Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Mrs. Don-o
This constitutes a pattern. And a pattern that doesn't fit anybody but Peter.

It sure does. And Jesus Himself said "He who is first shall be last". I see nothing definitive about superiority over the other Apostles. Nothing. nada. Does your faith require Peter to be "special" above the other Apostles? Does it require Mary to be sinless (even though that goes contrary to Scripture)? Does your faith require the RCC to be the One True Church? If the answer to all of these is yes, then the RCC has replaced God in your life because I guarantee you that none of the Apostles taught/believed any of that.

176 posted on 05/02/2015 9:28:29 AM PDT by BipolarBob (My God can kick your Allahs arse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies ]


To: BipolarBob; Mrs. Don-o
Perhaps you missed my precvious post. Even the Bible says Peter is more important.

Hat tip to daniel

 

"Peter" mentioned by that name 162 times in all of the New Testament, sometimes together as "Simon Peter," and separately as "Cephas" 6 times, and separately as Simon 17 times at most, for a total of 185. In addition, a cursory count finds other apostles are mentioned by name about 80 times.


177 posted on 05/02/2015 9:42:36 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies ]

To: BipolarBob
Mrs Don-o: "This constitutes a pattern. And a pattern that doesn't fit anybody but Peter."
BipolarBob: "It sure does."

Why, thank you, Bipolar! This comes from evaluating the evidence, instead of just trying to explain it away.

" And Jesus Himself said "He who is first shall be last"."

And the last, first. And the the guys in the middle, di-si-do in place. :o)

If all the last (the children, for example) come first, I suppose ALL us grown-us will be more or less level at the very back of the line :o)

"I see nothing definitive about superiority over the other Apostles. Nothing. nada."

It depends on what you mean by "superiority". I don't imagine Peter was the smartest or most intellectual. He was not the most well-trained in Jewish and Greek knowledge (Paul apparently scoops him on that.) I don't know that fishermen are inherently higher-up than tax collectors.

All I know is that, according to Scripture, Peter is given, symbolically, "The Keys." The meaning of this is very well illustrated in Isaiah 22, where God says to Shebna, the unworthy "Master of the Palace," that He will cast him out from his office, and instead "summon my servant Eliakim, son of Hilkiah", giving him all the symbols of leadership:

"I will clothe him with your robe,
gird him with your sash,
confer on him your authority.
He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem,
and to the house of Judah.
I will place the key of the House of David
on his shoulder;
what he opens, no one will shut,
what he shuts, no one will open."

Clearly the significance of the "keys" is to make someone the Master of the Palace (who stands in for the King in his absence) and and to give him authority.

We don't know that Eliakim, son of Hilkiah, was an innately "superior" man, no more than Simon (Peter) son of Jonah was: we do know he was given a position by God.

"Does your faith require ... Mary to be sinless (even though that goes contrary to Scripture)?"

Here's your Scripture on Mary: Kecharitomene." Read it carefully. I rest my case.

By the way, It's not un-Scriptural. Not only do we have the Angelic Salutation, we also have the realization that in Biblical language,words like "all" and "none" and so forth, often don't mean to indicate exceptionless absolutes, but rather to indicate the general run of things.

For instance, Scripture says "No one has ever seen God," but it also says, "Moses and Aaron saw the God of Israel."

Scripture says "No man is just, not even one", yet it also calls Noah, Joseph of Nazareth, and even John the Baptist, "Just men."

Scripture says "All men have sinned," and also calls Mary "Kecharitomene" (full of grace, not full of sin!)

"Does your faith require the RCC to be the One True Church?"

Depends on what you mean. The conciliar document Lumen Gentium says that "the Church of Christ... subsists in the Catholic Church." It doesn't say "IS" in a total, mathematically-closed-set, exclusive sense.

This is because the Catholic Church also teaches that we [can], according to Catholic doctrine, affirm correctly that the Church of Christ is present and operative in the churches and ecclesial communities not yet fully in communion with the Catholic Church, on account of the elements of sanctification and truth that are present in them."

What are these "elements of sanctification and truth"? That's dealt with explicitly in the Catechism (para. 825): "The elements of sanctification found also outside the visible confines of the Church are: (1) the Bible, (2) the life of grace, (3) Faith, (4) hope, (5) charity, (6) other interior gifts of the Spirit, (7) and visible elements."

I think that this can contribute to a more accurate nderstanding.

190 posted on 05/02/2015 11:39:11 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("The Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth." - 1 Timothy 3:15)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson