Posted on 06/20/2015 12:42:46 PM PDT by rwa265
You’re reading the wrong Bible. The King James and its successors are political documents, not complete Scripture.
You put your own words in now? No wonder you profess such knowledge of Scripture.
Catholic author in the time of Constantine; translated by a protestant theologian and posted on a protestant web site.
Which words was that and I didn’t profess anything.
Your degree is in what exactly and where di you earn it?
Your degree is in what exactly and where did you earn it?
But it, the church of Matthew 16:18, will show up at the end of Daniel's Seventieth Week.
See post 43 for links to the real truth.
So, the epistles have primacy over the Gospel?
I am going to go with Peter on several occasions:
Gal 2:9 and when they perceived the grace that was given unto me, James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision;
1Co 1:12 Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos: and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
1Co 3:22 whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours;
1Co 9:5 Have we no right to lead about a wife that is a believer, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
1Co 15:5 and that he appeared to Cephas; then to the twelve;
And of course you should also remember Jesus Himself: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).
How do prtos dodge that the ONLY meaning of Cephas is ROCK
Peter and the Papacy (Free Republic link)
Oh, it seems like only yesterday, and with 835 replies, you will see that the whole thing involved an assiduous study of Classical Greek vs Koine Greek, plus Aramaic and Hebrew with a little Latin and French thrown in, and we came to the consensus position that: nobody here knows what they're talking about!!
No, I mean: THOSE GUYS don't know what they're talking about. Those guys ain't got no book-larnin'. Those guys can't handle the truth. Which then grew ever warmer and more fraternal as we concluded that THOSE GUYS are liars! They are deceivers! They are limbs of Satan!
I have other things to do right now, but if anybody ways the full Golden Treasure of Wisdom without having to labor through Matthew, Mark, Luke and Strong AGAIN --- just follow that link.
Cordial greetings to all.
Great question, verga: How do they?
BTW, what's a "prtos?"
Stupid fat fingers, should read Prot.
Oh, it seems like only yesterday, and with 835 replies, you will see that the whole thing involved an assiduous study of Classical Greek vs Koine Greek, plus Aramaic and Hebrew with a little Latin and French thrown in, and we came to the consensus position that: nobody here knows what they're talking about!!
No, I mean: THOSE GUYS don't know what they're talking about. Those guys ain't got no book-larnin'. Those guys can't handle the truth. Which then grew ever warmer and more fraternal as we concluded that THOSE GUYS are liars! They are deceivers! They are limbs of Satan!
I have other things to do right now, but if anybody wants the full Golden Treasure of Wisdom without having to re-invent the Real by laboring through Matthew, Mark, Luke and Strong AGAIN --- just follow that link.
Cordial greetings to all.
It is also amazing to me that the succession of the Church from Jesus to Peter, something so important, would only be recorded in Matthew’s gospel. Why did the others think it so trivial that they didn’t even mention it?
that is then “bound and loosed” in heaven?
I’ve always wondered about this too.
Well that’s one theory.
Jesus also called Peter Satan so I guess its also possible that the Roman Catholic church was established on Satan. That would explain whey the gates of hell wouldn’t stand against it, since rather than oppose it, they stand for it.
Just another theory to consider.
“So much anger here over St. Peter’s role.”
For myself it’s not anger but puzzlement. I’d venture that 90+% of Catholics are Gentiles, yet among them they anchor to one of God’s apostles to the JEWS. It is PAUL who was chosen by Christ to preach “my gospel”—the one he received directly from the risen Jesus—to the Gentiles (most likely you).
It seems that re: Peter, Catholics stop after the Gospels. It was Paul whom the Spirit used to confront Peter and frankly knock down the idea that he and James, et. al were the “pillars” they seemed to be vis a vis Paul’s supposedly lesser role.
He tartly adds “Those men added nothing to my message” and “God shows no partiality”.
There is no attempt to negate Peter’s role to the Jews, but Paul vigorously defends his to the Gentiles. God was working through both, but Catholics appear not to have gotten the memo that Paul is THEIR apostle. Thirteen (perhaps fourteen) letters in the NT to Peter’s two (maybe one?)?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.