Peter, the Rock, and the Keys

[michael_legna]

The word used in both places is from the same Greek root and should be translated in both places as "translate"  not "interpret".  Just because the KJV is consistent in it's error does not mean it is not an error.

You sound like a parrot, the official RCC bible, confirms the KJV is true, or and it has been interpreted from the Latin V.

So, your teaching is full of holes....

Petro once again you make no sense.  First you accuse me of being a parrot and then you claim that I don't agree with the official Catholic Bible so my teaching is full of holes.  Make up your mind - which is it.

You ignore my points since you can't refute them and instead change your attack to some unquoted claim that the RCC Bible says the KJV is true.  Provide a quote so people can see if your misunderstand the statement otherwise no one is going to believe you.  I know base on my past interactions with you your understanding of even the simplest statements leaves a lot to be desired so I can't take your claim at face value.  Show me where the RCC Bible says the KJV is true then I can determine what it is they meant by it - I am sure they do not mean it was infallibly translated.  I am also sure they do not contend that the KJV was translated from the Latin Vulgate - what utter nonsense.

[michael_legna]

Can't you see michael_legna that Catholics and Protestants will never agree on scripture interpretation ?  They are like chalk and cheese.  The Catholic repeats his church dogma and the obedient ones will not budge from it come what may.  The Protestant on the other hand really has no dogma to cling to and relies on the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.  One repeats his church dogma secondhand; the other gets his teaching direct from the third person of the Trinity.

Amen

Yes I agree there is a difference in approaches.  One relies on the Church to resolve all disputes as in Matt 18:17 and sees the Church as the pillar and ground of truth as in 1 Tim 3:15.

The others rely on the promise of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in true believers, but unfortunately that indwelling is apparently by 30,000 or more different spirits since their are 30,000 or more interpretations of scripture.  I for one don't believe there are 30,000 different Holy Spirits, so that is why I don't trust those individuals interpretations because they aren't from the Holy Spirit no matter what their pride tells them.  

I think the key reason the Holy Spirit isn't helping those individuals with their 30,000 different interpretations is because they aren't all true believers - I mean how could they be, they all believe different things.

[Sower]

Can't you see michael_legna that Catholics and Protestants will never agree on scripture interpretation ?  They are like chalk and cheese.  The Catholic repeats his church dogma and the obedient ones will not budge from it come what may.  The Protestant on the other hand really has no dogma to cling to and relies on the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.  One repeats his church dogma secondhand; the other gets his teaching direct from the third person of the Trinity.

Amen

And Amen! It is truly awesome! May the LORD receive all honour, praise and glory for teaching us and guiding us daily.

[Lance]

Yes I agree there is a difference in approaches.  One relies on the Church to resolve all disputes as in Matt 18:17 and sees the Church as the pillar and ground of truth as in 1 Tim 3:15.

The others rely on the promise of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in true believers, but unfortunately that indwelling is apparently by 30,000 or more different spirits since their are 30,000 or more interpretations of scripture.  I for one don't believe there are 30,000 different Holy Spirits, so that is why I don't trust those individuals interpretations because they aren't from the Holy Spirit no matter what their pride tells them.  

I think the key reason the Holy Spirit isn't helping those individuals with their 30,000 different interpretations is because they aren't all true believers - I mean how could they be, they all believe different things.

To hear Catholics talk one will soon realize that St Paul and his team were wasting their time, according to them, since they had no church to lean on like modern day Catholics—and yet they quote scriptures written by them.  If they were inspired, is inspiration limited to them alone.  I think not.

There are rogues in every outfit but it doesn't make everyone bad.  I would be interested too, to know where the figure of 30,000 comes from.  Is it an accurate figure or an approximate one.  Could it be 29, 999 or possibly 30,001 ?

[Petro]

posted by michael as reply #30

Petro once again you make no sense.  First you accuse me of being a parrot and then you claim that I don't agree with the official Catholic Bible so my teaching is full of holes.  Make up your mind - which is it.

Both, you are a parrot repeating what the RCC teaches at this point, the bible interprets words not, the church, and your points are full of holes because it clear the bible, has interpreted this particular word for us from the Aramaic language, so keep the elect from being deceived from false teachers, and to manifest who the false teachers are.

Peter, is interpreted as "a stone", case closed....

 

You ignore my points since you can't refute them and instead change your attack to some unquoted claim that the RCC Bible says the KJV is true.

The Bible refutes your points I don't have to refute anything.

 Provide a quote so people can see if your misunderstand the statement otherwise no one is going to believe you.

I already have and as you can see, it is you who does not understand, because you cannot hear, nor see the things which are clearly seen and understood by those who possess Gods Spirit.

 I know base on my past interactions with you your understanding of even the simplest statements leaves a lot to be desired so I can't take your claim at face value.  Show me where the RCC Bible says the KJV is true then I can determine what it is they meant by it - I am sure they do not mean it was infallibly translated.  I am also sure they do not contend that the KJV was translated from the Latin Vulgate - what utter nonsense.

You know nothing, this is why you put more weight in your churches teachings rather than Gods Word.

I gave you there understanding of what they interpreted, in there marginal refernce.  

You simply diasagree with it also.

Peter is not the rock on which the church is built, Jesus is that rock  the stone cut out without hands of Dan 2:34,45, WHICH IS THE KINGDOM he has established and it will given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey Him.

And this is not speaking of Peter.

Sorry michael, but you are wrong again...



Petro

[Petro]

Can't you see michael_legna that Catholics and Protestants will never agree on scripture interpretation ?  They are like chalk and cheese.  The Catholic repeats his church dogma and the obedient ones will not budge from it come what may.  The Protestant on the other hand really has no dogma to cling to and relies on the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.  One repeats his church dogma secondhand; the other gets his teaching direct from the third person of the Trinity.

lance,

Now you are talking, not much scripture but, you at least got it right.

Who needs mans dogma, when one possess the Spirit of God, to lead them unto ALL TRUTH, isn't that what Jesus promised??

Jhn 16
7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you
8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.
12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come.
14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you.
15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall show it unto you.
16 A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.

Dogma is like a bad joke, it not only perpetuates human teachings for doctrines of God, but  leads souls further from God, While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought into bondage.

Your follow up post was wishy washy...Oh well..

Blessings,

Petro

[Lance]

Faint praise. LOL

[ollie]

Can't you see michael_legna that Catholics and Protestants will never agree on scripture interpretation ?  They are like chalk and cheese.  The Catholic repeats his church dogma and the obedient ones will not budge from it come what may.  The Protestant on the other hand really has no dogma to cling to and relies on the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.  One repeats his church dogma secondhand; the other gets his teaching direct from the third person of the Trinity.

Amen

Yes I agree there is a difference in approaches.  One relies on the Church to resolve all disputes as in Matt 18:17 and sees the Church as the pillar and ground of truth as in 1 Tim 3:15.

The others rely on the promise of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in true believers, but unfortunately that indwelling is apparently by 30,000 or more different spirits since their are 30,000 or more interpretations of scripture.  I for one don't believe there are 30,000 different Holy Spirits, so that is why I don't trust those individuals interpretations because they aren't from the Holy Spirit no matter what their pride tells them.  

I think the key reason the Holy Spirit isn't helping those individuals with their 30,000 different interpretations is because they aren't all true believers - I mean how could they be, they all believe different things.

Are you saying the Holy Spirit is needed to interpret the doctrines of Christ which He the Holy Spirit has already taught and brought into rememberance to the apostles and the other inspired writers of the Bible?

And the only institution that has this power of the Holy Spirit to interpret the inspired words of the Holy Spirit again for the
masses is the church headquartered at Rome?




 

[michael_legna]

To hear Catholics talk one will soon realize that St Paul and his team were wasting their time, according to them, since they had no church to lean on like modern day Catholics—and yet they quote scriptures written by them.  If they were inspired, is inspiration limited to them alone.  I think not.

St. Paul and the others had a Church to lean on the Catholic Church - it started with Peter!  You can see Paul leaning on this Church at the Council of Jerusalem in the Book of Acts.  He would have been wasting his time though if he had not resorted to asking the Church to resolve the dispute because it was clear he was at an impass with those other members of the Church, so he did the right thing and asked the Church to decide the issue.    And yes they also were inspired in some instances - like when they were writing the New Testament letters and documents.  But they were not inspired at all times, they still made mistakes, they still sinned.  But if you want to claim that that inspiration continues today in the average individual Christian you should provide some scripture to support the idea because it isn't so, it wasn't even so in St. Paul's day.

I would be interested too, to know where the figure of 30,000 comes from.  Is it an accurate figure or an approximate one.  Could it be 29, 999 or possibly 30,001 ?

I will try to get you a source but it is a widely known figure.  As for if it is exactly 30,000 or not you should note that I said "30,000 or more", I mean there is a new denomination formed almost every day so an exact figure is probably impossible to nail down, but I was being kind actually.  The number of different doctrines certainly exceeds 10 times that number since most Protestants don't agree completely even with their own pastor or church's doctrine on every issue.

[michael_legna]

Can't you see michael_legna that Catholics and Protestants will never agree on scripture interpretation ?  They are like chalk and cheese.  The Catholic repeats his church dogma and the obedient ones will not budge from it come what may.  The Protestant on the other hand really has no dogma to cling to and relies on the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.  One repeats his church dogma secondhand; the other gets his teaching direct from the third person of the Trinity.

Amen

Yes I agree there is a difference in approaches.  One relies on the Church to resolve all disputes as in Matt 18:17 and sees the Church as the pillar and ground of truth as in 1 Tim 3:15.

The others rely on the promise of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in true believers, but unfortunately that indwelling is apparently by 30,000 or more different spirits since their are 30,000 or more interpretations of scripture.  I for one don't believe there are 30,000 different Holy Spirits, so that is why I don't trust those individuals interpretations because they aren't from the Holy Spirit no matter what their pride tells them.  

I think the key reason the Holy Spirit isn't helping those individuals with their 30,000 different interpretations is because they aren't all true believers - I mean how could they be, they all believe different things.

Are you saying the Holy Spirit is needed to interpret the doctrines of Christ which He the Holy Spirit has already taught and brought into rememberance to the apostles and the other inspired writers of the Bible?

And the only institution that has this power of the Holy Spirit to interpret the inspired words of the Holy Spirit again for the
masses is the church headquartered at Rome?

I am saying something very similar to that, but not exactly that.  

One can interpret the Bible for themselves, and be quite successful at it, if they study hard to show themselves approved.  But they cannot interpret scripture infallibly for they are not protected from error by the Holy Spirit as the Church is.  So if they come up with an interpretation that differs from the Church they must submit to the Church's teachings on that matter.

[Lance]

Hi michael_legna,

I am well aware what Roman Catholics believe.  I obtained the book "Catechism of the Catholic Church" which is 1½ inches thick and will take you a thousand years to quote on this forum.  That ought to demonstrate how the RCC have sewn things up doctrinally.  However it is wrong from beginning to end.  I think I would be prohibited from saying on this forum just what I believe the RCC to be but I dare say you can guess.  That does not mean all Catholic things are wrong.  That is how one gets converts—look for the points of agreement and expand from there. These are the very tactics cults use too.

God bless.

[michael_legna]

I am well aware what Roman Catholics believe.  I obtained the book "Catechism of the Catholic Church" which is 1½ inches thick and will take you a thousand years to quote on this forum.  

It takes more than just obtaining a book to know what it says you actually have to read it.  I have not only read the Catholic Catechism cover to cover, but have studied it and  have highlighted something of value on every page.  I know what it says and I am willing to discuss anything you want to quote from it to show you it is not contrary to a proper understanding of scripture.

That ought to demonstrate how the RCC have sewn things up doctrinally.  

Unfortunately the length of something does not prove it is wrong, unless you want to accuse the Bible of the same flaw, as it is longer than the Catechism is.

However it is wrong from beginning to end.  

That's funny it begins with -

God, infinitely perfect and blessed in himself, in a plan of sheer goodness freely created man to make him share in his own blessed life. For this reason, at every time and in every place, God draws close to man. He calls man to seek him, to know him, to love him with all his strength. He calls together all men, scattered and divided by sin, into the unity of his family, the Church. To accomplish this, when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son as Redeemer and Savior. In his Son and through him, he invites men to become, in the Holy Spirit, his adopted children and thus heirs of his blessed life.

and ends with -

By the final "Amen," we express our "fiat" concerning the seven petitions: "So be it."

In what way do you think either of those statements are wrong?

I think I would be prohibited from saying on this forum just what I believe the RCC to be but I dare say you can guess.  

I probably know what you think.  I will say it for you.  You think the RCC is the harlot of the Apocalypse.  You probably get this from Hislops Babylon Mystery Religion (which has been discredited and denounced even by the Evangelical Pastor Ralph Woodrow who was it's prime advocate after Hislop died), or from Boettner's Roman Catholicism or Hunt's The Woman Rides the Beast.  I have read both of these last two and there is either an error, or a misrepresentation of the Catholic Church on EVERY page.  

I am willing to bet if you didn't get your notions from them you got them from someone who has relied on them.  You certainly didn't come by them on your own as you haven't even read the Catechism so you don't know what the Catholic Church teaches.

[Lance]

Well michael_legna, you deserve a medal for reading all that.  LOL   Don't get me wrong, I admire your zeal for your church and realize that you could be a powerful force on our side, but alas I have met powerful forces before and I have yet to see one change course.  There were zealots in Jesus day too and one of them was in Jesus band but that was an exception and Jesus could see that his motives were right.

Your description of your own church, I thought a little extreme since there are probably saved people in all churches.  I can think of a few in your own church but they are the exception rather than the rule.  My experience of Catholics has been so adverse that I no longer witness to them because of their violent reaction to the true gospel.  Equate that with, " My sheep hear my voice " and you will see that there is something dreadfully wrong.

God bless

[JudgeNot]

Lance says:

since there are probably saved people in all churches

Bingo!  I agree Lance – which is why I do not get caught up in arguments that include the perceived need of spiritual judgment (or arguments that may result in name-calling).  I have a fairly large extended family.  My family is also fairly “religious”.  I have cousins who are Catholic, Methodist, Church of Christ, Presbyterian and Baptist.  I have spirit-filled cousins in each church, and I know they are saved and we will meet again in the next life.  When we have family reunions we are quite harmonious – due largely to mutual respect and love.  
While we may say "I disagree because I have been taught that..." we never say "You are wrong!".

[michael_legna]

Your description of your own church, I thought a little extreme since there are probably saved people in all churches.  

I did not describe my own Church that way I merely stated that I know of other who do portray it in that light.

My experience of Catholics has been so adverse that I no longer witness to them because of their violent reaction to the true gospel.  Equate that with, " My sheep hear my voice " and you will see that there is something dreadfully wrong.

Again you error in your reasoning.  The violence of the reaction is not an indicator of right an wrong.  His true sheep would react as violently to a false Gospel, as those who are not His sheep react to the true Gospel.  Did you ever stop to think that that adverse reaction was not to the true Gospel but only to what you thought was the true Gospel.  

I have read the Bible cover to cover as well, several times in several different translations and I have seen nothing in the scriptures that teach a different Gospel than what is held by the Catholic Church.