congregation was to be built that Matthew when translating into Greek used two different nouns, Petros and petra. (Incidentally, the evidence indicates that Matthew first wrote his gospel in Hebrew and then himself translated it into Greek.) We cannot imagine Matthew’s being so careless as to use two different nouns if Jesus had not intended to make any distinction. And so we have a modern literal translation of Jesus’ words as follows: “You are Peter [Petros, masculine], and on this rock-mass [petra, feminine] I will build my congregation.”—Matt. 16:18,

The fact is that Peter did not even continue to take the lead, not to say anything of headship! As soon as the apostle Paul was chosen we find him coming to the fore, in the record of Acts. Peter is mentioned only once in that book after the twelfth chapter, and throughout the whole book of Acts less than one half as often as is Paul. **When the apostles and older men met at Jerusalem to discuss points of Christian teaching and practice, it was James, the half brother of Jesus, who presided. In summing up the matter he said: “My **decision [not even our decision, much less Peter’s decision] is not to trouble those from the nations who are turning to God.”—Acts 15:19,

Nor can the fact that Jesus three times commanded Peter to feed his sheep be used to argue that Peter was given headship. It was but fitting, in view of Peter’s having three times denied his Lord, that Jesus should three times ask him if he loved him and then tell him to feed his sheep and lambs. That Peter did not consider his position as shepherd as unique is seen from his words at 1 Peter 5:1-4

AS STATED BEFORE…
Paul wrote several of his letters from Rome during the time that Peter was supposed to have been there. Yet in not one of these does he make any reference to Peter’s being in Rome. …And in the letter Paul wrote to the Christian congregation at Rome he sends greetings to twenty-six, and, in all, makes mention of thirty-five Christians, but does not mention Peter. Could Paul have thus ignored Peter if Peter had been in Rome, and pope at that? Unthinkable! Indicative of the weakness of the case of Peter’s having been in Rome is the applying of Babylon to Rome at 1 Peter 5:13.

Before Pentecost the apostles seemed to take in very little Jesus taught them, they were like immature babes in Christ.

Everthing went in one ear and out the other. They didn’t understand he would rise again, though they were told before hand he would. Why should we expect them to understand Peter’s leadership roll, Peter didn’t seen to understand at that time either. they were not mature till Pentecost. They only understood the things Christ taught them after being confirmed by the Holy Spirit when he came on them at Pentecost and brought to their rememberance all Christ said and did. Just as we are strengthened to become mature in faith by laying on of hands in the sacrament of Confirmation.

I believe you are now trying to convince yourselves However, compare ( Mt 13:10,11)
Also, I agree there were somethings they didn’t fully understand but it wasn’t time
(John 16:12-13)

But*, Everything went in one ear and out the other.?* The conferring of leadership
upon Peter? I find that highly unlikely.

Now about your question "Why does the WT have a succession of presidents and governing body, plus congregation ministers? as opposed to my comment

…for any mention whatsoever of the Holy Father, or a pope, a college of cardinals, archbishops, metropolitans, patriarchs, monsignors, right reverends, priests, abbots, monks and nuns?

continued

 

[Bill_Pick]

Dj Dave Do you people in Brooklyn know you are on a Cathloic froum making a fool of your self

 

[dj_dave]

Now about your question "Why does the WT have a succession of presidents and governing body, plus congregation ministers? as opposed to my comment

…*for any mention whatsoever of the Holy Father, or a pope, a college of cardinals, archbishops, metropolitans, patriarchs, monsignors, right reverends, priests, abbots, monks and nuns? *

**

continued

Sorry, some titles to me are simple; others are pretentious. Here are a few examples:
Clergyman: “Reverend.”
Anglican bishop: “Right Reverend the Lord Bishop.”
Roman Catholic bishop (in Italy): “His Excellency, the Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Monsignor.”
Cardinal: “His Eminence.”
The pope: “Most Holy Father.”
The titles “reverend” and “bishop” have been in use for such a long time that they do not grate on the ear of most church members. But are such titles authorized by the Bible?
“Reverend,” “Bishop,” and “Cardinal”
In the King James Version, the term “reverend” appears only once, at Psalm 111:9, which says: “Holy and reverend is his name.” Whose name? The next verse says: “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom.” (Psalm 111:10) …this belongs exclusively to Jehovah, the Almighty. Is it correct then to give it to humans?

“If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work,” wrote Paul to Timothy. (1 Timothy 3:1, KJ) However, according to The New Jerusalem Bible, the verse reads: “To want to be a presiding elder is to desire a noble task.” Early Christians with responsible duties were referred to as “elders” and “overseers.” Were those terms used as titles? No. Such men were never called “Bishop Peter” or “Elder James.” That is why mature Christian men among Jehovah’s Witnesses who serve the congregation as elders never use the term “elder” as a title. The terms “elder” and “overseer” (bishop) apply to those holding a position of authority and responsibility. The terms also describe the qualifications of the men appointed and the work that they do.

What about the title “cardinal”? Is it found in the Bible? No. It is not in any version. In fact, the Roman Catholic Church admits that this title is not Biblical. The New Catholic Encyclopedia explains: “The word is derived from the Latin word cardo meaning ‘hinge,’ and in the words of Pope Eugene IV, ‘as the door of a house turns on its hinges, so on the cardinalate does the Apostolic See, the door of the whole Church, rest and find support.’” This reference work also informs us that “cardinals enjoy the privilege of being directly addressed as ‘Eminence.’” Their status also allows them to wear a red gown and a red cap. Did the apostles have those ‘privileges’? The Bible answers no.

Should members of the clergy be called lords? Anglican bishops are addressed “lord.” Catholic prelates are often addressed “monsignor,” which means “my Lord.” In some countries, ministers of the Dutch Reformed Church are addressed dominee, a title derived from the Latin word dominus, meaning “lord.” But Jesus instructed his disciples: “You know that in the world, rulers lord it over their subjects, . . . but it shall not be so with you.” (Matthew 20:25, 26, The New English Bible) Also, the apostle Peter wrote: “Do not lord it over the group which is in your charge, but be an example for the flock.” (1 Peter 5:3, NJB) On the occasion when Jesus humbly washed the feet of his disciples, he said to them: “You call me Master and Lord, and rightly; so I am.” (John 13:13, NJB) Is it right for men to use a religious title that belongs to God and to his Son?

Is the religious title “father” correct? It is used widely by Roman Catholics and Anglicans. “Padre,” meaning “father,” is also widely used. But Jesus taught his disciples: “You must call no one on earth your father, since you have only one Father, and he is in heaven.” (Matthew 23:9, NJB) The New English Bible reads similarly: “Do not call any man on earth ‘father.’” Why do clergymen and their followers disobey this command from the Lord Jesus Christ?

The pope of Rome is usually addressed as “Holy Father" and “Most Holy Father.” “Holy Father” is a title that appears only once in the Bible. (John 17:11) It is the exclusive title of the Supreme Being. Is it right for creatures, who are earthly and imperfect, to be addressed by that title? Because of Paul’s bringing the good news to certain Christians and nourishing them spiritually he was like a father to them, but in no scripture is “father” applied to him as a religious title. (1Co 4:14, 15) Paul likened himself to both a father and a mother in his relation to the Thessalonian Christians. (1Th 2:7, 11) Whereas reference is made at Luke 16:24, 30 to “father Abraham,” this is basically in the sense of fleshly ancestry.

Please read and note the context of Matthew 23:1-12. Jesus begins speaking about the Pharisees, who were a prominent sect of Judaism. They were legalists, sticklers for observance of every detail of the Mosaic Law. They liked to dress and act in such a way as to call attention to themselves. Their religion was one of ostentation—their style of clothing, their principal places at meals, their front seats in the synagogues, and their titles of honor. They even claimed greater respect than that which was given parents. They wanted to be called father. However, Jesus shows that all his followers are equal as God’s children. Any title that suggests the opposite is a haughty usurpation of something that belongs to God. Thus, Jesus forbids the use of the word “father” as a title of honor in a religious sense. Jesus insists that his followers have only one Father in the faith, Jehovah.

True Christians today avoid using flattering religious titles, and they avoid the practice of setting men on ecclesiastical pedestals. Among Jehovah’s Witnesses the only form of address for ministers is “brother.” (2 Peter 3:15) That is in harmony with what Jesus said: “You are all brothers.”—Matthew 23:8, NJB.

A wee bit of common sense would allow one to realize that any instituation that is 2,000 years old would evolve from what it was very small] to what it is [the largest Christian Church in the World[/COLOR]]. (With all do respect how does that comment relate to Matthew 7:13,14)??? The Apostles were largely uneducated or undereducated. Which itself proves Divine Inspiration. Read Mt. 18:15-18 and Mt. 16:15-19] then to that clear, and concise mandate add these as additional evidence of the Primacy and The Singular Church.
Compare (Luke 10:21) You would think that in 60 years they would have at least mentioned a “Pope”…Listen, we could debate this till Armageddon.

Now what about the witnesses? Are they similar to the 1st century congregations? continued…

 

[Bill_Pick]

dj_dave:
Sorry, some titles to me are simple; others are pretentious. Here are a few examples:
Clergyman: “Reverend.”
Anglican bishop: “Right Reverend the Lord Bishop.”
Roman Catholic bishop (in Italy): “His Excellency, the Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Monsignor.”
Cardinal: “His Eminence.”
The pope: “Most Holy Father.”
The titles “reverend” and “bishop” have been in use for such a long time that they do not grate on the ear of most church members. But are such titles authorized by the Bible?
“Reverend,” “Bishop,” and “Cardinal”
In the King James Version, the term “reverend” appears only once, at Psalm 111:9, which says: “Holy and reverend is his name.” Whose name? The next verse says: “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom.” (Psalm 111:10) …this belongs exclusively to Jehovah, the Almighty. Is it correct then to give it to humans?

“If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work,” wrote Paul to Timothy. (1 Timothy 3:1, KJ) However, according to The New Jerusalem Bible, the verse reads: “To want to be a presiding elder is to desire a noble task.” Early Christians with responsible duties were referred to as “elders” and “overseers.” Were those terms used as titles? No. Such men were never called “Bishop Peter” or “Elder James.” That is why mature Christian men among Jehovah’s Witnesses who serve the congregation as elders never use the term “elder” as a title. The terms “elder” and “overseer” (bishop) apply to those holding a position of authority and responsibility. The terms also describe the qualifications of the men appointed and the work that they do.

What about the title “cardinal”? Is it found in the Bible? No. It is not in any version. In fact, the Roman Catholic Church admits that this title is not Biblical. The New Catholic Encyclopedia explains: “The word is derived from the Latin word cardo meaning ‘hinge,’ and in the words of Pope Eugene IV, ‘as the door of a house turns on its hinges, so on the cardinalate does the Apostolic See, the door of the whole Church, rest and find support.’” This reference work also informs us that “cardinals enjoy the privilege of being directly addressed as ‘Eminence.’” Their status also allows them to wear a red gown and a red cap. Did the apostles have those ‘privileges’? The Bible answers no.

Should members of the clergy be called lords? Anglican bishops are addressed “lord.” Catholic prelates are often addressed “monsignor,” which means “my Lord.” In some countries, ministers of the Dutch Reformed Church are addressed dominee, a title derived from the Latin word dominus, meaning “lord.” But Jesus instructed his disciples: “You know that in the world, rulers lord it over their subjects, . . . but it shall not be so with you.” (Matthew 20:25, 26, The New English Bible) Also, the apostle Peter wrote: “Do not lord it over the group which is in your charge, but be an example for the flock.” (1 Peter 5:3, NJB) On the occasion when Jesus humbly washed the feet of his disciples, he said to them: “You call me Master and Lord, and rightly; so I am.” (John 13:13, NJB) Is it right for men to use a religious title that belongs to God and to his Son?

Is the religious title “father” correct? It is used widely by Roman Catholics and Anglicans. “Padre,” meaning “father,” is also widely used. But Jesus taught his disciples: “You must call no one on earth your father, since you have only one Father, and he is in heaven.” (Matthew 23:9, NJB) The New English Bible reads similarly: “Do not call any man on earth ‘father.’” Why do clergymen and their followers disobey this command from the Lord Jesus Christ?

The pope of Rome is usually addressed as “Holy Father" and “Most Holy Father.” “Holy Father” is a title that appears only once in the Bible. (John 17:11) It is the exclusive title of the Supreme Being. Is it right for creatures, who are earthly and imperfect, to be addressed by that title? Because of Paul’s bringing the good news to certain Christians and nourishing them spiritually he was like a father to them, but in no scripture is “father” applied to him as a religious title. (1Co 4:14, 15) Paul likened himself to both a father and a mother in his relation to the Thessalonian Christians. (1Th 2:7, 11) Whereas reference is made at Luke 16:24, 30 to “father Abraham,” this is basically in the sense of fleshly ancestry.

Please read and note the context of Matthew 23:1-12. Jesus begins speaking about the Pharisees, who were a prominent sect of Judaism. They were legalists, sticklers for observance of every detail of the Mosaic Law. They liked to dress and act in such a way as to call attention to themselves. Their religion was one of ostentation—their style of clothing, their principal places at meals, their front seats in the synagogues, and their titles of honor. They even claimed greater respect than that which was given parents. They wanted to be called father. However, Jesus shows that all his followers are equal as God’s children. Any title that suggests the opposite is a haughty usurpation of something that belongs to God. Thus, Jesus forbids the use of the word “father” as a title of honor in a religious sense. Jesus insists that his followers have only one Father in the faith, Jehovah.

True Christians today avoid using flattering religious titles, and they avoid the practice of setting men on ecclesiastical pedestals. Among Jehovah’s Witnesses the only form of address for ministers is “brother.” (2 Peter 3:15) That is in harmony with what Jesus said: “You are all brothers.”—Matthew 23:8, NJB.

Compare (Luke 10:21) You would think that in 60 years they would have at least mentioned a “Pope”…Listen, we could debate this till Armageddon.

Now what about the witnesses? Are they similar to the 1st century congregations? continued…

DjDave do you know why som one is called a Monsignor

 

[Filioque]

dj dave says:
Compare (Luke 10:21) You would think that in 60 years they would have at least mentioned a “Pope”…Listen, we could debate this till Armageddon.

Now what about the witnesses? Are they similar to the 1st century congregations? continued

In the interest of not confusing the issue with nonsense, I’ve clipped out the busy cut and paste from Brooklyn and cut to the chase.

It is similar to “D.J.”'s penchant for following the WT construct of playing slight of hand with history, and with honest scholarship. Well I should not brand Russellites with the scholarly crimes, as they simply cut and paste from the same MO as their Trinitarian Protestant ancestors.

Within the authentic history of the Catholic Church, which is broad and not given to the misinterpretations and mis-representations that “D.J” has followed lock step with the evershifting winds of the Grand Poobah’s of the Watchtower, one will find the entirety of the truth taught only by the Catholic Church and supported by the Bible. The Watchtower and many Evangelical Protestants become caught in a Biblical “fundamentalist gridlock” by stressing proof texts over the entire Bible in it’s proper context, (Both to itself, and it’s place in supporting true doctrine, rather than being the only source of doctrine).

First, while the Title of Pope usually brings the image of the Roman Pontiff, the reality is that even from the days of the Apostles, Spiritual leaders, such as the Apostles and their successors, (Bishops) have been refereed to as Spirtual Fathers. St. Paul himself tells us,
“I do not write this to make you ashamed but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you might have 10,000 guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers. Indeed, in Christ Jesus I became your father through the Gospel” (1 Corinthians 4:14-15). And he describes his relationship with the Christians of the Church in Thessalonica as being “like a father with his children” (1 Thessalonians 2:11). Doesn’t St. Paul, in the above passages, claim to be the spiritual father of the Corinthian and Thessalonian Churches, their father in the Gospel - Father Paul, if you will?

What does this have to do with THE Pope? Well the Catholic Church does not deny that the title POPE, which is derived from the word, Papa, or Father, has been applied to bishops, and even priests. Even among the Orthodox, the tite is used. While today “Pope” is more commonly used for major Patriarchs, such as the Bishop of Rome, and the Chief Bishop of the Coptic Orthodox, among others, it still is derived from the title of (Spiritual) Father. While the title Pope, does not appear in the Bible, in the exact manner as it is used today, neither do other doctrinal truths or practices seem to appear in it. Just as the Oak does not look like an acorn, it is composed of the same basic cells, with the same DNA as the original acorn. So too the Catholic Church maintains the same Biblical Truth that the Apostles were given to protect by Jesus Himself.

As to the Second issue, nope, I don’t think the JW’s resemble the Biblical, or Early Church in any way. They may distort the Bible to make it appear so, but that is just one of many distortions. As we have seen “D.J.” admit, the JW overlords have changed doctrine, when they have discovered that they were misled by the Holy Spirit in the past. Well sure he did not use those words to describe the multiple changes, which they now condemn, but then again if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then “God’s only Org.” having taught various doctrines which it now repudiates, must logically be following a different Lord, as it seems to be the Lord of Confusion, the creator of Babble who they worship, and not the God who is eternal, and unchanging God. but an ever evolving god who misleads people.

 

[dj_dave]

A wee bit of common sense would allow one to realize that any instituation that is 2,000 years old would evolve from what it was [very small] to what it is [the largest Christian Church in the World].

I agree some things have to be developed later–But I would expect most of them to be found in and or taken from the Bible. “trinity, purgatory, mass, immortal soul, lent, novenas, indulgences, penances, holy water, veneration of Mary, the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption of Mary”–are not.

[Eph. 4: 4 “There is one body [One Church] and one Spirit, [One set of beliefs] just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, 5 one Lord,[One God] one faith, [One set of doctrine and dogma] one baptism, By water in the Trinity]

I agree with this…well, except for the ‘TRINITY’ part added.

I can’t help but think, really–if someone who was raised in some outback area in Australia out of touch with today’s entire world and read the description of how Jesus described the Scribes and Pharisees mentioned in my previous post their dress; high titles;liking front seats and so on…they would see a similarity with your church.

As we all know at Pentecost 33 C.E., holy spirit was poured out on 120 disciples … About 3,000 new disciples were baptized on that day.—Acts, chapter 2.

The congregations in different localities grew in numbers as the apostles and others continued speaking the Word of God with boldness. The preaching soon spread throughout the Mediterranean area, from Babylon and North Africa to Rome and perhaps Spain.—Romans 15:18-29; Colossians 1:23; 1 Peter 5:13.

Wherever people became disciples, they formed congregations. Qualified, mature men were appointed as elders, or overseers, to maintain the standard of right teaching and conduct in the congregations. But they did not constitute a clergy class; they were ministers and fellow workers for the Kingdom of God.—Acts 14:23; 20:28; 1 Corinthians 3:5; 5:13; Colossians 4:11; 1 Timothy 3:1-15; Hebrews 13:17; 1 Peter 5:1-4.

The apostles and other close coworkers served as a governing body. They took the lead in the preaching work. They resolved problems in the Jerusalem congregation. They sent qualified brothers to Samaria and Antioch to strengthen new believers there. They handled a dispute about circumcision, sending out their decision for all congregations to observe. Yet these men were not masters over others but were servants and fellow workers of the entire congregation.—Acts 4:33; 6:1-7; 8:14-25; 11:22-24; 15:1-32; 16:4, 5; 1 Corinthians 3:5-9; 4:1, 2; 2 Corinthians 1:24.

The early disciples were identified as Christians, being called such by divine providence. They also had teachings that distinguished them; these were called the teaching of the apostles, or the pattern of healthful words. This Scriptural teaching was also known as the truth.—John 17:17; Acts 2:42; 11:26; Romans 6:17; 1 Timothy 4:6; 6:1, 3; 2 Timothy 1:13; 2 Peter 2:2; 2 John 1, 4, 9.

They were a worldwide association of brothers united in love. Never would a war of any kind pit one Christian against another.Would an Apostle John in Judea fight against an Apostle James in Rome if a war broke out? They showed an interest in their fellow believers in other countries. When traveling abroad, fellow believers welcomed them into their homes. They maintained a high standard of moral conduct, being a holy people separate from the world.They kept close in mind the time for the day of Jehovah’s presence and zealously made public declaration of their faith.—John 13:34, 35; 15:17-19; Acts 5:42; 11:28, 29; Romans 10:9, 10, 13-15; Titus 2:11-14; Hebrews 10:23; 13:15; 1 Peter 1:14-16; 2:9-12; 5:9; 2 Peter 3:11-14; 3 John 5-8.

I hope you ALL take the time to look up all of these scriptures

In any arrangement where a large number of people desire to work at unity, there needs to be some supervision. God is a God of order; hence, that order should be reflected in the congregation of his people. As in the first century, so today, qualified, mature, and experienced Christian men are designated as elders, or overseers. These supervise the congregation and look after its spiritual needs. They are assisted by other faithful men known as ministerial servants. These men receive no salary or other financial benefit but serve voluntarily, meeting their own expenses, usually from secular employment.—1 Corinthians 14:33, 40; Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:8, 9.

Hey, everyone, I have spent enough time on this website. There are a lot more things I could say to everyone. But it would only cause animosity (2 Timothy 2:23-24)

I have check all of my posts and I am convinced I have produced enough evidence 144,000; Heaven; ect …along with all of the accompanying links to convict me of being a ‘true Christian’ and being on the path spoken of by Jesus
(Matthew 7:14)

Now regarding the Topic of this entire “POST subject” please look up this Greek word from 2 Tim 3:16 “epanorthósis”

There is no point in replying to this post. I am leaving. I will pray for you as I know you will pray for me.

 

[PJM]

dj dave The fact is that Peter did not even continue to take the lead, not to say anything of headship! As soon as the apostle Paul was chosen we find him coming to the fore, in the record of Acts. Peter is mentioned only once in that book after the twelfth chapter, and throughout the whole book of Acts less than one half as often as is Paul.

Hmmmm. Are we reading the same Bible?

**Petrine Proofs

Mt: 16:18: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church; and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.”

The rock (Greek, petra) referred to here is St. Peter himself, not his faith or Jesus Christ. Christ appears here not as the foundation, but as the architect who “builds.” The Church is built, not on confessions, but on confessors - living men (see, e.g., 1 Pet 2:5. Today, the overwhelming consensus of the great majority of all-biblical scholars and commentators is in favor of the traditional Catholic understanding. Here St. Peter is spoken of as the foundation-stone of the Church, making him head and superior of the family of God (i.e., the seed of the doctrine of the papacy).

**Mt. 16:19 **“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . .”
The “power of the keys” has to do with ecclesiastical discipline and administrative authority with regard to the requirements of the faith, as in Isaiah . From this power flows the use of censures, excommunication, absolution, baptismal discipline, the imposition of penances, and legislative powers

Mt: 16:19 “.whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

“Binding” and “loosing” were technical rabbinical terms, which meant to “forbid” and “permit” with reference to the interpretation of the law, and secondarily to “condemn” or “place under the ban” or “acquit.” Thus, St. Peter and the popes are given the authority to determine the rules for doctrine and life, by virtue of revelation and the Spirit’s leading , and to demand obedience from the Church. “Binding and loosing” represent the legislative and judicial powers of the papacy and the bishops St. Peter, however, is the only apostle who receives these powers by name and in the singular, making him preeminent.

Peter’s name occurs first in all lists of apostles. Matthew even calls him the “first”. Judas Iscariot is invariably mentioned last.

Peter is regarded by Jesus as the Chief Shepherd after Himself Jn 21:15-17, singularly by name, and over the universal Church, even though others have a similar but subordinate role

Peter alone among the apostles is mentioned by name as having been prayed for by Jesus Christ in order that his “faith may not fail” Lk 22:32.

Peter alone among the apostles is exhorted by Jesus to “strengthen your brethren” Lk 22:32.

Peter first confesses Christ’s divinity Mt 16:16.

Peter is regarded by the Jews Acts 4:1-13 as the leader and spokesman of Christianity.

Peter is specified by an angel as the leader ** Mk 16:7.**

Peter’s words are the first recorded and most important in the upper room before Pentecost Acts 1:15-22.

Peter takes the lead in calling for a replacement for Judas Acts 1:22.

Peter is the first person to speak (and only one recorded) after Pentecost, so he was the first Christian to “preach the gospel” in the Church era Acts 2:14-36

Peter works the first miracle of the Church Age, healing a lame man Acts 3:6-12

Peter utters the first anathema (Ananias and Sapphira) emphatically affirmed by God Acts 5:2-11

Peter is the first person after Christ to raise the dead Acts 9:40.

Peter is the first to receive the Gentiles, after a revelation from God Acts 10:9-48.

Peter instructs the other apostles on the catholicity (universality) of the Church Acts 11:5-17.

Peter is the object of the first divine interposition on behalf of an individual in the Church Acts 12:1-17.

Peter presides over and opens the first Council of Christianity, and lays down principles afterwards accepted by it Acts 15:7-11.

Peter is the first to recognize and refute heresy, in Simon Magus Acts 8:14-24.

Peter’s name is mentioned more often than all the other disciples put together: 191 times(162 as Peter or Simon Peter, 23 as Simon, and 6 as Cephas). John is next in frequency with only 48 appearances, and Peter is present 50% of the time we find John in the Bible! Archbishop Fulton Sheen reckoned that all the other disciples combined were mentioned 130 times. **If this is correct, Peter is named a remarkable 60% of the time any disciple is referred to! **

Peter’s proclamation at Pentecost Acts 2:14 contains a fully authoritative interpretation of Scripture, a doctrinal decision and a disciplinary decree concerning members of the “House of Israel” - an example of “binding and loosing.”

Peter commanded the first Gentile Christians to be baptized Acts 10:44-48.

Peter corrects those who misuse Paul’s writings 2 Pet 3:15-1.

**

 

[yankee_doodle]

I have check all of my posts and I am convinced I have produced enough evidence 144,000; Heaven; ect …along with all of the accompanying links to convict me of being a ‘true Christian’ and being on the path spoken of by Jesus
(Matthew 7:14)

evidence of what? People still get conned by mythology

 

[PJM]

=Bill Pick;5688055]Sorry, some titles to me are simple; others are pretentious. Here are a few examples:
Clergyman: “Reverend.”
Anglican bishop: “Right Reverend the Lord Bishop.”
Roman Catholic bishop (in Italy): “His Excellency, the Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Monsignor.”
Cardinal: “His Eminence.”
The pope: “Most Holy Father.”
The titles “reverend” and “bishop” have been in use for such a long time that they do not grate on the ear of most church members. But are such titles authorized by the Bible?
“Reverend,” “Bishop,” and “Cardinal”
In the King James Version, the term “reverend” appears only once, at Psalm 111:9, which says: “Holy and reverend is his name.” Whose name? The next verse says: “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom.” (Psalm 111:10) …this belongs exclusively to Jehovah, the Almighty. Is it correct then to give it to humans?

“If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work,” wrote Paul to Timothy. (1 Timothy 3:1, KJ) However, according to The New Jerusalem Bible, the verse reads: “To want to be a presiding elder is to desire a noble task.” Early Christians with responsible duties were referred to as “elders” and “overseers.” Were those terms used as titles? No. Such men were never called “Bishop Peter” or “Elder James.” That is why mature Christian men among Jehovah’s Witnesses who serve the congregation as elders never use the term “elder” as a title. The terms “elder” and “overseer” (bishop) apply to those holding a position of authority and responsibility. The terms also describe the qualifications of the men appointed and the work that they do.

What about the title “cardinal”? Is it found in the Bible? No. It is not in any version. In fact, the Roman Catholic Church admits that this title is not Biblical. The New Catholic Encyclopedia explains: “The word is derived from the Latin word cardo meaning ‘hinge,’ and in the words of Pope Eugene IV, ‘as the door of a house turns on its hinges, so on the cardinalate does the Apostolic See, the door of the whole Church, rest and find support.’” This reference work also informs us that “cardinals enjoy the privilege of being directly addressed as ‘Eminence.’” Their status also allows them to wear a red gown and a red cap. Did the apostles have those ‘privileges’? The Bible answers no.

Should members of the clergy be called lords? Anglican bishops are addressed “lord.” Catholic prelates are often addressed “monsignor,” which means “my Lord.” In some countries, ministers of the Dutch Reformed Church are addressed dominee, a title derived from the Latin word dominus, meaning “lord.” But Jesus instructed his disciples: “You know that in the world, rulers lord it over their subjects, . . . but it shall not be so with you.” (Matthew 20:25, 26, The New English Bible) Also, the apostle Peter wrote: “Do not lord it over the group which is in your charge, but be an example for the flock.” (1 Peter 5:3, NJB) On the occasion when Jesus humbly washed the feet of his disciples, he said to them: “You call me Master and Lord, and rightly; so I am.” (John 13:13, NJB) Is it right for men to use a religious title that belongs to God and to his Son?

Is the religious title “father” correct? It is used widely by Roman Catholics and Anglicans. “Padre,” meaning “father,” is also widely used. But Jesus taught his disciples: “You must call no one on earth your father, since you have only one Father, and he is in heaven.” (Matthew 23:9, NJB) The New English Bible reads similarly: “Do not call any man on earth ‘father.’” Why do clergymen and their followers disobey this command from the Lord Jesus Christ?

The pope of Rome is usually addressed as “Holy Father" and “Most Holy Father.” “Holy Father” is a title that appears only once in the Bible. (John 17:11) It is the exclusive title of the Supreme Being. Is it right for creatures, who are earthly and imperfect, to be addressed by that title? Because of Paul’s bringing the good news to certain Christians and nourishing them spiritually he was like a father to them, but in no scripture is “father” applied to him as a religious title. (1Co 4:14, 15) Paul likened himself to both a father and a mother in his relation to the Thessalonian Christians. (1Th 2:7, 11) Whereas reference is made at Luke 16:24, 30 to “father Abraham,” this is basically in the sense of fleshly ancestry.

Please read and note the context of Matthew 23:1-12. Jesus begins speaking about the Pharisees, who were a prominent sect of Judaism. They were legalists, sticklers for observance of every detail of the Mosaic Law. They liked to dress and act in such a way as to call attention to themselves. Their religion was one of ostentation—their style of clothing, their principal places at meals, their front seats in the synagogues, and their titles of honor. They even claimed greater respect than that which was given parents. They wanted to be called father. However, Jesus shows that all his followers are equal as God’s children. Any title that suggests the opposite is a haughty usurpation of something that belongs to God. Thus, Jesus forbids the use of the word “father” as a title of honor in a religious sense. Jesus insists that his followers have only one Father in the faith, Jehovah.

True Christians today avoid using flattering religious titles, and they avoid the practice of setting men on ecclesiastical pedestals. Among Jehovah’s Witnesses the only form of address for ministers is “brother.” (2 Peter 3:15) That is in harmony with what Jesus said: “You are all brothers.”—Matthew 23:8, NJB.

Compare (Luke 10:21) You would think that in 60 years they would have at least mentioned a “Pope”…Listen, we could debate this till Armageddon.

Now what about the witnesses? Are they similar to the 1st century congregations? continued…

DjDave do you know why som one is called a Monsignor

***But does the bible denounce the application of these names? No it does not.

Why is this? Because its only a name. And because Christ allows the head of His Church to actually govern it. What a concept. It’s proven to be sufficient for 2,000 consecutive years. Imagine that:thumbsup:

As an FYI our Pope is also called “His Holiness.”***

Lets debate somthing that has revelance and perhaps will effect the salvation of souls.

Love and prayers,

 

[dj_dave]

QUOTE=PJM;5690193Mt. 16:19 "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . ."
The “power of the keys” has to do with ecclesiastical discipline and administrative authority with regard to the requirements of the faith, as in Isaiah . From this power flows the use of censures, excommunication, absolution, baptismal discipline, the imposition of penances, and legislative powers

I knew I would come back one last time…

First off we agree wholeheartedly about Peter. Notice this excerpt:

*** w77 7/15 p. 440 The Apostle Peter—Why So Loved by Many ***
Why do so many of us especially love Peter? It might be said that it is because of Peter’s “humanness.” Helping toward this end doubtless is the fact that we know so much more about Peter than about any of the rest. Endearing us to him is his warm, ardent nature. With it went an impulsiveness, at times even impetuousness. He was quick to transmit thought and feeling into actions, something that ever so many of us are prone to do.,
…We must not overlook the two fine letters that Peter wrote and which contain so much valuable information and encouraging admonition, especially to all who suffer for righteousness’ sake. These letters cause us to appreciate Peter still more. Truly the apostle Peter was a most lovable person, greatly used by his God and his Master, in spite of his weaknesses. What an encouragement his life is to all who try hard to follow their Master even as Peter did!—1 Pet. 2:21.

Now, it is true Isaiah did speak of “keys” But, then so did Jesus. Notice:

TRUE, the Bible uses the term “key” to symbolize authority, government, and power. Eliakim, elevated to a position of trust and honor, had “the key of the house of David” put upon his shoulder. (Isa 22:20-22) In the Middle East, in more recent times, a large key upon a man’s shoulder identified him as a person of consequence or importance. Anciently, a king’s adviser, entrusted with the power of the keys, might have general supervision of the royal chambers and might also decide on any candidates for the king’s service.

In the angelic message to the congregation in Philadelphia the exalted Jesus Christ is said to have “the key of David,” and he is the one “who opens so that no one will shut, and shuts so that no one opens.” (Re 3:7, 8) As the Heir of the covenant made with David for the Kingdom, Jesus Christ has had committed to him the government of the household of faith and the headship of spiritual Israel. (Lu 1:32, 33)

By his authority, symbolized by “the key of David,” he can open or shut figurative doors, or opportunities and privileges.—Compare 1Co 16:9; 2Co 2:12, 13.

Jesus gave us a clue to what the keys open up when he said to the Jewish Pharisees: “Woe to you who are versed in the Law, because you took away the key of knowledge; you yourselves did not go in, and those going in you hindered!” (Luke 11:52) The keys, then, would have something to do with unlocking knowledge.They would unlock something that had been previously locked up for centuries. They would have to do with the sacred secret of God, his administration of the universe by his heavenly kingdom. (Rom. 16:25; Col. 1:26, 27) While faithful men of ancient times had looked forward to the coming of the Messiah and his kingdom, it was never understood by them that associated with him would be men taken from earth to heaven to be heavenly kings and priests. The apostle Paul explains the purpose of this sacred secret at Ephesians 1:9-12; 3:5, 6.

Since even the faithful prophets of old did not have this knowledge, when was it first opened up? When were the keys used and how many of them were there? In speaking of the sacred secret, notice that the apostle says that a feature of that secret was “that people of the nations should be joint heirs and fellow members of the body and partakers with us of the promise in union with Christ Jesus through the good news.” (Eph. 3:6)

The “us” here would be Paul and his fellow Christian Jewish associates. He speaks here additionally of people of the nations as others to whom this knowledge would be opened. So there were THREE keys of the Kingdom, keys that unlocked knowledge. FIRST, the Jews had the opportunity unlocked to them of entering into the heavenly kingdom and, SECOND, the Samaritans, AND the THIRD the Gentiles were later invited to this great privilege.

**NOTICE WHEN AND HOW THE SCRIPTURES BACK THIS INTERPRETATION:: **

First, a questiuon: Does the use of the word “key” in Jesus’ statement to Peter indicated that Peter would have the privilege of initiating a program of instruction that would open up special opportunities with respect to the Kingdom of the heavens?

Different from the religious leaders of that time, Peter clearly did use divinely provided knowledge to help persons to ‘enter into the kingdom,’ AGAIN, the first was on the day of Pentecost 33 C.E…, when Peter, under inspiration, revealed to a gathered multitude that Jehovah God had resurrected Jesus and exalted him to His own right hand in the heavens and that Jesus, in that royal position, had poured out holy spirit on his assembled disciples. As a result of this knowledge and acting upon Peter’s exhortation, “Repent, and let each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the free gift of the holy spirit,” about 3,000 Jews (and Jewish converts) took the step that led to their becoming prospective members of “the kingdom of the heavens.” Other Jews subsequently followed their example.—Ac 2:1-41.

On another occasion Peter and John were sent to the Samaritans, who had not received the holy spirit even though they had been baptized. However, the two apostles “prayed for them” and “went laying their hands upon them,” and they received holy spirit.—Ac 8:14-17.

The third occasion of Peter’s being used in a special way to introduce persons into privileges as Kingdom heirs was when he was sent to the home of the Gentile Cornelius, an Italian centurion. By divine revelation Peter recognized and declared God’s impartiality as regards Jews and Gentiles and that people of the nations, if God fearing and doers of righteousness, were now as acceptable to God as their Jewish counterparts. While Peter was presenting this knowledge to his Gentile hearers, the heavenly gift of the holy spirit came upon them and they miraculously spoke in tongues. They were subsequently baptized and became the first prospective members of “the kingdom of the heavens” from among the Gentiles. The unlocked door of opportunity for Gentile believers to become members of the Christian congregation thereafter remained open.—Ac 10:1-48; 15:7-9.

 

[PJM]

I knew I would come back one last time…True Isaiah did speak of “keys” But, then so did Jesus. Notice:

---

The Rock and the Key’s a not so hard place.

The answer lies in the W’s, who, what, where and why?

Who? Jesus the Christ (Mt. 16:16) The Son of God. All Knowing - all Wise - all everything Good. A key element of Gods Perfect Goodness is that God is and has to be “All-Fair and All Just.”

The words used by Jesus are carefully selected to insure proper understanding.

What? Pulling out ONLY the words “Key’s (more than one) to the Kingdom of Heaven.” (Lk.26:1-3) , is like offering one a sandwich without bread.

This is part of the discourse in which Christ makes clear in unambiguous language that He intends to: 1. Form His Church (singular use of “I” and “you” and “church.” 2. That it is to be only ONE church. 3. That Peter is given the access (gate keys) to heaven. 4. Peter (and Peter alone) is given all of the power and authority to govern with COMPLETE autonomous authority, answering ONLY to God [the King] Himself!

To “bind” and to “loose” were common, rabbinical, legally binding at Law terms for exactly that! Complete, and free governance. Jesus, Peter and all that heard knew exactly what Jesus meant! Exactly what Jesus meant!

WHERE? Mt. 16:13: “Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do men say that the Son of man is?” “

Caesarea Philippi is in the hill country of Judea. It was a by their standards, a large town. It was also the site of the areas Major Pagan Temple. Thus Jesus ask, “ who do people say that I am.” Not satisfied with the response Jesus then “ask His deciples (plural.) PETER answers, (Mt. 16: 16 Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

The location Jesus chooses is a clear indication of the Mission of His Church, and Peter and the Apostles. “Overcome, do away with pagan worship.” Jesus not only gives His Church this Mission, He gives His Church all of the tools and authority needed to accomplish it!

Why? Why indeed! Jesus knew from the moment of his Conception in the Virgin womb of His Mother, what Gods plan (His Plan) was. He knew that he would suffer and die that He would rise from the Dead, and be our Redeemer. He further knew that (Mt. 22:14 “14 For many are called, but few are chosen." The word “chosen, in this context means “chosen BY US!” In other words, many will deny, and many will die because of unbelief, because of the personal choice we make.

Jesus clearly knew what lie in store for His Deciples and the persecution His Church, and His Deciples, would have to face. This is precisely why the mandate, why the authority, why the church, why they too would die professing that Christ is Lord! That Jesus remains present “ Really Present,” why Jesus instituted the Seven Sacraments. All this so that His Church would have the power and the authority, the tools and the grace, to become the “Narrow Gate” of Christ plan for our Salvation. (Mt. 7: 13.)

The “Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven” is a literal statement of FACT!

This is what Jesus said, did, intended and has accomplished.

I made the point of why Jesus selected Caesarea Philippi, and it was primarily because it was the “center of pagan worship for the area.” Indeed it was the location of a very large Pagan Temple.

But why did Jesus use the term “the keys?” Was there a specific reason? Would those to whom Jesus was speaking have easily picked up on what Jesus was saying and doing?

Jesus often used Parables that told stories in order to make the point He was trying to make. So we can understand that whatever words Jesus selected were carefully chosen.

What first impressed me about today’s Jerusalem is that it remains a Walled in city."

Back in the time if Jesus all major cites were walled in for protection from attack. These cities actually had two real GATES, with REAL KEYS. A minor gate and the Main gate.

Now under independent rule, each major city also had there own king, and thus a “kingdom.” So there were many Kings and many kingdoms. A brief reading of the Old Testament list many Kings (who often merged with other kingdoms for the purpose of self-defense) because they were usually too small to be completely independent against other NATIONS, who too merged all of their kingdoms resources to do battle and gain territory.

So the Apostles and the Jewish people of that time period would have been firmilar and comfortable with the idea of a King and his Kingdom.

Lets look briefly at the President of the United States. Does he personally unlock the Whitehouse in the morning and lock-up at night? Of course not, he has someone do it.

Such was true of Kings and Kingdoms. All day to day governance was given to a person that they selected as “Prime Minister.” An example of this is Genesis 42 and Joseph, the brother sold into slavery, who is made Prime Minister of all of Egypt.

Typically a Prime Minister had complete, autonomous control of ALL day to day activities. The Prime Minister answered to NOONE except the King Himself and.

This is the common understanding and the very reason for the specific reference to “Keys” and the “Kingdom.” There would have been absolutely zero doubts about what Christ was saying, doing and mandating for Peter, now the “Prime Minister” for Christ!

This account is historically provable. Indeed Christ intended to start His (ONE) Church, and to give Peter and those “prime-ministers” (POPES) complete and autonomous control and governance of His Church. ***

Love and prayers friend,