• We will be performing necessary maintenance on the forum and related hardware from Satuday 25th of September onward. Users might experience some downtime, which we will ensure that it is limited - if at all noticeable.

The Pope

PaperClip

New Member
In my faith, we pray for CHRIST to intercede on a other person's behalf because the Bible teaches it. Romans 10:9 - Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.

However, within Catholicism, the Pope and priests are "given" a role belonging to Christ. Some Protestants - from Relaxer Rehab's response - also agree that man can intercede for man.

Just for clarity: when man intercedes for man, we're praying to the LORD JESUS CHRIST, not to another earthly man. That's what intercession is: to stand in the gap for another in prayer for help, strength, healing, a specific prayer request. It is NOT an intercession to ABSOLVE another from sin. Only Jesus Christ can do that.
 

divya

Well-Known Member
Just for clarity: when man intercedes for man, we're praying to the LORD JESUS CHRIST, not to another earthly man. That's what intercession is: to stand in the gap for another in prayer for help, strength, healing, a specific prayer request. It is NOT an intercession to ABSOLVE another from sin. Only Jesus Christ can do that.

Ok, well we have a bit of a different understanding of the term, but I believe the general idea is the same.
 

kayte

Well-Known Member
Kneeling is done in prayer before God and may also be done out of respect as illustrated in the case of the pope. Putting up half a defintion only leads to half the truth.

We both posted definitions of the word Genuflect.
BOTH definitions..state genuflect as Worship.......and for the record.....I did not "put up half a definition" .... I posted in entirety.
Where we diverge is on Semantics..and Perception..or in that article Spinning..
I already said as much ....btw,that narrative by the priest...the narrative posted earlier is biased and angry and defensive...and generalizes
....making his article...his own hidden agenda..he certainly has one ...
The Catholic Church versus THEM.. ironically fanning the very flames he accuses THEM of doing.

The spin is this ....by using the word genuflecting and not saying the more loaded word....worship....which is stated in BOTH definitions that you and I posted ....is an attempt to broaden the concept in order to make it "acceptable" .....spinning
IF the word Worship was used as would be proper as it is both definitions instead of the word ...Genuflect...AND
in the context you offered.... saying genuflect is a form of respect.. ...here's what it looks like

We worship before the Pope as a form of respect....
People would bristle at the idea..which is why the word worship is not being used .....
your assertion that the definition genuflect offered by me in a half fashion but ...as I already said... is not only not true.....but even if it was ..it still would not be relevant..or important

call genuflecting whatever you want
bending on the kneee
respecting
bowing
etc etc
it's just merely arguing Semantics or word defnitions
However...ignoring and evading ...the more obvious word WORSHIP
...even though that is what is being done....
....THAT....is the spin ..the lie......

The reason it looks strange to me ...seeing people bow in front of the Pope....is not because of my unfamiliarity with Catholic Culture...but because it is WRONG to my own spirit..it's jarring..... which is why I reached out to a a forum of those who adore Christ.
.....Christ.......not their religions

I am not saying the Pope is not worthy of respect
What I am saying is he is not worthy of worship

Let's call it what is ....it's worshipping as included in both defnitions
and you call this "respecting"...
Certainly
& I agree to disagree.

Kneeling is done in prayer before God and may also be done out of respect as illustrated in the case of the pope

and may also be done ????
who is giving permission for this? Certainly people can give license ..to anything ....does it make it... ..right?

"Kneeling is done in prayer before God" ...we agree here....
Where we disagree.... I say.... kneeling in prayer is done ONLY before God
or Kneeling in prayer is done before God..ONLY

Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and HIM ONLY....
THIS is the law I recognize......
 
Last edited:

didirose

Active Member
^^^

Respect does not equate worship.

Homonyms are part of the english language
(e.g. lie - can mean not to tell the truth or to lay down, but laying down doesn't mean you are telling the truth)

Catholics choose whether or not they bow. It is a choice and they are not forced to do so. I'm not sure how you read and I apologize for any confusion on that part.

In any case, be blessed on your own spiritual journey.
 

kayte

Well-Known Member
Respect does not equate worship.

I agree....unforunately the two can and have become confused....

genuflecting-bowing down as/and worshipping are linked and are synonyms which means words of like action.
Whereas as telling a lie and resting on a bed ...lying.... are completely different actions...though the words sound the same and those are homonyms...
it's again evading the legitimate use of the word worship

The word Genuflect literally means "To bow or kneel before God."

Whether it's pleasant to admit it or not,human beings..DO worship the Pope...who is another human being ..not targeting Catholics... many people irregardless of religion worship him.....
it's insidious.... idol worship... we are not always aware of it
With a worldwide audience..the Pope really could stop enabling this..if he chose.He does not choose.:ohwell:

Be blessed on your journey as well.....you are clearly devoted & spiritual
and thank you for all your viewpoints ..I've learned a lot
 
Last edited:

Farida

Well-Known Member
What about these quotes?

Catholic Catechism, par. 882 The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter's successor, 'is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful.'[LG 23.] 'For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.' [LG 22; cf. CD 2,9.]


But the Bible says...
Ephesians 1:22-23 (King James Version)
22And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.



Catholic Catechism, par. 846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? [Cf. Cyprian, Ep. 73.21: PL 3, 1169; De unit.: PL 4, 509-536.] Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body: Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.

Recent support:
6) "For it is through Christ’s Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help towards salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained."
Vatican II 1965

But Bible says:
Romans 10:9 - That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.



Catholic Catechism, par. 891 'The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful - who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals.... The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter's successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium,' above all in an Ecumenical Council. [LG 25; cf. Vatican Council I: DS 3074.] When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine 'for belief as being divinely revealed,' [DV 10 # 2.] and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions 'must be adhered to with the obedience of faith.' [LG 25 # 2.] This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.


Where does the Bible teach that any man - called the pope - is infallible? Where does the Bible say that his words "extend as far as the deposit of the divine Revelation itself?"

Much more here regarding the catechism here...
http://www.romancatholicteachings.com/catholic_catechism/catechism2.html

All these quotes give him power, none say he is Jesus or that he is to be worshiped. They say he is infallible (not on all matters - you can research further on papal infallibility) and that he receives divine revelation. How many people claim God talked to them and revealed something.

I personally don't believe all this, but I'm just letting you know, it is the people who treat him like a God, but the religion does not mandate that type of behavior. I'm sad they are permissive about it.
 

divya

Well-Known Member
All these quotes give him power, none say he is Jesus or that he is to be worshiped. They say he is infallible (not on all matters - you can research further on papal infallibility) and that he receives divine revelation. How many people claim God talked to them and revealed something.

I personally don't believe all this, but I'm just letting you know, it is the people who treat him like a God, but the religion does not mandate that type of behavior. I'm sad they are permissive about it.

1. However, the fact that the Lord has talked to you and revealed something does NOT make you infallible. To belief that the pope is infallible within his position not Biblical, but it is Catholic doctrine - clearly in the catechism.

2. What about the belief posted that the only way to heaven is through the Catholic church? That is also false, but is Catholic doctrine as it is within the catechism.

3. What about the belief that the pope has full, supreme and universal power over the church? That is not Biblical because the Bible says Jesus is the head of the church.

4. What about the belief that Mary committed no sin? That is also in the catechism, and is not Biblical. Christ is the One who sinlessly walked the earth.

That being said I understand if you do not believe this, but these doctrines are what the Catholic church teach in the catechism. These teachings are held despite the Bible strongly teaching otherwise.
 

angenoir

Active Member
Interesting thread. Interesting arguments on both sides.

I am Catholic and I can tell you, we do not worship the Pope. God is the only person Catholics worship.
I have very deep respect for the Pope as the head of my church and yup I would probably kiss his ring if I met him, because it's a traditional sign of respect. The ring is worn by whoever is Pope. It is like a symbol for the head of the Church.

It is NOT worship and we never for one minute even imagine we are worshiping him. The Pope is human, a man. And we know it. He sins like everyone else. But still he is the head of our church and therefore we accord him due respect.
We also believe that God gives him help and grace to lead the church just like other ladies here believe that God gives their pastor grace to lead the flock.

I understand that people looking in would ask questions and that's ok. BUT why would you insist on saying we worship when we ourselves are telling you we don't.

PS: Did you know that in some parts of Africa and even Asia when children are greeting their elders traditionally they kneel or bow or prostrate themselves or do some other sign. It's not worship. It's just deep respect and linked to tradition.
When people greet royalty they bow really deep or they curtsey. It's just a traditional sign of respect.
The CC has 2,000 years of tradition.

PPS: What would happen if you didn't kiss his ring? Nothing at all. I think you can even shake his hand if you want to. Many people meet the Pope and neither kiss his ring nor bow. It's all good.
 

kayte

Well-Known Member
PS: Did you know that in some parts of Africa and even Asia when children are greeting their elders traditionally they kneel or bow or prostrate themselves or do some other sign. It's not worship. It's just deep respect and linked to tradition.
When people greet royalty they bow really deep or they curtsey. It's just a traditional sign of respect.
The CC has 2,000 years of tradition.

Come onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

That's like saying......

PS. Did you know in New York City and in Beverly Hills ..actors ..actually bow after a performance..to the audience.. Or a conductor bows to his musicians....or ballerinas curtsy....or the waiters in 20 star restaurants bow after taking an order...

it's out of context....as are ancestors..elders...etc

bowing before a ..religious icon..... any religious icon ...is loaded
whether it is the Dalai Lama.. The Pope... or a Hindu statue...

I did not make up the term genuflect.:ohwell:
this is part of the Catholic vocabulary in describing its respect etiquette to the POPE ...and genuflect means worship....
Curious how can the church be unaware of ...in denial of and enable this?
In the bible....even...angels ...do not allow this practice and they say why...they do not want to be confused for God

Anyways ...pardon the pun...but... I am bowing out of this thread...:look:

I might feel compelled to address the question directly to the POPE
Why do you allow people to bow to YOU and kiss YOUR ring? How does this bring one closer ..to God?

I'd be very interested in his answer.
 

angenoir

Active Member
BTW from my understanding genuflection is simply means bowing by bending one knee. Its does not specify to whom. See wiki dictionary:

Genuflection (or genuflexion) (Latin genuflexio "bending of the knee") is an act of reverence in Christianity, consisting of falling onto (usually) one knee. Today the term is used mostly in the Latin rite of the Catholic Church and in churches of the Anglican Communion.

The reason I pulled up tradition to try and explain the kissing of the ring etc is because that's really what it's about and there could be I guess 1 million other ways of expressing our respect but somehow this is the one that's been handed down over the centuries.
The people you see being so ecstatic when they see the Pope, well, when they go home believe no one think they saw Christ that would be crazy. But they're really happy they saw the Pope.

Ofcourse Christ is the head of the Church! He is the one wo instituted it. And we firmly believe that. But the Pope is the spiritual leader of the Church here. Most churches have a bishop or someone who leads right, so for us its the Pope who is the head of the universal church. You remember when Christ renamed Peter and said on this rock I will build my church and then later He also said feed my sheep, feed my lambs. Well, Peter was chosen by Christ to lead all the apostles and the early church, and after his death, someone was chosen to succeed him and so forth down the ages. 2000 years.

About refering the Pope as his holiness. It does NOT mean we think the pope is without fault or sin. Nope. He is a human being after all. It's a term. In my opinion it falls right in with your highness, your honour etc...

People will believe what they want to regardless of what you try to explain. But in all honesty things are really as we tell you. I hope the other ladies come in and maybe they can add a voice.:yep:

Be blessed ladies!
 

divya

Well-Known Member
Come onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

That's like saying......

PS. Did you know in New York City and in Beverly Hills ..actors ..actually bow after a performance..to the audience.. Or a conductor bows to his musicians....or ballerinas curtsy....or the waiters in 20 star restaurants bow after taking an order...

it's out of context....as are ancestors..elders...etc

bowing before a ..religious icon..... any religious icon ...is loaded
whether it is the Dalai Lama.. The Pope... or a Hindu statue...


I did not make up the term genuflect.:ohwell:
this is part of the Catholic vocabulary in describing its respect etiquette to the POPE ...and genuflect means worship....
Curious how can the church be unaware of ...in denial of and enable this?
In the bible....even...angels ...do not allow this practice and they say why...they do not want to be confused for God

Anyways ...pardon the pun...but... I am bowing out of this thread...:look:

I might feel compelled to address the question directly to the POPE
Why do you allow people to bow to YOU and kiss YOUR ring? How does this bring one closer ..to God?

I'd be very interested in his answer.

I agree...
 

PaperClip

New Member
In the bible....even...angels ...do not allow this practice and they say why...they do not want to be confused for God

Kinda half browsing this thread and I saw this statement (esp. the bolded) and I had to let you know: you just said something SO POWERFUL RIGHT THERE....seriously....


Anybody or anything that's not pointing us DIRECTLY to the Lord Jesus Christ needs to be avoided at any cost.
 

alexstin

Well-Known Member
BTW from my understanding genuflection is simply means bowing by bending one knee. Its does not specify to whom. See wiki dictionary:

Genuflection (or genuflexion) (Latin genuflexio "bending of the knee") is an act of reverence in Christianity, consisting of falling onto (usually) one knee. Today the term is used mostly in the Latin rite of the Catholic Church and in churches of the Anglican Communion.

The reason I pulled up tradition to try and explain the kissing of the ring etc is because that's really what it's about and there could be I guess 1 million other ways of expressing our respect but somehow this is the one that's been handed down over the centuries.
The people you see being so ecstatic when they see the Pope, well, when they go home believe no one think they saw Christ that would be crazy. But they're really happy they saw the Pope.

Ofcourse Christ is the head of the Church! He is the one wo instituted it. And we firmly believe that. But the Pope is the spiritual leader of the Church here. Most churches have a bishop or someone who leads right, so for us its the Pope who is the head of the universal church. You remember when Christ renamed Peter and said on this rock I will build my church and then later He also said feed my sheep, feed my lambs. Well, Peter was chosen by Christ to lead all the apostles and the early church, and after his death, someone was chosen to succeed him and so forth down the ages. 2000 years.

About refering the Pope as his holiness. It does NOT mean we think the pope is without fault or sin. Nope. He is a human being after all. It's a term. In my opinion it falls right in with your highness, your honour etc...

People will believe what they want to regardless of what you try to explain. But in all honesty things are really as we tell you. I hope the other ladies come in and maybe they can add a voice.:yep:

Be blessed ladies!

The only thing is Christ did not say He would build His church on Peter. It was the revelation that Peter had that Jesus was the Christ and the Son of God that Christ built His church on

Matt16:16-18: And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
 

Caramela

New Member
The only thing is Christ did not say He would build His church on Peter. It was the revelation that Peter had that Jesus was the Christ and the Son of God that Christ built His church on

Matt16:16-18: And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

right. This is true. That "rock" is the solid confession of Peter that Jesus Christ is Lord, son of the living God. The "rock" is not Peter himself.
 

didirose

Active Member
BTW from my understanding genuflection is simply means bowing by bending one knee. Its does not specify to whom. See wiki dictionary:

Genuflection (or genuflexion) (Latin genuflexio "bending of the knee") is an act of reverence in Christianity, consisting of falling onto (usually) one knee. Today the term is used mostly in the Latin rite of the Catholic Church and in churches of the Anglican Communion.

The reason I pulled up tradition to try and explain the kissing of the ring etc is because that's really what it's about and there could be I guess 1 million other ways of expressing our respect but somehow this is the one that's been handed down over the centuries.
The people you see being so ecstatic when they see the Pope, well, when they go home believe no one think they saw Christ that would be crazy. But they're really happy they saw the Pope.

Ofcourse Christ is the head of the Church! He is the one wo instituted it. And we firmly believe that. But the Pope is the spiritual leader of the Church here. Most churches have a bishop or someone who leads right, so for us its the Pope who is the head of the universal church. You remember when Christ renamed Peter and said on this rock I will build my church and then later He also said feed my sheep, feed my lambs. Well, Peter was chosen by Christ to lead all the apostles and the early church, and after his death, someone was chosen to succeed him and so forth down the ages. 2000 years.

About refering the Pope as his holiness. It does NOT mean we think the pope is without fault or sin. Nope. He is a human being after all. It's a term. In my opinion it falls right in with your highness, your honour etc...

People will believe what they want to regardless of what you try to explain. But in all honesty things are really as we tell you. I hope the other ladies come in and maybe they can add a voice.:yep:

Be blessed ladies!

I agree and I add it important sometimes to take into account both traditions and language the bible was written. The goal should not be simply to interpret the bible just for yourself but to understand the context it was written in as well as the audience it was written for.

With that said here is quote taken from catholic.com further discussing Peter and the rock. I was always taught that Peter or Petros in Koine Greek (language of the New Testament ) means rock. Also note that Jesus and his disciples spoke to each other in the Aramaic language. The bible was written in Koine Greek because that was the common language of the time. Let's take a closer look then at the Aramaic language:


"We know that Jesus spoke Aramaic because some of his words are preserved for us in the Gospels. Look at Matthew 27:46, where he says from the cross, ‘Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?’ That isn’t Greek; it’s Aramaic, and it means, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’

"What’s more," I said, "in Paul’s epistles—four times in Galatians and four times in 1 Corinthians—we have the Aramaic form of Simon’s new name preserved for us. In our English Bibles it comes out as Cephas. That isn’t Greek. That’s a transliteration of the Aramaic word Kepha (rendered as Kephas in its Hellenistic form).

"And what does Kepha mean? It means a rock, the same as petra. (It doesn’t mean a little stone or a pebble. What Jesus said to Simon in Matthew 16:18 was this: ‘You are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my Church.’

"When you understand what the Aramaic says, you see that Jesus was equating Simon and the rock; he wasn’t contrasting them. We see this vividly in some modern English translations, which render the verse this way: ‘You are Rock, and upon this rock I will build my church.’ In French one word, pierre, has always been used both for Simon’s new name and for the rock."

"Greek and Aramaic have different grammatical structures. In Aramaic you can use kepha in both places in Matthew 16:18. In Greek you encounter a problem arising from the fact that nouns take differing gender endings.

"You have masculine, feminine, and neuter nouns. The Greek word petra is feminine. You can use it in the second half of Matthew 16:18 without any trouble. But you can’t use it as Simon’s new name, because you can’t give a man a feminine name—at least back then you couldn’t. You have to change the ending of the noun to make it masculine. When you do that, you get Petros, which was an already-existing word meaning rock.

"I admit that’s an imperfect rendering of the Aramaic; you lose part of the play on words. In English, where we have ‘Peter’ and ‘rock,’ you lose all of it. But that’s the best you can do in Greek."


Further explanation from the same site of Peter's role and the papacy:

Beyond the grammatical evidence, the structure of the narrative does not allow for a downplaying of Peter’s role in the Church. Look at the way Matthew 16:15-19 is structured. After Peter gives a confession about the identity of Jesus, the Lord does the same in return for Peter. Jesus does not say, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are an insignificant pebble and on this rock I will build my Church. . . . I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven." Jesus is giving Peter a three-fold blessing, including the gift of the keys to the kingdom, not undermining his authority. To say that Jesus is downplaying Peter flies in the face of the context. Jesus is installing Peter as a form of chief steward or prime minister under the King of Kings by giving him the keys to the kingdom. As can be seen in Isaiah 22:22, kings in the Old Testament appointed a chief steward to serve under them in a position of great authority to rule over the inhabitants of the kingdom. Jesus quotes almost verbatum from this passage in Isaiah, and so it is clear what he has in mind. He is raising Peter up as a father figure to the household of faith (Is. 22:21), to lead them and guide the flock (John 21:15-17). This authority of the prime minister under the king was passed on from one man to another down through the ages by the giving of the keys, which were worn on the shoulder as a sign of authority. Likewise, the authority of Peter has been passed down for 2000 years by means of the papacy.
 
Last edited:

kayte

Well-Known Member
Acts 10
King James

1There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band,
2A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway.
3He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him, and saying unto him, Cornelius.
4And when he looked on him, he was afraid, and said, What is it, Lord? And he said unto him, Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God.
5And now send men to Joppa, and call for one Simon, whose surname is Peter:
6He lodgeth with one Simon a tanner, whose house is by the sea side: he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do.
7And when the angel which spake unto Cornelius was departed, he called two of his household servants, and a devout soldier of them that waited on him continually;
8And when he had declared all these things unto them, he sent them to Joppa.
9On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:
10And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
11And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
12Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
13And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
14But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
15And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
16This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.
17Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate,
18And called, and asked whether Simon, which was surnamed Peter, were lodged there.
19While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.
20Arise therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them.
21Then Peter went down to the men which were sent unto him from Cornelius; and said, Behold, I am he whom ye seek: what is the cause wherefore ye are come?
22And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of thee.
23Then called he them in, and lodged them. And on the morrow Peter went away with them, and certain brethren from Joppa accompanied him.
24And the morrow after they entered into Caesarea. And Cornelius waited for them, and he had called together his kinsmen and near friends.
25And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him. 26But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.


Contemporary English Version
When Peter arrived, Cornelius greeted him. Then he knelt at Peter's feet and started worshiping him. 26But Peter took hold of him and said, "Stand up! I am nothing more than a human."

Wycliffe New Testament
And it was done, when Peter was come in [when Peter had entered], Cornelius came meeting him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.
26 But Peter raised him, and said, Arise thou, also I myself am a man, as thou. [Peter soothly raised him, saying, Rise, and I myself am a man, as and thou.]

New International
Cornelius was waiting for them and had called together his relatives and close friends.25 When Peter entered, Cornelius met him, fell at his feet, and worshiped him.26 But Peter helped him up, saying, "Stand up. I too am only a human."


The Message
God Plays No Favorites
23-26The next morning he got up and went with them. Some of his friends from Joppa went along. A day later they entered Caesarea. Cornelius was expecting them and had his relatives and close friends waiting with him. The minute Peter came through the door, Cornelius was up on his feet greeting him—and then down on his face worshiping him! Peter pulled him up and said, "None of that—I'm a man and only a man, no different from you."
 
Last edited:

alexstin

Well-Known Member
I agree and I add it important sometimes to take into account both traditions and language the bible was written. The goal should not be simply to interpret the bible just for yourself but to understand the context it was written in as well as the audience it was written for.

With that said here is quote taken from catholic.com further discussing Peter and the rock. I was always taught that Peter or Petros in Koine Greek (language of the New Testament ) means rock. Also note that Jesus and his disciples spoke to each other in the Aramaic language. The bible was written in Koine Greek because that was the common language of the time. Let's take a closer look then at the Aramaic language:


"We know that Jesus spoke Aramaic because some of his words are preserved for us in the Gospels. Look at Matthew 27:46, where he says from the cross, ‘Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?’ That isn’t Greek; it’s Aramaic, and it means, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’

"What’s more," I said, "in Paul’s epistles—four times in Galatians and four times in 1 Corinthians—we have the Aramaic form of Simon’s new name preserved for us. In our English Bibles it comes out as Cephas. That isn’t Greek. That’s a transliteration of the Aramaic word Kepha (rendered as Kephas in its Hellenistic form).

"And what does Kepha mean? It means a rock, the same as petra. (It doesn’t mean a little stone or a pebble. What Jesus said to Simon in Matthew 16:18 was this: ‘You are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my Church.’

"When you understand what the Aramaic says, you see that Jesus was equating Simon and the rock; he wasn’t contrasting them. We see this vividly in some modern English translations, which render the verse this way: ‘You are Rock, and upon this rock I will build my church.’ In French one word, pierre, has always been used both for Simon’s new name and for the rock."

"Greek and Aramaic have different grammatical structures. In Aramaic you can use kepha in both places in Matthew 16:18. In Greek you encounter a problem arising from the fact that nouns take differing gender endings.

"You have masculine, feminine, and neuter nouns. The Greek word petra is feminine. You can use it in the second half of Matthew 16:18 without any trouble. But you can’t use it as Simon’s new name, because you can’t give a man a feminine name—at least back then you couldn’t. You have to change the ending of the noun to make it masculine. When you do that, you get Petros, which was an already-existing word meaning rock.

"I admit that’s an imperfect rendering of the Aramaic; you lose part of the play on words. In English, where we have ‘Peter’ and ‘rock,’ you lose all of it. But that’s the best you can do in Greek."


Further explanation from the same site of Peter's role and the papacy:

Beyond the grammatical evidence, the structure of the narrative does not allow for a downplaying of Peter’s role in the Church. Look at the way Matthew 16:15-19 is structured. After Peter gives a confession about the identity of Jesus, the Lord does the same in return for Peter. Jesus does not say, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are an insignificant pebble and on this rock I will build my Church. . . . I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven." Jesus is giving Peter a three-fold blessing, including the gift of the keys to the kingdom, not undermining his authority. To say that Jesus is downplaying Peter flies in the face of the context. Jesus is installing Peter as a form of chief steward or prime minister under the King of Kings by giving him the keys to the kingdom. As can be seen in Isaiah 22:22, kings in the Old Testament appointed a chief steward to serve under them in a position of great authority to rule over the inhabitants of the kingdom. Jesus quotes almost verbatum from this passage in Isaiah, and so it is clear what he has in mind. He is raising Peter up as a father figure to the household of faith (Is. 22:21), to lead them and guide the flock (John 21:15-17). This authority of the prime minister under the king was passed on from one man to another down through the ages by the giving of the keys, which were worn on the shoulder as a sign of authority. Likewise, the authority of Peter has been passed down for 2000 years by means of the papacy.


Believers have the keys to the Kingdom, not one man. Sorry, but what you've written flies in the face of context. To say that Christ who is the foundation of the church then turns around and built His church on Peter is false and to say that the authority Peter had has been past down to the Popes only?:perplexed For one, Church is not a religious term. The ecclesia which is the word for church were those called out ones who made sure that the will of the king was taken to all. Caesar had a church and Christ had His church.

There are many differences between the message of the Catholic church and the message that Jesus preached. Shouldn't they have the same focus if indeed, the Pope had authority handed down from Jesus Himself to lead "the church"?

Just taking something as simple as Jesus' crucifixion. That was an awesome sacriifice and I am grateful to my Lord for doing it but why didn't Jesus tell the thousands of people that followed Him that He was going to be crucified? Why did He only tell His dicsiples about His crucifixion? Why wasn't it something that He concentrated on after He rose from the dead?

The cruxificion is something that is central to the Catholic church(other churches too but this is Catholic thread LOL!),right?

Why did Jesus come to earth? He said it in His own words. What is the Catholic church's position on this? It should be the same as Jesus' position.

It just seems that if you're someone's chief representative then you would focus on the things the one you were representing focused on.:yep:
 

Caramela

New Member
[/B]

Believers have the keys to the Kingdom, not one man. Sorry, but what you've written flies in the face of context. To say that Christ who is the foundation of the church then turns around and built His church on Peter is false and to say that the authority Peter had has been past down to the Popes only?:perplexed For one, Church is not a religious term. The ecclesia which is the word for church were those called out ones who made sure that the will of the king was taken to all. Caesar had a church and Christ had His church.

There are many differences between the message of the Catholic church and the message that Jesus preached. Shouldn't they have the same focus if indeed, the Pope had authority handed down from Jesus Himself to lead "the church"?

Just taking something as simple as Jesus' crucifixion. That was an awesome sacriifice and I am grateful to my Lord for doing it but why didn't Jesus tell the thousands of people that followed Him that He was going to be crucified? Why did He only tell His dicsiples about His crucifixion? Why wasn't it something that He concentrated on after He rose from the dead?

The cruxificion is something that is central to the Catholic church(other churches too but this is Catholic thread LOL!),right?

Why did Jesus come to earth? He said it in His own words. What is the Catholic church's position on this? It should be the same as Jesus' position.

It just seems that if you're someone's chief representative then you would focus on the things the one you were representing focused on.:yep:

Excellent post! :up:
 

didirose

Active Member
[/B]

Believers have the keys to the Kingdom, not one man. Sorry, To say that Christ who is the foundation of the church then turns around and built His church on Peter is false and to say that the authority Peter had has been past down to the Popes only?:perplexed For one, Church is not a religious term. The ecclesia which is the word for church were those called out ones who made sure that the will of the king was taken to all. Caesar had a church and Christ had His church.

There are many differences between the message of the Catholic church and the message that Jesus preached. Shouldn't they have the same focus if indeed, the Pope had authority handed down from Jesus Himself to lead "the church"?

Just taking something as simple as Jesus' crucifixion. That was an awesome sacriifice and I am grateful to my Lord for doing it but why didn't Jesus tell the thousands of people that followed Him that He was going to be crucified? Why did He only tell His dicsiples about His crucifixion? Why wasn't it something that He concentrated on after He rose from the dead?

The cruxificion is something that is central to the Catholic church(other churches too but this is Catholic thread LOL!),right?

Why did Jesus come to earth? He said it in His own words. What is the Catholic church's position on this? It should be the same as Jesus' position.

[B]It just seems that if you're someone's chief representative then you would focus on the things the one you were representing focused on[/B].:yep:

For clarification purposes note that I clearly said that this was a quote from catholic.com. So what you say I wrote I did not. I added the quote in context of the topic in question which was in regards to Peter.

To answer the bolded please refer to the bible for the Catholic position, which specifically uses the words of Jesus.

In response to the red, I'm not the pope, but I would imagine that he would say his focus is also on the word of Christ. But I'm sure you can write to any archdiocese for further clarification. You're saying his focus is on something else is your opinion but those who are Catholic would think otherwise.
 

alexstin

Well-Known Member
For clarification purposes note that I clearly said that this was a quote from catholic.com. So what you say I wrote I did not. I added the quote in context of the topic in question which was in regards to Peter.
To answer the bolded please refer to the bible for the Catholic position, which specifically uses the words of Jesus.

In response to the red, I'm not the pope, but I would imagine that he would say his focus is also on the word of Christ. But I'm sure you can write to any archdiocese for further clarification. You're saying his focus is on something else is your opinion but those who are Catholic would think otherwise.

My apologies:yep:

As far as referring to the bible for the Catholics position on why Jesus came to earth...I just want to know the church's position. I don't attend Mass so I have no way of knowing what they teach on that specific point. Is there a website that addresses that specifically?

As far as your last statement, so what do Catholics focus on specifically in the word?
 
Last edited:

didirose

Active Member
My apologies:yep:

As far as referring to the bible for the Catholics position on why Jesus came to earth...I just want to know the church's position. I don't attend Mass so I have no way of knowing what they teach on that specific point. Is there a website that addresses that specifically?

As far as your last statement, so what do Catholics focus on?


JESUS! Believe it or not, that is our focus.:yawn:
(no sarcasm involved in this answer, it is what we believe)

Your question to me implied otherwise but now I understand that you are not familiar with the Catholic church.

Again our focus is on the word of Jesus our mass illustrates this in two parts through the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist. If you read the bible than all that Catholics believe will be revealed to you, we don't focus all of our beliefs on a few verses we use the whole thing. Asking me to explain more would be asking me to break down the mass in minute parts and explain each part in reference to the bible. It's doable but I don't think we want it in a thread about the Pope.

Their are many websites to give you more expert clarification this link will take you to some of them or just do a google search:
http://www.catholicity.com/links/135/

You can also search hear on lhcf because there was an entire thread dedicated to answering questions on catholicism.
 
Top