Michael sent us a reflection of the Catholic defense of the Apostle Peter's special status as the foundation of the Christian Church (the Roman Catholic Church).
"It appears as if Mary will one day rule the world,
with ten thousands of her saints in tow... :-( "
came from the Bible Way Baptist Church, Pastor Bob Picard,
upon inquiry. In the next reply he added: "The saddest
part is that many "so-called" evangelicals are falling for the
lie that the Roman Church is an ally of the Cross. That's just as
far from the truth today as it was during the dark ages! In fact, these
days are just as dark."
Why all this concentration on Catholicism? Because is
it the greatest danger to born again believers today. What is
happening to the congregations all over the world is Catholicism.
Instruments of this penetration are the religious and political programs
by satellite via the dish, television, religious radio
programs, Promise Keepers, the Graham Crusades, Internet and the religious
right movement.
Our only defense is knowing the fine points of the Gospel
and where exactly Catholicism departs from the Gospel, to keep
ourselves from joining the broad road which leads to eventual
destruction. Just a look at the book titled "Vatican Council
II" could easily convince a person that the pope is indeed the
leader of the Christian church. To lay a strong Biblical foundation for
this article allow us to share the Apostle Paul's rendition
of the foundation of the church who is Jesus. "And I, brethren,
could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, [even]
as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with
meat: for hitherto ye were not able [to bear it], neither
yet now are ye able. For ye are yet carnal: for whereas [there
is] among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal,
and walk as men?
"For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I [am] of Apollos;
are ye not carnal? Who then is Paul, and who [is] Apollos, but ministers
by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted,
Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither
is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but
God that giveth the increase. Now he that planteth and he that watereth
are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own
labour. For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry,
[ye are] God's building. According to the grace of God which
is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and
another buildeth thereon.
"But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation
can no man lay than that is laid, which is
Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold,
silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work
shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because
it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work
of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built
there upon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's
work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself
shall be saved; yet so as by fire. Know ye not that ye are the
temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If
any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for
the temple of God is holy, which [temple] ye are.
"Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to
be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be
wise. or the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it
is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. And again,
The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.
Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;
Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life,
or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours;
And ye are Christ's; and Christ [is] God's." (1
Corinthians 3)
Michael addressed us by asking how we came to choose the name "Cephas
Ministry Inc." He thought maybe we had no idea that we were not
qualified to use that name. One more point before we get into the
material about witnessing to someone who is deeply interested
in the Gospel. Certain that some of you don't agree with the way we
go about witnessing, may we share why we do it the way we do.
# 1 we know that we have at best two shots at getting some information
through to an individual before they leave the field. We try
to max out and hit as many major points as
possible.
# 2 we don't worry about the results. That is the Holy
Spirit's territory. From our own experience of coming out of
a cult, it was the work of many efforts which came in a variety
of situations and each incident was as effective as the next.
Even just screaming a word or two of truth at someone has an eventual
effect and contributes to the breakthrough. The person
in a cult is basically asleep and can't get hurt by anything a person
might say because the cultic teachings insulate from attack.
That is the very reason it takes a long time to get the job
done. The individual in question has to have a vital love of the truth
for efforts to be ultimately fruitful.
Michael (Catholic) wrote: "More than 1/2 of the research that I am familiar with on this subject comes from David Currie's book, a born fundamentalist, born again Catholic. This author is very familiar with the evangelical position and his very roots and identity are tied into the evangelical world-view. Though I can add to some of his material and enhance his views, his humility and position in writing the book to his Protestant friends, family and admirers is very convincing. In returning to the text, I hope I can show you that the position of Peter as the rock that would guide the Church is biblical, reasonable, logical and necessary in itself to maintain the authentic teachings of Christ.
"In the Gospel of Matthew we read: "Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, He began asking His disciples, saying, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" And they said, "Some say John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets." He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" And Simon Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." And Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. And I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it." (Matthew 16:13-18)."The Roman Catholic Church interprets Jesus here to say, "You are Peter, and upon you, Peter, I will build My church." Peter would be the rock upon which the Church would be built [Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraph 552, 586, 881]. He would be the "prince of all the apostles and visible head of the whole church." (First Dogmatic Constitution of the Church of Christ," chapter 1, Vatican session 4)
"I will give you the keys to 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. After singling out Peter to ask him on this important matter, Peter gives the answer to Christ's true identity. Christ addresses Peter, instead of the other apostles, and calls him "Blessed", a possibly permanent quality. In fact, if we are to understand Mary as being "blessed" as addressed by the angel for being the mother of Christ, or the spiritual mother of the Church, it would be logical to also see this same blessedness of Peter being related to him being the spiritual father of the Church, being given the task of shepherding the children of God. Christ says he is blessed because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. Or, in the NIV, "for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my father in heaven." He is blessed simply because of this gift of divine revelation, something that would be particularly useful to lead a Church infallibly."
Cephas Ministry Inc. (CMI) from the Bible (KJV)
There are several problems with this interpretation. The first is that someone
reading Matthew's Gospel in Greek, the original language of the New Testament,
would not have immediately concluded that Peter was the rock. In the Gospel
of Matthew, when Jesus said toSimon, "You are Peter, and upon this
rock I will build My church," (Matthew 16:18),
His choice of words was significant. Though Peter's name means rock (Petros),
Jesus did not say, "You are Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (petros)
I will build my church." What He said was, "You are Peter (Petros),
and upon this rock (petra) I will build My church."
The word Jesus chose to use for rock, petra, is a feminine noun that refers
to a large rock (Gr.#4073), is more like a cliff made of the
same substance as the stone Petros is made of. Petros
in Greek #4074 is a stone or rock which is also true of
all the disciples and each born again believer
(lively stones which together represent the temple in
which God lives) The New Testament uses this word in Matthew 7:24,25
to refer to the Rock upon which a wise man built his house. This information
was hard to come by. Dake's Bible and the Online Bible
which uses the concordance #s for each work verified Dake's
Bible. For comparison on size petra is also found later in Matthew's Gospel
describing Jesus' tomb carved out of solid rock. (ref.
Matthew 27:60)
Why else did Jesus use the word stones? Several reasons are, one they
are on the ground and walked on by people, just as Christianity is walked
on by many from the top echelon to the least. Another
reason is that stone is transformable over time into
beautiful gems through which the light can shine in many different
hues. Not to forget the fact that temples are built from
stones. In the old country, they were from stone and they stand
and stand hundreds of years to proclaim dedication to God in some form or
another. One cannot imagine how they were even built,
they are so enormous.
What Jesus said to Peter should be translated as, "You
are a stone, and on this cliff (speaking of Himself),
I will build My church," which would indicate that the rock on
which the church would be built was something other than Peter.
In the original Greek language the truth would not have
been an issue, while in English it could easily be misread because
of the way the verse is worded.
The context of Matthew 16:13-20 is not about Peter; it is about
Jesus. It starts with a question that Jesus raises about
His identity: "Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?"
and reaches a climax with Peter's declaration: "Thou art the Christ,
the Son of the living God." It concludes with the Lord warning
His disciples "that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ."
After Peter correctly answered Jesus' question as to His identity,
the Lord remarked, "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona,
for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto you, but My
Father which is in heaven." "This rock" would
be the solid Rock, "the Christ, the Son of the living
God" upon which Christian faith would rest. Every
Christ oriented doctrine and practice would be founded upon
Him. Every true believer would hold to a common conviction: Jesus is "the
Christ, the Son of the living God."
(The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that Peter is the rock upon
which Christ would build His church [Ibid., 552, 586, 881]. This is
the official Roman Catholic position. Curiously, however it also states:
"Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father,
we believe in Jesus and confess: "You are the Christ,
the Son of the living God." On the rock of this faith confessed
by St. Peter, Christ built His Church. -Catechism of the Catholic
Church (424) This is common to all cults, they will present direct
opposites in their doctrines which can't both be true.
The Apostle Matthew wrote to Jews and expected them to know the
Old Testament and it's prophecies so they would understand the
language used in the New Testament. There are many references to the
"Rock" in relation to God. The Old Hebrew Testament spoke of
the coming Messiah. Examples of Jesus' mention are Psalms 118:22: "The
stone [which] the builders refused is become
the head [stone] of the corner." "[There is] none
holy as the LORD: for [there is] none beside thee: neither [is there]
any Rock like our God." (1 Samuel 2:2)
"And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling
and for a rock of offense to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for
a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem." (Isaiah 8:14)
Obviously these Scriptures are not about the Apostle Peter,
in fact Scripture symbolism is usually not used to symbolize
man, but always of God. Peter himself wrote of Christ as a rock (petra)
in 1 Peter 2:6-8:
"Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay
in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on
him shall not be confounded. Unto you therefore which
believe [he is] precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone
which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense, [even
to them] which stumble at the word, being disobedient:
whereunto also they were appointed."
Paul also refers to Christ by the Greek word petra. In Romans he
wrote of Christ as "a rock (petra) of offense" (Romans 9:33) over
which the Jews had stumbled. In first Corinthians he wrote of a
spiritual rock encountered by Israel in the wilderness. He identified that
rock, saying, ".. and the rock (petra) was Christ." (1
Corinthians 10:4) Roman Catholic proponents, aware that Matthew's
use of the word petra in the phrase "upon this rock"
does not help their cause, counter by arguing that Jesus taught in
Aramaic, not Greek. They claim that when Jesus spoke the words recorded
in Matthew 16:18, He did not change His words but repeated
Peter's Aramaic name Kepha. What Christ said, they claim,
was: "You are Kepha, and upon this kepha I will build my Church."
And so, they say, it is clear that Peter was to be the foundation
upon which the Church would be built.
What is fair to say, Rome's interpretation of Matthew
16:18 cannot bear the scrutiny of close examination.
Consequently, Roman Catholic defenders must move the discussion
off the inspired page and on the field of speculation.
The inspired New Testament Scriptures were written
in Greek, not Aramaic. What Jesus might have said in Aramaic
is conjecture. Why did the Holy Spirit not simply use Aramaic
words as He did elsewhere in the Greek New Testament as
in Matthew 5:22: "Raca", Eloi in Mark 15:34,
and Rabboni in John 20:16. There are five places where the Holy Spirit
refers to Peter as Cephas which is the Aramaic form
Kephas instead of Peter's name Petros.
To confirm that we have proven our point that the Church was not built
on St.Peter as the Roman Catholic doctrine contends, the
Bible refers us to two Scriptures: Note that the Apostles are referred to
as a group: "And are built upon the foundation of the apostles
and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the
chief corner [stone];" (Ephesians 2:20)
"And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them
the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. (Revelation
21:14)
The verses Matthew 16:13-19 are the key Scriptures on which
the Roman Catholic Church rests. They claim that the Apostle Peter
is the founder of their church who gave the keys and the authority
to the popes. The editors of the Columbia Encyclopedia even labor under
the influence of Roman Catholicism in stating "Petros"
petra = rock. "The pope is the pope by reason of being bishop of
Rome. As the successor in the see of Rome (the Holy See) of St.
Peter, its first bishop, the pope claims to be the shepherd
of all Christians and representative (vicar or vicegerent
of Christ..) The bishop of Rome is also patriarch
of the West.."
Peter, Saint [Gr. Petros; Gr. petra = rock; this is a translation of Cephas],
d. A.D. 67?. Prince of the Apostles, disciple listed first in the
Gospels. His original name was Simon, but Jesus gave
him the nickname Cephas [Aramaic, =rock]..." "Official lists
no longer number the popes in sequence." Up through 189
A.D. dates all carried a question mark.
In conclusion to the question of who is the foundation
of the church, there should be no doubt in our minds at this
point that it is not the Catholic Church if they
continue to claim the
Apostle Peter as having passed on the baton to the first pope.
The Church is made up of true believers world wide who acknowledge
the deity of Jesus Christ as Peter did. Christ is the "Rock" upon
which the Church is built. "For other foundation can no man lay
than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ." (1 Cor 3:11)
Michael emphasized the word "Blessed" as a status which sets apart only two individuals in his tradition, the Virgin Mary and St. Peter, when in fact the word "Blessed" is used generously in the New Testament and sets many apart to a special status in God's eyes. "Blessed" are those who: are poor in spirit; mourn; weep; are meek; are they which hunger and thirst for the Word of God; are merciful; are pure in heart; are peacemakers; are persecuted; are reviled by men; are not offended in Jesus Christ; are they who come in the name of Jesus Christ; are faithful and wise servants; eat bread in the Kingdom of God (referring to the marriage supper of the Lamb in Rev. 19:9); are the barren during the tribulation; have not seen and yet have believed; have their iniquities forgiven and sins are covered by the blood; will not receive sin imputed unto them by the Lord; endure temptation when he or she is tried; read and hear the prophecy of Revelation and keep those things which are written therein, for the time is at hand; are dead which died in the Lord; watch for the Rapture and keep their garments clean; hath part in the First Resurrection (the Rapture); they do His commandments: "Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." (Matthew 22:36-40) and "Blessed" are those who may enter in through the gates into the city, the New Jerusalem.
Michael (Catholic priest): "We have discussed the meaning of the word change," Petros" or "C(K)ephas", but I think it is also useful to see how exactly God has used his chosen vessels as he has changed their names, such as "Abram" to "Abraham" and "Jacob" to "Israel". Their names were changed and were meant to reflect a certain characteristic that they would embody; they would be permanent reminders of what the covenant with God meant in salvation history. I feel that it is very clear that Jesus was speaking the Aramaic, making it unambiguous to the readers about what Christ was saying. He was neither pointing to himself nor promising to himself; he was pointing to the one he was passing the baton to, as he was soon to leave the apostles. We have various confirmations of this from Jesus as he addresses Peter before the passion in Luke 22:32 saying, "Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for you, Simon , that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen (confirm) your brothers". Simon, like Christ, was to be the rock of spiritual strength, prefigured in the rock that Moses struck. He would be the attack of Satan constantly, but Christ had promised that he would be kept from teaching heresy as the gates of Hell would not prevail, even if others lost their faith."
CMI from the Bible (KJV): One of the Scriptures Michael refers
to is John 1:42 which was written about the beginnings of Jesus's
ministry when he first selected His disciples. "He (Andrew) first findeth
his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias,
which is, being interpreted, the Christ. And he brought
him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou
art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by
interpretation, A stone." (John 1:41,42)
The name "Cephas" was Peter's Aramaic name `Kephas', and
had no significance other than Peter's own name. In Greek #4074 Petros
= stone and Cephas #2786 = stone. No change has taken place. In Abraham's
case we do have a change in meaning when God gave him a new
name as this Scripture relates: "Neither shall thy name any more
be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father
of many nations have I made thee." (Genesis 17:5) Abram
#087 means exalted father. Abraham on the other hand #085 which
means father of a multitude. In Jacob's case there is
also a change of meaning. "And God said unto him,
Thy name [is] Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob,
but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel."
(Genesis 35:10) Jacob #3290 means heelholder
or supplanter which relates to the purpose of his life in the Gospel.
Israel #3478 means God prevails.
Paul spoke of the twelve Apostles of Jesus as a group that were
so called by way of eminence (#1427) which is used throughout the New Testament
in regard to the twelve. "And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed
to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave
to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we [should
go] unto the heathen {Gentiles}, and they {the twelve} unto the circumcision
{the Jews}." (Galatians 2:9) The Vatican
shepherds a primarily Gentile Church which was Paul's territory. Paul
confirms: "But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision
{Gentiles} was committed unto me, as [the gospel] of the circumcision
{Jews}[was] unto Peter; For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the
apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward
the Gentiles:" (Galatians 2:7,8) Paul and Apollos
were not considered to be of the twelve.
The introduction to the Book of Romans in the Hebrew Greek Key
study Bible (p. 1402), states: "Although it is
commonly believed that Peter founded the Church of Rome, there
is little evidence for this. In fact, the evidence does not give us
enough information to suggest who was responsible for leading the
believers in Rome.. Paul was writing to a predominantly
Gentile audience. (ref. Rom.1:13) (Introduction
to Romans, Hebrew Greek Key Study Bible p.1402)
Michael (Catholic priest): Beyond looking at the first promise of Christ, we should look at the three other promises Christ makes to Peter. I ask, as Mr. Currie does on p.53, "Why make all those promises to Peter if "rock" refers to the faith, not the man?" The second promise after that of building the Church on Peter, is that the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church. This may not affect Peter directly, but it does affect Christian's relationships to the work that Peter started. Are many of the modern day "Church-planters" continuing the work that Peter started, or are they tearing down the work Jesus himself promised he would build? Did Jesus choose leaders for His Church that were guaranteed to keep this work going. Can any of the 25,000 Protestant denominations trace their leaders to the line of Peter or his successors, or even the teachings that we unequivocally orthodox or the norm and standard for Christians for well over 1,000 years? Or to put it differently, is there room in the promise of Jesus for the Church to turn so corrupt that it would be better to start over again and try to interpret Jesus ideas differently? And finally, how are we to reconcile revamping the Church's doctrines, if St. Paul calls it in 1 Tim 3:15, "the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the
pillar and foundation of truth."I have found some interesting revelations when looking at the third promise in light of the entire Bible, as well as its implications at face value. Jesus addresses Peter in the "you" singular in v. 19, despite the fact that the other apostles are also there. He says, "I will give you the keys to the kingdom Heaven." This passage obviously needs clarifying through other scriptures, though it indeed seems to be a very special promise. We have four passages in the Old Testament that refer to keys in some way: Isaiah 22:22, Isaiah 33:6, I Chronicles 9:27, and Judges 3:25. The only ways they are used metaphorically (not referring to keys but something else) or symbolically are in Isaiah 22:22 and Isaiah 33:6. Here is Isaiah 33:6, "He will be the sure foundation for your times, a rich store of salvation and wisdom and knowledge; the fear of the LORD is the key to this treasure.
This passage is translated differently in many versions omitting the prophet's use of the word "key", and this use does not seem so relevant to what Christ gave to Peter. It is Yahweh is being addressed as the great overthrower of Assyria, not any mortals when the prophet uses. We find a much stronger and more fitting formula in Isaiah ch 22v.22: "I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open."
This passage refers to Eliakim, the one who will become Prime minister of Israel, taking the place of Shebna's, the master of the palace's (v.15) office and station (v.19). In verse 21,
Yahweh confirms that he will give Eliakim Shebna's former authority and make him a "father" of Jerusalem and the house of Judah. Finally, in verse 22, he is given the key, the symbol of supreme authority to make decisions in the kingdom. In confirmation, even most Protestant scholars agree that Jesus is borrowing the language of Isaiah to demonstrate to Peter what he is both now entrusted and obliged to do.We see this in Matthew 16:19-20: "I will give you the keys to 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. Peter, as the Prime-minister of the new Covenant Israel, holds this new office, not just through a prophet's mouth, but through God Himself's mouth. The office, like Eliakim's, is intergenerational: once a prime-minister dies, his office is replaced. Furthermore, it is an all-powerful office, that only death can overcome as Eliakim's decisions would be final. Through Jesus and Paul's statements about the new covenants fulfilling and surpassing the old, it is only logical that Jesus would leave someone in charge of interpreting the scriptures and enforcing Yahweh's law, just as Moses and eventually the pharisees did as we see in Matthew's account.
Matthew 23, v.1-3 (KJV) Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. With humanity exalted in Christ coming in the flesh, he Christ chooses to set up a new Seat for the New Covenant-- that of Peter possessing the necessary to accurately interpret scripture and sacred condition, binding and loosing what is necessary to enter the Kingdom of heaven. Whether the Jews liked it or not they had to observe and do all that the Pharisees asked them to observe; this, of course, was in reference to the law. In the same way we are bound. Rather than 25,000 denominations arguing over what the Bible means to them, we have a seat that has maintained pure Christian doctrine for 2,000 years, so that none may perish out of ignorance. There is a sacred link in this new covenant, in which humanity, exalted in the Birth of God in the flesh, is entrusted to write for God (new testament writers), preach for God (the apostles), and dogmatically speak for God. (He is referring to the Pope).
This mystical union or oneness of the Pope with Christ can be seen in John 21:15-17, when Christ asks Peter about his love for Him three times, and then tells Peter after his first affirmation that he did love Christ , "tend my sheep"(v.15), after Peter's second affirmation, "feed my lambs"(v.16), and after Simon Peter expresses his unequivocal love the third time, Christ asks him again "tend my sheep" (v.17). Though we already know Christ as the "Good Shepherd" through the gospels, it is plain that Christis giving Peter His shepherding duties until he returns. We see Peter in his shepherding, prime-minister role in Acts 15 as he refutes the necessity of circumcision, a work of the law, in the Council of Jerusalem "after much debate "(v.7) says to the presbyters (priests), "My brothers, you are well aware that from early days God made his choice among you that through my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe." Then in verse 10, " Why, then, are you now putting God to the test by placing on the shoulders of the disciples a yoke that neither our ancestors nor we have been able to bear? On the contrary we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus in the same ways as they. The whole assembly fell silent, and listened while Paul and Barnabas described the signs and wonders God had worked among the Gentiles through them."
James then confirms Peter's judgment in verses 19-21 as he was known as the bishop (overseer) of Jerusalem at the time when we look at Christian history.Finally, we can't overlook the real substance of God's family hear on earth. As Peter says in 1 Peter 4:17 For it is time for judgment to begin with the family of God; and if it begins with
us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God? There is a responsibility given to the spiritual fathers of the Church in this matter, even as Paul calls himself a father in I Cor 4:14-15, 1 Tim 1:2, and Tit 1:4. It is the job of fathers to make sure they do all they can for their children to survive. Christ did not fail us in this regard. The Jews were shocked that God took the form of man. Their faith could not realize. It just so happens many have fallen away from the Church because they do not believe that a man can speak dogmatically for Christ, nor their very Savior be substantially present in the ultimate sacrifice to the Father.Please understand that is God who we hear when we listen to the Pope speaking dogmatically. God is that good to us. Don't stone the Pope for blasphemy when God himself has put him in authority over all believers. (This comment is directed at our website
which addresses the pope's support of evolution).John 10:33-34 The Jews answered him, "We are not stoning you for good work but for blasphemy. You, a man, are making yourself God. Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, "You are gods?" No. The pope is not God, but he has a relationship to God like no other. Some things Jesus said are still hard to believe . That is why we are given an infallible teacher.
CMI from the Bible (KJV) Considering Isaiah 33:6 in context, we can clearly see who shoulders the responsibility. "The LORD is exalted; for he dwelleth on high: he hath filled Zion with judgment and righteousness. And wisdom and knowledge shall be the stability of thy times, [and] strength of salvation: the fear of the LORD [is] his treasure." (Isaiah 33:5,6) In the KJV the word "key" is not mentioned and Michael is stating that the KJV is incorrect because it omitted the word "key". Michael does come to the conclusion that Jesus is the overthrower of Satan not man and that this key has nothing to do with Rome.
Next he refers to Isaiah 22:22: "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." Again Michael is trying to bring the Gentile Roman Catholic church under the house of David and somehow ride on the tail of the promise made to Israel, that they will be delivered.
Isaiah 22 refers to the day of trouble and in that day did the Lord of God of hosts call to weeping, and to mourning, and to baldness, and to girding with sackcloth. Michael refers to Eliakim, who will have the key as a forerunner to the Catholic Church. He points to Eliakim, who shall be the father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah, which is obviously misinterpreted and easy to do. References are Job 12:14 and Revelation 3:7
"Behold, he breaketh down, and it cannot be built again: he shutteth up a man, and there can be no opening." (Job 12:14) But through the New Testament written in the blood of Jesus Christ, God made good on His promise to Israel. The key of David is the key that opens to door to heaven and no man can shut it, which includes the pope. "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;" (Revelation 3:7)
Here we come to the key under discussion and
are referred to Luke 1:32 and Revelation 1:18 "He shall be great, and
shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give
unto him the throne of his father David:" "I
[am] He that liveth, and was dead; and, behold,
I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and
of death." (Revelation 1:18) The Scriptures not only confirm
that the keys belong to Jesus Christ but that Jesus is the "rock"
upon which Jesus builds His Church. The keys which Peter received
had to do with forgiveness of sins as emphasized in John 20:21-23
when he addressed all the disciples after he resurrected: "Then
said Jesus to them again, Peace [be] unto you: as [my] Father hath sent
me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on
[them], and saith unto them, Receive ye
the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted
unto them; [and] whose soever [sins] ye retain, they are
retained." That key given to the Apostle Peter with which power to
bind and loose came referred to duties of performance according
to the Concordance. The Greek word "Deo" [#1210] to pronounce
or determine to be binding or obligatory, that is, of
duties for performance, transgressions, for punishment. Luo,
to loose is to pronounce not to be bound. (Matthew 16:19)
A note in the Hebrew Greek Study Bible
(KJV) p.1204 emphasizes, there is no reference made here
to the binding or loosing of persons. One can
note that this speaks exclusively of things because of
the neuter gender of the indefinite pronouns ho'
(3739), "whatever," in verse nineteen, and ho'sa (3745), "whatever,"
in Matthew 18:18. Believers can never make conclusive decisions about
things, but can only confirm those decisions which have already
been made by God Himself as conclusive in the general context of His kingdom
both on earth and in heaven. The two verbs, dedeme'non from
de'o [1210] and lelume'non [3089], are both perfect passive
participles which should have been translated respectively as "having
been bound" and "having been loosed" already in
the heavens. Before these verses can be correctly understood,
a distinction must be made between the "church"
(v.18) and the kingdom of the heavens is made up of both
the earthly and heavenly realms. The teaching here is
that those
things which are conclusively decided by God in the kingdom
of heaven, having been decided upon, are emulated by the Church
on earth.
Michael concluded his letter with "May
the Holy Spirit guide Us," Michael 2 Timothy 4:3
The Scripture ironically was meant for Michael: "For the
time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;
but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves
teachers, having itching ears;" (2 Timothy 4:3)
CMI from the Bible KJV
Here are some of the reasons why we can't accept Peter as
the founder of Catholicism, which according to the dictionary is the
universal church, which is not necessarily the same as the Body of
Christ Jesus. For Peter to identify our Lord Jesus Christ as the Christ
took the ability to communicate with God which is only possible under
the influence of the Holy Spirit. Without Him there is no vertical
communication, which means Peter had accepted in his heart what
Jesus was teaching every day to the disciples.
The Word of God in Mark 4:30-32 is talking about Jesus in
the parable of the mustard seed which was just revealed. The Bible
is fantastic and we hope you don't deprive yourself of studying it
yourself even though the pope has a problem with that. It would
be a great loss to you. Listen to this Scripture: Jesus
said (talking about Himself and His Church) "Whereunto shall
we liken the kingdom of God? or with what comparison shall we compare
it? It is like a grain of mustard seed, (he is talking about the Word
of God, He is the Word), which, when it is sown in the earth, is less
than all seeds that be in the earth (isn't He referring to Himself
in reference to the cross. He was nailed to the cross
like a criminal). But when it is sown (the crucifixion),
it groweth up, and becometh greater than all herbs (Jesus said "I
am the vine, your are my branches"), and shootest out great branches;
so that the fowls of the air may lodge under the shadow of it.
"He is referring to His Church. The fowls in Matthew 13:4
"..the fowls came and devoured them up (the seedlings). The Word
which springs to life. Matthew 13:23 "But he that received
seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth
it; (it takes the Holy Spirit to understand it); which also
beareth fruit, and bringeth forth some a hundredfold, some sixty,
some thirty."
In Matthew 26:75 Scripture proves that the Word had become part
of Peter, when he denied knowing Jesus three times and the cock crowed.
Jesus had told him "Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice."
Peter remembered what Jesus had told him. Peter was very masculine
and wanted to take matters into his own hands on several occasions.
In Matthew 26:74 Peter cursed and swore and said that
he did not know the man, speaking of Jesus. Peter was angry because Jesus
had let him down. Peter wanted Jesus to set up His kingdom
right then and there. He wasn't thinking about heaven.
Matthew 16:21-24 "From that time
forth began Jesus to show unto his disciples, how that
he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the
elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again
the third day. Then Peter took him. and began to rebuke him, saying,
Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. But he turned,
and said unto Peter. "Get the behind me, Satan:
thou art an offense unto me: for thou savorest not
the things that be of God, but those that be of
men." Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will
come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me
(not Peter nor the universal church headed by the Pope). For
whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will
lose his life for my sake shall find it."
John 18:10 "Then Simon Peter having
a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant,
and cut off his ear ... Jesus said unto Peter, "Put
up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given
me, shall I not drink it?" If Jesus were to have chosen
anyone to be the sole foundation of his physical
church, it would have been the Apostle John. Peter had little in
common with Jesus. In reference of the name change, if Peter had been given
the name "New Jerusalem" (Jerusalem, the mother of us all,
see Gal. 4:26) you might have had a case. Rev. 2:17 "He
that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith
unto the churches; To him that
overcometh will I give to eat the hidden manna, and will give him a white
stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving
he that receiveth it." In Rev. 3:12 Jesus speaks to the church of Philadelphia
which has an open door to God, "Him that overcometh will I make a pillar
in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon
him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new
Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and
I will write upon him my new name." If you were correct,
you would be implying that Cephas is Jesus's new name.
This Scripture refers to Rev. 22:4 "And
they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads."
In 1 Corinthian 3:18, Paul states: "Let noone deceive
himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world (could
this be referring to the Pope?), let him become a fool, (no
likelihood of that), that he may be wise. For the wisdom of this world
is foolishness with God, for it is written, He taketh the wise in
their own craftiness.. (which has happened to the Pope and his
thirst for political power and world leadership. To invite
all faiths, Hindus, Shintos, Islams, Buddhists, etc.. to come under
his wings is Babylonian and is not what God is teaching where unity is concerned.
He wants unity of faith in the Word of God, word for word. This
ambition of the Pope is the reason for his
support of evolution. It fits all religions with one exception,
the Word of God and the concept of creation. With Vatican II the Roman
Catholic Church which you are attracted to, has ceased to exist. I hope
you read Vatican II with
"discernment." It states openly that all faiths, no matter
what religion, lead to God. It is the same heresy that Mother Theresa
insisted on.)
To continue the verse: "And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours; Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours; And ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's."
We have a book in our library by William Stuart McBirnie, Ph.D. who spent his life researching the twelve Apostles: The Search for the Twelve Apostles. On page 59 "The first church dedicated to Peter was founded by King Lucius, the British King, who was the first by royal decree to proclaim Christianity the national faith of Britain in Winchester A.D. 156. "The church was erected A.D. 179, to the affectionate memory of St. Peter, in commemoration of his evangelizing labors in Britain. It is still known as `St Peter's of Cornhill'.. Peter fled to Britain which is outlined in the book "Drama of the Lost Disciples" by George F. Jowett. He was banished from Rome with the rest of the Jews. He was a free-lance missionary, stemming from Avalon, preached in Britain during the Caradoc-Claudian war. There is lots of physical evidence in ancient records. The children of Claudia and Rufus Pudens were raised at the knees of Peter and Paul.
His last visit to Britain took place
shortly before his final arrest and crucifixion in Nero's
circus at Rome. (The historic facts are preserved to this day
in Europe). Peter's final days in Rome from Jowett: "Maliciously condemned,
Peter was cast out into the horrible, fetid prison of the Mamertine.
There, for nine months, in absolute darkness, he endured
monstrous torture shackled to a post. Never before or since has there been
a dungeon of equal horror. Historians write of it as being the most
fearsome on the brutal agenda of mankind. Over three thousand
years old, it is probably the oldest torture chamber extant,
the oldest remaining monument of bestiality of ancient Rome,
a bleak testimony to its barbaric inhumanity, steeped in Christian
tragedy and the agony of thousands of its murdered victims. It can be seen
to this day, with the dungeon and the pillar to which Peter
was bound in chains... referred to as Gemonium or Tullian Keep..
if only to provide us who live so securely today
with a slight reminder of what the soldiers of Christ
suffered for our sake, so we may be quickened the better to appreciate the
substance of our Christian heritage.. He was chained in upright position
for nine month so he couldn't lie down, yet his magnificent
spirit remained undaunted. It flamed with the immortal
fervour of his noble soul proclaiming the Glory
of God, through His Son, Jesus Christ.. in spite of the
suffering he converted his gaolers, Processus, Martinianus,
and forty-seven others.. He refused to die in the same position
as our Lord, declaring he was unworthy. Peter demanded to be crucified
in the reverse position, with his head hanging downward. His wish
was granted in Nero's circus A.D. 67 (The Drama of the Lost Disciples, George
F. Jowett, p. 176)
Yes we agree, all born again believers (not necessarily
all Catholics) are a royal priesthood, but Peter and Christ
are not equal because Jesus is God. Why does Jesus beg us not
to follow
men? The cornerstone holds the whole house up in ancient
construction. If it is taken out, it collapses. God describes
the Apostles in Revelation as beautiful gems. Rev 21:10..14, "And
he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and
showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven
from God. Having the glory of God and her light was like unto
a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as
crystal; and had a wall great and high.. 14 the wall of the city had
twelve foundations, and in them the names of the
twelve apostles of the Lamb... garnished with all manner of
precious stones.. 1. jasper; 2. sapphire; and so
on representing the beauty of each Apostle
likened to a particular gem, different
from each other. Peter is always mentioned as part of the twelve, not set
apart from the twelve.
Here are some of our questions about the Roman Catholic Church. Why do they use Egyptian symbols in the name of Christ. The Tiara head wear, the obelisk in the center of the circular layout of St Peter's square which lines up with Sun worship. The Pope often refuses to wear the tiara, but why Maltese crosses on his clothing? They were Hitler's fancy, which brings us to the Masonic influence in Catholicism.
We are including several pictures to prove Masonic influence in Catholicism. You say to study history is to become a Catholic. We went to Luebeck, Germany, a city of Cathedrals, monuments of ancient days. The oldest one is 900 A.D. and you would not believe the symbolism on the walls, the windows and the floors. One church had a large astrological clock in the hallway. Many highly respected citizens where buried inside the churches with their symbolisms, crests and other insignia carved in stone for all to see. Freemasonry is written all over it. Martin Luther went into that city and tore into their meetings and put them on the run. That is one reason this country was set up the way it was. People can practice whatever. The Constitution was written by a majority of Freemasons. They believe in a god "In God we Trust", if it's an Islam , their god is Allah, which god is dependent on their particular Bible that they swear by. Masonry is the ecumenical forerunner of what the Catholic Church is trying to do now.
From A Christian point of view, we have
a problem with the practice of celibacy. If we are His royal
priesthood, which includes men and women, husbands
and wives, a normal life style, why celibacy, when it causes
major problems to Catholic priests. Much money is spent by the
church for lawyers to bail out misbehaving priests. Peter as the rock
on which Jesus built his church would not qualify as such
because he was married. The Scripture does not call for celibacy necessarily.
God states it is better to stay single if one wants to be totally
dedicated to the Lord, because a partner will dilly your time away
and that would include abstinence I'm sure, but the Church in
the New Testament required a priest to have one wife. 1
Titus 3:2 "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one
wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given hospitality, apt to teach."
You state that the church should interpret Scripture for us. We agree if they follow Biblical teachings. Catholics have added their own version to the Gospel. Nothing but Latin came from Catholic pulpits that noone could understand for hundreds of years. The Word is the seed: no Word, no life. Luther changed all that or we would still be getting Latin.
You brought up tradition:
here is what God had to say about tradition: Col.
2:8-10 "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy
and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the
rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For in Him dwellest all the
fullness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in Him,
which is the head of all principality and power.."
If you can't identify with spiritual warfare and demonic activities, it's because Satan doesn't bother those who don't offend him. I can't tell you how difficult this is for us to do, because judging from your words, you are on fire for Mary and young and to uproot someone's beliefs was not our favorite pastime in the past. Now we are dedicated to it because we don't want anyone to get caught up like we did and find 20 years down the road that we were offending God every day of those 20 years. You can't imagine how devastating it was to come to that realization. We beg you to study as much information as you can about your church, so the Holy Spirit can witness the truth to you.
In closing God only has two commandments for Gentiles, we are not under the law you know. Matthew 22:37 Jesus said unto him, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with "all" thy heart, and with "all" thy soul, and with "all" thy mind. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." God is a jealous God. He wants "all" your attention. You identify with Mary. She had a family after she had Jesus, how could she be sinless? Whose wife is she in the Trinity as Co-Redeemer? Joseph is her husband in the physical.
And the worst part is purgatory. Aren't
Roman Catholics contradicting the following Scripture? Speaking of Jesus
in Jude vs 24 "Now unto Him that is able to keep
you from falling, and to
present you faultless before the presence of his
glory with exceeding joy." You see His righteousness is
imputed unto us as stated in Romans 4:21 "And being fully persuaded
that, what he had promised He was able also to perform and therefore it
was imputed to him (speaking of Abraham) for righteousness. (Abraham
believed God when God told him he was going to have a son. That is
all it took for Abraham to have the "Jesus"
righteousness imputed to him. God set us totally free,
see James 2:23 "Now it was not written for his sake
alone, that it was imputed to him; but for us also, to whom it shall
be imputed, if we believe on him that raised us up Jesus our Lord
from the dead; Who was delivered for our offenses, and was raised
again for our justification." To go to purgatory means
that Jesus didn't get the job done. It is an offense to Him.
I should believe that the Pope is a believer? Never. Have a great
life Michael, I pray to God that the Holy Spirit
will witness the Scriptures to you in total truth.
The pictures you are receiving, by email file attachment, come from a Vatican collection. (Coin #1) The Eucharist shows the sun as symbol rather than just a round wafer. (Coin # 2) St.Peters Square Obelisk which is considered to be pagan worship to Egyptian gods. # 3 Nicola DaGuardiagrele, Processional Cross 1434 has a Phoenix on the stem just below the top. I hope you can blow the picture up sufficiently to see it in the second picture which is somewhat blown up.
The phoenix represents the revival of the Babylonian Empire that rules the world in the Last-Days. Title: The Phoenix Rises again. According to Manly P. Hall, 33rd degree, in his book the "The secret Teachings of All Ages", the Eagle was the original three symbols of Scorpio, and served as an emblem of the theurgic art and secret processes, magical the same as did the Goat of Mendes. He further stated that it is reasonably certain the Modern Masonic Eagle was originally a Phoenix; and that the ancient mystics accounted the Phoenix a symbol of the immortality of the human soul. Like the Phoenix which is reborn out of its own dead body seven times seven, the "spiritual nature" of man also is reborn again and again in triumph (reincarnation) over his dead physical body. To the Egyptians, the Phoenix was a symbol of regeneration. On the bottom of the picture (the eagle feeding young eagles): Sacrificing "life" for the "New Order of the Ages" From the book "The Final Warning" by Gary D. Blevins.
"To the only wise God our Savior, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever." Amen. (Jude 1:25)
As it turned out Michael went to Rome,
Italy right after he began this discussion with us and was able to look
at Rome with this information. He came back satisfied that there
was indeed a
problem within the church. He admitted it, but Catholicism for
him is still it. Like I said, the Holy Spirit is working with him and will
win in the end, if Michael is a believer which he claims to be.