This is a good example of why we need Tradition and it’s keeper, the Magisterium as our guide when reading Scripture and indeed, this is only one of many such examples (even on this thread). The fact if the matter is, two people can read the exact same sentences out if the Bible (or anything really) and interpret them entirely differently (if no further guidance is given or accepted). Observe...
(Some) Protestants clearly interpret the passages Elsie provided as saying, in effect, everytime Peter is mentioned, “Peter (his name now at the time of this incident)...”
We Catholics interpret/read those verses to say, “Peter (the one who would later be called Peter but at this time was called “Simon”)...
In other words, we believe the author was saying “He who was called Peter later..” Whereas you (non-Catholics) believe it says “He who used to be Simon sometime before but is now Peter...” (You just can’t identify the moment his name was changed apparently).
The point is, both readings, when read alone and divorced from any historical and/or Traditional teaching on the matter are valid. No one can say which is “better” from the Bible alone. One needs a context of some sort not provided by Scripture alone.
This is the ironic and glaring truth that stands out, to me and I dare say others who read such debates: those who reject the need for a Tradition and a Magisterium to guard and preserve both Tradition and Scripture do, by their own rejection, demonstrate the need for such time and time again by their insistence upon their own, personal interpretation of Scripture (in effect, making themselves a “mini-Pope”)
Demonstrated, to those who have no preconcieved agenda against the Church and possess a love for Truth over all else, that is.
Forgive my intrusion into your “discussion”. I leave you to resume arguing over something that can never be resolved, given the present course, as I have demonstrated, if you so desire.
Nothing to forgive. You make the exact point I was hoping to deliver. By taking a consistant position - we arrive at two different conclusions - ergo interpretation of the Word is essential.
Thank you for your comment sir. :)
“The point is, both readings, when read alone and divorced from any historical and/or Traditional teaching on the matter are valid. No one can say which is “better” from the Bible alone. One needs a context of some sort not provided by Scripture alone.”
Yellow flag.
If you can PROVE this is historical and directly from the Apostles teaching before 100 AD, fine. It lends real credence. If like so much of Roman teaching, it did not arise for hundreds of years, it is simply eisogesis that is used to support later doctrine.
In this case, historical context is not the magisterium. It would be factual history. It would be accepted by almost all as an important reason to choose one possible view over another. Magisterium not needed where facts are present. If no facts are present, the magisterium can add nothing absolute.
Unfortunately, in declaring a doctrine that arose hundreds of years later - and here you can take your pick from among many - grammar, language, history, systematic theology, etc. are ignored by the magisterium. In that case, they do a disservice to the Holy Words of God.
Not so.
They are fulfilling the commands of Scripture to "study to show themselves approved, a workman who rightly handles the Word of Truth." Those who fail to fulfill this command cannot rightly say they are also fulfilling the Greatest Commandment - "to love God with ALL your heart, ALL your would and ALL your mind."
No mini-me popes needed. Just a commitment to do what He commands.
I have ALREADY 'provided' Scripture that shows PETER being used when Jesus called him to be a disciple.
What the RCC cannot do is show that this verse is somehow different than the Saul/Paul name change.
NIV Matthew 4:18-19
18. As Jesus was walking beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon called Peter and his brother Andrew. They were casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen.
19. “Come, follow me,” Jesus said, “and I will make you fishers of men.”