This is why Peter isnt the rock.Its christREAD

[iwonder]

It’s really very simple. Peter and his successors are the Rock simply because Our Lord named him so and so be it.

Mary

 

[RyanL]

ok. this is just silly. i’ve screwed up my verse numbering 3 times now. i’ll just post what i want you to read…

deuteronomy:
8"If a matter arises which is too hard for you to judge, between degrees of guilt for bloodshed, between one judgment or another, or between one punishment or another, matters of controversy within your gates, then you shall arise and go up to the place which the LORD your God chooses. 9And you shall come to the priests, the Levites, and to the judge there in those days, and inquire of them; they shall pronounce upon you the sentence of judgment. 10You shall do according to the sentence which they pronounce upon you in that place which the LORD chooses. And you shall be careful to do according to all that they order you. 11According to the sentence of the law in which they instruct you, according to the judgment which they tell you, you shall do; you shall not turn aside to the right hand or to the left from the sentence which they pronounce upon you. 12Now the man who acts presumptuously and will not heed the priest who stands to minister there before the LORD your God, or the judge, that man shall die. So you shall put away the evil from Israel. 13And all the people shall hear and fear, and no longer act presumptuously.

isaiah:
22The key of the house of David
I will lay on his shoulder;
So he shall open, and no one shall shut;
And he shall shut, and no one shall open.

Remember, the old testament was not just a bunch of irrellevant nonsense. Jesus came, not to destroy the law, but to FULFILL it! Praise be to God!

RyanL

 

[Little_Mary]

exodus:

God defined everything we need to know in this life in 66 books we call the Bible. You and I both agree it is authentic, God-breathed, and the Word of God. What unofficial terms are you talking about?, where did God do this? I remember God laying things down very clear even before Moses wrote the first book of the Bible. i.e.(Adam and Eve were told not to eat the fruit of the tree of good and evil, and what would happen to them if they did).

It’s 72 books darlin’

Have you ever asked yourself where the Bible came from?
I’ll save you some time. It came out of the Catholic church. It was compiled by Catholics and ratified by a Catholic Pope. 400 years AD. We were going to Mass and practicing the Catholic faith long before we had access to God’s word in the Bible.

It all goes together. Faith, tradition and God’s word.

Think about it.

 

[exodus]

RyanL:

ok. this is just silly. i’ve screwed up my verse numbering 3 times now. i’ll just post what i want you to read…

deuteronomy:
8"If a matter arises which is too hard for you to judge, between degrees of guilt for bloodshed, between one judgment or another, or between one punishment or another, matters of controversy within your gates, then you shall arise and go up to the place which the LORD your God chooses. 9And you shall come to the priests, the Levites, and to the judge there in those days, and inquire of them; they shall pronounce upon you the sentence of judgment. 10You shall do according to the sentence which they pronounce upon you in that place which the LORD chooses. And you shall be careful to do according to all that they order you. 11According to the sentence of the law in which they instruct you, according to the judgment which they tell you, you shall do; you shall not turn aside to the right hand or to the left from the sentence which they pronounce upon you. 12Now the man who acts presumptuously and will not heed the priest who stands to minister there before the LORD your God, or the judge, that man shall die. So you shall put away the evil from Israel. 13And all the people shall hear and fear, and no longer act presumptuously.

isaiah:
22The key of the house of David
I will lay on his shoulder;
So he shall open, and no one shall shut;
And he shall shut, and no one shall open.

Remember, the old testament was not just a bunch of irrellevant nonsense. Jesus came, not to destroy the law, but to FULFILL it! Praise be to God!

RyanL

Christ did fulfill it. The veil of the temple was torn in two. No longer was there a holiest of holies that can only be entered into once a year by a priest on behalf of Jewish people. Christ is the high priest, that has made all believers priests and kings unto God(Revelation 1). Peter says those he wrote to are a “holy priesthood” and a “royal priesthood”. Who’s the authority in the NT church? The Word of God, and Christ(the head).

BTW, are you working on Matt 20, or did you just ignore that part of the post?

 

[TNT]

exodus:

God defined everything we need to know in this life in 66 books we call the Bible. …

Hello Again!
\Now all you have to do is tell us what verse .
BTW:
Where is the word TRINITY in your bible?
Where is the verse that says Christ is 2 complete natures in one Divine Person?
Where is the declaration IN your bible that says “there shall be 66 books”. Even the early KJV had more books than that in it. And that was 1600+ad!
Where does it say that 2Peter must be in your bible?
Where does it say that Hebrews is to be in your bible?
Where does it even say WHO wrote Hebrews? Was the writer Apostolic, or just some wondering apostate Jew?
The truth is YOU must go OUTSIDE the bible to prove the contents OF the Bible. BUT since that runs you smack into the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, you cannot be honest. Being unable to be honest, you lost your credibility.

 

[TNT]

Originally Posted by exodus
Got it wrong my friend, … The church is the body of Christ(not the church of Christ denomination), its invisible, not visible. Christ has always been the head, and he doesn’t share that

Jesus commissions humans to act on HIS authority…We call that sharing one’s authority. I know, It’s a wild idea!
So, did Jesus step down and Baptize you into Christianity or did HE share authority with a sinful human. Surely you did not Baptize yourself. WAIT. Nah. You’re not that far gone.
Did Jesus step down and give you an infallible Bible or did a human write that stuff with authority and did a multitude of other non-infallible humans preserve it authoritatively for you?
** Jesus doesn’t share??? **
ALL Authority comes FROM the Father of Lights, thus saith the Lord. Yep, He shares His authority. No denying it.

TNT:

Matt 18: 16 And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. 17 And if he will not hear them: **tell the INVISIBLE **church. And if he will not hear the **INVISIBLE ** church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.

Makes complete sense to me ! :whacky:

Now, to tell an INVISIBLE church, that’s bad enough. BUT if you get an answer from an INVISIBLE church, you have entered the world of Gnosticism!

 

[mercygate]

exodus:

Christ did fulfill it. . . . The veil of the temple was torn in two. No longer was there a holiest of holies that can only be entered into once a year by a priest on behalf of Jewish people. Christ is the high priest, that has made all believers priests and kings unto God(Revelation 1).

Now you’re talkin’ Catholic! The fulfillment of the OT priesthood is consummated in Christ and thus, the priesthood of the Church, which participates in His priesthood, lives that fulfillment, unbroken, through the river of time until Jesus comes again.

Peter says those he wrote to are a “holy priesthood” and a “royal priesthood”.

Yes! But if we’re all priests in the same way, then why would there be bishops and priests in the New Testament? The understanding of this since Apostolic times is summarized in *The Catechism of the Catholic Church: *

**1547 **The ministerial or hierarchical priesthood of bishops and priests, and the common priesthood of all the faithful participate, “each in its own proper way, in the one priesthood of Christ.” While being “ordered one to another,” they differ essentially. In what sense? While the common priesthood of the faithful is exercised by the unfolding of baptismal grace --a life of faith, hope, and charity, a life according to the Spirit–, the ministerial priesthood is at the service of the common priesthood. It is directed at the unfolding of the baptismal grace of all Christians. The ministerial priesthood is a *means *by which Christ unceasingly builds up and leads his Church. For this reason it is transmitted by its own sacrament, the sacrament of Holy Orders.

]
Who’s the authority in the NT church? The Word of God, and Christ(the head).

Christ, the head, of course. But if by “the word of God” you mean Scripture only, then what about I Tim 3:15, which says the Church is the authority: “the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth”?

In Matthew 18:15-18, when disputes arise among the faithful, does the Lord say to take it to the Scriptures for resolution? No.

"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; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

 

[RyanL]

exodus,

i have not forgotten about matt 20. i am seriously meditating on it. my initial thoughts are simply that the apostles, once again, are being knuckleheads who just don’t understand what’s going on. i don’t think any of them really understood until after the resurection (during the 40 days of Christ on earth that are nearly silent). i’m coming to this conclusion after having read the most recent papal homily which really shows humility in leadership (guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4959621,00.html). i cannot understand how a man can be so humble - it’s almost as if he didn’t know he was at the helm of the spiritual lives of over 1.1 billion people… but to answer your question, no, i’m haven’t forgotten matt 20 and i’m not done considering it yet.

to retouch - HOW, exactly, is Christ a fulfillment of the OT passages i quoted, if there is nothing even remotely resembling them in your beliefs? fulfillment means making more full, so i fail to see how the elimination of them fulfills anything. i know how He fulfills them in my beliefs…and would be happy to explain if you don’t see it already. also, you didn’t answer if Christ knew about isaiah 22:22 when he spoke matt 16:18 to peter? the two passages are almost identical in form and content, and isaiah gives ACTUAL earthly power-of-the-king to a “prime minister” (so to speak). did Jesus not know what he was doing? i would also like to ask why, if given the opportunity to participate in the fulfillment of prophesy, would you choose not to fulfill it? another OT verse for you:
malachi 1:11
11For from the rising of the sun, even to its going down,
My name shall be great among the Gentiles;
In every place incense shall be offered to My name,
And a pure offering;
For My name shall be great among the nations,"
Says the LORD of hosts.

do you have incense at your church? why not? do you offer a pure offering? why not? this is the last book of your OT, and clearly states this prophesy…why isn’t your church fulfilling it?

i pledge to you that i will prayerfully consider any response you present, if you will only do likewise for me.

in loving Peace,
RyanL

 

[mercygate]

RyanL:

. . . Christ knew about isaiah 22:22 when he spoke matt 16:18 to peter? the two passages are almost identical in form and content, and isaiah gives ACTUAL earthly power-of-the-king to a “prime minister” (so to speak).

Ryan, these passages are also echoed in Paul’s statement in 2Cor.5:18: “All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the** ministry **of reconciliation.” This relates to his justifying his forgiveness of the incestuous man by declaring: “if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ.” (2Cor 2:10) *

And in 2Cor 5:5, Paul states “now we are ambassadors for Christ” – an ambassador holds real authority on behalf of the King.*

 

[Ignatius]

exodus:

Matthew 16:13-20

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? 14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. 15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealedit unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven…** removed because you want to hid the TRUTH Here is what you left out-

18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter

; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. 20 Then he commanded his disciples, that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ.

And here is the TRUE meaning of this:
18 “Thou art Peter”… As Simon bar Jonah, by divine revelation, here made a solemn profession of his faith of the divinity of Christ; so in recompense of this faith and profession, our Lord here declares to him the dignity to which he is pleased to raise him: viz., that he to whom He had already given the name of Peter, signifying a Rock as in the Old Testament God had called Abraham the rock, John 1:42, should be a rock indeed, of invincible strength, for the support of the building of the church; in which building he should be, next to Christ himself, the chief foundation stone, in quality of chief pastor, ruler, and governor; and should have accordingly all fulness of ecclesiastical power, signified by the keys of the kingdom of heaven.

18 “Upon this rock”… The words of Christ to Peter, spoken in the common language of the Jews which our Lord made use of, were the same as if he had said in English, Thou art a Rock, and upon this rock I will build my church. So that, by the plain course of the words, Peter is here declared to be the rock, upon which the church was to be built: Christ himself being both the principal foundation and founder of the same. Where also note, that Christ, by building his house, that is, his church, upon a rock, has thereby secured it against all storms and floods, like the wise builder, St. Matt. 7. 24, 25.

18 “The gates of hell”… That is, the powers of darkness, and whatever Satan can do, either by himself, or his agents. For as the church is here likened to a house, or fortress, built on a rock; so the adverse powers are likened to a contrary house or fortress, the gates of which, that is, the whole strength, and all the efforts it can make, will never be able to prevail over the city or church of Christ. By this promise we are fully assured, that neither idolatry, heresy, nor any pernicious error whatsoever shall at any time prevail over the church of Christ.

19 “The keys of the Kingdom of Heaven” All of the ancient Hebrews would have clearly understood this language as giving all power and authority, as was the custom for the Prime Minister until the return of the King.

*19 *“Loose upon earth”… The loosing the bands of temporal punishments due to sins, is called an indulgence; the power of which is here granted.

May the Holy Spirit remove the scales from your eyes and guide you to the “Pillar and Foundation of TRUTH.”

Yours in Christ.

 

[Ignatius]

SusanL:

Think about it. If you were given new arguments that you weren’t prepared for, wouldn’t you want to think about it !

Susan, they never come back. Please prove me wrong.

 

[mercygate]

exodus:

Matthew 20:24-28
Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God

Then Jesus tells them at the end of the passage not to tell anyone that Peter is pope??? Nope, not to tell that he was Jesus the Christ.

??? We would understand the passage as linking those two thoughts.

The apostles were great men of God, but they(the ten) still had indignation when they had the idea that one(or two) of them would be over them…notice this is when Peter is supposed to already be “rock”, chief of the apostles, etc. Yet they get mad, not because Peter is already pope, but because the other two wanted to be first. The Lord tells them “it shall not be so among you”.

exous:

Poof, no more pontiff.

Let me rephrase that for you:

So, to me this indicates that the other disciples are unaware of the supposed primacy of Peter and seems to undercut Mt. 16:18-19.

**

Matthew 20

**:24-28

24 And when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation against the two brethren. 25 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great** exercise authority upon** them.

26But it shall not be so among*** you***: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;27And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:28Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

What are you attempting to indicate here? That the papacy is not a ministering office? That it is not a serving office? [sorry- somehow I cannot disable the bold text.]

 

[SusanL]

Ignatius:

Susan, they never come back. Please prove me wrong.

They might not ever come back. I’m just hoping that they’re thinking about the information. It’s really hard to accept that what you’ve been taught was wrong. That’s how it was for me as a convert to Catholicism.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

It’s really hard to accept that what you’ve been taught was wrong.

yes! – especially if your way of life and family is built on that belief.

Practice humility – tend toward perfection.

 

[Church_Militant]

exodus:

Peter was not infallible. Catholic pope’s were not even infallible until the 1800’s. Hence a doctrine not backed by the Word of God.

Surely Benedict XVI knows he is pope today, Peter never had a clue of his primacy, because there is no such thing as a pope in the Word of God.

Of course neither is Sola Scriptura, but that’s another thread alltogether…

Really? So Peter was not infallible when he orally called Annanias and Saphira on their deception and the Holy Spirit struck them dead? I’ll wager that they would debate that with you… :yawn:

 

[RyanL]

well…nuts. exodus has been suspended.

does anyone else know how prots understand fulfillment of the OT types? is it always elimination = fulfillment?

in Peace and Love,
RyanL

 

[mercygate]

RyanL:

well…nuts. exodus has been suspended.

does anyone else know how prots understand fulfillment of the OT types? is it always elimination = fulfillment?

in Peace and Love,
RyanL

This is a great question and deserves its own thread.

I’ll bet that the whole idea of types/fulfillment is remote-to-nonexistent to most Protestants, St. Paul notwithstanding.

 

[Ignatius]

exodus:

First the inquisitors tried to get Galileo to admit that he had earlier been officially banned from teaching Copernicus’ theory

Once again you are in error my friend. Nicholas Copernicus was a churchman, who first advanced the doctrine that the sun and not the earth is the centre of our system, round which our planet revolves, rotating on its own axis. His great work, “De Revolutionibus orblure coelestium”, was published at the earnest solicitation of two distinguished fellow churchmen, Cardinal Schömberg and Tiedemann Giese, Bishop of Culm. It was dedicated by permission to Pope Paul III in order, as Copernicus explained, that it might be thus protected from the attacks which it was sure to encounter on the part of the “mathematicians” (i.e. philosophers) for its apparent contradiction of the evidence of our senses, and even of common sense. He added that he made no account of objections which might be brought by ignorant wiseacres on Scriptural grounds. Indeed, for nearly three quarters of a century no such difficulties were raised on the Catholic side, although Luther and Melanchthon condemned the work of Copernicus in unmeasured terms.

You had better check your sources.

Pax vobiscum.

 

[YinYangMom]

seetiger33:

If we take scripture put it together and say yes scripture is consistant. Yes there are no double meanings or falsehoods of the word of god. So look at all these scriptures were the rock is obviously God himself. So who is god? Jesus. Trinity. Of course you agree now look at all these scriptures. God is obviously the rock.

The Lord is my ROCK, and my fortress, and my deliverer. My God, is the ROCK of refuge. Psalm 18:2, 94:22.

God was their ROCK, and the high God their redeemer. Psalm 78:35.

Unto Thee will I cry, O LORD, MY ROCK; Psalm 28:1.

Bow down Thy thine ear to me; deliver me speedily: be Thou my strong ROCK, FOR A HOUSE of defense to SAVE me. for Thou art my ROCK and my FORTRESS; therefore for Thy name’s sake lead me, and guide me. Psalm 31:2,3).

I will say unto God my ROCK, why hast Thou forgotten me? Psalm 41:l0.

Lead me to the ROCK that is higher than I Psalms 61:2

He Only is my ROCK and my salvation; He is my defense; I shall not be moved. In GOD is my salvation and my glory: THE ROCK of my strength, and my refuge, is in God. Trust in him at all times, ye people, Pour out your heart before him; God is a refuge for us. Selah Psalm 62:6-8

To shew that the Lord is upright: He is my ROCK, and there is no unrighteousness in Him. Psalm92:15.

but the Lord is my defense; and MY GOD IS THE ROCK of my refuge. Psalm 94:22.

O Come, let us sing unto THE LORD; let us make a joyful noise to THE ROCK of our salvation. Psalm 95:1.

The stone which the builders refused is become the head of the corner. This is the Lord’s doing; it is marvellous in our eyes. Psalm 118:22, 23.

Therefore thus saith the Lord God: Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste. Isaiah 28:16.

Because I will publish the name of the LORD: ascribe ye greatness unto OUR GOD! He is THE ROCK, His work is perfect: for all his ways are judgement: Deuteronomy 32:3,4.

Then he forsook God which made him, and lightly esteemed THE ROCK of his salvation. Deuteronomy 32:15, 18).

And he said: THE LORD IS MY ROCK, and my fortress, and my deliverer II Samuel 22:2.

All old testament quotes.
Jesus came to fulfill the Old Testament.
He IS the New Testament.
And as such he made Peter the Rock of the Church.

 

[Milliardo]

exodus:

Are you saying Church writers thought their writings were “God-breated”? They are long dead, you disagree, they accepted the Scripture and did not add to it. Hence the warning in Rev 22. I can have the same debate with charasmatics, if it is inspired writings why not write it into one volume as the true Holy Scritpures, and complete the Word of God.

Not in the same way as the ones compiled to make the Bible, but that’s not the point: early Christian communities read the works of the early Church Fathers in their gatherings. That is why when the Council of Carthage finalzed the canon as we know it today, they said thus:

That nothing be read in church besides the Canonical Scripture.

that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church
under the name of divine Scripture.
This is in recognition of the fact that prior to the completion of the canon various writings were recognized by early Christians as Scripture, thus after the canon was completed the Council only deemed worthy of being considered as Scripture would be those in the canon.

There is historical tradition of the deaths but the Bible does not record it.

Interesting you now plead to tradition in this case. Double standard?

If Jesus made Peter the “rock” and intended it to be passed on, surely the Bible would have recorded that little detail in detail(pun intended, but seriously).

If you plead to tradition with the deaths of the Apostles Peter and Paul, wouldn’t it make sense then that Apostolic Succession is not recorded in the Bible explicitly, but was observed by the Apostles as Jesus commanded them to?

John was alive until the late 90’s of the first century yet he writes nothing about or to Peter or a successor to Peter.

Here’s something interesting: Pope St. Clement I handled a problem the church in Corinth had. The Apostle John was alive at that time, and lived nearby Ephesus. Wouldn’t it be reasonable for the Corinthians to write to him instead of Clement then? But the Corinthians wrote to Clement, and Clement exercised his authority, which the Corinthians accepted without question. Even if one would argue that they probably wrote to John, it would be logical that John pointed them to Clement to go to, as there is Peter.