Are you infallible?

One Fold ^ | December 10, 2013 | Brian Culliton

[paladinan]

I smell the breath of the serpent!

:) Er... may I gently point out that FatherofFive is not (I presume) at your home, but you are? When I smell something funny in someone's breath, but I'm the only one in my house, I really do need to suspect that I'm smelling my own breath, you know...

[metmom]

MamaB:Jesus was/is The Rock not some man.

Regal:ROFL!!!!!

You think that's FUNNY????

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.

http://biblehub.com/greek/strongs_4073.htm

Petra ALWAYS refers to Jesus in Scripture.

[metmom]

This clown is looking for an excuse to make it up as he goes along.

Are you infallible?

Because if you aren't then you are expressing nothing more than your fallible opinion about the article.

[Resettozero]

It was the only Church.

This church...?

Revelation 3:14-22 (NIV)

14 “To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:
These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation.
15 I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other!
16 So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth.
17 You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.
18 I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see.
19 Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent.
20 Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with me.
21 To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I was victorious and sat down with my Father on his throne.
22 Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches.”

Is this the church that later morphed into the RCC?

[G Larry]

Where does that leave you?

[metmom]

Are you infallible?

Because if you aren’t then you are expressing nothing more than your fallible interpretation of the article.

You CANNOT be sure that we are wrong unless you are sure you are right, and if you are fallible, you can never be sure you’re right nor can you be sure if the Catholic church is correct either.

[editor-surveyor]

Heh heh.

[editor-surveyor]

A commandment to “eat my flesh” does not exist anywhere in the word.

A figurative reference to “eating my flesh” referring to his sacrifice on the cross occurs in John chapter 6, and in verse 63 he affirms that is purely a spiritual reference.

Nice try though!

Still smell that serpent...

[metmom]

Catholic Revisionist history proves nothing.

[editor-surveyor]

Nothing was added.

The commandments remain unchanged.

[metmom]

Of course.

The HOLY SPIRIT guides us into all truth and while the church is the pillar and foundation of truth, it is itself not the truth.

It’s supposed to uphold the truth, which is the word of God and that is NOT something that the Catholic church does when it denigrates it and puts the magisterium and “sacred tradition” on equal or greater footing than the word of God itself.

[metmom]

Could you cite chapter and verse where the Bible says, "the Roman Catholic Church is not the real Church"? I must have missed it...

Actually, you need to provide the verse that states that "the Roman Catholic Church is not the real Church"?

Show us where the phrase *Roman Catholic church* appears in Scripture.

[metmom]

Show us where the phrase “the Roman Catholic Church is the real Church” is in Scripture and then you might have cause to claim that it the one true church that Jesus founded.

Claiming to be it retroactively means nothing.

[paladinan]

Petra ALWAYS refers to Jesus in Scripture.

Even by the biased standard that you're using, that isn't true; you should have told your "Strong's" search to look for variants of petra, as well--in Greek, word prefixes and suffixes change with parts of speech, etc.

"Other seeds fell on rocky [Gk: petrOdE, from "petra"] ground [...]" (Matthew 13:5)

"And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom; and the earth shook, and the rocks [Gk: petrai] were split;" (Matthew 27:51)

"And Joseph took the body, and wrapped it in a clean linen shroud, and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn in the rock [Gk: petra (the exact form! Your search missed this one, I think...}];" (Matthew 27:59-60)

But more to the point: Jesus was obviously changing Simon's name to Peter (Kepha = Petros = rock) in Matthew 16, which indicates a change in status and mission (cf. Abram to Abraham, Jacob to Israel, etc.)... and He wasn't slighting or insulting Simon as He did it (or would you suggest that Jesus would say "Blessed are you, Simon barJonah, [etc.]", right before belittling him by calling him a pebble, simply to contrast it with a Name for Himself?). Even reputable Protestant Bible scholars admit that the only possible reason for trying to derange the syntax of Matthew 16:18 and deny Peter's "rock-hood" is a biased personal aversion to the claims of the Roman Catholic Church... and not for any true basis found in the text.

[FatherofFive]

Petra ALWAYS refers to Jesus in Scripture.

So Wrong. Peter=Petra=Petras=Kepha

All refer to Peter. The first pope

[paladinan]

Catholic Protestant Revisionist history proves nothing."

:) There. Fixed it for you!

Surely you see that this is raw opinion and mere rhetorical theater, on the part of anyone who makes statements such as yours?

[Gamecock]

Show us where the phrase “the Roman Catholic Church is the real Church” is in Scripture and then you might have cause to claim that it the one true church that Jesus founded.

Easy enough to refute.

"And John answered and said, 'Master, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow with us.' And Jesus said to him, 'Do not forbid him, for he who is not against us is for us'." (Luke 9:49,50)

Of course Rome would have anyone who is not bowing to the Pope is against them, but that is another discussion.

[FatherofFive]

and that is NOT something that the Catholic church does when it denigrates it and puts the magisterium and “sacred tradition” on equal or greater footing than the word of God itself.

What happened to "the word of mouth" mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 ?

So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

We Catholics know. The letters are the Bible, preserved by the Catholic Church.

What happened to the word of Mouth? What happened to all those things in John 21:25 that could fill more books than the world could hold?

[paladinan]

Actually, you need to provide the verse that states that "the Roman Catholic Church is not the real Church"?

(??) I do? Why would I need to show that the Catholic Church is not the true Church, much less find a Scripture passage for that? The statement is false, so I wouldn't expect to find it in Scripture.

Show us where the phrase *Roman Catholic church* appears in Scripture.

Right next to "Trinity". :)

But more to your point: don't you remember that Catholics are not believers in the illogical and unscriptural tradition-of-men known as "sola Scriptura", and that we're no more obligated to obey it than we would be obligated to avoid the number 13, avoid black cats crossing our paths, and other such man-made nonsense?

You, on the other hand, are a sola Scriptura adherent; and you need to obey your own standard (as does editor-surveyor); if you make a claim about the Faith, then you'll need to show where Scripture teaches it. Editor-surveyor claimed that the Roman Catholic Church is "obviously not the true Church" (i.e. that Her claims to that effect were "clearly false", and that "Scripture refuted them"); I'm simply asking him and you to put your money where your mouths are.

Now, if you don't WANT to obey "sola Scriptura", fine... then we can finally throw that silly and fake standard away, and all be the better for it. But you need to make up your minds; you can't have it both ways.

[FatherofFive]

Show us where the phrase “the Roman Catholic Church is the real Church” is in Scripture

The Church of Scripture is the catholic Church. Only after the heresy of the reformation was there a need to add a descriptor to the church.