Posted on 01/06/2013 3:56:49 PM PST by NYer
Bl. John Henry Newman said it best: “To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.” History paints an overwhelming picture of St. Peter’s apostolic ministry in Rome and this is confirmed by a multitude of different sources within the Early Church. Catholic Encyclopedia states, “In opposition to this distinct and unanimous testimony of early Christendom, some few Protestant historians have attempted in recent times to set aside the residence and death of Peter at Rome as legendary. These attempts have resulted in complete failure.” Protestantism as a whole seeks to divorce Christianity from history by rending Gospel message out of its historical context as captured by our Early Church Fathers. One such target of these heresies is to devalue St. Peter and to twist the authority of Rome into a historical mishap within Christianity. To wit, the belief has as its end the ultimate end of all Catholic and Protestant dialogue – who has authority in Christianity?
Why is it important to defend the tradition of St. Peter and Rome?
The importance of establishing St. Peter’s ministry in Rome may be boiled down to authority and more specifically the historic existence and continuance of the Office of Vicar held by St. Peter. To understand why St. Peter was important and what authority was given to him by Christ SPL has composed two lists – 10 Biblical Reasons Christ Founded the Papacy and 13 Reasons St. Peter Was the Prince of the Apostles.
The rest of the list is cited from the Catholic Encyclopedia on St. Peter and represents only a small fraction of the evidence set therein.
It is an indisputably established historical fact that St. Peter laboured in Rome during the last portion of his life, and there ended his earthly course by martyrdom. As to the duration of his Apostolic activity in the Roman capital, the continuity or otherwise of his residence there, the details and success of his labours, and the chronology of his arrival and death, all these questions are uncertain, and can be solved only on hypotheses more or less well-founded. The essential fact is that Peter died at Rome: this constitutes the historical foundation of the claim of the Bishops of Rome to the Apostolic Primacy of Peter.
St. Peter’s residence and death in Rome are established beyond contention as historical facts by a series of distinct testimonies extending from the end of the first to the end of the second centuries, and issuing from several lands.
That the manner, and therefore the place of his death, must have been known in widely extended Christian circles at the end of the first century is clear from the remark introduced into the Gospel of St. John concerning Christ’s prophecy that Peter was bound to Him and would be led whither he would not — “And this he said, signifying by what death he should glorify God” (John 21:18-19, see above). Such a remark presupposes in the readers of the Fourth Gospel a knowledge of the death of Peter.
St. Peter’s First Epistle was written almost undoubtedly from Rome, since the salutation at the end reads: “The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you: and so doth my son Mark” (5:13). Babylon must here be identified with the Roman capital; since Babylon on the Euphrates, which lay in ruins, or New Babylon (Seleucia) on the Tigris, or the Egyptian Babylon near Memphis, or Jerusalem cannot be meant, the reference must be to Rome, the only city which is called Babylon elsewhere in ancient Christian literature (Revelation 17:5; 18:10; “Oracula Sibyl.”, V, verses 143 and 159, ed. Geffcken, Leipzig, 1902, 111).
From Bishop Papias of Hierapolis and Clement of Alexandria, who both appeal to the testimony of the old presbyters (i.e., the disciples of the Apostles), we learn that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome at the request of the Roman Christians, who desired a written memorial of the doctrine preached to them by St. Peter and his disciples (Eusebius, Church History II.15, 3.40, 6.14); this is confirmed by Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3.1). In connection with this information concerning the Gospel of St. Mark, Eusebius, relying perhaps on an earlier source, says that Peter described Rome figuratively as Babylon in his First Epistle.
Another testimony concerning the martyrdom of Peter and Paul is supplied by Clement of Rome in his Epistle to the Corinthians (written about A.D. 95-97), wherein he says (chapter 5):
“Through zeal and cunning the greatest and most righteous supports [of the Church] have suffered persecution and been warred to death. Let us place before our eyes the good Apostles — St. Peter, who in consequence of unjust zeal, suffered not one or two, but numerous miseries, and, having thus given testimony (martyresas), has entered the merited place of glory”.
He then mentions Paul and a number of elect, who were assembled with the others and suffered martyrdom “among us” (en hemin, i.e., among the Romans, the meaning that the expression also bears in chapter 4). He is speaking undoubtedly, as the whole passage proves, of the Neronian persecution, and thus refers the martyrdom of Peter and Paul to that epoch.
In his letter written at the beginning of the second century (before 117), while being brought to Rome for martyrdom, the venerable Bishop Ignatius of Antioch endeavours by every means to restrain the Roman Christians from striving for his pardon, remarking: “I issue you no commands, like Peter and Paul: they were Apostles, while I am but a captive” (Epistle to the Romans 4). The meaning of this remark must be that the two Apostles laboured personally in Rome, and with Apostolic authority preached the Gospel there.
Bishop Dionysius of Corinth, in his letter to the Roman Church in the time of Pope Soter (165-74), says:
“You have therefore by your urgent exhortation bound close together the sowing of Peter and Paul at Rome and Corinth. For both planted the seed of the Gospel also in Corinth, and together instructed us, just as they likewise taught in the same place in Italy and at the same time suffered martyrdom” (in Eusebius, Church History II.25).
Irenaeus of Lyons, a native of Asia Minor and a disciple of Polycarp of Smyrna (a disciple of St. John), passed a considerable time in Rome shortly after the middle of the second century, and then proceeded to Lyons, where he became bishop in 177; he described the Roman Church as the most prominent and chief preserver of the Apostolic tradition, as “the greatest and most ancient church, known by all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul” (Against Heresies 3.3; cf. 3.1). He thus makes use of the universally known and recognized fact of the Apostolic activity of Peter and Paul in Rome, to find therein a proof from tradition against the heretics.
In his “Hypotyposes” (Eusebius, Church History IV.14), Clement of Alexandria, teacher in the catechetical school of that city from about 190, says on the strength of the tradition of the presbyters: “After Peter had announced the Word of God in Rome and preached the Gospel in the spirit of God, the multitude of hearers requested Mark, who had long accompanied Peter on all his journeys, to write down what the Apostles had preached to them” (see above).
Like Irenaeus, Tertullian appeals, in his writings against heretics, to the proof afforded by the Apostolic labours of Peter and Paul in Rome of the truth of ecclesiastical tradition. In De Præscriptione 36, he says:
“If thou art near Italy, thou hast Rome where authority is ever within reach. How fortunate is this Church for which the Apostles have poured out their whole teaching with their blood, where Peter has emulated the Passion of the Lord, where Paul was crowned with the death of John.”
In Scorpiace 15, he also speaks of Peter’s crucifixion. “The budding faith Nero first made bloody in Rome. There Peter was girded by another, since he was bound to the cross”. As an illustration that it was immaterial with what water baptism is administered, he states in his book (On Baptism 5) that there is “no difference between that with which John baptized in the Jordan and that with which Peter baptized in the Tiber”; and against Marcion he appeals to the testimony of the Roman Christians, “to whom Peter and Paul have bequeathed the Gospel sealed with their blood” (Against Marcion 4.5).
The Roman, Caius, who lived in Rome in the time of Pope Zephyrinus (198-217), wrote in his “Dialogue with Proclus” (in Eusebius, Church History II.25) directed against the Montanists: “But I can show the trophies of the Apostles. If you care to go to the Vatican or to the road to Ostia, thou shalt find the trophies of those who have founded this Church”.
By the trophies (tropaia) Eusebius understands the graves of the Apostles, but his view is opposed by modern investigators who believe that the place of execution is meant. For our purpose it is immaterial which opinion is correct, as the testimony retains its full value in either case. At any rate the place of execution and burial of both were close together; St. Peter, who was executed on the Vatican, received also his burial there. Eusebius also refers to “the inscription of the names of Peter and Paul, which have been preserved to the present day on the burial-places there” (i.e. at Rome).
There thus existed in Rome an ancient epigraphic memorial commemorating the death of the Apostles. The obscure notice in the Muratorian Fragment (“Lucas optime theofile conprindit quia sub praesentia eius singula gerebantur sicuti et semote passionem petri evidenter declarat”, ed. Preuschen, Tübingen, 1910, p. 29) also presupposes an ancient definite tradition concerning Peter’s death in Rome.
The apocryphal Acts of St. Peter and the Acts of Sts. Peter and Paul likewise belong to the series of testimonies of the death of the two Apostles in Rome.
yes..he (the devil) will flee from you!
Romans 16:20 And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly
Thank you for your encouragements.
I think what throws some people on these threads and in everyday life is the idea of what place "works" have in a believer's life. We know from Scripture that they do not save us, that they can never take away our sins and they do nothing to make us deserving of eternal life. Some people respond to the Gospel of salvation by grace apart from works, that we are made righteous by faith and not by our good deeds, with sneering accusations of, "You mean you can go out and live as you please and STILL go to heaven when you die?!". And of course we have to answer, as Paul had to to the SAME accusation, that we are created "unto good works which God has prepared for us to walk in them" (Eph. 2:10) and that grace is not a license to sin. BUT...we are not saved by our works. It's really hard for some people to get their minds around that.
We also know from Scripture that a genuine faith causes a change of our very spirits. We are no longer slaves to sin but have been given the power to resist sin through the indwelling Holy Spirit, who is given to us as the down payment for our heavenly home. Our new spirit nature is overcoming our old nature and we find ourselves not even desiring the same life we had. We find as we grow closer to the Lord in our relationship with him that we actually WANT to please him because we are so grateful for his mercy, grace and love. We love him because he first loved us and saved us.
God does not cast us out, he will never leave us or forsake us, he won't lose us and no one can pluck us out of his hands - not even ourselves! How can we NOT respond to that kind of love? It is knowing this grace that causes us to want to love him back and live to honor him. This IS the kind of service God desires - NOT the kind that is "good" because of fear of hell. I don't think I have ever met someone who was really a Christian who did not have the life to back it up. Real faith does that to a person. Rather than thinking I have to be good to make it to heaven and being afraid of God, I have the real freedom to serve him because I really love him - and THAT'S the kind of service He wants - not works done out of obligation or fear. I think living for Christ out of love is far more glorifying to God than living in order to somehow merit heaven or avoid hell.
So, yes, I agree that the work God designed us to do will be the very best for us because he loves us and wants what is best for us. When we rebel, we will be chastened so that we are reminded of His plans for us - plans for a future, one for good and not for evil. How can we NOT love him? Knowing that he is at work within us conforming us to be like Christ is the most wonderful thing in the world! His love is SO complete that even when we do sin, he is STILL our Father and will forgive us when we come to him in repentance. His love and grace is SO total that when we do sin - and we will - he will NOT cast us out. We have assurance that nothing can separate us from his love. If this truth is allowed to sink in, there is nothing that can come close to the joy and peace He gives us.
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God" Ephesians 6:17...and what does a helmet do?..it protects the MIND!..the FACT we have been FREELY GIVEN that "helmet" protects our minds against the devil and his accusing deceits!
Amen dear AG Praise God indeed!
We hear that a lot.It sounds very similar to...(Luke 15)"But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf."...and yet we are told earlier that...he "wasted his substance with riotous living",so maybe the little quip about harlots reveals what was on the mind of the son who stayed home.
"If this truth is allowed to sink in, there is nothing that can come close to the joy and peace He gives us."
Amen...allowing it to "sink in" is indeed that very work of God and joy and peace will be the result!
Grace and peace to you bb! and God bless and keep us all! He is able!
Praise God!!!
it's not a question of the minority or not. It's a question of following what Christ teaches and on the matter of what Christ teaches both of you do not follow Him
So, if you two want to ignore what Christ teaches, that's your problem
What does Jesus say saves us?
| 13But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. |
Jesus said it is not faith ALONE. We are saved by God's GRACE. Full-stop.
James 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. -- it's never faith ALONE. Note that
no one is denying that one MUST have faith to be saved by the freely given grace of salvation, however, it is not faith ALONE. As shown above, Jesus Himself said that
He who believes and is baptized will be saved. (Mk 16:16)
[U]nless you repent you will all likewise perish. (Lk 13:3
[H]e who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. (Jn 6:54)
So, do listen to the words of Jesus who said it is faith+ repentance+baptism+the Eucharist+endurance, not any of these in isolation. Of course, these don't "save us" per se, since it is Christ's sacrifice on the Cross that grants us our salvation that we can accept or reject
The problem happens when one takes one section of the word in isolation.
The basic fact is that your religion by rejecting Christ’s teachings (above) is a cult, outside of orthodoxy
I invite you, count-your-change, to give your biblical interpretation proving your point that Jesus is not God.
It sure is.
That's why when someone asks us of how we can be sure that we're saved, we can say *yes*. It's not a matter of *feelings*. The change is so profound that it is simply beyond comprehension or explanation.
You KNOW.
An apt analogy on your part in light of Acts 1:8 where Jesus said they'd be clothed with power from on high.
dunamis: (miraculous) power, might, strength
Definition: (a) physical power, force, might, ability, efficacy, energy, meaning (b) plur: powerful deeds, deeds showing (physical) power, marvelous works.
Amen sister "if the Son makes you free ye shall be free indeed" and it is that realization that will buckle us at the knees and lift us up at the same time like little else will.Oh what love He has for us!
Thankyou Lord Jesus!
Baby Jesus???? For real????
Hebrews 10:12-14 12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. 14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.
Revelation 1:12-18 12 Then I turned to see the voice that was speaking to me, and on turning I saw seven golden lampstands, 13 and in the midst of the lampstands one like a son of man, clothed with a long robe and with a golden sash around his chest. 14 The hairs of his head were white, like white wool, like snow. His eyes were like a flame of fire, 15 his feet were like burnished bronze, refined in a furnace, and his voice was like the roar of many waters. 16 In his right hand he held seven stars, from his mouth came a sharp two-edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining in full strength.
17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand on me, saying, “Fear not, I am the first and the last, 18 and the living one. I died, and behold I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.
I didn’t suggest a negotiating session on this thread, if you wish to start a thread on the subject I’ll comment there. Thank you for the invite, I’ll meet you there.
Those are not spoken to church age believers.
1 Pet. 3:20-21: " It (Baptism )saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ"
Let's finish the verse and put it in context, shall we? Like Catholics claim non-Catholics don't do....
1 Peter 3:18-22 18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, 19 in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, 20 because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. 21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him.
Peter clarifies here that it is NOT water baptism.
Jesus tells what qualifies man for eternal life and it simply believing.
John 3:16-18 16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
John 5:24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.
John 6:47 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.
Ephesians 2:4-10 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
The problem happens when one takes one section of the word in isolation.
That is exactly the problem with the way the Catholic church has taken James 2:17 out of context. The failure to distinguish between intellectual assent and true saving faith is what causes the Catholic church to misinterpret James.
Intellectual assent is intellectual assent. True saving faith manifests works and that is how one can tell if they have that kind of saving faith.
Intellectual assent does not become saving faith by adding works and that is apparently a deceit perpetrated by Satan with great success, having convinced multitudes that if they acknowledge God's and Jesus' existence and then do works with it, that it is saving faith.
It's not. It's merely a counterfeit.
Another red herring.
Show us where cyc ever stated that instead of stating it as a fact in the form of an accusation and demanding that he defend a baseless accusation made against him.
You've pulled the same nonsense on me and others many times and we've refused to play along. It's an immature and disingenuous debate tactic. Nobody owes an answer to anyone who engages in that kind of underhanded slander.
I’d be more than happy to discuss the arguments for and against, pro and con but this thread with as far afield from the original subject as it’s become isn’t the best forum.
Why; silly little man - we have 2000 years of 'christian' (wink, wink) writing to back it up!!!
Who needs 'types' when you have direct quotes?
John 6:28-29
Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”
Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 John 3:21-24
Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God and receive from him anything we ask, because we keep his commands and do what pleases him. And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. The one who keeps God’s commands lives in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us.
You missed the verse...
56 And Mary abode with her about three months, and returned to her own house.
Oh; it's been COVERED all right!
Built up in bits and pieces like Watterson's Calvinosaurus.
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.