Pope: may all Christians recognize true meaning of Peter’s primacy

AsiaNews ^ | 7 June, 2006

[colorcountry]

Okay Petrosius, let's cut to the chase, what part of your Catholic Church must I have to receive salvation?

I really don't know, but coming from a Mormon background who believes I must perform ordinances here upon earth, that are designated by supposed prophets of God, in order that I might earn the Celestial Kingdom and a dwelling space with Him, I just don't see that we are separate. I'm asking you right now, what part of faith do you have in Christ Jesus, that is not available to me?

[Claud]

Hey jrny, do you have a NT Greek lexicon? I have a classical Greek one, and I'd like to supplement with NT Greek. Not sure what the best one is though. Any thoughts?

[jrny]

Each entry in my lexicon lists all the different spellings and meanings for the different time periods and localities which spoke Greek. So, it's not specifically NT, and it was also a gift, so I have not had much experience trying to buy a Greek Lexicon myself.

[Uri’el-2012]

XS>Did the Ru'ach HaKodesh breath the Word of G-d in Koine Greek or in Aramaic?

I do not know. But I *do* know that He breathed *this name for Peter* in Aramaic, which is all that's at issue here. This is proved by John 1:42 which says that Petros is a translation of Cephas and not the other way around. This argument is not built on some historical theory, but on the infallible word of God.

117 posted on 06/09/2006 9:04:34 AM MDT by Claud

Do you mean John 1:42?

John 1:42 He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said,
"You are Simon the son of John; you shall be called Cephas" (which is translated Peter).

as in;
small pebble
see :

1 Co 1:12
1 Co 3:22
1 Co 9:5
1 Co 15:5
Gal 1:18
Gal 2:9
Gal 2:11
Gal 2:14

b'shem Y'shua

[tenn2005]

Now this is around 160-180 A.D.--and a clear statement of both the pre-eminence of Rome and the necessity of other Churches conforming to its teachings. That is the papacy in its very essence.

You have chosen to ignore most of the scriptures in my post and attempted to refute clear Bible teachings with the writings of ordinary men (your Catholic Fathers) which were written 100 to 130 years after the fact. That is a very lame approach but undoubtedly one that you have been taught by the Catholic Church

[tenn2005]

We can also see this in the work of St. Paul in appointing bishops in the churches he established.

That would also be wrong. If you will checks Paul's letters to Timothy and Titus, you will find that he sent them to appoint Elders/Bishops in every church. There is no scripture which states that Paul ever personally appointed an Elder/Bishop. Sorry, it is just not there.

[Claud]

You have chosen to ignore most of the scriptures in my post and attempted to refute clear Bible teachings with the writings of ordinary men (your Catholic Fathers) which were written 100 to 130 years after the fact.

My friend, we are doing almost nothing but arguing scriptures. I have made repeated points about the Greek of Matt 16 which are going totally unanswered and ignored. Again I ask, what is that "taute" doing there? Thou art Rock, and upon this SAME (taute) rock, I shall build my church. I have demonstrated clearly from Scripture why Peter's name was given in Aramaic not Greek.

As for the Fathers, I posted that quote because you said the papacy and those other traditions were invented 300 years after Christ. They most certainly were not. They were well in place by 150-160 A.D. Peter founded the Church of Rome and died there. That is a historical fact.

[wmfights]

"Wherefore of these men who have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us, beginning from the baptism of John, until the day wherein he was made a witness with us of his resurrection. And they appointed two, Joseph, called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And praying, they said: Thou, Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen to take the place of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas hath by transgression fallen, that he might go to his own place. And they gave them lots, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles."
(Acts 1:20-26)
___________________________________

If you read the passage you are quoting to support this notion that your church has Apostles running it today, or has special authority based on succession, it will fall on it's face. Let me point out that when Mathias was selected it was by lots. Peter did not have any special authority to dictate anything. Also, some of the criteria for what is an Apostle are noted. Again I say there are no Apostles living today.

If you want some direction on what SCRIPTURE says the requirements to be an Apostle were they can be found in Acts 1:22,
I Corinthians 9:1 and Galatians 1:1.

BTW, it is falling into this trap of believing that your church and its leaders have special authority that leads you to tolerate your leader kissing the koran and embracing islam.

[Claud]

Do you mean John 1:42? John 1:42 He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, "You are Simon the son of John; you shall be called Cephas" (which is translated Peter).

Yes I do. And I already agreed with the fact that Petros/petra were distinct usages in some forms of Greek. We are well beyond that point in the conversation now.

But that point is moot because John 1:42 states clearly that Jesus called Simon Cephas which was then translated into Petros.

[Kolokotronis]

"Whether that distinction held in the 1st century NT Greek, I do not know."

Not really. It honestly is a play on words. I think your first explanation is linguistically correct.

[Titanites]

leads you to tolerate your leader kissing the koran and embracing islam.

By accusing him of embracing Islam, are you suggesting the lie that Pope John Paul II became a Muslim or believes Islam brings salvation?

Here are some of JPII's own words:

Whoever knows the Old and New Testaments, and then reads the Koran, clearly sees the process by which it completely reduces Divine Revelation. It is impossible not to note the movement away from what God said about Himself, first in the Old Testament through the Prophets, and then finally in the New Testament through His Son. In Islam all the richness of God's self-revelation, which constitutes the heritage of the Old and New Testaments, has definitely been set aside.

Some of the most beautiful names in the human language are given to the God of the Koran, but He is ultimately a God outside of the world, a God who is only Majesty, never Emmanuel, God-with-us. Islam is not a religion of redemption. There is no room for the Cross and the Resurrection. Jesus is mentioned, but only as a prophet who prepares for the last prophet, Muhammad. There is also mention of Mary, His Virgin Mother, but the tragedy of redemption is completely absent. For this reason not only the theology but also the anthropology of Islam is very distant from Christianity.

JPII knew perfectly well that Islam is not a religion of redemption. If you are disappointed that he did not call the Muslims the spawn of Satan, that is no reason to spread the calumny that he accepts Islam as a road to salvation.

You may believe JPII sinned by kissing the Koran. There aren't many Catholics, if any, including JPII, who don't think he was a sinner. The Catholic Church is a church of sinners. If you belong to a church for just the perfect, please tell us about it. JPII wasn't perfect and made many mistakes throughout his life. Many Catholics believe his kissing the Koran was one of them. Personally, I don't. I view it as a sign of respect to other humans beings and not as a sign that he accepts the Koran as the true word of God, as JPII clearly states in his words above. Spitting on the Koran that was presented to him, or even just refusing it would have accomplished nothing in the meeting he was at. JPII loved all people, including Muslims, and to me the kiss demonstrated that. I spent the previous 6-years working in a Muslim country in North Africa and the Muslims greatly appreciated the dialogue JPII opened with them and the respect he showed them. Did this appreciation result in mass conversions - I doubt it. But the dialogue is there and nothing will happen unless you acknowledge these people with respect. I am convinced that JPII's efforts increased the understanding of Christianity amoung many Muslims and I had a number approach me to talk about it, which I attribute to this effort.

Also, I don't recall seeing anything in the news from your congregation calling Muslims the spawn of Satan and the benefits that has reaped. If there has been, please share it with us.

[Kolokotronis]

" Did the Ru'ach HaKodesh breath the Word of G-d in Koine Greek or in Aramaic ?"

Depends on who he was talking to. My bet is that its usually in Greek, but then again, Latin might have a claim. Many Protestants seem to think it was in the King's Englaish, but I doubt that.

[Claud]

Not really. It honestly is a play on words. I think your first explanation is linguistically correct.

Eucaristw Kolo! Well you know how hard it is for folks to read Scripture through the Fathers, it is also hard for some 21st century Anglo-Americans to read Greek through the Greeks! So I am trying to entertain every possibility on their behalf, even though I am quite convinced this really is what you say.

Ahh, it must be frustrating for you to hear us talk about what your language MUST mean! LOL

[tenn2005]

As for the Fathers, I posted that quote because you said the papacy and those other traditions were invented 300 years after Christ. They most certainly were not. They were well in place by 150-160 A.D.

The word "Pope" does not appear in any of the writings that you referenced. And these writings were over 100 years after the fact.

Peter founded the Church of Rome and died there. That is a historical fact.

That is not historicel fact, it Catholic tradition. Present any historical writing, other than the Catholic Church Fathers, that says Peter died in Rome. If Peter established the church in Rome and was there, why was it necessary for Paul to write the letter to the Romans? Why was it necessary for Paul to come there in order that the church in Rome could receive some spiritual gifts? Why couldn't Peter have taken care of that himself?

My friend, we are doing almost nothing but arguing scriptures. I have made repeated points about the Greek of Matt 16 which are going totally unanswered and ignored.

Finally, get of Matt 16 and answer the rest of my scriptural refereces.

[Iscool]

Seems to be conjecture...But since Paul appears to have spoken Hebrew to the Hebrews in the Synagogues, well, you get the picture...But let me really stretch it here...

1Co 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say Jesus spoke in the language of the angels as well...And I'm going to hazard a guess that Adam and Eve spoke in the language of God and the angels...

I'm going to guess that God spoke in Hebrew which is probably God's chosen language...Anybody with me on this???

[Kolokotronis]

"I'm going to guess that God spoke in Hebrew which is probably God's chosen language...Anybody with me on this???"

Only until the Incarnation... since then he speaks Greek! :)

[Kolokotronis]

" Ahh, it must be frustrating for you to hear us talk about what your language MUST mean! LOL"

Ah, well, Claud, as the simple grandson of simple Greek peasants, I am honored to be educated by my Anglo Saxon betters, even about the mother tongue. Someday I hope to pass for white, too! :)

[Petrosius]

First I want to point out that, contrary to the charges of some, Catholics do not believe that we earn salvation from acts that we perform, it is a pure grace. While salvation is a gift earned by the sacrifice of Jesus upon the cross it results in the union with God through an act of love.

And one of them, a doctor of the law, asked him, tempting him: Master, which is the great commandment of the law? Jesus said to him: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments dependeth the whole law and the prophets.
(Matt. 22:35-40)

This act of love is the total submission of the intellect and will to God. Because of Original Sin however we are born with a defective nature, our intellect clouded and and will weakened. God teaches us through revelation, which for the Catholic includes both the Bible and Sacred Tradition which are the products of the Teaching Authority of the Church. Without this divinely established Teaching Authority protected by the Holy Spirit we would still remain in ignorance and uncertainty as the various debates here concerning the true meaning of Scripture demonstrate.

But this assent of the intellect is not enough to be a complete act of love, there must also be the submission of the will to God. To strengthen our will the Holy Spirit comes to us with the gift of grace, allowing us to conform our will to God. Indeed this grace is the actual indwelling of the Holy Spirit in our soul.

It is the Catholic belief that the primary (not the only) means of this is through the seven Sacraments. These are outward and visible signs instituted by Christ to be the channels of his grace. Of these the most important is the Holy Eucharist. This is the sacrament of the Body of Blood of Jesus Christ that he instituted at the Last Supper when he took bread and wine and said "this is my Body" and "this is my Blood." As Catholics we take these words literally, that as God Jesus turned the elements of the bread and wine into his actual Body and Blood, with only the appearance of the bread and wine remaining. And when we commanded "Do this for a commemoration of me" he empowered the priest to repeat this action so that every time Mass is said the bread and wine presented at the altar becomes the actual Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, which we are invited to receive in Holy Communion. This is the center of Catholic worship and this is what is not available to you as a non-Catholic.

[Petrosius]

There is no scripture which states that Paul ever personally appointed an Elder/Bishop. Sorry, it is just not there.

Check out 2 Timothy 1:6:

For which cause I admonish thee, that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of hands. [i.e., ordination]

[Petrosius]

Only until the Incarnation... since then he speaks Greek! :)

K, I will grant you that our Lord speaks Greek but the Holy Spirit speaks to the Church in Latin!