Posted on 08/12/2017 7:16:17 PM PDT by ebb tide
Wolfgang Huber, former Council President of the Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD), believes in a "breakthrough" at the communion of Protestants and Catholics to the Ecumenical Church Day of 2021. "I can not imagine that we will celebrate this church day without A breakthrough has been achieved in the area of Eucharistic hospitality, "said the former bishop of Berlin in the interview of the" Weser-Kurier "(Saturday). Until the event in Frankfurt am Main 2021 something must move.
"Machistort des Papstes" less promising
According to Huber, the next steps in the Eucharist and the Lord's Supper will be "decentralized". "My feeling is that Pope Francis wants to broaden the scope of individual bishops' conferences for ecumenically relevant decisions, and sees this path as a more promising one as a central path for the whole world church and a breakthrough through a pope's power," said Huber.
The former bishop of the Evangelical Church of Berlin-Brandenburg-Silesian Oberlausitz was 75 years old on Saturday. Berlin's Archbishop Heiner Koch congratulated him with a congratulatory letter: Koch thanked him especially for the "strong accents" which he had placed both in the Protestant church and in the ecumenism. He praised Huber as a "strong integrator" and recalled that the fusion of the Evangelical Church of Berlin-Brandenburg with the Evangelical Church of the Silesian Oberlausitz fell in his office in 2004.
Huber was born on 12 August 1942 in Strasbourg. From 1994 to 2009 he was a bishop of Berlin, and from 2003 to 2009 he was the presidency of the Evangelical Church in Germany. Before that, he was himself president of the church. In his own words, however, it was self-evident for him to leave the office before his bishop's election. "For me the church day movement is characterized by the fact that it is a lay movement that cooperates with the Church, but on the basis of reciprocal freedom", he explained. At the Kirchentag this year in Berlin and Wittenberg you got the feeling of a joint event. "From the old counterpart of the church and the church day nothing was visible to the outside." He wanted something more friction, however. "Friction generates fire," says Huber. (JHE / KNA)
Have you figured out what century you’re in, yet?
Have you figured out that labeling others as heretics is the pot calling the kettle black?
See Post #60.
Not when only one party is the heretic.
I hope they carry more of the Good News of the Gospel than they did when I was missing the boat in the '50s-'60s, but it seems they are more into the Southern Baptist "You're all going to hell because you ain't good enough for God" mode.
I wish you well and I'm so glad Jesus lets me appreciate His gift w/o the intervention of a bunch of "holier than thou" self-appointed "judgementalists" who delude themselves into thinking they are less prone to sinfulness than all others.
They seem to have forgotten that the word "catholic" means universal/all-inclusive and gone into full pharisee mode.
Reminds me of an old Joke:
A man moves into a new town and starts seeking a church to attend. The town is small and only has one church and they have a list of rules that the man can't believe anyone can possible follow if they are being honest. The people are sure they have the right solution and are adamant. about every rule being followed before one can become a full member of the church.
The man goes home to pray about it and says to God, "I want to be part of a church to worship in but the church they have here is hard to get into. I don't think they'll let me in no matter how hard I try." To his astonishment, God replies to him, "My blessed son. Do not despair. They won't let me in their church either."
Which presupposes that He has provided and preserved His word which tells us what obedience requires and enables it. And writing is God's manifest means of preservation: Exodus 17:14; 34:1,27; Deuteronomy 10:4; 17:18; 27:3; 31:24; Joshua 1:8; 2 Chronicles 34:15,18-19; Ps. 19:7-11; 119; John 20:31; Acts 17:11; Revelation 1:1; 20:12, 15;Matthew 4:5-7; 22:29; Lk. 24:44,45; Acts 17:11
• And the Lord said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book.. (Exodus 17:14)
• And the Lord said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest. (Exodus 34:1)
• And the Lord said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. (Exodus 34:27)
• And he wrote on the tables, according to the first writing.. (Deuteronomy 10:4)
• And thou shalt write upon them all the words of this law,..(Deuteronomy 27:3)
"Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever: (Isaiah 30:8; cf. Job 19:23) "
• And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites: (Deuteronomy 17:18)
• And thou shalt write upon them all the words of this law, when thou art passed over, that thou mayest go in unto the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, a land that floweth with milk and honey; as the Lord God of thy fathers hath promised thee. (Deuteronomy 27:3)
• " And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished, (Deuteronomy 31:24) "
• This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success. (Joshua 1:8)
• "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. (John 20:31) "
• Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter; (Revelation 1:19)
• "And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. (Revelation 20:12) "
• "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. (Revelation 20:15) "
As is abundantly evidenced, as written, Scripture became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God.
And thus it was not the veracity of Scripture that subject to testing by oral preaching/tradition, but oral preaching was subject to testing by Scripture:
These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. (Acts 17:11)
While even SS preachers enjoin submission to oral teaching, this is under the premise that it is Scriptural, being subject to testing by Scripture, but men such as the apostles could also speak as wholly inspired of God and also provide new public Divine revelation, which even Rome does not claim to do, and thus her declaration of oral teaching cannot be equal to Scripture, which as the assured word of God is not only correct, but has a special supernatural anointing.
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. (Hebrews 4:12)
And it was not because oral tradition preserved the Word of God that brought about a national revival, but because of the wholly inspired-of-God written word:
And Hilkiah answered and said to Shaphan the scribe, I have found the book of the law in the house of the Lord. And Hilkiah delivered the book to Shaphan. (2 Chronicles 34:15)
Then Shaphan the scribe told the king, saying, Hilkiah the priest hath given me a book. And Shaphan read it before the king. And it came to pass, when the king had heard the words of the law, that he rent his clothes. (2 Chronicles 34:18-19) Nor was it passed-down oral tradition that was ever lauded like the written word of God, (Ps. 19:7-11; 119) and was the authority the Lord reproved the devil and religious leadership by, and substantiated His clams by, and opened the minds of the disciples to. (Mt. 4; 22; Lk. 24:44,45)
Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. (Matthew 4:5-7)
Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. (Matthew 22:29)
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, (Luke 24:44-45)
Scripture is the only wholly inspired supreme substantive transcendent standard, to which all men are to submit.
And looking through the God-inspired record of what know the NT church believed (Acts onward), we see that the Catholic distinctives are not there , but are contrary to it.
You also disagree with Jesus about having a “personal” relationship with him. He told the apostles, “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them. Whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.” In other words, Jesus gave the apostles the power to JUDGE, and then to forgive or refuse forgiveness. Now, it would clearly be preposterous for Jesus to give this power to the apostles unless the faithful were going to TELL their sins to the apostles. So, in John’s gospel, Jesus clearly says that our relationship with him here on earth is not absolutely direct, but is mediated by certain men.
Simply Wrong. Rather than taking a text in isolation as Catholics often must do, and which is the only way you can attempt to make your RC tradition here appear Scriptural, you needed to examine in the light of the rest of Scripture, and in particular the Scriptural record of the NT church, Acts onward, which is interpretive of the gospels.
In so doing, we can see,
1. Nowhere are NT pastors distinctively called by the distinctive word for a distinctive separate sacerdotal class of believers, ("hiereus" in Greek, and "priests" in English), to whom souls regularly came to obtain forgiveness.
Instead, all believers are called to sacrifice (Rm. 12:1; 15:16; Phil. 2:17; 4:18; Heb. 13:15,16; cf. 9:9) and all constitute the only priesthood (hieráteuma) in the NT church, that of all believers, (1Pt. 2:5,9; Re 1:6; 5:10; 20:6).
2. Nowhere are NT believers shown regularly confessing sins to their pastors, or ever commanded to do so. Instead, the only exhortation or command to confess sins is to each other in general.
Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. (James 5:16)
Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months. And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit. Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins. (James 5:17-20)
Here we see an example of spiritual binding and loosing, in which the heavens were bound from providing rain, and then loosed to do so, whereby believers of like fervent holy faith are encouraged as able to obtain such binding and loosing in prayer.
However, in the case of an infirm man the intercession of NT pastors (presbuteros) can obtain deliverance of chastisement, as indicated by James 5:14,15, as can the intercession of believers of fervent holy faith, but pastors as particularly expected to be so.
Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms. Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. (James 5:13-15)
Yet nowhere is the infirm man required to confess his sin, and which in this case is likewise one he is ignorant of, but chastened for. (cf. Mark 2:1-11) Nor is this an example of the Catholic "Last Rites," as healing is what is promised here, while the Catholic Last Rites is normatively a precursor of death.
And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay. When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion. (Mark 2:3-12)
One can be chastised for unconfessed sins he is not aware of, and mercy can even be requested for those who sinned in ignorance, (Lk. 23:34; Acts 7:60) and here we see healing and forgiveness being treated as one thing, for the latter obtained the former. And which was in response to the intercession of the man's friends, and is corespondent to James 5.
In both cases it seems that the afflicted were not aware of the sins that there were under chastisement for, and in neither case was confession of such required, and in both cases intercession obtained deliverance without sacerdotal clergy being required.
3. Nowhere does any NT pastor teach believers that they need to be confessing their sins to them in particular in order to obtain forgiveness.
Instead, Scripture simply states that,
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:9)
And when Peter charged Simon Magnus with sin, he told him to pray to God himself if perhaps he might be forgiven. However, this does not mean that intercession for mercy cannot be asked of pastors or believers in general, as was also the case here.
Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity. Then answered Simon, and said, Pray ye to the Lord for me, that none of these things which ye have spoken come upon me. (Acts 8:22-24)
4. As seen in James 5:16-18, the power of binding and loosing are is not restricted to clergy, but formal judicial actions are executed under leadership, not autocratically but in union with all the church.
But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (Matthew 18:16-18)
While judicial actions are carried out by the whole church under leadership, that the power to bind and loose is not restricted to clergy is also evident by what follows Matthew 18:16-18, as it applies to two or three are gathered together in the Lord's name.
Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:19-20)
The formal corporate judicial binding and loosing is seen in action in 1 Corinthians 5:3-5:
For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
Likewise is the corporate nature of forgiveness by the body that was harmed by public sin:
To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ; Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. (2 Corinthians 2:10-11)
5. Leadership does act in the person of Christ in such judicial and disciplinary cases (which flows from the OT: Dt. 17:8-13), together with the church, while Spirit-filled holy men such as the apostles can also declare one to be bound in sin, as seen before in Acts 8:20-23, and in Acts 5:1-10 (cf. Acts 13:6-12; 1Co. 4:21) be instruments of Divine judgment.
Yet this is not an endowment of office as if anyone in that office can execute such, but such can be the power of Spirit-filled holy men who are to occupy that office, while the power of binding and loosing in general is provided for all Spirit-filled holy believers.
And since there simply is no Catholic priesthood in the NT church, no separate sacerdotal class of believers distinctively called by the distinctive name for such, whose primary active function is that of offering the Catholic Eucharist as an offering for sin, to be consumed in order to obtain spiritual and eternal life , then any spiritual power that might belong to the office of NT presbuteros does not apply to them .
6. Outside of the above, nowhere is clerical intercession or that of anyone required for forgiveness, but the promise that "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (1 John 1:9) means that forgiveness does not require regular confession to clergy, let alione Catholic priests.
In many places in the gospel, Jesus makes clear that he is appointing men to transmit his teaching, and to sanctify and to govern in his name. In other words, Jesus describes a religion, an institution, in which he appoints men to mediate the teaching and the sanctifying activity of Jesus.
And thus the Westminster Confession affirms "it belongeth to synods and councils, ministerially to determine controversies of faith," and we believe in ordaining elders (presbuteros) who are the only overseers of the church after the apostles, and who were not Catholic priests, and were normally married.
That and the absence of other Catholic distinctives and the overall contrary nature of Catholicism disallows both the Catholic church from being the one true church (though some within it can be saved) and your own priesthood, and thus you as being a priest from being NT pastors.
Nor was it ever yours to give. Just bunk.
Man-made paganism.
Those who deny the sinlessness of Mary cite "All have sinned..." as "proof" that Mary sinned. But St. Paul was not discussing Mary at the point. He was addressing an audience--ALL OF WHOM WERE SINNERS. He wasn't discussing the exceptions--such as unborn babies, or newborn babies, or the retarded--or Mary. The passage "All have sinned..." does NOT mean that all unborn babies have sinned, or that newborn babies have sinned, or that the retarded have sinned, or that Mary sinned.
The Greek used in Romans 3:23 does indicate that all have sinned....with all meaning just that....ALL. Each and everyone of us have sinned.
We're not born with a clean slate and start racking up sin points.
Further, regarding Mary, Roman Catholicism's own Catholic Encyclopedia online admits, "No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture."
It further admits the Roman Catholic understanding of Genesis 3:15 is based on a flawed rendering of the passage in the Vulgate and was not known prior to the 4th century.
"The sentence against the first parents was accompanied by the Earliest Gospel (Proto-evangelium), which put enmity between the serpent and the woman: "and I will put enmity between thee and the woman and her seed; she (he) shall crush thy head and thou shalt lie in wait for her (his) heel" (Genesis 3:15). The translation "she" of the Vulgate is interpretative; it originated after the fourth century, and cannot be defended critically."
The CE even admits the ECFs are not in agreement on this issue.
These include Origen, St. Basil and St. Chrysostom.
It further admits the "feast of the Immaculate Conception" is a late development.
"The older feast of the Conception of Mary (Conception of St. Anne), which originated in the monasteries of Palestine at least as early as the seventh century, and the modern feast of the Immaculate Conception are not identical in their object."
How did it become ingrained in Roman Catholicism? As Roman Catholics do with so many things....through force:
"By a Decree of 28 February, 1476, Sixtus IV at last adopted the feast for the entire Latin Church and granted an indulgence to all who would assist at the Divine Offices of the solemnity (Denzinger, 734). The Office adopted by Sixtus IV was composed by Leonard de Nogarolis, whilst the Franciscans, since 1480, used a very beautiful Office from the pen of Bernardine dei Busti (Sicut Lilium), which was granted also to others (e.g. to Spain, 1761), and was chanted by the Franciscans up to the second half of the nineteenth century. As the public acknowledgment of the feast of Sixtus IV did not prove sufficient to appease the conflict, he published in 1483 a constitution in which he punished with excommunication all those of either opinion who charged the opposite opinion with heresy (Grave nimis, 4 Sept., 1483; Denzinger, 735)."
" Whilst these disputes went on, the great universities and almost all the great orders had become so many bulwarks for the defense of the dogma. In 1497 the University of Paris decreed that henceforward no one should be admitted a member of the university, who did not swear that he would do the utmost to defend and assert the Immaculate Conception of Mary. Toulouse followed the example; in Italy, Bologna and Naples; in the German Empire, Cologne, Maine, and Vienna; in Belgium, Louvain; in England before the Reformation. Oxford and Cambridge; in Spain Salamanca, Toledo, Seville, and Valencia; in Portugal, Coimbra and Evora; in America, Mexico and Lima. The Friars Minor confirmed in 1621 the election of the Immaculate Mother as patron of the order, and bound themselves by oath to teach the mystery in public and in private. The Dominicans, however, were under special obligation to follow the doctrines of St. Thomas, and the common conclusion was that St. Thomas was opposed to the Immaculate Conception. Therefore the Dominicans asserted that the doctrine was an error against faith (John of Montesono, 1373); although they adopted the feast, they termed it persistently "Sanctificatio B.M.V." not "Conceptio", until in 1622 Gregory XV abolished the term "sanctificatio". Paul V (1617) decreed that no one should dare to teach publicly that Mary was conceived in original sin, and Gregory XV (1622) imposed absolute silence (in scriptis et sermonibus etiam privatis) upon the adversaries of the doctrine until the Holy See should define the question. To put an end to all further cavilling, Alexander VII promulgated on 8 December 1661, the famous constitution "Sollicitudo omnium Ecclesiarum", defining the true sense of the word conceptio, and forbidding all further discussion against the common and pious sentiment of the Church. He declared that the immunity of Mary from original sin in the first moment of the creation of her soul and its infusion into the body was the object of the feast (Denzinger, 1100)."
As this illustrates, the "very clear dogma" of the "Immaculate Conception" is:
a) not supported by Scripture nor found in Scripture
b) not supported by the ECFs
c) was not supported by the various feasts
d) came about through coercion within Roman Catholicism
We might could apply that term to a broader aspect of Roman Catholicism.
Yup, religion is bondage alright and Catholicism excels in it with it/s rituals and requirements and sacraments, etc.
Jesus came to set us free, free from the bondage of Law keeping.
Galatians 5:1 For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.
Colossians 2:16-23 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God.
If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations— “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.
Phillippians 3:2-15 Look out for the dogs, look out for the evildoers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh. For we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh— though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless. But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord.
For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith— that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead. Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own. But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.
Peter – rock
Matthew 16:18 - http://bible.cc/matthew/16-18.htm
Jesus said that Peter was *petros*(masculine) and that on this *petra*(feminine) He would build His church.
Greek: 4074 Pétros (a masculine noun) – properly, a stone (pebble), such as a small rock found along a pathway. 4074 /Pétros (”small stone”) then stands in contrast to 4073 /pétra (”cliff, boulder,” Abbott-Smith).
“4074 (Pétros) is an isolated rock and 4073 (pétra) is a cliff” (TDNT, 3, 100). “4074 (Pétros) always means a stone . . . such as a man may throw, . . . versus 4073 (pétra), a projecting rock, cliff” (S. Zodhiates, Dict).
4073 pétra (a feminine noun) – “a mass of connected rock,” which is distinct from 4074 (Pétros) which is “a detached stone or boulder” (A-S). 4073 (pétra) is a “solid or native rock, rising up through the earth” (Souter) – a huge mass of rock (a boulder), such as a projecting cliff.
4073 (petra) is “a projecting rock, cliff (feminine noun) . . . 4074 (petros, the masculine form) however is a stone . . . such as a man might throw” (S. Zodhiates, Dict).
It’s also a strange way to word the sentence that He would call Peter a rock and say that on this I will build my church instead of *on you* as would be grammatically correct in talking to a person.
There is no support from the original Greek that Peter was to be the rock on which Jesus said he would build His church. The nouns are not the same, one being masculine and the other being feminine. They denote different objects.
Also, here, Paul identifies who petra is, and that is Christ. This link takes you to the Greek.
http://biblehub.com/text/1_corinthians/10-4.htm
1 Corinthians 10:1-4 For I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock (petra) that followed them, and the Rock (petra) was Christ.
http://biblehub.com/text/romans/9-33.htm
Romans 9:30-33 What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, as it is written,“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock (petra) of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”
http://biblehub.com/text/1_peter/2-8.htm
1 Peter 2:1-8 So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander. Like newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up into salvation— if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good.
As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in Scripture: “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”
So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe,
“The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone,”
and
“A stone of stumbling, and a rock (petra) of offense.”
They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.
All occurrences of *petra* in the Greek.
That's interesting because Jesus said that if they were forgiven, they were forgiven.
So what's with the years of penance the church piled onto people to keep them in bondage? Didn't they believe Jesus?
And then lo and behold, they CHANGED it. All from the church that never changes.....
Also, forgiveness is not earned.
By it’s vary nature, it is freely given. If it’s paid for somehow, (through penance) then the person has not been forgiven, they’ve worked of a debt due.
ReallY
Which supper?
A pitchin or the watered down, lame thing we call 'communion'?
Will it model the Last Supper: a PASSOVER meal??
Absolutely.
Every Christian goes to heaven.
They are the saved ones.
If they go to hell, they haven't been saved. Or do you not know what people are saved FROM?
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.