Posted on 07/22/2007 7:40:38 PM PDT by xzins
Yes, note also in Paul’s letter to the Romans. Supposedly, Peter would have been the bishop there for many years and still would be when Paul wrote the letter, went there and was imprisoned. Not one mention of Peter ever, no greetings to him anywhere. And no help from him either if he was there!
Terrific post, Harley!
No, Paul is certainly not God and he was the first to say so. But he was entrusted with organizing and watching over all the churches.
"Beside those things that are without, that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the churches." -- 2 Corinthians 11:28
And he corrected Peter on several occasions.
The RCC, however, wrongly teaches that priests, after some fabricated manner of Peter, are "another Christ."
Outright blasphemy. Repent of it.
Rome is a strange place.
Romans 1:5
By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:
1:6 Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ:
1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
1:8 First , I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.
1:9 For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I make mention of you always in my prayers;
1:10 Making request, if by any means now at length I might have a prosperous journey by the will of God to come unto you.
1:11 For I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established;
1:12 That is, that I may be comforted together with you by the mutual faith both of you and me.
1:13 Now I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you, (but was let hitherto ,) that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles.
Those matters are part of our sanctification, not our justification.
As has been said, if you get justification wrong, just about everything else will be off. And so it is with your denial that justification is by Christ alone as a one-time, perfectly performed, complete and personalized atonement of the sins of His sheep, according to the will and purpose of God from before the foundation of the world.
From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." -- Hebrews 10:12-14
"For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous." -- Romans 5:19"But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
Good, just trying to steer clear of a little trend toward Bibliolatry.
Repent of it.
Ah. If only I had free will.
;)
In the long run, how very true.
Amen. Unto this day.
Yes 1000's, and RC's believe this too. If they didn't they would not have an objection to women holding the office of priest, a basis for headcoverings, etc., etc.
It is kind of amusing to think how women in the RCC might regard being in the priesthood if only oral tradition was presented to them as a reason for denial.
Yes, they remind me of the atheists who bring out the bible to chastise Christians. See here.... they sputter in indignation...
But what we are talking about is salvation and entry into Heaven. It is the difference between necessary AND sufficient, and necessary BUT insufficient.
Peter was in Rome
As Peter had preached the Word publicly at Rome, and declared the Gospel by the Spirit, many who were present requested that Mark, who had followed him for a long time and remembered his sayings, should write them out.” Clement of Alexandria, fragment in Eusebius Church History, VI:14,6 (A.D. 190)
‘You have thus by such an admonition bound together the plantings of Peter and Paul at Rome and Corinth.” Dionysius of Corinth, Epistle to Pope Soter, fragment in Eusebius’ Church History, II:25 (c. A.D. 178).
“Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:1:1 (c. A.D. 180).
You also said....
“”Peter was never in charge of any churches, either””
The Early Church Fathers don’t agree with you
“ I think it my duty to consult the CHAIR OF PETER, and to turn to a church whose faith has been praised by Paul The fruitful soil of Rome, when it receives the pure seed of the Lord, bears fruit an hundredfold My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross. As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the CHAIR OF PETER. FOR THIS, I KNOW, IS THE ROCK on which the CHURCH is built! This is the house where alone the paschal lamb can be rightly eaten. This is the ark of Noah, and he who is not found in it shall perish when the flood prevails.” Jerome, To Pope Damasus, Epistle 15:1-2 (A.D. 375).
“Supposing, as you assert, that some offence rested upon those persons, the case ought to have been conducted against them, not after this manner, but according to the Canon of the Church. Word should have been written of it to us all, that so a just sentence might proceed from all. For the sufferers were Bishops, and Churches of no ordinary note, but those which the Apostles themselves had governed in their own persons For what we have received from the BLESSED APOSTLE PETER, that I signify to you; and I should not have written this, as deeming that these things were manifest unto all men, had not these proceedings so disturbed us.” Athanasius, Pope Julius to the Eusebians, Defense Against the Arians, 35 (A.D. 347).
Dear Friend,
Are you suggesting these guys are lying?
You had better hope they were not liers,because they were involved in the Bible Canon process
I have no opinion of or about them, one way or another as nothing they ever did or say, affects my salvation one whit. I do know from the bible that God never lies, and from it I see no evidence of a Peter-built truck of a church
The Bible does not tell you that you need oxygen to breathe either.
Does this mean you will stick your head in a plastic bag and live -;)
You can do better than that. Bring up snake handling, now that’s funny!
You mean simpletons?.
I can't hep your confusion, HD. Maybe you can tell us just where this eternal lake of fire is supposed to be? If I remember well, the fire itself is burning sulfur. Eternally burning sulfur?
The verses referring to the lake of fire are metaphorical, but then I am sure there are some who take them literally.
Normally [the OT] talks about the righteous living forever with God while the wicked will be cut off
Judaism doesn't teach that. It is possible that you are misinterpreting their own scripture? According to Jewish Encyclopedia Sheol is
"a place beneath the earth, beyond gates, where both the bad and the good, slave and king, pious and wicked must go at the point of death."
Soteriology is unknown to Judaism. Therefore your assertion that the "righteous living forever with God" cannot come from the OT.
You've already have gone on record as not believing in the Old Testament and not believing in Paul's writings
That's a mischaracterization, HD. I never said I don't believe the OT. I just don't believe in it literally. I also believe that some of the Episles are writings of St. Paul. The way he is interpreted by Protestants is what I doubt. I also look at St.Paul as a necessary element in saving the church, which was literally evicted in Israel. There was no other choice but to go to the Gentiles.
Acts 13:46 speaks poignantly about this:
"It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles."
Thus, Gentiles came to the Apostles as an afterthought, as Christ never suggested that they preach to the Gentiles. To the contrary, He told them to stay away from them! So, if it was God's intention to take His message to the Gentiles, it was not revealed while He was walking on easrth. To say that he revealed it to St. Paul is unconvincing because when He died he is quoted as saying "it is finished/accomplished."
Christ was God's full revelation to mankind. Further revelations simply don't make sense, which is why to me St. Paul's Epistles are not Gospels, and why the Book of Revelation is suspect. They both claim further revelation, which suggests that Christ's revealtion was incomplete.
If our Lord stated it, I think it's more than "scary". Psa 30:3 O LORD, You have brought up my soul from Sheol; You have kept me alive, that I would not go down to the pit
Again, you are proofing Christ with OT. Humanity was in the pit hopelessly until Christ came and offered everyone His hand.
Being saved for having babies is part of "sanctification" and not "justification?" So there are two ways of being saved?
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.