|
Post by TarueBeliever on May 4, 2004 20:40:17 GMT -5
Let’s debate the translation and interpretation of another controversial scripture, Matthew 16:18 …
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. Matthew 16:18 (Catholic New American Bible)
I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. Matthew 16:18 (Protestant New American Standard Bible)
The Protestant and Catholic translations are in close agreement, at least in the wording. But what about in interpretation? Let's look at the original common Greek. For Matthew 16:18, the Byzantine-Majority Texts and the Westcott-Hort are in agreement ...
kagô de soi legô hoti su ei Petros , kai epi tautêi têi petrai oikodomêsô mou tên ekklêsian , kai pulai haidou ou katischusousin autês : Matthew 16:18 (transliteration of the Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament)
See the next post for a table of Greek-to-English Translation.
|
|
|
Post by TarueBeliever on May 4, 2004 20:41:57 GMT -5
INFLECTED WORD | BASE WORD | GRAMMATICAL DATA | ENGLISH TRANSLATION | kagô | kai-egô | pn 1st sg nom-conj | I also | de | de | conj | but/now | soi | su | pn 2nd sg dat | to/in/by you | legô | legô | v 1st sg pre act ind | I say | hoti | hoti | conj | that | su | su | pn 2nd sg nom | you | ei | eimi | v 2nd sg pre act ind | you are | petros | petros | n nom sg mas | a stone | kai | kai | conj | and | epi | epi | prep | on | tautêi | houtos | dem pn dat sg fem | this | têi | ho | art dat sg fem | the | petrai | petra | n dat sg fem | solid rock | oikodomêsô | oikodomeô | v 1st sg fut act ind | I will build | mou | egô | pn 1st sg gen | of/from me | tên | ho | art acc sg fem | the | ekklêsian | ekklêsia | n acc sg fem | church | kai | kai | conj | and | pulai | pulê | n nom pl fem | gates | haidou | haidês | n gen sg mas | of the underworld | ou | ou | adv | not | katiscusousin | katischuô | v 3rd fut act ind | he/she/it will prevail against | autês | autos | pn gen 3rd sg fem | of/from her |
|
|
|
Post by TarueBeliever on May 4, 2004 22:05:57 GMT -5
Coninued from previous posting
but/now | I also | to/in/by you | I say | that | you | you are | a stone | and | on | this | the | solid rock | I will build | of/from me | the | church | and | gates | of the underworld | not | he/she/it will prevail against | of/from her .
But I also say to you that you are a stone and on this the solid rock I will build my church and gates of the underworld will not prevail against her.
Accoording to Liddell and Scott's An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon, the Greek words petros and petra, while similar, are two separate words. The word petros refers to loose stones while the word petra refers to solid rock. Jesus was calling Peter a "loose stone." Jesus said he would build his church on "solid rock."
What petra is Jesus talking about? Let's look at 1 Corinthians 10:4 ...
kai pantes to auto pneumatikon brôma ephagon kai pantes to auto pneumatikon epion poma, epinon gar ek pneumatikês akolouthousês petras, hê petra de ên ho christos: (Westcott-Hort)
and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ. (NASB)
Christ is he petra, "the rock" on which the Church is built, not ho petros, Peter. There's no problem with the masculine ho christos being compared to the feminine he petra either as supposed by the notes found in Catholic Bible for Matthew 16:18-19.
Matthew 16:18-19 doesn't prove that Jesus made Peter the head of the Church.
Scott
|
|
|
Post by masarap on May 5, 2004 23:49:17 GMT -5
St Clement wrote the Corinthians: Why, then are there strifes, tumults, divisions, schisms, and wars among you? Have we not one God and one Christ? Is there not one Spirit of grace poured out upon us? And have we not one calling in Christ? Why do we divide and tear to pieces the members of Christ, and raise up strife against our own body and have reached such a height of madness as to forget that "we are members of one another" (Eph 4:25)? Remember the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, how He said, "woe to the man by whom offenses come! It were better for him that he had never been born, than that he should cast a stumbling-block before one of My elect. Yea, it were better for him that a millstone should be hung about his neck, and he should be sunk in the depths of the sea, than that he should cast a stumbling-block before one of My little ones" (cf. Mt 18:6-7). Your schism has subverted the faith of many, has discouraged many, has given rise to doubt in many, and has caused grief to us all. And still your sedition continues. In my opinion this letter applies here today on this board as much as it did in the first century when St. Clement wrote it. Blessings to you all, Ann Hello Ann, I am here in the Philippines now and in this country the presidential elections will happen in a few days.... There is one candadate named "Brother Eddie Villanueva" This man is running for a presidency based on Godly principles and accountabilty. He is a "born again Christian" but has said over and over he supports freedom of religion. In a nation that has a history of some of the biggest corruption in the world even though 85% of the people are Roman Catholic the corruption is only getting worse... Eddie has been a very vocal opponent against doing things the same way they have been done in the past and wants the poor as well as the rich to have an equal chance of achieving a decent life. The incredible thing is, the Roman Catholic Church has been one of his biggest critics... They claim he is a problem to the "real Church" and yet all the candidates they have supported in the past have been corrupt to the core... The RC has turned a blind eye to them and has said "boys will be boys", "after all we are not saints but sinners" and unchangable thats why people here cling to the "big enabler" called the Catholic Church of the Philippines. People here are codependant and have no idea what it means to be "transformed by the renewing of their mind" or "having the mind of Christ" because they are not told this.... They are not told they are a "kingdom of Priests"or "a Holy Nation" or that THEY ARE THE SAINTS.... all they know is they are sinners that, can at most achieve purgatory to suffer again for thousand years or so unless of course someone will buy an indugence for them. But fat chance of that because they are poor and cant even afford a death ceremony in the Church they have pledged allengence to all of their living days...
This Presidential candidate is tired of the Corruption, the double speak, the hypocracy. Would not Jesus be against the same??? Why than is the RC against any candidate that has these convictions? Of what I can see the RC is the one bringing division here in the Philippines.... Evidently they havn't read Ephesians... or heard of St Clement....
Blessings, Masarap
|
|
|
Post by Jan on May 6, 2004 2:47:01 GMT -5
May the Lord be with you in your ministry, Masarap! So happy you have taken the time to post here. Do you know the song by mercyme? Here I Am? This is what comes to me after reading your post! Here are the words: On the other side of the world/She stands on the ocean shore/Gazing at the heavens she wonders/Is there something more/Never been told the name of Jesus/She turns and walks away/What a shame/Just across the streat in your hometown/Leaving from his nine to five/Gazing down the road he wonders/Is this all there is to life/Never been told the name of Jesus/He continues on his way/What a shame/Whom shall I send/Who will go for me/to the ends of the earth/Who will rise up for the King/Here I am/Send me/Whether foreign land or neighbors/Everyone's the same/Searching for the answers/That lie within your name/I want to proclaim the name of Jesus/In all I do and say/Unashamed/How beautfiul are the feet of those who bring good news/Proclaiming peace and salvation <><
|
|
|
Post by genesda on May 6, 2004 5:29:26 GMT -5
gene, and also typical that you find a few words in there to draw attention from the point of the pkmtyolpage! St Clement had a personal relationship with the Apostles and was taught by them and it is thought that he was consecrated as a bishop by Peter himself. " It was thought?" He should have had a personal relationship with Jesus, if you understand that terminology. [/color] Please read the pkmtyolpage from St. Clement and concentrate on the total message of his writings without nitpicking every word and try to see how he was addressing Christian fighting amongst themselves. Blessings, Ann Ann, I have Peter's words. I don't need those of someone who came later. Maqybe you should rely on the original and not those who came later. [/color]
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on May 6, 2004 9:29:06 GMT -5
Hello Ann, I am here in the Philippines now and in this country the presidential elections will happen in a few days.... There is one candadate named "Brother Eddie Villanueva" This man is running for a presidency based on Godly principles and accountabilty. He is a "born again Christian" but has said over and over he supports freedom of religion. In a nation that has a history of some of the biggest corruption in the world even though 85% of the people are Roman Catholic the corruption is only getting worse... Eddie has been a very vocal opponent against doing things the same way they have been done in the past and wants the poor as well as the rich to have an equal chance of achieving a decent life. The incredible thing is, the Roman Catholic Church has been one of his biggest critics... They claim he is a problem to the "real Church" and yet all the candidates they have supported in the past have been corrupt to the core... The RC has turned a blind eye to them and has said "boys will be boys", "after all we are not saints but sinners" and unchangable thats why people here cling to the "big enabler" called the Catholic Church of the Philippines. People here are codependant and have no idea what it means to be "transformed by the renewing of their mind" or "having the mind of Christ" because they are not told this.... They are not told they are a "kingdom of Priests"or "a Holy Nation" or that THEY ARE THE SAINTS.... all they know is they are sinners that, can at most achieve purgatory to suffer again for thousand years or so unless of course someone will buy an indugence for them. But fat chance of that because they are poor and cant even afford a death ceremony in the Church they have pledged allengence to all of their living days...
This Presidential candidate is tired of the Corruption, the double speak, the hypocracy. Would not Jesus be against the same??? Why than is the RC against any candidate that has these convictions? Of what I can see the RC is the one bringing division here in the Philippines.... Evidently they havn't read Ephesians... or heard of St Clement....
Blessings, Masarap Masa, God bless you for the work that you do. You are an inspiration to us all. I agree with you. I do not know anything about the Phillipines and the churches there. From what you posted, I know that is not what the RCC teaches. Many things that you have posted in the past about the Phillipines do not reflect any of the teachings that the RCC. That does not mean that you should judge the RCC for these wrong statements. The Vatican does not know everything that goes on everywhere in the world. Men abuse and misinform people. As for indulgences, there is nothing in the cathechism saying that indulgences are bought and no one knows but God, how long one is purgatory. In fact, God exists outside of time or space, so to me it is a process of penance for sins that I did not confess to and has no aspect of time, just the cleansing of a stained soul before it can enter into God's perfect kingdom. Indulgences are acts of charity and penance offered up to God for another person that has pkmtyolped on. As I understand it, if I go work at the local soup kitchen for a day I could offer that work up to God for a person in purgatory. Every day, I pray for Jesus to show his divine mercy to the souls in purgatory and lead them to his eternal kingdom. Good Luck and Blessings on all of the work you do. Ann
|
|
|
Post by RealistState on May 6, 2004 18:51:35 GMT -5
Hello Ann, I am here in the Philippines now and in this country the presidential elections will happen in a few days.... There is one candadate named "Brother Eddie Villanueva" This man is running for a presidency based on Godly principles and accountabilty. He is a "born again Christian" but has said over and over he supports freedom of religion. In a nation that has a history of some of the biggest corruption in the world even though 85% of the people are Roman Catholic the corruption is only getting worse... Eddie has been a very vocal opponent against doing things the same way they have been done in the past and wants the poor as well as the rich to have an equal chance of achieving a decent life. The incredible thing is, the Roman Catholic Church has been one of his biggest critics... They claim he is a problem to the "real Church" and yet all the candidates they have supported in the past have been corrupt to the core... The RC has turned a blind eye to them and has said "boys will be boys", "after all we are not saints but sinners" and unchangable thats why people here cling to the "big enabler" called the Catholic Church of the Philippines. People here are codependant and have no idea what it means to be "transformed by the renewing of their mind" or "having the mind of Christ" because they are not told this.... They are not told they are a "kingdom of Priests"or "a Holy Nation" or that THEY ARE THE SAINTS.... all they know is they are sinners that, can at most achieve purgatory to suffer again for thousand years or so unless of course someone will buy an indugence for them. But fat chance of that because they are poor and cant even afford a death ceremony in the Church they have pledged allengence to all of their living days...
This Presidential candidate is tired of the Corruption, the double speak, the hypocracy. Would not Jesus be against the same??? Why than is the RC against any candidate that has these convictions? Of what I can see the RC is the one bringing division here in the Philippines.... Evidently they havn't read Ephesians... or heard of St Clement....
Blessings, Masarap An interesting point I found out about Brother Eddie Villanueva is that he considers himself Catholic. I got that from the Manila Times: www.manilatimes.net/national/2004/jan/22/yehey/opinion/20040122opi2.htmlI spoke with 2 close Fillipino friends of mine today (one of whom just returned from the Phillipines last week after a months stay). They indicated that the charismatic Roman Catholic movement is very big right now, particularly in the northern provinces.
|
|
|
Post by masarap on May 6, 2004 21:54:16 GMT -5
Realist, I too consider myself Catholic, in a sense that I belong to the CHURCH (universal) All men that are washed in the blood of Jesus and Born again are part of the "BODY" Eddie is not Roman Catholic and the RC leaders are saying "its people like him that pull people away from the real church" Brother Eddie is a Protestent and now protesting against the corruption of a government and in a pkmtyolpive way the "Big Church and their white washed tombs" that turns a blind eye or recieves "offerings" from men that have there hands in the cookie jar and crumbs all over their face.... I pray for him and this country... Blessings, Masarap
|
|
|
Post by Pietro on May 9, 2004 9:52:54 GMT -5
Yet it is the matter of "fullness" on which the Catholic Church begins to build the doctrine of a sinless Mary. The Catholic Church doesn't consider it a figure of speech. The Catholic Church considers it a declaration by God through the angel that she was so full of sanctifying grace that no sin could enter into her. The exact interpretation is important to Catholic Doctrine. So important, that the wording was changed in 1998 in the litugical copies of the New American Bible used by the priests at pkmtyolm from "Hail, favored one!" to "Hail, full of grace!" at the specific instruction of Pope John Paul II.
Scott You have made a good argument, Scott. I can only respond by saying that scripture comes from tradition so tradition has the ultimate authority to interpret.
|
|
|
Post by Nicodemus on May 9, 2004 10:24:10 GMT -5
I can only respond by saying that scripture comes from tradition so tradition has the ultimate authority to interpret. You make many posts, Pietro, advising me of how I should approach Scripture and then you make a statement like this where you show us that you do not even believe that Scripture comes from the mind of God to the pen of man through the process of immediate inspiration and absolute revelation. Rather, your words reveal that you believe the Bible is just the best book that human reasoning can come up with - that it contains the Word of God - but it is not really the Word of God. And I find that to be an empty and vain philosphy. And yet I find that to be the purest essence of Catholicism that there is. "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ" (Col. 2:8)
|
|
|
Post by TarueBeliever on May 9, 2004 18:30:20 GMT -5
You have made a good argument, Scott. I can only respond by saying that scripture comes from tradition so tradition has the ultimate authority to interpret. Pietro,
From where did you drag up this teaching? Not that it would matter to me, but it's not a teaching of the Catholic Church. The CotCC teaches that the Scriptures came from God. Men, inspired by God, wrote the words of the Bible. These men, weren't taking down dictation from the Catholic Church.
As the Catholic Church Tradition did not furnish us with the scriptures, it is not the proper interpreter. The Holy Spirit gave us the Scriptures. The Holy Spirit is the proper interpreter. The Scriptures ought to be studied as a whole. Lessons learned in an expository method -- begin in a book of the Bible and read as it was written. Sentence by sentence, chapter by chapter, book by book. We ought not pull single verses out of context to prove our points. Let the Scriptures teach the lessons as they come and teach God's lessons.
The Catholic Church claim is that because they came up with the canon or list of books to include in the Bible, that they have the final say over the meaning of the words. NEWS FLASH. They were just doing what God wanted. It doesn't give them any authority. The CC is authority hung up.
Scott
|
|
|
Post by genesda on May 10, 2004 6:16:38 GMT -5
Pietro,
From where did you drag up this teaching? Not that it would matter to me, but it's not a teaching of the Catholic Church. The CotCC teaches that the Scriptures came from God. Men, inspired by God, wrote the words of the Bible. These men, weren't taking down dictation from the Catholic Church.
As the Catholic Church Tradition did not furnish us with the scriptures, it is not the proper interpreter. The Holy Spirit gave us the Scriptures. The Holy Spirit is the proper interpreter. The Scriptures ought to be studied as a whole. Lessons learned in an expository method -- begin in a book of the Bible and read as it was written. Sentence by sentence, chapter by chapter, book by book. We ought not pull single verses out of context to prove our points. Let the Scriptures teach the lessons as they come and teach God's lessons.
The Catholic Church claim is that because they came up with the canon or list of books to include in the Bible, that they have the final say over the meaning of the words. NEWS FLASH. They were just doing what God wanted. It doesn't give them any authority. The CC is authority hung up.
Scott Scott, I agree with the words of your post as you wrote them, but seeing other things you've posted, I'm not sure if you're following what you wrote. [/color]
|
|
|
Post by Pietro on May 10, 2004 9:43:56 GMT -5
Pietro,
From where did you drag up this teaching? Not that it would matter to me, but it's not a teaching of the Catholic Church. The CotCC teaches that the Scriptures came from God. Men, inspired by God, wrote the words of the Bible. These men, weren't taking down dictation from the Catholic Church.
As the Catholic Church Tradition did not furnish us with the scriptures, it is not the proper interpreter. The Holy Spirit gave us the Scriptures. The Holy Spirit is the proper interpreter. The Scriptures ought to be studied as a whole. Lessons learned in an expository method -- begin in a book of the Bible and read as it was written. Sentence by sentence, chapter by chapter, book by book. We ought not pull single verses out of context to prove our points. Let the Scriptures teach the lessons as they come and teach God's lessons.
The Catholic Church claim is that because they came up with the canon or list of books to include in the Bible, that they have the final say over the meaning of the words. NEWS FLASH. They were just doing what God wanted. It doesn't give them any authority. The CC is authority hung up.
Scott I agree that the CC is authority hung up. Scripture is inspired but it comes to us through human beings situated in specific times, places, and cultures. Nic writes; You make many posts, Pietro, advising me of how I should approach Scripture and then you make a statement like this where you show us that you do not even believe that Scripture comes from the mind of God to the pen of man through the process of immediate inspiration and absolute revelation.
Rather, your words reveal that you believe the Bible is just the best book that human reasoning can come up with - that it contains the Word of God - but it is not really the Word of God.From the mind of God through the mind of men. Not just the best book of human reasoning, but inspired by God. You deny the human element. You deny that human beings had any part to play other than being mindless robots taking dictation. You seem to see it as a process of automatic writing as if the person is totally possessed.
|
|
|
Post by Nicodemus on May 10, 2004 12:25:14 GMT -5
Automatic writing? I associate that with the occult.
God did not employ occult sciences in authoring the Word of God, yet it is His word - delivered to human authors that wrote as they were moved upon by the Holy Spirit (that is what the Bible says about itself).
Yet each author spoke from his own experience, but was led so as to keep them from writing error.
Paul employed ameneusis' and they spoke exactly, word-for-word in robotic fashion exactly what Paul dictacted - but those writers were not writing under inspiration, but Paul was giving to them God's inspired message.
The writers of the Gospels each told the same story, but related it to different themes of the Person of Christ. Matthew spoke of the King of the Jews, Mark wrote of the servant of God, Luke wrote of the Man-God, and John wrote of the God-Man.
Matthew was written to the Jews, Mark was written to the Romans, Luke to the Greeks and John to the Gentiles in general.
|
|