Upon THIS Rock I will build my Church

[Nancy]

You have considerable issues involving mental health. You are so narcissitic. I am not being dishonest except in your mind. You haven't destroyed any thing I have said except in your mind. I am not back pedaling, except in your mind. There was no 'smooth move' except in your mind.

Your whole presentation is to build a facade. You work on the facade because it covers or hides the reality.

Stranger

I know I shouldn't laugh and, no offense BOL, this could have been written to anyone!! but:"You have considerable issues involving mental health."
Ahahaha! Just burst out laughing at the first line...struck me funny. Is that terrible??!

 

[Enoch111]

Ahahaha! Just burst out laughing at the first line...struck me funny. Is that terrible??!

Of course its terrible. You are not supposed to laugh at nuts.

 

[Nancy]

Of course its terrible. You are not supposed to laugh at nuts.

 

[Stranger]

I know I shouldn't laugh and, no offense BOL, this could have been written to anyone!! but:"You have considerable issues involving mental health."
Ahahaha! Just burst out laughing at the first line...struck me funny. Is that terrible??!

Nothing wrong with a good laugh.

Stranger

 

[Nancy]

Nothing wrong with a good laugh.

Stranger

Oh you got that right! I honestly have been in need of a good belly laugh, thank you sir! I'm still chuckling.

 

[Stranger]

Oh you got that right! I honestly have been in need of a good belly laugh, thank you sir! I'm still chuckling.

And your quite welcome.

Stranger

 

[epostle]

You kid yourself. If you followed God, he would not have the name of a man, nor could he be seen.

What is that supposed to mean? We follow a visible name of a man as a god??? There is this spiritual sickness going around that claims the Pope said he was God, or that Catholics worship the Pope as God. It's anti-Catholic hard core spiritual pornography.

As for authority, "all authority in heaven and on the earth has been given to the Son", and "a servant is not greater than his master."

16 Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and said to them,
“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”
Does "therefore" mean that Jesus is giving them HIS authority ?
On whose authority are the eleven to baptize and teach?

Could 11 men, traveling on foot, reach "all nations" in their own lifetime? Without succession, "make disciples of all nations" would be impossible.

"Whoever exalts himself will be humbled."

Matthew 23 is not about putting down authority, it's about putting down VANITY. You seem to have this anti-authority mentality that is not biblical.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You kid yourself. If you followed God, he would not have the name of a man, nor could he be seen.

As for authority, "all authority in heaven and on the earth has been given to the Son", and "a servant is not greater than his master."
"Whoever exalts himself will be humbled."

John 16:13-15
But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth.h He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming.
He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.
Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.

Jesus transferred ALL Authority to His Church (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18. Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).
And, ummmm . . . WHO said anything about being "greater" than the master??

 

[BreadOfLife]

Sorry. I have already showed you that Eve knew and responded to Adam's declaration that Eve was the mother of all living. God never did say it. Adam did. All was based upon (Gen. 3:15). And I showed you the same with Abraham. He knew and acted upon it.

Peter never declared himself to be the rock upon which the Church was to be built. Nor did he act like it. Which brings me back to the two question you refuse to answer.

Why does the pope claim and wield such authority, believing that Jesus said Peter was the rock, when Peter didn't? Why does the Roman church feel it must act all high and mighty, based on what they believe Christ said to Peter, when Peter never did?

Stranger

Ummmm, you originally stated that Eve CLAIMED to be the "Mother of ALL the living".
She NEVER did.

You originally stated that Abraham CLAIMED to be "Father of a multitude of nations".
He NEVER did.

The question you have NOT been able to answer is the SAME:
Why would Peter have to CLAIM to be the Rock of Matt. 16:18 if Jesus already told him (Peter) that he was.

Why put that criteria on Peter when you aren't willing to do it to Ever or Abraham??
Look - you've LOST this argument and your pathetic responses only show a childlike desperation to keep arguing.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Other than this, you were correct. There could be ONLY ONE ROCK and that Rock is Christ, not Peter.

And, as I've repeatedly shown - that is a Biblically-bankrupt claim.
Isaiah 51:1-2 calls Abraham a "ROCK."

Do your homework . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

No he didn't. Peter never indicated any such thing. It is only in your mind and dreams.

Peter didn't claim to have primacy. Well, concerning Eve, I have already showed you. Plus, it wasn't God that said that Eve was the Mother of all living, it was Adam. Of course he was correct, as he believed God concerning (Gen. 3:15) . And then Eve showed she believed that also concerning (Gen. 3:15) And of Abraham I have already showed you in the book of (Hebrews) that he did claim those promises given him. You ignore these verses, but you can't hide from these verses. You have a standard argument. And if that argument is upset, you just ignore it and repeat it.

Just as you ignore now my questions in post #128. "Why does the pope claim such authority and wield such authority, believing that Jesus said Peter was the rock? Why does the Roman Church feel it must act all high and mighty, based on what they believe Christ said to Peter, when Peter never did?

Stranger

Nobody is acting "high and mighty" - it's a God-given Authority.
Jesus appointed Peter to be in charge, and as Acts 1:20 shows - the Apostles' offices are SUCCESSIVE.

That means the Authority is transferred to the SUCCESSOR . . .

 

[Enoch111]

And, as I've repeatedly shown - that is a Biblically-bankrupt claim.
Isaiah 51:1-2 calls Abraham a "ROCK."

Do your homework . . .

I already showed you that it God who is called "the Rock" in that passage, NOT Abraham. And by insisting that Peter is the Rock, you are actually promoting heresy. See all the Scriptures I have posted confirmed that only God And Christ are the Rock.

 

[ScottA]

What is that supposed to mean? We follow a visible name of a man as a god??? There is this spiritual sickness going around that claims the Pope said he was God, or that Catholics worship the Pope as God. It's anti-Catholic hard core spiritual pornography.



16 Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and said to them,
“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”
Does "therefore" mean that Jesus is giving them HIS authority ?
On whose authority are the eleven to baptize and teach?

Could 11 men, traveling on foot, reach "all nations" in their own lifetime? Without succession, "make disciples of all nations" would be impossible.

Matthew 23 is not about putting down authority, it's about putting down VANITY. You seem to have this anti-authority mentality that is not biblical.

The only thing I said about authority was that all authority was given to Jesus. What is your problem? Do you have a problem with me saying that?

 

[ScottA]

John 16:13-15
But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth.h He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming.
He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.
Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.

Jesus transferred ALL Authority to His Church (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18. Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).
And, ummmm . . . WHO said anything about being "greater" than the master??

By this same measure you use, it will be measured back to you.

Obviously you don't see it...I mean you don't even see in your own quotes above, that whoever is given the Holy Spirit...has no authority of "his own."

But when I tell you the very same thing that you quote Jesus saying - you do not receive it. Do you not realize that according to the very verses that you have quoted, this means that you have not received Him, nor He who sent Him?

 

[Stranger]

Ummmm, you originally stated that Eve CLAIMED to be the "Mother of ALL the living".
She NEVER did.

You originally stated that Abraham CLAIMED to be "Father of a multitude of nations".
He NEVER did.

The question you have NOT been able to answer is the SAME:
Why would Peter have to CLAIM to be the Rock of Matt. 16:18 if Jesus already told him (Peter) that he was.

Why put that criteria on Peter when you aren't willing to do it to Ever or Abraham??
Look - you've LOST this argument and your pathetic responses only show a childlike desperation to keep arguing.

No, 'claimed' is your word, not mine. See, you are still the 'wordsmith' I said they believed and acknowledged it (Gen 4:1) (Heb. 11:17-19) See post my post #100, 104. See your constant use of 'claim' in post #98, 115, etc. etc.

What I have said is that Peter never claimed that he was the rock or any such authority that went with it. If any apostle could have it would have been Paul, but neither did he ever claim any such authority.

Which brings me back to my questions. If Peter didn't why does the pope? Why does the Roman Church? In other words, why wouldn't the Roman Church follow Peter's example and not lay claim to something Peter never did?

The answer is pretty obvious. Power. The pope and papacy must establish these links to establish power over the Church of Jesus Christ.

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

Nobody is acting "high and mighty" - it's a God-given Authority.
Jesus appointed Peter to be in charge, and as Acts 1:20 shows - the Apostles' offices are SUCCESSIVE.

That means the Authority is transferred to the SUCCESSOR . . .

No, Jesus did not appoint Peter in charge. That he was a leader and one of the inner circle which consisted of Peter, James, and John, yes. That he was appointed as a leader or the rock that the Church is built on, no.

And yet when James died there was no successor? (Acts 12:2)

Stranger

 

[epostle]

The only thing I said about authority was that all authority was given to Jesus. What is your problem? Do you have a problem with me saying that?

Not at all. Do you have a problem with the authority that Jesus gave to the Apostles and their successors to teach? Or is that authority to teach conferred upon each indwelt believer with a Bible?

 

[epostle]

By this same measure you use, it will be measured back to you.

Obviously you don't see it...I mean you don't even see in your own quotes above, that whoever is given the Holy Spirit...has no authority of "his own."

A)This statement assumes that authoritative teaching on faith and morals without the Holy Spirit has occurred.
B) It also assumes the Church became a mere human institution after the finalization of the canon of Scripture.
(A)&(B) are absurd. The removal of the divine from the institutional church is a Gnostic error, because the historic Church is an extension of the Incarnation united by the Eucharist. The structure of the Church is modeled after the Davidic Kingdom, and councils are modeled after the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15.

But when I tell you the very same thing that you quote Jesus saying - you do not receive it. Do you not realize that according to the very verses that you have quoted, this means that you have not received Him, nor He who sent Him?

Using the same verses does not mean you are saying the same thing.

John 14:26 – Jesus promises that the Holy Spirit would teach the Church (the apostles and successors) all things regarding the faith. This means that the Church can teach us the right moral positions on such things as in vitro fertilization, cloning and other issues that are not addressed in the Bible. After all, these issues of morality are necessary for our salvation, and God would not leave such important issues to be decided by us sinners without His divine assistance.

John 16:12 – Jesus had many things to say but the apostles couldn’t bear them at that point. This demonstrates that the Church’s infallible doctrine develops over time. All public Revelation was completed with the death of the last apostle, but the doctrine of God’s Revelation develops as our minds and hearts are able to welcome and understand it. God teaches His children only as much as they can bear, for their own good.

John 16:13 – Jesus promises that the Spirit will “guide” the Church into all truth. Our knowledge of the truth develops as the Spirit guides the Church, and this happens over time.

1 Cor. 2:13 – Paul explains that what the ministers teach is taught, not by human wisdom, but by the Spirit. The ministers are led to interpret and understand the spiritual truths God gives them over time.

 

[epostle]

No, Jesus did not appoint Peter in charge. That he was a leader and one of the inner circle which consisted of Peter, James, and John, yes. That he was appointed as a leader or the rock that the Church is built on, no.

And yet when James died there was no successor? (Acts 12:2)

Stranger

Matt. 16:18 – 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 –
1) you are blessed,
2) you are the rock on which I will build my Church, and
3) 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).

Peter is the Rock that Jesus builds His Church on, nobody said Peter builds anything.
Jesus and Paul refer to Peter as Rock in the Aramaic, translated to Greek to Latin to English.
Here are over 70 NT citations, followed by a brief exegesis, indicating Peter's primacy.
Given all the biblical data for the doctrine of the papacy, and the unanimous testimony of centuries of Early Church Father's writings, and the witness of history, I have to conclude that the denial of the doctrine of the papacy is a tradition of men. The papacy developed, just as the Bible developed. A seedling from an acorn is not a fully developed oak tree. The office of Peter has the same essential elements as the office of Pope Francis.

And yet when James died there was no successor? (Acts 12:2)

St. Symeon , who was the Bishop of Jerusalem during the rule of Trianon (98-117), succeeded James.
Saint Symeon was succeeded by Justus 1 st (107-111).
The last NT book was written before this time, which explains why these events are not recorded in Scripture.
It was after the death of James that centrality shifted from Jerusalem to Rome where Peter and Paul were martyred. (in the presence of that obelisk that was moved to St. Peter's Square).

 

[ScottA]

Not at all. Do you have a problem with the authority that Jesus gave to the Apostles and their successors to teach? Or is that authority to teach conferred upon each indwelt believer with a Bible?

No, I only have a problem when the authority is abused or not according to the whole of scripture. Where men take license that was not given to them, simply by limiting the interpretation in favor of them taking charge.

Jesus' words regarding authority come under His first announcement that He would build His church by revelation from God, and then He elaborated to explain that it would be via the Holy spirit who would not be acting on His own authority, but on Jesus' authority. So, the idea that anyone would take that to mean that they had more authority than (or instead of) their Master...is just wrong - biblically.

Christ did not put men above the Holy Spirit, nor can men put themselves above Him.