Posted on 04/17/2012 9:55:18 AM PDT by Colofornian
I think you ought to review that statement. Peter is mentioned 60 times in Acts of the Apostles : Acts 1:13, Acts 1:15, Acts 2:37, Acts 2:38, Acts 3:1, Acts 3:3, Acts 3:4, Acts 3:6, Acts 3:11, Acts 3:12, Acts 4:1, Acts 4:8, Acts 4:13, Acts 4:19, Acts 5:3, Acts 5:8, Acts 5:9, Acts 5:15, Acts 5:29, Acts 8:14, Acts 8:20, Acts 9:32, Acts 9:34, Acts 9:38, Acts 9:39, Acts 9:40, Acts 9:43, Acts 10:5, Acts 10:9, Acts 10:13, Acts 10:14, Acts 10:17, Acts 10:18, Acts 10:19, Acts 10:21, Acts 10:23, Acts 10:25, Acts 10:26, Acts 10:32, Acts 10:43, Acts 10:44, Acts 10:45, Acts 10:46, Acts 11:1, Acts 11:2, Acts 11:4, Acts 11:7, Acts 11:7, Acts 11:13, Acts 12:1, Acts 12:3, Acts 12:5, Acts 12:6, Acts 12:7, Acts 12:11, Acts 12:14, Acts 12:16, Acts 12:18, and Acts 15:7.
You are equally wrong on your assessment of the exclusivity of the ministries of the Apostles and St. Paul and to the historicity of Peter and the Catholic Church.
Campion, I’m no longer responding to this topic of Catholicism. It’s a “Mormonism” thread after all :)
Plus I believe in Sola Scriptura so we’ll likely never agree.
You believe the divinely-inspired Word of God to be unBiblical eh?
Yep. We definitely have nothing further to discuss.
Ask a Catholic if they are going to heaven and they’ll say...”hopefully”. They have no assurance of their own salvation.
If you admit salvation is a free gift from God then you must believe that God does not change his mind. Salvation is never taken away right?
Salvation is a one-time deal. Christ’s blood covers us from now to eternity. Catholics teach that you can lose your salvation.
To address your other posts, you believe that the Catholic catechism provides the “exegy” needed to fully understand the intents and purposes of scripture. In a way you are correct that historical and cultural perspective is vital to interpretation. However, Catholic tradition should NEVER trump the Bible. The Bible is God’s authority.
Maybe you can explain to me why the early Catholic church teaches that Mary was without sin? It’s nowhere in the Bible but HEY, the Catholic church says so! What else can they get away with telling you? Who holds these men accountable?
From the Catholic Catechism:
“1129 The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation”
works works works
I don't think so and permit me to explain why.
Because He is the Word (Logos) made flesh every word of Scripture is as important and precious as every crumb of the Eucharist. We therefore can't ignore context and details that we assume to be irrelevant. Jesus took Peter and along with the other Apostles and Disciples up to Caesarea Philippi to reveal his papacy to him. The selection of the location is far from a coincidence. Caesarea Philippi is a 25 mile, two day hike from Capernaum thorough some pretty rough country.
At the site of the revelation was a massive exposed rock cliff. Atop the rock stood the city of Caesarea Philippi. It was a very important location militarily, and had been a place of temples and worship dating back millenia. At the base of the cliff was a massive grotto that at the time was a natural cistern that the Greeks and their predecessors believed was an a gate to the underworld. Physically, that rock stood between an city and the gates of hell.
Jesus then told Peter that he was a smaller rock, and that upon it, like the larger rock upon which was built the city before them, He would build His Church and that it would stand for ever against the gates of hell. A side note is that all of this arguing about the relevance of Petros versus Petra is foolish in the context of that location. Jesus often used wordplay and humor to convey His message.
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.