Bible alone

[theefaith]

What else may I ask do we need ?

the teaching authority of Christ in his church


Jesus Christ extends his mission, power, and authority to His church of His apostles!

Even His judging!
Matt 19:28 and 1 cor 6:2
His teaching authority!
Matt 28:19 and Jn 20:21
His power to forgive sins!
Jn 20:23
His being the light of the world!
Matt 5:14
His ministry of reconciliation!
2 cor 5:18
His authority in governing the church and administering the kingdom!
Matt 16:18-19 & 18:18 Jn 21:17
Lk 22:29
Apart from me you can do nothing. Jn 15:5
So the church is subject to Christ!
Eph 5:24
Christ shares His glory! 2 thes 1:10 rev 12:1


Jesus Christ continues HIS ministry in His new covenant church thru Peter, the apostles, and their successors with the same mission, power, and authority!
Mt 16:18 Mt 28:19 Matt 18:17 Acts 1:17 acts 8:31 & 35 acts 9:4 Lk 10:16 Jn 8:32 Jn 13:20 Jn 15:5 Jn 16:13 Jn 20:21-22 eph 2:20 acts 2:42
1 Tim 3:15

Fundamentalism drives a wedge between Christ and his church, separates Christ from His kingdom, and the authority of Christ from the new covenant!

1 Corinthians 16:22
If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema

Extends to the truth and the church

Cos Christ is the truth and His church teaches the truth without error! Jn 14:6 matt 28:19 matt 18:17 1 Tim 3:15 Jn 29:21-23 Jn 16:13

Christ and His church are one! Acts 9:4 eph 5:32

Authority of the Apostles!

What authority does Christ have?
What power does Christ have?
What mission / ministry does Christ have?

Peter, the apostles and their successors have the same authority, power, and mission! Jn 20:21 as my father sent me, even so send I you!

John 17:18
As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.

The apostles are Christ’s successors!
They have authority to send others as well, apostle means one who is sent!

Therefore the apostles have authority to send more apostles or successors!
Apostolic succession!

The nations still need to be taught, disciples still need to be baptized and the church the new covenant kingdom of christ still needs to be governed!

Hebrews 3:1
Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

Christ is an apostle, and has authority to send other apostles, the apostles also have this authority, so the apostles continue down thru the centuries as Christ promised! Matt 28:19-20

Keys of authority! And power to bind and loose! Matt 16:18 and Matt 18:18 matt 28:19 Isa 22:21-22

Moral authority:
(Teaching)
Necessity of being taught by Christ:
Two edge sword: defining truth and condemning errors, and Interpreting scripture.

Jurisdictional authority:
(Governing / administering)
Necessity of Peter and the apostles and their successors to govern the holy church.

Spiritual authority:
(Life of Grace)
Sanctifying thru the mass and Sacraments

The apostles teaching is Christ’s teaching, Christ and His church are one! Acts 9:4

Christian rule of faith is not the Bible alone! But the doctrine of the apostles! Acts 2:42

Jesus Christ continues HIS ministry in His new covenant church thru Peter, the apostles, and their successors with the same mission, power, and authority!
Mt 16:18 Mt 28:19 Acts 1:17 acts 8:31 & 35 Lk 10:16 Jn 8:32 Jn 13:20 Jn 15:5 Jn 16:13 Jn 20:21-22 eph 2:20

 

[Marine0311]

FYI, your cult is NOT Jesus He is in heaven. Why doesn’t your cult follow Acts 2:42 instead of creating doctrines through false traditions ?

 

[theefaith]

You "tag" is absurd. You Catholics have so distorted Christianity and the meaning of the Bible that it is almost unknown in your flawed denomination.

It's propaganda of your clergy to believe them instead of the pure Word of God. From the (unScriptural) Pope on down, you've manufactured a false religion.

Martin Luther saved Christianity from the evils and perversions of the Catholic denomination.

that is a flat denial
Of Christ, the HS, and scripture

Matt 16:18-19 shall NOT prevail
Jn 16:13 HS leads apostles into all
Truth! And they teach us Matt 28:19
The church “IS” the pillar of truth 1 Tim 3:15
Must hear the church Matt 18:17

 

[theefaith]

Where in the Bible does this appear (or anything even close to it)?

Hail Mary, Full of Grace, The Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now, and at the hour of our death. Amen.

This is praying to a dead woman, asking her to pray for you, a sinner. It is absurd on both counts.

I suggest you do some reading and find out what lies the Catholic denomination teaches about Mary, and stop trolling with stupid flaming zingers.

Jn 11:25 ALIVE!

A new song!

Good enough for Angels!
Good enough for the Bible!
Good enough for me!

Hail Mary! Full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou among women,
Lk 1:28 blessed is the fruit of thy womb, (Jesus) Lk 1:42 Holy Mary, mother of God, Lk 1:43 pray for us sinners, now,
rev 5:8 and at the hour of our death, Matt 24:13 amen!

It is really God who greeting Mary with the “Hail Mary”!
Lk 1:26 & Lk 1:45

Blessed art thou among all women! Lk 1:28 & Lk 1:45 & Lk 1:48

All generations shall call me blessed! Lk 1:48

A new song of thanksgiving for bringing our salvation!

And thanksgiving for the incarnation of Jesus Christ! The word was made flesh and dwelt among us thanks to Mary’s yes consenting to our salvation!

all generations except heretics and fundamentalists who are spiritually blind!

 

[Marine0311]

Rejecting the lies of the RCC is neither heretical nor blindness, because those who love God and know scripture have been warned by God to get very far from away from her heresies.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You with your superior intelligence have placed MORE importance on Peter than in Jesus. Jesus as scripture says is the foundation stone which makes your beloved Peter a “pebble” there Einstein. Yes, I was in the Marine Corps from 1968 to 1971 with one tour in Vietnam. Your long list of Jesuit plants means absolutely nothing to anyone with common sense.

And, as I’ve schooled you on previous posts – Jesus isn’t the ONLY the only person in Scripture who is referred to as the “ROCK”.
- Abraham is called the “ROCK (Isaiah 51:1-2)
- Peter is called the “ROCK” (Matt. 16:18).

As for the Protestant scholars I listed who AGREE with me – they can HARDLY be called, “Jesuit plants”, my woefully-ignorant friend . . .

Twelve Quotations from Ten Protestant Biblical Scholars
William Hendriksen
member of the Reformed Christian Church
Professor of New Testament Literature at Calvin Seminary
The meaning is, ‘You are Peter, that is Rock, and upon this rock, that is, on you, Peter I will build my church”Our Lord, speaking Aramaic, probably said, ‘And I say to you, you are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church”Jesus, then, is promising Peter that he is going to build his church on him! I accept this view.
New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1973), page 647
JPK page 14

Gerhard Maier
leading conservative evangelical Lutheran theologian
Nowadays a broad consensus has emerged which -in accordance with the words of the text -applies the promise to Peter as a person. On this point liberal (H. J. Holtzmann, E. Schweiger) and conservative (Cullmann, Flew) theologians agree, as well as representatives of Roman Catholic exegesis.
‘The Church in the Gospel of Matthew: Hermeneutical Analysis of the Current Debate’
Biblical Interpretation and Church Text and Context
(Flemington Markets, NSW: Paternoster Press, 1984), page 58
JPK pages 16-17

Donald A. Carson III
Baptist and Professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Seminary
(two quotations from different works)
Although it is true that petros and petra can mean ‘stone’ and ‘rock’ respectively in earlier Greek, the distinction is largely confined to poetry. Moreover the underlying Aramaic is in this case unquestionable; and most probably kepha was used in both clauses (‘you are kepha’ and ‘on this kepha’), since the word was used both for a name and for a ‘rock’. The Peshitta (written in Syriac, a language cognate with Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses. The Greek makes the distinction between petros and petra simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine petra could not very well serve as a masculine name.
The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 8 (Matthew, Mark, Luke)
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), page 368
JPK pages 17-18
The word Peter petros, meaning ‘rock’ (Gk 4377), is masculine, and in Jesus’ follow-up statement he uses the feminine word petra (Gk 4376). On the basis of this change, many have attempted to avoid identifying Peter as the rock on which Jesus builds his church. Yet if it were not for Protestant reactions against extremes of Roman Catholic interpretations, it is doubtful whether many would have taken ‘rock’ to be anything or anyone other than Peter.
Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary -New Testament, vol. 2
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), page 78
JPK page 18

John Peter Lange
German Protestant scholar
The Saviour, no doubt, used in both clauses the Aramaic word kepha (hence the Greek Kephas applied to Simon, John i.42; comp. 1 Cor. i.12; iii.22; ix.5; Gal. ii.9), which means rock and is used both as a proper and a common noun.... The proper translation then would be: ‘Thou art Rock, and upon this rock’, etc.
Lange’s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: The Gospel According to Matthew, vol. 8
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1976), page 293
JPK page 19

John A. Broadus
Baptist author
(two quotations from the same work)
Many insist on the distinction between the two Greek words, thou art Petros and on this petra, holding that if the rock had meant Peter, either petros or petra would have been used both times, and that petros signifies a separate stone or fragment broken off, while petra is the massive rock. But this distinction is almost entirely confined to poetry, the common prose word instead of petros being lithos; nor is the distinction uniformly observed.
But the main answer here is that our Lord undoubtedly spoke Aramaic, which has no known means of making such a distinction [between feminine petra and masculine petros in Greek]. The Peshitta (Western Aramaic) renders, ‘Thou are kipho, and on this kipho’. The Eastern Aramaic, spoken in Palestine in the time of Christ, must necessarily have said in like manner, ‘Thou are kepha, and on this kepha’.... Beza called attention to the fact that it is so likewise in French: ‘Thou art Pierre, and on this pierre’; and Nicholson suggests that we could say, ‘Thou art Piers (old English for Peter), and on this pier.’
Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew
(Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1886), pages 355-356
JPK page 20

J. Knox Chamblin
Presbyterian and New Testament Professor
Reformed Theological Seminary
By the words ‘this rock’ Jesus means not himself, nor his teaching, nor God the Father, nor Peter’s confession, but Peter himself. The phrase is immediately preceded by a direct and emphatic reference to Peter. As Jesus identifies himself as the Builder, the rock on which he builds is most naturally understood as someone (or something) other than Jesus himself. The demonstrative this, whether denoting what is physically close to Jesus or what is literally close in Matthew, more naturally refers to Peter (v. 18) than to the more remote confession (v. 16). The link between the clauses of verse 18 is made yet stronger by the play on words, ‘You are Peter (Gk. Petros), and on this rock (Gk. petra) I will build my church’. As an apostle, Peter utters the confession of verse 16; as a confessor he receives the designation this rock from Jesus.
‘Matthew’
Evangelical Commentary on the Bible
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1989), page 742
JPK page 30

Craig L. Blomberg
Baptist and Professor of New Testament
Denver Seminary
Acknowledging Jesus as The Christ illustrates the appropriateness of Simon's nickname ‘Peter’ (Petros = rock). This is not the first time Simon has been called Peter (cf. John 1:42), but it is certainly the most famous. Jesus’ declaration, ‘You are Peter’, parallels Peter’s confession, ‘You are the Christ’, as if to say, ‘Since you can tell me who I am, I will tell you who you are”The expression ‘this rock’ almost certainly refers to Peter, following immediately after his name, just as the words following ‘the Christ’ in v. 16 applied to Jesus. The play on words in the Greek between Peter’s name (Petros) and the word ‘rock’ (petra) makes sense only if Peter is the rock and if Jesus is about to explain the significance of this identification.
The New American Commentary: Matthew, vol. 22
(Nashville: Broadman, 1992), pages 251-252
JPK pages 31-32

David Hill
Presbyterian minister and Senior Lecturer in the Department of Biblical Studies
University of Sheffield, England
On this rock I will build my church: the word-play goes back to Aramaic tradition. It is on Peter himself, the confessor of his Messiahship, that Jesus will build the Church. The disciple becomes, as it were, the foundation stone of the community. Attempts to interpret the ‘rock’ as something other than Peter in person (e.g., his faith, the truth revealed to him) are due to Protestant bias, and introduce to the statement a degree of subtlety which is highly unlikely.
‘The Gospel of Matthew’
The New Century Bible Commentary
(London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1972), page 261
JPK page 34

 

[BreadOfLife]

Cont'd . . .

Suzanne de Dietrich
Presbyterian theologian
The play on words in verse 18 indicates the Aramaic origin of the passage. The new name contains a promise. ‘Simon’, the fluctuating, impulsive disciple, will, by the grace of God, be the ‘rock’ on which God will build the new community.
The Layman’s Bible Commentary: Matthew, vol. 16
(Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1961), page 93
JPK page 34

Donald A. Hagner
Fuller Theological Seminary
The natural reading of the passage, despite the necessary shift from Petros to petra required by the word play in the Greek (but not the Aramaic, where the same word kepha occurs in both places), is that it is Peter who is the rock upon which the church is to be built.... The frequent attempts that have been made, largely in the past, to deny this in favor of the view that the confession itself is the rock... seem to be largely motivated by Protestant prejudice against a passage that is used by the Roman Catholics to justify the papacy.
Matthew 14-28
Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 33b
(Dallas: Word Books, 1995), page 470
JPK pages 36-37

 

[Jim B]

Rejecting the lies of the RCC is neither heretical nor blindness, because those who love God and know scripture have been warned by God to get very far from away from her heresies.

Great post!

 

[Marine0311]

Salvation was and is based on Jesus NOT Peter. You do know Jesus is king of kings and Lord of Lords right ? The little pebble (Peter) is saved by the foundation stone (Jesus) just like everyone else is.

 

[Illuminator]

You with your superior intelligence have placed MORE importance on Peter than in Jesus.

BofL said no such thing, so it just your opinion.

Jesus as scripture says is the foundation stone which makes your beloved Peter a “pebble” there Einstein.

The Greek for "pebble" is lithos, which is not used anywhere in Matthew 16. "Kepha" does not mean pebble, it means ROCK. Jesus spoke Aramaic, not Greek. "Cephas" is transliterated from the Aramaic "Kepha", so imposing Greek grammar rules onto a different language is just wrong. Paul used "Cephas" 6 times, and everyone understood who Paul was talking about. So why would Paul use a word with Aramaic origins to Greek speaking communities?
In fact, we don’t even need Matt. 16:18 to prove Peter is the rock because Jesus renamed Simon “rock” in Mark 3:16 and John 1:42.

Matt. 16:18 – also, in quoting “on this rock,” the Scriptures use the Greek construction “tautee tee” which means on “this” rock; on “this same” rock; or on “this very” rock. “Tautee tee” is a demonstrative construction in Greek, pointing to Peter, the subject of the sentence (and not his confession of faith as some non-Catholics argue) as the very rock on which Jesus builds His Church. The demonstrative (“tautee”) generally refers to its closest antecedent (“Petros”). Also, there is no place in Scripture where “faith” is equated with “rock.”

Matt. 16:18-19 – in addition, to argue that Jesus first blesses Peter for having received divine revelation from the Father, then diminishes him by calling him a small pebble, and then builds him up again by giving him the keys to the kingdom of heaven is entirely illogical, and a gross manipulation of the text to avoid the truth of Peter’s leadership in the Church. This is a three-fold blessing of Peter – you are blessed, you are the rock on which I will build my Church, and you will receive the keys to the kingdom of heaven (not you are blessed for receiving Revelation, but you are still an insignificant little pebble, and yet I am going to give you the keys to the kingdom).

Matt. 16:18-19 – to further rebut the Protestant argument that Jesus was speaking about Peter’s confession of faith (not Peter himself) based on the revelation he received, the verses are clear that Jesus, after acknowledging Peter’s receipt of divine revelation, turns the whole discourse to the person of Peter: Blessed are “you” Simon, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to “you,” and I tell “you,” “you” are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church. I will give “you” the keys to the kingdom, and whatever “you” bind and loose on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven. Jesus’ whole discourse relates to the person of Peter, not his confession of faith.

Matt. 16:13 – also, from a geographical perspective, Jesus renames Simon to rock in Caesarea Philippi near a massive rock formation on which Herod built a temple to Caesar. Jesus chose this setting to further emphasize that Peter was indeed the rock on which the Church would be built.

Yes, I was in the Marine Corps from 1968 to 1971 with one tour in Vietnam.

I remember the time well. I had American friends worried about the draft. Nam vets were not received well by large segments of the population because of the leftist cultural (sexual) revolution of the '60's. A belated "thank you for your service" from me.

Your long list of Jesuit plants means absolutely nothing to anyone with common sense.

So, the long list of Protestant reference manuals are Jesuit plants? That's not common sense, it's intellectual suicide and fundie paranoia.

 

[Illuminator]

Salvation was and is based on Jesus NOT Peter.

Nobody is saying salvation is based on Peter.

You do know Jesus is king of kings and Lord of Lords right ?

Right, and Protestantism shows no sign of being monarchical on earth. The Church and the papacy is modelled from the Davidic Kingdom, not AT&T or Microsoft. How is an earthly body with no earthly head supposed to be a kingdom?
Ezek. 37:24-25 – David shall be king over them forever and they will have one shepherd. Jesus is our King, and Peter is our earthly shepherd.
Jer. 33:17 – Jeremiah prophesies that David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the earthly House of Israel. Either this is a false prophecy, or David has a successor of representatives throughout history.
Dan. 2:44 - Daniel prophesies an earthly kingdom that will never be destroyed. Either this is a false prophecy, or the earthly kingdom requires succession.

 

[Marine0311]

Is The Church Built on “Petros” or “Petra”?



The churches of Christ Greet You (Romans 16:16)



The Roman Catholic Church claims that Peter was the first pope, the successor of Christ. They say he is therefore Christ's vicar and the visible and infallible head of the church, having power and authority over all the other apostles and the entire church. Catholic leaders also claim that Christ built His church upon Peter and gave him the keys to unlock and close the kingdom of heaven and hell to anyone as he chose. They assert that the popes in past history up to the present are Peter's successors, and have the same power of the keys.


These far‑reaching claims are based on the verses found in Matthew 16:18-19. Let us make a careful and critical examination of these verses and see what Jesus said and what He actually meant. Here is the text: "Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build My church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."


The New Testament was originally written in the Greek, from which the Latin, English, and other versions were translated. If you study the Greek text you will find that the word Peter and the word Rock on which Christ was to build His church are two separate and distinct words, each having a different meaning. The word Peter in Greek is petros, which means "a piece of rock; a stone; a single stone; movable, insecure, shifting, or rolling." The word rock is petra, which means "a rock; a cliff; a projecting rock; mother rock; huge mass; solid formation; fixed; immovable; enduring."


The word petros for Peter in the Greek is in the masculine gender and the word petra for the rock is in the feminine gender. Petros and petra are two distinct words in the Greek. Petros is a shifting, rolling, or insecure stone, while petra is a solid, immovable rock. In the English language the gender is not specified by the article. We say the fork, the spoon, and the knife. The three words have the same article. In the Greek, as in many of the modern languages, each noun and corresponding article is in the masculine, feminine, or neuter gender. In many cases it is an arbitrary arrangement, regardless of sex.


The article in Greek is important. If one noun is in the masculine it must have a masculine article, and if it is in the feminine it must have a feminine article. The text under consideration in the Greek shows that petros is in the masculine, and petra in the feminine, proving that they are two distinct words; and each one has a different meaning. Now the question is, on which of the two, petros or petra, did Christ establish His church? Was it on petros, a movable stone, or petra, an immovable rock?


Let us quote the text again: "I say also unto thee [to Peter], That thou art Peter [petros, masculine gender], and upon this Rock [petra, feminine gender] I will build My church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). The text indicates clearly that the church of Christ is built on petra and not on Petros. Is The Church Built on “Petros” or “Petra”

 

[Marine0311]

Is The Church Built on “Petros” or “Petra”?



The churches of Christ Greet You (Romans 16:16)



The Roman Catholic Church claims that Peter was the first pope, the successor of Christ. They say he is therefore Christ's vicar and the visible and infallible head of the church, having power and authority over all the other apostles and the entire church. Catholic leaders also claim that Christ built His church upon Peter and gave him the keys to unlock and close the kingdom of heaven and hell to anyone as he chose. They assert that the popes in past history up to the present are Peter's successors, and have the same power of the keys.


These far‑reaching claims are based on the verses found in Matthew 16:18-19. Let us make a careful and critical examination of these verses and see what Jesus said and what He actually meant. Here is the text: "Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build My church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."


The New Testament was originally written in the Greek, from which the Latin, English, and other versions were translated. If you study the Greek text you will find that the word Peter and the word Rock on which Christ was to build His church are two separate and distinct words, each having a different meaning. The word Peter in Greek is petros, which means "a piece of rock; a stone; a single stone; movable, insecure, shifting, or rolling." The word rock is petra, which means "a rock; a cliff; a projecting rock; mother rock; huge mass; solid formation; fixed; immovable; enduring."


The word petros for Peter in the Greek is in the masculine gender and the word petra for the rock is in the feminine gender. Petros and petra are two distinct words in the Greek. Petros is a shifting, rolling, or insecure stone, while petra is a solid, immovable rock. In the English language the gender is not specified by the article. We say the fork, the spoon, and the knife. The three words have the same article. In the Greek, as in many of the modern languages, each noun and corresponding article is in the masculine, feminine, or neuter gender. In many cases it is an arbitrary arrangement, regardless of sex.


The article in Greek is important. If one noun is in the masculine it must have a masculine article, and if it is in the feminine it must have a feminine article. The text under consideration in the Greek shows that petros is in the masculine, and petra in the feminine, proving that they are two distinct words; and each one has a different meaning. Now the question is, on which of the two, petros or petra, did Christ establish His church? Was it on petros, a movable stone, or petra, an immovable rock?


Let us quote the text again: "I say also unto thee [to Peter], That thou art Peter [petros, masculine gender], and upon this Rock [petra, feminine gender] I will build My church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). The text indicates clearly that the church of Christ is built on petra and not on Petros. Is The Church Built on “Petros” or “Petra”

 

[Marine0311]

Continued:
Let us quote the text again: "I say also unto thee [to Peter], That thou art Peter [petros, masculine gender], and upon this Rock [petra, feminine gender] I will build My church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). The text indicates clearly that the church of Christ is built on petra and not on Petros.


Now, who is this petra or rock on which Christ built His true church? Let the Holy Bible again give the answer. If the Bible gives the answer, we make no mistake in accepting it because the definition is authentic. "They drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock [petra, in the Greek] was Christ" (1 Corinthians 10:4). Here we have evidence that petra refers to Christ, and not to Peter, petros. Again we quote: "Jesus Christ Himself being the chief Cornerstone" (Ephesians 2:20) "He is the Rock, His work is perfect" (Deuteronomy 32:4; 2 Samuel 22:2-3) (Douay, 2 Kings 22:2-3).


If Peter is the rock on which Christ was to build His church, Peter could not be overcome and the gates of hell could not prevail against him. But the fact is that he was overcome, and the gates of hell did prevail against him. Didn't he deny his Lord? This was after Christ told him that the Rock was not to be overcome. Jesus told Peter on one occasion: "Get thee behind Me, Satan: thou art an offense unto Me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men" (Matthew 16:23). Peter himself gives the answer as to who the Rock is. He says Jesus is “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:16). Again, speaking of Christ, he says: "This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders" (Acts 4:10-11); so Christ, the Son of God, must be the rock on which God built His church.


If Jesus would have built His church on Peter, petros, He would have said: "Thou art Petros, and upon this Petros [or upon it] I will build My church," but such is not the case. He plainly says: "Thou art Petros, and upon this petra I will build My church.” Paul tells us that the petra is Christ. He also says, “For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 3:11). Peter is never designated by petra. Thus, Peter and Paul agree that Christ is the Rock; but the pope claims the title for himself. Which testimony should we accept? "Let God be true, but every man a liar" (Romans 3:4).


Long before Jesus was born He was considered the Rock. Isaiah declares: "Therefore thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation" (Isaiah 28:16). Peter applies this prophecy to Christ. He wrote: "Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief Cornerstone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on Him shall not be confounded" (1 Peter 2:6). David said: "Lead me to the Rock that is higher than I" (Psalm 61:2) (Douay, Psalm 60:3).



If the church was built on Peter then Peter would be the head of the church. However, Peter was not the head of the church in his day. Instead of having the disciples, apostles, and other believers call Peter pope, or Father Peter, or Holy Father Peter, Jesus said: "Be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.... But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant" (Matthew 23:8‑11). "Call no man your father," could not refer to an earthly parent, but to the spiritual fathers. Jesus recommended our paying full respect to earthly parents when He quoted the commandment: "Honor thy father and thy mother" (Mark 7:10).


Sometimes 1 Corinthians 4:15 is used to prove that we may call spiritual leaders our fathers. Paul writes: "For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel." They were begotten through the Gospel and not through Paul. Again Paul writes: "I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth" (Romans 1:16). We repeat: it is through the Gospel that we are begotten, and not through Paul or some other person. It is the Gospel that is the power of God unto salvation, and not man. Is The Church Built on “Petros” or “Petra”

 

[Illuminator]

Do Catholic babies fast 24-48 hours before baptism?
Why are you so selective in obeying Sacred Tradition?

Luther and Calvin baptized babies. Why are you so selective in obeying your own reformers?

 

[JunChosen]

The problem with that is that Scripture itself DOESN’T support Sola Scriptura

That is YOUR understanding! We've had this conversation in the past, do you remember? I gave you Revelation 22:18-19. Do you remember the response you gave? If you had forgotten, you said, the word "book" in Revelation 22 pertained only to the Book of Revelation.

Then I said, "If that is true, then can you expound Revelation 13:8 apart from the Bible?" And you never got back to me with a response.

Can you now give an answer pertaining to Sola Scriptura?

To God Be The Glory

 

[BreadOfLife]

That is YOUR understanding! We've had this conversation in the past, do you remember? I gave you Revelation 22:18-19. Do you remember the response you gave? If you had forgotten, you said, the word "book" in Revelation 22 pertained only to the Book of Revelation.

Then I said, "If that is true, then can you expound Revelation 13:8 apart from the Bible?" And you never got back to me with a response.

Can you now give an answer pertaining to Sola Scriptura?

To God Be The Glory

Rev 22:18-19 is NOT a descriptn of 0 nor does it provide support for the idea that Scripture is our SOLE Authority.
It simply warns the reader not to add to take away from this Book.

I'm NOT sure what Rev. 13:8 has to do with Sola Scriptura - but as far as I can tell - it doesn't have anything to do with it.
Plkease explain WHY you think it does . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Is The Church Built on “Petros” or “Petra”?
The churches of Christ Greet You (Romans 16:16)

The New Testament was originally written in the Greek, from which the Latin, English, and other versions were translated. If you study the Greek text you will find that the word Peter and the word Rock on which Christ was to build His church are two separate and distinct words, each having a different meaning. The word Peter in Greek is petros, which means "a piece of rock; a stone; a single stone; movable, insecure, shifting, or rolling." The word rock is petra, which means "a rock; a cliff; a projecting rock; mother rock; huge mass; solid formation; fixed; immovable; enduring."

The word petros for Peter in the Greek is in the masculine gender and the word petra for the rock is in the feminine gender. Petros and petra are two distinct words in the Greek. Petros is a shifting, rolling, or insecure stone, while petra is a solid, immovable rock. In the English language the gender is not specified by the article. We say the fork, the spoon, and the knife. The three words have the same article. In the Greek, as in many of the modern languages, each noun and corresponding article is in the masculine, feminine, or neuter gender. In many cases it is an arbitrary arrangement, regardless of sex.


The article in Greek is important. If one noun is in the masculine it must have a masculine article, and if it is in the feminine it must have a feminine article. The text under consideration in the Greek shows that petros is in the masculine, and petra in the feminine, proving that they are two distinct words; and each one has a different meaning. Now the question is, on which of the two, petros or petra, did Christ establish His church? Was it on petros, a movable stone, or petra, an immovable rock?

Let us quote the text again: "I say also unto thee [to Peter], That thou art Peter [petros, masculine gender], and upon this Rock [petra, feminine gender] I will build My church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). The text indicates clearly that the church of Christ is built on petra and not on Petros. Is The Church Built on “Petros” or “Petra”

Sooooo, everythijng I taught you about in post #399 and all of the scholarly testimony from Protestant sources I listed in posts 406 & 407 just dribblrd out of those hles in your head like so much gravy.

I guess it wouldn't help a person wuth limited capacity - like yourself - to be reminded that Jesus spoke Aramaic to His Discuples - and NOT Koine Greek.
Oh well - at least everybody reading this post of yours will have a good laugh . . .

 

[Marine0311]

Sooooo, everythijng I taught you about in post #399 and all of the scholarly testimony from Protestant sources I listed in posts 406 & 407 just dribblrd out of those hles in your head like so much gravy.

I guess it wouldn't help a person wuth limited capacity - like yourself - to be reminded that Jesus spoke Aramaic to His Discuples - and NOT Koine Greek.
Oh well - at least everybody reading this post of yours will have a good laugh . . .

 

[Marine0311]

I don’t pay much attention to Jesuits pretending to be fundamentalist bible believers. Nah, nothing dribbled out but I do understand the Roman Catholic bait and switch game, which by the way is far from being truthful or honest.The Roman Catholics will stay in the hole they dug themselves into, but the christians will recognize the lies told by the RCC.