M
Michael16
Guest
I’m thinking that grace is required to successfully live a holy life. But, I do know that humans have free will to choose.
- Status
Not without grace. The unregenerate cannot choose to follow God. That takes grace. Once grace is received, one can choose to reject it. One can also receive it and allow the Spirit to guide.
M
mcq72
Guest
yes helped but what was final, that Peter had also ? The Catholic church was not quite in existence yet when Peter made His biggest decision/discernment, though there was the OT equivalent, God ordained, Jewish magisterium of sorts.
M
mcq72
Guest
You mean Catholic Church ?
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Because of this we are no longer slaves to sin. Rom 6
While they promise them liberty, they themselves are slaves of corruption; for by whom a person is overcome, by him also he is brought into bondage. 2 Peter 2:19
and the truth shall make you free."
For he who is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman
Last time i heard a slave is not free whilst a slave
last time i heard your are a slave till you are set free, by the Truth, which is not in us till we are born again.
While they promise them liberty, they themselves are slaves of corruption; for by whom a person is overcome, by him also he is brought into bondage. 2 Peter 2:19
and the truth shall make you free."
For he who is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman
Last time i heard a slave is not free whilst a slave
last time i heard your are a slave till you are set free, by the Truth, which is not in us till we are born again.
M
Michael16
Guest
The point being Saint Peter is who he was because Jesus declared him to be so. While Saint Peter correctly discerned the truth. Because he did so, Jesus entrusted him with authority as His Vicar on Earth.
The Church came into being when Jesus set Saint Peter as the Rock. Coming into full effect upon His Ascension after His Resurrection.
The Church came into being when Jesus set Saint Peter as the Rock. Coming into full effect upon His Ascension after His Resurrection.
M
Michael16
Guest
Yes. All churches in communion with the Holy Father is the Church.
M
Michael16
Guest
Reflecting upon the Proclamation of the Kingdom: Repent, for the Kingdom Of God is at hand. How can a man repent, amend his life and follow his Lord while yet being unfree to choose? As I see it: A man can break free from his bonds to sin upon hearing the Word of God, which is Christ Jesus; and follow Him of his own free will. He does so because the Devil deluded him into thinking he had no choice. So, the slavery to sin is illusion broke now by the Word of the Lord. Thus, the truth sets him free of the delusions and lies of the devil. However: Not in the way Luther teaches it. For Luther, free will is an illusion. For the Catholic, slavery to sin is an illusion.Humans are free to choose. For God to decree otherwise, makes no sense. God wouldn’t hold a creature responsible for actions that the creature has no control over. If He did; He wouldn’t be God. That simply cannot be.
That’s the thing with the devil. The devil has no power to force a person to do evil. As we see in the Garden, our First Parents sinned of their own free will. Eve was convinced. She could have said no despite the devil playing upon her weakness. Adam deliberately chose to sin; knowing full well what he was doing but because he wanted to be with Eve. In that way, his sin was greater than Eve’s.
The only thing the devil can do is lie, manipulate and play upon our weaknesses. But, ultimately sin is a matter of choice by an agent with free will. That’s the lesson of mortal sin. Sin cannot be mortal without the element of choice made by free will.
You see how Luther was wrong in this?
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
again how ?
M
Michael16
Guest
You’re looking for a specific answer, I feel. Saint Peter answered Our Lord as he believed. Thus, because he discerned and believed correctly; Saint Peter was gifted with a new name and given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven as Head of the Church, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail.
Last edited:
G
GladTidings
Guest
Through divine revelation given only to Peter as described in verse 17, when Jesus said, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly father.”
He did not use his intellect, he did not guess, God revealed the truth to him.
He did not use his intellect, he did not guess, God revealed the truth to him.
M
mcq72
Guest
I hesitated on the intellect part, for indeed we are rational beings. Yet I forgot my own journey, that intellect would have failed me except for this…it showed me I could not figure it out by myself, even by my intellect…
Like my brain gathered all the data, from parents to teachers and priests and pastors, and scripture and magisterial traditions,and even hearing the gospel, like climbing the ladder, to the top, and still not free, still not believing, seeing, …until by grace I let go of it all and left it in His hands to save me…and in my intellectual stillness (actually my whole being), He saved me.
Last edited:
G
GladTidings
Guest
I’ve always taken, “…for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you…” to mean he did not use his intellect, or knowledge given to him from others, except the holy Spirit.
Also, I do not see how, as a protestant, verse 17 helps to defend your faith. And are you saying it ties in with Sola Scriptura?
M
mcq72
Guest
No, I agree…flesh and blood , mine, failed me…as Elihu said in the book of Job, God puts understanding in the heart of man, irrespective of people…or Jeremiah, where God does the writing on ones heart, which of course is what happened to Peter.
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Yes and no. I mean none of this is possible without air to breathe also.
Does that contradict SS? If it does, it most certainly also contradicts any three legged stool also.
Divine revelation, the ministry of the Holy Spirit and our God given ability for conscience and conviction are not foreign from Catholic thought also, even deemed sacred.
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Upon further examination I noticed your personal critique of the verse with “given only to Peter”. Perhaps or
perhaps not it was unique.
My personal opinion is that it is a unique divine revelation for any individual to say sincerely what Peter said, that Jesus is the Messiah. Surely the rest of the apostles had come or would soon come to the same conclusion, and not because Peter first said it, but because of the exact same revelation from the Father. For no one comes to the Son unless drawn by the Father and vice versa.
Verse 17 does not tell us what the other apostles were thinking. It reminds of the “until” of Joseph not knowing Mary , or Jesus being the firstborn. It is not definitive as to what came afterwards, but my opinion is that it would not be wrong to opine relations even other children would follow. So to it would not be wrong to surmise other apostles who thought Jesus was the Christ were divinely inspired also.
Not sure it has any bearing on Peter being the leader, even a rock, for He was these things even before this gospel discourse.
There is no doubt we are built also upon Peter, Christ being the chief cornerstone, as we are also built upon all the apostles per verse in Revelations, and all the saints before us being living stones per an epistle.
In my opinion, the other apostles would also have or use the keys of the kingdom, having similar commission, though Peter was first amongst equals with such authority and exercise thereof.
Again, I would say any Christian ever has had same divine revelation that Peter had on whom Jesus is. God is not a respector of persons on this, and wishes that no man perish.
Last edited:
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
Agree, but each individual is obviously NOT led into “all truth” as the different denominations teach different doctrines.
M
mcq72
Guest
Yes, just as every magisterium seems to have failed at one time or another, per our three major divisions. ( Magisteriums are made up of individuals).
Last edited:
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
Good thread with a ton of content. I started it like 3 days ago and just now have the opportunity to catch up. Thanks for your contributions.
I would say the explanation about scripture being superior to ‘conflicting’ sources such as tradition, etc, still requires a valid interpreter. We believe that not one doctrine in the Church conflicts with scripture. I will, however, concede that they are not all spelled out for us. So perhaps that’s a separate thread – does everything a Christian need to know about the faith have to be easily discernible in black and white in the scriptures and why.
I would say the explanation about scripture being superior to ‘conflicting’ sources such as tradition, etc, still requires a valid interpreter. We believe that not one doctrine in the Church conflicts with scripture. I will, however, concede that they are not all spelled out for us. So perhaps that’s a separate thread – does everything a Christian need to know about the faith have to be easily discernible in black and white in the scriptures and why.
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
Luther seemed to have a unhealthy view of the sacrament of confession. He made remarks about it and how it seemed impossible to please God, etc. And I don’t know if it was poor catechesis or what, but a well formed Catholic Christian does not lose their sanity over sins committed as he seemed to do. We confess to God then do it perfectly in the sacrament and receive grace and sometimes very good advice in the confessional as well.
- Status