"All right, mistakes were made. But one can hardly hold the current incarnation of Holy Mother Church responsible for the oversights of old."
Posted on 08/17/2013 2:06:44 AM PDT by NYer
Sorry; but there is NO proof that jesus changed anyone's name.
There IS proof, however, that ol' Simon was ALREADY know as Pete BEFORE the verse that you are going to quote.
(You can look it up.)
Dang!
You stole my zinger!
Where did Jesus GIVE the Magisterium ANY authority at all?
You want ME to defend them??
Yes. Do you believe that changing the subject is a CATHOLIC virtue?
Yes. Do you believe that changing the subject is a CATHOLIC virtue?
Dang it!
You got my zinger!
Dang it!
You got my zinger!
Why isn’t this FR problem FIXED???
You first!
You claim Jesus took St. Peter’s position away. Where did he do so?
“Now the JURY would like to look at your evidence to this claim; if it wouldn’t trouble you TOO much to produce it.”
Perhaps you can show me where ‘faith alone’ appears in the bible prior to Luther.
“Christ never gave him “a position of authority”.”
Yes, he did. Right in Matthew. Matthew clearly states that Jesus, after Peter confessed that Jesus was the Messiah, that he was going to build his church upon Peter - and gave him the Keys to the Kingdom of heaven.
It’s all right there. Now you’re free to deny the Gospels and what they teach, but that doesn’t mean you get to deny the Gospels and at the same time claim sola scriptura. Either the Gospels are true or they are not.
“Simon was ALREADY know as Pete”
[[citation needed]].
“Where did Jesus GIVE the Magisterium ANY authority at all?”
“I give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven....” Right there in Matthew.
“Matthew clearly states that Jesus, after Peter confessed that Jesus was the Messiah, that he was going to build his church upon Peter - and gave him the Keys to the Kingdom of heaven.”
Oh sure, I know what Rome teaches. They have to. It is their justification to try to Lord it over Orthodox and Protestant Christians. Take it away and the infrastructure collapses. Further, as a Roman, you are required to believe it - heck you are not allowed to study and come to any other conclusion. I get where you’re coming from.
The rest of us disagree because of what is said, because of language, grammar, history and the totality of Scripture.
Christ alone is the foundation on which the Gathering of His own is built.
“Oh sure, I know what Rome teaches. They have to.”
It’s right there in scripture. “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven”. Again - either the Gospel is true or it is not.
“because of language, grammar, history and the totality of Scripture.”
Show me then in the Greek, where it says what you claim it says. The text is very clear. “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven”.
“Further, as a Roman, you are required to believe it - heck you are not allowed to study and come to any other conclusion”
A terrible argument.
First, you ARE required to take the Roman interpretation without question. That is t an argument, but an observation about why you can’t see it objectively... Nor question what you were taught.
"All right, mistakes were made. But one can hardly hold the current incarnation of Holy Mother Church responsible for the oversights of old."
You claim Jesus took St. Peter’s position away.
Me FIRST?
It's YOUR chosen religions claim that peter was even GIVEN any osition.
I have produced the Scripture in question, in it's en tireity, and in context.
You have huffed and puffed and TRIED to move the goalposts.
Your pathetic efforts to get ME to do something MORE is noted.
There you go AGAIN!
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.