User Tag List

Page 11 of 54 FirstFirst ... 89101112131421 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 807

Thread: What is God's first creation?

  1. #151
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Carmarthenshire
    Posts
    8,117
    Thanks
    156
    Thanked 774 Times in 678 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    179632
    Quote Originally Posted by SonOfCaleb View Post
    This is incorrect. The introduction of chapters and verses into the Bible was way earlier than the "1700s". In fact chapters existed as early as 1200C.E. Regardless this point is completely irrelavent. Its fine not to have an answer but as i said already i'm not going to waste my time on non-sequiters.
    Yeah, it was earlier than the 1700's but I was typing from memory. Fact is they were added and they do have an adverse effect, if only making people lazy. I seldom provide chapter and verse because I know that those in whom the word richly dwells with recognise the scripture and unto us* alone is understanding given.

    us* the redeemed, regenerate and repentant sinners.
    I know Him, correctly, as Messiah whom you call Christ. Yah Shua whom you call Jesus. Messianists who you call Christians.

    "Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm".

    I refuse, point blank, to speak peace to the unregenerate, hypocrites, religious dogma lovers and those that oppose the following statement:
    A regenerate man trusts in the evangelism of salvation conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed justness of Messiah alone.
    If you are fully persuaded, by experience, of this delightful, beautiful and life giving doctrine then I love you as a brother.

    Anyone who thinks that salvation is conditioned on anything a man thinks, does or says is atheist. I cannot and will not speak peace to him or her.

    I don't make statements online that I wouldn't repeat in front of my Maker, my grandmother or a judge.

  2. #152
    Old Timer SonOfCaleb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    465
    Thanks
    54
    Thanked 141 Times in 116 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    7490
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    So what?

    What does that have to do with the subject at hand?
    One of the usual 3D's. Deny. Deflect & Defend.
    John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. 2 This one was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence".

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SonOfCaleb For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (June 25th, 2018),lifeisgood (June 26th, 2018)

  4. #153
    Over 750 post club Idolater's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    973
    Thanks
    113
    Thanked 163 Times in 139 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    19592
    Quote Originally Posted by Truster View Post
    Messiah is talking to Peter about Peter. Verses 17 and 19 make the meaning of 18 clear.
    That's absolutely correct. It requires anti-Catholic bias to force yourself to read it otherwise. Good job, Truster.
    "Those who believe in Christ" are all the Christians, Catholic or not.

    @Nee_Nihilo

  5. #154
    Over 750 post club Idolater's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    973
    Thanks
    113
    Thanked 163 Times in 139 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    19592
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Actually, if you read the Greek of Matthew 16:18, Jesus makes a distinction.

    Peter's name in Greek (Petros) is the diminutive form of the greek word for rock. In other words, "Peter" means "little rock."

    Jesus says, "You are 'PETROS' [little rock], and upon this 'PETRA' [rock] I will build my church."

    Jesus isn't talking about Peter. He's talking about THE ROCK, Himself.
    There's nothing wrong with Strong's Concordance or in knowing the Greek. But take a step back please, and consider that neither Christ nor His disciples were speaking Greek, which is why we have in John's Gospel the various interpretations, from the spoken language which was Aramaic, into the Greek, in which he was writing, and that of which his audience spoke and understood.

    So you need to ask Keypurr what exactly the Lord said to Peter, in the actual language in which He spoke, which was Aramaic, and in which, there is no distinction in gender for the word 'rock,' that would change if the word were applied to a male such as Peter, so, during the actual conversation between Christ and Peter, all the way back when it happened, the word was the same, Keppa or Kepha or Cephas or whatever version/transliteration you prefer (ask Keypurr what his Aramaic New Testament says), but the word was the same: "You (Peter) are 'Cephas,' and upon this 'cephas' I will build My Church."

    Matthew 16:18 KJV means both, upon Peter's confession, which was a compact confession of Triune Christianity ('the Son of the Living God' = Trinity), and upon the man Peter himself, who, because of the Apostle John's Gospel account, we know, was a very strong man, John 21:11 KJV, 153 'great fishes.'
    @keypurr @Bright Raven @Right Divider @SonOfCaleb
    "Those who believe in Christ" are all the Christians, Catholic or not.

    @Nee_Nihilo

  6. #155
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,383
    Thanks
    23,959
    Thanked 6,785 Times in 4,263 Posts

    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147602
    Quote Originally Posted by Idolater View Post
    There's nothing wrong with Strong's Concordance or in knowing the Greek. But take a step back please, and consider that neither Christ nor His disciples were speaking Greek, which is why we have in John's Gospel the various interpretations, from the spoken language which was Aramaic, into the Greek, in which he was writing, and that of which his audience spoke and understood.
    Ok, and...?

    So you need to ask Keypurr what exactly the Lord said to Peter, in the actual language in which He spoke, which was Aramaic, and in which, there is no distinction in gender for the word 'rock,' that would change if the word were applied to a male such as Peter,
    Except that there is a difference between the words used for Peter and rock in Aramaic. See below.

    so, during the actual conversation between Christ and Peter, all the way back when it happened, the word was the same, Keppa or Kepha or Cephas or whatever version/transliteration you prefer (ask Keypurr what his Aramaic New Testament says), but the word was the same: "You (Peter) are 'Cephas,' and upon this 'cephas' I will build My Church."
    So, essentially, you're saying that the author of Matthew (which was originally written in Greek) got it wrong when he wrote (inspired by God, no less) "Petros" (piece of rock) and "petra" (mass of rock)?

    The author of Matthew (ie, Matthew the Apostle) made the distinction in Greek for a reason. Extrapolating backwards from Greek to what was said in Aramaic means you lose the meaning of certain words and phrases in translation.

    Matthew 16:18 KJV means both, upon Peter's confession, which was a compact confession of Triune Christianity ('the Son of the Living God' = Trinity), and upon the man Peter himself, who, because of the Apostle John's Gospel account, we know, was a very strong man, John 21:11 KJV, 153 'great fishes.'
    Allow me to refer you to SOC's post, which explains why we know that what Matthew wrote (in Greek) is referring not to Petros as the petra, but Jesus as the petra:

    Quote Originally Posted by SonOfCaleb View Post
    Verse 18 doesnt support your position. In fact the Greek translation of the words Petra and Petros prove empircally that your understanding is incorrect.
    The word "Rock" translates from the Greek word peʹtra (feminine gender), which designates a mass of rock and therefore differs from peʹtros (masculine gender and employed as a proper name, Peter), meaning "piece of rock." This distinction makes it clear that, when saying to Peter, "You are Peter, and on this rock-mass I will build my congregation," Jesus was not using synonymous terms. Even in the Aramaic version the distinction is apparent from a difference in the gender of the particle preceding the word kiʼphaʼ, used for both "Peter" and "rock." The masculine verbal pronoun (hu) precedes "Peter," but "rock" is preceded by the feminine demonstrative adjective (hadeʼ).

    Notice Peter himself also identifies Jesus as the "Rock" that the Christian Congregation was to be built upon at 1 Peter 2:4-8:-

    Interestingly that the apostles did not understand Jesus’ statement to signify that Peter was the rock-mass is evident from the fact that they later disputed about who seemed to be the greatest among them. (Mr 9:33-35; Lu 22:24-26) There would have been no basis for such disputing had Peter been given the primacy as the rock-mass on which the congregation was to be built.

    Of additional interest is Augustine, one of the so called early "Church Fathers" who at one time also believed that Peter was the "Rock" but later changed his view. Lange’s Commentary on Matthew 16:18 quotes Augustine as saying: “The rock is not so named from Peter, but Peter from the rock (non enim a Petro petra, sed Petrus a petra), even as Christ is not so called after the Christian, but the Christian after Christ. For the reason why the Lord says, ‘On this rock I will build my church,’ is that Peter had said: ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ On this rock, which thou hast confessed, says he, I will build my church. For Christ was the rock (petra enim erat Christus), upon which also Peter himself was built; for other foundation can no man lay, than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”

    Thus the evidence is clear the religion that bore Christs name, Christianity, has Jesus as its Rock or cornerstone.
    (Emphasis mine)

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    Tambora (June 27th, 2018)

  8. #156
    Over 750 post club Idolater's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    973
    Thanks
    113
    Thanked 163 Times in 139 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    19592
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    (Emphasis mine)
    Why does Christ refer to Peter with a masculine gender word, and then to Himself with a feminine gender word?
    "Those who believe in Christ" are all the Christians, Catholic or not.

    @Nee_Nihilo

  9. #157
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    15,250
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,741 Times in 2,788 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1247753
    The Rock (capital R) there, is both Peter's acknowledgement, or confession - both in word and in deed - that Jesus is Israel's Prophesied Christ, AND the fact that He is.

    John 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 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.

    Who had been they of His Own people who did receive Him?

    Israelites like the following...

    1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

    1:47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!

    1:49 Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.

    1:51 And he saith unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.

    One key aspect of that being, the following...

    Luke 6:46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say? 6:47 Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like: 6:48 He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock. 6:49 But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.

    There were those Israelites who denied Him as to Who He was, both in their words, and in their deeds...

    Matthew 16:1 The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired him that he would shew them a sign from heaven. 16:2 He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red. 16:3 And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowring. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times? 16:4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed. 16:5 And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread. 16:6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

    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.

    And there were those Israelites who acknowledged or confessed Him as to Who He was, both in their words and in their deeds..

    We read of them also, in this same chapter...

    16:13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? 16:14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. 16:15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

    The Rock (capital R) there, is both Peter's acknowledgement, or confession - both in word and in deed - that Jesus is Israel's Prophesied Christ, AND the fact that He is.

    Acts 17: 11, 12.

  10. #158
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,383
    Thanks
    23,959
    Thanked 6,785 Times in 4,263 Posts

    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147602
    Quote Originally Posted by Idolater View Post
    Why does Christ refer to Peter with a masculine gender word, and then to Himself with a feminine gender word?
    Because "rock" (as in, a mass of rock) in Greek is a feminine word, "petra." He's using the word as a metaphor for Himself, in contrast to His calling Peter (again, as a metaphor) a "piece of rock," Petros.

    Something else to consider: If you were a builder, would you build a church building on a small slab of rock laid down on sand? or would you build it on a foundation of solid rock that extends deep into the earth and far out in all directions laterally?

    Jesus is called "the Chief Cornerstone (which the builders rejected)." Wikipedia defines "cornerstone" as


    "the first stone set in the construction of a masonry foundation, important since all other stones will be set in reference to this stone, thus determining the position of the entire structure."



    And more importantly, He is known as "the Rock of Offense." The word used elsewhere in the New Testament which refers to Him as such is petra.

    So, if Christ is referred to as "the Chief Cornerstone," would it not make sense that Jesus would refer to Himself (and not Peter) as the rock which the church will be built on?

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    Right Divider (June 27th, 2018),Tambora (June 27th, 2018)

  12. #159
    Over 750 post club Idolater's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    973
    Thanks
    113
    Thanked 163 Times in 139 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    19592
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Because "rock" (as in, a mass of rock) in Greek is a feminine word, "petra." He's using the word as a metaphor for Himself, in contrast to His calling Peter (again, as a metaphor) a "piece of rock," Petros.

    Something else to consider: If you were a builder, would you build a church building on a small slab of rock laid down on sand? or would you build it on a foundation of solid rock that extends deep into the earth and far out in all directions laterally?

    Jesus is called "the Chief Cornerstone (which the builders rejected)." Wikipedia defines "cornerstone" as


    "the first stone set in the construction of a masonry foundation, important since all other stones will be set in reference to this stone, thus determining the position of the entire structure."



    And more importantly, He is known as "the Rock of Offense." The word used elsewhere in the New Testament which refers to Him as such is petra.

    So, if Christ is referred to as "the Chief Cornerstone," would it not make sense that Jesus would refer to Himself (and not Peter) as the rock which the church will be built on?
    But buildings are not built upon the cornerstone, the cornerstone is part of the building, as the cornerstone is the stone in the foundation that sets the angle for the building's eventual walls. Christ is the Cornerstone of the Church, for sure, but the Lord Himself said that He'd build His Church (including her foundation, of which the Cornerstone is critically integral) 'upon' Peter, the 'Rock.' Matthew 16:18 KJV
    "Those who believe in Christ" are all the Christians, Catholic or not.

    @Nee_Nihilo

  13. #160
    Old Timer SonOfCaleb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    465
    Thanks
    54
    Thanked 141 Times in 116 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    7490
    Quote Originally Posted by Idolater View Post
    Why does Christ refer to Peter with a masculine gender word, and then to Himself with a feminine gender word?
    Because in Greek they're two different nouns/words with totally different meanings, the gender determining the meaning.

    The word "Rock" translates from the Greek word peʹtra (feminine gender), which designates a mass of rock and therefore differs from peʹtros (masculine gender and employed as a proper name, Peter)
    John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. 2 This one was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence".

  14. #161
    Over 750 post club Idolater's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    973
    Thanks
    113
    Thanked 163 Times in 139 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    19592
    Quote Originally Posted by SonOfCaleb View Post
    Because in Greek they're two different nouns/words with totally different meanings, the gender determining the meaning.
    But nonetheless, you say that 'petra' refers to Christ Himself, and He is a male, like Peter. Why does the word become 'petros' for Peter, but remains 'petra' for Christ?
    "Those who believe in Christ" are all the Christians, Catholic or not.

    @Nee_Nihilo

  15. #162
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,383
    Thanks
    23,959
    Thanked 6,785 Times in 4,263 Posts

    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147602
    Quote Originally Posted by Idolater View Post
    But buildings are not built upon the cornerstone, the cornerstone is part of the building, as the cornerstone is the stone in the foundation that sets the angle for the building's eventual walls. Christ is the Cornerstone of the Church, for sure, but the Lord Himself said that He'd build His Church (including her foundation, of which the Cornerstone is critically integral) 'upon' Peter, the 'Rock.' Matthew 16:18 KJV
    Except scripture doesn't say "I will build the church on Peter," it says "I will build the church on this rock.

    Petros means "a piece of rock" in Greek.
    Petra means "a mass of rock" in Greek.

    They are two similar words that both mean "rock," but they specify what kind of rock.

    Jesus (petra) is the foundation. Peter (petros) is a rock on that rock.

    Again, Jesus is referred to multiple times throughout the NT as "rock," "stone," "cornerstone," etc.

    Why would God want to build the church on a fallible man, when He could build it on the Infallible Man, Christ Jesus?

  16. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    lifeisgood (June 26th, 2018),Right Divider (June 27th, 2018),SonOfCaleb (June 25th, 2018),Tambora (June 27th, 2018)

  17. #163
    Over 750 post club Idolater's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    973
    Thanks
    113
    Thanked 163 Times in 139 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    19592
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Except scripture doesn't say "I will build the church on Peter," it says "I will build the church on this rock.

    Petros means "a piece of rock" in Greek.
    Petra means "a mass of rock" in Greek.

    They are two similar words that both mean "rock," but they specify what kind of rock.

    Jesus (petra) is the foundation. Peter (petros) is a rock on that rock.

    Again, Jesus is referred to multiple times throughout the NT as "rock," "stone," "cornerstone," etc.

    Why would God want to build the church on a fallible man, when He could build it on the Infallible Man, Christ Jesus?
    In Matthew 16:18 KJV, 'rock' means Peter (and, as I've already granted, Peter's Trinitarian confession of faith in Mt16:16KJV). It's right in the same verse. There's no reason to doubt what is meant here, save for anti-Catholic bias, which you display in spades, along with almost every other non-Catholic. Except me.
    "Those who believe in Christ" are all the Christians, Catholic or not.

    @Nee_Nihilo

  18. #164
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,383
    Thanks
    23,959
    Thanked 6,785 Times in 4,263 Posts

    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147602
    Quote Originally Posted by Idolater View Post
    But nonetheless, you say that 'petra' refers to Christ Himself, and He is a male, like Peter. Why does the word become 'petros' for Peter, but remains 'petra' for Christ?
    Because one word is a name, the other is used as a metaphor.

    Or do you assert that all words in a metaphor must reflect the gender of the person they are being attributed to? Because as far as I'm aware, there is no such standard.

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    Tambora (June 27th, 2018)

  20. #165
    Old Timer SonOfCaleb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    465
    Thanks
    54
    Thanked 141 Times in 116 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    7490
    Quote Originally Posted by Idolater View Post
    But nonetheless, you say that 'petra' refers to Christ Himself, and He is a male, like Peter. Why does the word become 'petros' for Peter, but remains 'petra' for Christ?
    The fact Christ is Male is irrelavent. In the Greek due to how the language is structured linguistically the gender as denoted by the speaker matters. Hence the differences as i've already explained.

    This is not unsual. Its the same for many "Romance" languages.
    John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. 2 This one was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence".

  21. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SonOfCaleb For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (June 25th, 2018),lifeisgood (June 26th, 2018)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us