M
For a guy who dares not answer my question, “Do the Jews worship the same God we worship” he’s just full of authoritative pronouncements, ain’t he?http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gifCorrect, Peter was not in charge of the kingdom of heaven, but he was in charge of the kingdom on earth. He could bind and loose, and no one could unbind what he had bound, or unloose what he had loosed. He had authority over all the world to teach. Christ promised him that the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church, and I trust him.
Hi Vern, I though Jesus left the Holy Spirit to take care of the Masters business.So you believe Jesus lied when he said;
17 Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. 18 And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Peter is given the keys – that is the symbol of stewardship. A steward was a person appointed to take care of the master’s business in the master’s absense. Which describes Peter’s role exactly – and that of every Pope since.
We have no disagreement on that either.Correct, Peter was not in charge of the kingdom of heaven, but he was in charge of the kingdom on earth
whos kingdom and what kingdom was that exactly?
. He could bind and loose, and no one could unbind what he had bound, or unloose what he had loosed.
what did he bind and loose exactly? and would anyone in seated in the heavenly realms disagree with him?
He had authority over all the world to teach.
to teach what exactly? remember it was his exclusive authority and so an exclusive teaching no?
Christ promised him that the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church, and I trust him.
Is this to make some kind of anti semite point?For a guy who dares not answer my question, “Do the Jews worship the same God we worship” he’s just full of authoritative pronouncements, ain’t he?http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif
ok i make this point on this onlyFor a guy who dares not answer my question, “Do the Jews worship the same God we worship” he’s just full of authoritative pronouncements, ain’t he?http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif
No, it’s to give you a chance to prove that you aren’t an anti-Catholic bigot. You said the Pope was a heretic and a false teacher because he accepts that Muslims worship the same God we worship.Is this to make some kind of anti semite point?
if so i wont bother answering
see my post on your question.No, it’s to give you a chance to prove that you aren’t an anti-Catholic bigot. You said the Pope was a heretic and a false teacher because he accepts that Muslims worship the same God we worship.
So here’s your chance. Do Jews worship the same God we worship?
Remember, they don’t accept Jesus as the Messiah, and they don’t believe He rose again.
So, do they worship the same God or not?
A ship went down in a typhoon in the Pacific, There were only six survivors, two Jews, two Catholics, and two Baptists. They managed to make it to a desert island, and were stranded there.It’s been about one hour since you posted this Vern, so I believe the number now stands at 33,005. Sorry to be so detail oriented, but there are new splits hourly.![]()
Yes, it was. In the Greek, which is the original language of the NT, they have different words for the singular and plural words. For example, the pronoun “you”, is “su” in the singular and “umeis” in the plural. They can not be confused. In the passage where Christ gives the keys to Peter, he uses the singular pronoun “su”.whos kingdom and what kingdom was that exactly?
what did he bind and loose exactly? and would anyone in seated in the heavenly realms disagree with him?
to teach what exactly? remember it was his exclusive authority and so an exclusive teaching no?
We have no disagreement on that either.
but that wasnt about Peter alone was it?
I Agree totally no explanation is or was needed.This was already posted, but worth posting again. No explaination is needed:
John 21: 15-17
When therefore they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me more than these? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs.
He saith to him again: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? He saith to him: yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs.
He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep.
Give me a simple yes or no – don’t tap dance around.see my post on your question.
It was Christ’s kingdom on earth, but Christ gave the authority to Peter.whos kingdom and what kingdom was that exactly?Correct, Peter was not in charge of the kingdom of heaven, but he was in charge of the kingdom on earth
No one in heaven would disagree with Peter because what Peter would bind or loose was from the truth of God. Peter was only proclaiming the truth from God.what did he bind and loose exactly? and would anyone in seated in the heavenly realms disagree with him?. He could bind and loose, and no one could unbind what he had bound, or unloose what he had loosed.
He had the authority to proclaim the truth of Christ without it being questioned, especially in tough decisions.to teach what exactly? remember it was his exclusive authority and so an exclusive teaching no?He had authority over all the world to teach.
I am very glad we agree.Christ promised him that the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church, and I trust him.
so do i
As I have said before, when one resorts to name-calling in gentlemanly debate, one has lost the argument.No, it’s to give you a chance to prove that you aren’t an anti-Catholic bigot. You said the Pope was a heretic and a false teacher because he accepts that Muslims worship the same God we worship.
he is
Yes, it was. In the Greek, which is the original language of the NT, they have different words for the singular and plural words. For example, the pronoun “you”, is “su” in the singular and “umeis” in the plural. They can not be confused. In the passage where Christ gives the keys to Peter, he uses the singular pronoun “su”.
The kingdom is Christ’s, but Christ gave authority to Peter to teach of the truth of Him and the Father and the Spirit.
That isnt a special authority given to peter alone
To bind and to loose is to say that Peter had the authority to say, “this is truth, and this is not truth.” What he bound was already truth, nut he was given the ability to proclaim it with authority so that everyone knew it was truth.
Niether is that a special authority given to peter alone
What Peter taught could not be contradicted because it was the truth that was from heaven.
Well usually if a mans teahing is from heaven this would be the case, but i cant think of another example except in the case of peter where the opposite actually happened.
Peter was indeed teaching others that they couldnt eat with gentiles and was rebuked because he was wrong, and so in peters case what you wrote above certainly was not the case.
One example of what Peter bound was at the council of Jerusalem in Acts 15, it was him who said that the gentiles did not need to be circumcised. Another is when he decided that they should choose a successor to Judas in Acts 1.
That was decided not by peter alone. So he was part of that decision but didnt have final say. It was An agreed decision
no man is an island.
infact if you see what God was doing in the church he was making it clear every part of the body had an (name removed by moderator)ut and must play its part
no lone rangers here.
Not that what he taught was exclusive, but he had the authority to say this is what we teach and this is what we do not teach.
yes not exclusive exactly so jesus confered on him what he confered on all who believed in him
excatly my point.
They could all teach the truth, but it was up to Peter to make the difficult decisions.
first part correct second part ludicrous.