Total Posts:48|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Matthew 16.....Upon this Rock...

EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 3:57:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Jesus left us many principles, principles that are spirit by nature. These principles unlock spiritual truths and spiritual revelations, we see the duality of flesh and spirit constantly in the narrative.
We see this clearly as the first principle Jesus lays out for us in John 3....
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?

Jesus described spiritual truths using physical analogies so us material beings could relate and learn, however we see the most simple principles being mangled by religious freaks and institutions.

I would like to show you a spiritual principle that has been corrupted by material institutions and turned into a man-made abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 5:17:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 3:57:01 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Jesus left us many principles, principles that are spirit by nature. These principles unlock spiritual truths and spiritual revelations, we see the duality of flesh and spirit constantly in the narrative.
We see this clearly as the first principle Jesus lays out for us in John 3....
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?


Jesus described spiritual truths using physical analogies so us material beings could relate and learn, however we see the most simple principles being mangled by religious freaks and institutions.

I would like to show you a spiritual principle that has been corrupted by material institutions and turned into a man-made abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 7:50:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 5:17:32 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/2015 3:57:01 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Jesus left us many principles, principles that are spirit by nature. These principles unlock spiritual truths and spiritual revelations, we see the duality of flesh and spirit constantly in the narrative.
We see this clearly as the first principle Jesus lays out for us in John 3....
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?


Jesus described spiritual truths using physical analogies so us material beings could relate and learn, however we see the most simple principles being mangled by religious freaks and institutions.

I would like to show you a spiritual principle that has been corrupted by material institutions and turned into a man-made abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 7:58:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The "Church" (the people) was built upon the principle that Peter confessed, it really had nothing to do with Peter, the "rock" was the principle, he just happened to confess it and Jesus revealed the meaning.
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 8:37:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 7:50:58 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/23/2015 5:17:32 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/2015 3:57:01 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Jesus left us many principles, principles that are spirit by nature. These principles unlock spiritual truths and spiritual revelations, we see the duality of flesh and spirit constantly in the narrative.
We see this clearly as the first principle Jesus lays out for us in John 3....
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?


Jesus described spiritual truths using physical analogies so us material beings could relate and learn, however we see the most simple principles being mangled by religious freaks and institutions.

I would like to show you a spiritual principle that has been corrupted by material institutions and turned into a man-made abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.

Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.

Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 8:49:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 8:37:27 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/2015 7:50:58 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/23/2015 5:17:32 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/2015 3:57:01 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Jesus left us many principles, principles that are spirit by nature. These principles unlock spiritual truths and spiritual revelations, we see the duality of flesh and spirit constantly in the narrative.
We see this clearly as the first principle Jesus lays out for us in John 3....
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?


Jesus described spiritual truths using physical analogies so us material beings could relate and learn, however we see the most simple principles being mangled by religious freaks and institutions.

I would like to show you a spiritual principle that has been corrupted by material institutions and turned into a man-made abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.

Like every time Jesus spoke, He is speaking about the spirit, spiritual principles.

Read this chapter, it's chalk full of them, too many to list. The spiritual principles within these are too numeral to expand on.
https://www.biblegateway.com...


Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.


Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.

You're missing the point brother, I'm not disputing words, I'm disputing the false interpretation.
And so you're saying without the RCC you would have developed the Pope based upon the principle Jesus revealed? I'm not sure I believe you....
What does the Pope have to do with any of it? The church is the people (the body), Jesus is the mediator, the scripture is the Word, the Spirit is our Guide, what would we need the old Pope for??
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 8:52:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 8:49:49 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/23/2015 8:37:27 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/2015 7:50:58 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/23/2015 5:17:32 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/2015 3:57:01 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Jesus left us many principles, principles that are spirit by nature. These principles unlock spiritual truths and spiritual revelations, we see the duality of flesh and spirit constantly in the narrative.
We see this clearly as the first principle Jesus lays out for us in John 3....
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?


Jesus described spiritual truths using physical analogies so us material beings could relate and learn, however we see the most simple principles being mangled by religious freaks and institutions.

I would like to show you a spiritual principle that has been corrupted by material institutions and turned into a man-made abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.

Like every time Jesus spoke, He is speaking about the spirit, spiritual principles.

Read this chapter, it's chalk full of them, too many to list. The spiritual principles within these are too numeral to expand on.
https://www.biblegateway.com...


Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.


Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.

You're missing the point brother, I'm not disputing words, I'm disputing the false interpretation.
And so you're saying without the RCC you would have developed the Pope based upon the principle Jesus revealed? I'm not sure I believe you....
What does the Pope have to do with any of it? The church is the people (the body), Jesus is the mediator, the scripture is the Word, the Spirit is our Guide, what would we need the old Pope for??

*Numerous*, excuse me...
August_Burns_Red
Posts: 1,253
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 9:04:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I agree partly with your OP theology. Yes...I have always disbelieved the claim of the RCC to aposolic succession as they call it///that since Peter was the first Pope and started the Church it became the RCC and they have "the market cornered" being the "universal" Church. (katolikos= Greek.)
But I also think that Jesus DID hand the reigns over to Peter (Petros = rock in Greek.) and that He meant it literally. For Peter to head-up His ministry after He was killed. If Jesus were alive today He would have no problem in admitting that he handed the reigns to Peter. "The conrerstone on which I build my church" is pretty clear evidence." Nothing in this quote hints at it not being a literal "changing of the guard."
And now a big "BUT".....i also think if Jesus were alive today he would be 100% angered and dismayed and even would loathe what the RCC has become. and also of its history. the bad popes. the icons and idols. not to mention the pederast priests.
When I was an atheist I used the RCC as proof that all religion is bad. And that God is not real. Now I realize that is unfair. The RCC is just composed of flawed humans like a lot of big institutions. This is not God's fault--the whole Free Will thing, again.
But boy....so many of those RCC cardinals and bishops and priests are going to be very surprised when they die and do not go to Heaven to be with God. It is then that they will know what He really thinks of them and their false claims of being a Universal Church.
Im sorry to any good and righteous Catholics reading this, I know there are some out there. More good than bad, really. And even the bad hierarchy, they know not what they do. (some of them do know!) this is just my opinion on the Church and I think it really really needs a Vatican III meet to clean up its act before its too late.
Tomorrow's forecast: God reigns and the Son shines!
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 9:06:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 8:37:27 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/2015 7:50:58 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/23/2015 5:17:32 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/2015 3:57:01 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Jesus left us many principles, principles that are spirit by nature. These principles unlock spiritual truths and spiritual revelations, we see the duality of flesh and spirit constantly in the narrative.
We see this clearly as the first principle Jesus lays out for us in John 3....
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?


Jesus described spiritual truths using physical analogies so us material beings could relate and learn, however we see the most simple principles being mangled by religious freaks and institutions.

I would like to show you a spiritual principle that has been corrupted by material institutions and turned into a man-made abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.


Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.


Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.

And BTW, why would it matter that Jesus said "you" "seven" times lol? Of course Jesus said "you" He was speaking to Peter, that is a ridiculous assessment. As I explained before the "rock" was the principle, Peter was not the principle itself, make sense? Peter just happened to confess the principle. Peter was not the principle.

What you're going to have to do is show me why I should not consider what Jesus said in the same manner He said everything else? Why should I not believe that the Church was built upon the principle?
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 9:06:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.

Like every time Jesus spoke, He is speaking about the spirit, spiritual principles.


Sorry, saying "every time" is not an answer. Neither is giving me homework. I don't expect you to quote everything Jesus said, but you need to give me some examples. That which can be claimed without evidence can be rejected without evidence.

Read this chapter, it's chalk full of them, too many to list. The spiritual principles within these are too numeral to expand on.
https://www.biblegateway.com...


Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.


Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.

You're missing the point brother, I'm not disputing words, I'm disputing the false interpretation.

But that's what we're interpreting- words. Jesus makes no mention of a principle, but He does mention Peter (you and rock) almost ten times. If Jesus expected them to think He was talking about some unmentioned principle, He failed to ever tell them.

And so you're saying without the RCC you would have developed the Pope based upon the principle Jesus revealed? I'm not sure I believe you....

Please don't bear false witness.

What does the Pope have to do with any of it? The church is the people (the body), Jesus is the mediator, the scripture is the Word, the Spirit is our Guide, what would we need the old Pope for??

To be our Earthly shepherd (as Jesus lined out in John 21:15 ff)
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 9:07:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 9:06:07 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/23/2015 8:37:27 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/2015 7:50:58 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/23/2015 5:17:32 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/2015 3:57:01 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Jesus left us many principles, principles that are spirit by nature. These principles unlock spiritual truths and spiritual revelations, we see the duality of flesh and spirit constantly in the narrative.
We see this clearly as the first principle Jesus lays out for us in John 3....
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?


Jesus described spiritual truths using physical analogies so us material beings could relate and learn, however we see the most simple principles being mangled by religious freaks and institutions.

I would like to show you a spiritual principle that has been corrupted by material institutions and turned into a man-made abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.


Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.


Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.

And BTW, why would it matter that Jesus said "you" "seven" times lol? Of course Jesus said "you" He was speaking to Peter, that is a ridiculous assessment. As I explained before the "rock" was the principle, Peter was not the principle itself, make sense? Peter just happened to confess the principle. Peter was not the principle.

What you're going to have to do is show me why I should not consider what Jesus said in the same manner He said everything else? Why should I not believe that the Church was built upon the principle?

I just answered all these questions in my post immediately before this one.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 9:08:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 9:07:41 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/2015 9:06:07 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/23/2015 8:37:27 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/2015 7:50:58 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/23/2015 5:17:32 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/2015 3:57:01 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Jesus left us many principles, principles that are spirit by nature. These principles unlock spiritual truths and spiritual revelations, we see the duality of flesh and spirit constantly in the narrative.
We see this clearly as the first principle Jesus lays out for us in John 3....
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?


Jesus described spiritual truths using physical analogies so us material beings could relate and learn, however we see the most simple principles being mangled by religious freaks and institutions.

I would like to show you a spiritual principle that has been corrupted by material institutions and turned into a man-made abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.


Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.


Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.

And BTW, why would it matter that Jesus said "you" "seven" times lol? Of course Jesus said "you" He was speaking to Peter, that is a ridiculous assessment. As I explained before the "rock" was the principle, Peter was not the principle itself, make sense? Peter just happened to confess the principle. Peter was not the principle.

What you're going to have to do is show me why I should not consider what Jesus said in the same manner He said everything else? Why should I not believe that the Church was built upon the principle?


I just answered all these questions in my post immediately before this one.

No you didn't.
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 9:11:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 9:08:59 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?


Jesus described spiritual truths using physical analogies so us material beings could relate and learn, however we see the most simple principles being mangled by religious freaks and institutions.

I would like to show you a spiritual principle that has been corrupted by material institutions and turned into a man-made abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.


Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.


Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.

And BTW, why would it matter that Jesus said "you" "seven" times lol? Of course Jesus said "you" He was speaking to Peter, that is a ridiculous assessment. As I explained before the "rock" was the principle, Peter was not the principle itself, make sense? Peter just happened to confess the principle. Peter was not the principle.

What you're going to have to do is show me why I should not consider what Jesus said in the same manner He said everything else? Why should I not believe that the Church was built upon the principle?


I just answered all these ques

Check out my post from 9:06 pm. If you still have questions after reading that,.let me know.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 9:14:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 9:06:12 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.

Like every time Jesus spoke, He is speaking about the spirit, spiritual principles.



Sorry, saying "every time" is not an answer. Neither is giving me homework. I don't expect you to quote everything Jesus said, but you need to give me some examples. That which can be claimed without evidence can be rejected without evidence.

Read this chapter, it's chalk full of them, too many to list. The spiritual principles within these are too numeral to expand on.
https://www.biblegateway.com...


Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.


Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.

You're missing the point brother, I'm not disputing words, I'm disputing the false interpretation.


But that's what we're interpreting- words. Jesus makes no mention of a principle, but He does mention Peter (you and rock) almost ten times. If Jesus expected them to think He was talking about some unmentioned principle, He failed to ever tell them.

You can't be serious, did you read the chapter I supplied? He even explained He talked in parables, those parable reveal spiritual truth, like always.

And so you're saying without the RCC you would have developed the Pope based upon the principle Jesus revealed? I'm not sure I believe you....

Please don't bear false witness.

Because I don't believe any sincere believer would say such a thing, sounds like you been brainwashed, Jesus never spoke of any Pope, Jesus relayed spiritual Truth, He did not establish the Papal, He established the principle. Like He always did.

What does the Pope have to do with any of it? The church is the people (the body), Jesus is the mediator, the scripture is the Word, the Spirit is our Guide, what would we need the old Pope for??

To be our Earthly shepherd (as Jesus lined out in John 21:15 ff)

And he fed them..... what do we need the Pope for....
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 9:24:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/201



Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.

Like every time Jesus spoke, He is speaking about the spirit, spiritual principles.



Sorry, saying "every time" is not an answer. Neither is giving me homework. I don't expect you to quote everything Jesus said, but you need to give me some examples. That which can be claimed without evidence can be rejected without evidence.

Read this chapter, it's chalk full of them, too many to list. The spiritual principles within these are too numeral to expand on.
https://www.biblegateway.com...


Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.


Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.

You're missing the point brother, I'm not disputing words, I'm disputing the false interpretation.


But that's what we're interpreting- words. Jesus makes no mention of a principle, but He does mention Peter (you and rock) almost ten times. If Jesus expected them to think He was talking about some unmentioned principle, He failed to ever tell them.

You can't be serious, did you read the chapter I supplied? He even explained He talked in parables, those parable reveal spiritual truth, like always.


He didn't always speak in parables. As I said, it's up to you to provide the evidence, not give me a homework assignment.

And so you're saying without the RCC you would have developed the Pope based upon the principle Jesus revealed? I'm not sure I believe you....

Please don't bear false witness.

Because I don't believe any sincere believer would say such a thing, sounds like you been brainwashed,

Claiming someone, who simply disagrees with your fallible interpretation, is brainwashed is rather bigoted. Are you claiming all Catholics are brainwashed, or just this one?

esus never spoke of any Pope, Jesus relayed spiritual Truth, He did not establish the Papal, He established the principle. Like He always did.

He established the papacy in Matthew 16.

What does the Pope have to do with any of it? The church is the people (the body), Jesus is the mediator, the scripture is the Word, the Spirit is our Guide, what would we need the old Pope for??

To be our Earthly shepherd (as Jesus lined out in John 21:15 ff)

And he fed them..... what do we need the Pope for....

Well, since Peter is no longer alive, we need his successor to continue to feed Jesus's sheep. Or do you believe Jesus's sheep no longer need to be tended to?
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 9:29:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 9:24:23 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/201



Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.

Like every time Jesus spoke, He is speaking about the spirit, spiritual principles.



Sorry, saying "every time" is not an answer. Neither is giving me homework. I don't expect you to quote everything Jesus said, but you need to give me some examples. That which can be claimed without evidence can be rejected without evidence.

Read this chapter, it's chalk full of them, too many to list. The spiritual principles within these are too numeral to expand on.
https://www.biblegateway.com...


Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.


Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.

You're missing the point brother, I'm not disputing words, I'm disputing the false interpretation.


But that's what we're interpreting- words. Jesus makes no mention of a principle, but He does mention Peter (you and rock) almost ten times. If Jesus expected them to think He was talking about some unmentioned principle, He failed to ever tell them.

You can't be serious, did you read the chapter I supplied? He even explained He talked in parables, those parable reveal spiritual truth, like always.


He didn't always speak in parables. As I said, it's up to you to provide the evidence, not give me a homework assignment.

Don't be a wise guy you know what I mean, you need to show me why the church was not built upon the principle rather than a man, you have done nothing to show me it was not a principle, do you know what a principle is lol?
I don't need to give you a homework assignment for you to understand what I'm saying, it should be obvious.

And so you're saying without the RCC you would have developed the Pope based upon the principle Jesus revealed? I'm not sure I believe you....

Please don't bear false witness.

Because I don't believe any sincere believer would say such a thing, sounds like you been brainwashed,

Claiming someone, who simply disagrees with your fallible interpretation, is brainwashed is rather bigoted. Are you claiming all Catholics are brainwashed, or just this one?

So far you.



esus never spoke of any Pope, Jesus relayed spiritual Truth, He did not establish the Papal, He established the principle. Like He always did.

He established the papacy in Matthew 16.

No He didn't.

What does the Pope have to do with any of it? The church is the people (the body), Jesus is the mediator, the scripture is the Word, the Spirit is our Guide, what would we need the old Pope for??

To be our Earthly shepherd (as Jesus lined out in John 21:15 ff)

And he fed them..... what do we need the Pope for....

Well, since Peter is no longer alive, we need his successor to continue to feed Jesus's sheep. Or do you believe Jesus's sheep no longer need to be tended to?

The Pope feeds us nothing, what is the Pope feeding us? I've never needed anything from a Pope, never.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 9:33:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
And BTW, I have no problem with any "shepherd", we are discussing the Pope, a shepherd does not have to be a Pope, a shepherd is a shepherd. Two different definitions.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 10:05:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 9:04:34 PM, August_Burns_Red wrote:
I agree partly with your OP theology. Yes...I have always disbelieved the claim of the RCC to aposolic succession as they call it///that since Peter was the first Pope and started the Church it became the RCC and they have "the market cornered" being the "universal" Church. (katolikos= Greek.)
But I also think that Jesus DID hand the reigns over to Peter (Petros = rock in Greek.) and that He meant it literally. For Peter to head-up His ministry after He was killed. If Jesus were alive today He would have no problem in admitting that he handed the reigns to Peter. "The conrerstone on which I build my church" is pretty clear evidence." Nothing in this quote hints at it not being a literal "changing of the guard."
And now a big "BUT".....i also think if Jesus were alive today he would be 100% angered and dismayed and even would loathe what the RCC has become. and also of its history. the bad popes. the icons and idols. not to mention the pederast priests.
When I was an atheist I used the RCC as proof that all religion is bad. And that God is not real. Now I realize that is unfair. The RCC is just composed of flawed humans like a lot of big institutions. This is not God's fault--the whole Free Will thing, again.
But boy....so many of those RCC cardinals and bishops and priests are going to be very surprised when they die and do not go to Heaven to be with God. It is then that they will know what He really thinks of them and their false claims of being a Universal Church.
Im sorry to any good and righteous Catholics reading this, I know there are some out there. More good than bad, really. And even the bad hierarchy, they know not what they do. (some of them do know!) this is just my opinion on the Church and I think it really really needs a Vatican III meet to clean up its act before its too late.

Okay hang on, I'm not saying Jesus didn't hand anything to Peter, I'm saying the church was built upon what Peter stated, that "thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." That was what the church was built upon, do you disagree with that?
That was a spiritual revelation that was the corner stone, as I stated, Peter really had nothing to do with the principle itself, should be common sense I would think.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 10:12:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 9:06:12 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.

Like every time Jesus spoke, He is speaking about the spirit, spiritual principles.



Sorry, saying "every time" is not an answer. Neither is giving me homework. I don't expect you to quote everything Jesus said, but you need to give me some examples. That which can be claimed without evidence can be rejected without evidence.

Read this chapter, it's chalk full of them, too many to list. The spiritual principles within these are too numeral to expand on.
https://www.biblegateway.com...


Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.


Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.

You're missing the point brother, I'm not disputing words, I'm disputing the false interpretation.


But that's what we're interpreting- words. Jesus makes no mention of a principle, but He does mention Peter (you and rock) almost ten times. If Jesus expected them to think He was talking about some unmentioned principle, He failed to ever tell them.

And that is nonsense, the principle was what Peter confessed, how can you not see that? The church was built upon the principle that "thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."

Principle:
1.a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning:

As I explained above, the fact Jesus said "you" is irrelevant, of course He did that is who He was conversing with.

And so you're saying without the RCC you would have developed the Pope based upon the principle Jesus revealed? I'm not sure I believe you....

Please don't bear false witness.

What does the Pope have to do with any of it? The church is the people (the body), Jesus is the mediator, the scripture is the Word, the Spirit is our Guide, what would we need the old Pope for??

To be our Earthly shepherd (as Jesus lined out in John 21:15 ff)
August_Burns_Red
Posts: 1,253
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 10:16:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 10:05:13 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/23/2015 9:04:34 PM, August_Burns_Red wrote:
I agree partly with your OP theology. Yes...I have always disbelieved the claim of the RCC to aposolic succession as they call it///that since Peter was the first Pope and started the Church it became the RCC and they have "the market cornered" being the "universal" Church. (katolikos= Greek.)
But I also think that Jesus DID hand the reigns over to Peter (Petros = rock in Greek.) and that He meant it literally. For Peter to head-up His ministry after He was killed. If Jesus were alive today He would have no problem in admitting that he handed the reigns to Peter. "The conrerstone on which I build my church" is pretty clear evidence." Nothing in this quote hints at it not being a literal "changing of the guard."
And now a big "BUT".....i also think if Jesus were alive today he would be 100% angered and dismayed and even would loathe what the RCC has become. and also of its history. the bad popes. the icons and idols. not to mention the pederast priests.
When I was an atheist I used the RCC as proof that all religion is bad. And that God is not real. Now I realize that is unfair. The RCC is just composed of flawed humans like a lot of big institutions. This is not God's fault--the whole Free Will thing, again.
But boy....so many of those RCC cardinals and bishops and priests are going to be very surprised when they die and do not go to Heaven to be with God. It is then that they will know what He really thinks of them and their false claims of being a Universal Church.
Im sorry to any good and righteous Catholics reading this, I know there are some out there. More good than bad, really. And even the bad hierarchy, they know not what they do. (some of them do know!) this is just my opinion on the Church and I think it really really needs a Vatican III meet to clean up its act before its too late.

Okay hang on, I'm not saying Jesus didn't hand anything to Peter, I'm saying the church was built upon what Peter stated, that "thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." That was what the church was built upon, do you disagree with that?
That was a spiritual revelation that was the corner stone, as I stated, Peter really had nothing to do with the principle itself, should be common sense I would think.

sorry...I'm not following you on how peter had nothing to do with it if Jesus handed him the reigns. I guess your theology is too complex for me. I am a simply Christian who was Saved and who thinks that Jesus' words are all I need to live one, that and my continual contact and awareness of God in my life. I am not a believer in "Jesus was God." To my way of thinking,when somebody knows they are about to die and they tell another to his face that they are bequeathing him control, well, that person who is receiving the control certainly does have something to do with it. it was after all, him and nobody else that Jesus chose.
Tomorrow's forecast: God reigns and the Son shines!
celestialtorahteacher
Posts: 1,369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 10:24:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The statement in Matthew where Jesus the Jewish religious leader says he will build his church upon the rock of Peter proves to us Jews that Matthew's Jesus is a Gentile Church Father fabrication. No Jew raised in Jewish religion and a Jewish religious leader to boot would ever think to start a Gentile "church" for Jewish fellowship. Not only is Jewish Jesus being captured and edited to become "Gentile" the story itself is nothing more than a retelling of Rome's Janus-Pater god, Father Janus, god of gates and Keeper of the Gate of Heaven, the Gospel story is a ripoff of Roman pagan god worship.
celestialtorahteacher
Posts: 1,369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 10:31:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
But you know people who researched the roots of Bible beliefs can tell believers where their beliefs originated as pagan mythologies become "Christianized" just as before the Gentile Christians were the Jewish priesthood fabricators creating "monotheism" out of pagan polytheistic worship, e.g. the very name "Israel" contains three top Egyptian gods, one Canaanite God, all captured for Judaism, Isis, Moon, RA, Sun, EL, Saturn. Most every "Hebrew" name hides a pagan god or pagan king within it.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 11:11:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 3:57:01 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Jesus left us many principles, principles that are spirit by nature.

Is spiritual the same as mental in your book ?

If not what is the difference between the two ?
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2015 2:09:47 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 3:57:01 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Jesus left us many principles, principles that are spirit by nature. These principles unlock spiritual truths and spiritual revelations, we see the duality of flesh and spirit constantly in the narrative.
We see this clearly as the first principle Jesus lays out for us in John 3....
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?


Jesus described spiritual truths using physical analogies so us material beings could relate and learn, however we see the most simple principles being mangled by religious freaks and institutions.

I would like to show you a spiritual principle that has been corrupted by material institutions and turned into a man-made abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

Some of this may have been stated before, but I'll give a complete answer. Jesus spoke in Aramaic, thus he actually said:
"And I say to thee: That thou art Kepha (rock); and upon this kepha (rock) I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

So in Jesus' actual words you get the word play between Kepha and kepha. However, did you just notice what else just happened? God just directly renamed someone. This is of incredible significance!

The only people that God had previously renamed were Abram to Abraham, Sarai to Sarah, and Jacom to Israel. The Jews referred to themselves as the Israelites and sons of Abraham. They were renamed to permanent leadership positions. This makes Jesus' dual rock statement even more likely pointing to Peter as the Rock, but there is yet more!

What about the Keys and binding and loosing? What does the bible say about the keys?

"And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: `The words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David, who opens and no one shall shut, who shuts and no one opens.Revelation 3:7

Jesus, the Holy One, has the Key! And that key opens and shuts in such a way that nobody else can reverse the action. And he told us he is giving it to Peter. What incredible authority he has just handed to Peter. Was there any precedence of this in the Davidic kingdom (Jesus in a King in the line of David)?

"In that day I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your girdle on him, and will commit your authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. And I will fasten him like a peg in a sure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father's house. And they will hang on him the whole weight of his father's house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons."Isaiah 22:20-24

So in the Davidic kingdom the king gave the key to the Kingdom to a steward or prime minister. And that man had the full authority of the king to open and shut!

Thus it is even more conclusive that it is Peter who is the rock. And like in the Davidic kingdom the office of steward was passed on. Like any government we can know who are the legitimate authorities.
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2015 2:30:03 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Jesus didn't build any religion', he was just the guy who was used as a figurehead to flag up Christianity, many years after he was a rotting corpse. If he was alive today I suspect he might be very surprised, and even disgusted, by some of the stuff claimed in his name by extreme Christians, many of whom infest this forum!
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2015 5:53:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 10:16:17 PM, August_Burns_Red wrote:
At 7/23/2015 10:05:13 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/23/2015 9:04:34 PM, August_Burns_Red wrote:
I agree partly with your OP theology. Yes...I have always disbelieved the claim of the RCC to aposolic succession as they call it///that since Peter was the first Pope and started the Church it became the RCC and they have "the market cornered" being the "universal" Church. (katolikos= Greek.)
But I also think that Jesus DID hand the reigns over to Peter (Petros = rock in Greek.) and that He meant it literally. For Peter to head-up His ministry after He was killed. If Jesus were alive today He would have no problem in admitting that he handed the reigns to Peter. "The conrerstone on which I build my church" is pretty clear evidence." Nothing in this quote hints at it not being a literal "changing of the guard."
And now a big "BUT".....i also think if Jesus were alive today he would be 100% angered and dismayed and even would loathe what the RCC has become. and also of its history. the bad popes. the icons and idols. not to mention the pederast priests.
When I was an atheist I used the RCC as proof that all religion is bad. And that God is not real. Now I realize that is unfair. The RCC is just composed of flawed humans like a lot of big institutions. This is not God's fault--the whole Free Will thing, again.
But boy....so many of those RCC cardinals and bishops and priests are going to be very surprised when they die and do not go to Heaven to be with God. It is then that they will know what He really thinks of them and their false claims of being a Universal Church.
Im sorry to any good and righteous Catholics reading this, I know there are some out there. More good than bad, really. And even the bad hierarchy, they know not what they do. (some of them do know!) this is just my opinion on the Church and I think it really really needs a Vatican III meet to clean up its act before its too late.

Okay hang on, I'm not saying Jesus didn't hand anything to Peter, I'm saying the church was built upon what Peter stated, that "thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." That was what the church was built upon, do you disagree with that?
That was a spiritual revelation that was the corner stone, as I stated, Peter really had nothing to do with the principle itself, should be common sense I would think.

sorry...I'm not following you on how peter had nothing to do with it if Jesus handed him the reigns. I guess your theology is too complex for me. I am a simply Christian who was Saved and who thinks that Jesus' words are all I need to live one, that and my continual contact and awareness of God in my life. I am not a believer in "Jesus was God." To my way of thinking,when somebody knows they are about to die and they tell another to his face that they are bequeathing him control, well, that person who is receiving the control certainly does have something to do with it. it was after all, him and nobody else that Jesus chose.

So you are a Catholic? and believe Jesus set up the Papal lol? because that's all I'm really disputing here, Peter was not infallible, it was what Peter confessed that was infallible simple?
Everything that transpired in the passage we are discussing is based on what? That's right, it is based on what Peter confessed right? correct me when you think I'm wrong... that confession was verse 16 right?.......... "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."
Everything Jesus said after was based upon that, yes Jesus called Peter the "rock" but why? because of the revelation Peter had of the principle in verse 16, Peter had nothing to do with the principle other than confessing it just like I have nothing to do with the principle of gravity but I can confess to it.

Peter wasn't infallible, it was the principle that the church was built on that was confessed by Peter which was infallible and everything was hung on that, it could have been some bum off the street that confessed it and Christ would have said the same thing, the rock naming thing was just based on the confession Peter made.
You and I could do the same thing as Peter and all the same principles would apply likewise.

You said " I am a simply Christian who was Saved and who thinks that Jesus' words are all I need to live one, that and my continual contact and awareness of God in my life. "
Yes I agree with that I think and that is where I'm coming from, it's not me telling you that you need a Pope or need to become a Catholic, and that is because of what I've been saying in this thread, that we don't need all this religious crap, with men wearing gold all over and these silly costumes pretending to be infallible while everyone bows down as he strolls by lol, give me a break, all that religious garbage comes from a simple principle?
The church was supposed to be built on the principle in verse 16, not literally Peter himself or the Pope, I'm not really sure why this would seem complicated....
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2015 5:55:15 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 9:29:26 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/23/2015 9:24:23 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7/23/201




Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.

Like every time Jesus spoke, He is speaking about the spirit, spiritual principles.



Sorry, saying "every time" is not an answer. Neither is giving me homework. I don't expect you to quote everything Jesus said, but you need to give me some examples. That which can be claimed without evidence can be rejected without evidence.

Read this chapter, it's chalk full of them, too many to list. The spiritual principles within these are too numeral to expand on.
https://www.biblegateway.com...


Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.


Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.

You're missing the point brother, I'm not disputing words, I'm disputing the false interpretation.


But that's what we're interpreting- words. Jesus makes no mention of a principle, but He does mention Peter (you and rock) almost ten times. If Jesus expected them to think He was talking about some unmentioned principle, He failed to ever tell them.

You can't be serious, did you read the chapter I supplied? He even explained He talked in parables, those parable reveal spiritual truth, like always.


He didn't always speak in parables. As I said, it's up to you to provide the evidence, not give me a homework assignment.

Don't be a wise guy you know what I mean, you need to show me why the church was not built upon the principle rather than a man,

I know you want Jesus to speak in parables when there's no reason to believe He did. Sure He did sometimes, but He always explained Himself later. This didn't happen here which should tell you He meant what He said. It was Jesus who changed Simon's name to Peter (which means rock), and then said He was going to build His Church on "this rock". That is the primary meaning of the text. A secondary meaning could also include the principle you allude to, but the Apostles would have known He was referring to Peter primarily. They were devout Jews, and as such would have recognized Jesus's allusion to Isaiah 22. Beginning in verse 20, the passage speaks of the office of prime minister. This was someone who worked for the king, and spoke for the king in his absence. Here is the part of chapter 20 Jesus was invoking:

"22 And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open."

Sound familiar? Keys, binding and loosening? Clearly Jesus was appointing Peter as His prime minister. An office that had succession as well. That's why we still have Popes today. We'll continue to need them until the King comes back.

you have done nothing to show me it was not a principle, do you know what a principle is lol?
I don't need to give you a homework assignment for you to understand what I'm saying, it should be obvious.

And so you're saying without the RCC you would have developed the Pope based upon the principle Jesus revealed? I'm not sure I believe you....

Please don't bear false witness.

Because I don't believe any sincere believer would say such a thing, sounds like you been brainwashed,

Claiming someone, who simply disagrees with your fallible interpretation, is brainwashed is rather bigoted. Are you claiming all Catholics are brainwashed, or just this one?

So far you.



esus never spoke of any Pope, Jesus relayed spiritual Truth, He did not establish the Papal, He established the principle. Like He always did.

He established the papacy in Matthew 16.

No He didn't.

What does the Pope have to do with any of it? The church is the people (the body), Jesus is the mediator, the scripture is the Word, the Spirit is our Guide, what would we need the old Pope for??

To be our Earthly shepherd (as Jesus lined out in John 21:15 ff)

And he fed them..... what do we need the Pope for....

Well, since Peter is no longer alive, we need his successor to continue to feed Jesus's sheep. Or do you believe Jesus's sheep no longer need to be tended to?

The Pope feeds us nothing, what is the Pope feeding us? I've never needed anything from a Pope, never.

I'm sure there were some Christians living 2,000 years ago who said they didn't need Peter to feed them, but Jesus said otherwise.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2015 5:57:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 9:33:31 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
And BTW, I have no problem with any "shepherd", we are discussing the Pope, a shepherd does not have to be a Pope, a shepherd is a shepherd. Two different definitions.

The Pope is the shepherd of the Cristian flock. Unfortunately, sheep don't always know what's best for them and don't always listen to the shepherd.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2015 6:02:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 10:12:16 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/23/2015 9:06:12 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 7abomination....

Matthew 16
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus is precisely coming against religious mindset and religious organization from the start to relay a spiritual truth and principle that would give us (the people)the power to become what Jesus came to show us, and not the religious institutions, funny how they twist it anyways....
The principle is based on what Peter expresses, the "rock" is the analogy that supports the principle, not a literal description of Peter (or the Pope) but a literal description of the truth of what Peter declared.
Jesus didn't mean for Peter to be worshipped or honored as an infallible figure, quite the opposite as we see the story unfold.
How unfortunate such a spiritual principle could get lost in such a travesty. Christ always empowered the individual and the freedom we have to come to God without any interference or man-made systems.

Jesus says... "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

That was the principle behind the words and Jesus supports it by saying...

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus was supporting the principle not the person, upon this "principle" I will build my "church", it was the spiritual revelation that Jesus was speaking to, the formation of the "POPE" is nothing short of an abomination and a lie, has nothing to do with what Jesus was teaching.

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it. [g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

With all due respect, your interpretation of Matthew 16 flies in the face of context of the text. What you want me to believe is that Jesus was saying "You, you, you, you, your profession of faith, you, you, you.

Instead, it would seem more likely that Jesus built His Church upon Peter, especially since that's what Peter means (rock).

No, it "flies in the face" of nothing, Jesus built His church upon the principle, not Peter, like He always did and does. Peter had nothing to do with the principle itself.

Like He always does??? Name one time.

Like every time Jesus spoke, He is speaking about the spirit, spiritual principles.



Sorry, saying "every time" is not an answer. Neither is giving me homework. I don't expect you to quote everything Jesus said, but you need to give me some examples. That which can be claimed without evidence can be rejected without evidence.

Read this chapter, it's chalk full of them, too many to list. The spiritual principles within these are too numeral to expand on.
https://www.biblegateway.com...


Imagine there was no RCC or any church and you are with Peter and Jesus and heard His sayings, you're going to sit here and tell me you would translate what He was saying and come to the conclusion that Christ was setting up the Papal and not a spiritual principle? Wow, that's very entertaining.


Of course I would, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic. Aramaic has only one word for "rock", so I would have heard "You are Rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church." Not only that, but as I pointed out, Jesus said "you" (referring to Peter) seven times. Linguistically, no other possibility exists.

You're missing the point brother, I'm not disputing words, I'm disputing the false interpretation.


But that's what we're interpreting- words. Jesus makes no mention of a principle, but He does mention Peter (you and rock) almost ten times. If Jesus expected them to think He was talking about some unmentioned principle, He failed to ever tell them.

And that is nonsense, the principle was what Peter confessed, how can you not see that? The church was built upon the principle that "thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."


Jesus makes no allusion to this principle you speak of when mentioning what He would build His Church upon. He said you are Peter, and upon this rock (Peter means rock), I will build my Church.

Principle:
1.a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning:

As I explained above, the fact Jesus said "you" is irrelevant, of course He did that is who He was conversing with.


Not only that, but Peter was the focus of the entire conversation.

And so you're saying without the RCC you would have developed the Pope based upon the principle Jesus revealed? I'm not sure I believe you....

Please don't bear false witness.

What does the Pope have to do with any of it? The church is the people (the body), Jesus is the mediator, the scripture is the Word, the Spirit is our Guide, what would we need the old Pope for??

To be our Earthly shepherd (as Jesus lined out in John 21:15 ff)
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2015 6:05:54 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 11:11:47 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 7/23/2015 3:57:01 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Jesus left us many principles, principles that are spirit by nature.

Is spiritual the same as mental in your book ?

No.

If not what is the difference between the two ?

Mental is relating to the mind. The spiritual realm is not the mind, it is a literal world. The word "spirit" in scripture consists of everything within that world, could be person, places or things. Example....Holy Spirit would be a "Person" in this sense, a person who is a Spirit Being. An angel could be called a "spirit", a demon could be called a spirit, anything that inhabits this realm is related to the "spirit".

When Jesus speaks about the spirit He is not referring to ones mind, the spirit world is outside the mind, our minds are irrelevant to the spirit just like our minds our irrelevant to the external world, our minds don't make up the external world it's already there.