Catholics

[mjrhealth]

If you were able to construct a cohesive sentence - I might respond to it.
But, as it is, you aren't making any - as usual . . .

You dont respond anyway. Nothing you write makes any sense, and is all against our Lord. Could care less, since you dont care any. Not fussed about you, its teh poor lambs that come here who have to see this filth dished out, the ones who are truly seeking Christ and get garbage shoved down there throats. Not even God can change you, because you dont want to be changed, you can have your religion, it serves no man any good.

 

[BreadOfLife]

oh pls, you were just expounding on the Rotting Vines in Christ like yesterday lol, stop already

And you're lying again. I never said that the Vine rots.

Christ is the Vine - WE are the branches.
Some of those branches wither and die and are cut off and burned (John 15:5-6).

If you knew the Bible, you wouldn't be making these Scripturally-bankrupt statements . . .

hey, i am a hypocrite too!

Can't argue with you there . . .

You can be the Pharisee as long as you like, bro. Trust that your posts will live on in comedy skits for years, ok, i might even write a book

Judging by how little you know of Scripture - I doubt you can even read a book . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Is there such a thing as "luck" with God?

Nope.
And there's no such thing as knowing Christ without His Church.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You are not listening.

Seeking Peter first instead of the spirit of God, has resulted in the long drawn out version - centuries, of being lead unto all truth by the Holy Spirit...instead of what might have been. That is not Jesus lying, that is Him being just to those who would rather have a man over them...just like He did with making Saul king, and just like He did with making Israel wander in the desert, and allowing them to go into captivity. But...no...God would never do that...Saul was given supreme authority, and Israel was a light before all men!

Man...have you got a lot to learn.

Whew - this is like talking to a wall . . .

You keep making the moronic claim that I have "chosen" Peter over Christ. That is not only a lie - it's complete ignorance of what the Church has taught for 2000 years.

The bottom line here is that you have absolutely zero grasp of what Christ's Church is and its purpose.

 

[ScottA]

Whew - this is like talking to a wall . . .

You keep making the moronic claim that I have "chosen" Peter over Christ. That is not only a lie - it's complete ignorance of what the Church has taught for 2000 years.

The bottom line here is that you have absolutely zero grasp of what Christ's Church is and its purpose.

No...you read the same verse about Peter, the spirit of God, and who Jesus was and how He would build His church, as the rest of us...and you all assumed He only meant Peter, and him first (instead of God first).

Thus, you all caused the church to suffer for 2000 years while God gave you your just reward under the teachings of men, while He spoke to men by the Holy Spirit in spite of your folly.

 

[BreadOfLife]

No...you read the same verse about Peter, the spirit of God, and who Jesus was and how He would build His church, as the rest of us...and you all assumed He only meant Peter, and him first (instead of God first).

Thus, you all caused the church to suffer for 2000 years while God gave you your just reward under the teachings of men, while He spoke to men by the Holy Spirit in spite of your folly.

The fact that YOU don't see that He was speaking ONLY to Peter in Matt. 16:18-19 is astounding.
Nobody else who was present there at Cesarea-Philippi had their name changed to "Rock" (Kepha).

Many of your Protestant scholars no longer live in the denial that YOU and others here do and agree with the Church's position:

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

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

 

[ScottA]

The fact that YOU don't see that He was speaking ONLY to Peter in Matt. 16:18-19 is astounding.
Nobody else who was present there at Cesarea-Philippi had their name changed to "Rock" (Kepha).

Many of your Protestant scholars no longer live in the denial that YOU and others here do and agree with the Church's position:

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

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

You mean those same guys who fell asleep 3 TIMES while Jesus prayed? ... Yeah...right...very convincing!

 

[amadeus]

Nope.
And there's no such thing as knowing Christ without His Church.

Actually I agree with you on both points.

"Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." Matt 22:36-40

The second one speaks of how we are to treat His Church.
The following verse clarifies:

"If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?" I John 4:20

 

[BreadOfLife]

Actually I agree with you on both points.

"Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." Matt 22:36-40

The second one speaks of how we are to treat His Church.
The following verse clarifies:

"If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?" I John 4:20

Actually - the second command from Jesus there is not relegated exclusively to fellow Church members.
It refers to ALL people.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You mean those same guys who fell asleep 3 TIMES while Jesus prayed? ... Yeah...right...very convincing!

Peter ALSO fell asleep when Jesus was praying in the Garden - but Jesus built the Church on him.

 

[aspen]

well, if you ever get what he is saying, this forum will prolly be a lot less interesting, lol. Have a nice evening, Bread.

Now, this statement is truth!

 

[ScottA]

Peter ALSO fell asleep when Jesus was praying in the Garden - but Jesus built the Church on him.

So sorry... in your own slumber, you don't even see what you have said.

 

[bbyrd009]

So sorry... in your own slumber, you don't even see what you have said.

ha, no kidding, yikes.

 

[bbyrd009]

Now, this statement is truth!

ha...i hesitate to point out that if BoL just started cracking on the RCC, we would be compelled to start apologizing for it lol; it's just human nature. This whole script could be flipped today, and BoL would perceive a completely different reality in that case, right? When the buttons don't work anymore, we stop pushing them. The RCC will not have changed a whit; only perceptions will have changed.

 

[aspen]

ha...i hesitate to point out that if BoL just started cracking on the RCC, we would be compelled to start apologizing for it lol; it's just human nature. This whole script could be flipped today, and BoL would perceive a completely different reality in that case, right? When the buttons don't work anymore, we stop pushing them. The RCC will not have changed a whit; only perceptions will have changed.

True. Unfortunately, fundamentalists (those who value doctrine over people) are famous for doubling down on their opinions when confronted with their mistakes or lack of empathy. You cant take the fun out of a fundy - no matter what the cause, they will attempt to annihilate anyone who threatens their precious doctrine.

The saddest part about fundamentalists is that behind all the bellicose and bluster....they are terribly fragile people.......if you actually disarm them accidently, they flip from bully to dependent in an instant.

In fact, ‘shedding the light’ on the mental gymnastics employed by fundamentalists in order to protect their doctrine, can often lead to disillusionment and complete rejection of the vary doctrines they formerly protected. It is no coincidence that many atheists are former religious fundamentalists - they just switched teams

 

[bbyrd009]

True. Unfortunately, fundamentalists (those who value doctrine over people) are famous for doubling down on their opinions when confronted with their mistakes or lack of empathy. You cant take the fun out of a fundy - no matter what the cause, they will attempt to annilate anyone who threatens their precious doctrine.

The saddest part about fundamentalists is that behind all the bellicose and bluster....they are terribly fragile people.......if you actually disarm them accidently, they flip from bully to dependent in an instant.

In fact, ‘shedding the light’ on the mental gymnastics employed by fundamentalists in order to protect their doctrine, can often lead to disillusionment and complete rejection of the vary doctrines they formerly protected. It is no coincidence that many atheists are former religious fundamentalists - they just switched teams

yes, the relationship to Fundies and Atheists has been documented already, a google search will reveal.

 

[amadeus]

Actually - the second command from Jesus there is not relegated exclusively to fellow Church members.
It refers to ALL people.

Indeed and then when and if we are obeying both of those commandments, are we not already in the Church and therefore among the redeemed of the Lord?
What else would we lack and why?

 

[bbyrd009]

You mean those same guys who fell asleep 3 TIMES while Jesus prayed? ... Yeah...right...very convincing!

funny how "rock" takes on a different meaning when it is used in reference to a "head," huh?

 

[twinc]

funny how "rock" takes on a different meaning when it is used in reference to a "head," huh?

or to sleep like rock a byes - twinc

 

[twinc]

So sorry... in your own slumber, you don't even see what you have said.

even in slumber Peter was the rock as in rock a byes imho - twinc

Indeed and then when and if we are obeying both of those commandments, are we not already in the Church and therefore among the redeemed of the Lord?
What else would we lack and why?

Actually - the second command from Jesus there is not relegated exclusively to fellow Church members.
It refers to ALL people.

Jesus did not say 'love thy neighbour as thyself as He said ye have heard it said of old - what He did say was 'love one another as I have loved you - twinc