Testimony of a Former Irish Priest

BereanBeacon.Org ^ | Richard Peter Bennett

[small voice in the wilderness]

Not a snowball’s chance..

[Quix]

True.

[Quix]

Look at you! With each post you and your fellow believers roll up your carts. laden completely down with your doctrines, creeds, dogmas, traditions, etc. I can almost hear the wheels squeaking and threatening to collapse under the weight of your beliefs. Which you need ALL of them, in order to make One point with Each post. And here we stand, one bible each, every day, giving you scripture and showing you the futileness of your “points”. I would say it’s almost unfair. Except for the fact that you choose to pull that cart around like it’s some kind of ‘cart of knowledge’.

---

HMMMMMMMMMMMMM . . . apt.

[small voice in the wilderness]

..squeak, squeak..the wheels keep on turning..

“Fresh brains for the living...fresh brains here...”

[OLD REGGIE]

John 13:
[21] When Jesus had thus spoken, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, "Truly, truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me."
[22] The disciples looked at one another, uncertain of whom he spoke.
[23] One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved, was lying close to the breast of Jesus;
[24] so Simon Peter beckoned to him and said, "Tell us who it is of whom he speaks."
[25] So lying thus, close to the breast of Jesus, he said to him, "Lord, who is it?"
[26] Jesus answered, "It is he to whom I shall give this morsel when I have dipped it." So when he had dipped the morsel, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot.

John was lying in the place of honor>

Simon Peter found it necessary to relay his question through "the one he loved" (John)

Jesus answered to John.

Hmmmmmm. Was John the first "Pope"?

[Natural Law]

"And here we stand, one bible each, every day, giving you scripture and showing you the futileness of your “points”."

The one bible was, by virtue of this divinely-appointed authority, the Catholic Church which determined, preserved and defended the canon of Scripture, presented to you from that same cart. You are indeed enriched by it but are impoverished by the rejection of the other gifts it contains. I pity your emptiness.

[Deo volente]

Is it meaningful that Jesus called him "Simon, son of John" the last recorded time He spoke to him (Simon)?

Not really, if you're arguing that Simon is not really Peter the rock because Jesus here does not include that name. He's already referred to as Simon Peter in the same text, Simon "the Rock". When Jesus gave Simon the additional name "Peter", He wasn't saying Peter was a physical rock, a mineral substance, and that Simon had ceased to be. He was using a metaphor to express a profound truth about Peter's new calling, to be the Rock (or foundation) on which the Church was built. He was still Simon, but now with the additional name of Peter. Throughout the New Testament he is called Simon, Simon Peter, or just Peter.

If you're proposing here that Jesus forgot that he had earlier called Simon by the name "Peter", well then you've got a whole other problem. That's the only argument that I could think of to assert that this verse has any bearing on the question of Peter's primacy. Another argument, I suppose, would be to say that Christ is somehow "taking back" the name Peter and the keys and the power of binding and loosing. Is that what you're trying to say, because there's no Scripture anywhere to suggest that. The fact that Jesus calls him Simon here and not Peter proves nothing.

[wagglebee]

If you're proposing here that Jesus forgot that he had earlier called Simon by the name "Peter", well then you've got a whole other problem. That's the only argument that I could think of to assert that this verse has any bearing on the question of Peter's primacy. Another argument, I suppose, would be to say that Christ is somehow "taking back" the name Peter and the keys and the power of binding and loosing. Is that what you're trying to say, because there's no Scripture anywhere to suggest that. The fact that Jesus calls him Simon here and not Peter proves nothing.

Actually, for any of this to be true, one would have to start with the premise that Jesus Christ was not aware of what Saint Peter would subsequently do.

[D-fendr]

Imagine if the Church just accepted the Word of God as its final authority.

Imagine hundreds of churches thinking they know the Word of God differently from the others. Imagine millions of people thinking they have the authority to determine what the church teaches as the Word of God.

[small voice in the wilderness]

Acts 16:1-16. This is a list of greetings from Paul to the saints in Rome.

Note: Peter is NOT mentioned. Not once. According to the papal catalogue of bishops of Rome, Peter was in Rome at this time. Since he is NOT once mentioned by Paul, seems like Peter was not there. IF Peter had been at Rome as the bishop, he would have been the FIRST one Paul would have referred to. Don't you think? Hmmmm....

Once again, this seems to make the very foundation of apostolic succession by the Roman bishops fall...to..the..ground...

Maybe there is a good reason that someone can fill me in on, but there may be a chance, or maybe even likely that Peter was never in the city of Rome in all his life..

[Jvette]

Imagine if the Church just accepted the Word of God as its final authority. No doctrines of fallen man, no traditions based on years of feel-good nothingness. And no one between themselves and God but Jesus Christ, the ONE MEDIATOR between God and man.

As it is in His Church, Praise God.

Imagine if there was One body, and One Spirit, even as ye are called in One hope of your calling. One Lord, One faith, One baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. “(Eph. 4:4-6).

As it is in his Church, Praise God.

Imagine if there was ONE gospel that saves. “For by grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, NOT OF WORKS, lest any man should boast.” (Eph. 2:8,9).

As it is in His Church, Praise God.

Imagine if there was a group of people called saints, and they were made up of all living and dead saved believers. And not some elitist group that fallen men have decided to label and VENERATE as saints.

As it is in His Church, Praise God.

Imagine if there were no group of people on earth claiming they alone hold the keys to the kingdom and no one is saved outside their Church.

A completely Scriptural claim based on the words of Jesus in the Gospel in which the King of Kings gives the keys to St. Peter along with the authority to bind and loose, which will be upheld in Heaven.

Imagine if God’s Word was studied, rightly divided, so as to be an approved workman of God that needeth not to be ashamed. Imagine being able to do this without running to a Church for the “correct understanding” of God’s Word.

Again, this shows an immature and uninformed understanding of the Church and her doctrines regarding Scripture.

Imagine having the Holy Spirit guiding you in all truth and not councils, and meetings, and dogma and doctrines of men and traditions that could or could not be the same day to day, depending on who is in charge.

The Holy Spirit is alive in all those councils that have defined doctrines with which you agree the same as it has led the Church to those doctrines with which you disagree.

Imagine being able to rest in the Finished Work of Christ instead of not knowing if you’ll ‘make it’ or not in the end.

St. Paul enjoins us to run the race until the end so that we may win the crown and not have run in vain. St. Paul rejoices in the suffering he endures so that he may finish the work of Christ. I am happy to be in his company.

[OLD REGGIE]

“STOP trying to use English grammar to explain texts which were spoken in Aramaic and written in Koine Greek — both the grammar systems differ from English.”

Good point. Perhaps you would agree to stop relying purely on the supposition that it was spoken in Aramaic and written in Koine Greek.

Possible? Yes.

Probable? Open to question.

When you find a manuscript younger than the 4th century let me know.

[Deo volente]

And here we stand, one bible each, every day, giving you scripture and showing you the futileness of your “points”.

The Catholic Church defined the doctrine of the Trinity at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D. It's one of our "points" on that "squeaking cart", as you put it.
You do believe in the Trinity, don't you? Well, it's nowhere to be found in your Bible. The Church gave it to you, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

By the way, did you know your Bible contains seven fewer books than the one that was in existence and accepted by Christians for many centuries? What gave the "reformers" the right to throw those books out?

[Cronos]

How can you hold to sola scriptura when no where in Scripture is God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit referred to as the Holy Trinity and yet Truth as defined by that very Church founded before the canon of Scripture.

[Jvette]

Perhaps it was a means by which to remind Peter of his humble origins and his humanity so that when faced with the awesome responsibility of caring for Jesus’ flock, he would remember that he can do nothing without God.

Peter was the son of a man, not the Son of God and so always just a man rather than God, Himself subject to all the frailties of humanity and dependent on the Holy Spirit.

When one considers the enormous commission Jesus had just placed on him, it seems important that Jesus would also remind him that what he is and what he will do is all by the grace and strength that God will give him.

Pretty pathetic to isolate this one verse and claim absolute authority that is disparaged when that same claim is made by the Church.

[OLD REGGIE]

A Church Father is anyone who (1) taught orthodox doctrine and learning, (2) possessed holiness of life, and (3) had a certain antiquity. Early authors who do not possess these qualities are considered ecclesiastical writers

In the Roman Catholic Church, St. John of Damascus, who lived in the 8th century, is generally considered to be the last of the Church Fathers and at the same time the first seed of the next period of church writers, scholasticism. St. Bernard is also at times called the last of the Church Fathers.

A brief list is then:

2 Apostolic Fathers
2.1 Clement of Rome
2.2 Ignatius of Antioch
2.3 Polycarp of Smyrna
3 Greek Fathers
3.1 Irenaeus of Lyons
3.2 Clement of Alexandria is technically not a Church Father but instead referred to as an ecclesiastical write
r 3.3 Origen of Alexandria
3.4 Athanasius of Alexandria
3.5 Cyril of Alexandria
3.6 John Chrysostom
3.7 Cappadocian Fathers
4 Latin Fathers
4.1 Tertullian
4.2 Cyprian of Carthage
4.3 Ambrose of Milan
4.4 Jerome of Stridonium
4.5 Augustine of Hippo
4.6 Gregory the Great

This list is completely imaginary and without merit.

Is there such a thing as an "Official" list of Church Fathers?

[Cronos]

No religion more influenced with paganism than Calvinism where you have a demonic Calvingod who creates beings who hate him in the womb, then forces some to “love” him and be grateful to have been “saved” from his wrath.
. But you already know this.

[metmom]

I expected better from boatbums, but there was no counter proof given anywhere in her long post, it was only personal opinions of some pastor with no backing evidence when he slurs a historical figure and all the pastor said was “Oh, this guy in the 1st century practised and preached about infant baptism, but I in the 21st century don’t like that, hence the 1st century guy must be wrong”

What's so ironic is the criticism of non-Catholics by Catholics that what they present is merely personal opinion by members of an organization who bases their most important teachings on traditions, IOW, the personal opinions of others..... long dead.

It'd be funny if the hypocrisy displayed weren't so sad.

[small voice in the wilderness]

I pity your emptiness.

"Lovie, come quickly... the riff-raff have gathered in the street again..holding black books..and saying something about God's Word being enough..sit down dear..I know it's a frightful thought..imagine THEM reading the same words as the church reads to us..please dear..don't faint..they will soon tire of their commoness and go away...I'll close the drapes, dear..light a candle and pray for their ability to hear what the church wants us to hear.."

[Cronos]

So, then tell me where exactly in scripture do you, SVITw, Boatbums and Old Reggie, where exactly do you see in Scripture where God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are referred to as the Holy Trinity? And yet this is the Truth as defined by that very Church founded before the canon of Scripture.