/christian/ - Christianity

Religious discussions and spirituality

SAVE THIS FILE: Anon.cafe Fallback File v1.0 (updated 2021-01-10)

Want your event posted here? Requests accepted in this /meta/ thread.

Max message length: 5120

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB

Board Rules
More

(used to delete files and postings)


Anonymous 04/24/2021 (Sat) 10:34:49 No.589
Peter is not the rock. The Revelation that Jesus Christ is the Son of the Living God IS the Rock. Jesus did NOT say "That thou art Peter, and upon thee I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it". Jesus said "That thou art Peter, and upon THIS ROCK I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it". The catholics have sadly missed it for more than 1700 years. "Therefore thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste." "Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder." With all due respect to catholics but the Precious Rock of christians is their Lord Jesus Christ but the rock of the catholics is the rotting carcass of Peter.
>>607 Again, if they knew the truth and walked according to God’s commandments and will, they would come out from among them. As it is written. “ And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.”
>>589 Amen. Well put!
>>589 >For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Amen, I found an article written by a papist called "Peter, the Rock and Cornerstone of Christ’s Church". The absolute blasphemy is unbelievable.
Indeed. Jesus is the cornerstone of the church. He is the Christ, the Son of the living God. Peter, like all christians are lively stones. And so, he is one of the rocks. He is not the Rock. The apostles and prophets are built upon this precious cornerstone and christians are built upon this foundation and together, all christians, apostles, and prophets are built upon this Rock and together, we make a building based on the cornerstone, the Lord Jesus Christ. Blessed be the Name of the LORD!! >To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious, ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. >Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; in whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: in whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.
>>653 Praise the Lᴏʀᴅ.
>>589 >>639 >>653 >>660 Blessed be the Name of the Lord! >For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
>>652 I believe I found this heretical article you speak of: https://wherepeteris.com/peter-the-rock-and-cornerstone-of-christs-church/ The audacity of the papists to call Peter the CORNERSTONE is mind boggling. Talk about having absolutely 0% fear of God in them...
Open file (1.80 MB 480x240 amen.gif)
>>589 Though christians know this truth from the Holy Word of God (KJV in english) to be self evident, we should remember to not bash the poor catholics and not hate them for they are deceived. We should show the truth to them in love and pray for them that they may come to the truth as well concerning this matter and flee out of egypt and babylon and serve God by obeying the Gospel according to Acts 2:38-39
>>696 Says the guy who reads The Book poorly translated by an anglo with bias
>>698 Verily, the word of God is revealed only to those who hear it. Either people will hear and accept the truth or they won't. Wonderful, isn't it, anon?
>>698 >he says, while reading the NAB Revised Edition.
>>696 Hear hear
This is just one of the grievous errors of the rcc. Another one is that they believe that mary was virgin her entire live while it is written in the Bible that she had atleast 6 children with Joseph after Jesus.
>>703 Galatians 3:22 >But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. Romans 4:13-14 >For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. >For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:
>>705 Amen
the greek word for 'rock' is petra, and Peter is derived from this. is that a coincidence?
>>708 My firend, the Lord Jesus Christ has preserved his holy word in english for us which can be found in the Holy Bible King James Version. And thus, we do not need the knowledge of foreign languages to understand what God has to say for us who speak english. Yea, the Lord renamed Simon to Peter for the revelation he got from the Father. Peter was born again and could see the kingdom of God. The Lord Jesus Christ is that precious cornerstone we read about in the old testament. And Peter, like all christians are lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. We are all built on that precious cornerstone. The Lord Jesus Christ. Christians are built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, and the christians, apostles, and prophets are built on that chief cornerstone. >To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious, ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. >Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; in whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: in whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit. Amen. May these words be a blessing to you as you seek the Lord in his word KJV.
>>709 What gospel do non-English speakers inherit then?
>>713 All languages have their correct version. But for us who speak english, God's word is found in the KJV.
>>714 What happens when those languages conflict in meaning?
>>715 What do you mean?
Open file (27.20 KB 320x240 BibleKJV.jpg)
>>715 It just means you are misunderstanding something. The original languages themselves and any accurate translations are correct.
>>589 >15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? >16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. >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. >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. >19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. >20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. I mean, it seems obvious that Jesus is referring to Peter confessing that he is Christ in the previous passage, therefore his faith is solid as rock in a pun on his name, and this rock of faith is what the church is founded on. Then the next verse is about the spiritual reward it brings, instead of the bizarre papist interpretation that it gives them charge over Christendom and salvation.
>>720 >accurate translations >KJV Incorrect
>>725 Praise God for ears to hear! Amen, the church is built on the fact that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God! This is the precious cornerstone.
>>709 (meant to get back to this sooner) I appreciate your kind words. however, the New Testament was originally written in Koine Greek, so I should think that those who seek the truth will come closer to it in ancient documents, rather than later translations. an exception is the Latin Vulgate, because St Jerome likely worked from ancient sources which no longer exist today. I don't mean to talk down on the King James Version, it was a superb translation based on the best sources available at the time (Textus Receptus). however, there's no need to stop there, since more recent scholarship has uncovered new sources closer to the original texts. as for the point in question, of course the Lord is paramount to all Christian belief. however, the meaning seems clear enough to me -- Jesus taught and sacrificed, but delegated the task of building the Church to His followers. as the first Pope, Peter was the rock or foundation of the Church, as his name suggests. and for all the ups and downs over the centuries, even if you take the sedevacantist position, there is still the Catholic Church.
Open file (117.91 KB 1004x666 1c5cdbc99.png)
>>765 >however, there's no need to stop there, since more recent scholarship has uncovered new sources True. >closer to the original texts. False. For God stated in Scripture itself that His word would never pass away from the world. If every generation didn't have it, it definitely isn't inspired. Matthew 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. Isaiah 59:21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever. >and for all the ups and downs over the centuries, even if you take the sedevacantist position, there is still the Catholic Church. What Scripture says anything about this? Why do you assume that a later sect founded by Constantine, which is what I'm assuming you are referring to, is the same as the church attested of in the New Testament. And finally, how do you explain the non-adherence to the Bible of this group? They blatantly just go against Scripture, as a Mormon would or some other sectarian group of the same type. Pic related.
>>765 Respectfully, you failed to understand. Peter is not the Rock but a rock. Jesus Christ is that precious cornerstone prophesied in the old testament. Catholics sadly usurp the title of cornerstone and give it to Peter when it only belongs to the Lord. All christians are lively stones built up on that precious cornerstone to be a holy habitation for the Lord. Like we also see in the design of the temple in the old testament how there were singers in the temple for the Lord. They were lively stones. None of the stones in the temple of vatican are alive, but dead. Because the roman religion is a religion of death. > Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet, Again, because the KJV is perfectly translated, there remains no more need for the knowledge of the original languages to “get a deeper and more correct understanding”. God is Almighty and has the ability to perfectly translate and preserve his Word in any language, as he has done with the KJV. He also promised to preserve his Word unto all generations like we read about in Psalm 12:6-7. That includes ours. And since not everyone speaks english, then it would stand to reason that most, if not all languages have their equivalent of our KJV. Furthermore, I have nothing against learning greek and hebrew. If you want to learn these languages out of pure interest or that you would like to see how the Bible was originally written, then praise God, that is wonderful. However, if you want to “study” the original languages in order to twist or pervert what the Bible says by means of the original languages because you feel like it was “not translated correctly” to come up with teachings that are not originally there in the first place, then that is wickedness and frankly witchcraft. There are many warnings in the Bible concerning adding or taking away from the Bible. If you, anon, still cannot receive this, then, friend, I would counsel you to seek God in his Word, the KJV until God reveals the truth concerning this matter to you. Because as Jesus said in the same passage we are talking about: >...Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for ‘’’flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee’’’, but my ‘’’Father which is in heaven.’’’ Amen. I pray that this message is a blessing to you.
These are the silly posts I remember 8chan /christian/ for. This and the /leftypol/ astroturfing.
>>768 >Witchcraft for wanting to know the true words rather than ones from an earthly king. Keep your holy King James, let that anon read closer to the truth in peace.
>>771 You are verily carnally minded, friend.
Open file (544.98 KB 1574x2250 919RLvDJKiL.jpg)
>>771 >Witchcraft for wanting to know the true words rather than ones from an earthly king. >he thinks King James translated the King James Bible The ignorance of modern "Christians," this illiteracy is how the Romans so perverted the Gospel by the 16th century. It seems modern empire is laying the road for men to return to that darkness.
>>726 >>771 Ye are deceived.
>>767 >Matthew 24:35 >Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. yes, and the words are still preserved 2000 years later, as opposed to the numerous works of Classical Antiquity that have perished over time, or exist only in fragments. >What Scripture says anything about this? Why do you assume that a later sect founded by Constantine, which is what I'm assuming you are referring to, is the same as the church attested of in the New Testament. it's there in the OP. and the Roman Church dates back to antiquity. >And finally, how do you explain the non-adherence to the Bible of this group? They blatantly just go against Scripture, as a Mormon would or some other sectarian group of the same type. Pic related. certainly the Mormons are a schismatic sect, with their belief in Joseph Smith, a man who lived in the 19th century, and his strange writings. those stories about the Nephites and Lamanites are very unlikely to be true, as opposed to the original Bible which is consistent with secular scholarship. to get back on topic, I see no conflict between Catholicism and the Bible, unless you're thinking of the deuterocanonical books. >>768 it's debatable what was meant by rock, but the connection with Peter's name, and the context of Jesus telling these words to him, seems convincing to me. >Again, because the KJV is perfectly translated, there remains no more need for the knowledge of the original languages to “get a deeper and more correct understanding”. God is Almighty and has the ability to perfectly translate and preserve his Word in any language, as he has done with the KJV. He also promised to preserve his Word unto all generations like we read about in Psalm 12:6-7. as I said, the Word has lived since the ancient world, and it continues to live. the KJV is a masterful translation, but is it perfect? is a Bible not the Word simply because it's not KJV? the original translators said: >Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay wee affirme and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee have seene none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. As the Kings Speech which hee uttered in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian and Latine, is still the Kings Speech, though it be not interpreted by every Translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expresly for sence, every where. For it is confessed, that things are to take their denomination of the greater part; ... No cause therefore why the word translated should bee denied to be the word, or forbidden to be currant, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting foorth of it. For what ever was perfect under the Sunne, where Apostles or Apostolike men, that is, men indued with an extraordinary measure of Gods spirit, and priviledged with the priviledge of infallibilitie, had not their hand? The Romanistes therefore in refusing to heare, and daring to burne the Word translated, did no lesse then despite the spirit of grace, from whom originally it proceeded, and whose sense and meaning, as well as mans weaknesse would enable, it did expresse. the whole introduction is good, but for this discussion I included only a couple significant passages, which make it clear: what matters is the essence, not a particular version. >However, if you want to “study” the original languages in order to twist or pervert what the Bible says by means of the original languages because you feel like it was “not translated correctly” to come up with teachings that are not originally there in the first place, then that is wickedness and frankly witchcraft. There are many warnings in the Bible concerning adding or taking away from the Bible. I agree that texts should not be distorted, manipulated, intentionally misread, and so on. texts guide us towards the essence of the meaning, as said above, and referring to numerous sources, including the most ancient, is beneficial in this.
>>780 No, my friend. It is not debatable what Jesus meant by rock. It might be for confused and lost theologians but not for us who are born of the Word of God! It is evident by scripture that the Rock is the Lord Jesus Christ. If you cannot see this, it is because you are (respectfully) not born of the Word. You are not born again. This is why I said that you must seek God in his Holy Word which is the KJV if you speak english. God will also reveal to you that the KJV is his Word. But the revelation will not come from us who are flesh, my friend.
>>780 Yet the Orthodox Church also dates to antiquity, and you are not of them?
Open file (27.20 KB 320x240 BibleKJV.jpg)
>>783 Anon, the Gnostics date to antiquity. It doesn't give them any special claim since they go against the Bible. If you worship some guy in a funny hat who has a track record of claiming to be god, that is on you. Likewise if you worship idols despite what the New Testament, that's on you. It's sad that such people come here trying to cast doubt on the holy Scriptures though. It was better for you that a millstone were hanged about your neck and you were cast into the sea, than that you were to offend one of the least that believes in Christ. Mark 9:42.
Open file (472.53 KB 220x182 based.gif)
>>782 >If you cannot see this, it is because you are (respectfully) not born of the Word. You are not born again. I was baptized early in life, I believe that's a similar concept. I too am fallible flesh, but I believe I have a strong understanding of these matters. peace and blessings despite our major differences. >>783 I'm not as familiar with Eastern Orthodox, but there are a number of differences there. historical events led to a permanent schism between East and West, just as the Reformation/30 Years War sundered us from Protestants. the point was, that anon claimed that the Catholic Church couldn't possibly be the Church referred to in Scripture, because it was founded centuries later. I pointed out that Catholic roots go much further back, so that the connection is plausible. that doesn't mean that ancient ideas and movements are necessarily true because of their age.
>>788 Again, sir. Many people who have been baptised in Jesus' Name for the remission of sins will not be saved. Why? Because they are not born of God. I know that it's getting slightly repetitive but revelation comes from God only. Stay away from theology and search the scriptures (KJV) and seek God in prayer to reveal the truth to you. How can you enter into a kingdom which you cannot see?
>>789 you're not the first person to tell me this. I've read some Scripture, although it's been awhile. I'll keep this in mind.
>>790 And may God reveal the truth to you and give you all wisdom necessary to understand it. May he also guide you according to his good pleasure. Amen. I will pray for you, friend.
>>789 Amen. A sign of those born in the spirit is their sobriety in attitude; their assurance of salvation in Christ shepherds them away from the intoxication of the world. Not only outward though, their sobriety is not only of the body, but of the soul; they are patient with their fellows, not derisive, not permissive, but tireless in the edification of men God-willing. They crave not praise or worship, they expurge false pride, they present in action, not in appearance knowing that all they do is accounted for, after the worth of the good itself, not for a reward, humble to ultimate justice. The world may not take account of them, or indeed, may hate them, yet without light of Christ coming through them all earthly things are chaff. All theologies are worthless if the Holy Spirit does not come upon a man, and it is only through the light of holy scripture that we know it. Many a literary scholar has read the Bible, however in their heart's frame it is a work of man, of no weight on their conscience; though they may construct elaborate theories with clever arguments in the end they drink of the font of their pride and not of the free love of God. >>790 You must ask of yourself beholding a church (in a denominational sense), knowing however that each congregation and individual believer of its body does stand on their own: do they honor this end, or do they honor some other, some idol they have fashioned in the absence of God? And it will become apparent to you how few in the world, the necessary few, worthily bear the Cross of the necessary Savior.
>>789 Hey anon, I support using the KJV as an accurate translation into English and most of what you said. But there's nothing wrong with theology, as long as it is done properly according to first principles from the word of God. When you say that, you might make people think that you mean studying the divine (theology) itself should be avoided. I don't think this is necessarily the case if done rightly. This is sort of like how I have seen people sometimes say, "stay away from doctrine," in actuality Scripture says (2 John) – “He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.” We don't want to let modern "intellectuals" lay exclusive claim to these things, anymore than we should allow the enemies of God to lay claim to the rainbow (as a symbol of God's covenant).
>>796 I see what you mean, anon. But please remember that the Bible says that we ought to speak as the oracles of God (Written in 1 peter 4:11). And so, we should not use words that are not in the Bible when we speak about the Bible. My firend, christians do not use theology. Instead they read and cherish the Word of their dear Father as it is written and obey it. Let me make myself clear, I have nothing against people using original languages for their own interests to see how the Bible was written. Where the problem starts is when people begin using this narrative: "Well, when we read verse X, we see that the word Y is translated incorrectly. In the original greek, the word Y should be actually Z. This is the CoRrEcT eXeGeSiS of this particular passage." Hearing people say "well in the original languages it should say this/that" makes my blood boil seeing people in their foolish pride using vain terms (theology, exegesis, eisegesis, and so on...) to degrade God's Holy Word.
>>798 >that we ought to speak as the oracles of God (Written in 1 peter 4:11) Amen. Today the world in its pagan ways seeks to be oracle of everything aside from the life-giving Truth.
>>798 >seeing people in their foolish pride using vain terms (theology, exegesis, eisegesis, and so on...) to degrade God's Holy Word. Yes but remember, whosoever rejects God's word, the same will judge them in the last day (John 12:48).
>>799 >>800 Praise God, Amen.

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms
Delete
Report

Captcha (required for reports)

no cookies?