| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/24/2022 5:40:39 AM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
Childishness |
Posted on 03/06/2022 11:16:06 AM PST by CharlesOConnell
With promises like this; if I were Catholic; I'd wear TWO!
—> those who wear the scapular from the fires of hell; She will also shorten their stay in purgatory
—-> With promises like this; if I were Catholic; I’d wear TWO!
The Brown Scapular can’t even save itself from fire 🔥! Throw it in and watch it burn and melt… like anyone who puts their hope in it.
You are correct sir. I was poorly catechised, but that was by choice. I didn’t like catechism class. I just wanted to flirt with the girls and when I got out, I just wanted to go play hockey. 😆😆😀
Evidently, I wasn’t alone. It seemed the girls were doing as much flirting as we guys were. We sure were a bunch of lousy Catholics. 😀
=========
But the Bible can, and is entirely consistent. Take note of the following:
Forty days before Jesus' peripatectic ministry began, He was baptized by his cousin John at Bethabara (Mt. 1:13, Jn. 1:28). That happened in mid-to-late 29 A.D., not long before John was jailed for his accusations of Herod. It was at that time that the sobriquet "Kayfahs" (in Aramaic language)was given to Simon Bar Jonah by Jesus when they first met. That is described in the volume "The Gospels: A Precise Translation"; the author Fred Wittman:
"40Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter, was one of the two who heard from John and followed Him. 41This one finds his own brother Simon. And he says to him,This shows that (1) Simon was already informed by his brother Andrew that he should consider Jesus to be the Messiah (Anointed One) prophesied in the Holy Scriptures (example: the Hebrew of Psalm 2:2, the last word ־משׁיחו pronounced "Messiach" translated as "anointed" in English); and (2) this is the time that Jesus gave him the title, or nickname "Kayfahs" in Aramaic, which was translated to the Greek "Petros" by John when he wrote this Gospel account (not "petra" the feminine inflection, having a different meaning, which is "a vast geological escarpment of rock extending perhaps for miles").We have found The Messiah (which being translated, The Christ).42And he led him to Jesus. Now when Jesus earnestly looked upon him. He said.You yourself are Simon. the son of Jonah. You yourself shall be titled Kayfahs* (which is being interpreted, A piece of a rock).----------
*Note: In Beloved John's Koine Greek manuscript, this is πετρος pronounced "peh-tross" which in the masculine is the definition of a stone or piece of rock perhaps up to the size of a human, but not much bigger. The definition given in the translation of this inflection of the base is very precise as to size.
Most people haven't learned this detail, for different causes; one is that it is a minor detail to the greater story inscripturated here, but a second is that its significance greatly detracts from the preferred (mis)interpretation by one deviate "Christic" cult of the passage that covers Jesus' declaration of the formal gathering of people called out to deliberate under leadership, the assembly (Anglicized as 'church') to worship and to be taught Bible truths.
That later occasion is described in Levi's Gospel (Matthew 16:15-19 and context, precisely translated in the volume cited above):
"15He says to them,In this second passage, the overall import is that it took place in the month Sivan (our June) of 32 A.D. two and a half YEARS later than when Simon first received his sobriquet "Kayfahs" = a piece of rock, precisely defined in plain-literal language, from Jesus, a precisely speaking kind of guy. That nickname was used by then all from their first meet, for the years of discipleship afterward. It was not a new thing at Caesarea Philippi where Jesus announced the building of His clutch of professing earthly believers, a village situated on just such a cliff of rock, upon which they were (standing or sitting?) at the time He was imparting this novel concept that embraces the New Covenant, another announcement to de given later once they got used to this one.But yourselves, Whom are you saying that Iam?16Then Simon Peter answered and said,You are continuously The Christ, The Son of The Absolutely Living God.17And Jesus answered and said to him,You are continually a blessed one, Simon Bar Jonah; because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father, namely The One in The Heavens. 18Now I Myself also say to you, "You yourself are Peter πετρος, and upon this rock ledgeτη πετρα I will build My Church. And Hell's gates shall not prevail upon it. 18And I will give to you the keys to the Kingdom of the Heavens. And what thing ever you bind upon the Earth shall be a bound thing in The Heavens. And what thing ever you loose upon the Earth shall be a loosed thing in The Heavens."---------
Note: In verses 17 to 19, Jesus is addressing Simon singularly, not here including the others at the moment.
Even many years later, Paul in his epistles calls Simon "Kayfahs" (the KJV gives it in English letters as "Cephas," which most readers (mis)pronounce it as "Seefuss" in their ignorance; the translators wanted the letter "C" to have the "K" sound, not the "S" sound).
The second thing deserving a remark is that the "Rock" being in the feminine gender, has a precise and very different meaning, and that is a NEW use of the sense, in comparison to the OLD use of reference to stone-like material (Simon's intellectual dullness? inflexiblity of opinion? unteachability?). What Jesus meant was the physical plain-literal term that suggested the figurative-literal totsl strength, solidity, and unchangeable concept that measured how His faithfulness and reliability in all things would size up as compared to any other touchstone (so to speak). Like Peter, who was wholly unreliable in his fidelity or reasoning aptitude, didn't even seem to be shaken by this comparison (?!).
Thirdly, one needs to come to realization that Simon DID execute the first application of use of "the Keys to the Kingdom of The Heavens," which would be a figurative-literal application of that phrase of the Keys to his first sermon on the day of Pentecost, in which over three thousand souls were admitted by immersion subsequent to their profession of faith in Jesus as one's Savior and Lord. But note: the sermon was addressed to humans tracing their heritage of Jewishness only, not Gentiles. Peter had not yet a concept of the churches' breadth, even from Jesus delegation of the Great Commission. Peter was not yet willing to admit Gentile into his concept of what Jesus' Church was all about.
There is more to discuss about this, but the concept of Jesus' Church being founded on Peter's person or example is totally false, when even lazily investigating the facts residing in the writings about him show the supposition's absolute incredible weakness, just a con trick.
The last and most important point we ought to take away from this is that the foundational concept did NOT come from Simon Bar Jonah's mentality or body of knowledge. It came from The Mighty God and Father of Jesus God's Anointed King of All, put on the lips of the unlearned fisherman much as a warning came from the mouth of Balaam's ass. The foundational Rock of Belief and its Originator in not just a concept to marvel at; it is a fearsome warning of what might happen to the human or fallen angel that might trifle with the Father's Only Begotten-in-the-flesh Son, and go away into eternity unforgiven. Remember, Judas Iscariot was right there and heard it all; only a hair's breadth difference between the standing of Judas and that of Simon. The difference is that of even a miniscule degree of unobliterated, perseverant, ineradicable preference of a human in commitment to The Christ above self or other, as fixed in Simon Bar Jonah, for whom Jesus effectively prayed for his faith not to fail, and informed Peter of it (Luke 22:32). Peter was not yet "saved," was he? Not "converted" from Judaism to complete trust in Jesus, though he professed otherwise. A very ticklish thing if you are of a miscatechized Christic cult, if you can "lose your salvation", eh?
What is the reader's position on the subject of this post? Eh?
First passage was John 1:40-42 APT
thats the poopy part of the Ark... always needing to be cleaned up...
That’s the Roman organization, from the Vatican down.
It is known, allowed, covered up.
It’s liberal, Marxist, full of child molesters, and gay.
This has been true under the past 4 popes at a minimum.
Nothing in Scripture anyone could construe to identify that as Christ’schurch.
You misspelled “typical”.
Could you please show us where in Scripture the terms * Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus * and * Invincible Ignorance * are found?
Which is only a rabbit trail.
I did not ask those questions nor does it address the point of my post, that Catholicism can take no credit whatsoever for giving is God’s word.
The homosexual priests issue has been a problem for over 1,000 years in Catholicism.
All one has to do is check out Father Peter Damian and The Book of Gomorrah.
Dp you really imagine I would endorse a false assertion by you? You miss characterize what I wrote as ‘sounding more like Calvinism’ to you, then expect me to endorse that erroneous thought by using it to reason an issue you promote? I washed my hands of you once. Silly of me to entertain your twisted reasoning once again.
I had completely forgotten about that brown scapular. Me, and all the other people I went to Catholic school with, needed to wear 10 scapulars. Most of the people I went to Catholic school with, were grotesque sinners, and they enjoyed sinning. We were typical, lousy Catholics. All of us. 🤗😀
Could you please show us where in Scripture the term “sola scriptura” is found?
Why wasn’t I told this, when I was a Catholic? 😀😆🙃
The principal of our school, was a priest, and he had two assistant priests. Most our teachers were nuns. We always wondered if he was boinking the nuns. No one ever knew for sure. I did know one of those assistant priests, married the school secretary. She had to divorce her husband first. Her kids were my classmates.
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.