The first thing you must understand is, Peter was not the rock upon which the Church would be built,rather it was ChristMatt 16:16-1816 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. KJV The specific words that are key to understanding this are "Peter" and "rock," for they are both derivatives of the same word meaning rock. But the word translated to "Peter" in the verse above (and below) is petros, and the word translated to "rock" is petra. Also, the word "rock" below has the definite article in the Greek (although it is not seen in the English language translation), whereas the word "Peter" (although capitalized in the English translation) does not have the definite article. But simply stated, a petros is a small rock; while petra is a large rock, even a solid foundation of stone. Matt 16:1818 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. KJVPeter: Greek word #4074 Petros (pet'-ros); apparently a primary word; a (piece of) rock (larger than NT:3037); as a name, Petrus, an apostle: KJV - Peter, rock. Compare NT:2786. rock: Greek word #4073 petra (pet'-ra); feminine of the same as NT:4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): KJV - rock. (The definite article): Greek word #3588 ho (ho); including the feminine he (hay); and the neuter to (to); in all their inflections; the def. article; the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom): KJV - the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc..Also, the word "and" (between "Peter" and "upon") in the above illustration is kai in the Greek and can also be translated to the word "but" in the English. This of course changes the way that this verse is commonly understood. Observe:and: Greek word #2532 kai (kahee); apparently, a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force; and, also, even, so then, too, etc.; often used in connection (or composition) with other particles or small words: KJV - and, also, both, but, even, for, if, or, so, that, then, therefore, when, yet. But to give you a sense of the meaning of the word petra ("rock"), there is a city carved out of the side of a mountain, located in modern day Jordan, which is called Petra. "Peter" (petros) was a movable stone, a smaller piece; petra (translated "rock") was a solid foundation; and incidentally, that Rock was Christ: 1 Cor 10:44 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock [petra] that followed them: and that Rock [petra] was Christ. KJVRock: Greek word #4073 petra (pet'-ra); feminine of the same as NT:4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): KJV - rock.
Was Peter Pope???
- Thread starter Letsgofishing
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
(Peacebewithyou;28639)
But Kriss, Tallman has verses he quotes to support his views.Just like another poster has verses he quotes to support his views that we are still bound by the law and can't wear cotton/poly blends. THAT is the point. This entire forum is a perfect example of why the Bible alone without an authority doesn't work ... there are just too many opinions - all based on scripture - and EVERYONE thinks they are right.We even have unorthodox Christian & others who don't even agree that God is three in One - something as basic as that.So Tallman's post where he says those with the "Spirit of God" to lead them don't need to follow a man - how comical is that? Because YOU'VE just said he is actually "following men."Honestly, THIS forum proves to me, without a shadow of doubt that God knew what He was doing when He established a Church, rather than handed out Bibles.
Come on PeaceHow arrogant that sounds when you are guilty of the same exact thing you are saying you are the one right because men told you so that's completely hypocritical simply because you believe its right ?????yet your church is one of the most flagrant at breaking the most obvious things in the Word, Tallmans whole church agrees with him your whole church agrees with you what makes you think you are right ????? You try to act as though you are above this all when your church is one of the biggest dividers of the Christain religion whether you want to face it or not your church is part of the problem not the answer. Im just saying Gods word is right it disagrees with both of you at times there is only one right answer thats the Word of God,as its written not as some choose to twist it to fit their view. There are minor disagreements amoung those that just follow scripture all the major disagrements comewhen you mix mens religion into the mix.
But Kriss, Tallman has verses he quotes to support his views.Just like another poster has verses he quotes to support his views that we are still bound by the law and can't wear cotton/poly blends. THAT is the point. This entire forum is a perfect example of why the Bible alone without an authority doesn't work ... there are just too many opinions - all based on scripture - and EVERYONE thinks they are right.We even have unorthodox Christian & others who don't even agree that God is three in One - something as basic as that.So Tallman's post where he says those with the "Spirit of God" to lead them don't need to follow a man - how comical is that? Because YOU'VE just said he is actually "following men."Honestly, THIS forum proves to me, without a shadow of doubt that God knew what He was doing when He established a Church, rather than handed out Bibles.
Come on PeaceHow arrogant that sounds when you are guilty of the same exact thing you are saying you are the one right because men told you so that's completely hypocritical simply because you believe its right ?????yet your church is one of the most flagrant at breaking the most obvious things in the Word, Tallmans whole church agrees with him your whole church agrees with you what makes you think you are right ????? You try to act as though you are above this all when your church is one of the biggest dividers of the Christain religion whether you want to face it or not your church is part of the problem not the answer. Im just saying Gods word is right it disagrees with both of you at times there is only one right answer thats the Word of God,as its written not as some choose to twist it to fit their view. There are minor disagreements amoung those that just follow scripture all the major disagrements comewhen you mix mens religion into the mix.
Jon-Marc
New Member
No, Peter was not a pope. Besides, he was married, and as far as I know the pope can't marry. Of course, I suppose that senseless rule could have come later.
(n2thelight;28643)
The first thing you must understand is, Peter was not the rock upon which the Church would be built,rather it was ChristMatt 16:16-1816 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. KJV The specific words that are key to understanding this are "Peter" and "rock," for they are both derivatives of the same word meaning rock. But the word translated to "Peter" in the verse above (and below) is petros, and the word translated to "rock" is petra. Also, the word "rock" below has the definite article in the Greek (although it is not seen in the English language translation), whereas the word "Peter" (although capitalized in the English translation) does not have the definite article. But simply stated, a petros is a small rock; while petra is a large rock, even a solid foundation of stone. Matt 16:1818 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. KJVPeter: Greek word #4074 Petros (pet'-ros); apparently a primary word; a (piece of) rock (larger than NT:3037); as a name, Petrus, an apostle: KJV - Peter, rock. Compare NT:2786. rock: Greek word #4073 petra (pet'-ra); feminine of the same as NT:4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): KJV - rock. (The definite article): Greek word #3588 ho (ho); including the feminine he (hay); and the neuter to (to); in all their inflections; the def. article; the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom): KJV - the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc..Also, the word "and" (between "Peter" and "upon") in the above illustration is kai in the Greek and can also be translated to the word "but" in the English. This of course changes the way that this verse is commonly understood. Observe:and: Greek word #2532 kai (kahee); apparently, a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force; and, also, even, so then, too, etc.; often used in connection (or composition) with other particles or small words: KJV - and, also, both, but, even, for, if, or, so, that, then, therefore, when, yet.But to give you a sense of the meaning of the word petra ("rock"), there is a city carved out of the side of a mountain, located in modern day Jordan, which is called Petra. "Peter" (petros) was a movable stone, a smaller piece; petra (translated "rock") was a solid foundation; and incidentally, that Rock was Christ: 1 Cor 10:44 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock [petra] that followed them: and that Rock [petra] was Christ. KJVRock: Greek word #4073 petra (pet'-ra); feminine of the same as NT:4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): KJV - rock.
The only problem with that theory is that Jesus spoke aramic where Rock and Peter both have the same word. Kephos Therefore the rock was Peter.Your brother in christRyan Fitz
The first thing you must understand is, Peter was not the rock upon which the Church would be built,rather it was ChristMatt 16:16-1816 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. KJV The specific words that are key to understanding this are "Peter" and "rock," for they are both derivatives of the same word meaning rock. But the word translated to "Peter" in the verse above (and below) is petros, and the word translated to "rock" is petra. Also, the word "rock" below has the definite article in the Greek (although it is not seen in the English language translation), whereas the word "Peter" (although capitalized in the English translation) does not have the definite article. But simply stated, a petros is a small rock; while petra is a large rock, even a solid foundation of stone. Matt 16:1818 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. KJVPeter: Greek word #4074 Petros (pet'-ros); apparently a primary word; a (piece of) rock (larger than NT:3037); as a name, Petrus, an apostle: KJV - Peter, rock. Compare NT:2786. rock: Greek word #4073 petra (pet'-ra); feminine of the same as NT:4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): KJV - rock. (The definite article): Greek word #3588 ho (ho); including the feminine he (hay); and the neuter to (to); in all their inflections; the def. article; the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom): KJV - the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc..Also, the word "and" (between "Peter" and "upon") in the above illustration is kai in the Greek and can also be translated to the word "but" in the English. This of course changes the way that this verse is commonly understood. Observe:and: Greek word #2532 kai (kahee); apparently, a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force; and, also, even, so then, too, etc.; often used in connection (or composition) with other particles or small words: KJV - and, also, both, but, even, for, if, or, so, that, then, therefore, when, yet.But to give you a sense of the meaning of the word petra ("rock"), there is a city carved out of the side of a mountain, located in modern day Jordan, which is called Petra. "Peter" (petros) was a movable stone, a smaller piece; petra (translated "rock") was a solid foundation; and incidentally, that Rock was Christ: 1 Cor 10:44 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock [petra] that followed them: and that Rock [petra] was Christ. KJVRock: Greek word #4073 petra (pet'-ra); feminine of the same as NT:4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): KJV - rock.
The only problem with that theory is that Jesus spoke aramic where Rock and Peter both have the same word. Kephos Therefore the rock was Peter.Your brother in christRyan Fitz
If the cathlic church was appointed by God dont you think He would of taken the gospel away from her because her sins were worse than the Jews idolterest ways????Other wise he would have to apologise to the Jews.
(kriss;28647)
Come on PeaceHow arrogant that sounds when you are guilty of the same exact thing you are saying you are the one right because men told you so that's completely hypocritical simply because you believe its right ?????yet your church is one of the most flagrant at breaking the most obvious things in the Word, Tallmans whole church agrees with him your whole church agrees with you what makes you think you are right ????? You try to act as though you are above this all when your church is one of the biggest dividers of the Christain religion whether you want to face it or not your church is part of the problem not the answer. Im just saying Gods word is right it disagrees with both of you at times there is only one right answer thats the Word of God,as its written not as some choose to twist it to fit their view. There are minor disagreements amoung those that just follow scripture all the major disagrements comewhen you mix mens religion into the mix.
I'll sum this conversation up for you two. a long time ago God made human beings. These human beings were very good at screwing things up. For example all eve had to do was not eat a simple apple ( or have intercourse whatever theory you belong too.) and not only did she screw that up so did her husband.and Humans kept screwing up, in fact we got so screwed up that God had to send his son into the world to act as a sacrificial lamb, and made a bible so we all know about.Now He made a church to make sure this bible's interpretation didn't get screwed , and they did a decent job, well until the crusades which sort of split them up into 33,000 pieces in time. which meant that there were 32,999 or maybe even 33,000 screwed up interpretations of the bible.That is why God made the most important parts clear and unscrewable ( unless your a mormon and Jw, somehow they missed the message.) Jesus is God and died for us. and if we accept him as God and accept him as our savior than we are saved. and then we are christians.It doesn't matter how screwed up your doctrine is, theres no way to miss that. and thats the part which mattersGod will unscrew the scriptures in heaven. I gurantee you.your brother in christRyan Fitz
Come on PeaceHow arrogant that sounds when you are guilty of the same exact thing you are saying you are the one right because men told you so that's completely hypocritical simply because you believe its right ?????yet your church is one of the most flagrant at breaking the most obvious things in the Word, Tallmans whole church agrees with him your whole church agrees with you what makes you think you are right ????? You try to act as though you are above this all when your church is one of the biggest dividers of the Christain religion whether you want to face it or not your church is part of the problem not the answer. Im just saying Gods word is right it disagrees with both of you at times there is only one right answer thats the Word of God,as its written not as some choose to twist it to fit their view. There are minor disagreements amoung those that just follow scripture all the major disagrements comewhen you mix mens religion into the mix.
I'll sum this conversation up for you two. a long time ago God made human beings. These human beings were very good at screwing things up. For example all eve had to do was not eat a simple apple ( or have intercourse whatever theory you belong too.) and not only did she screw that up so did her husband.and Humans kept screwing up, in fact we got so screwed up that God had to send his son into the world to act as a sacrificial lamb, and made a bible so we all know about.Now He made a church to make sure this bible's interpretation didn't get screwed , and they did a decent job, well until the crusades which sort of split them up into 33,000 pieces in time. which meant that there were 32,999 or maybe even 33,000 screwed up interpretations of the bible.That is why God made the most important parts clear and unscrewable ( unless your a mormon and Jw, somehow they missed the message.) Jesus is God and died for us. and if we accept him as God and accept him as our savior than we are saved. and then we are christians.It doesn't matter how screwed up your doctrine is, theres no way to miss that. and thats the part which mattersGod will unscrew the scriptures in heaven. I gurantee you.your brother in christRyan Fitz
I agree letsgofishing But the biggest problem is that people all say their religion is the right one I will repeat this again and again GOD HAS NO RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION GOD IS NOT CATHOLIC.. NOT PENICOSTAL.. NOT BAPTIST ...NOT PRESPERTEYIAN ...NOT METHODIST.... GOD HAS NO RELIGION .......... HE IS OUR RELGION OUR ONLY RELIGIONif you are in any church GODS WORD trumps your man made doctrines every timeThere is no "RIGHT RELIGION" only right believers if you put your church doctrine before Gods Word you are in error. God never appointed any religious denomination as right. reguardless of what men tell youThere is only one Way and that is Christ
What Jesus said in Metthew 16: 18, was,You are peter, [Petros] and upon this rock [Petra] will I build my Church.The Greek word for "Peter" is Petros, it means, "A little stone that is easily shaken". Jesus would never build His Church on something that is easily shaken.The Greek word "Rock" as in [Upon this rock I will build my Church] is Petra It means. "A solid rock, a firm foundation that wont be moved"What Jesus was saying is, "I will build My Church on revelation knowledge, [that Jesus is the son of God].Jesus goes on to say, " The gates of hell shall not prevail againts My Church". v19.If you are a born again Christian You belong to His Church, and you have the keys of the Kingdom, and whatever you bind is bound in heaven, and whatever you loosed is loosed in heaven.Peter was not the first pope, His doctine is compleately different.The Church today "The born again Christians" still has power and authority.
(Alanforchrist;28746)
What Jesus said in Metthew 16: 18, was,You are peter, [Petros] and upon this rock [Petra] will I build my Church.The Greek word for "Peter" is Petros, it means, "A little stone that is easily shaken". Jesus would never build His Church on something that is easily shaken.The Greek word "Rock" as in [Upon this rock I will build my Church] is Petra It means. "A solid rock, a firm foundation that wont be moved"What Jesus was saying is, "I will build My Church on revelation knowledge, [that Jesus is the son of God].Jesus goes on to say, " The gates of hell shall not prevail againts My Church". v19.If you are a born again Christian You belong to His Church, and you have the keys of the Kingdom, and whatever you bind is bound in heaven, and whatever you loosed is loosed in heaven.Peter was not the first pope, His doctine is compleately different.The Church today "The born again Christians" still has power and authority.
you guys love this argument don't you!!!!!
oh well I'll post my response again which no one has been able to answer. ( maybe Jesus was speaking in greek doesn't really count because how does Peter understand him if that was the case??)The only problem with that theory is that Jesus spoke aramic where Rock and Peter both have the same word. Kephos Therefore the rock was Peter.thank you very much anybody want me to post it againyour brother in christRyan Fitz
What Jesus said in Metthew 16: 18, was,You are peter, [Petros] and upon this rock [Petra] will I build my Church.The Greek word for "Peter" is Petros, it means, "A little stone that is easily shaken". Jesus would never build His Church on something that is easily shaken.The Greek word "Rock" as in [Upon this rock I will build my Church] is Petra It means. "A solid rock, a firm foundation that wont be moved"What Jesus was saying is, "I will build My Church on revelation knowledge, [that Jesus is the son of God].Jesus goes on to say, " The gates of hell shall not prevail againts My Church". v19.If you are a born again Christian You belong to His Church, and you have the keys of the Kingdom, and whatever you bind is bound in heaven, and whatever you loosed is loosed in heaven.Peter was not the first pope, His doctine is compleately different.The Church today "The born again Christians" still has power and authority.
you guys love this argument don't you!!!!!
(kriss;28732)
I agree letsgofishing But the biggest problem is that people all say their religion is the right one I will repeat this again and again GOD HAS NO RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION GOD IS NOT CATHOLIC.. NOT PENICOSTAL.. NOT BAPTIST ...NOT PRESPERTEYIAN ...NOT METHODIST.... GOD HAS NO RELIGION .......... HE IS OUR RELGION OUR ONLY RELIGIONif you are in any church GODS WORD trumps your man made doctrines every timeThere is no "RIGHT RELIGION" only right believers if you put your church doctrine before Gods Word you are in error. God never appointed any religious denomination as right. reguardless of what men tell youThere is only one Way and that is Christ
completley agree
I agree letsgofishing But the biggest problem is that people all say their religion is the right one I will repeat this again and again GOD HAS NO RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION GOD IS NOT CATHOLIC.. NOT PENICOSTAL.. NOT BAPTIST ...NOT PRESPERTEYIAN ...NOT METHODIST.... GOD HAS NO RELIGION .......... HE IS OUR RELGION OUR ONLY RELIGIONif you are in any church GODS WORD trumps your man made doctrines every timeThere is no "RIGHT RELIGION" only right believers if you put your church doctrine before Gods Word you are in error. God never appointed any religious denomination as right. reguardless of what men tell youThere is only one Way and that is Christ
completley agree
(kriss;28647)
Come on PeaceHow arrogant that sounds when you are guilty of the same exact thing you are saying you are the one right because men told you so that's completely hypocritical simply because you believe its right ?????yet your church is one of the most flagrant at breaking the most obvious things in the Word, Tallmans whole church agrees with him your whole church agrees with you what makes you think you are right ????? You try to act as though you are above this all when your church is one of the biggest dividers of the Christain religion whether you want to face it or not your church is part of the problem not the answer. Im just saying Gods word is right it disagrees with both of you at times there is only one right answer thats the Word of God,as its written not as some choose to twist it to fit their view. There are minor disagreements amoung those that just follow scripture all the major disagrements comewhen you mix mens religion into the mix.
I'm sorry Kriss, I reread my post and it does sort of drip with arrogance. I wasn't specifically talking about your church, or Tallman's church, or my church, or no church. I was speaking of the method Tallman claimed that guided Chrisitans.. the "putting on the mind of Christ" as if that would keep one free from error. My observation is that doesn't work. At all. Because everyone can support their own wacky ideas using verses from the Bible. It's done all over this site. It's not fair to call them "man made" ideas if the ideas are supported with scripture. THAT is my point. We all have opinions about what the verses in the Bible actually mean. I say this.. you say that.. Tallman says something... Jag says something else... and the no mixed garment guy says his thing.. all with verses.If I, with my small brain, can appreciate that the Bible alone, as a guide, leads to confusion, surely God knew that as well. It just makes sense that He established a Church. You may disagree that it's the Catholic Church - so be it. But honestly, if you were God and you had to to go away but you wanted your people to remain faithful, wouldn't you set up an Authority in your absence? Otherwise your followers are left to duke it out among themselves.. each one of us would claim.. No Kriss meant this... oh no.. she meant THIS... etc. etc. Wouldn't it make so much more sense if you appointed Denver to have final say on the matter? Then whenever there's a disagreement, Denver could step in and say, "THIS is how it was meant.." Now granted, my example doesn't work because you can't inspire Denver to speak for you - but still, you get the point, right?
Come on PeaceHow arrogant that sounds when you are guilty of the same exact thing you are saying you are the one right because men told you so that's completely hypocritical simply because you believe its right ?????yet your church is one of the most flagrant at breaking the most obvious things in the Word, Tallmans whole church agrees with him your whole church agrees with you what makes you think you are right ????? You try to act as though you are above this all when your church is one of the biggest dividers of the Christain religion whether you want to face it or not your church is part of the problem not the answer. Im just saying Gods word is right it disagrees with both of you at times there is only one right answer thats the Word of God,as its written not as some choose to twist it to fit their view. There are minor disagreements amoung those that just follow scripture all the major disagrements comewhen you mix mens religion into the mix.
I'm sorry Kriss, I reread my post and it does sort of drip with arrogance. I wasn't specifically talking about your church, or Tallman's church, or my church, or no church. I was speaking of the method Tallman claimed that guided Chrisitans.. the "putting on the mind of Christ" as if that would keep one free from error. My observation is that doesn't work. At all. Because everyone can support their own wacky ideas using verses from the Bible. It's done all over this site. It's not fair to call them "man made" ideas if the ideas are supported with scripture. THAT is my point. We all have opinions about what the verses in the Bible actually mean. I say this.. you say that.. Tallman says something... Jag says something else... and the no mixed garment guy says his thing.. all with verses.If I, with my small brain, can appreciate that the Bible alone, as a guide, leads to confusion, surely God knew that as well. It just makes sense that He established a Church. You may disagree that it's the Catholic Church - so be it. But honestly, if you were God and you had to to go away but you wanted your people to remain faithful, wouldn't you set up an Authority in your absence? Otherwise your followers are left to duke it out among themselves.. each one of us would claim.. No Kriss meant this... oh no.. she meant THIS... etc. etc. Wouldn't it make so much more sense if you appointed Denver to have final say on the matter? Then whenever there's a disagreement, Denver could step in and say, "THIS is how it was meant.." Now granted, my example doesn't work because you can't inspire Denver to speak for you - but still, you get the point, right?
But that makes absoulty no sense If I baracated myself with group of any kind I would swear that group is right to lock yourself in any man made religion is the problem you or any other religion follower that are not following the Word you are taking the side of your church when it goes against the Word (Gods authority)Yes I would set up an Authority thats the point The bible is the authority you are saying men are the authority You can not seem to distingh between the two
(Peacebewithyou;28770)
I'm sorry Kriss, I reread my post and it does sort of drip with arrogance. I wasn't specifically talking about your church, or Tallman's church, or my church, or no church. I was speaking of the method Tallman claimed that guided Chrisitans.. the "putting on the mind of Christ" as if that would keep one free from error. My observation is that doesn't work. At all. Because everyone can support their own wacky ideas using verses from the Bible. It's done all over this site. It's not fair to call them "man made" ideas if the ideas are supported with scripture. THAT is my point. We all have opinions about what the verses in the Bible actually mean. I say this.. you say that.. Tallman says something... Jag says something else... and the no mixed garment guy says his thing.. all with verses.If I, with my small brain, can appreciate that the Bible alone, as a guide, leads to confusion, surely God knew that as well. It just makes sense that He established a Church. You may disagree that it's the Catholic Church - so be it. But honestly, if you were God and you had to to go away but you wanted your people to remain faithful, wouldn't you set up an Authority in your absence? Otherwise your followers are left to duke it out among themselves.. each one of us would claim.. No Kriss meant this... oh no.. she meant THIS... etc. etc. Wouldn't it make so much more sense if you appointed Denver to have final say on the matter? Then whenever there's a disagreement, Denver could step in and say, "THIS is how it was meant.." Now granted, my example doesn't work because you can't inspire Denver to speak for you - but still, you get the point, right?
This is why His Words from the very beginning of Time. (aka First Earth Age) God word's has no denomination whatsoever. This is why like Christianity has begone so Anti...Anti-Christianity that is. My Rock is Christ and Christ only. ...Only He has the foreknowledge, not Peter.Christ is the only Way, the Truth and the Life to Heaven...This is no such thing as an infallible church...because Today's church is using man-made doctrine over the Word.JagLovest ye in Christ Yahshua, Lord and Saviour of the world.
I'm sorry Kriss, I reread my post and it does sort of drip with arrogance. I wasn't specifically talking about your church, or Tallman's church, or my church, or no church. I was speaking of the method Tallman claimed that guided Chrisitans.. the "putting on the mind of Christ" as if that would keep one free from error. My observation is that doesn't work. At all. Because everyone can support their own wacky ideas using verses from the Bible. It's done all over this site. It's not fair to call them "man made" ideas if the ideas are supported with scripture. THAT is my point. We all have opinions about what the verses in the Bible actually mean. I say this.. you say that.. Tallman says something... Jag says something else... and the no mixed garment guy says his thing.. all with verses.If I, with my small brain, can appreciate that the Bible alone, as a guide, leads to confusion, surely God knew that as well. It just makes sense that He established a Church. You may disagree that it's the Catholic Church - so be it. But honestly, if you were God and you had to to go away but you wanted your people to remain faithful, wouldn't you set up an Authority in your absence? Otherwise your followers are left to duke it out among themselves.. each one of us would claim.. No Kriss meant this... oh no.. she meant THIS... etc. etc. Wouldn't it make so much more sense if you appointed Denver to have final say on the matter? Then whenever there's a disagreement, Denver could step in and say, "THIS is how it was meant.." Now granted, my example doesn't work because you can't inspire Denver to speak for you - but still, you get the point, right?
This is why His Words from the very beginning of Time. (aka First Earth Age) God word's has no denomination whatsoever. This is why like Christianity has begone so Anti...Anti-Christianity that is. My Rock is Christ and Christ only. ...Only He has the foreknowledge, not Peter.Christ is the only Way, the Truth and the Life to Heaven...This is no such thing as an infallible church...because Today's church is using man-made doctrine over the Word.JagLovest ye in Christ Yahshua, Lord and Saviour of the world.
Jag were not saying that we depend on Peter.Peter is not my rock. all I'm saying is that Peter was the one appointed by God to lead the early christian church.Peacebewithyou is taking it a step forward, saying that since Jesus had Peter lead his church than that must be the true church which God has granted authority and even though I somewhat disagree, that has nothing to do with us depending on Peter.Catholics depend on God and Jesus Christ, not Mary, Peter, or the priest.your brother in christRyan Fitz
Ok lets take this a step futher Lets say Peter was appointed to be first Pope Lets say for argument sake he started the Catholic church he was obviously one of the most favored Aspostles choosen by Christ himself. So answer me this we have two books of Peter and the Catholic church follows neither to the Word so how can you say its not corupt when you yourselfs do not put Peters teachings above corupt men
(kriss;28794)
Ok lets take this a step futher Lets say Peter was appointed to be first Pope Lets say for argument sake he started the Catholic church he was obviously one of the most favored Aspostles choosen by Christ himself. So answer me this we have two books of Peter and the Catholic church follows neither to the Word so how can you say its not corupt when you yourselfs do not put Peters teachings above corupt men
Interesting. Which verses specifically are we talking here?
Ok lets take this a step futher Lets say Peter was appointed to be first Pope Lets say for argument sake he started the Catholic church he was obviously one of the most favored Aspostles choosen by Christ himself. So answer me this we have two books of Peter and the Catholic church follows neither to the Word so how can you say its not corupt when you yourselfs do not put Peters teachings above corupt men
Interesting. Which verses specifically are we talking here?
(kriss;28785)
But that makes absoulty no sense If I baracated myself with group of any kind I would swear that group is right to lock yourself in any man made religion is the problem you or any other religion follower that are not following the Word you are taking the side of your church when it goes against the Word (Gods authority)Yes I would set up an Authority thats the point The bible is the authority you are saying men are the authority You can not seem to distingh between the two
But in a practical sense, you've got 10 believers.. all armed with scripture, who disagree. Now what? I am joe-shmoe new beleiver and I can see all sides because they ALL have their own scriptures to back up their beliefs. Which side to I pick? How do I know who is actually on God's side? p.s. None of them go to a "Church" so forget the man-made stuff. They've just all read the Bible & have come up with 10 differeing opionions.
But that makes absoulty no sense If I baracated myself with group of any kind I would swear that group is right to lock yourself in any man made religion is the problem you or any other religion follower that are not following the Word you are taking the side of your church when it goes against the Word (Gods authority)Yes I would set up an Authority thats the point The bible is the authority you are saying men are the authority You can not seem to distingh between the two
But in a practical sense, you've got 10 believers.. all armed with scripture, who disagree. Now what? I am joe-shmoe new beleiver and I can see all sides because they ALL have their own scriptures to back up their beliefs. Which side to I pick? How do I know who is actually on God's side? p.s. None of them go to a "Church" so forget the man-made stuff. They've just all read the Bible & have come up with 10 differeing opionions.
Who says we disagree you ? we do not disagree on the big things you keep saying that but the only examples you give are from other churches and we have always said they are as wrong as you because they to follow men traditions Not the Word
Similar threads
