| St. Peter and Rome |
 |
| 11/15/04 |
Posted on 10/27/2006 8:14:39 PM PDT by Salvation
| St. Peter and Rome |
|
| 11/15/04 |
That's not it and you know it...Like I said earlier, get personal with God and ask Him to open the bible for you...While you study it...
What you mabye don't realize is that you (if you're saved) have the same Spirit and power IN YOU that raised Jesus from the dead...That's the same Spirit that reveals the scripture to you...
Then why haven't Lutherans changed their position? Why did John Wesley believe the same way more than two centuries later? Do you honestly believe that Mary and Joseph would have felt "reproached" if their parenting was limited to caring for the Son of God?
What were the mainly illiterate people supposed to do prior to the invention of the printing press when Bibles were incredibly expensive and nearly impossible to get?
Nope...That's why I emphasazed MY OPINION...God is the judge but we are told to judge all things...Not to determine one's future destination but for fellowship...
I suspect from yur response you don't have a personal testimony...
Tell me, since you don't believe my verses from Jeremiah of the "false prophets who lead people astray with their reckless boasting" are sufficient, how do you determine who is speaking the truth and who isn't? What criteria do you use? Based upon some council of men who tell you they have the Spirit of God?
This is what your church tells you...Why would copies of the scripture be expensive??? Sure, they didn't run off a million copies at a time, but they had enough copies to spread their beliefs far and wide...
Are you actually that naive about the availability of books prior to the invention of the printing press? And do you think the Catholic Church somehow conspired to accomplish this? Do you have any idea how long it takes to transcribe a Bible by hand? And finally, the overwhelming portion of the people was illiterate. Why would God create so many insurmountable obstacles to Salvation?
It is interesting that Catholics talk about how a large family is truly a blessing from God and then turn right around and say that Joseph and Mary should have had only one child.
Simon was indeed a special person in scripture. The Book of Acts was written in about 62 A.D. by Luke....and have you ever wondered why Luke spent so much time (2/3 of a chapter) telling us about him? [Acts 8] Have you ever wondered why the Bible is so silent on the activities of the other apostles but tells us quite a bit about Simon....a wanna be?
A false religious system had begun....almost immediately after Pentecost [II Thessalonians 2:7][Jude 4] and Luke is making sure we know what caused it. Luke and Paul, spending most of their time in and about Asia Minor, Greece and Rome indicate to us that this was the location where much of the early heresies were emanating from.
Hasting's Dictionary of the Apostolic Church, Volume 2, page 496 says: "It seems beyond question that Luke knew the reputation which Simon Magus acquired, and that he regarded the subsequent history of Simon as the natural result of what occurred in the beginning of his connection with the Christians." Luke was attempting to expose Simon and indicate to us that he was never a part of God's Church! By 62 A.D. this was obviously a major problem as Simon had many followers running around calling themselves Christians!
Simon was a Samaritan [Acts 8:9]. Simon used sorcery [Acts 8:9]. Simon had the entire population of Samaria regarding him a a God [Acts 8:10]. Simon was a descendant of Babylonians [II Kings 17:24] and practiced "their" mystery religion.
Simon tried to buy his way in [Acts 8:18-19] and was rejected by Peter. Peter used a prophecy in doing this by using the phrase "Gall of Bitterness". These words to a first century Jew meant someone who is worshiping idols and the abominations of the heathens [Deuteronomy 29:16-18]. "Make sure there is no root among you that produces such bitter poison."
It has been shown conclusively in this thread that Simon went to Rome about 42 A.D., greatly influenced the Romans, had a statue erected to himself, was known far and wide as Simon "Pater" or Father Simon and II Kings 17:40-41 tells us what the Babylonians did after being resettled in Assyria. These are the folks Simon Magus called ancestors.
Much of what the Magisterium teaches can be found in the roots of this poison.....this gall of bitterness.
Sounds familiar????
Post #549 should say in the second to last paragraph: "Resettled in Samaria....not Assyria!
Yes, I am always amazed that such available material just doesn't seem to "Sink In" with the very people who most often quote it......as the "Work of the Early Fathers."
Ideas are God inspired. The idea of "Use The Scriptures" was communicated by the passage in question. I don't think you can reasonably say that, at the time, the practice or guideline was to think up a great idea, then teach it as doctrine, and this was accepted practice.
You must give me evidence that the Old Testament was treated like that by the Levities, or any Israelite.
My references to the Catholic clergy is stained with fact the the fathers of the church tell you to pray to dead humans when every word in the Bible states or implies that people pray to God, and with the new covenant, through the Christ in faith and belief, only.
As I said before, the smaller the number of books, down to the maximum of them that can be absolutely trusted as accurate, is the best way. Christ's message was very simple.
You give the church Holy Ghost authority using the scriptures with only labored interpretation, and some on conjecture. This is why you endlessly get an argument. If you had anything compelling, it would have been settled long ago.
Not everybody agrees that what the church calls the Apocalypse was divinely inspired. The four Gospels, Acts, Letters everyone agrees was inspired. Let's leave it at that. God promised some exquisite consequences to those who follow false doctrine. I not so sure He would consider the lessor offense of having been duped.
Yes, you don't go by scripture alone. So, what do you think God thinks about praying to dead people? He's OK with it, do you think? Is Christ the Lord? Based on what we know this Spirit has said, that is written down, like scripture?
But I get it! You don't go by scripture alone, so you don't have to have scripture to say you need not use scripture. What a great con; my hat is off.
Again you ask me for scripture, when you are saying scripture is not necessary. Because Protestants believe in scripture only so we should follow our own example? Ah, but if not needing scripture is Truth, it is Truth for anyone.
But not for the Catholic church, of course. They have scripture to prove it. Why should they need scripture to prove it if scripture is not necessary?
Why not just publicly claim up front and in all writings the notice that the Catholic church is the only true church, the only true interpreter of God's word, old and new covenants, whose word is law and whose authority is the voice of God Himself and anyone who departs from its doctrine is eternally damned to hellfire?
Each point above proceeds directly from the premise that holy scriptures can be no governor to one, and only one, church.
The church is not in the scripture. The Bible is, and always has been about individuals, not some preeminent, huge corporation that controls the world's access to God.
The Body of Christ is all the individuals that believe in the Christ and His teachings. I imagine there are a number of them in the Catholic church.
Read it again and try to think like an individual soul of God and not like a corporation.
The perfection of men of God could and can be achieved by any individual then or now, with or without a church, or any other corporate structure. The word of God is for MANKIND!
Where does the scripture teach you don'thave to go by scripture? I ask you again, where is even the custom or practice in the Old or New testament that allows men disregard the need for the authority of the scriptures?
Or are you guys just freewheelin' it?
And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son:
Oh? It's not suggestive?
I guess not by someone with so much to loose if she didn't stay a virgin.
Myself, I'm just curious. It's important that she be a virgin when she bore Jesus, but of no particular importance that she stay so. Unless you need to worship he, I guess.
"He then not putting faith in God a whit the more, set himself with still greater zeal to the study of the whole magic art, that he might the better bewilder and overpower multitudes of men. Such was his procedure in the reign of Claudius Caesar, by whom he was honoured with a statue on account of his magical power. This man was glorified by many as if he were a god, and he taught that it was himself who appeared among the Jews as the Son, but descended in Samaria as the Father, while he came to other nations in the character of the Holy Spirit. He represented himself, in a word, as being the loftiest of all powers, that is, the Being who is the Father over all, and he allowed himself to be called by whatsoever title men were pleased to address him."[Vs 1]
"Now this Simon, from whom all sorts of heresies derive their origin . . . conferred salvation upon men . . . for men are saved through his grace, not on account of their own righteous actions." [Verse 3]
"Thus then, the mystic priests belonging to this sect both lead profligate lives and practice the magical arts, each one of them to the extent of his ability. They use exorcisms and incantations. . . and whatever othe curious arts can be had recourse to, are eagerly pressed into their service. They also have an image of Simon fashioned after the likeness of Jupiter, and another of Helena in the shape of Minerva; and these they worship. In fine they have a name derived from Simon, the author of these impious doctrines, being called Simonians; and from them, 'knowledge falsely so-called' received its beginning, as one may learn from their assertions." [Verse 4]
"The successor of this man was Menander, also a Samaritan by birth, and he too was a perfect adept in the practice of magic. He affirms . . . that he himself is the person who has been sent forth from the presence of the invisible beings as a saviour for the deliverance of men . . . He gives too as he affirms, by that magic which he teaches, knowledge to this effect, that one may overcome those very angels that made the world; for his disciples obtain a resurrection by being baptized unto him, and can die no more, but remain in possession of immortal youth." [Verse 5]
This magician Simon who sat in a sacerdotal chair in Rome for 25 years? whose followers were "called Christians", was called by these "so-called Christians" many appellations including: the Father {Pater}, the Son, the Holy Spirit, and others ..... conferring "salvation by grace" unto those who were "baptized unto him". Where is the magisterium of this ancient religious sect founded by Simon the Magician today? Still in Rome?
Interesting word....Pater.
Peter, Pator, Patre, Padre, Patora, Preter was the name given to many ancient heathen Gods. The term always meaning "inter"preters" of sacred knowledge. In many ancient cultures the father was the chief priest of the family and became known as Pator. The head Pator was the Arch Pator....or the "Patriarch".
The early Roman writer "Lucilius" mentions that Neptune, Liber, Saturn, Mars, Janus and Quirnus were all Paters.... Chief Gods......especially Ju-Piter. Jupiter was the Roman way of saying "Zeus Peter" and was the chief god of the Greeks.
The pagan God, Artemis is pictured standing by a stone pillar....a phallic symbol which became known as Petras....or simply a "Peter". Yes, there was a Peter in Rome.....early in the first century.....for about 25 years. It was not the Apostle Peter....it was Simon "Pator" Magus.
Except the only connection between the Magisterium and Magus is in the first three letters and in your head.
I am proving you wrong. If the scripture be the sole source of Christian truth, then this fact better be right there in the scripture, black on white, inambiguous. It is not.
Why not just publicly claim up front and in all writings the notice that the Catholic church is the only true church, the only true interpreter of God's word, old and new covenants, whose word is law and whose authority is the voice of God Himself and anyone who departs from its doctrine is eternally damned to hellfire?
Why not? Of course the Catholic Church is the only true Church, established by Christ, His only mystical body and bride, outside of which there is no salvation. Christ has one body and one bride, and so there is one Church and one Church only, amen.
And your incredulous gasps are just your opinion.
Is this Vatican I or Vatican II teaching? I keep forgetting and get them mixed up.
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.