Peter Is Not The Rock!

[Anglian]

Dear Beamishboy,

I suspect the most sensible thing we can do when someone apologises, is not to look the gift horse in mouth or to make the one apologising uncomfortable. Christ did not behave so.

Given your distrust of Catholic sources, here is the BBC transcript link:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/pope/johnpaulii_5.shtml

The Vatican text is here
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/j..._jp-ii_spe_20010504_archbishop-athens_en.html

Some memories are especially painful, and some events of the distant past have left deep wounds in the minds and hearts of people to this day. I am thinking of the disastrous sack of the imperial city of Constantinople, which was for so long the bastion of Christianity in the East. It is tragic that the assailants, who had set out to secure free access for Christians to the Holy Land, turned against their own brothers in the faith. The fact that they were Latin Christians fills Catholics with deep regret. How can we fail to see here the mysterium iniquitatis at work in the human heart? To God alone belongs judgement, and therefore we entrust the heavy burden of the past to his endless mercy, imploring him to heal the wounds which still cause suffering to the spirit of the Greek people. Together we must work for this healing if the Europe now emerging is to be true to its identity, which is inseparable from the Christian humanism shared by East and West.

What the Pope said just before that is something we could all learn from.

Certainly, we are burdened by past and present controversies and by enduring misunderstandings. But in a spirit of mutual charity these can and must be overcome, for that is what the Lord asks of us. Clearly there is a need for a liberating process of purification of memory. For the occasions past and present, when sons and daughters of the Catholic Church have sinned by action or omission against their Orthodox brothers and sisters, may the Lord grant us the forgiveness we beg of him.

Speak as a Christian, not a philosopher - as Pope John Paul did here, and on other occasions.

I am unaware of any other Church leader offering even this much. It may well be, as you suggest, that in my Church there may be less to apologise for in as far as we have spent the last 1600 years being bashed about by folk with swords; but there are, as we all know, episodes in our own history when a word of repentance would be in order. The same is true of your own Church, and the Eastern Orthodox.

How like human beings to embrace Christ's message of repentance and love, and find it so difficult to do either. As we pray: 'according to your mercy, Lord, not according to our deserts.'

peace,

Anglian

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

What the Pope said just before that is something we could all learn from.

Certainly, we are burdened by past and present controversies and by enduring misunderstandings. But in a spirit of mutual charity these can and must be overcome, for that is what the Lord asks of us. Clearly there is a need for a liberating process of purification of memory. For the occasions past and present, when sons and daughters of the Catholic Church have sinned by action or omission against their Orthodox brothers and sisters, may the Lord grant us the forgiveness we beg of him.

Greetings. So why does there have to be 2 seperate "churches"? Isn't that unbiblical in some ways?

Luke 11:29 Of the yet throngs being convened, He begins to be saying "the generation this generation wicked is a Sign is seeking and a Sign not shall be being given to it except the Sign of Jonah the Prophet. 30 For according as became Jonah a Sign to the Ninevites thus shall also the Son of the Man to the generation this.

Matt 12:41 `Men Ninevites shall be resurrecting/ana-sthsontai <450> (5698) in the judging with the generation/geneaV <1074>, this,

 

[Anglian]

Dear LLOJ,

You write:

Greetings. So why does there have to be 2 seperate "churches"? Isn't that unbiblical in some ways?

There are many answers to this question. The one I prefer is: 'because prideful men, convinced that they, alone carry the teaching of the Apostles, insist they are right.'

'According to thy mercy, Lord ...'

peace,

Anglian

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Dear LLOJ,
You write:

There are many answers to this question. The one I prefer is: 'because prideful men, convinced that they, alone carry the teaching of the Apostles, insist they are right.'

'According to thy mercy, Lord ...'
peace,
Anglian

Yeah. That is why it is so difficult debating atheists, Jews and Muslims on our Bible. Sigh

Romans 9:27 Isaiah yet cries-out over the Israel "if-ever may be the number of the sons of Israel as the sand of the sea, the Remnant/kata-leimma <2640> shall be being Saved". [Daniel 12:1]

Reve 7:3 saying: "No ye should be injuring the land, neither the sea, neither the trees, untill we should be sealing the bond-servants of the God of us on the foreheads of them" 4 And I hear the number of the ones having been sealed a hundred forty four thousands having been sealed out of every tribe of sons of Israel.

 

[archierieus]

The only religious leader I can recall actually apologising was Pope John Paul II. In that, he behaved as St. Peter behaved and proved himself a worthy spiritual successor.

When the rest of our leaders (including my own) get round to apologising and repenting for the sins of the past, then we shall all be doing as Christ calls us.

My dear Anglian,

I do appreciate your comments, and believe that you are spot on with regard to the importance of making apologies. An apology can go a huge way toward restoring communion.

However, if an apology is genuine, it is accompanied by repentance, which means, as you know, turning away from, turning back from the behaviors which caused the offense. "Aye, there's the rub!" (Do I need to cite to Shakespeare for that quote lol?)

THAT is the question of the hour for this student. I have read the apologies, followed them in the media, and heard many, many protestations to the effect that times have changed, that things are no longer as they used to be.

However, I am a researcher, and a careful researcher. I have wanted to go beyond the protestations, and the nice-sounding words, and get to the heart of the matter. Hence, my extremely serious quest for the truth in regard to the issues at bar here. Has there been a REAL change, on an OFFICIAL level, as evidenced by the formal pronouncements of the organization?

Close examination of the records has indicated to this student that there has not. Based on the inquiries I have conducted, I have concluded that the nice words, the efforts to reach out to other communions, are STILL fueled by the desire for domination. For example, the olive branch has been extended to a number of organizations, HOWEVER on condition of acceptance of papal supremacy. And THAT is the fatal flaw, that is the eye-opener. World domination on a religious level is still claimed BY RIGHT, and moral authority over secular governments is asserted as a matter of right as well.

Down deep, there has been no change--but there HAS been a splendid marketing job!

Dave

 

[squint]

Men will continue to divide and be divisive over as little as a SINGLE WORD.

This is the way of the flesh man...they will continue IN DIVISIONS. The church has more than adequately expressed this as a present day and rapidly growing reality no matter what they claim in numbers. Were individual believers set together their divisions and individual 'lordings' over others become quickly apparent.

An earlier poster expressed his concerns about the RCC coming into political power and his fanciful faithful stand of NUTS.

God in the Old Testament forsaw this working...and this has continued to happen and will continue to happen because God has made it so to happen:

Ezekiel 38:

20 So that the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the heaven, and the beasts of the field, and all creeping things that creep upon the earth, and all the men that are upon the face of the earth, shall shake at my presence, and the mountains shall be thrown down, and the steep places shall fall, and every wall shall fall to the ground.
21 And I will call for a sword against him throughout all my mountains, saith the Lord GOD: every man's sword shall be against his brother.
22 And I will plead against him with pestilence and with blood; and I will rain upon him, and upon his bands, and upon the many people that are with him, an overflowing rain, and great hailstones, fire, and brimstone.

Haggai 2:22
And I will overthrow the throne of kingdoms, and I will destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the heathen; and I will overthrow the chariots, and those that ride in them; and the horses and their riders shall come down, every one by the sword of his brother.

This is a reality that 'we' all openly practice here everyday and this practice goes on throughout the WHOLE WORLD and will get progressively WORSE until it's OVER and this by God's Exact Intention sparked by HIS WORD in Power whether any man of flesh know it or not, see it or not.

enjoy!

squint

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Men will continue to divide and be divisive over as little as a SINGLE WORD.

This is the way of the flesh man...they will continue IN DIVISIONS. The church has more than adequately expressed this as a present day and rapidly growing reality no matter what they claim in numbers. Were individual believers set together their divisions and individual 'lordings' over others become quickly apparent.

Haggai 2:22
And I will overthrow the throne of kingdoms, and I will destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the heathen; and I will overthrow the chariots, and those that ride in them; and the horses and their riders shall come down, every one by the sword of his brother

That would mean the 2nd seal in revelation is now being fulfilled?

Reve 6:4 And came out another horse, firery, and to the one sitting upon him was given to him to be taking the peace out of the land, and that one another they should be slaying. And was given to him a sword, great.

 

[Anglian]

Dear Dave,

Down deep, there has been no change--but there HAS been a splendid marketing job!

Dave

You may be correct. But where do we go wrong in accepting the apology and acting upon it and accepting it in good faith? whatever you think of it, it is a good deal further than anyone else has gone.

How often are we called to forgive?

peace,

Anglian

 

[squint]

That would mean the 2nd seal in revelation is now being fulfilled?

Reve 6:4 And came out another horse, firery, and to the one sitting upon him was given to him to be taking the peace out of the land, and that one another they should be slaying. And was given to him a sword, great.

Bingo! A 'firey' slaying for sure. What is the sentence that nearly all believers pass amongst themselves to our fellow man but FIREY torture for all of eternity?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Bingo! A 'firey' slaying for sure. What is the sentence that nearly all believers pass amongst themselves to our fellow man but FIREY torture for all of eternity?

Revelation is pretty fascintating but unfortunately, bible translations differ quite a bit in places.

http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm

Reve 11:4 these are the two olives-trees, and the two lamp-stands, the-ones before the Lord [*God] of the land standing
5 and if any them willing to injure, fire is going out of the mouth of them and is devouring the enemies of them. And if any should be willing them to injure, thusly is binding him to be killed.

NASB) Revelation 11:4 These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth.

NKJV) Revelation 11:4 These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth.

 

[squint]

Revelation is pretty fascintating but unfortunately, bible translations differ quite a bit in places.

http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm

Reve 11:4 these are the two olives-trees, and the two lamp-stands, the-ones before the Lord [*God] of the land standing
5 and if any them willing to injure, fire is going out of the mouth of them and is devouring the enemies of them. And if any should be willing them to injure, thusly is binding him to be killed.

NASB) Revelation 11:4 These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth.

NKJV) Revelation 11:4 These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth.

As you know LLoJ, these are interesting subjects. There is a fire that comes to destroy without any doubt. Unto 'whom' will always be my question to any believers. What is true against one entity class will not be true to a different entity class.

God has set the vessels of honor in the same flesh as the vessels of dishonor. When the Sword of His Word DIVIDES these TWO it becomes apparent 'who' is 'who' in every single case.

The fact that in the same flesh of Peter was also a vessel of dishonor is not in dispute. Satan SPOKE from his lips. There is the OTHER vessel. The fact that Satan 'entered' Judas shows the other vessel IN Judas.

Were we to apply this measure to any subsequent chain of Pope's we would find the SAME FACT to be consistent. But they CANNOT admit this fact or they would UTTERLY lose credibility in an instant as well insulting the FLOCK with THE FACTS. Heaven forbid we should speak truth to each other in these matters.

There is no doubt that ALL of the Popes were and are sinners. What they cannot admit is that it is THE DEVIL himself who is 'implicated' in EVERY sin. For the Pope to admit that as a present tense condition...I'd fall over in shock. Paul said whenever he desired to do good EVIL WAS PRESENT with himself.

Can you picture the Pope, speaking EX-Cathedra in his opening remarks..."I am trying to speak with infallibility unto good, BUT EVIL IS NOW PRESENT WITH ME!"

ha! That'll be the DAY!

enjoy!

squint

 

[Rhamiel]

LLOJ

Greetings. Why is it a lot of times when a non-RC presents a post, the RCs always try to find something in it that is insulting.

He said that the only thinkg keeping the Church, that I love and trust, from being murderous is that it is currantly impotant, it would be like me saying your father would go around killing people if he was stronger.

archierieus

However, I am a researcher, and a careful researcher. I have wanted to go beyond the protestations, and the nice-sounding words, and get to the heart of the matter. Hence, my extremely serious quest for the truth in regard to the issues at bar here. Has there been a REAL change, on an OFFICIAL level, as evidenced by the formal pronouncements of the organization?

We don't do the things that we appologized for anymore, no more crusades and anti-semitism is frowned on and all that other stuff, what do you think the Catholic Church would have to do to show that it is really sorry for its past crimes?

 

[archierieus]

Dear Dave,

You may be correct. But where do we go wrong in accepting the apology and acting upon it and accepting it in good faith? whatever you think of it, it is a good deal further than anyone else has gone.

How often are we called to forgive?

peace,

Anglian

But Anglian, if someone apologizes on the one hand, but then says that I am a heretic and do not have assurance of salvation outside of his tradition, (and the two most recent popes have said, publicly, that Protestants are heretics!) and must submit to HIM, just as he has always said for a millennium and a half, then what kind of apology is that? I am reminded of the sad experience of the indigenous peoples in this country, with the European settlers, summarized in these words: "White man speak with forked tongue."

If the RCC will take the following actions, it would go a long way toward giving credibility:

1. Renounce the claim to be the only true Church, and that Protestants and others are 'heretics.'

2. Renounce the claim that there is no assurance of salvation outside the RCC.

3. Renounce the demand that everyone must submit to the Roman pontiff. Instead, let the 'Roman pontiff' DECLINE supremacy, and take the lowest place, taking the role of a servant.

4. Renounce any effort to influence 'the civil authorities' (JPII's words) to support the RCC's teachings.

To our RC colleagues on this Board: Please do communicate the above to your bishop, with the request that same be forwarded to the Vatican. I for one shall await most anxiously the response.

Regards as always,

Dave

 

[archierieus]

LLOJ
He said that the only thinkg keeping the Church, that I love and trust, from being murderous is that it is currantly impotant, it would be like me saying your father would go around killing people if he was stronger.

archierieus
We don't do the things that we appologized for anymore, no more crusades and anti-semitism is frowned on and all that other stuff, what do you think the Catholic Church would have to do to show that it is really sorry for its past crimes?

I appreciate the empathy, the hurt and the strong sense of loyalty to one's church which come through in our post. But Rhamiel, and friends, Romans, countrymen, hear me for my cause!

Your church says that I am a heretic. Your church says that I do not have salvation, or, in another place, that I cannot have assurance of salvation outside of your church. Your church demands that I submit to your pope (speaking of which, is it still de rigueur for the bishops and cardinals to kiss the pope's toe? Did you know that some centuries back, one king renounced allegiance to the pope because when the toe was presented to be kissed by the king, the king's dog bit it and the pope commanded the dog to be killed?) And your church is attempting to influence my government to enforce your church's doctrines.

Can you understand my concerns?

Dave

 

[Rhamiel]

Archy

if someone apologizes on the one hand, but then says that I am a heretic and do not have assurance of salvation outside of his tradition, (and the two most recent popes have said, publicly, that Protestants are heretics!) and must submit to HIM, just as he has always said for a millennium and a half, then what kind of apology is that? I am reminded of the sad experience of the indigenous peoples in this country, with the European settlers, summarized in these words: "White man speak with forked tongue."

we did not apologize for saying you are in error, if you see a brother in error should you not try to correct him? Most Catholics do not use the term heretic when talking about protestants anymore because it is seen as rude and it downplays the fact that protestants are Christians, most Catholics use the term "seperated brothers and sisters" when talking about how protestants relate to the Church.
The assurance of salvation part is kinda tricky, we believe that if you die in a state of friendship with Christ you are saved, we do not believe in "once saved always saved" we do say that protestants can be saved by the power of Christ.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Archy
we did not apologize for saying you are in error, if you see a brother in error should you not try to correct him? Most Catholics do not use the term heretic when talking about protestants anymore because it is seen as rude and it downplays the fact that protestants are Christians, most Catholics use the term "seperated brothers and sisters" when talking about how protestants relate to the Church.
The assurance of salvation part is kinda tricky, we believe that if you die in a state of friendship with Christ you are saved, we do not believe in "once saved always saved" we do say that protestants can be saved by the power of Christ.

Ah thanks. We feel that way about you RC's also

 

[Photini]

LLOJ
We don't do the things that we appologized for anymore, no more crusades and anti-semitism is frowned on and all that other stuff, what do you think the Catholic Church would have to do to show that it is really sorry for its past crimes?

I, for one, appreciated the apology made to the Orthodox Church...and especially since it was accompanied by returning certain relics. I don't look at it as bigger than it is though. I do look at it as a good start to heal some very old wounds.

 

[archierieus]

Archy
we did not apologize for saying you are in error, if you see a brother in error should you not try to correct him? . . . The assurance of salvation part is kinda tricky, we believe that if you die in a state of friendship with Christ you are saved, we do not believe in "once saved always saved" we do say that protestants can be saved by the power of Christ.

Kinda tricky? Another huge, watershed difference between the two systems of belief. For a Protestant, the answer is very simple: the prayer of salvation:

1. I realize I am a sinner, and need a Savior;
2. I repent of my sins, by God's grace and with God's help;
3. I accept Jesus Christ as my Substitute, my Savior, His perfect life to stand in place of my sinful life, and His death on the cross to pay the price for all my sins.

That's it. Nothing tricky about it. EVERYONE who prays that prayer, who accepts Jesus as his Savior, WILL BE SAVED. Religion, creed, church attendance or lack thereof, not the issue. That's it. It is sacred, between the soul and God. Nothing between, nothing interfees, nothing stands in the way. And the assurance of salvation is a wonderful thing.

As for seeing someone else in error, another huge difference. For Protestants, the solution is to sit down together and open God's Word, praying for the guidance of the Holy Spirit to lead each one into truth. That's the long and short of it. The priesthood of all believers.

Dave

 

[GodsTwo]

The Word of Yahuweh can't be any plainer than this.

The Savior for whom the Rock was named, asked His disciples the most important question ever posed: "Who do you say (lego - affirm and maintain, advise and teach) I Am (eimi - I exist and am present as)?" To which, a disciple named for the astuteness of his revelation, responded: "Simon (a transliteration of the Hebrew name Shim’own, meaning to listen, understand, discern, regard, and proclaim) Petros (a masculine proper name meaning pebble or stone) gave the answer, ‘The Messiah, the Son of the living God.’" (Matthew 16:15-16)

Affirming this live-saving truth, "Yahushua said (lego), ‘Blessed (makarios - a poetic term denoting transcendent happiness in a life beyond labor and death) are you Shim’own (the one who listens, understands, discerns, regards, and proclaims), son of (bar) Yonah (from yownah, meaning the dove; the name of a Yahudi sent to Nineveh, Assyria whose life and book serve as a prophetic metaphor for Yahushua saving Gentiles), because flesh and blood did not make this manifest (apokalupto - disclose by baring), but My Father who is in Heaven." (Matthew 16:17) As is usually true with Scripture, every name and nuance was carefully chosen, revealing subtle and profound truths.

What follows is important. Petros/Peter isn’t the petra/bedrock. The recognition that "Yahushua is the Messiah, the Son of the living God," is the foundation upon which the ekklesia/called-out assembly would be restored and established. Beyond the evidence sprinkled throughout the Tanach, identifying the Rock with Yahshua, "Petros" was a man and every reference to "petra/bedrock" is feminine.

"Indeed (de), I (kago) say (logos) concerning this (hoti - as a marker of equivalence for identifying and explaining this) to you (soi), you (su) are (ei) Petros (a masculine proper noun meaning pebble or stone), and (kai) upon/by/in/with (epi - "upon" when used with things that are at rest, "by" when used in relationship to people, "with" when used in connection with authority, and "in" used in reference to an observation) this one (taute - singular feminine demonstrative pronoun) Rock (petra - bedrock, a feminine noun; a large stone which projects itself) I shall build by edifying, promoting, and restoring (oikodomeo - rebuild and establish, strengthen and enable, instruct and improve) My (mou) called out gathering (ekklesia)." (Matthew 16:18)

English translations all leave "hoti/concerning this" out of their renderings of Yahshua’s answer. Had it been included, no rational person would have thought that Petros, rather than his answer, was the foundation of the ekklesia. The source of edification and restoration is the Savior, not his flawed and imperfect disciple.

Believing Peter is the Rock is irrational and delusional. The evidence of Yahuweh's Word is irrevocable/irrefutable and supercedes, trumps, pre-empts, negates, refutes, and proves to be a lie all that oppose/contradict it, whether said opposition is human or church dogma.

The "Rock" has not yet come, for God's church does not yet exist.

 

[Rhamiel]

LLOJ

Ah thanks. We feel that way about you RC's also

thank you LLOJ, it is nice to know that you think it is possible for Catholics to be saved. I know things can get a little mean in GT at times but it is good to point out we are all Christians and the fighting here is that between siblings who will rest in the Fathers house when the long day is over with