Liafailrock replied:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>OK. Let me try to paraphrase some of the Scriptures and put together what we've been discussing all along which may give you better insight as to where I am coming from (besides, I owe you a long discourse). You are indeed a patient person for putting up with the likes of me, although I assure you that my bark is worse than my bite. If you met me in person I would be totally unthreatening and usually likeable to most.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm likable too!
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Matthew 16:16-19: "And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 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. 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."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
A very "dangerous" piece of scripture for Fundamentalists to quote, I might add…
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Peter confessed Jesus as the Son of the Living God in whom Jesus claimed His Father revealed it to him. And because of this Jesus then effectively said, "You are Peter [Rock] because upon this Rock [i.e. Christ Himself ( I Corinthians 10:4)] I will build my church.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oops, my Bible does not have "i.e., Christ Himself" in it.
There are two "rocks" being spoken of here. They are in the same sentence; the first occurrence being when Simon's name is changed to Peter (Petros is Greek,
Kepha in Aramaic, which is the language Christ spoke; the second occurrence comes, almost within the same breath,
kepha is spoken again as what the church is to be built upon. The second "kepha" refers back to the first "Kepha," which in Simon now "Peter" (ROCK). Therefore, the church is to be built upon Peter and upon Peter only. The Church is not built upon Christ, the Church is built
BY Christ upon Peter.
Take that quote to any English teacher and have him or her parse it for you, and will see that no other conclusion can be made. Use any bible version you wish, even the original Koine Greek, and the conclusion is conclusive - The Church is to be built upon Peter.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Was Peter symbolic of The Rock? Yes. Was he a rock? Yes. You see, those born of God take on the same nature because they are also of God.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Non sequitur to the issue, sir. All the wordsmithing in the world will not change the fact that Christ is to build His church upon Peter.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>In addition, (as you have recognized) this was given to the other apostles. Peter, the apostles and all believers take on the same nature and authority of Christ.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm sorry but I am not following you here. The other apostles, so far as I can tell, were never referred to as "rocks." What I think you are confusing here is the fact that, later on, in Matthew 18:18, Jesus extends the power to "bind and loose," but that does not mean that Christ is building His church upon them in the sense of Matthew 16:18. Also, Peter is given the "keys of the kingdom of heaven," exclusively, and not to the other apostles. Nevertheless, the other apostles do have authority per 18:18, plus what flows from the "keys," through the authority of Peter, and to the others.
I retired with the rank of Commander (0-5) after 30 years in the Navy, therefore, I had authority, but my authority came down to and through me by my superiors, the Captains (0-6) and the Admirals above me. And as such, their authority was greater then mine, just as the authority of the other apostles is lesser then that of Peter, the "Chief of the Apostles."
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Yet, Christ is the head. How can that be? It can be that way because Paul compared believers to the body of Christ. Each have their position, rank and purpose for the coming Kingdom of God. The body is the body, whether it would be the callus on the foot (the least) or brain (Christ). Hence that is why in Revelation 1:6 it is said, "And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen." The Messianic Psalm 2 is also applicable to believers. Paul goes on to say that we are joint-heirs with Christ and even has the apparent gall to say that we will judge nations and angels (a function most people think is only reserved for God--- only God is higher than the angels.) Mankind (Adam) was created to be thus. For you see, had Adam taken from the tree of life, he would have produced spiritual sons of God. God's Spirit would have been in Adam through that tree of life and indeed that would have been the incarnation the same as Christ.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
There is no question as to who is the ultimate spiritual head of the Church - It's founder, of course, which is Jesus Christ. Even so , Christ made Peter the human earthly head of the Church, just as He know he would spiritually rule from heaven, His "second in command" in charge of the Church here on earth. That is why the pope is called "The Vicar of Christ." If you rebel at the idea, but just consider that Christ set it up that way, and Matthew 16:18-19 is the "Charter Text" that does this.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I know, I know. You may have questions regarding the dynamics of it all. I'm not sure of the answers. It did not happen that way. I suppose Adam would have produced offspring the same as Christ. We are made into the image of Christ at the resurrection. Any being begets itself equal to itself. Yet, if Adam were alive today, we'd look up to him being the father of us all (the head) yet we would all be human.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I am not sure I follow you here, but Christ came because of the fall of man. That we both know and believe.
And your point is…??
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Let's continue in that verse. After that Jesus effectively said, "and because of this, I give to you the authority (keys) of the Kingdom of Heaven with my authority to proclaim the Kingdom of God "<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
My bible does not say "…with my authority to proclaim the Kingdom of God." But I do see that you agree that "keys" is the perfect metaphor for "authority," amplified even in the nest statement, "…whatsoever you bind…loose on earth, is bound…loosed in heaven" (paraphrased) as an example of that authority.
The gospel can be proclaimed through the world without having the authority of the "keys," but there is no doubt that such authority certainly backs up the proclamation of that very gospel. When Peter proclaimed the gospel, authority did not go away with that proclamation! It continued well into the quotes I gave from Acts as to his continuing authority as the "Chief of the Apostles."
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>And indeed, he launched the gospel on that day of Pentecost. Also, I agree with you that he pioneered so much more because of that confession inspired by the Father. He was given authority to use the power from heaven to the fullest.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Good! We both agree here…
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>However, I see this as a WORK (i.e. 'ACTS of the Apostles') where the power of God through the risen Christ would work through Peter. I am unsure how this can be misconstrued as to being given a higher authority over the other apostles.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Did I not give ample evidence from my quotes from Acts as well as that link I gave you as to the understanding, the early fathers had of who Peter was and how his authority continues, not only over the other apostles but the whole Church? Perhaps you need to go back and read them again…
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>In the eschatological sense, Peter (and the rest of the believers) will be given full power in God's Kingdom at the resurrection. However, I am assuming we are discussing Peter in the flesh.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Again, the evidence I gave, especially in the link I provided, is ample evidence that the primacy of Peter continues well after Pentecost and beyond the proclamation of the gospel.
As to "Peter in the flesh," sure, but I am also extending this to Peter's successors. Do you know who Peter's immediate successor was after he died? It was a guy called
Linus. Next after him came
Anacletus, followed by
Clement (who I briefly dissussed in a previous message, as I recall) and then after him came
Evaristus, all the way down to the 256th successor -
John Paul II.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Nevertheless, we shall now go to JOHN 20:23. This proclamation by Christ is an extension to what was already said to Peter in Matthew. "OK Peter. Not only do you have authority for the mighty works of the Kingdom, but you also may proclaim whose sins are retained and whose are forgiven BASED on my atoning work."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You read from a strange bible, as all the versions I have say no such a thing. Christ gives an absolute power to forgive the sins of men, or to retain them, period. And besides, Christ does not give this power to Peter only, but to ALL of the apostles! And this is another example of the authority, all of the apostles received from Christ, even as Christ gives the greater authority to Peter in the "keys" and being first to receive the power to "bind and loose."
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The crux of the gospel message is saving those who are lost (Jesus came to seek and save that which is lost) who are called as the Firstfruits to rule and reign in the coming Kingdom of God. The message that Peter (and the apostles) was to preach was the message in which one can base their salvation in other words. I do not see a reason to make this more complicated than it is. No apostle, Peter or otherwise, actually has power to forgive sins.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I beg to differ, sir. It is
you who are making this far more complicated then a simple read of John 20:22-23. But I suspect this is not your own reasoning, but the reasoning of others, which is fine. All of the "others" I rely upon to get the proper sense of that scripture quote comes from the writings of the early fathers, and from the magisterium of Holy Church, a "sense" that was taught as doctrine for nearly 1500 years before the Protestant Reformation without one hint, that I know of, that disputed that doctrine.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>They only proclaim it (Mark 2:7). I should be careful here. Once again I am talking about their being in the flesh back when they lived on Earth. When they are in the resurrection with the rest of us, then they will judge (Jesus said they would judge the 12 tribes of Israel) because they will be given the righteousness of Christ.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
First of all, you must show a relationship between proclaiming the gospel and the out and out stark reality of the power Christ gives to his apostles here. This comes immediately after His resurrection, and when he appeared to them despite the lock doors with, "peace be onto you." And then an astounding action: "He breathed upon them…" (Seen only in Genesis when God breathed life into Adam), followed with '…As the Father sent me, I also send you…" And even before Pentecost, Christ say finally, "…receive the holy Spirit…"
Do you get the feeling, Christ is going to say something very profound here? Why the elaborate preamble if he is only going to say something that simply tells them that they are to "promulgate the gospel"? (Or similar words…)
No, He is giving them the
actual power to forgive or retain the sins of others!
Worthiness has nothing to do with it, which did not bother Christ at all, did it? And even poor Peter, the one who betrayed His thrice, receives this power!
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Thus, in the flesh, they merely are the instruments of proclamation of remitting or retaining sins but in an eschatological sense I suppose they have the power to forgive or judge.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are very close to the truth here, sir…
But simply proclaiming the truth does not forgive sins!
Those who receive this truth and believe and are baptised will forgive sins, all sins, from their time of reason go moment of baptism.
But if they sin once again, seriously sin, some time later? (A whole new "bucket of worms" here…)
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>These gifts can and have been given to believers down through the ages and others have that same authority in the resurrection.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Let's keep the discussion of those alive and here on earth. John 20:22-23 has nothing to do with the final judgment as how we may participate in the judgment of others at the final judgment. I am speaking of going to my pastor, a priest, and asking him to forgive me of my sins, period. It is called the
Sacrament of Reconciliation and whether a priest has this power or not. I insist that the priest does per John 20:22-23, and one of the quotes I initially gave to show the authority given to the Church by Christ.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Although you have not openly stated this, I am assuming because you are attempting to prove the Lordship of Peter over the other apostles that whoever Peter names as his next successor has the same authority (since Christ gave him the keys of the Kingdom).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, Matthew 16:22-23 does that, not John 20:22-23, which I gave as an example of authority given to the apostles, including Peter. Also, Peter never named his successor - his successor was elected by others to take his place, and so it was for all of the popes in history.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>That, in turn, filters down through the next generation of apostles or popes because each had this same authority. I do not buy that. Remember, God's gift of grace (Spirit) is for "whoever will come". The ones who are chosen by birthright pass down physically from generation to generation. Such are the tribes of Israel and the monarchy. That is because these are human offspring with a carnal lineage and Earthly blessings. Thus, God's offspring in a similar manner goes from generation to generation on whomever he wants to beget. Passing on apostleship human-to-human reeks of the natural lineage to me. You can never be sure that this was the person God chose. And indeed, history confirms some not-so-honorable successors.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
First of all, you are confusing the grace that Christ give to all Christians, not just priests, bishops and popes. Indeed, I am sure that some popes reside in the lowest place in hell for their misdeeds! On the other hand, there are lay Christians, without any rank in the Church, who have no doubt achieved the highest place in heaven!
Secondly, we believe that the holy Spirit directs who will be elected pope at the next conclave. It is not a "natural lineage" but one of diverse lineage. Who would have thought we would have a Polish pope today? Some speculate that an African Cardinal, a very learned man of deep faith, may be our next pope!
And he is of the same race as my bishop, Bishop John Recard of the diocese of Pensacola-Tallahassee, a black man of deep faith and conviction!
Finally, it is a miracle to me that of about six scoundrels we have had as popes, not one of them declared a dogma that was against faith and morals! Strangely, indicating that God has a plan, one pope, a real scoundrel, was a brilliant administrator of the Church for which we can be grateful. Yet I fear for his soul at his death, his personal judgment before the Lord. God knows what he is doing when a pope is elected, even those who are scoundrels in their personal conduct and morals.
Holy Mother Church remains intact
despiteher own clergy, sometimes, but on the positive side, of any one scoundrel, there are hundreds of good and holy men and women who are the Church. Note the "Saint" prefixed before the names of about a third of the popes in the list of popes. That should tell you something. Out of about 256 popes, only about 6 of them were scoundrels, and that is a far better record then 1 out of 12 apostles, where one betrayed Our Lord.
God bless,
PAX
Bill+†+
Blest be God.
Blest be his holy name.
Blest be Jesus Christ, true God and true man.
Blest be the name of Jesus.
Blest be his most sacred heart.
Blest be his most precious blood.
Blest be Jesus in the most holy sacrament of the altar.
Blest be the Holy Spirit, the Consoler.
Blest be the great Mother of God, Mary most holy.
Blest be her holy and immaculate conception.
Blest be her glorious assumption.
Blest be the name of Mary, virgin and mother.
Blest be Saint Joseph, her most chaste spouse.
Blest be God in his angels and in his saints.
- The Divine Praises -
