OSAS : Gnostic Heresy

[pandaflower]

https://ucatholic.com/blog/which-bible-should-i-use-a-list-of-approved-translations/

 

[GracePeace]

Jesus is the rock . The Church of Jesus is built on Jesus,not Peter.
Peter,Petrus, an idiom of sorts to communicate to the apostle the eternal foundation of the church of the Christ Jesus,who is the cornerstone.

1 Corinthians 10:4
And all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ.

1 Peter 2:6 For it stands in Scripture: “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

1 Samuel 2:2
“There is none holy like the Lord: for there is none besides you; there is no rock like our God."

Deuteronomy 32:4
" The Rock, his work is perfect, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness and without iniquity, just and upright is he."

I don't have to deny the obvious. John got to the tomb first, but let Peter go in first, and, at the end of the Gospel, John put himself BEHIND Peter and Jesus. Peter was called the rock, and on the rock, He built His church : Peter preached at Pentecost, and Peter first went to the Gentiles with the Gospel (not knowing they could even be saved at all).

When you start these mental gymnastics of denying Peter is the rock Christ built His Church on, it really is embarrassing. The answers you come up with just don't work. BEFORE Christ says "on this rock", He's talking to Peter, AFTER Christ says "on this rock", He's still talking to Peter ("I will give you [singular, not plural--he's talking to an individual, and I say it is Peter] the keys"), so it makes more sense to acknowledge He is talking to Peter when He says "on this rock". Stop playing games with God's Word just because you have a bone to pick with the Catholic Church. You're making yourself look ridiculous.

 

[GracePeace]

Hey GP,

You have a good grasp of what is in Scripture, you just don't have a good grasp of the full context of Scripture in this scenario you brought up. I suppose it's not entirely your fault. You are repeating what your Protestant men have taught you. Or maybe, just maybe, this is one of those times you are 'looking to others for conclusions others have come to' and if you don't find them completely satisfactory you discuss it on the internet'? If the latter is true, I am happy to oblige.

Yup, Paul confronted Peter and revealed him to be a hypocrite. Peter wasn't practicing what he preached. Peter wasn't adhering to the teachings of The Church. Your interpretation (or what your men have taught you) of those passages suggest that Peter was being submissive to Paul. The true interpretation of those passages is that Peter wasn't being submissive to the teachings of The Church, so Paul called him out on it.

This I actually arrived at on my own.
Actually, it was, apparently, a "wild west" back then, and there was no absolute "Church teaching", because, apparently, the Jewish believers had some sort of expectation of Peter, and Peter was afraid of them, so he was trying to satisfy their expectation--and those Jewish believers were not being kicked out of the Church. This was prior to the Jerusalem council, and before Paul had written Romans (not that it is absolutely understood even today--many still wrangle about the Law, and whether Christians are obliged to serve by means of the Law). Sure, Paul knew the Gospel, but many, as he says, "especially of the circumcision", were rebellious, and "wanting to be teachers of the Law not knowing what they were saying".

In regard to your "Peter taught error" quip

Before Acts 10, Peter was teaching only Jews could be saved, and that they had to keep the Law. How do I know? "Nothing unclean has ever touched my lips." Also, the men who were scattered abroad after the persecution of Stephen were going around preaching only to Jews--they were persevering in the only doctrine they all had in common, that only Jews could be saved. How do I know they all thought only Jews could be saved? When Cornelius received the Spirit, they were astonished that the Spirit was given also to Gentiles, and, when they went back, and the Jewish believers confronted Peter for his "sin" of entering a Gentile's house, and eating with Gentiles, he explained, and they said, "Well, then, God has also granted repentance to the Gentiles." They did not know before then--and the men who had fled after Acts 7 were going around preaching only to Jews.
So, Peter was teaching this--that Jews were to serve by the Law, and that only Jews could be saved.

Therefore, even granting, for the sake of argument, you all are Peter's successors, you all may be teaching things--whether unbeknownst to you, or known to you (but that you won't admit)--that do not accord with Scripture (eg, "Mary is the New Eve").

I say this so that you better understand Scripture: Scripture never says that Peter, or any man, is infallible. Scripture does say that individual men who read Scripture twist Scripture. Scripture also says that The Church is the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Timothy 3:15) and if we don't adhere to the teachings/decisions of The Church we are to be kicked out of the Church (Matthew 18). So, it doesn't matter that "Peter taught error". He got corrected and The Church taught/teaches the truth. As long as one who speaks repeats the teachings of The Church, they can't be teaching error.

Again, my point was that Peter taught error, and you want to claim to be his successors, so you would have no basis for claiming infallibility, since he wasn't infallible, but, unbeknownst to him, taught contrary to reality.

 

[pandaflower]

I don't have to deny the obvious. John got to the tomb first, but let Peter go in first, and, at the end of the Gospel, John put himself BEHIND Peter and Jesus : Peter was called the rock, and on the rock, He built His church. It was Peter who preached at Pentecost, and Peter who first went to the Gentiles with the Gospel (not knowing they could even be saved at all).

Mary of Magdalena was the first to arrive at the empty tomb.

Your assertion regarding Peter not knowing if the Gentiles could be saved is not true.

Acts 15:7
And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.

 

[GracePeace]

Mary of Magdalena was the first to arrive at the empty tomb.

I'm not arguing about who got there first, I'm saying John intentionally put himself BEHIND Peter on that occasion AND on the occasion at the end of the Gospel, and that is in addition to the fact that it was Peter who walked on the water with Jesus; when Peter said, "I'm going fishing", after Christ's death, they all followed, and Peter went ahead of all of them to Jesus on the shore, and to the breakfast, and it was Peter who preached at Pentecost, and Peter who went to the Gentiles first. Peter is the rock Jesus built His Church upon!

Your assertion regarding Peter not knowing if the Gentiles could be saved is not true.

Acts 15:7
And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.

Oops, that is LONG after Acts 10!
Try again--read my argument more carefully!

 

[pandaflower]

I'm not arguing about who got there first, I'm saying John intentionally put himself BEHIND Peter on that occasion AND on the occasion at the end of the Gospel, and that is in addition to the fact that it was Peter who walked on the water with Jesus; when Peter said, "I'm going fishing", after Christ's death, they all followed, and Peter went ahead of all of them to Jesus on the shore, and to the breakfast, and it was Peter who preached at Pentecost, and Peter who went to the Gentiles first. Peter is the rock Jesus built His Church upon!

Oops, that is LONG after Acts 10!
Try again--read my argument more carefully!

Your argument is in error. Once is enough.

Jesus began his ministry in the Gentile area of Galilee. Not in the area of the Jews in the south and the Jewish area of Jerusalem.

Matthew 4

 

[GracePeace]

Your argument is in error. Once is enough.

Jesus began his ministry in the Gentile area of Galilee. Not in the area of the Jews in the south and the Jewish area of Jerusalem.

Matthew 4

Ok we disagree.

 

[pandaflower]

Your argument is in error. Once is enough.

Jesus began his ministry in the Gentile area of Galilee. Not in the area of the Jews in the south and the Jewish area of Jerusalem.

Matthew 4

You laugh at these biblical truths .

Wow.

 

[GracePeace]

You laugh at these biblical truths .

Wow.

All I said was it is clear to me that Christ meant Peter was the rock He would build His Church on, and I gave my reasons for believing that--and I still believe it, because your empty objections are irrelevant and laughable!

 

[GracePeace]

Your argument is in error.

You didn't read carefully : I said Peter didn't know Gentiles could be saved IN ACTS 10, WHEN HE WENT TO CORNELIUS.

It is obvious that he knew Gentiles could be saved by Acts 15--I never would argue to the contrary, since he received that revelation in Acts 10, and the number 10 precedes 15 ! Lol

You should just admit you misread what I said and move on!

 

[pandaflower]

You didn't read carefully : I said Peter didn't know Gentiles could be saved IN ACTS 10, WHEN HE WENT TO CORNELIUS.

It is obvious that he knew Gentiles could be saved by Acts 15--I never would argue to the contrary, since he received that revelation in Acts 10, and the number 10 precedes 15 ! Lol

You should just admit you misread what I said and move on!

You may choose to repeat error as often as you like and excuse why you actually don't know what you're talking about as often as you wish.

As you proceed it is a blessing. Because it lets us know who you are not.

 

[GracePeace]

You may choose to repeat error as often as you like and excuse why you actually don't know what you're talking about as often as you wish.

As you proceed it is a blessing. Because it lets us know who you are not.

What is the "error"? That Peter didn't know Gentiles could be saved?
If he knew Gentiles could be saved, why were they all astonished when Cornelius received the Spirit?
Why was it the first time the Jewish believers who confronted Peter when he got back to Jerusalem (after having gone to Cornelius's house) had ever heard Gentiles could be saved ("Well, then, God has also granted the Gentiles...")?
Why did the Jewish believers who fled after Stephen's martyrdom, in Acts 7, preach "only to Jews" (Acts 11), if not for the fact that they were not in town when Peter finally got the understanding that Gentiles could be saved?

What is my "error"?

 

[Marymog]

NRSV: Catholic Edition - Catholic Bible Press

The New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition (NRSV-CE) is a Bible translation approved for use by the Catholic Church.

www.catholicbiblepress.com

Got it....you can't back up what you said but cutting and pasting.

Thanks for your time..........Mary

 

[pandaflower]

Got it....you can't back up what you said but cutting and pasting.

Thanks for your time..........Mary

How ridiculous you sound.
Posing as RCC is sad. Especially when you fail do badly at the effort.

God help you through your obvious trials.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Christ meant Peter was the rock He would build His Church on

The topic of discussion in Matthew 16:18 was Who Jesus is and how Peter knew He was the Son of God so Jesus was clearing speaking of revelation knowledge as being what Jesus would build His Church upon.

1 Corinthians 2:12 tells us the Holy Spirit has been given to man so we can know the things God has given to man which is how revelation knowledge is received which is always based on what God has said in His Word (See John 16:13, and John 17:17)

The devil has provided deception for gullible, carnally minded people to not get what Jesus was saying here and instead focus of Peter in spite of the FACT that through out the New Testament there no evidence that the other Apostles thought Peter was in charge neither did they treat Peter as though he was the leader of the church.

IN Acts 15:13-21 we see the Apostle James as being the leader over this meeting so by this we know if Peter was the leader of the Body of Christ then he would have led this meeting but he did not.

And in Galatians 2:11-14 we see where the Apostle Paul had to correct Peter for being in error which is hard on catholics since they claim Peter was the first "catholic pope" and they claim their popes speak for the Lord and cannot speak or do anything in error

 

[pandaflower]

By the by, has anyone thought to correct the first giant error in this thread?

Gnostic people did not,do not,believe in eternal salvation ,eternal security, in the first place.

The Gnostics, Gnosis=Knowledge, believe,believed, knowledge saves, saved, them from the trials of the world.


No kinship with our faith at all.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

How ridiculous you sound.
Posing as RCC is sad. Especially when you fail do badly at the effort.

God help you through your obvious trials.

wow I forgot all about her. have not seen her in years..

 

[GracePeace]

By the by, has anyone thought to correct the first giant error in this thread?

Gnostic people did not,do not,believe in eternal salvation ,eternal security, in the first place.

The Gnostics, Gnosis=Knowledge, believe,believed, knowledge saves, saved, them from the trials of the world.


No kinship with our faith at all.

Avail yourself of the information in the video presentation before responding to it (Proverbs 18:13).

 

[GracePeace]

By the by, has anyone thought to correct the first giant error in this thread?

Gnostic people did not,do not,believe in eternal salvation ,eternal security, in the first place.

The Gnostics, Gnosis=Knowledge, believe,believed, knowledge saves, saved, them from the trials of the world.


No kinship with our faith at all.

Funny, no one on your side of the debate has bothered to "debunk" the claims; they just emptily object, like they do everything else, completely impotent to prove anything about anything.

 

[Marymog]

How ridiculous you sound.
Posing as RCC is sad. Especially when you fail do badly at the effort.

God help you through your obvious trials.

And you post again with no evidence of your allegation......sad!