Where was Peter buried?

[Randy_Carson]

By the way, we are all under the strict authority of God, God has no respect of persons, even if you are the pope, “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” Romans 3:23. Ralph

Catholics do not believe that the pope is without sin.

He may be infallible under specific circumstances, but he is not impeccable.

Please be sure that you understand the difference between these two things.

 

[Randy_Carson]

By the way, we are all under the strict authority of God, God has no respect of persons, even if you are the pope, “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” Romans 3:23. Ralph

It is simply untrue that ALL have sinned.

The primary question to be asked concerning Romans 3:23 is this: When the Bible uses the word “all”, does it necessarily exclude exceptions? The answer is “no” as several scripture passages suggest.

For example, Matthew 3:5 tells us, “People went out to him from Jerusalem and all Judea and the whole region of the Jordan.” Does this mean that there were no places from which people did not go out to see Jesus? This is not likely. The author attempted to convey an idea that a large number of people went out to see Jesus by using hyperbole.

Similarly, 1 Corinthians 15:22 says, “For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.” Does this mean that every single person ever born will die? Well, the Bible tells us that Enoch and Elijah were taken up into heaven without dying, so we know that obviously not all die because these two exceptions exist. From this, we know that the Bible does not necessarily exclude exceptions when it uses the word, “all”.

Returning to Romans 3:23, we should ask further whether Paul intended to exclude exceptions when he used the word, “all”, or is he using it in a non-absolute way? To understand the context of Paul’s thought, we should look at Romans 3:10-12 wherein he quotes Psalm 14:2-3: **“**As it is written: “There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away; they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.”

Does Paul really believe that there no righteous people? Of course not! The Bible tells us that Joseph was a just man (Mt 1:19), John the Baptist’s parents, Zechariah and Elizabeth, were declared righteous (Luke 1:19), and Psalm 14 goes on to speak of “the company of the righteous” in verse 5 while Psalm 15 references those who walk blamelessly and do what is right. So, if Paul is using the word “all” to mean “absolutely no exceptions”, then he is using the word very differently from the verses he quoted from Psalm 14 and from other passages of scripture.

Finally, it is also reasonable for us to assume that Paul would agree that infants and those who are mentally deficient cannot sin personally—two additional exceptions to the concept of “all” having sinned.

Therefore, when Paul uses the word, “all”, it is obvious that he is not attempting to declare that every single individual who ever lives will be guilty of committing personal sin; rather, he is attempting to communicate with clarity the universality of sin and the idea that both Jews and Gentiles alike are sinners before God. He is not attempting to exclude the possibility of exceptions.

 

[mchale]

I have a pastor who preaches in our church, preaching the word of God from the Bible. The oranization I belong to rests on Jesus Christ, we have no hierarchy, Christ is our “president”, and may God bless you also. Ralph

So does the pastor therefore have no authority that others in your church do not also have? If that is the case, would you be allowed to go up on Sunday and preach the word of God from the Bible?

Let us also remember this, no church that was established in the New Testament was set up without an authority over it. Generally when Paul or one of the apostles established the Church in a new area, they would appoint overseers (episcopi/bishops) and elders (presbyters/priests) who were responsible for preaching and overseeing the church. Likewise, deacons were appointed by the apostle to handle the day to day administration of the Church community. Finally of course, as the Council of Jerusalem demonstrated, that all of the individual churches were subject to the apostles as a whole. Now, whether or not you want to also include Peter in this hierarchy, it is absurd to suggest that the Church that Jesus established did not have a hierarchy within it.

On the flip side, if we admit that such a hierarchy did exist, but then exclude such a hierarchy from our own churches, then we have essentially innovated and deviated from the plan that Jesus appears to have had for the Church.

–
Bill

 

[PaulF2]

You will find this quote in Romans 2:11, but I suggest that you read a few verses befor and after that verse. Everyone is equal at the foot of the cross, no one is better than the other person, regardless of his or her position. We are all sinners and in need of salvation. We will be saved only through the blood of Christ,there is no other way regardless of what we do or how hard we try. God loves us all, but not all will turn to Him to accept His free gift of salvation. Ralph

You are using the standard fundamentalist “debate” tactics of 1) ignoring all the parts of Scripture you don’t like or can’t explain; 2) Drawing non-sequituers from parts of Scripture totally unrelated to the topic at hand. Yes, Ralph, we ALL believe that we are all sinners in need of salvation. You can’t possibly not be aware that Catholics believe that.

I’m going to try this one more time, since there still has been no reply from you that I’ve seen - back to the original topic:

Obviously, Scripture’s revelations ENDED at a specific point.

Also, quite obviously, Scripture itself tell us that it is NOT a “be all end all manual for the faith”. Have you read it?

John tells us that there were many things that Christ said and did that were NOT written down.

Paul told his disciples to obey the ORAL teachings of the apostles. Are you familiar with any?

Scripture tells us that it is the CHURCH that is the “pillar and foundation of truth” (1 Tim 3:15).

In the writings of the early Fathers there are over 300 references to Peter (and Paul) teaching and being martyred in Rome.

The Church came first, and THEN the Bible. The Church produced the Bible - which did not exist until almost 400 years after Christ. Christians were dying for Christ for decades before even the first (real) gospel was written!

And the Catholic Church gave you this Bible. You trust that the Church produced a correct Bible from the hundreds of non-inspired documents out there - you trust that the Church was infallible at that time. If you do NOT trust that the Church was infallible then then there is no way you could trust the Bible. Why was the Church infallible then but not now? You can see that the base of your position, the doctrine of sola scriptura, is completely nonsensical. Nobody who knows the history of Christianity and thinks carefully would be able to honestly believe it.

So, you can see that to assert that Peter was not in Rome because you do not see that written in Scripture makes no sense.

God bless you, Ralphy.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I have a pastor who preaches in our church, preaching the word of God from the Bible.

My father, a Methodist, says the same thing about his church. I bet you don’t believe some of the same things he believes.

How do you know that what your pastor is teaching is the correct interpretation of the Bible?

How does he know that what he is teaching is correct? Ask him this question.

What happens when (not if) you disagree with what he teaches?

Does your pastor have the authority to correct your understanding if he thinks you are wrong in your interpretation?

Would you be willing to accept his authority if he attempted to correct you?

Why or why not?

To whom would you go if the two of you could not agree on an interpretation? Whose authority would you ultimately accept?

 

[Marsha_Adams]

Randy:

IF Protestants had answers to your questions, there wouldn’t be 33,000+ sects out there.

 

[ralphy]

For what you say I gather yours is a single-church denomination, i.e., you’re not Baptist, Presbyterian, etc. just a free evangelical church strictly based on the Bible. But you understand the Bible according to what your pastor says. The moment you disagree with him you automatically become another evangelical church. A one-man church. Or an n-men church, if you manage to get n men to follow you. Now, if we see JW’s, they also claim they follow the Bible. And just see what a lot of strange ideas they’ve got. LDS’s claim the Bible authorizes their Book of Mormon. Historically, Sola Scriptura has never worked. It takes two witnesses, as Jesus said. [John 8, 17 ” It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true”]. – In the RCC, it is the Bible and the Tradition, or if we wish to mention men, the hierographer [the inspired man who wrote a Bible book] and the Pope, who acts under strict authority of God Himself [Mattew 16, 19 “whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” and Luke 22,32 ‘I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren’. So a Catholic can rest assured he is in the right path. The Word of God says it so, and God cannot err or deceive. God bless your Church and make it fructify even if it does not agree in every point with the RCC.

When I disagree with my pastor, we sit down and “reason together” as the bible says. We settle any difference we may have according to the word of God. Ralph
[/QUOTE]

 

[ralphy]

How 'bout linking us up!!

Does your church or group have a public forum for Catholics to visit and have a look at your doctrine, especially moral doctrine?

I will check this request out and get back to you. Ralph

 

[brb2]

When I disagree with my pastor, we sit down and “reason together” as the bible says. We settle any difference we may have according to the word of God.

Why might you two ever disagree? You both are inerrantly inspired by the same Spirit when you read the scriptures

 

[ralphy]

It is simply untrue that ALL have sinned.

The primary question to be asked concerning Romans 3:23 is this: When the Bible uses the word “all”, does it necessarily exclude exceptions? The answer is “no” as several scripture passages suggest.

For example, Matthew 3:5 tells us, “People went out to him from Jerusalem and all Judea and the whole region of the Jordan.” Does this mean that there were no places from which people did not go out to see Jesus? This is not likely. The author attempted to convey an idea that a large number of people went out to see Jesus by using hyperbole.

Similarly, 1 Corinthians 15:22 says, “For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.” Does this mean that every single person ever born will die? Well, the Bible tells us that Enoch and Elijah were taken up into heaven without dying, so we know that obviously not all die because these two exceptions exist. From this, we know that the Bible does not necessarily exclude exceptions when it uses the word, “all”.

Returning to Romans 3:23, we should ask further whether Paul intended to exclude exceptions when he used the word, “all”, or is he using it in a non-absolute way? To understand the context of Paul’s thought, we should look at Romans 3:10-12 wherein he quotes Psalm 14:2-3: **“**As it is written: “There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away; they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.”

Does Paul really believe that there no righteous people? Of course not! The Bible tells us that Joseph was a just man (Mt 1:19), John the Baptist’s parents, Zechariah and Elizabeth, were declared righteous (Luke 1:19), and Psalm 14 goes on to speak of “the company of the righteous” in verse 5 while Psalm 15 references those who walk blamelessly and do what is right. So, if Paul is using the word “all” to mean “absolutely no exceptions”, then he is using the word very differently from the verses he quoted from Psalm 14 and from other passages of scripture.

Finally, it is also reasonable for us to assume that Paul would agree that infants and those who are mentally deficient cannot sin personally—two additional exceptions to the concept of “all” having sinned.

Therefore, when Paul uses the word, “all”, it is obvious that he is not attempting to declare that every single individual who ever lives will be guilty of committing personal sin; rather, he is attempting to communicate with clarity the universality of sin and the idea that both Jews and Gentiles alike are sinners before God. He is not attempting to exclude the possibility of exceptions.

I will not even discuus this matter with you. It is straight forward statement, God said that “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”, just accept it as it is. This is the original sin that came from Adam. Ralph

 

[ralphy]

Why might you two ever disagree? You both are inerrantly inspired by the same Spirit when you read the scriptures

We are still in the flesh, and Satan will try to bring something between us and God. Ralph

 

[ralphy]

Does God respect you Ralphy ?

If God has any respect for me, it will be from the fact that I am His child ( a born again christian), and Christ lives in me, through His Holy Spirit. But not me as a person. Ralph

 

[brb2]

If God has any respect for me, it will be from the fact that I am His child ( a born again christian), and Christ lives in me, through His Holy Spirit. But not me as a person. Ralph

Acts 10:34 And Peter opened his mouth and said; "Truly I perceive that God shows no Partiality [respect of one race over another], but in EVERY NATION anyone who fears him and does what is right is ACCEPTIBLE to him.

So, without regards to race or creed … if you fear & obey, you are acceptible to him as a person [aka … one of the Respectible Elect]

 

[ralphy]

Acts 10:34 And Peter opened his mouth and said; "Truly I perceive that God shows no Partiality [respect of one race over another], but in EVERY NATION anyone who fears him and does what is right is ACCEPTIBLE to him.

So, without regards to race or creed … if you fear & obey, you are acceptible to him as a person [aka … one of the Respectible Elect]

I agree with you. I should have said acceptable, which is a real blessing. PTL. Ralph

 

[Marsha_Adams]

I will not even discuus this matter with you. It is straight forward statement, God said that “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”, just accept it as it is. This is the original sin that came from Adam. Ralph

Prove the doctrine of original sin using the Bible only.

 

[zach_dunn]

I am not sure where you get the idea that it was refering to the old testament. My bible says “ALL” scripture, including the new testament. Ralph

Would you please answer the first question of my post? I’ll restate it here for you:

Many other books claim to be inspired, why are they not?

Thanks and God bless you,
Zach

 

[ralphy]

Prove the doctrine of original sin using the Bible only.

Hello Marsha. If you check out Romans 5:12, this should clarify it for you. Ralph

 

[Marsha_Adams]

Romans 5:12 does not discuss original sin, it explains how death entered the world. Adam’s sin opened the door to death. That text does not say that we inherit Adams sin. Original sin is a Catholic doctrine but it cannot be proven by Sola Scriptura. The same is true of the Trinity. The Bible suggests the Trinity but can be used to argue both for and against the Trinity. Protestantism got both of these doctrines from the Catholic Church, not from the Bible.

 

[Mc_Sweeney]

I have a pastor who preaches in our church, preaching the word of God from the Bible. The oranization I belong to rests on Jesus Christ, we have no hierarchy, Christ is our “president”, and may God bless you also. Ralph

As previously suggested, why not ask The Holy Spirit, who leads in truth, to lead you into The Church founded by Jesus. Jesus founded one Church which is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.

There are in excess of 30,000 ‘churches’ in the world. Who founded them, and where is their Scriptural Authority? Mother Church’s Scriptural Authority is not in doubt. St Peter’s successor, and Christ’s Vicar on earth, is Pope Benedict XV1. Glory be to God.

God bless.

 

[Zooey]

Can you prove that St. Peter has no feet before they buried him? I will ask my brother in law which he knows about St. Peter well. I knew he was hung upside down and died from blood flow through the head. God bless him.

I think that the point was, that part of the trauma of death by crucifixion upside down would be that the feet would not be able to support the body (as the hands/arms are), and therefore that the feet would be torn from the body.
Hence no feet in the tomb of Peter…I had never really thought that through before myslef, but now that I have your (most excellent) question before me, it really does make sense to me.

I hope this helps!!!