ArchivedReality v.s. TraditionBeliever wrote:Peace Scorpion and Aineo,
Matthew 16:13-20
Peter's Confession of Christ
13When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?"
14They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
15"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
16Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ the Son of the living God."
17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." 20Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ.
The Catholic church loves to quote this Scripture, however, who according to God is the cornerstone upon which the church will be built? Isa 28:16
16 Therefore thus says the Lord GOD,
"Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a tested stone,
A costly cornerstone for the foundation, firmly placed.
He who believes in it will not be disturbed. NAS
Realize that Peter is the Rock, He is the first Bishop.
It is Peter who leads the Church, so He played a very important role in the early church and all Popes are successors of Peter.
What I realize is the rock Jesus built His church upon was the rock of faith in Him. As Peter attests: 1 Peter 2:1-10
2:1 Therefore, putting aside all malice and all guile and hypocrisy and envy and all slander, 2 like newborn babes, long for the pure milk of the word, that by it you may grow in respect to salvation, 3 if you have tasted the kindness of the Lord. 4 And coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected by men, but choice and precious in the sight of God, 5 you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 For this is contained in Scripture:
"Behold I lay in Zion a choice stone, a precious corner stone, And he who believes in Him shall not be disappointed."
7 This precious value, then, is for you who believe. But for those who disbelieve,
"The stone which the builders rejected, This became the very corner stone,"
8 and,
"A stone of stumbling and a rock of offense";
for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom they were also appointed. 9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 for you once were not a people, but now you are the people of God; you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.
Peter did not ascbibe to himself the position as the stone upon which Christ would build His church.
When did this symbol become officially recognized as satanic?
So they just picked this symbol and made it satanic.
The cross has been a pagan symbol as far back as Egypt when it was used in worship of the god Ra. I have not done as much research on the inverted cross as Scorpion so I will let him respond to this part of your post. Catholic tradition is based on Gnosticism and pagan ceremonies. All you have to do to confirm this is study Babylonian, Egyptian, Greek, and Roman mythology. Jesus' prayer in John 17 teaches us this:
That is quite an accusation, Aineo, what proof do you have?
I was never taught anything pagan in Catholic schools, so I must wonder if you' ve been reading too many anti-Catholic websites, or maybe your pastor is one of those Catholic bashing pastors.
Actually, Believer I have not been reading many anti-Catholic websites, I have been researching Gnosticism and Mithraism. As to be able to prove my assertions, yes I can. Constantine was a devotee of Mithras before he had his vision. It was Constantine who set Christmas as Dec 25, the annual celebration of the sun god known as Apollo, Solar Invictus and other names. The Eucharist is based on pagan ceremonies. The immaculate conception is a Gnostic concept, as is the assumption. From the long list of titles which the Egyptians gave her come the following :-Lady of Many Names, Great Lady from Primeval time, Divine Lady, Only One, Greatest of gods and goddesses, Queen of the gods, Prototype of all beings, Queen of goddesses and women, Queen of the Dekan stars, Maker of the sunrise, Lady of heaven, Holy one of heaven, Queen of the earth, Queen of the South and North, The fire-producer, Great goddess of the Other World, Mother of Horus, Mother of the God, Lady of the Birth Chamber, Lady of Life, Bestower of Life, Giver of gifts to gods and spirits, Lady of bread and beer, Lady of abundance, Lady of joy and gladness, Lady of love, Lady of beauty, The Beauty of Thebes, The Majesty of Heliopolis, The Beneficent one in Memphis, Lady of spells, words of power and incantations Daughter of Keb and Nut (i.e. Heaven and Earth), Daughter of Neb-er-tcher (i.e.God Almighty), Lady of weaving and fulling, She whose son is Lord of the Earth and whose husband is Lord of the Deep, Lady of the Nile-flood, etc.
THE CULT OF ISIS AND THE WORSHIP OF THE VIRGIN MARY COMPARED
Isis and Horus, Isis is the only pagan goddess pictured with her infant son:
http://www.paganizingfaithofyeshua.freeservers.com/isis_nursing.gif
http://www.paganizingfaithofyeshua.freeservers.com/no_11_isis_and_serapis.htm
ISIS AND SERAPIS (GREEK FOR OSIRIS)
___________________________
Mary and the infant Jesus:
http://www.ngv.vic.gov.au/collection/international/painting/t/ipa00118.html
http://www.getty.edu/art/collections/objects/oz549.html
Transubstantiation is the RCC teaching that the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper actually become the body and blood of the Lord. This is based on what Jesus and Paul teach about “this is My body”. The RCC attempts to prove this is not symbol of Christ’s body by appealing to the original Greek. Here is my response to a Catholic on another board when John 6 was brought up .. lets finish the whole chapter: John 6:67-71
67 Jesus said therefore to the twelve, "You do not want to go away also, do you?" 68 Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69 "And we have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God." 70 Jesus answered them, "Did I Myself not choose you, the twelve, and yet one of you is a devil?" 71 Now He meant Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the twelve, was going to betray Him. NAS
The twelve understood what Jesus said to mean His words as the significance of the “flesh” and “blood” had yet to be revealed to them. Deut 8:3
3 And He humbled you and let you be hungry, and fed you with manna which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that He might make you understand that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by everything that proceeds out of the mouth of the LORD. NAS Not just some words but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of the Lord.Matthew 26:26-29
26 And while they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is My body." 27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; 28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins. 29 "But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom." NAS If you honestly believe the Apostles say the bread and wine to be the real flesh and blood of Christ you fail to understand this happened before the crucifixion of our Lord. It is logical to see the bread and wine as symbols. 1 Cor 11:17-34
23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it, and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me." 25 In the same way He took the cup also, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me." 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes. 27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself, if he does not judge the body rightly. 30 For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep. 31 But if we judged ourselves rightly, we should not be judged. NAS
What I find germane in this is what is missing from Paul’s teaching and that is the words: “which become the flesh and blood” of the Lord. “Do this in remembrance of Me”, does not mean “do this in remembrance of My death” since without the resurrection the death of Jesus has no greater significance than the death of any human being. Heb 10:8-18
8 After saying above, "Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin Thou hast not desired, nor hast Thou taken pleasure in them" (which are offered according to the Law), 9 then He said, "Behold, I have come to do Thy will." He takes away the first in order to establish the second. 10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11 And every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; 12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God, 13 waiting from that time onward until His enemies be made a footstool for His feet. 14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. 15 And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying,
16 "This is the covenant that I will make with them
After those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws upon their heart,
And upon their mind I will write them,"
He then says,
17 "And their sins and their lawless deeds
I will remember no more."
18Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin.
NAS
When a Catholic receives the Eucharist they receive a wafer dipped in the wine (and this is a comparatively new procedure as historically the congregation only took of the wafer which was held above the cup) and do not drink the wine. This is an alteration made to the Lord’s Supper. The only individual who actually drinks of the cup is the priest.
The Lord was sacrificed once for all, and once for all time; not at every mass or every time the Lord’s Supper is given.
For centuries the RCC prohibited the masses from reading and meditating on God’s word by promoting the illiteracy of the masses. What did Jesus teach about His word? John 15:1-11
15:1 "I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. 2 "Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it, that it may bear more fruit. 3 "You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. 4 "Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you, unless you abide in Me. 5 "I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me, and I in him, he bears much fruit; for apart from Me you can do nothing. 6 "If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch, and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. 7 "If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it shall be done for you. 8 "By this is My Father glorified, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples. 9 "Just as the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you; abide in My love. 10 "If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father's commandments, and abide in His love. 11 "These things I have spoken to you, that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full. NAS
The Pharisees had the same attitude toward the Jews, which is why they developed their traditions, which resulted in the Mishnah and the Talmud. The catechism is to the Bible what the Mishnah and the Talmud are to the Law and the prophets. What did Jesus teach about the traditions of the Pharisees? Matt 15:2-9
3 And He answered and said to them, "And why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 "For God said, 'Honor your father and mother,' and, 'He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him be put to death.' 5 "But you say, 'Whoever shall say to his father or mother," Anything of mine you might have been helped by has been given to God, " 6 he is not to honor his father or his mother.' And thus you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7 "You hypocrites, rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying,
8'This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
9'But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.'
NAS
Mark 7:6-13
6 And He said to them, "Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written,
'This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7'But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.'
8 "Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men." 9 He was also saying to them, "You nicely set aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 "For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him be put to death'; 11 but you say,' If a man says to his father or his mother, anything of mine you might have been helped by is Corban (that is to say, given to God),' 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that. " NAS
I know this thread is about the body and blood of Christ, however, Jesus’ teachings on the traditions of men covers many of our objections to the catechism. Exodus 20:4
4 "You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. NAS Idol or any likeness would include every statue found in every Catholic church worldwide and can even mean a cross, which is probably why the early church did not use the cross until after Constantine and the conversion of pagan temples into Christian churches.
The traditions of man void the word of God. The individual I was debating then brought up the Greek to show the passage is not a metaphor with an explanation for a Catholic apologetic site, which I countered with this to which I have yet to get a response: At 9:46 AM -0600 2/23/99, james m smith wrote:
>On 02/07/99, ""Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>" wrote:
>> At 4:34 PM -0600 2/6/99, William B. Steidtmann wrote:
>> >In "Figures of Speech Used in the Bible" by E.W. Bullinger (Baker Book
>> >House, Grand Rapids, Michigan) a disscussion of the phrase "this is my
>> >body" from Matthew 26:26 is taken up (pp. 738-739) as it relates to a
>> >"simple law of figurative language". The argument is as follows: the
>> >pronoun "this" in the Greek is TOUTO and the gender is neuter. If the
>> >statement "this is my body" were meant to be taken in a literal sense the
>> >pronoun would have taken the gender of the noun it replaces which in this
>> >case is "bread", in the Greek ARTOS, and is masculine. But the pronoun
>> >TOUTO is not masculine, rather it has taken the neuter gender of the noun
>> >"body" (SOMA) to which the meaning is "carried across" the verb. This "at
>> >once shows us that a figure is employed" and is not meant to be taken
>> >literally; it is a metaphor.
>> > Being a person who is but a "Little Greek" can anyone cite
>> >references/examples that would confirm/deny this law?
>>
>> I'd like to see evidence for such a law, too? I really doubt seriously
>> there is any such "law" --or that the reader is given any sort of
>> self-explanatory code to determine where the sense is literal and where it
>> is metaphorical.
>
>Is it reasonable to assume that no such "law" exists? Would it not be more
>profitable to exhibit obvious cases that would show its failure? Many
>clear examples can be given to support this "law" but clear examples to
>disprove it are elusive. Can anyone debunk this "law" citing unambiguous
>cases? Please.
I would have thought that the burden of proof lies on one who asserts the
existence of such a law. Nevertheless, it's occurred to me to ask how, on
the basis of the above description of the "law," one is supposed to judge
Jesus' self-identification as the "bread of life" in John 6:51 as
figurative?
EGW EIMI hO ARTOS hO ZWN hO EK TOU OURANOU KATABAS: EAN TIS FAGHi EK TOUTOU
TOU ARTOU ZHSEI EIS TON AIWNA, KAI hO ARTOS DE hON EGW DWSW hH SARX MOU
ESTIN hUPER THS TOU KOSMOU ZWHS. I think it is safe to say that all the
modifiers and pronouns referring to ARTOS in this verse are masculine
singular. To be sure, this ARTOS is identified with Jesus' SARX that must
be eaten if one is to have life. Does the "simple rule" cited above help to
demonstrate that this is a metaphor rather than a real identification?
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cconrad at yancey.main.nc.us
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
Metaphors in Greek After Constantine move his capitol to Constantinople he established 4 sees with equal authority, those were Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, and Antioch. The Eastern church in Constantinople and the Western Church in Rome split in the 5th century, which was made official in 1054. Rome was never seen as the titular head of Christianity until Rome took that designation and revised history to fit their claim.
Now if you would like to discuss the Catholic catechism dealing with justification, sanctification, or any other doctrine we can start a new thread for each.
| View Parent Message View dfilename Return Home |