The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles) -- Thread 156

Southern Baptists ending talks with Catholic Church ^ | 3/24/01 | AP

[Proud2BAmerican]

So would you say that a group of Episcopalians who come to the belief that Jesus did not want women to be ministers (do Episcy's call their ministers priests? I'm not sure) and go and found their own church down the street are not forming a new denomination? You think they remain Episcopalians?

I guess, in retrospect, this entire discussion is really moot until someone has reliable information from the book's publishers as to what constitutes a denomination.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Now, anyone have some Halelujahs to sound out! Praise God.

Amen and Amen Havoc my friend and ally :) this is great!

Its goina be pretty hard for them to spin this one, only the blind will not see this!

BigMack

[malakhi]

MOVE
TO
THREAD 157!!!

At your own pace...

[Proud2BAmerican]

Any questions?

----

Petros is the new name given to Simon bar Jona by Christ. Christ called him 'rock.' Kind of a cool nickname, actually. When it's transliterated from Cephas (what Jesus spoke) into Greek, it is forced into the form of 'petros' because it is a masculine name. And I've read that 'petros' means little pebble only in certain Greek poems around the 2nd or 3rd century BC - and that by the time of Jesus, it was most certianly synomous with massive rock. At any rate, in the other places, the normal, feminine, usage of the word, 'petra', can be applied because in none of those places is it actually referring to a male name, thus the prefectly acceptable usage of the feminine form. At any rate, this discussion would be moot in Aramaic, since the words used would be 'Cephas'.

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Now, anyone have some Halelujahs to sound out! Praise God. And ya'll have been quoting these verses as authoritative - probably not realizing just how authoritative they are! Peter was in the presence of the petra, but nowhere in the entire NT is he referred to as petra, that is reserved to Jesus - Completly!

This debate can now be put to rest. Hallelujah. Praise God. I'm convinced more than every now. Catholics lose this one.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Catholics lose this one.

And the last one and the one before that and back on thread 151 and and............

:>)

BigMack

[Havoc]

Petros is the new name given to Simon bar Jona by Christ. Christ called him 'rock.' Kind of a cool nickname, actually. When it's transliterated from Cephas (what Jesus spoke) into Greek, it is forced into the form of 'petros' because it is a masculine name. And I've read that 'petros' means little pebble only in certain Greek poems around the 2nd or 3rd century BC - and that by the time of Jesus, it was most certianly synomous with massive rock. At any rate, in the other places, the normal, feminine, usage of the word, 'petra', can be applied because in none of those places is it actually referring to a male name, thus the prefectly acceptable usage of the feminine form. At any rate, this discussion would be moot in Aramaic, since the words used would be 'Cephas'.

Petros is a Peice of rock, by definition, larger than lithos (pebbles), but smaller than petra which is larger masses. One cannot hollow out petros and make a dwelling or a tomb from it - it is too small for that.

Cephas is rooted from Kephas which is equivelant to petros in the definition above. Aramaic is an assumption - and texts in aramaic are a myth until produced - which as yet, no one has seen. One cannot argue from absence.

So, this is all the better you can do. When the proof is presented that you are wrong you resort to nonexistant evidence and spit at the scriptures and at the truth. I've addressed this before. And it seems Catholics are the only ones fighting the scripture here. There was an effort in constructing the grammer of the thought expressed in Matthew 16:18 - The grammer used shows that the selection of the two words was deliberate. Changing petra to petros or vice versa creates an unreconcileable error in grammer. Using Cephas in both places would do the exact same thing. Ya'll just can't seem to grasp that - you don't understand the scripture; so I don't shudder in disbelief that you don't understand Greek or translation principles either.

[ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton]

Peter was in the presence of the petra, but nowhere in the entire NT is he referred to as petra, that is reserved to Jesus - Completly!

This debate can now be put to rest. Hallelujah. Praise God. I'm convinced more than every now.

As am I. You boys have been smoking Some really GOOD Stuff!

[ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton]

Hey, Havoc, you been mixing your metaphors again.

If I say to someone your as big as a Rock, it doesn't mean I am referring to that same person if I use the metaphor again.

If if the Rock thing is unclear, it is cleared up in the next verse when Jesus refers to the keys, however.

Hope you didn't dislocate your shoulder or suffer needlessly from all the back patting around here.

[Proud2BAmerican]

Let me try to say it another way. Let's say that I'mm write, and Christ meant to call Peter a 'large immoveable rock.' The author, writing in Greek ,would still be forced to use the phrase 'petros' because he was using the word as a proper masculine name, and is forced to use the masculine form of the word. He cannot use the word petra to apply to Peter's new name because PETRA IS FEMININE and PETER IS A MAN.

[Havoc]

o.>