[sndbay]

1 Cr 10:1-2-3-4 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

The importance of the scripture offered in reference, is for several reasons. #1 we have to recognized who were all were baptized. #2 we can recognized what was called spiritual meat, and #3 we can recognized spiritual drink. Then #4 we can recognize that spiritual Rock is Christ.
***********************************

Question your thoughts: How can we answer the call to salvation without trust in the Three in "ONE"...
Eph 4:4-5-6 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

Don't think for a minute you can raise as Christ raised without being Baptism in Christ, buried and dead to this world, and able to be adopted as a child of God. Division of the three would be against what is writtten.
*******************************

Question your thoughts: How can we drink of the spiritual blood that is Christ?
John 6:53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

1 Cr 11:25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

The spiritual drink that we are to remember is the blood of Christ, drinking of the new testament.
*************************************

Question your thoughts: How can we eat of the spiritual bread of life, not like the manna that feeds the hungry flesh?

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

THE WORD MADE FLESH!

John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

John 6:57-58 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

Recognize the spiritual Rock, and spiritual meat that followed Moses. Scripture tells us the same Christ, the Word that was made flesh and dwelled with us followed Moses. They too ate and drank of the spiritual Rock, and too they were baptized. Do not separate or divide One Lord, One Baptism, One Faith in "ONE GOD"

~in Christ

[Tj3]

Tj3,
SO you still insist on a false idea that The Church did not become The Church until centuries later.

No, The Church was created by Christ. The Roman Catholic Denomination did not exist until centuries later.

Please do not misrepresent what I said.

[Tj3]

And in which of the 72 books of the bible does it say that it was written down "so that man couuld not corrupt it".

The Bible only has 66 books. There are several places where we are told not to corrupt the word of God (Prov 30:5-6, Rev 22:18 being two), and 1 Cor 4:6 tells us not to go beyond what is written.

And which of the 72 books of the bible did Christ say, "and so it was said, so let it be written"? I don't remember that part.

Stick with me, you'll learn a lot! :)

I know that the Catholic Church was born when Christ said, "Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church," (Matt 15:17-18)

In english, doesn't Christ say I WILL and UPON THIS ROCK and BUILD MY CHURCH?

Anyone reading it clearly in English or in the original Greek will see that the Rock (which throughout scripture refers to God) is the declaration that Peter made:

Matt 16:15-18
15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" 16 Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 17 Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.
NKJV

Peter is called a stone and this declaration is the Rock, because it is about Christ and Christ in the Rock. Paul confirms it when he sayud that the church cannot have a foundation other than Christ:

1 Cor 3:10-12
11 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
NKJV

So any church with a man as it's foundation is not the Church that Christ built. Lastly, Christ built a body of believers as the church, not a manmade denomination.

[Tj3]

Boy, John 6 really irks you. Why don't you remove it from the bible along with James?

John 6 does not irk me - why should it?

What does irk me is people taking a verse out of context to make it say the opposite of what it actually says.

Like this one:

What is it about, "eat this, this is my body" and "drink this, this is my blood" that you don't under stand. (Cf. Matt 26:26-27)

In context it reads:

Matt 26:26-30
26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is My body." 27 Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you. 28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 29 But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom." 30 And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.
NKJV

Well, here since the sacrifice on the cross had not yet occurred, and since Jesus was sitting there in His whole body, it was clear that this was not the blood shed on the cross, and then in the next verse, Jesus says that it is the fruit of the vine, which is wine.

Why some folk insist on taking verses out of context, I don't know.

[Tj3]

Question your thoughts[/B]: How can we answer the call to salvation without trust in the Three in "ONE"...
Eph 4:4-5-6 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

Don't think for a minute you can raise as Christ raised without being Baptism in Christ, buried and dead to this world, and able to be adopted as a child of God. Division of the three would be against what is writtten.

The question is, what is the "One Baptism" which is essential? The baptism of the Holy Spirit which is given to all who believe, whether they are baptized in water or not? Or water?

[sndbay]

I did not say that tradition is out of the question.All I said is that tradition that is not in agreement with the Word should not be taken as God's will! Jesus said that he who is not against us is with us.
It takes two witnesses to testify the word so that the word becomes certain.Tradition should be backed up somehow by the Word, I think it is clear that every word that is against the Word somehow, is not God's!
Again I am not saying that we should forget everything else and just focus and study the Bible, but I am saying examine every word, every tradition if it is God's or not!

I agree, and we can see many traditions today that have been brought forth by man, that are indeed against what is written. Each holiday for example has paganism orgin.
The celebration of the feast of Passover.. Christ is our Passover, the paschal lamb..

Man's tradition has brought this celebration to us as their oral tradition of Easter.. (orgin as a paganism feast)

(1 Cr 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.)

Unleaved bread would be Christ, the bread of life without sin and corruption.


Jesus warned of the leaven in man's doctrine. That which can raise up being in corruption.

Matthew 16:11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?
Matthew 16:12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

The first church that began the division in what was the Word of God. Do the traditions of man cause division in religions, and faith today?

How many churches today baptize as written in the Word that is the flesh of Christ?The inspired Word of the Holy Spirit. The Word that is the Spiritual Truth of God?

[sndbay]

The question is, what is the "One Baptism" which is essential? The baptism of the Holy Spirit which is given to all who believe, whether they are baptized in water or not? or water?

Christ commanded that his disciples baptize.. Christ fulfilled what was required in following HIM. Baptism to follow, and be raised as He was raised...

Romans 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

Romans 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

Romans 6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.

1 Peter 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

It was water that Christ was baptized in.. It was the red sea that Mose and his people passed through... (Hebrew 10:22) speaks of pure water....

[Tj3]

Christ commanded that his disciples baptize.. Christ fulfilled what was required in following HIM. Baptism to follow, and be raised as He was raised...

Yep, we are to be baptized in water. There are many other things that we are commanded to do - are you saying that everything we are commanded to do is essential for salvation? If so then I trust that you know that would mean that we would all be destined for hell since no one has obeyed the law perfectly.

The fact is that we are told that it is essential to believe in Jesus to be saved. Nowhere are we told that water baptism is essential to be saved, and in fact we have a case in Acts 10 where we see people saved before water baptism.

[sndbay]

Peter is called a stone and this declaration is the Rock, because it is about Christ and Christ in the Rock. Paul confirms it when he sayud that the church cannot have a foundation other than Christ:

Tom, there are a few details that are obvious to what was said concerning the rock that Christ mentioned. If you look up Peter's name you can see that it means a rock or a stone. The meaning of a name is given at birth by hertiage from the family. Peter would be expected to live according to that name. Certainly more respected then Jazeb which means sorrow, and was named that because of his mother's sorrow. However a stone or rock is solid and metaph. of a soul hard and unyeilding...

The truth is, that Christ is the Rock of salvation, and the spiritual Rock we stand upon stedfast. Christ is the Rock of glory..


This is the obvious proof
It is written and spoken by Christ concerning Peter. (John 1:42 And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.)

Then anyone can read (1 Corinthians 3:21-22-23) to hear scripture say that no man is to glory in man.. it then names such men not to glory in ..

1 Cr 3:21-23 Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours; Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours; And ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's.


The pride of satan's work is known by God

This was written because For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.
3:19-20 KJV

`in Christ

[Tj3]

Tom, there are a few details that are obvious to what was said concerning the rock that Christ mentioned. If you look up Peter's name you can see that it means a rock or a stone.

Actually it means a piece of a rock or a stone - and a piece chipped off a rock is a stone.

The truth is, that Christ is the Rock of salvation, and the spiritual Rock we stand upon stedfast. Christ is the Rock of glory..

Absolutely right.

[sndbay]

Yep, we are to be baptized in water. There are many other things that we are commanded to do - are you saying that everything we are commanded to do is essential for salvation? If so then I trust that you know that would mean that we would all be destined for hell since no one has obeyed the law perfectly.

The fact is that we are told that it is essential to believe in Jesus to be saved. Nowhere are we told that water baptism is essential to be saved, and in fact we have a case in Acts 10 where we see people saved before water baptism.

Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Romans 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Gal 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.

Gal 5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

***************

New creature has strength in Christ Jesus :
2 Cor. 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

Christ dwells within and strength us to avail over satan.
Gal. 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.


The body of new creature, divine nature (refer:2 Pet. 1:4) born of the spirit will go to the right side of the boat... (my own metaph speaking)

1 John 2:5-6 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

2 Peter 1:4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

1:8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

~in Christ

[Tj3]

Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Romans 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Gal 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.

Gal 5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

I snipped the rest for brevity... none of those passages said that baptism in water is essential for salvation.

[JoeT777]

You guys are hilarious. For nearly 2,000 years ‘Peter’ meant ‘rock’. It meant ‘rock’ from when Christ spoke it till…well, until Scriptures ran into you two wondrous scholars. And now the two of you proclaim ‘Peter’ to be a stone, a pebble, a chip of sandstone, what marvels of scholastic crawfish’en can we expect next? And if Peter were a pebble, then wouldn’t that make it all the more miraculous that Christ established his Universal Kingdom on a small insignificant pebble? Guys, just in case you haven’t heard, this pebble business has been debunked years ago by real scholars who understand the Greek and Aramaic of the day.

Certain beliefs and doctrines were handed to us by the Apostles and their successors. This we call Tradition. That Tradition was memorialized in sacred writings, a compendium of God’s revelation to mankind in 72 books. Authenticated teachings of Christ were bequeathed to posterity by the Mystical Body of Christ, i.e. the Roman Catholic Church. This is a continuation of God’s Divine laws held in the Tradition of Abram and Mosses; wherein Christ lived and fulfilled its tenets and prophecies.

JoeT

[Tj3]

You guys are hilarious. For nearly 2,000 years 'Peter' meant 'rock'.

Maybe in your circles (though I am not sure how you make the 2000 year claim - since scripture itself says that the meaning is "stone")

John 1:42
42 And he brought him to Jesus. Now when Jesus looked at him, He said, "You are Simon the son of Jonah. You shall be called Cephas" (which is translated, A Stone).
NKJV

Certain beliefs and doctrines were handed to us by the Apostles and their successors. This we call Tradition. That Tradition was memorialized in sacred writings, a compendium of God's revelation to mankind in 72 books. Authenticated teachings of Christ were bequeathed to posterity by the Mystical Body of Christ, i.e. the Roman Catholic Church. This is a continuation of God's Divine laws held in the Tradition of Abram and Mosses; wherein Christ lived and fulfilled its tenets and prophecies.

The claim that your denominational traditions came from the Apostles is, in and of itself, a denominational traditional. Since the denomination came centuries later, it is a creation of men, and the traditions are creations of men.

As for the 6 books added by your denomination, many contradict scripture, and at least one denies divine inspiration.

[sndbay]

none of those passages said that baptism in water is essential for salvation.

No they don't but each says I follow in Christ, doing the Will of God. God sustains us, and guides us, we are to listen to hear HIS voice.

Remember what was said to Job?


Job 37:14 Hearken unto this, O Job: stand still, and consider the wondrous works of God.
Job 37:15-16 Dost thou know when God disposed them, and caused the light of his cloud to shine? Dost thou know the balancings of the clouds, the wondrous works of him which is perfect in knowledge?
Job 37:21 And now men see not the bright light which is in the clouds: but the wind passeth, and cleanseth them

Do we fully understand all that God commands of us? Did the people understand their salvation washed over them in the water of the red sea, and baptized them?
(Exd 14:13 And Moses said unto the people, Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the LORD, which he will shew to you to day: for the Egyptians whom ye have seen to day, ye shall see them again no more for ever.)

In doing the will of God we exalt His glory and praise. The water in baptism is like the well of salvation in newness of life. God is the well of our salvation in which we draw from. Baptism is what holds us together in good conscience with God and the HIS fire (Luke 12:50)

~in Christ

[Tj3]

No they don't but each says I follow in Christ, doing the Will of God. God sustains us, and guides us, we are to listen to hear HIS voice.

Agreed. Even though baptism is not essential for salvation, it is something that all believers should do as an act of obedience and a testimony of what Christ has done in their lives.

In doing the will of God we exalt His glory and praise. The water in baptism is like the well of salvation in newness of life. God is the well of our salvation in which we draw from. Baptism is what holds us together in good conscience with God and the HIS fire (Luke 12:50)

I disagree. It is the word of God and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit that unifies believers. Not water.

[JoeT777]

And Jesus came into the quarters of Cæsarea Philippi: and he asked his disciples, saying: Whom do men say that the Son of man is? But they said: Some John the Baptist, and other some Elias, and others Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. (Matt 16)

Setting the scene; Caesarea Phillippi is in the valley of Lebanon below Mount Hermon as mentioned in Josh 11:17 or Baal Hemon as mentioned in Judg 3:3. Of particular interest is a land feature of a massive rock face. One of the tributaries for the Jordan River flows through the area. The area was liberated by the Maccabean revolt in 167 B.C. In 4 B.C. one of Herod the Great s three sons, Philip, built the Roman Grecian of Caesarea Philippi to honor the Roman emperor. You can imagine Jesus with this huge rock wall as a backdrop, asking twice (not once, but twice), “Whom to they say that I am?” No other disciples could give the answer but Simon. Simon confessed Jesus as being both the Messiah and the “Son of the Living God.” God had revealed to Simon what no other man on earth knew; Christ was the Second Person of the One Devine God.

Simon is used in English, French, Scandinavian, German, Hungarian, Slovene, Biblical Pronounced: SIE-mən (English), see-MAWN (French), ZEE-mawn (German) [key] From the Greek form of the Hebrew name שִׁמְעוֹן (Shim'on) which meant "he has heard". This was the name of several biblical characters, including the man who carried the cross for Jesus. However, the most important person of this name in the New Testament was the apostle Simon, also known as Peter (a name given to him by Jesus). Because of him, this name has been common in the Christian world. In England it was popular during the Middle Ages, though it became rarer after the Protestant Reformation. Behind the Name: Meaning, Origin and History of the Name Simon

And Jesus answering said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

There is a significance to the number of times “blessed art thou” is used in the New Testament. It's used only three times, twice in Luke 1: 42 And she cried out with a loud voice and said: Blessed art thou among women ...And blessed art thou that hast believed, because those things shall be; and once here in Matthew 16:17. It’s only used once by Jesus. (this holds true in the NKJV also) It no little significance that like the blessing bestowed Mary, God seats Peter in a special Chair for our salvation; the first of 266 whose “successor’s gives judgment,” St. Peter, St. Linus, St. Anacletus, St. Clement I, St. Alexander I, St. Sixtus I, St. Telesphorus, St. Hyginus… Benedict XVI.

Are we to assume that Peter didn’t know of this? Are we to assume that this blessing made to Mary, the “handmaid” of God, would not in the same sense make Peter, the primary servant of Christ? And what significance are we to make of this blessing that came out of Christ’s own mouth? That this was just some utterance, a use of metaphors, a courteous remark? Would it not be safe to assume that who Christ blesses stays blessed? How does our eye pass so freely across the words “blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona” without stopping to wonder at the significance that's found nowhere else in the New Testament? Peter is the only one in history blessed by Christ himself? The Catholic Church is the Mystical Body of Christ, we share that blessing. Peter was our first Vicar. By making ourselves “servants” of the Church, we in turn make ourselves, subjects of the Church whose head is the vicar (earthly representative) of Christ; and as such sharing in that one and only blessing uttered by Christ.

Because this was revealed to Peter by God, Christ calsl Peter a rock and on this Rock Christ built His church; hell won’t prevail against it, not even TJ.

And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

The “keys” are the keys to the kingdom of heaven, similar to the “keys” mentioned in Isaiah 22. With the transfer of the keys, one to another, power and authority is also transferred; Christ gives Peter the supreme authority over the Church and to bind and loose, both in heaven and on earth.

“In regard to the Petros Kepha argument made by some, the play of words involved in naming Simon “Rock” is as clear in Aramaic as in English, if we use the literal translation “Rock” for the Aramaic Kepha rather than “Peter” which is derived from the Greek Petros. In Greek the noun for rock is feminine. Therefore it is unsuitable for a man’s name, and Peter is named Petros while the precise word for rock is petra, making the meaning a little less clear. But Christ’s words to Peter were spoken in Aramaic and first recorded in Armaic in Matthew’s Gospel; furthermore, we know that Peter was later often called Kepha or Cephas as well as Petros.” “Warren H. Carroll, A History of Christendom Vol 1, 1985, pg 349 footnote 135.


Insofar as I’m able to discern, based on the knowledge of those fluent in Greek and Latin, the differences between the KJV and the Douay-Rheims are not major. Only a few verses in the KJV give a different understanding. My reason for mentioning the Scriptural differences, as elsewhere in my responses, of cases referring to Christ as a Rock is related to his strength. Furthermore, when compared with a Rock it referrers to Christ’s founding of doctrinal precepts; as it where knowledge pouring forth baptismal waters from Christ’s strength refreshing the people of Israel, e.g. Exodus 17:5 And the Lord said to Moses: Go before the people, and take with thee of the ancients of Israel: and take in thy hand the rod wherewith thou didst strike the river, and go. 6 Behold I will stand there before thee, upon the rock Horeb, and thou shalt strike the rock, and water shall come out of it that the people may drink. This doctrinal foundation is shown in 1 Cor 3:11-12 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. NKJV

The Catholic Church has always understood the Scripture to give Primacy to Peter. This was illustrated in a letter written by Pope Clement I (third in succession to Peter and had personally known Peter) to the Corinthians (circa) 95 AD claiming authority over Corinth. St. Irenaeus tells the second hand account from St. Polycarp where John was heard to say “the faithful wo are everywhere must agree with this Church (Rome) because of its more important principality.” During the Councils and Synods surrounding the early heresies the Popes decision settled the matter. This is illustrated in 431 AD. Where the Bishops responded to Pope Celestine’s decision, “He [Peter] lives even to this time, and always in his successor’s gives judgment.”

We Catholics find that "This is the sole Church of Christ which in the Creed we profess to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic, which our Savior, after his resurrection, entrusted to Peter's pastoral care (Jn. 21:17), commissioning him and the other apostles to extend and rule it (cf. Matt. 28:18, etc.), and which he raised up for all ages as "the pillar and mainstay of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15). This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him. Nevertheless, many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside its visible confines. Since these are gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, they are forces impelling towards Catholic unity." (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Genitum, 8)

Like Sndbay I also think there is a significance in names. Seeing that Simon has the Hebrew meaning, “he has heard” with the surname meaning “dove”, which in most cultures nuances of peace, Matthew 16:17 takes a special significance. Christ calls the son of peace who has heard the son of the living God a rock. Peter is made the living foundation (or cornerstone if you prefer that metaphor) of the Church. Even the location can’t be discounted; Caesarea Philippi is a region that has a large rock outcrop that forms a cliff. Christ’s intent is clear and his words have faithfully survived in His Bride for 2,000 years.

But, where do you think “Protestantism” came from? Where did each of the 30,000 different Christian Denominations get their Scriptures, each insisting it has the one and only one authoritative interpretation? How do they recon Christ’s words, “That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. ” (Cf. John 17). How then do you suppose those 30,000 interpret this, “I am the bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the desert: and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven: that if any man eat of it, he may not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven.” (Cf. John 6). How then would you suggest that those 30,000 different Churches are One Church as Christ prayed “that they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me.” (John 17:20)

It’s not just a little significant that the didactic narrative of Matthew 16:5 is a prelude; “And when his disciples were come over the water, they had forgotten to take bread. Who said to them: Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. (Matt 16:5). Christ reminds them of the two substances that give life, the waters of baptism and the bread of life (Cf. John 6:48); likewise crossing over these waters leads to leavened faith.


JoeT

[Tj3]

It is of little value to go through everything in this detail, but I will add a few comments

In England it was popular during the Middle Ages, though it became rarer after the Protestant Reformation.

If you think that Peter is an uncommon or less common name today, where are you living? Your source of this information is inaccurate at best.

It no little significance that like the blessing bestowed Mary, God seats Peter in a special Chair for our salvation;

Really? Where is this "special chair" mentioned in scripture?

Peter was our first Vicar.

Where is this in scripture?

By making ourselves “servants” of the Church, we in turn make ourselves, subjects of the Church whose head is the vicar (earthly representative) of Christ; and as such sharing in that one and only blessing uttered by Christ.

Vicar means substitute. Peter, according to this tradition (note: not scripture, but tradition) is a substitute for Christ.

Because this was revealed to Peter by God, Christ calsl Peter a rock and on this Rock Christ built His church; hell won't prevail against it, not even TJ.

Since scripture itself tells us that Peter was a stone, and Christ was the rock, and Paul says that Christ is the only true foundation of the church, this claim is false. Jesus did not found a denomination.

The “keys” are the keys to the kingdom of heaven, similar to the “keys” mentioned in Isaiah 22. With the transfer of the keys, one to another, power and authority is also transferred; Christ gives Peter the supreme authority over the Church and to bind and loose, both in heaven and on earth.

Jesus still has the keys in the book of Revelation. Those are not the keys given to Peter, nor did He give keys specifically to Peter.

The Catholic Church has always understood the Scripture to give Primacy to Peter.

Exactly - a Roman Catholic denominational teaching, not scriptural.

But, where do you think “Protestantism” came from? Where did each of the 30,000 different Christian Denominations get their Scriptures, each insisting it has the one and only one authoritative interpretation?

I am not a protestant, but I can say from my knowledge and research into various protestant denominations that, although some are like the Roman catholic church in that they claim they alone have the only right interpretation, that is certainly not the case with most, nor is it true of most other non-Catholic churches whether they are protestant or not.

[Tj3]

I find it sad that there are those who engage in denominationalism, who say that their denomination is the only right one. Paul spoke against that quite directly, because even back in the first century, there were those who claimed that the were under one or another of the Apostles (and yes, Peter was one mentioned specifically by Paul)

1 Cor 1:11-14
11 For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe's household, that there are contentions among you. 12 Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am of Paul," or "I am of Apollos," or "I am of Cephas," or "I am of Christ." 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
NKJV

There is nothing wrong with denominations, but when the denomination (any denomination) cease to be just a tool for us to use to evangelize and to encourage fellowship amongst believers, and changes to become the master, then we have a problem.

[JoeT777]

I find it sad that there are those who engage in denominationalism, who say that their denomination is the only right one. Paul spoke against that quite directly, because even back in the first century, there were those who claimed that the were under one or another of the Apostles (and yes, Peter was one mentioned specifically by Paul)

1 Cor 1:11-14
11 For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe's household, that there are contentions among you. 12 Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am of Paul," or "I am of Apollos," or "I am of Cephas," or "I am of Christ." 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
NKJV

There is nothing wrong with denominations, but when the denomination (any denomination) cease to be just a tool for us to use to evangelize and to encourage fellowship amongst believers, and changes to become the master, then we have a problem.

That's correct, there is but one Church, the church you know as Roman Catholic Church, i.e. the Church of Jesus Christ. Christ didn't make subdivisions (denominations) of His Church.

JoeT