Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Pope Francis says what..?

Actually, no, Christ did not use 2 Greek words. Christ spoke Aramaic. He used Kephas.


To call Peter Petra would be like calling a man named Robert "Roberta". Does that make sense to you?



Again, Christ did not move from one gender to another. The translator did and for the sensible reason of not calling a man by a woman's name.


Good point. One that supports my argument.



Don't ignore the rest of Matthew 16:19 - "... whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."
Christ isn't talking about you and I there, he is only talking to one person.

Apostolic tradition is not limited to what was accepted as canonical writings, i.e. included in the Bible. There is an unbroken chain of succession from Peter to today.

Said who?

You do place too much importance on Peter. Jesus also spoke of binding and loosening in in Matt.18:18 and was certainly not only speaking to Peter.

Peter was a disciple of Jesus and walked with him on earth. I look forward to meeting him one day but he is still just a man and as fallible as any man.

Upon what do you base this assertion? This sounds a little contradictory to most of what I have heard in lectures or read in books.



This makes me think you don't understand what you are posting about.

It amazes me that so many protestors, so many haters, are so involved with this. It is totally NOT of your world in the slightest and it is none of your concern.

Those of us who do not protest totally accept totally and are delighted to do so.

It isn't about rock, it's about the ANCHOR of our lives and our faith ... the Pope and the Eternal Roman Catholic Church.

May God Bless. And may God Bless all of you who are lost. It must be so very lonely.

No, He more than likely spoke Hebrew not Aramaic and certainly not Greek. I personally believe Matthew was originally written
in Hebrew.

Aside from semantics, Peter is very clear that Christ is the Rock, the Stone, on which the Church is built. Peter never ever, absolutely nowhere in his writings, ever claims supremacy or primacy. He never claims to be "the foundation" or "the Rock on which the Church or the Papacy is built. This as I have shown is clearly seen in Peter's epistles and his sermon in Acts.

Peter writes Christ is "the living Stone, disallowed indeed of men but chosen of God. and precious.

Think about it! Peter was fallible as all human beings know. There was no infallibility in Peter. It's just plain common sense that the Church was built upon Christ our Lord!

Jesus is our ROCK as the word so clearly explains to us time and time again. Would you disagree with this?



Exactly! and you just answered your own question!!

Jesus called him Petros/masculine! NOT Petra/feminine!

Again, disregarding semantics of what language is spoken. This bottom line is this...JESUS CHRIST IS THE ROCK!



And mine too, He was a living stone, just as we are, he was a priest, just as we are...1 Pet 2:5, "you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood.
Peter is one stone of many used to build the spiritual house of God, the Church.



I am not ignoring it, and yes you are correct, Christ is talking to one person and as I have stated that only one person used the keys to open doors to the Jew and gentile.

He never passed those keys on to a succession of Popes of which you clearly have no proof whatsoever. SHOW ME WHERE HE DID!

Peter received the keys as one of the 12 Apostles of the Lamb of which no one else will ever be.

Peter was never a Pope and he surely never claimed to be.

I would like to apologize if any of this seemed like an attack on your faith. Many of us just love to discuss religious ideas. We may often offer differing opinions and challenges. On my part, these are never meant to destroy, but to build. Sound doctrine should always be able to withstand questions and examination. If it is not sound doctrine then one would benefit spiritually to build upon stronger foundations.

You are absolutely correct that we often attack too vehemently and seem to kill our wounded in the Body of Christ. I see the Catholic church as a vital part of the Church in whole but no more important than any other part and no member of more importance than any other. I believe scripture makes this very clear. The Pope should be honored and respected as any elder should, but he is not the anchor of my life or my faith. That honor is reserved for Jesus Christ and no other. You are sadly deceived if you look to any man as your anchor because all men are fallible.

I do not want to destroy your faith or to convert you to a different denomination, but only discuss doctrine so that hopefully we can both come to a better understanding of each other and grow in our faith. Please try not to take offence at challenges. I know this is often a difficult aspect of my own spiritual growth but I also know that it is a benefit and when I've been challenged it has caused more reflection and study on my part to come to a more perfect understanding. All of us now only see darkly, but one day we will see face to face and we will know as we are known. I believe this is speaking of Christ but also of ourselves, since we cannot be separated from Christ and are in fact, His Body. We might as well learn to love each as brothers now. That does not mean that we will never quarrel but that we will never let our quarrels separate us.

Evidence in scripture doesn't show Jesus speaking Hebrew, at least not primarily. When he was dying on the Cross, he resorted to the language he was most comfortable with, Aramaic.

And Peter is refereed to by his Aramaic name, Kephas, in scripture.

Of course the Pope is fallible. That's why he doesn't speak infallibly about everything. Only when he speaks ex cathedra. Again, we go back to Matthew 18. But I am getting bored with this, so I'll send you to http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm#IIIA for further explanation.

As far as apostolic succession, I don't know where your assertion comes from, it is so off-the-wall (but unfortunately common). There is plenty of documentation. Again, I direct you to http://www.catholic.com/tracts/apostolic-succession

Thank you but I am not interested in reading the tradition of man.

Obviously, I just don't get it. Why would everyone refer to Simon as Peter or Kepha after a certain point in time? Why would they continue that in the KJV?

What does it mean when Paul and these others call Simon Kepha? Could it be that Simon was somehow assuming some role that Jesus performed while on Earth?

And why would Jesus have to tell the Apostles to recruit new leaders? And how do we know he didn't? Jesus was alive for 32yrs and the NT only covers a relative few hours of his last 2 years. Do you think he said or did anything else?

Why do you consider the acts of the Apostles that weren't written about in canonical literature to be retrograde? Maybe sinful? Or do you think it is all a lie?

They only save you from having to do stuff later.



Meknows you are correct.

How well does man's conscience stack up with God's Word?

Why folks wish to claim separation from God/Spirit so they later can profess being 'reborn' in this physical life... baffles the chit out of me.

I guess it's to claim elitism over your fellow man.

Kent

Very true, though it placates the flesh to prove others wrong, than to clean your own house:speck/eye/plank.

I am not sure how Pope Francis' musings coincide with Hebrews 11:6


"Without faith it is impossible to please God, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him."

+1 Seems clear that the Pope is a heretic.

Rebirth, or salvation if you will, is a thing to be experienced rather than described. I can only tell you , I am not the same man I was and it's easy for me to know the reason why.

Unless of course we are born with salvation...

Which would be the foundation of the Pope's statement.

The ignorant part of these discussions are the ones who use scripture to judge the salvation of another person. That's anti Christ's teachings and yet they claim to be Christians.

Kent

You accept what totally? What The Lord said in the Holy Bible, or what the Pope said and who men called holy?

Sorry, but I saw the Pope on TV say to worship the church. Is the church God?

The proper attitude is to share in a spirit of meekness and love and let the Holy Spirit do the convicting and judging, and then, only if the person is willing or interested. Christians are however human, and just as subject to every passion and shortcoming as everyone else.