Religious Survey

[GVF]

The scriputes also state that whomever serves the least of their neighbors serves Christ. Therefore, those people who serve their neighbors, are indeed serving God and do indeed know God. I might add that they know God more than someone who shouts at the top of their voice that they are a Christian.

this would probably be in reference to "...love thy neighbor as thyself..."; The second reference there would be likened to the Pharisess which he Jesus rebuked many times for their outwardcalling to watch their works. As long as that is not a reference that I am the one standing on the street corner shouting 'look at me', since you have no idea how I carry myself. Proclaiming one's faith is a command. And I try live it as well.

Also, Judaism and Islam do not reject Jesus. Jesus is mentioned by name in the Koran. His mother, Mary, is the only woman mentioned in the entire Koran. Modern Judaism looks upon Jesus as a great Rabbi.

Looking upon Jesus as a great Rabbi or teacher is different than acknowledging Him as the Son of God. I could look upon you as the same, but that would not acknowledge you as the Holy One.

I would like to leave you with a quote that I believe most fundamentalists will never live by:
Oh, and just to let you in on a little secret...the faith relationship between yourself and God that works for your life, does not necessarily work for everyone's life. Peoples are inherently different. Therefore they will worship God in different ways. I do not find it a mere coincidence that at the very core of all the major world religions, the message is the same. Some people choose to believe in falsehoods about other religions, most people choose not to educate themselves about other religions. Yet, these people are the ones that get caught up in the ritual and customs, instead of the meaning.

A little secret back...i was not trying to impose my faith upon any of the one's involved in this discussion with each other. I was answering some questions on what/why i believe about a few things. I was returning those questions with my answers and the scripture that applies to my answers. Just some good ole spiritual discussions. You can't force beliefs. If someone picks up on it, great. While I am not an expert in many religions, i do know a fair amount of practices, right or wrong scripturally, in various practices, at least major religions anyway. Those I am not knowledgeab;e of, I don't get into unless I learn something about it and can go study the word on it. You however attacked me for that. I do not apologize for expressing my beliefs with the sripture to back it up. You won't find me saying I think this or think that just because. I try to keep true to the word as I know it today. What you will also not find me doing is using written creeds from other religions to categorize my doctrine as this or that, as created by writings of men not present and inspired by Jesus and God to supply those writings/scriptures. I think you will find that all authors of the New Testament were recorded as being present with Christ and bore witness to what they wrote. I am a new testament chrsitian, and the Bible is the only "doctrine" I use. And, for the record, yes, people can choose to live and worship, or not, as they decide. That is how we were created. Does that make it right, or make certain ideals and truths disappear just because you choose not to acknowledge them. Certainly not. Not any more than capital punishment would not be invoked upon me for murdering someone and because i beleived I would not be put to death. Why would God's law be superficial while ours are 'literal.'

 

[therealUT]

A little secret back...i was not trying to impose my faith upon any of the one's involved in this discussion with each other. I was answering some questions on what/why i believe about a few things. I was returning those questions with my answers and the scripture that applies to my answers. Just some good ole spiritual discussions. You can't force beliefs. If someone picks up on it, great. While I am not an expert in many religions, i do know a fair amount of practices, right or wrong scripturally, in various practices, at least major religions anyway. Those I am not knowledgeab;e of, I don't get into unless I learn something about it and can go study the word on it. You however attacked me for that. I do not apologize for expressing my beliefs with the sripture to back it up. You won't find me saying I think this or think that just because. I try to keep true to the word as I know it today. What you will also not find me doing is using written creeds from other religions to categorize my doctrine as this or that, as created by writings of men not present and inspired by Jesus and God to supply those writings/scriptures. I think you will find that all authors of the New Testament were recorded as being present with Christ and bore witness to what they wrote. I am a new testament chrsitian, and the Bible is the only "doctrine" I use. And, for the record, yes, people can choose to live and worship, or not, as they decide. That is how we were created. Does that make it right, or make certain ideals and truths disappear just because you choose not to acknowledge them. Certainly not. Not any more than capital punishment would not be invoked upon me for murdering someone and because i beleived I would not be put to death. Why would God's law be superficial while ours are 'literal.'

I attack you, and will attack any and all who continue to state, for stating that only those who believe in Christ will go to heaven. That viewpoint and belief system is an ingrained and subconsious belief that you and your fellow worshippers are inherently better humans than 'infidels.' This belief manifests itself throughout the world and throughout history in the African slave trade, international terrorism, domestic terrorism, the Holocaust, etc.

 

[GVF]

I would have to believe that those who are 'poor in spirit' are not exactly solid in their faith. Yet, here, Jesus promises them heaven. I am not a Bible literalist, therefore, I do not have to struggle with my faith when passages and authors contridict each other, on the surface. The meanings I take from scripture are much deeper. However, you now have to come up for a rationalization for why Jesus said this. Being the fundamentalist that you are, and taking it upon yourself to now interpret the literal meaning of Jesus's words, I guess you would have to believe yourself to be a prophet...

I see you are active early today.

I don't have my bible with me here, but also "By grace are you saved through faith." I'll look it up when I get home. There are some others that also express that works alone not the vehicle of salvation.

I like the meek inheriting the earth quote. Powerful. Means I have hope.

I think it is important though not to isolate individual verses. commands and such are ties together thorughout. Yes, works are important. Very important. They are a proclamation of my faith more than any words I use in these threads. I won't get into my personal works, but as an example what do my words mean if i walk by the hungry person in front of the grocery store to buy my food, and don't try to help in some way. That could have been an angel I was to minister upon. I see the New testament as a complete guide. One place it says faith without works is dead. Another it says you are saved by grace, not works. You should put all pieces of a particular thought together in scripture then study the teaching.

 

[therealUT]

I see you are active early today.

I don't have my bible with me here, but also "By grace are you saved through faith." I'll look it up when I get home. There are some others that also express that works alone not the vehicle of salvation.

I like the meek inheriting the earth quote. Powerful. Means I have hope.

I think it is important though not to isolate individual verses. commands and such are ties together thorughout. Yes, works are important. Very important. They are a proclamation of my faith more than any words I use in these threads. I won't get into my personal works, but as an example what do my words mean if i walk by the hungry person in front of the grocery store to buy my food, and don't try to help in some way. That could have been an angel I was to minister upon. I see the New testament as a complete guide. One place it says faith without works is dead. Another it says you are saved by grace, not works. You should put all pieces of a particular thought together in scripture then study the teaching.

I do. That is called taking the Bible wholistically and allegorically. Through your posts, you have taken much of the Bible literally.

I also study much of the early history of the Christian church...or the first 300 years before the Bible was assembled. Many of the early traditions were started by Jesus and continued through St. Peter. I happen to put more trust into anything St. Peter set up than in the stories told, 40 years later, by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul.

 

[GVF]

I attack you, and will attack any and all who continue to state, for stating that only those who believe in Christ will go to heaven. That viewpoint and belief system is an ingrained and subconsious belief that you and your fellow worshippers are inherently better humans than 'infidels.' This belief manifests itself throughout the world and throughout history in the African slave trade, international terrorism, domestic terrorism, the Holocaust, etc.

Listen/Read. Try to read exactly what I am saying and have said. I do not state those things. I supplied God's word that stated those things. Freedom of choice is envoked by each to his own from that point forward. You can attack me all you want, but you have yet to show me where God himself does not say these things in the Bible. He has destroyed peoples back to Adam who did not believe in him. All but Noah and his family, Jericho, Sodom, Philistines, Canaanites, etc...the list is long. The destruction of the unrighteous is as much a part of the Bible as is salvation of the righteous.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Sorry, but the TRUT thing makes me laugh......... :air_kiss:

 

[therealUT]

Listen/Read. Try to read exactly what I am saying and have said. I do not state those things. I supplied God's word that stated those things. Freedom of choice is envoked by each to his own from that point forward. You can attack me all you want, but you have yet to show me where God himself does not say these things in the Bible. He has destroyed peoples back to Adam who did not believe in him. All but Noah and his family, Jericho, Sodom, Philistines, Canaanites, etc...the list is long. The destruction of the unrighteous is as much a part of the Bible as is salvation of the righteous.

And that right there is the reason extremists result to violence against infidels. Not just in the Middle East, but also in the bombings of abortion clinics right here in the United States. I see that I can no longer reason with you.

 

[GVF]

I do. That is called taking the Bible wholistically and allegorically. Through your posts, you have taken much of the Bible literally.

I also study much of the early history of the Christian church...or the first 300 years before the Bible was assembled. Many of the early traditions were started by Jesus and continued through St. Peter. I happen to put more trust into anything St. Peter set up than in the stories told, 40 years later, by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul.

By St. Peter, are referring to the same Apostal Peter that was with Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Paul. all who were with and bore witness to Christ.

 

[therealUT]

By St. Peter, are referring to the same Apostal Peter that was with Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Paul. all who were with and bore witness to Christ.

Yes. The one whom Jesus commissioned to start the Church. That Church became the Catholic Church. The liturgy of the Eucharist has not changed in the Catholic church since it was put into place by Jesus and continued through Peter.

 

[GVF]

And that right there is the reason extremists result to violence against infidels. Not just in the Middle East, but also in the bombings of abortion clinics right here in the United States. I see that I can no longer reason with you.

Sorry to offend you. I guess the whole world should throw away the truth. But, I stand on my faith. and I am not an extremist nor a violent person, nor do I get in people's faces and tell them they are going to hell. I will answer questions, and on questions such as those, I will merely supply the scripture and let them read for themselves, as I have done here. I am not an accusatory person. It is not my nature. But, I also will not hide from those who attack the truths of God. I am commanded not to waiver in my faith. If I am asked by anyone in this world if I believe in God, I will answer yes. To paraphrase, "Those who deny me before men, I will deny to my Father in heaven, those who acknowledge me before men, i will acknowledge to my Father..." Early Christians have been persecuted for centuries for maintaining their beliefs. Whether physical or verbal. According to scripture these arabic and jewish extremists were cursed to this violence and strife for all of their generations that rejected God. My faith does not cause that. Their violence against the truth and God go back beyond the crucifiction.

 

[therealUT]

Sorry to offend you. I guess the whole world should throw away the truth. But, I stand on my faith. and I am not an extremist nor a violent person, nor do I get in people's faces and tell them they are going to hell. I will answer questions, and on questions such as those, I will merely supply the scripture and let them read for themselves, as I have done here. I am not an accusatory person. It is not my nature. But, I also will not hide from those who attack the truths of God. I am commanded not to waiver in my faith. If I am asked by anyone in this world if I believe in God, I will answer yes. To paraphrase, "Those who deny me before men, I will deny to my Father in heaven, those who acknowledge me before men, i will acknowledge to my Father..." Early Christians have been persecuted for centuries for maintaining their beliefs. Whether physical or verbal. According to scripture these arabic and jewish extremists were cursed to this violence and strife for all of their generations that rejected God. My faith does not cause that. Their violence against the truth and God go back beyond the crucifiction.

Fair enough. If you are not going to waiver in the words of Christ as depicted in the Scripture, then why do you refuse to belief in transubstantion?

Oh, and on the subject of religious terrorism...you are much closer than you think you are.

 

[GVF]

Yes. The one whom Jesus commissioned to start the Church. That Church became the Catholic Church. The liturgy of the Eucharist has not changed in the Catholic church since it was put into place by Jesus and continued through Peter.

Where did Jesus command Peter, one of the 12 apostles, who accounts are no more or no less than the others, to start the Catholic Church. What chapter and verse? The church was established upon the crucifiction of Christ. He called all to be christians. The churches that the apostles established on their missionary journeys were churches of the new testament. Paul wrote most of the letters to them. they were not "Catholic" churches, nor does the scripture indicate any of them became "catholic." Catholocism has a long and deep tradition in the world. Probably the next oldest to new testament christianity. As you said, though, the church that became catholic. that implies to me, that the church that was established by Christ was neither here nor there, but christian by the word that was was given, and anything else would be a man made add on. Any misinterpretation by a "christian" church as well. My wife's side of the family is catholic. I can appreciate your upbringing in the catholic church. I here alot of that. None of them attend now. Five have converted to christian faith. But, that is neither here nor there. Taking the Bible for anything other than the meaniung that were written would be seeking the truth, not being a literalist. Anything other than that is altering the word to make life easier to accept. I have certainly been more welcoming of your interpretations and beliefs than you have of mine. Which is why I am not trying to sway you my way, but only appreciate the dialogue. You have not displayed an approach in your on right that shows christ in your life. And, you are the one getting violent. The gospel is for all. People don't have to reject it's teachings and become violent.

 

[GVF]

Fair enough. If you are not going to waiver in the words of Christ as depicted in the Scripture, then why do you refuse to belief in transubstantion?

Oh, and on the subject of religious terrorism...you are much closer than you think you are.

that is a soap box you need to get off of. you are the only person in here that screams religious terrorism. It is your phobia.you have bought into the fact that anyone that does not yield to your alegorical and religious history belief system is a litralist and a terroist. I am neither. I am a Christian who believes in immersed baptism, weekly communion, giving and helping those in need spritually and physically as I can. I am barely making it financially due to plant closings and job losses, but I try to do what I can. You appear to be confused as to what you actually believe. I haven't figured it out yet. "You have to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything."

 

[therealUT]

Where did Jesus command Peter, one of the 12 apostles, who accounts are no more or no less than the others, to start the Catholic Church. What chapter and verse?

And you have studied the scriptures? You must have only studied those verses which fit your beliefs...

"Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Matthew 16:17-19, NAB

"Blessed art though, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 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. 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."
KJV

The church was established upon the crucifiction of Christ. He called all to be christians. The churches that the apostles established on their missionary journeys were churches of the new testament. Paul wrote most of the letters to them. they were not "Catholic" churches, nor does the scripture indicate any of them became "catholic." Catholocism has a long and deep tradition in the world. Probably the next oldest to new testament christianity. As you said, though, the church that became catholic. that implies to me, that the church that was established by Christ was neither here nor there, but christian by the word that was was given, and anything else would be a man made add on. Any misinterpretation by a "christian" church as well. My wife's side of the family is catholic. I can appreciate your upbringing in the catholic church. I here alot of that. None of them attend now. Five have converted to christian faith. But, that is neither here nor there. Taking the Bible for anything other than the meaniung that were written would be seeking the truth, not being a literalist. Anything other than that is altering the word to make life easier to accept. I have certainly been more welcoming of your interpretations and beliefs than you have of mine. Which is why I am not trying to sway you my way, but only appreciate the dialogue. You have not displayed an approach in your on right that shows christ in your life. And, you are the one getting violent. The gospel is for all. People don't have to reject it's teachings and become violent.

The word 'catholic' literally means universal. Also, I have not gotten violent. I have clearly stated that I believe that all who live a good life will go to heaven. If that seems violent to you, then again, I cannot reason with you.

 

[therealUT]

that is a soap box you need to get off of. you are the only person in here that screams religious terrorism. It is your phobia.you have bought into the fact that anyone that does not yield to your alegorical and religious history belief system is a litralist and a terroist. I am neither. I am a Christian who believes in immersed baptism, weekly communion, giving and helping those in need spritually and physically as I can. I am barely making it financially due to plant closings and job losses, but I try to do what I can. You appear to be confused as to what you actually believe. I haven't figured it out yet. "You have to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything."

No, I have stated that anyone who states that only those who believe as they do are 'blessed,' are closer to committing acts of terrorist than they know. The Islamic terrorists act violently because it is their only medium in which to gain power. I find it no coincidence that during the Clinton years, abortion clinics were bombed or set ablaze no less than 101 times, resulting in the deaths of 22 'infidels.' Since 2001, only 9 attacks, 0 deaths. Why? The Christian extremists feel they have another medium of power, 'their guy' is in charge. What happens in two years if Hillary is elected? My educated guess would be more violence at abortion clinics.

 

[GVF]

Transubstantion. Sorry I missed that until I reread. If I understand transubstantion as you are referring to in the Catholic sense of mass and the literal transformation of the communion emblems of enleaven bread and fruit of the vine into the actual body and blood when you partake...

I don't think I said I refused to believe that. I am a firm believer in the communion. that is my biggest issue with other faiths if i chose to give them a try. Many do not take at all. Many only spordadically. Few serve weekly on the first day as commanded. I do view the bread and wine ofthe communion as the body and blood of Christ. When he instituted the lord's Supper at the feast with the twelve, he gave those instructions of that representation. The communion should not be minimalized, nor disregarded. Does it literally or figuratively change to his actual blood and body in me. I honestly wouldn't know to say one way or the other except the fact that I know i am partaking of the emblems of the Lord's body. They are in me.

 

[GVF]

I can believe that God knew each person's decision before they ever made it, and somehow that is tied in to the doctrine of predestination, but that dosen't change that there are people in this world who will never have the choice to make. There are millions in this world who have never and will never hear of Jesus of Nazereth. If you accept that Jesus is the only way into heaven, then those people were born predestined to hell somehow. The only other alternatives I see are the doctrine of purgatory which realUT has been talking about, or universal salvation, which teaches that everyone will eventually be saved.


Ephesians 2:8 says that salvation is a gift, verse 9 goes on to say that it can't be earned by works. Now if it is something that one can earn and then lose, possibly earn again and lose it again, then it ceases to become a free gift. What would a person have to do to earn it, and how would he then lose it?


Calvinism, Catholocism, as well as Lutheranism, Methodist, or any other denomination are not religions in and of themselves. They are belief systems that are based on a man's, or a groups interpretation of the bible. Your belief system is no different. It is how you personally, or your church (I'm guessing Chruch of Christ based on your positions thus far) interprets the bible. The bible is full of passages which can have several interpretations, and quite frankly, several passages which make no sense whatsoever.My personal opinion is that the bible is a collection of writings by ancient man, which try to convey his relationship with and to God as early man understood that relationship.

In order by paragraph:
The doctrine of purgatory relies on the fact that remaining church members really can pray you out of hades and into paradise. Scripture teaches that each is accountable on his own. There is nothing you and I can do for each other, except introduce the gospel, let God work, and encourage each other in the faith. Come death or judgement, we are on our own with Jesus as our interceder to God. We don't have the spiritual cleanliness to see God on our own. Jesus has to bridge that gap.


Salavation is a gift. And you read that as I do. There is no works in and of itself that can buy your way into heaven. You must have salvation. salvation is where you receive Grace. Grace is the vehicle that validates your salvation as well as your works. I believe that the counter to this is also addressed less we become lazy and indifferent thinking once saved, always saved. He also teaches faith without works is dead. bottom line, niether faith nor works alone is viable, but given both as a team, and with grace to cover our sins once we are saved, then you have the hope and promise of eternal life. You can lose that by walking away from faith, from abandoning God, from blasphemy of God. If you die in that state. Struggling and refuting are different. I would not confuse the two. I could die struggling with my faith, but still have the faith and be active in it, and I would not fear death. That is different from walking away to never return.

Your right, I am Church of Christ. I am not condemning anyone else's doctrine in and of itself. that's a quick ticket to a harsh judgement for myself. Either you've been around that, or I stated it earlier. But, anyway kudos for knowing your stuff. I had the feeling you have had exposure to the church in the past based on some of the lines of questions you'd only ask a church of Christer if you knew some of our beginnings. And, you are correct to a large degree. We are human and subject to interpretation much as all doctrine's. I think you'll also acknowledge since you are knowledgeable of the CoC is that yet we do not have a written doctrine of man. We do not have a handbook. we are not centrally organized. Each congragation chooses its own elders and deacons, and is autonomous. We do practice immersion, as we believe those are the examples given, we practice communion each and every first day as we believe is given in example. Mainstream CoC is accapella. The 1st Christian Church broke off the mainstream years ago and is instrumental with maybe a few other differences but the core beleif is the same. We use the Bible and the Bible only. We make every effort to interpret correctly as it is written.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Your right, I am Church of Christ.

We have to start a baptism/salvation thread now........good stuff...

 

[GVF]

In a sense they were predestined to die. Another one that puzzles me is the exodus from Egypt. If you go back and look at the story of the exodus, there is a frightening pattern. God sends a plague, the Pharaoh gives in and agrees to let the Israelites go, God hardens Pharaoh's heart, in other words He overrides Pharaoh's free will with His own, causing Pharaoh to change his mind and refuse to let the Israelites go. Then God comes back with an even greater show of force. This cycle is repeated until it ends with the death of the firstborn of Egypt and the destruction of the Egyptian army. I don't understand why all this death is necessary when Pharaoh agreed to let the Israelites go early in the confrontation. :dunno:

I think you'll find in all of this that each time God hardened Pharoh's heart and the israelites were recaptured, it followed a period, however brief or long, of disobedience by the Israelites. "Religion" then was not fatih based as ours is now. It was sign based. And the israelites were hard headed. So, they received alot of signs of God's power. It was not an excersize on Pharoh, but on the Israelites. Pharoh was just the vehicle of application of principle and teaching.

 

[GVF]

I get confused reading through some of the things in the Bible. Like in Joshua, the Isrealites go around and kill everyone and everything in sight, including animals, children, etc., and burn most of the cities and tribes to the ground. This is what God told them to do in order to "receive the Promised Land" he promised. Parting rivers so that they could walk through, hearing how these Isrealites were going around killing larger Armies terrified the Canaanites, Jebosites, and everyone else. I guess God put the fear in these people alright. They didn't get a chance, so were they all predestined to die? I think the only family God saved during the whole 7 years (or however long it took to go around and take over the land) was a prostitute and her family.

People who don't read the Bible, or don't know much about religion(s) look at these things and go :dunno:

These are very real world struggles people have with religion as a whole. Your line of thought coming from these examples is dead on a lot of struggles with faith. Keep in mind in these old testament war stories is that the peoples that god wage war on with the Israelites are those that did reject him. spreading the gospel in this fashion was common in the old testament. God had to validate his power over man and evil. He also had to protect the lineage of Christ to come. you can't let the people you chose to which Christ was to come to be snuffed out.

 

[GVF]

We have to start a baptism/salvation thread now........good stuff...

Be careful of your methods. 1950's CoC indcotrination won't fly here. This is a very knowledgeable and tough crowd. As they should they believe their system as much as I.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Be careful of your methods. 1950's CoC indcotrination won't fly here. This is a very knowledgeable and tough crowd. As they should they believe their system as much as I.

Ok,.................. :birgits_giggle:

I must not be apart of the crowd mentioned.

That is why we discuss is it not?

:blink:

 

[GVF]

And you have studied the scriptures? You must have only studied those verses which fit your beliefs...
The word 'catholic' literally means universal. Also, I have not gotten violent. I have clearly stated that I believe that all who live a good life will go to heaven. If that seems violent to you, then again, I cannot reason with you.

If you look at the surrounding verses of that passage and the theme in its entirity, Jesus was questioning if they (his desciples) knew who he was, or who people said he was. Peter, showing his faith replied that he was the "Christ, the Son of the Living God." the rock would also refer to that kind of faith that Christ would build his church and not Peter specifically. Especially since he said upon this rock, and not "you Peter", or "you the rock, Perter." Especially, since Christ did not establish anything eternal on anyone human because of our imperfections, and especially since in that same breath he also rebuked Peter in verse 23: 23Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men." Why would he establich a church on a man who is a stumbling block rather than a faith that is unwaivering. Why, if the new law is perfect and was made perfect, as shown in Hebrews 7-9, would anyone that supposedly had a church built on them by the almighty himself see a need to write a whole and attached creed on top of that perfection that was already given, with it's own guide for worship and structure.
The theme in that passsage is not Peter as the cornerstone, but the faith itself that Peter demonstrated in his answer. Peter is human. God would not have built a church on a human. Christ is the church.

 

[therealUT]

If you look at the surrounding verses of that passage and the theme in its entirity, Jesus was questioning if they (his desciples) knew who he was, or who people said he was. Peter, showing his faith replied that he was the "Christ, the Son of the Living God." the rock would also refer to that kind of faith that Christ would build his church and not Peter specifically. Especially since he said upon this rock, and not "you Peter", or "you the rock, Perter." Especially, since Christ did not establish anything eternal on anyone human because of our imperfections, and especially since in that same breath he also rebuked Peter in verse 23: 23Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men." Why would he establich a church on a man who is a stumbling block rather than a faith that is unwaivering. Why, if the new law is perfect and was made perfect, as shown in Hebrews 7-9, would anyone that supposedly had a church built on them by the almighty himself see a need to write a whole and attached creed on top of that perfection that was already given, with it's own guide for worship and structure.
The theme in that passsage is not Peter as the cornerstone, but the faith itself that Peter demonstrated in his answer. Peter is human. God would not have built a church on a human. Christ is the church.

All great responses in the allegorical sense of the Bible...

 

[GVF]

Ok,.................. :birgits_giggle:

I must not be apart of the crowd mentioned.

That is why we discuss is it not?

:blink:

True. If one truly believes, then he must spread it. I do not find fault in TRUT or MBRO for expressing their beliefs and standing by them as I do mine. TRUT could learn alot from MBRO's approach, but he is only as passionate in his train as I am mine. If he studies that much, I'm sure he will have different pointsin years to come. We all should. Actually, the more time we all spend in the given Word, the closer we should travel over time.