Skip to comments.TAKE THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN CHALLENGE
Posted on 04/20/2009 12:34:49 PM PDT by The Ignorant Fisherman
Who do you say that Jesus is? Do your thoughts, upbringing, religious background, or personal beliefs about Jesus line up with Gods Christ of the HOLY SCRIPTURES? You might ask, Well, does it make a difference? My friend, I say unto you, it surely does!
TAKE THE JESUS CHALLENGE
(Excerpt) Read more at theignorantfishermen.com ...
As an ex Catholic and one who follows the Scriptures now as my guide and not traditions that are un biblical, I have found that Peter was never called to be a pope and that there no head of the body of Christ save Christ alone (Col. 1:18,). No offense to you my friend... I was there once. Also the verse that The Lord stated that, "you are a little stone" is not the authority that he will be pope. It just states that Peter had a great position as the other 12 did to be builders of the “ Called out Assembly of God”,The Church (Eph.2:20). after the rejection of the the King and Kingdom offer to Israel. What also is fascinating is that the first Church was all Jews! Gentiles came later, God be praised!
My friend you sound like a dear sincere individual, Trust in the Scripture authority alone and not the vain traditions of man. (St. Matt 15, St. Mark 7) That is what Jesus taught us to do.
God's blessing for you and your family’
Not familiar with that one.
To God Be The Glory!
BLESSED BE THE NAME AND WORD OF THE LORD.
Not called to be Pope?
“Peter, Shepherd my lambs.”
“You are the rock, and upon this rock, I will build my church, and the gates of Hell shall not withstand it.”
Why is it that from the time Jesus tells Peter this, until the Council of Jerusalem, the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts depict only one other apostle directly addressing Jesus: Judas. Even when other disciples have questions to ask of Jesus, they ask them through Peter.
More than 90% of all quotes said by the 11 faithful disciples are uttered by Peter, or said to Peter, asking him to ask Jesus.
Why do the gospels call Peter, “Primus?” The word means, “the first.” Yet in none of the accounts of the first disciples is Peter the first called chronologically. It also means first in importance.
The gospels mention Peter 105 times. The number of times other disciples are mentioned (except when mentionned after another apostle in a list): Peter: 105; Andrew: 1; Both men named James: 5; John: 2; Matthew / Levi: 4; Phillip: 3; Bartholomew: 0; Thaddaeus / Lebbaeus: 0; Jude: 0. So that’s Peter 105, all others combined, 11. Even the gospel of John doesn’t mention John by name.
But no, Peter wasn’t special.
“I shall give you the keys to Heaven; whatever you declare bound on Earth is bound in Heaven, and whatever you declare loosed on Earth is loosed in Heaven.”
2 Thess 2:14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by WORD, or by our epistle.
When do you suppose the following TRADITION began?
2 Tim 4:3 For there shall be a time, when they will NOT endure sound doctrine; but, according to their OWN desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables.
Perhaps when the bible hit the printing press in the 1500's and folks bypassed the following passage?
2 Pet 1:20 Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.
My friend, we will disagree. You are quite rooted in your Catholic ideology. Much of the Catholic teachings though, you and I would be in whole hearted agreement with. I was born and raised Catholic but as I started to study the Bible I saw many contradictions to the Catholic teachings. I am now a fundamentalist Bible believing Christian much like Luther , Hus, etc..
Many of the Catholic teachings are based on a Bible verse taken totally out of context and the doctrines and dogmas are derived from a single verse and made to fit their teaching.
2 Thes. 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle. Is a good example, when taken in the whole and in context this verse is referring to truth in light of error of the anti- Christ and his movement in the Last days.
Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he [Jesus] answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? (Matt. 15:2, 3)
But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men (Matt. 15:9).
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” (Colossians 2:8)
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” (2 Timothy 4:3-4)
Indulgences, purgatory, popes, papal authority, the ascension and sinless nature of Mary, the immaculate conception, the Eucharist, praying to dead saints, the making of saints, the Mass and the re -crucifying of Christ, confessing sins to men- i.e., priests, institution of Priests, Crusades, burnings of those who reject catholic dogma.. etc.. etc.. are totally out of place in light of this verse would you not agree??. (2 Pet 1:20 Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.) Also the Catholic Church has thrown Israel under the bus when God has stated that they have a glorious future in Gods Kingdom and Christ will reign from Jerusalem. (Roms 9, 10, 11).
In light of your arrogant comment, Perhaps when the bible hit the printing press in the 1500’s and folks bypassed the following passage? Just shows the oppressive nature of the Catholic Church and its intimidation of fear and threats of purgatory and hell to all who rejected their dogmas and doctrines. They murdered and oppressed any who sought to read or have the Bible- Gods Holy Word in their own language all because they wanted their masses of people under their thumb. Catholic tyranny knew no bounds. Remember also my friend; Ignorant Fishermen were used of God and lead by the Holy Spirit to write the New Testament. It was for the common man. The Bible is what made America great. People fleeing Catholic and Anglican persecution came to America with the Bible in their own language and change the face of the world as never before! (1 Cor. 1:18-31)
The bottom line also is that salvation is a gift of God (Eph 2:8, 9, Rom 6:23 etc..etc ) Faith without works is dead but one does not work to be saved, the one who is saved is able to work out his gift of salvation to and for the glory of Almighty God!
You can not take the Gospel of St. John challenge and come up with your results.
Al the best,
My friend, never said that Peter was not special
I just love you guys... lol! Look at the context before you make your wise cracks..lol!!
I just dont super exalt him to a place of veneration and near worship as you and the Catholic Church does.
Those are all good verses and true except that you added your traditional Catholic spin to the Holy Scriptures. Paul was God’s penman for most of the New Testament. John who wrote John.1-3 John and Revelation. John referred to himself as the disciple etc.. he wasnt an ego maniac. In the light of Christ who are we but nothing. John was used more then Peter. Also the majority of the time that that dear Peter spoke he was rebuked by the Lord or putting his foot in his mouth, God Bless him and He did! The apostles were God’s agents and builders of the church, the body of Christ.
And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone ( 1 Cor. 12:12, Eph. 1:22,23, 2:20)
If any one is pope it is Christ the savior of the body Eph. 5:23 - For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
Any man who is in God’s will for God’s glory the gates of hell shall not prevail.
The Church is not a building or group but an organism 1 Cor. 12, Eph 5. It is His body as the Holy Scriptures teach.
If any one should have been a pope..it should have been Paul..now he was the man!
Yes, Peter was an illiterate fisherman, not much of an author. Paul doesn’t dominate the authorship of the New Testament as much as you think, however. Luke and John both give him a decent run for his money.
Mark was Peter’s secretary. The gospel of Matthew consists of an earlier Aramaic edition, but whenever Matthew covers most of the most crucial parts of Jesus’ life, the language shifts to what appears to be original to the Greek. This isn’t mere inference; First century writings attest to an Aramaic gospel of Matthew as early as 50 AD, but the central passages use wording particular to Greek. So for some reason, the most vital passages of Matthew were replaced by a Greek document.
Who? Well, it so happens that these vital passages are verbatim from the gospel of Mark, and represent 96% of the gospel of Mark. So, despite the fact that Matthew was an apostle, and completed his work considerably earlier, eventually Matthew defered to another author for most of the most crucial parts of the gospel. Why?
“Mark” refers to John Mark, the secretary of Peter.
Mark also is the source for much of Luke. So the notion that Peter is a secondary source of the New Testament is simply false.
Now, why does John refer to himself as “the beloved disciple”? Each and every time he is refered to, Jesus is giving him a commandment which the Catholic Chuch has since antiquity interpreted as intending for every Christian to obey. (Yes, including, “behold your mother.”)
To address your point:
Peter is called the rock apon which the church shall be built when he correctly identifies Jesus as the Messiah. Jesus gives him a new name. A name was that which rule was recognized. The basis of the new name *was* Peter’s faith in Christ, so there’s no contradiction between the notion that Jesus is the cornerstone of the Church, and that the church shall be built on the rock which is Peter. But Protestants over-simplify the faith of Peter to be merely his profession that Jesus is the messiah; Jesus explicitly defines that whatever Peter says is bound (law) in Earth is loosed in Earth, and whatever is loosed in Earth is loosed in Heaven. In other words, Jesus announces that Peter’s proclamations establish law. Hence, Jesus also says Peter shall be given the keys of Heaven. In other words, he is made regent, an office which by its nature needs to be passed on until the Return of the King. It makes no sense for Jesus to make Peter regent because Jesus will go to Heaven, but then have Peter also depart the Earth.
>> If any one is pope it is Christ the savior of the body <<
Jesus declares that he is the good shepherd, but then tells Peter to shepherd his sheep.
>> Any man who is in Gods will for Gods glory the gates of hell shall not prevail. <<
Yes, but Christians disagree about morality and doctrine. “Bible Christians” disagree on divorce, masturbation, abortion, and just about every other moral issue that affects more than 3% of the population. But while many Catholics may choose to disregard the Church’s teachings, the barque of Peter establishes correct doctrine so that we shall know the truth.
But the bible doesn’t say that Hell won’t prevail against the church. It says that the gates of Hell won’t withstand the church built apon the rock. Peter has authority over even the gates of Hell! And, hence, the pope has authority to suspend even temporal punishment for the souls in purgatory. (That’s what an indulgence is. And Father Tetzel never had authority to sell indulgences, if he even ever existed.)
My friend, we will disagree on this. Our foundations are different. I am a fundamentalist. Gods Word is the sole authority for me on all matters of Christianity views. You are rooted in Biblical truth with added traditions and fables of past traditions that Paul warned us about. (2 Tim 4:4)
To see things clearer you need to look at the Greek words used for Peter and Rock.
It was not upon Peter that the church was to be built, but upon “this rock” - Christ Himself. The word for “Peter” in the Greek is ‘petros’, which means ‘a little stone’, but Christ said He would build His Church upon another rock - in the Greek ‘petra’, a large rock. What Jesus meant by the contrast between the large and small rock was that Peter was one of the stones in the church (I Peter 2:3-5), but that Christ Himself was the Foundation Stone (I Corinthians 3:11).
The true Church, the true believers, are a spiritual house in which every believer is a living stone and Christ is the chief foundation and cornerstone. Paul unambiguously declares that Jesus is the Rock, not Peter (I Corinthians 3:11); and Peter actually denies that he himself is the rock. Read Peter’s testimony in I Peter 2:4-8, where he says that he is not the rock, but with all other believers only a little stone in the building of God’s spiritual house - the true Church. The doctrine that Peter is the rock on which the Church is built is an outright denial of Jesus Christ as Head of the Church - a usurpation of deity making Jesus only the “fruit of thy (Mary’s) womb Jesus” instead of the Son of God.
There are spectrums in everything (Left to Right) Protestantism and Catholicism included. The majority of Liberal Dems are Catholic. 50 % or more Catholics voted for Obama- a radial Leftist. To label Bible believers as - disagree on divorce, masturbation, abortion, and just about every other moral issue that affects more than 3% of the population- is woefully ignorant and shows the lack of perception and depth on issues on your part. Be a little more objective in you thinking and reasoning, not subjective and you will see things so much clearer. As far as I can remember my friend there is not one Bible used or to be found in the mass except for the Gospel readings and the responcatory readings.
Here in CT we have had several petifiles Priests. The Catholic Priesthood has become a hangout and hide out for sodomy and petifiles since forever. The Catholic church has protected these reprobates and have defended them time and time again, destroying countless lifes Paul stated that A leader of a church is to be married and able to manage their own house. How does a Catholic Priest fit that description?
A bishop (leader) then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach; (1 Tim 3:2)
The Catholic Priest I had as a young boy through my teens was a dear moral man who taught us the Golden Rule and moral biblical truth and I learned many good things from him. He was a great man But never told me the Biblical way of Salvation and how to be saved as Gods Word teaches.
May it be your sincere objective desire to be sure with confidence that the Catholic doctrines and tradition line up with Holy Scripture. You will fine that most of them do not and must be forced fit to work. Matt 7:21-23
All of Gods best,