Murder being wrong is NOT a Christian creation… nor theft being wrong… its part of the social contract that humans need to survive… all religions, including those pre Christian, or Jewish, believed in these things as well.

Actually it is. Just look at how many religions dismiss murder.

Baal allowed the murder of babies (abortion anyone) by roasting them as an offering. The longer they screamed, the more god was pleased.

Hinduism allows the murder of untouchables.

Islam allows the murder of infidels.

Which certainly hasn’t been solved by the issuing of book of canon; witness the hundreds of competing Christian denominations today. But you didn’t ask about the TEACHINGS of the Christ; you asked about his STORY.

q2600 on March 10, 2009 at 9:23 PM

The Bible is the only reliable source for either the teachings or story of Jesus. The canon informs the faithful which accounts are valid.

Jesus didn’t oversee the founding of His church or edit His own biography. It would have reduced fractionalism but apparently was beyond his earthly mission. The various denominations provide institutional support for individuals to find their way to Christ.

All the following is my paraphrasing and condensing of a section of the book “Upon this Rock” by Stephen K. Ray. It’s a great book and I would recommend it to anyone. The footnotes are very long and as interesting as the book is. It is filled with scripture, early Christian writers, and both Catholic and Protestant scholars.

First I’ll talk about “binding and loosing.”

“Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

In Jewish tradition this meant the “legislative and judicial powers of the Rabbinic office.” All of the middle east used these terms. This power was also given to all the Apostles in John’s Gospel.

This was “profound to First Century Jews.” Early converts would not be “confused or uncertain about what Jesus meant.” The first century Jewish historian, Josephus used these word also.

This meant that Peter and the Apostles had authority. To judge and to make laws, and also to forgive and retain. The original Greek words in this New Testament passage and the Hebrew words they stood for in part meant “to forbid and to allow” in rabbinical religious law.

While the binding and loosing power was given to all the Apostles (the first priests and Bishops), the “keys” were only given to Peter.

“I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven.”

This had huge significance. The “keys” were the “hallmark of royal authority.”

They belonged to Jesus and they were His to give and entrust to His steward. This would also be unmistakable to the Jews of Jesus’s time. The Davidic kings were “possessors of the keys of David” and had the power to “open and shut.”

Luke 1:30-33
Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus. He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High, and the LORD GOD WILL GIVE HIM THE THRONE OF DAVID HIS FATHER AND HE WILL RULE OVER THE HOUSE OF JACOB FOREVER, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”

Revelation 3:6-7
“Whoever has ears ought to hear what the Spirit says to the churches.”‘
“To the angel of the church in Philadelphia, write this: ” ‘The holy one, the true, who HOLDS THE KEY OF DAVID, WHO OPENS AND NO ONE SHALL CLOSE, WHO CLOSES AND NO ONE SHALL OPEN, says this: . . . “

Jesus was the Davidic king forever and He was the “holy one.” He held the “key of David” and would reign “forever.”

The Davidic Jewish kings of Israel followed the customs of other Middle Eastern kingdoms, such as Egypt. They had stewards who had “dominion over the house” like the Egyptian royalty and other Eastern rulers had Viziers and Majordomos. The Steward/Vizier/Majordomo was not simply a person, but an office that had succession. The king would entrust this office to someone he trusted and that person had royal authority over the land.

Isaiah 22:19-22
“I will thrust you from your office and pull you down from your station. On that day I will summon my servant Eliakim, son of Hilkiah; I will clothe him with your robe, and gird him with your sash, and give over to him your authority. He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. I WILL PLACE THE KEY OF THE HOUSE OF DAVID ON HIS SHOULDER, WHEN HE OPENS, NO ONE WILL SHUT, WHEN HE SHUTS, NO ONE SHALL OPEN.”

Here we see the Jewish king’s steward, Eliakim. The king places the “key of the house of David on his shoulder.” The steward is entrusted with the king’s power to “open” and “shut,” like in Revelations Chapter 3 above, where Jesus, as Davidic king, has the “key” and the power to “open” and “close.” Jesus also conferred his royal power to His steward, Peter.

Here is another passage which talks about the Egyptian steward (called a Vizier), Joseph (son of Hebrew Patriarch, Jacob).

Genesis 41:38-45
“Could we find another like him,” Pharaoh asked his officials, “a man so endowed with the spirit of God?” So Pharaoh said to Joseph: “SINCE GOD HAS MADE ALL THIS KNOWN TO YOU, no one can be as wise and discerning as you are. You shall be in charge of my palace, and all my people shall dart at your command. Only in respect to the throne shall I outrank you. Herewith,” Pharaoh told Joseph, “I place you in charge of the whole land of Egypt.” With that, Pharaoh took off his signet ring and put it on Joseph’s finger. He had him dressed in robes of fine linen and put a gold chain about his neck. He then had him ride in the chariot of his VIZIER, and they shouted “Abrek!” before him. Thus was Joseph INSTALLED OVER THE WHOLE LAND OF EGYPT.
“I, Pharaoh, proclaim,” he told Joseph, “that without your approval no one shall move hand or foot in all the land of Egypt.”
Pharaoh also BESTOWED THE NAME OF Zaphnath-paneah on Joseph, and he gave him in marriage Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera, priest of Heliopolis.”

Note the three things I capitalized. Joseph, as Vizier, was chosen because God had made things known to him. Just like Jesus said to Peter. His heavenly father revealed the truth to Peter and that is why Peter was chosen.

The Pharoah changed Joseph’s name upon giving him the office and the power. Just like Peter’s name was changed by Jesus (the king) when Jesus gave Peter (the steward) the “keys.”

It seems that Protestant and Catholic Bible scholars alike believe that Joseph was also given “the gift of infallible interpretation as the ‘preserver’ of Egypt.” (I don’t understand where this comes from. Maybe from “no one can be as wise and discerning as you are.”) Anyway there seems to be agreement on this point concerning Joseph. Catholics also believe that Peter had the “gift of infallible interpretation.”

And Joseph had power over the “whole land of Egypt.” In Isaiah above, the steward, Eliakim, “shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah.” Peter was also given authoritative power and was to be a “father” to the Christians.

Page 266 says, “Once the work of redemption had been completed and all authority had been given to Jesus, he passed the keys of authority over to Peter to administer the kingdom as a visible steward in his ‘absence.’”

This key of royal authority is not the only key conferred upon Peter. Jesus said, “I will give you the KEYS to the kingdom of heaven.”

What are these other keys? The keys to the Netherworld/Hell/Hades.
“Abyss” is also translated as “bottomless pit” and “Netherword” is also translated as Hades or Hell in some Bible versions (Catholic and Protestant.)

Revelation 1:17-18
When I caught sight of him, I fell down at his feet as though dead. He touched me with his right hand and said, “Do not be afraid. I am the first and the last,
the one who lives. Once I was dead, but now I am alive forever and ever. I hold the KEYS TO DEATH AND THE NETHERWORLD.”

Revelation 9:1
“Then the fifth angel blew his trumpet, and I saw a star that had fallen from the sky to the earth. It was given the KEY FOR THE PASSAGE TO THE ABYSS.”

Revelation 20:1-2

“Then I saw an angel come down from heaven, holding in his hand the KEY TO THE ABYSS and a heavy chain. He seized the dragon, the ancient serpent, which is the Devil or Satan, and tied it up for a thousand years. . .”

These passages in Revelation describe Jesus having the keys to death and the Netherworld. Jesus gave the Church the power to save souls and overcome sin (evil and Satan) and death by preaching Christ’s message. Jesus gave Peter authority over the Church, by giving him the keys.

These keys (over sin and death and royal Davidic authority forever) were given by Jesus to Peter alone. The office of Steward was an office with succession and Jesus reigns forever. So we believe that this office given to Peter also had succession.

(end of paraphrase of Ray’s book)

Good night and God bless you all.

right4life on March 10, 2009 at 9:19 AM

Just to be clear, Catholics also believe that Jesus is the rock. He is the stone that the builders rejected. But He gave His authority to Peter to be His earthly steward (like the Old Testament Davidic Kings who had chief stewards who held the keys to the kingdom and had the King’s authority while the King was away traveling. He was still the King and the head, but he gave his authority to the steward. Jesus is still our Davidic King forever and the head of the Church, but He gave His earthly authority to His steward.

Jesus made Simon Peter the rock on which He built His Church. There are many other New Testament scriptures that show Jesus set up Peter as the head of the Church. The one I love the most is at the end of John’s Gospel when He tells only Peter to “tend my sheep.”

But the most important quote is the one you are discussing. Look at all the “yous” in it.

And He is talking only to Peter. No one else. It was the whole point of changing Simon’s name to Rock/Kepha/Petros/Peter. (Jesus would have used the Aramaic Kepha when speaking to Peter since it was their daily common language amongst each other and we even see this in the original Greek uses Aramaic when it says “Simon, son of Jonah/John’ – ‘Simon, bar-Jona.’)

The original Greek words used here for “this rock” are “tautee petra.” Tautee really translates as “this same rock” or “this very rock.”
And Jesus was definitely setting up a physical Church and it was His.

Matthew 16:16-19:

Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

Jesus said to HIM in reply, “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.”

There are two whole sentences between Peter’s declaration of faith and Jesus saying “upon THIS ROCK.

q2600 on March 10, 2009 at 9:20 PM

I hope you don’t think it presumptuous of me, but I take hope in that one word you wrote – “still.”

If you don’t mind I will pray for you. I know that some do not want to believe. But it breaks my heart that there are many who do want to, but can’t for some reason. I pray they overcome those reasons. I don’t know where your sentiments lie.

But I believe with all my heart and I want everyone to believe.

Jesus is the truth. He really is. “I am the way and the truth and the life.”

Again, I hope you don’t take offense to this post. See my last post at 1:46 AM also.

q2600, The Lord bless you and keep you and make His face to shine upon you and give you peace.

(PS This prayer from Numbers is the oldest copy of written scripture found so far by archeology. It is on a stone that is about 600 years before Christ.)

I couldn’t agree with you more.

“We were made for you, O Lord, and our hearts are restless until they rest in Thee.” St. Augustine – Confessions page 1.

God has built Himself into our DNA and written His name into the hearts of men. Some struggle, but in the end “anyone who seeks will find and anyone who knocks, it will be opened onto you.” Prayer is key. Asking for the grace to believe if it is true. But not wanting to believe a falsehood if it is untrue.

“I believe, Lord, help my unbelief.” (Mark 9:24)

God bless you.

BlueCollarAstronaut on March 10, 2009 at 1:04 PM

I think that is the point that I guess I didn’t explain well enough. For Catholics the Word of God (written) is perfectly in line with the Word of God (oral through Sacred Tradition.)

Sacred Tradition, Catholic and Orthodox Christian beliefs, do not contradict our interpretation of the written Word of God. But they contradict your interpretation of the written Word of God.

To us, the written Word clearly points to our Tradition and beliefs. Perfectly in harmony. Some of them jump right off the page and it’s hard for us to understand how someone who isn’t Catholic or Orthodox doesn’t see it. (“For my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink”. . . . “this saying is hard; who can accept it?” . . . As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.” (John 6)

To us, Protestant tradition beliefs contradict the Word of God and to you Catholic beliefs contradict it.

So there we are. My whole point. We interpret the Word of God differently. But we both put it up as an authority that ones’ beliefs cannot contradict.

So you interpret according to Protestant tradition and I interpret according to Sacred Tradition. And we come up with different beliefs. And I do not believe that is how God set it up.

The Orthodox have been separated from the Catholics for 1,000 years on matters of authority in the Church, so we are in schism from each other,(but working towards full unity.) But they hold the same faith beliefs we do. How can that be after so much time? Because they also believe in Sacred Tradition and we believe the Holy Spirit guards the truths of Jesus Christ through it.
God bless you always.

There are some New Testament passages that claim non-believers are “of the Devil.”

Pelayo on March 10, 2009 at 9:33 PM

I missed the reference. Even if you found such passages–I don’t recall any off-hand, are you sure you aren’t thinking of the Q’ran?–it wouldn’t refer to disbelievers in the Devil as “of the Devil.”

Q2600. I found out a long time ago that there is no logic in religion – any religion.
Pelayo on March 10, 2009 at 9:33 PM

Oh? Then you have not looked far into religion, my friend. Is there anything illogical in the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism? Pythagoras based his studies in geometry and music on the same Graeco-Egyptian mystery traditions that inform modern Gnositicism; is the Pythagorean Theorem illogical?
You have been approached about religion by too many superstitous people, and you have confused one with the other.

The same mind set that claimed you were a devil worshipper probably claim atheism is a religion.
Pelayo on March 10, 2009 at 9:33 PM

For some, it certainly functions as one! Richard Dawkins comes to mind–every bit as proselytizing and superstitious (ever heard of “memes?”) as the worst that Protestantism has to offer.

There are some New Testament passages that claim non-believers are “of the Devil.”
Pelayo on March 10, 2009 at 9:33 PM

You will have to give me a reference. I can assure you, however, that it is a matter of translation. First-century Jews did not believe in a personification of evil.

The same mind set that claimed you were a devil worshipper probably claim atheism is a religion.

There are some New Testament passages that claim non-believers are “of the Devil.”

In fact, I actually can’t count the number of times that I’ve been called a Devil-worshipper. Often when it comes out in a discussion of religion that I don’t believe in the Devil.

Explain THAT logic to me… :)

My understanding is that there were rival fractions of Christians. As early as James, Peter, and Paul there was contention over how to implement the church that would teach the lessons of Jesus.

dedalus on March 10, 2009 at 9:15 PM

Which certainly hasn’t been solved by the issuing of book of canon; witness the hundreds of competing Christian denominations today. But you didn’t ask about the TEACHINGS of the Christ; you asked about his STORY.

Have you ever had a true believing Christain fundamentalist point his finger at your nose and tell you that God would not let errors be made in the translations? I was once told that there were absolutely no errors in the King James Version. I was also told that my opinion was blasphemous and I would be punished in Hell for that opinion. I soon left that church and later left religion altogether.

Pelayo on March 10, 2009 at 9:10 PM

I have, and I did exactly the same thing. I was an atheist from age 18-22. I am still not a Christian. After much study (of several religious traditions) and personal searching, I have accepted myself as a Gnostic (not to be confused with the pot-smoking Hippies who think calling themselves “Gnostic” makes them sound cool).

How did people know the story of the Christ in the 350 years between His death and the creation of the Bible?

q2600 on March 10, 2009 at 9:03 PM

My understanding is that there were rival fractions of Christians. As early as James, Peter, and Paul there was contention over how to implement the church that would teach the lessons of Jesus.

In point of fact, it is arguable that anyone who hasn’t read the original Aramaic doesn’t really know the story of the Christ–there were significant errors made in both major families of Greek translations.

Have you ever had a true believing Christain fundamentalist point his finger at your nose and tell you that God would not let errors be made in the translations? I was once told that there were absolutely no errors in the King James Version. I was also told that my opinion was blasphemous and I would be punished in Hell for that opinion. I soon left that church and later left religion altogether.

Gee whiz, that sounds like an Obama excuse.

Pelayo on March 10, 2009 at 9:00 PM

The senior guys usually have staff-level people. Moses had thousands of people that he had to provision for in a hostile environment.

How do you know the story of Jesus except through the Bible? Josephus?

dedalus on March 10, 2009 at 8:53 PM

How did people know the story of the Christ in the 350 years between His death and the creation of the Bible? How do missionaries make conversions in areas that speak languages that don’t have translations of the Bible yet?

In point of fact, it is arguable that anyone who hasn’t read the original Aramaic doesn’t really know the story of the Christ–there were significant errors made in both major families of Greek translations.

Moses was too senior to do all the writing himself. He had a nation to lead–one that was wandering around in the desert and likely often mutinous. Also, probably someone other than Moses wrote the part about Moses dying.

Gee whiz, that sounds like an Obama excuse.

If you believe that the Bible is the message that God sent, doesn’t that actually make you a “Biblican,” rather than a “Christian” (who would rather put the Christ is the message and sole authority of the Church)?

q2600 on March 10, 2009 at 8:45 PM

How do you know the story of Jesus except through the Bible? Josephus?

Author, singular. The Pentateuch were written (or at least, set into oral tradition) by Moses.

dedalus on March 10, 2009 at 8:34 PM

Moses was too senior to do all the writing himself. He had a nation to lead–one that was wandering around in the desert and likely often mutinous. Also, probably someone other than Moses wrote the part about Moses dying.

Romeo13 on March 9, 2009 at 11:25 PM
You know, all law legislates morality.
Do you believe murder is wrong? Theft? False witness?
INC on March 9, 2009 at 11:27 PM

All laws do not legislate morality. Is taxing someone’s income at 40% morally right? Is denying certain people their right of self defense morally right? Is the Endangered Species Act with all its abuses morally right?

The word all is a rather dangerous word.