Catholic Faith Defender

JOHN. 8:32 “et cognoscetis veritatem et veritas liberabit vos”

Reply from Henry Arganda (Member PMCC 4thwatch) #2

Posted by catholicfaithdefender on December 27, 2008

Reply from Henry Arganda (Member PMCC 4thwatch) #2

Author : henry arganda (IP: 64.228.132.176 , bas2-windsor12-1088718000.dsl.bell.ca)
E-mail : henri_4w@yahoo.ca
URL    : http://www.pmcc4thwatch.com
Whois  : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=64.228.132.176
Comment:
yang pagkakamali nyo ng turo o doctrina ay nangangahulugan yan na nailigaw nyo ang tao sa tamang unawa para kayong mga fareseo sa mat.23:15 ginagawang mamamayan ng impeyerno ang tao..isa pang pagkakamali nyo na d2 pa lang ay masasabi natin na talagang mali kayo ay si pedro ang itinuturo nyong Batong kinasasaligan ng iglesia..well alam ko ginagamit nyo ang amplified bible..and i tell you peter(grk petros)a large piece of rock and upon this Rock petra i will build my church a large piece of rock like gibraltar..means ng gibraltar na syang petra (Christ) pagkalakilaki basahin mo ang gibraltar..kung anong klasing bato..#kaya si cristo ang pundasyun ng iglesia..si pedro ay isa lang sa mga haligi Gal 2:9.si pedro rin ang tanungin natin ns sya mismo ang nagsabi na sya (cristo)ang bato acts 4:10–11 o di ba marunong pa kayo kay pedro baka naman lumusot pa kayo na sabihin nyo na iba ang head of the corner or corner stone sa foundation para di ka na makalusot mr.paisones isa lang ang ibig
sabihin nyan#..Isa.28:16 “therefore thus saith the Lord God behold i lay in Zion for a foundation a stone,a precious corner stone..a sure foundation.o ano baka mali si Isais nyan tigas kasi ng ulo nyo sinabi na ni pedro eh na si Cristo ang pundasyun ayaw nyo pang tanggapin o sige sagutin mo yan#..o sige gamitin natin yung ginagamit nyo sa efeso..2:20..diba ginagamit nyo ito para patunayan na ang pundasyun ay apostol eh mali pa rin kayo ipalagay na natin na maga apostol ang pundasyun sa hindi paggamit ng ibang verse sa biglang basa ika nga mali pa rin kayo kasi sabi nyo si pedro lang ang pundasyun eh d2 mga apostol at mga propeta eh di marami nakuuu bakit paborito nyo si pedro lang mahina pundasyun nyo sa tao lang.#.ang tamang unawa d2 ay ang mga apostol at ang mga propeta nakatayo sa pundasyun na si jesucristo dahil sila nga haligi Gal 2:9 san ba nakatayo ang haligi ?sagutin mo?tanungin pa natin si pablo kung sino ang pusdasyun ng iglesia?1 cor3:11- for other foundation can no man lay
than that is laid which is laid,which is laid jesus Christ..patunayan mo mr.paisones na si pedro ang pundasyun ayon sa biblia kapag napatunayan mo yan tunay kayong iglesia ang romano kung hindi sorry to say kayong lahat pa impeyerno dahil giba ang inyong pundasyun ..pag nagiba ang pundasyun lahat ng aral nyo mali na yan..hihintayin ko ang sagot mo.

——————#0#———————#0#————————-#0#———————–

-Replied by: Brod. G-one T. Paisones-

Sasagutin na naman po natin ang mga tira at pang aalipusta ni Brad Henry Arganda sa totoong Iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo- ang Santa Iglesia Catolica. Tira ng tira si Henry Arganda sagot din tayo ng sagot sa mga tanong n’ya na may kahalong pang-aalipusta at fallacy.

Henry: “yang pagkakamali nyo ng turo o doctrina ay nangangahulugan yan na nailigaw nyo ang tao sa tamang unawa para kayong mga fareseo sa mat.23:15 ginagawang mamamayan ng impiyerno ang tao..isa pang pagkakamali nyo na dito pa lang ay masasabi natin na talagang mali kayo ay si pedro ang itinuturo nyong Batong kinasasaligan ng iglesia.”

G-one: “Eh tulad ng dati sasagutin natin si Brad Henry sa kanyang accusation sa ating mga Katoliko. Hindi po kami nag kamali Brad Henry Arganda, lahat ng mga allegation mo tungkol sa Santa Iglesia ay pawang walang ebidensya. Tulad ng nasabi ko na na “kung gusto mo ng isang maka Kristianong discussion hingil sa mga accusation mo laban sa aming mga Catholic Faith Defenders, kahit sa ano mang oras at kahit sa ano mang panahon ay handa po kaming ipagtangol ang Doctrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica sa mga taong naninira at kumukotya sa Aral nito. I want to repeat again that we Catholic Faith Defenders are always ready in defending the Catholic Truth against its enemies in spiritual means.” Mag pasabi kalang kung saan dito sa Cebu at kalian ang gusto mo Henry Arganda.

Wala ngang logic ang mga reasoning mo Henry Arganda, tapos sasabihin mo na Impiyerno na kaming mga Catoliko. Conclusion mo pa lamang mali na; at ang mga argumento mo Henry ay pang elementary. Hindi ako naniniwala na lahat ng members ng 4th Watch PMCC ay katulad mo Henry Arganda. Wag mo namang dungisan ang religion mo; mag bigay ka naman ng respeto. Kung sa tingin mo mali ang doctrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica at gusto mo itong wastuhin, bakit hindi ka makipag kita sa mga pari o di kaya’y sa aming mga Catholic Faith Defenders. Makipag dialogue ka sa amin sa maka Kristianong paraan. Hindi ka dapat basta-bastang tira ng tira na wala namang ebidensya. Eh para kang walang pinag-aralan d’yan kapatid. Kapatid na Henry alam kung mabuti kang tao, peru wag mo namang alipostahin ang paniniwala naming mga Katoliko dahil MALI ang paniniwala mo tungkol sa doctrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica.

———————————-

Henry: “well alam ko ginagamit nyo ang amplified bible..and i tell you peter(grk petros)a large piece of rock and upon this Rock petra i will build my church a large piece of rock like gibraltar..means ng gibraltar na syang petra (Christ)pagkalakilaki basahin mo ang gibraltar..kung anong klasing bato”

G-one: “Nag mamarunong nga naman itong si Henry Arganda, akalain nga naman na ginamit daw naming ang Amplified Bible… Bro Henry hindi mo kasi alam ang contexts ng Matt. 16:18 sa Greek eh…

Narito ang mga punto natin:

1.) Sa Matt. 16 ang linguahe na isinulat dito ay ang Greek; pero ang linguahing sinalita o ginamit ng Panginoon Jesus at nang mga apostol ay ang Aramaic. Ang BarJonah ay salitang Aramaic na ibig sabihin ay “son of Jonah”. Majority po ng mga scholar ay naniniwala na ang madalas na wikain ng Panginoong Jesus ay ang Aramaic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_of_Jesus)

Kaya ang Matt. 16:18 na PETROS sa pagkasulat, peru ang ibinigkas talaga ng Panginoong Jesus ay KEPHA. Pariho lang po ang kahulugan ng PETROS (in Greek) sa KEPHA (in Aramaic) – “And he brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas” (which, when translated, is Peter f ). John 1:42 (TNIV)” at nasa footnote ng Today’s New International Version (TNIV) na ang CEPHAS ay Aramaic.

Kaya sa Aramaic Bible ay walang pinag-iba ang Pedro sa Bato. Pawang KEPHA po ang Aramaic word ng Pedro at Bato dahil ang ibig sabihin ng Pedro ay Bato:

Therefore sa Matt. 16:18 ang Batong pinagtatayoan ng Iglesia ay si San Pedro.

2.) Sa Matt. 16:18 ang Greek construction na “tautee tee” which means on “this” rock; on “this same” rock; or on “this very” rock. “Tautee tee” is a demonstrative construction in Greek, pointing to Peter, the subject of the sentence as the very rock on which Jesus builds His Church. The demonstrative (“tautee”) generally refers to its closest antecedent (“Petros”).

Kahit na ang mga Protestant Scholar ay nagsasabing si Pedro ang bato sa Matt. 16:18:

16:18 This rock (taute to petra) The nearest referent (for the pronoun “this”) in the context of Jesus’ statement is Peter, forming a wordplay on his name, Petros. While it is possible Jesus is referring to Peter’s confession of him as the Christ (v. 16), it seems more likely that Jesus is describing Peter and the other disciples’ future ministry as the foundation of the future church (cf. Eph. 2:20). As representative spokesman for the disciples, Peter was the first to preach to both Jews (Acts 2) and Gentiles (Acts 10) the truth that salvation is through Jesus (cf. Acts 2:36; 10:36). [petra, houtos]

David K. Lowery, B.A, Th.M., Ph.D. is a Protestant scholar and Professor of New Testament Studies, at the Dallas Theological Seminary. : The Bible Knowledge Key Word Study, copyright 2002, printed Victor Publishing, edited by Darrell L. Bock, Pg. 79


Matthew’s narrative built on Mark’s but intensified the paradox of Peter’s actions by stressing the greatness of his confession before Jesus’ devastating rebuke (Matthew 16:13-23). When Simon Peter confessed, Jesus pronounced an exultant blessing on him, not because he had figured out Jesus’ identity himself, but because God had revealed it to him. Then Jesus spoke of Simon’s identity by using a play on words, “You are Peter (Greek, petros), and on this rock (petra) I will build my church and the powers of death will not prevail against it.” Simon had been called Peter since he was first introduced in Matthew, but now the meaning of that name was revealed. He was the one through whom God revealed Jesus’ identity, and thus, strengthened by that confession, he had become the rock on which Jesus would build his community. Further, Jesus promised to him “the keys of the kingdom of heaven,” and whatever he bound or loosed on earth would be bound or loosed in heaven. The words seem consciously enigmatic. Some Christians have taken them to mean that Peter was given authority over the Church as a whole; other Christians find this too broad an interpretation. In any event, Jesus’ words seem to foreshadow Peter’s role as a principal leader of the early Church.

Mysteries of the Bible, copyright 1988, printed by Reader’s Digest Association, Edited by Alma E. Guinness, pg.313



William Hendriksen
member of the Reformed Christian Church
Professor of New Testament Literature at Calvin Seminary

The meaning is, “You are Peter, that is Rock, and upon this rock, that is, on you, Peter I will build my church.” Our Lord, speaking Aramaic, probably said, “And I say to you, you are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church.” Jesus, then, is promising Peter that he is going to build his church on him! I accept this view.

New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1973), page 647
JPK page 14


Gerhard Maier
leading conservative evangelical Lutheran theologian

Nowadays a broad consensus has emerged which — in accordance with the words of the text — applies the promise to Peter as a person. On this point liberal (H. J. Holtzmann, E. Schweiger) and conservative (Cullmann, Flew) theologians agree, as well as representatives of Roman Catholic exegesis.

“The Church in the Gospel of Matthew: Hermeneutical Analysis of the Current Debate”
Biblical Interpretation and Church Text and Context
(Flemington Markets, NSW: Paternoster Press, 1984), page 58
JPK pages 16-17


Donald A. Carson III
Baptist and Professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Seminary
(two quotations from different works)

Although it is true that petros and petra can mean “stone” and “rock” respectively in earlier Greek, the distinction is largely confined to poetry. Moreover the underlying Aramaic is in this case unquestionable; and most probably kepha was used in both clauses (“you are kepha” and “on this kepha“), since the word was used both for a name and for a “rock”. The Peshitta (written in Syriac, a language cognate with Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses. The Greek makes the distinction between petros and petra simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine petra could not very well serve as a masculine name.

The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 8 (Matthew, Mark, Luke)
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), page 368
JPK pages 17-18

The word Peter petros, meaning “rock” (Gk 4377), is masculine, and in Jesus’ follow-up statement he uses the feminine word petra (Gk 4376). On the basis of this change, many have attempted to avoid identifying Peter as the rock on which Jesus builds his church. Yet if it were not for Protestant reactions against extremes of Roman Catholic interpretations, it is doubtful whether many would have taken “rock” to be anything or anyone other than Peter.

Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary — New Testament, vol. 2
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), page 78
JPK page 18


John Peter Lange
German Protestant scholar

The Saviour, no doubt, used in both clauses the Aramaic word kepha (hence the Greek Kephas applied to Simon, John i.42; comp. 1 Cor. i.12; iii.22; ix.5; Gal. ii.9), which means rock and is used both as a proper and a common noun…. The proper translation then would be: “Thou art Rock, and upon this rock”, etc.

Lange’s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: The Gospel According to Matthew, vol. 8
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1976), page 293
JPK page 19


John A. Broadus
Baptist author
(two quotations from the same work)

Many insist on the distinction between the two Greek words, thou art Petros and on this petra, holding that if the rock had meant Peter, either petros or petra would have been used both times, and that petros signifies a separate stone or fragment broken off, while petra is the massive rock. But this distinction is almost entirely confined to poetry, the common prose word instead of petros being lithos; nor is the distinction uniformly observed.

But the main answer here is that our Lord undoubtedly spoke Aramaic, which has no known means of making such a distinction [between feminine petra and masculine petros in Greek]. The Peshitta (Western Aramaic) renders, “Thou are kipho, and on this kipho“. The Eastern Aramaic, spoken in Palestine in the time of Christ, must necessarily have said in like manner, “Thou are kepha, and on this kepha“…. Beza called attention to the fact that it is so likewise in French: “Thou art Pierre, and on this pierre“; and Nicholson suggests that we could say, “Thou art Piers (old English for Peter), and on this pier.”

Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew
(Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1886), pages 355-356
JPK page 20


J. Knox Chamblin
Presbyterian and New Testament Professor
Reformed Theological Seminary

By the words “this rock” Jesus means not himself, nor his teaching, nor God the Father, nor Peter’s confession, but Peter himself. The phrase is immediately preceded by a direct and emphatic reference to Peter. As Jesus identifies himself as the Builder, the rock on which he builds is most naturally understood as someone (or something) other than Jesus himself. The demonstrative this, whether denoting what is physically close to Jesus or what is literally close in Matthew, more naturally refers to Peter (v. 18) than to the more remote confession (v. 16). The link between the clauses of verse 18 is made yet stronger by the play on words, “You are Peter (Gk. Petros), and on this rock (Gk. petra) I will build my church”. As an apostle, Peter utters the confession of verse 16; as a confessor he receives the designation this rock from Jesus.

“Matthew”
Evangelical Commentary on the Bible
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1989), page 742
JPK page 30


Craig L. Blomberg
Baptist and Professor of New Testament
Denver Seminary

Acknowledging Jesus as The Christ illustrates the appropriateness of Simon’s nickname “Peter” (Petros = rock). This is not the first time Simon has been called Peter (cf. John 1:42), but it is certainly the most famous. Jesus’ declaration, “You are Peter”, parallels Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ”, as if to say, “Since you can tell me who I am, I will tell you who you are.” The expression “this rock” almost certainly refers to Peter, following immediately after his name, just as the words following “the Christ” in v. 16 applied to Jesus. The play on words in the Greek between Peter’s name (Petros) and the word “rock” (petra) makes sense only if Peter is the rock and if Jesus is about to explain the significance of this identification.

The New American Commentary: Matthew, vol. 22
(Nashville: Broadman, 1992), pages 251-252
JPK pages 31-32


David Hill
Presbyterian minister and Senior Lecturer in the Department of Biblical Studies
University of Sheffield, England

On this rock I will build my church: the word-play goes back to Aramaic tradition. It is on Peter himself, the confessor of his Messiahship, that Jesus will build the Church. The disciple becomes, as it were, the foundation stone of the community. Attempts to interpret the “rock” as something other than Peter in person (e.g., his faith, the truth revealed to him) are due to Protestant bias, and introduce to the statement a degree of subtlety which is highly unlikely.

“The Gospel of Matthew”
The New Century Bible Commentary
(London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1972), page 261
JPK page 34


Suzanne de Dietrich
Presbyterian theologian

The play on words in verse 18 indicates the Aramaic origin of the passage. The new name contains a promise. “Simon”, the fluctuating, impulsive disciple, will, by the grace of God, be the “rock” on which God will build the new community.

The Layman’s Bible Commentary: Matthew, vol. 16
(Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1961), page 93
JPK page 34


Donald A. Hagner
Fuller Theological Seminary

The natural reading of the passage, despite the necessary shift from Petros to petra required by the word play in the Greek (but not the Aramaic, where the same word kepha occurs in both places), is that it is Peter who is the rock upon which the church is to be built…. The frequent attempts that have been made, largely in the past, to deny this in favor of the view that the confession itself is the rock… seem to be largely motivated by Protestant prejudice against a passage that is used by the Roman Catholics to justify the papacy.

Matthew 14-28
Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 33b
(Dallas: Word Books, 1995), page 470
JPK pages 36-37

Sa Matt. 16:18 ang phrase na “on this rock” ay reperido kay Pedro. Catholic believes that other apostles are also foundation of the church and Christ Himself is the chief cornerstone (Efe. 2:20) but in Matt. 16:18 the only reference on the phrase “on this rock” is for Saint Peter.

3.) Matt. 16:18-19 This is a three-fold blessing of Peter – you are blessed, you are the rock on which I will build my Church, and you will receive the keys to the kingdom of heaven (not you are blessed for receiving Revelation, but you are still an insignificant little pebble, and yet I am going to give you the keys to the kingdom). (http://www.scripturecatholic.com)

Tungkol naman sa sinabi ni Bro Henry na ginamit natin ang amplified Bible; isa po itong haka-haka o isang panghuhula ni Henry Arganda. But im sorry Mr. Arganda Henry mali po ang panghuhula ninyo. Hindi po kami gumamit ng Amplified Bible para lang mapatunayan ko na si San Pedro ang Bato na pinag-uusapan sa Matt. 16:18 dahil wala pa po sa kamay ko ang ganong uri o version ng Biblia. At salamat sa iyo kapatid na Henry dahil sa information mo na ibinigay mo sa amin hingil sa Amplified Bible.

At salamat na mismo kay brad Henry dahil sa kanyang information na ibinigay sa atin na buko na natin ang pag sisinungalin nya para lang masiraan ang Doctrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica hinggil kay San Pedro. Ang sabi nya kasi “well alam ko ginagamit nyo ang amplified bible..and i tell you peter(grk petros)a large piece of rock and upon this Rock petra i will build my church a large piece of rock like gibraltar.. means ng gibraltar na syang petra (Christ) pagkalakilaki basahin mo ang gibraltar..kung anong klasing bato” –PERU ang katotohanan po, nang binasa ko po sa online ang footnote nang nasabing Amplified Bible (na inakala ni Henry na ginamit ko sa mga pagpapatotoo ko na si Pedro ay ang Bato) ang nakalagay doon ay Si Pedro or Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah is the rock on which the church is built. Narito ang boong minsahi sa Amplified Bible:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=16&version=45

Matthew 16 (Amplified Bible)

18And I tell you, you are [e]Peter [Greek, Petros–a large piece of rock], and on this rock [Greek, petra–a [f]huge rock like Gibraltar] I will build My church, and the gates of Hades (the powers of the [g]infernal region) shall [h]not overpower it [or be strong to its detriment or hold out against it].

Footnotes:

e. Matthew 16:18 The rock on which the church is built is traditionally interpreted as either Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah, or it may be Peter himself (see Eph. 2:20).

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=16&version=45

Sa itaas malinaw na malinaw ang kamalian ni Henry Arganda dahil sabi nya na ang “Rock petra i will build my church a large piece of rock like gibraltar.. means ng gibraltar na syang petra (Christ) Peru ang footnote nang nasabing Amplified Bible ay hindi naman pala. Kaya po nabuko po natin ang kamalian ni Henry Arganda.

———————————-

Henry: “kaya si cristo ang pundasyun ng iglesia..si pedro ay isa lang sa mga haligi Gal 2:9.si pedro rin ang tanungin natin na sya mismo ang nagsabi na sya (cristo)ang bato acts 4:10–11 o di ba marunong pa kayo kay pedro baka naman lumusot pa kayo na sabihin nyo na iba ang head of the corner or corner stone sa foundation para di ka na makalusot mr.paisones isa lang ang ibig sabihin nyan”

G-one: Wala po tayong problema sa nasambit ni Henry sa itaas na si Cristo ang pundasyon at bato sa Act. 4:10-11; si Cristo ang batong espiritwal 1 Cor. 10:4 (TNIV) and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.” Pero itinatag ng Panginoong Hesus Cristo ang Kanyang Iglesia kay Pedro Matt. 16:18, John 1:42; at sa mga Apostol at mga Propeta Efe. 2:20 (TNIV) “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.”

Ang pagkakamali lang po ni Henry Arganda ay ang conclusion nya’ng si Cristo ang bato sa Matt. 16:18, na wala pong ebidensya. Naniniwala po ang santa Iglesia Catolica na si Cristo ang Batong Espiritwal the Foundation of the Church (Defense Catholic Truth By Bro. Socrates Fernandez, Page 59-60) peru hindi po si Cristo ang Bato na tinotukoy sa Matt. 16:18.

Sa Bible hindi po dapat natin limitahan ang ating pang-unawa sa mga termino o mga salitang bumabasi sa SUBJECT ng mga ito dahil kalimitan ng mga TERMS na ito ay FIGURATIVE o BIBLICAL EXPRESSION.

Halimbawa:

“BATO”

-DIOS ay Bato (2 Sam. 22:2-3)

-Cristo ay Bato (1 Cor. 10:4)

-Pedro ay Bato (John 1:42)

-Believers ay Bato (1 Ped. 2:5 Magandang Balita Biblia)

“PASTOL”

-Cristo ay Pastol (John 10:11) (1 Ped. 2:25)

-Apostles & Church Leaders ay Pastol {implicit} (Act. 20:28)

-Pedro ay Pastol {implicit} (John 21:15-17)

“LION”

-Crito (Rev. 5:5)

-Judah (Gen 49:9 CEV)

-Devil like a roaring lion (1 Pet. 5:8)

Wala po akong dapat lusotan dahil ang Scripture na mismo ang nag papatunay na si Cristo ay ang Batong Espiritwal na pundasyon ng Iglesia (1 Cor. 10:4) (Defense Catholic Truth By Bro. Socrates Fernandez, Page 59), at si Pedro ay Bato (John 1:42) (My Catholic Faith By Most Reverend Louis LaRavoire Morrow, Page 98) na syang pagtatayoan ni Cristo sa Kanyang Iglesia (Matt 16:18-19) (Paano Ninyo Sasagutin By Fr. Ben Carreon, Page 126-127) at ang mga apostol at propeta (Efe. 2:20) (Catechism for Filipino Catholic {Junior Edition}, Number 482, Page 163) (Catholic Catechism By Fr. M. Guzman, Number 157, Page 39).

———————————-

Henry: “Isa.28:16 “therefore thus saith the Lord God behold i lay in Zion for a foundation a stone,a precious corner stone..a sure foundation.o ano baka mali si Isais nyan tigas kasi ng ulo nyo sinabi na ni pedro eh na si Cristo ang pundasyun ayaw nyo pang tanggapin o sige sagutin mo yan”

G-one: Itong si Henry napakasinungaling, Hindi po doctrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica na si Cristo ay hindi foundation; kaya nga ginamit po namin ang Efe. 2:20 dahil aral ng Iglesia Catolica yang verse na yan. Ang punto po naming dito na SA MATTHEW 16:18 SI SAN PEDRO PO ANG BATO NA SINABI NI CRISTO NA PAGTATAYOAN NG KANYANG IGLESIA. Therefore Saint Peter is the Foundation of the Church in Matt. 16:18.

Para malaman ng lahat ang Doctrina ng Santa Iglesia ay ang mga ito:

Si Cristo ay ang espirituwal na BATO ng Iglesia (1 Cor. 10:4) “Yes, it is true that Christ is the leading cornerstone of the foundation (Eph. 2:20). Christ is himself, “the spiritual rock following them and the rock is Christ” (1 Cor. 10:4). This is a metaphorical Biblical expression which means that Christ is really the spiritual head and leader. However, it is willed by the Lord that there must be a visible leader in his Church and that leader be his vicar. Therefore those texts from 1 Cor. 3:11; Acts 4:11 do not contradict the Catholic teaching that Christ is the cornerstone of the foundation. However, we cannot also go against Christ’s will to appoint a visible head for His Church.”

“And now I say to you: you are Peter (or rock) and on this rock I will build My church; and never will the powers of death overcome it” (Matt. 16:18). Remember that Christ was the one who changed the name Simon into Cephas (Jn. 1:42). Cephas in Aramaic means ROCK- or BEDROCK, not an ordinary small stone rolling on the ground. Even in Greek, the word CEPHAS comes from Kephalaion which means fundamental or foundation (GREEK – SPANISH dictionary, Mendizabal, Page 298) Even though foundation is also defined by other people as faith of Peter but what is faith if there is no person holding on to it?” (Defense Catholic Truth by Bro. Socrates Fernandez, Page 59)

Si San Pedro ang pundasyon ng Iglesia sa Matt. 16:18 “At tungkol sa ‘bato’ na ayaw kilalanin ng kaibigan mo (Numer Villanosa), sabihin mo sa kanyang wala siyang balita. Halos lahat ng mga dalubhasa sa Bibliyang Protestante ay tinitiyak na walang ibang batong binabanggit si Kristo sa Mt. 16:18 kundi si Pedro. Kasama rito si Alford, Bloomfield, Kiel, Marsch, Rosmuller, Seifert, Thompson, at Weiss at iba pa. Ang mga ito’y nagsunog ng kilay bilang bihasa at iskolar sa syensya ng Biblia at lahat sila’y nagpapatotoo na walang ibang batong binanggit si Kristo sa tekstong yaon (Matt. 16:18) kundi si Pedro.” (Paano Ninyo Sasagutin by Fr. Ben Carreon, Page 126) <Emphasis added>

Ang mga Apostol at mga profeta ang pundastion ng Iglesia at si Cristo mismo ang chief cornerstone (Efe. 2:20). “The Catholic Church is apostolic because she was founded by Christ on the Apostles and in accordance with his divine will has always been and will always be governed by their lawful successors.” (Catholic Catechism By Fr. M. Guzman, Number 157, Page 39).

———————————-

Henry: “o sige gamitin natin yung ginagamit nyo sa efeso..2:20..diba ginagamit nyo ito para patunayan na ang pundasyun ay apostol eh mali pa rin kayo ipalagay na natin na maga apostol ang pundasyun sa hindi paggamit ng ibang verse sa biglang basa ika nga mali pa rin kayo kasi sabi nyo si pedro lang ang pundasyun eh d2 mga apostol at mga propeta eh di marami nakuuu bakit paborito nyo si pedro lang mahina pundasyun nyo sa tao lang”

G-one: Para sa kalinawan ng lahat hindi po namin sinabi na si Pedro lamang ang pundasyon na mababasa sa BUONG BIBLIA. Napakasinungaling po nitong si Mr. Arganda. Mr. Arganda saan po nabasa na sinulat ko na si Pedro lang ang pundasyon na mababasa sa Buong Biblia? Ang sabi ko na si Pedro lamang ang Pundation na tinotokoy na pagtatayuan ng Iglesia sa Matt. 16:18 (specific verse in the Bible; not whole Bible); hindi ko sinabing si Pedro LAMANG ang Foundation ng Iglesia na mababasa sa Buong Biblia. Para maintindihan ng lahat… Sa Matt. 16:18 si Pedro lamang ang tinutukoy na syang pagtatayuan ng Iglesia (kung sa Matt. 16:18 lamang ang pag-uusapan) peru kung sa buong biblia na pag-uusapan abay hindi ko sinasabing si San Pedro lamang ang Foundation ng Iglesia; pati narin ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo, mga Apostol at mga Propeta ay Foundation rin ng tunay na Iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo (Efe. 2:20).

At mali daw ang nakasulat sa Efe. 2:20 na ang mga Apostol ay pundation ng Iglesia. Nako itong si Mr. Arganda kahit mababasa na eh gilubag parin. Hindi po mali ang Efe. 2:20 ang mali po ay si Mr. Arganda.

———————————-

Henry: “ang tamang unawa dito ay ang mga apostol at ang mga propeta nakatayo sa pundasyun na si jesucristo dahil sila nga haligi Gal 2:9 san ba nakatayo ang haligi ?sagutin mo?tanungin pa natin si pablo kung sino ang pusdasyun ng iglesia?1 cor3:11- for other foundation can no man lay than that is laid which is laid,which is laid jesus Christ..patunayan mo mr.paisones na si pedro ang pundasyun ayon sa biblia kapag napatunayan mo yan tunay kayong iglesia ang romano kung hindi sorry to say kayong lahat pa impeyerno dahil giba ang inyong pundasyun ..pag nagiba ang pundasyun lahat ng aral nyo mali na yan..hihintayin ko ang sagot mo.”

G-one: Sa pundation ng Tunay na Iglesia, hindi lamang si Pedro o mga apostol at mga propeta ang nag silbing pundasyon dito, bagkus nariyan si Cristo ang Batong Espiritwal(1 Cor. 10:4) na foundation din ng tunay na Iglesia (1 Cor 3:11) (Defense Catholic Truth by Bro. Socrates Fernandez, Page 59-60) dahil sasamahan nya ang Kanyang Iglesia hanggang sa kataposan ng mundo (Mat. 28:19-20) at hinding-hindi ito madadaig ng kamatayan (Matt. 16:18-19). Kaya hindi po contradict ang Matt. 16:18 at Eph. 2:20 sa 1 Cor. 3:11.

Ang ibig sabihin sa “for other foundation can no man lay” ito po yong mga itinatag na Iglesia na tao lamang ang nag tatag, at hindi si Cristo (Act 17:24 KJV “God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands,”) -tulad na lamang ng 4th Watch PMCC na itinatag ni Arsenio Feriol dito sa Pilipinas.

Ang 4th Watch PMCC na itinatag ni Arsenio Ferriol ay hindi tunay na iglesia sapagkat ayon kay Cristo na Siya ay mag tatag ng Kanyang Iglesia (Matt. 16:18) at naitatag nya ito (Mat. 18:17) at sasamahan nya ito araw-araw hanggang sa kataposan ng mundo (Matt. 28:19-20) kaya mula sa panahon ng Panginoon Jesu-Cristo hanggang sa kasalukoyan NARITO PARIN ANG TUNAY NA IGLESIA- AT ITO ANG SANTA, IGLESIA, CATOLICA, APOSTOLICA, ROMANA. Samantalang ang 4th Watch PMCC ay wala pang isang daan taon itong itinatag ni Arsenio Ferriol.

Ang Santa Iglesia Catolica lamang ang makapag-dugtong sa panahon ni Cristo hanggang sa kasalukoyang panahon.

MGA TANONG PARA KAY HENRY ARGANDA

  1. Si Pedro ba ay Bato?
  2. Kung ang sagot mo ay Bato, ito ba ay malaking bato o maliit na bato?
  3. Sabi mo na mali ang naka sulat sa Efe. 2:20; ano ba ang authority mo nang sabihin mo na mali ang Efe. 2:20?
  4. Makapag bigay kaba ng Bible scholar na nagsasabing ang mga apostol ay hindi foundation dyan sa citas ng Efe. 2:20?
  5. Sang-ayon kaba sa sinasabi ko na ang tunay na iglesia ay sasamahan ni Cristo araw-araw hanggang sa kataposan ng mundo?
  6. Kung hindi ka sang-ayon sa (#5); nag sisinungaling ba si Cristo ng Sabihin nya na sasamahan Niya ang kangyang Iglesia hanggang sa kataposan ng mundo(Matt. 16:18)?
  7. Kung sang-ayon ka sa (#5); sang-ayon kaba sa sinasabi ko na ang tunay na Iglesia ay narito pa sa ating kasalukoyang panahon?
  8. Kailan na itatag ang 4th Watch PMCC?
  9. Kung ang sagot mo sa (#8) ay 33 A.D.; may maipapakita kabang mga standard na mga referencia na nagpapatunay sa sagot mo?
  10. Saan mababasa sa Biblia na ang 4th Watch PMCC ay itinatag ni Cristo letra-4-letra (at word-4-word)?
  11. Saan mababasa sa standard na mga references na ang 4th Watch PMCC ay itinatag ni Cristo letra-4-letra (at word-4-word)??
  12. Saan mababasa sa Biblia 4th Watch PMCC (Sa Chapter at verses nito)?
  13. Kailan mo ba ipapaharap sa akin yong proxy mo upang matuloy na ang debate nating hinggil kung sino ang tunay na Iglesiang Itinatag ni Cristo?

10 Responses to “Reply from Henry Arganda (Member PMCC 4thwatch) #2”

  1. #1.sa sagot mo paisones,sa amplipied..ang pinagbatayan mo ay ang footnote..ang footnote ba ay ang kahulugan ng verse..o dagdag ng nagsulat?ang footnote ay comment ng nagsulat ng aklat ..sa baba ang sagot ko dyan sa mali mong pakahulugan sa footnote. #2na mali mo, “yung mga bible scholar na mga nagpatotoo,pinahayagan ba ng Dios” ?apostol ba sila Gal.1:11-12,ang apostol lang ang pinapahayagan ng Dios..kaya dapat ikaw paisones sa kabuuan ka ng Bible bumatay..hindi sa isang talata lang…#3 na mali mo!– ang hinahanap ko sayo na sagot mo dapat ay sa catholic dogma,na turo ba ng katoliko na lahat ng apostol at propeta ay pundasyun?ang ginamit mo ay ang sulat ni Soc fernandez ,san kinuha yun ni soc sa catholic dogma ?ikaw na rin ang nagsabi na si Cristo ay spiritual na Foundation,,TANONG KO SI PEDRO BA AY LITERAL NA PUNDASYUN SAN MABABASA NA LITERAL FOUNDATION SYA.ANG PAGIGING BATO BA NI PEDRO AY LITIRAL NA BATO,?buti pa si pedro na lang ang sumagot…1 pet 2:5..ang lahat ng mga believers ay spiritual stones hindi literal na gaya ng kamalian nitong si paisones..si pedro ay bato lang sa pangalan.at di sya ang kinatatayuan ng iglesia..kay Cristo nakatayo.Epeso 2:22,babaguhin na naman yan ni Paisones parang si satanas gumamit ng salita…yung mga protestanteng nag patotoo sa mat.16:18 mga mali din yun kasi may bahid pa ng mali ng katoliko yun kasi lumabas lang yun sa katoliko.sa iyong footnotes sa amplified,nag jump ka sa iyong conclusion na inaangkin na naglagay ng comment na si Pedro ang pagtatayuan ng Iglesia.Matthew 16 (Amplified Bible)

    18And I tell you, you are [e]Peter [Greek, Petros–a large piece of rock], and on this rock [Greek, petra–a [f]huge rock like Gibraltar] I will build My church, and the gates of Hades (the powers of the [g]infernal region) shall [h]not overpower it [or be strong to its detriment or hold out against it].

    Footnotes:

    e. Matthew 16:18 The rock on which the church is built is traditionally interpreted as either Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah, or it may be Peter himself (see Eph. 2:20).
    Basahin mo ulit at unawain mo,…”or it may be…” nagpapahayag ng isang sugestion at hindi absolute conclusion na si pedro ang pagtatayuan

    Ginamit mo ang mga protestant bible scholar,ito naman ang isinulat ni Lorraine Boettner,a Theologian,Roman Catholism p.105″The Rock” -Romanist quote(Matt.16:13-19) this verse with relish,and add their own interpretation to establish their claim for papal authority. But in the greek the word peter is Petros,a person, masculine, while the word “rock”,petra is feminine and refers not to a person but to the declaration of Christ’s deitythat Peter had just uttered–“Thou art the Christ,the Son of the Living God”
    Using Peter’s name and making as it were,play upon words,Jesus said to Peter,”You are Petros and upon this petra I will build my church” The truth that Peter had just confessed was the foundation upon which Christ would build His church.He meant that Peter had seen the basic,essential truth concerning His person,the essential truth upon which the church would be founded, and that nothing would be able to overthrow that truth, not even all the forces of evil that might be arrayed against it.Peter was the first among the disciples to see our Lord as the Christ of God.Christ commended him for that spiritual insight, and said that His church would be founded upon that fact. And that, of course was a far different thing from founding the church on Peter.
    Had Christ intended to say that the Church would be founded on Peter,it would have been ridiculous for him to have shifted to the feminine form of the word in the middle of the statement,saying,if we may translate literally and somewhat whimsically,”And I say unto thee, that thou art Mr.Rock and upon this,the Miss Rock,I will build my church.” Clearly it was upon the truth that Peter had expressed, the deity of Christ,and not upon weak, vascillating Peter,that the church would be founded.The greek Petros is commonly used of a movable stone,a mere pebble,as it were.But “petra” means immovable foundation, in this instance the basic truth that Peter had just confessed,the deity of Christ.And in fact that is the point of conflict in the churches today between evangelicals on the one hand and modernist or liberals on the other,whether the church is founded on a truly divine Christ as revealed in a fully trustworthy Bible,or whether it is essentially a social service and moral welfare organization which recognizes Christ as an example, an outstandingly great and good man,but denies or ignores His deity.”

    Patunay yan paisones na hindi lahat ng protestants ay pareho ang paniwala,”may conflict” kung matino kang gumamit ng mga protestants schoolar or teologian,dapat lahat gagamitin mo.

    -one: Para sa kalinawan ng lahat hindi po namin sinabi na si Pedro lamang ang pundasyon na mababasa sa BUONG BIBLIA. Napakasinungaling po nitong si Mr. Arganda. Mr. Arganda saan po nabasa na sinulat ko na si Pedro lang ang pundasyon na mababasa sa Buong Biblia? Ang sabi ko na si Pedro lamang ang Pundation na tinotokoy na pagtatayuan ng Iglesia sa Matt. 16:18 (specific verse in the Bible; not whole Bible); hindi ko sinabing si Pedro LAMANG ang Foundation ng Iglesia na mababasa sa Buong Biblia. Para maintindihan ng lahat… Sa Matt. 16:18 si Pedro lamang ang tinutukoy na syang pagtatayuan ng Iglesia (kung sa Matt. 16:18 lamang ang pag-uusapan) peru kung sa buong biblia na pag-uusapan abay hindi ko sinasabing si San Pedro lamang ang Foundation ng Iglesia; pati narin ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo, mga Apostol at mga Propeta ay Foundation rin ng tunay na Iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo (Efe. 2:20).

    Bingo!!!!!yan inamin mo na hindi lamang si pedro ang pundasyun ng iglesia kung ang biblia sa kabuuan ang pagbabatayan!!pero teka basahin natin ang isang sagot mo…

    G-one: Itong si Henry napakasinungaling, Hindi po doctrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica na si Cristo ay hindi foundation; kaya nga ginamit po namin ang Efe. 2:20 dahil aral ng Iglesia Catolica yang verse na yan. Ang punto po naming dito na SA MATTHEW 16:18 SI SAN PEDRO PO ANG BATO NA SINABI NI CRISTO NA PAGTATAYOAN NG KANYANG IGLESIA. Therefore Saint Peter is the Foundation of the Church in Matt. 16:18.

    dito tayo sa jump conclucion mo…SA MAT.16:18 SI SAN PEDRO PO ANG BATO NA SINABI NI CRISTO NA PAGTATAYUAN NG IGLESIA,.”THEREFORE MR.PAISONES KUNG HINDI LANG SI PEDRO ANG PUNDASYUN NG IGLESIA ,AY MARAMING BATO..???samakatuwid maraming bato sa mateo 16:18,si Cristo,si pedro,at ang mga alagad (kasama ni pedrong mga apostol)verse 13–

    sabi mo aral ng katoliko ang verse na yang sa efeso 2:20 –saan nga sa catholic dogma?wag si soc ang gamitin mo..yung official na aklat na Doktrina na katoliko…catholic dogma(doctrine)

    samakatuwid paisones kung ang kabuuan ng biblia ang pagbabatayan ay mali ang unawa mo sa mat 16:18..na si pedro lamang ang pundasyun ng iglesia.tinatanggap mo ba ito?sagutin mo!

    G-paisones-said, peru kung sa buong biblia na pag-uusapan abay hindi ko sinasabing si San Pedro lamang ang Foundation ng Iglesia; pati narin ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo, mga Apostol at mga Propeta ay Foundation rin ng tunay na Iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo (Efe. 2:20).
    sa sagot mong ito Paisones ay maraming pundasyun ang iglesia..KUNG MAY MABASA AKONG BERSIKULO NA ISA LANG ANG PUNDASYUN NG IGLESIA SI CRISTO LANG AAMININ MO BA NA FALSE CHURCH ANG KATOLIKO?

  2. G-one At mali daw ang nakasulat sa Efe. 2:20 na ang mga Apostol ay pundation ng Iglesia. Nako itong si Mr. Arganda kahit mababasa na eh gilubag parin. Hindi po mali ang Efe. 2:20 ang mali po ay si Mr. Arganda.

    Sagot paisones,hindi ko sinabi na mali ang efeso 2:20 -ang mali yang unawa mo,basahin mo pinutol mo na naman..nawala ang mga propeta,.ang nilagay mo ay ang mga apostol ay pundation ng iglesia…tingnan mo nga ang epeso 2:20 kung yan ang nakalagay?binago na naman parang si satanas ka gumamit ng talata…

  3. G-one says-Sabi mo na mali ang naka sulat sa Efe. 2:20; ano ba ang authority mo nang sabihin mo na mali ang Efe. 2:20?

    sagot Mr paisones wag kang maglalagay ng mga salitang di ko sinabi o sinulat makakasuhan ka nang libelo..saan ko sinabi na mali ang nakasulat sa efeso 2:20?ipakita mo nga? kung di mo maipakita Juan 8:44 ka…hihintayin ko ..

  4. G-one question-Sang-ayon kaba sa sinasabi ko na ang tunay na iglesia ay sasamahan ni Cristo araw-araw hanggang sa kataposan ng mundo?

    oo sang ayun ako kami yun, hindi kayo yun.

  5. catholicfaithdefender said

    Reply from Henry Arganda (Member PMCC 4thwatch) #3

    Author : henry arganda (IP: 67.68.15.139 , bas2-windsor12-1128533899.dsl.bell.ca)
    E-mail : henri_4w@yahoo.ca
    URL : http://www.pmcc4thwatch.com
    Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=67.68.15.139

    Black: -Henri Arganda (New Comments)
    Red: -Henri’s Old Replies
    Blue: -G-one Paisones’ Old Reply
    Green:-G-one Paisones (New Reply)

    Comment:
    Henry:
    #1.sa sagot mo paisones,sa amplipied..ang pinagbatayan mo ay ang footnote..ang footnote ba ay ang kahulugan ng verse..o dagdag ng nagsulat?ang footnote ay comment ng nagsulat ng aklat ..sa baba ang sagot ko dyan sa mali mong pakahulugan sa footnote.

    G-one:
    Ang punto po natin dito Henry Arganda na mali ka sa akala mo na ang ang petra sa Matt. 16:18 sa Amplified Bible ay si Cristo. Narito ang mga pahayag mo noon:
    “well alam ko ginagamit nyo ang amplified bible..and i tell you peter(grk petros)a large piece of rock and upon this Rock petra i will build my church a large piece of rock like gibraltar..means ng gibraltar na syang petra (Christ)pagkalakilaki basahin mo ang gibraltar..kung anong klasing bato”
    Ang mali mo sa iyong conclusion na ang Rock “petra” i will build my church a large piece of rock like gibraltar..means ng gibraltar na syang petra (Christ) dahil mismo sa footnote nang naturang Biblia ay: “The rock on which the church is built is traditionally interpreted as either Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah, or it may be Peter himself (see Eph. 2:20).
    Ang mali mo ay ginamit mo ang Amplified Bible bilang ebedensya sa mga proposition mo peru ang masaklap hindi mo binasa ang footnote nito. Nidagdagan mo pa ang mali mo kasi sinabi mo na mali ang pagpakahulugan ko sa footnote sa Amplified Bible.
    Mr. Arganda wag mo naming ipakahalata na wala ka talagang alam sa Biblia dahil kahit na ang grade school ay maiintindihan ang pahayag ng may akda (sa Amplified Bible) sa kanyang footnote: “The rock on which the church is built is traditionally interpreted as either Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah, or it may be Peter himself (see Eph. 2:20)”.

    Henry:
    #2na mali mo, “yung mga bible scholar na mga nagpatotoo,pinahayagan ba ng Dios”
    ?apostol ba sila Gal.1:11-12,ang apostol lang ang pinapahayagan ng Dios..kaya dapat ikaw paisones sa kabuuan ka ng Bible bumatay..hindi sa isang talata lang…

    G-one:
    Mapapansin po natin sa itaas ang fallacious statement ni Henry Arganda. Ginamamit ko lang ang Amplified Bible (Scholar) sa pag counter sa kanyang argumento, dahil ginamit niya ito (Amplified Bible) bilang ebedensya sa kanyan proposition. At ginamit ko rin ang Amplified Bible sa paggiba (destroy) sa kanyang proposition sa Matt. 16:18.
    Mr. Arganda ang kabuohan ng Biblia at ng Apostolic Tradition (2 Tes. 2:15) ako nakabatay.

    Henry:
    #3 na mali mo!– ang hinahanap ko sayo na sagot mo dapat ay sa catholic dogma,na turo ba ng katoliko na lahat ng apostol at propeta ay pundasyun?ang ginamit mo ay ang sulat ni Soc fernandez ,san kinuha yun ni soc sa catholic dogma ?

    G-one:
    Hindi ba Henry Arganda napagkasunduan na natin via email (yahoo) ang mga hinanaing mo sa itaas (tungkol sa Catholic Dogma)? Hindi ko pwedi isulat dito ang napagkasunduan natin nahil bawal sa aming mga Catholic Faith Defenders ang adhominim. Pakatandaan mong nagkasundo na tayo hinggil sa bagay na ito. At kung magpupumilit ka; ikaw ang dapat mag pakita ng ebedensya na mali ang pahayag ko o contra ang pahayag ko sa Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. Ginamit ko ang libro ni Bro. Socrates Fernandez bilang ebedensya na tinuturo sa Doctrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica na ang mga apostol at propeta ay pundasyun.

    Henry:
    ikaw na rin ang nagsabi na si Cristo ay spiritual na Foundation,,TANONG KO SI PEDRO BA AY LITERAL NA PUNDASYUN SAN MABABASA NA LITERAL FOUNDATION SYA.ANG PAGIGING BATO BA NI PEDRO AY LITIRAL NA BATO,?buti pa si pedro na lang ang sumagot…1 pet 2:5..ang lahat ng mga believers
    ay spiritual stones hindi literal na gaya ng kamalian nitong si paisones..

    G-one:
    Ang sagot sa tanong mo ay si San Pedro ang foundation ng iglesia (Matt. 16:18, Efe. 2:20)! Kung binasa pa ni Henry ang reply#2 ko sa kanya, hindi na sya babangit ng katulad nito: “1 pet 2:5..ang lahat ng mga believers ay spiritual stones hindi literal na gaya ng kamalian nitong si paisones” dahil sinabi ko na: “Believers ay Bato (1 Ped. 2:5 Magandang Balita Biblia)”
    Narito ang naunang reply ko kay Henry Arganda:

    Sa Bible hindi po dapat natin limitahan ang ating pang-unawa sa mga termino o mga salitang bumabasi sa SUBJECT ng mga ito dahil kalimitan ng mga TERMS na ito ay FIGURATIVE o BIBLICAL EXPRESSION.

    Halimbawa:

    “BATO”
    -DIOS ay Bato (2 Sam. 22:2-3)
    -Cristo ay Bato (1 Cor. 10:4)
    -Pedro ay Bato (John 1:42)
    -Believers ay Bato (1 Ped. 2:5 Magandang Balita Biblia)

    Henry:
    si pedro ay bato lang sa pangalan.at di sya ang kinatatayuan ng iglesia..kay Cristo nakatayo.Epeso 2:22,babaguhin na naman yan ni Paisones parang si satanas gumamit ng salita..

    G-one:
    Akalain mo nga naman itong si Henry Arganda- para daw akong si satanas. Ehemm… Si Cristo ang nag pangalan kay Simon na “Kepha” dahil Siya (Cristo) ay mag tatag ng kaharian na hindi kalian man madadaig ng Kamatayan (Dan. 2:44) at itong kaharian na ito ay ang Iglesia (Mat. 16:18). Sinamahan at pinamunuan Nya ito (Ang Iglesia) ng Siya ay nabubuhay pa; nang Siya ay pumunta na sa Langit, itinalaga Niya sa Kanyang mga apostol ang mga Gawain bilang ambassador at Obispo (Mat. 28:19,Luke 10:16, Act. 1:20-25) at ang pangkalahatang Obispo sa mga Obispo -kay San Pedro (John 21:15-17). Kaya pinangalanang Kepha (John 1:42) ni Cristo si Simon sapagkat siya ang mag sibling tagapangalaga ng lahat ng kasapi ng Iglesia at Si Pedro ang foundation ng Iglesia kasama na rito ang mga apostol at profeta (Efe. 2:20). Mr. Arganda hindi ko binago ang nakasulat sa Biblia, IKAW ang bumago sa pagkaintindi mo sa Biblia.

    Ang mga sinaunang Cristiano ba sa kapanahunan ng 2nd Century (pagkatapos ng kapanahonan ng mga Apostol) hanggang 10th Century ay katulad ng pag-iisip ni Henry Arganda hingil kay Pedro at sa mga Apostol?
    Hindi po sapagkat ang paniniwala ng mga Church Fathers po ay contrary sa exegesis ni Henry Arganda. Narito po ang pahayag ng mga Church Fathers atbp:

    Peter is the Rock on which the Church is Built
    (Taken from ScriptureCatholic.com)

    “Peter, who is called ‘the rock on which the church should be built,’ who also obtained ‘the keys of the kingdom of heaven…’” Tertullian, On the Prescription Against the Heretics, 22 (c. A.D. 200).

    “And Peter, on whom the Church of Christ is built, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail…” Origen, Commentary on John, 5:3 (A.D. 232).
    “By this Spirit Peter spake that blessed word, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ By this Spirit the rock of the Church was established.” Hippolytus, Discourse on the Holy Theophany, 9 (ante A.D. 235).

    “’…thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church’ … It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church’s) oneness…If a man does not fast to this oneness of Peter, does he still imagine that he still holds the faith. If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church?” Cyprian, De Unitate Ecclesiae (Primacy text), 4 (A.D. 251).

    “…folly of (Pope) Stephen, that he who boasts of the place of the episcopate, and contends that he holds the succession from Peter, on whom the foundation of the Church were laid…” Firmilian, Epistle To Cyprian, Epistle 75(74):17(A.D. 256).
    “…Peter, that strongest and greatest of all the apostles, and the one who on account of his virtue was the speaker for all the others…” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 2:14 (A.D. 325).

    “And Peter,on whom the Church of Christ is built, ‘against which the gates of hell shall not prevail’” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6:25 (A.D. 325).

    “…the chief of the disciples…the Lord accepted him, set him up as the foundation, called him the rock and structure of the church.” Aphraates, De Paenitentibus Homily 7:15 (A.D. 337).

    “Peter, the foremost of the Apostles, and Chief Herald of the Church…” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures,1 1:3 (A.D. 350).
    “[B]lessed Simon, who after his confession of the mystery was set to be the foundation-stone of the Church, and received the keys of the kingdom…” Hilary de Poiters, On the Trinity, 6:20(A.D. 359).

    “[F]or the good of unity blessed Peter, for whom it would have been enough if after his denial he had obtained pardon only, deserved to be placed before all the apostles, and alone received the keys of the kingdom of heaven, to be communicated to the rest.” Optatus of Milevis, De Schismate Donatistorum, 7:3(A.D. 370).

    “[T]he Lord spoke to Peter a little earlier; he spoke to one, that from one he might found unity, soon delivering the same to all.” Pacian, To Sympronianus, Epistle 3:2 (AD 372).

    “Simon, My follower, I have made you the foundation of the Holy Church. I betimes called you Peter (Kepha), because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on earth a Church for me…I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, have given you authority over all my treasures.” Ephraim, Homily 4:1, (A.D. 373).

    “[T]he first of the apostles, the solid rock on which the Church was built.” Epiphanius, In Ancorato, 9:6 (A.D. 374).
    “Peter upon which rock the Lord promised that he would build his church.” Basil, In Isaias, 2:66 (A.D. 375).
    “As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the church is built!” Jerome, To Pope Damasus, Epistle 15 (A.D. 375).

    “Seest thou that of the disciples of Christ, all of whom were exalted and deserving of choice, one is called rock, and is entrusted with the foundations of the church.” Gregory of Nazianzen, Oration 32:18 (A.D. 380).

    “[W]e have considered that it ought be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it…”…The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the Apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither the stain nor blemish nor anything like it.” Pope Damasus, Decree of Damasus, 3 (A.D. 382).

    ”It was right indeed that he (Paul) should be anxious to see Peter; for he was the first among the apostles, and was entrusted by the Savior with the care of the churches.” Ambrosiaster, Commentary on Galatians, PL 17:344 (A.D. 384).

    “Peter bore the person of the church.” Augustine, Sermon 149:7 (inter A.D. 391-430).

    “Number the priests even from that seat of Peter. And in that order of fathers see to whom succeeded: that is the rock which the proud gates of hades do not conquer.” Augustine, Psalmus contro Partem Donati (A.D. 393).

    “But you say, the Church was rounded upon Peter: although elsewhere the same is attributed to all the Apostles, and they all receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the strength of the Church depends upon them all alike, yet one (Peter) among the twelve is chosen so that when a head has been appointed, there may be no occasion for schism.” Jerome, Against Jovinianus, 1 (A.D. 393).

    “The memory of Peter, who is the head of the apostles…he is the firm and most solid rock, on which the savior built his Church.” Gregory of Nyssa, Panegyric on St. Stephen, 3 (ante A.D. 394).

    “Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church,” Wherefore where Peter is the Church is…” Ambrose, Commentary on the Psalms, 40:30 (AD 395).

    “At length, after being tempted by the devil, Peter is set over the Church.” Ambrose, Commentary on the Psalms, 43:40 (AD 397).

    “In order that he may show his power, God has endowed none of his disciples with gifts like Peter. But, having raised him with heavenly gifts, he has set him above all. And, as first disciple and greater among the brethren, he has shown, by the test of deeds, the power of the Spirit. The first to be called, he followed at once…The Saviour confided to this man, as some special trust, the whole universal Church, after having asked him three times ‘Lovest thou me?’ And he receive the world in charge…” Asterius, Homily 8 (A.D. 400).

    “(Peter) The first of the Apostles, the foundation of the Church, the coryphaeus of the choir of disciples.” John Chrysostom, Ad eos qui scandalizati 17(ante A.D. 407).

    “Peter, that head of the Apostles, the first in the Church, the friend of Christ, who received revelation not from man but from the Father…this Peter, and when I say Peter, I mean that unbroken Rock, the unshaken foundation, the great Apostle, the first of the disciples, the first called, the first to obey.” John Chrysostom, De Eleemosyna, 3:4 (ante A.D. 407).

    “This Peter on whom Christ freely bestowed a sharing in his name. For just as Christ is the rock, as the Apostle Paul taught, so through Christ Peter is made rock, when the Lord says to him: “Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church…” Maximus of Turin, Homily 63 (A.D. 408).
    “…the most firm rock, who (Peter) from the principal Rock received a share of his virtue and his name.” Prosper of Aquitaine, The Call of All Nations, 2:28(A.D. 426).
    “He promises to found the church, assigning immovableness to it, as He is the Lord of strength, and over this he sets Peter as shepherd.” Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Matthew (A.D. 428).
    “[B]ut that great man, the disciple of disciples, that master among masters, who wielding the government of the Roman Church possessed the authority in faith and priesthood. Tell us therefore, tell us we beg of you, Peter, prince of the Apostles, tell us how the churches must believe in God.” John Cassian, Contra Nestorium, 3:12 (A.D. 430).
    “There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the Apostles, pillar of faith, and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to to-day and forever, lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed Pope Celestine, according to due order, is his successor and holds his place…” Philip, Council of Ephesus, Session III (A.D. 431).
    “[B]lessed Peter preserving in the strength of the Rock, which he has received, has not abandoned the helm of the Church, which he under took…And so if anything is rightly done and rightly decreed by us, if anything is won from the mercy of God by our daily supplications, it is of his work and merits whose power lives and whose authority prevails in his See…to him whom they know to be not only the patron of this See, but also primate of all bishops. When therefore…believe that he is speaking whose representative we are:..” Pope Leo the Great, Sermon 3:3-4 (A.D. 442).
    “We exhort you, honourable brother, to submit yourself in all things to what has been written by the blessed Bishop of Rome, because St. Peter, who lives and presides in his see, gives the true faith to those who seek it. For our part, for the sake of peace and the good of the faith, we cannot judge questions of doctrine without the consent of the Bishop of Rome.” Peter Chrysologus, Epistle 25 of Leo from Peter (A.D. 449).
    “If Paul, the herald of the truth, the trumpet of the Holy Ghost, hastened to the great Peter in order that he might carry from him the desired solution of difficulties to those at Antioch who were in doubt about living in conformity with the law, much more do we, men insignificant and small, hasten to your apostolic see in order to receive from you a cure for the wounds of the churches. For every reason it is fitting for you to hold the first place, inasmuch as your see is adorned with many privileges.” Theodoret of Cyrus, To Pope Leo, Epistle 113 (A.D. 449).
    “[T]he Lord wished to be indeed the concern of all the Apostles: and from him as from the Head wishes His gifts to flow to all the body: so that any one who dares to secede from Peter’s solid rock may understand that he has no part or lot in the divine mystery.” Pope Leo the Great, To Bishops of Vienne, Epistle 10 (A.D. 450).
    “Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith…” Council of Chalcedon, Session III (A.D. 451).
    “Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith, hath stripped him of the episcopate, and hath alienated from him all hieratic worthiness. ‘Peter, the apostle, who is the rock and support of the Catholic Church.’” Paschasinus, Council of Chalcedon, Session III (A.D. 451).
    “Peter is again called ‘the coryphaeus of the Apostles.’” Basil of Seleucia, Oratio 25 (ante A.D. 468).
    “The holy Roman Church is senior to the other churches not by virtue of any synodal decrees, but obtained the primacy from Our Lord and Savior in the words of the Gospel, ‘Thou art Peter…’” Pope Gelasius, Decree of Gelasium (A.D. 492).
    “[T]he statement of Our Lord Jesus Christ who said, ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,’…These (words) which were spoken, are proved by the effects of the deeds, because in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved without stain.’” Pope Hormisdas, Libellus professionis fidei, (A.D. 519).
    “To Peter, that is, to his church, he gave the power of retaining and forgiving sins on earth.” Fulgentius, De Remissione Peccatorum, 2:20 (A.D. 523).
    “Who could be ignorant of the fact that the holy church is consolidated in the solidity of the prince of the Apostles, whose firmness of character extended to his name so that he should be called Peter after the ‘rock’, when the voice of the Truth says, ‘I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven’. To him again is said “When after a little while thou hast come back to me, it is for thee to be the support of thy brethren.” Pope Gregory the Great, Epistle 40 (A.D. 604).
    “The decrees of the Roman Pontiff, standing upon the supremacy of the Apostolic See, are unquestionable.” Isidore of Seville, (ante A.D. 636).
    “For the extremities of the earth, and all in every part of it who purely and rightly confess the Lord, look directly towards the most holy Roman Church and its confession and faith, as it were a sun of unfailing light, awaiting from it the bright radiance of our fathers, according to what the six inspired and holy Councils have purely and piously decreed, declaring most expressly the symbol of faith. For from the coming down of the Incarnate Word among us, all the churches in every part of the world have possessed that greatest church alone as their base and foundation, seeing that, according to the promise of Christ Our Savior, the gates of hell do never prevail against it, that it possesses the Keys of right confession and faith in Him, that it opens the true and only religion to such as approach with piety, and shuts up and locks every heretical mouth that speaks injustice against the Most High.” Maximus the Confessor, Opuscula theologica et polemica (A.D. 650).
    “Peter was pronounced blessed by the Lord…the duty of feeding the spiritual sheep of the Church under whose protecting shield, this Apostolic Church of his has never turned away from the path of truth in any direction of error, whose authority, as that of the Prince of all the Apostles, the whole Catholic Church and the Ecumenical Synods have faithfully embraced…” Pope Agatho, To Ecumenical Council VI at Constantinople, (A.D. 680).
    “A copy of the letter sent by the holy and Ecumenical Sixth Council to Agatho, the most blessed and most holy pope of Old Rome…Therefore to thee, as to the bishop of the first see of the Universal Church, we leave what must be done, since you willingly take for your standing ground the firm rock of the faith, as we know from having read your true confession in the letter sent by your fatherly beatitude to the most pious emperor: and we acknowledge that this letter was divinely written (perscriptas) as by the Chief of the Apostles, and through it we have cast out the heretical sect of many errors which had recently sprung up..” Constantinople III, Council to Pope Agatho, (A.D. 680).
    “For, although the devil desired to sift all the disciples, the Lord testifies that He Himself asked for Peter alone, and wished that the others be confirmed my him; and to Peter also was committed the care of ‘feeding the sheep'(John 21:15);and to him also did the Lord hand over the ‘keys of the kingdom of heaven'(Matthew 16:19),and upon him did He promise to ‘build His Church’ (Matthew 16:18);and He testified that ‘the gates of Hell would not prevail against it’ (Matthew 16:19).” Pope Pelagius II, Quod Ad Dilectionem (c. A.D. 685).
    “’Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, and to thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven’? When Wilfrid spoken thus, the king said, ‘It is true, Colman, that these words were spoken to Peter by our Lord?’ He answered, ‘It is true O king!’ Then says he, ‘Can you show any such power given to your Columba?’ Colman answered, ‘None.’ Then added the king, “Do you both agree that these words were principally directed to Peter, and that the keys of heaven were given to him by our Lord?’ They both answered, ‘We do.’” Venerable Bede, (A.D. 700), Ecclesiastical History, 3:5 (A.D. 700).
    Link:

    Henry:
    yung mga protestanteng nag patotoo sa mat.16:18 mga mali din yun kasi may bahid pa ng mali ng katoliko yun kasi lumabas lang yun sa katoliko.

    G-one:
    Ewan ko kung nasa tamang pag-iisip si Henry Arganda. Mr. Arganda mag review ka nga ng Logic at Argumentation / Debate, dahil Fallacy of Non Sequitor ang mga contention mo. Fallacy of Non Sequitor- Ang ibig pong sabihin nito ay:

    Fallacy –errors in reasoning (Logical Fallacies) & error in understanding (Rhetorical Fallacies). The Art of Argumentation and Debate by: Africa, Page 92

    Non Sequitor is a Latin term which means it does not follow. This is a fallacy, which arises when the arguer draws a conclusion from a premise without any attempt to show the connection between the cause and the effect. (The Art of Argumentation and Debate by: Africa, Page 107)

    Hindi porkit lumabas sa Katoliko (Libro ng Katoliko) eh mali na iyon. Ang may akda tulad ni Fr. Ben Carreon ay sumulat lamang sa mga factual evidence hinggil sa mga stand ng scholars na mga protestante. Hindi basta-basta sinulat lang niya (Fr. Ben Carreon) na walang ebedinsya. Hindi po na emplowensyahan ang mga scholars na mga protestanti (ng Santa Iglesia Catolica) sa kanilang stand na si Pedro ang foundation ng iglesia sa Matt. 16:18.

    Henry:
    sa iyong footnotes sa amplified,nag jump ka sa iyong conclusion na inaangkin na naglagay ng comment na si Pedro ang pagtatayuan ng Iglesia.Matthew 16 (Amplified Bible)

    18And I tell you, you are [e]Peter [Greek, Petros–a large piece of rock], and on this rock [Greek, petra–a [f]huge rock like Gibraltar] I will build My church, and the gates of Hades (the powers of the [g]infernal region) shall [h]not overpower it [or be strong to its detriment or hold out against it].

    Footnotes:

    e. Matthew 16:18 The rock on which the church is built is traditionally interpreted as either Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah, or it may be Peter himself (see Eph. 2:20).
    Basahin mo ulit at unawain mo,…”or it may be…” nagpapahayag ng isang sugestion at hindi absolute conclusion na si pedro ang pagtatayuan

    G-one:
    Hindi nga absolute conclusion na si Pedro ang pagtatayuan sa Amplified Bible dahil sa conjunction na “OR” peru ipinahiwatig ng may akda (Amplified Bible) na “either Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah, or it may be Peter himself –is the rock on which the church is built. Samakatuwid dalawa lang ang pinag-pipilian ng may akda at salungat ito sa pahayag mo na si Cristo ang “bato” sa Matt. 16:18 (nang ginamit mo ang Amplified Bible sa contention mo).

    Henry:
    Ginamit mo ang mga protestant bible scholar,

    G-one:
    Ginamit ko ang mga protestant bible scholars; at may factual evidence ako hingil dito.

    Henry:
    ito naman ang isinulat ni Lorraine Boettner,a Theologian,Roman Catholism p.105″The Rock” -Romanist quote(Matt.16:13-19) this verse with relish,and add their own interpretation to establish their claim for papal authority. But in the greek the word peter is Petros,a person, masculine, while the word “rock”,petra is feminine and refers not to a person but to the declaration of Christ’s deitythat Peter had just uttered–“Thou art the Christ,the Son of the Living God”
    Using Peter’s name and making as it were,play upon words,Jesus said to Peter,”You are Petros and upon this petra I will build my church” The truth that Peter had just confessed was the foundation upon which Christ would build His church.He meant that Peter had seen the basic,essential truth concerning His person,the essential truth upon which the church would be founded, and that nothing would be able to overthrow that truth, not even all the forces of evil that might be arrayed against it.Peter was the first among the disciples to see our Lord as the Christ of God.Christ commended him for that spiritual insight, and said that His church would be founded upon that fact. And that, of course was a far different thing from founding the church on Peter.
    Had Christ intended to say that the Church would be founded on Peter,it would have been ridiculous for him to have shifted to the feminine form of the word in the middle of the statement,saying,if we may translate literally and somewhat whimsically,”And I say unto thee, that thou art Mr.Rock and upon this,the Miss Rock,I will build my church.” Clearly it was upon the truth that Peter had expressed, the deity of Christ,and not upon weak, vascillating Peter,that the church would be founded.The greek Petros is commonly used of a movable stone,a mere pebble,as it were.But “petra” means immovable foundation, in this instance the basic truth that Peter had just confessed,the deity of Christ.And in fact that is the point of conflict in the churches today between evangelicals on the one hand and modernist or liberals on the other,whether the church is founded on a truly divine Christ as revealed in a fully trustworthy Bible,or whether it is essentially a social service and moral welfare
    organization which recognizes Christ as an example, an outstandingly great and good man,but denies or ignores His deity.”

    G-one:
    Tungkol naman kay Lorraine Boettner masasabi nating itoy isang poor scholarship niya sapagkat sinabi niya na ang Petros ay kaiba sa petra dahil nga ang petros ay masculine at ang petra ay feminine peru pakakatandaan natin na ang vocal language na ginamit ni Jesu-Cristo sa panahon na ito (Mat. 16) ay ang Aramaic. Kaya nga tinawag ni Cristo si Simon na Kepha (John 1:42). Sa nasambit na natin sa Reply#2 kay Henry ang petros at petra ay walang pinagkakaiba sa Aramaic:

    Sa Matt. 16 ang linguahe na isinulat dito ay ang Greek; pero ang linguahing sinalita o ginamit ng Panginoon Jesus at nang mga apostol ay ang Aramaic. Ang BarJonah ay salitang Aramaic na ibig sabihin ay “son of Jonah”. Majority po ng mga scholar ay naniniwala na ang madalas na wikain ng Panginoong Jesus ay ang Aramaic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_of_Jesus)

    Kaya ang Matt. 16:18 na PETROS sa pagkasulat, peru ang ibinigkas talaga ng Panginoong Jesus ay KEPHA. Pariho lang po ang kahulugan ng PETROS (in Greek) sa KEPHA (in Aramaic) – “And he brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas” (which, when translated, is Peter f ). John 1:42 (TNIV)” at nasa footnote ng Today’s New International Version (TNIV) na ang CEPHAS ay Aramaic.

    Kaya sa Aramaic Bible ay walang pinag-iba ang Pedro sa Bato. Pawang KEPHA po ang Aramaic word ng Pedro at Bato dahil ang ibig sabihin ng Pedro ay Bato:

    At ang mga bihasang protestante ay alam ang mga nasambit natin sa itaas:

    David Hill
    Presbyterian minister and Senior Lecturer in the Department of Biblical Studies
    University of Sheffield, England
    On this rock I will build my church: the word-play goes back to Aramaic tradition. It is on Peter himself, the confessor of his Messiahship, that Jesus will build the Church. The disciple becomes, as it were, the foundation stone of the community. Attempts to interpret the “rock” as something other than Peter in person (e.g., his faith, the truth revealed to him) are due to Protestant bias, and introduce to the statement a degree of subtlety which is highly unlikely.
    “The Gospel of Matthew”
    The New Century Bible Commentary
    (London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1972), page 261
    JPK page 34

    Suzanne de Dietrich
    Presbyterian theologian
    The play on words in verse 18 indicates the Aramaic origin of the passage. The new name contains a promise. “Simon”, the fluctuating, impulsive disciple, will, by the grace of God, be the “rock” on which God will build the new community.
    The Layman’s Bible Commentary: Matthew, vol. 16
    (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1961), page 93
    JPK page 34

    Donald A. Hagner
    Fuller Theological Seminary
    The natural reading of the passage, despite the necessary shift from Petros to petra required by the word play in the Greek (but not the Aramaic, where the same word kepha occurs in both places), is that it is Peter who is the rock upon which the church is to be built…. The frequent attempts that have been made, largely in the past, to deny this in favor of the view that the confession itself is the rock… seem to be largely motivated by Protestant prejudice against a passage that is used by the Roman Catholics to justify the papacy.
    Matthew 14-28
    Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 33b
    (Dallas: Word Books, 1995), page 470
    JPK pages 36-37

    John A. Broadus
    Baptist author
    (two quotations from the same work)
    Many insist on the distinction between the two Greek words, thou art Petros and on this petra, holding that if the rock had meant Peter, either petros or petra would have been used both times, and that petros signifies a separate stone or fragment broken off, while petra is the massive rock. But this distinction is almost entirely confined to poetry, the common prose word instead of petros being lithos; nor is the distinction uniformly observed.
    But the main answer here is that our Lord undoubtedly spoke Aramaic, which has no known means of making such a distinction [between feminine petra and masculine petros in Greek]. The Peshitta (Western Aramaic) renders, “Thou are kipho, and on this kipho”. The Eastern Aramaic, spoken in Palestine in the time of Christ, must necessarily have said in like manner, “Thou are kepha, and on this kepha”…. Beza called attention to the fact that it is so likewise in French: “Thou art Pierre, and on this pierre”; and Nicholson suggests that we could say, “Thou art Piers (old English for Peter), and on this pier.”
    Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew
    (Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1886), pages 355-356
    JPK page 20

    (At marami pang iba, please refer to Reply#2)

    Henry:
    Patunay yan paisones na hindi lahat ng protestants ay pareho ang paniwala,”may conflict” kung matino kang gumamit ng mga protestants schoolar or teologian,dapat lahat gagamitin mo.

    G-one:
    Henry Arganda alam kong hindi lahat ng mga protestant scholars ay may stand na si San Pedro ang Foundation sa Matt. 16:19. Kung matino ka Mr. Arganda at alam mo ang rules ng public discussion hindi kana mag komento ng tulad nito: “kung matino kang gumamit ng mga protestants schoolar or teologian,dapat lahat gagamitin mo”
    Alam kong hindi lahat ng protestante ay nagkakasundo hinggil sa kanilang interpretation sa Biblia, kaya nga hindi nagkakaisa ang mga protestante sa kani-kanilang doctrina. Ang contention ko ay si San Pedro ang pinagtatayuan ng Iglesia sa Matt. 16:18 at bilang suporta sa mga argumento ko isinulat ko ang mga protestanting pabor sa contention ko. Pakakaalaman natin na ang mga protestante ay tinawag na protestante sapagkat contra sila sa mga doctrina ng Santa Iglesia. Kaya ginamit ko ang mga protestante na pabor sa contention ko dahil ang nature ng protestante ay contrahin ang doctrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica.

    Henry:
    -one: Para sa kalinawan ng lahat hindi po namin sinabi na si Pedro lamang ang pundasyon na mababasa sa BUONG BIBLIA. Napakasinungaling po nitong si Mr. Arganda. Mr. Arganda saan po nabasa na sinulat ko na si Pedro lang ang pundasyon na mababasa sa Buong Biblia? Ang sabi ko na si Pedro lamang ang Pundation na tinotokoy na pagtatayuan ng Iglesia sa Matt. 16:18 (specific verse in the Bible; not whole Bible); hindi ko sinabing si Pedro LAMANG ang Foundation ng Iglesia na mababasa sa Buong Biblia. Para maintindihan ng lahat… Sa Matt. 16:18 si Pedro lamang ang tinutukoy na syang pagtatayuan ng Iglesia (kung sa Matt. 16:18 lamang ang pag-uusapan) peru kung sa buong biblia na pag-uusapan abay hindi ko sinasabing si San Pedro lamang ang Foundation ng Iglesia; pati narin ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo, mga Apostol at mga Propeta ay Foundation rin ng tunay na Iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo (Efe. 2:20).

    Bingo!!!!!yan inamin mo na hindi lamang si pedro ang pundasyun ng iglesia kung ang biblia sa kabuuan ang pagbabatayan!!pero teka basahin natin ang isang sagot mo…

    G-one:
    FITA!!!!
    Tulad ng nasambit ko na na hindi lamang si San Pedro ang foundation ng iglesia kung patungkol sa boung laman ng Biblia (Efe. 2:20) peru sa Matt. 16:18 si San Pedro ang foundation ng Iglesia.

    Henry:
    G-one: Itong si Henry napakasinungaling, Hindi po doctrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica na si Cristo ay hindi foundation; kaya nga ginamit po namin ang Efe. 2:20 dahil aral ng Iglesia Catolica yang verse na yan. Ang punto po naming dito na SA MATTHEW 16:18 SI SAN PEDRO PO ANG BATO NA SINABI NI CRISTO NA PAGTATAYOAN NG KANYANG IGLESIA. Therefore Saint Peter is the Foundation of the Church in Matt. 16:18.

    dito tayo sa jump conclucion mo…SA MAT.16:18 SI SAN PEDRO PO ANG BATO NA SINABI NI CRISTO NA PAGTATAYUAN NG IGLESIA,.”THEREFORE MR.PAISONES KUNG HINDI LANG SI PEDRO ANG PUNDASYUN NG IGLESIA ,AY MARAMING BATO..???samakatuwid maraming bato sa mateo 16:18,si Cristo,si pedro,at ang mga alagad (kasama ni pedrong mga apostol)verse 13—

    G-one:
    Ang tanong ni Henry Arganda ay hindi malinaw “THEREFORE MR.PAISONES KUNG HINDI LANG SI PEDRO ANG PUNDASYUN NG IGLESIA ,AY MARAMING BATO..???- Baka ang tanong ni Henry ay ganito “THEREFORE MR.PAISONES KUNG HINDI LANG SI PEDRO ANG PUNDASYUN NG IGLESIA, ANG IGLESIA AY MARAMING BATO..???
    Ang sagot po natin sa tanong ni Henry Arganda:
    SA MAT.16:18 SI SAN PEDRO PO ANG BATO NA SINABI NI CRISTO NA PAGTATAYUAN NG IGLESIA. At singular lang po ang ginamit rito na bato sa Matt. 16:18 na patungkol kay San Pedro.
    PERU KUNG SA BOUNG BIBLIA HINDI LANG SI PEDRO ANG FUNDATION KUNG PATUNGKOL SA BUONG BIBLIA ANG PAG-UUSAPAN (Efe. 2:20).
    Tingnan po natin ang argument ni Mr. Henry pagkatapos ng kanyang tanong:

    samakatuwid maraming bato sa mateo 16:18,si Cristo,si pedro,at ang mga alagad (kasama ni pedrong mga apostol)verse 13—

    Sa mababasa natin sa Matt. 16:18 isa (singular) lang ang batong pinag-uusapan rito- at ito ay si Pedro.

    Henry:
    sabi mo aral ng katoliko ang verse na yang sa efeso 2:20 –saan nga sa catholic dogma?wag si soc ang gamitin mo..yung official na aklat na Doktrina na katoliko…catholic dogma(doctrine)

    G-one:
    Hindi ba Henry Arganda napagkasunduan na natin via email (yahoo) ang mga hinanaing mo sa itaas (tungkol sa Catholic Dogma) suman-ayon ka muna sa napagkasunduan natin? Pagnabasa ko na ang Efe. 2:20 ay doctrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica ayon sa Catholic dogma(doctrine) sang-ayon kaba sa napag kasunduan natin sa yahoo mail?
    Henry Saan mababasa sa Catholic Dogma na hindi doctrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica ang Efe. 2:20?

    Henry:
    samakatuwid paisones kung ang kabuuan ng biblia ang pagbabatayan ay mali ang unawa mo sa mat 16:18..na si pedro lamang ang pundasyun ng iglesia.tinatanggap mo ba ito?sagutin mo!

    G-one:
    Sa Matt. 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”. Upon this rock is singular and this refers to Saint Peter. Eph. 2:19-20 (Jerusalem Bible) So you are no longer aliens or foreign visitors: you are citizens like all the saints, and of God’s household. You are part of a building that has the apostles and prophets for its foundations, and Christ Jesus himself for its main cornerstone.

    Pansinin po natin ang sentence na “You are part of a building that has the apostles and prophets for its foundations, and Christ Jesus himself for its main cornerstone” sa Jerusalem Bible. Sa Eph. 2:19 nakasaad po doon na “you are citizens like all the saints, and of God’s household” ibig sabihin po nito na kasapi naho tayo sa house ng Diyos. Ang house of God ay ang Iglesia po (1 Tim. 3:15 KJV “But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.”). We are part of the building (The Church) being built upon the foundation of apostles and prophets and Christ Jesus himself for its main cornerstone (Eph. 2:19-20).
    Kaya hindi mali ang unawa ko sa Matt. 16:18 na si Pedro ang foundation ng Iglesia; at sa buong Biblia pati narin ng mga apostol, mga porfeta at si Cristo (main corner stone) mismo ang foundation ng iglesia.

    Henry:
    G-paisones-said, peru kung sa buong biblia na pag-uusapan abay hindi ko sinasabing si San Pedro lamang ang Foundation ng Iglesia; pati narin ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo, mga Apostol at mga Propeta ay Foundation rin ng tunay na Iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo (Efe. 2:20).
    sa sagot mong ito Paisones ay maraming pundasyun ang iglesia..KUNG MAY MABASA AKONG BERSIKULO NA ISA LANG ANG PUNDASYUN NG IGLESIA SI CRISTO LANG AAMININ MO BA NA FALSE CHURCH ANG KATOLIKO?

    G-one:
    Siguro ang nasa isipan ni Henry Arganda na gagamitin niya ay ang 1 Cor 3:11? Peru ganito po ang tamang interpretation sa 1 Cor. 3:11:

    Sa pundation ng Tunay na Iglesia, hindi lamang si Pedro o mga apostol at mga propeta ang nag silbing pundasyon dito, bagkus nariyan si Cristo ang Batong Espiritwal(1 Cor. 10:4) na foundation din ng tunay na Iglesia (1 Cor 3:11) (Defense Catholic Truth by Bro. Socrates Fernandez, Page 59-60) dahil sasamahan nya ang Kanyang Iglesia hanggang sa kataposan ng mundo (Mat. 28:19-20) at hinding-hindi ito madadaig ng kamatayan (Matt. 16:18-19). Kaya hindi po contradict ang Matt. 16:18 at Eph. 2:20 sa 1 Cor. 3:11.

    Ang ibig sabihin sa “for other foundation can no man lay” ito po yong mga itinatag na Iglesia na tao lamang ang nag tatag, at hindi si Cristo (Act 17:24 KJV “God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands,”) -tulad na lamang ng 4th Watch PMCC na itinatag ni Arsenio Feriol dito sa Pilipinas.

    Ang 4th Watch PMCC na itinatag ni Arsenio Ferriol ay hindi tunay na iglesia sapagkat ayon kay Cristo na Siya ay mag tatag ng Kanyang Iglesia (Matt. 16:18) at naitatag nya ito (Mat. 18:17) at sasamahan nya ito araw-araw hanggang sa kataposan ng mundo (Matt. 28:19-20) kaya mula sa panahon ng Panginoon Jesu-Cristo hanggang sa kasalukoyan NARITO PARIN ANG TUNAY NA IGLESIA- AT ITO ANG SANTA, IGLESIA, CATOLICA, APOSTOLICA, ROMANA. Samantalang ang 4th Watch PMCC ay wala pang isang daan taon itong itinatag ni Arsenio Ferriol.

    Ang Santa Iglesia Catolica lamang ang makapag-dugtong sa panahon ni Cristo hanggang sa kasalukoyang panahon.

    Henry:
    G-one says-Sabi mo na mali ang naka sulat sa Efe. 2:20; ano ba ang authority mo nang sabihin mo na mali ang Efe. 2:20?

    sagot Mr paisones wag kang maglalagay ng mga salitang di ko sinabi o sinulat makakasuhan ka nang libelo..saan ko sinabi na mali ang nakasulat sa efeso 2:20?ipakita mo nga? kung di mo maipakita Juan 8:44 ka…hihintayin ko ..

    G-one:
    Henry Arganda kung kakasuhan mo ako, maraming-maraming salamat sa iyo. At alam moba kung ano ang kasong libelo? Bro Henry, wagkang magmarunong, ika nga sa Cebuano: “Ayaw pagpatoo-too”; kasi hindi mo nga alam ang kasong libelo. Granting without admitting na pinaparatangan kita at hindi mo talaga sinulat (implicit & explicit) na mali ang naka sulat sa Efe. 2:20; then mag tanung ka sa abogado kung makakasuhan ba ako ng libelo… Assignment mo yan ha…..

    Nang sabihin natin ni henry na: “Sabi mo na mali ang naka sulat sa Efe. 2:20; ano ba ang authority mo nang sabihin mo na mali ang Efe. 2:20?” –ito’y dahil sa kanyang sinulat (comment) sa amin, samakatuwid ang aking katanungan sa itaas ay basi narin sa kanyang komento sa amin; narito ang kanyang komento:

    “o sige gamitin natin yung ginagamit nyo sa efeso..2:20..diba ginagamit nyo ito para patunayan na ang pundasyun ay apostol eh mali pa rin kayo ipalagay na natin na maga apostol ang pundasyun sa hindi paggamit ng ibang verse sa biglang basa ika nga mali pa rin kayo kasi sabi nyo si pedro lang ang pundasyun eh d2 mga apostol at mga propeta eh di marami nakuuu bakit paborito nyo si pedro lang mahina pundasyun nyo sa tao lang”

    Malinaw na nakasaad sa Efe. 2:20 “…apostles and prophets for its foundations, and Christ Jesus himself for its main cornerstone.” Peru ang sabi ni Henry ay: “…efeso..2:20..diba ginagamit nyo ito para patunayan na ang pundasyun ay apostol eh mali pa rin kayo ipalagay na natin na maga apostol ang pundasyun sa hindi paggamit ng ibang verse sa biglang basa…” Malinaw na sinabi ni Henry na mali raw na “pundasyun ay apostol” peru nang binasa natin ang Efe. 2:20 nakasaad roon na “…apostles and prophets for its foundations, and Christ Jesus himself for its main cornerstone.” Kaya naitanong natin kay Henry na: ano ba ang authority mo nang sabihin mo na mali ang Efe. 2:20?

    Henry:
    G-one At mali daw ang nakasulat sa Efe. 2:20 na ang mga Apostol ay pundation ng Iglesia. Nako itong si Mr. Arganda kahit mababasa na eh gilubag parin. Hindi po mali ang Efe. 2:20 ang mali po ay si Mr. Arganda.

    Sagot paisones,hindi ko sinabi na mali ang efeso 2:20 -ang mali yang unawa mo,basahin mo pinutol mo na naman..nawala ang mga propeta,.ang nilagay mo ay ang mga apostol ay pundation ng iglesia…tingnan mo nga ang epeso 2:20 kung yan ang nakalagay?binago na naman parang si satanas ka gumamit ng talata…

    G-one:
    Hindi sinabi (explicitly) ni Henry na mali ang efeso 2:20 peru maiintindihan at mababasa (implicit) na sinabi niya na mali ang efeso 2:20 dahil sinabi niya na mali raw na “pundasyun ay apostol” peru nang binasa natin ang Efe. 2:20 nakasaad roon na “…apostles and prophets for its foundations, and Christ Jesus himself for its main cornerstone.” Kaya naitanong natin kay Henry na: ano ba ang authority mo nang sabihin mo na mali ang Efe. 2:20?
    Dagdag pa ni Henry Arganda na mali daw ang unawa ko sa Efe. 2:20. Mga kapatid kayo na ang mag husga kung sino ang may maling pang-uunawa sa amin dalawa ni Henry Arganda (4th Watch PMCC) at sa akin (G-one Paisones –Catholic Faith Defender)

    Makapagbigay kaba ng Bible scholar na nagsasabing hindi foundation ang apostol sa Efe. 2:20? Pangalawang assignment mo na yan ha….

    Sa rules ng argumentation kailang dapat nakatoon sa subject ang proposition ng Debator. Kaya paminsan minsan hindi na natin isinasali sa pagsulat ang “profeta” sa Efe. 2:20 para malinawan ang bumabasa, makuha nila ang punto natin (particularly sa pinag-uusapang topiko) at malaman nila ang katotohan.

    Ang sumusunod ay ang mga Argumento:

    Henry Arganda: (4th Watch PMCC) – Sa Efe. 2:20 “Hindi foundation ang mga Apostolis” – (Ito po ay implicit basi narin sa mga comento ni Henry Arganda)

    G-one Paisones (Catholic Faith Defender) – Sa Efe. 2:20 “Ang mga Apostolis ay foundation”

    Kaya minsan hindi na natin naisama ang profeta sa mga argumento ko laban kay Henry.

    Sumatotal hindi ko binago ang Biblia; alam ng bumabasa na hindi natin binago Efe. 2:20 dahil sa nasambit na natin sa itaas na ang mga apostol, mga porfeta at si Cristo (main corner stone) mismo ang foundation ng iglesia. Peru paminsan-minsan hindi na natin isinusulat ang mga profeta para maka-focust ang bumabasa sa topiko na pinag-dedebatihan.

    Henry:
    G-one question-Sang-ayon kaba sa sinasabi ko na ang tunay na iglesia ay sasamahan ni Cristo araw-araw hanggang sa kataposan ng mundo?

    oo sang ayun ako kami yun, hindi kayo yun.

    G-one:
    Check Mate!
    Salamat sa pag sagot mo sa tanong ko. Peru napansin kong hindi mo sinagutan lahat ng tanong ko. Peru OK lang baka busy ka. Kung may Oras ka paki sagot naman ng mga tanong ko…. salamat…

    Dahil sang-ayon ka na ang tunay na iglesia ay sasamahan ni Cristo araw-araw hanggang sa kataposan ng mundo at sinabi mong hindi kayo (Catholic Church) yun; ang follow-up question ko sa iyo Henry Arganda (At pakisunod narin ng mga iba kong tanong) itong iglesia na ito; ito ba ay ang 4th Watch PMCC?

    Maraming salamat sa mga replies mo sa akin.

    Regards.

  6. […] Regards. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Reply from Henry Arganda (Member PMCC 4thwatch) #2 […]

  7. PANSININ NATIN ANG MGA MALING SAGOT NI PAISONES,

    G-ONE (alyas paisones),Sa itaas malinaw na malinaw ang kamalian ni Henry Arganda dahil sabi nya na ang “Rock petra i will build my church a large piece of rock like gibraltar.. means ng gibraltar na syang petra (Christ) Peru ang footnote nang nasabing Amplified Bible ay hindi naman pala. Kaya po nabuko po natin ang kamalian ni Henry Arganda.

    tingnan naman natin kung anong sagot nya dun sa isang pahayag nya tungkul sa footnote,itong si paisones..laking kalituhan..mahirap kasi ang lumaban sa katotohanan ng bible laging mabubuking..katakot takot na panglulubid ang ginagawa nya,

    Footnotes:

    e. Matthew 16:18 The rock on which the church is built is traditionally interpreted as either Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah, or it may be Peter himself (see Eph. 2:20).
    Basahin mo ulit at unawain mo,…”or it may be…” nagpapahayag ng isang sugestion at hindi absolute conclusion na si pedro ang pagtatayuan

    G-one:
    Hindi nga absolute conclusion na si Pedro ang pagtatayuan sa Amplified Bible dahil sa conjunction na “OR” peru ipinahiwatig ng may akda (Amplified Bible) na “either Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah, or it may be Peter himself –is the rock on which the church is built. Samakatuwid dalawa lang ang pinag-pipilian ng may akda at salungat ito sa pahayag mo na si Cristo ang “bato” sa Matt. 16:18 (nang ginamit mo ang Amplified Bible sa contention mo)

    HINDI DAW ABSOLUTE CONCLUSION NA SI PEDRO ANG PAGTATAYUAN,.

    G-ONE-Ang sabi ko na si Pedro lamang ang Pundation na tinotokoy na pagtatayuan ng Iglesia sa Matt. 16:18 (specific verse in the Bible; not whole Bible)

    TINGNAN MO YAN PAISONES HULING HULI KA yang salitang “LAMANG”absolute conclusion yan..oopps baka tumakas ka na naman..sabi pa nya dalawa lang ang pinagpipilian ng may akda..pero sa kanya(paisones)pinili agad si pedro..

    but let us once more study the petros and petra..The rcc apologists claim that “Petros” [masculine in gender] is the proper word to address “Simon Peter” since it is grammatically incorrect to call a male man, “Petra” [feminine in gender].

    Is it really grammatically incorrect to call Simon Peter, a male man, “Petra” – a Greek word feminine in gender?

    Based on biblical use of the word, “Petra”, this so called grammatical prohibition is suspect. Paul calls Christ “Petra” [feminine in gender] in 1 Cor. 10:4.

    1 Cor 10:4

    And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock [petra] was Christ.

    In the Greek NT, Christ has many names or titles that are feminine in gender such as; Power or “Dunamis”, Wisdom or “Sophia”, Resurrection or “Anastasis”, Way or “Hodos” , Truth or “Aletheia”, and the Life or “Zoe”

    1 Cor. 1:24

    But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power [duvnamin] of God, and the wisdom [sofivan] of God.

    John 11:25

    Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection [ajnavstasiß], and the life [zwhv]: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

    John 14:6

    Jesus saith unto him, I am the way [oJdo], the truth [ajlhvqeia], and the life [zwhv]: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

    If the feminine gender “PETRA” can be used for Christ (a male man) how can there be an objection on grammatical ground on the use of “Petra” for Peter (also a male man)? IOW, Matt. 16:18 could have been written this way:

    “You are Petra and on this Petra I will build my church.”

    However, it is interesting to ask why the Gospel Writer did not use “Petra” to address Simon Peter.

    A very good reason is to differentiate the person of Peter (“Petros”) from the person of Christ the “Petra.”

    It is highly probable that the Greek Gospel Writer wanted to retain the original “word play” as he heard Christ say it verbatim in the Aramaic; “Kepha” for “Petros” and “Shua” for “Petra.”

    Christ is the only person ever explicitly called “Petra” in the NT Scriptures. Likewise, “Petros,” is used to refer to Peter alone.

    “Shua” for “Petra.”

    Is it any wonder that the Aramaic name of Jesus is YeSHUA.

    Matthew 16:18: The Petros-petra Wordplay — Greek, Aramaic, or Hebrew?

    by David Bivin, Member of the Jerusalem School.
    Published: 01-Jan-2004
    David Bivin

    The pinnacle of the gospel story may be Jesus’ dramatic statement, “You are Petros and on this petra I will build my church.” The saying seems to contain an obvious Greek wordplay, indicating that Jesus spoke in Greek. However, it is possible that “Petros…petra” is a Hebrew wordplay.

    The recognition that the synoptic gospels are derived from a Semitic source or sources seems essential to any productive methodology of interpretation. Scholars of the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research have found that often unless one translates the Greek texts of the synoptic gospels to Hebrew, one cannot fully understand their meaning.

    BALIKAN NATIN ANG MGA MALING SAGOT PA NI PAISONES,(G-0)

    Peter is the Rock on which the Church is Built
    (Taken from ScriptureCatholic.com)

    “Peter, who is called ‘the rock on which the church should be built,’ who also obtained ‘the keys of the kingdom of heaven…’” Tertullian, On the Prescription Against the Heretics, 22 (c. A.D. 200).

    “And Peter, on whom the Church of Christ is built, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail…” Origen, Commentary on John, 5:3 (A.D. 232).
    “By this Spirit Peter spake that blessed word, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ By this Spirit the rock of the Church was established.” Hippolytus, Discourse on the Holy Theophany, 9 (ante A.D. 235).

    “’…thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church’ … It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church’s) oneness…If a man does not fast to this oneness of Peter, does he still imagine that he still holds the faith. If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church?” Cyprian, De Unitate Ecclesiae (Primacy text), 4 (A.D. 251).

    “…folly of (Pope) Stephen, that he who boasts of the place of the episcopate, and contends that he holds the succession from Peter, on whom the foundation of the Church were laid…” Firmilian, Epistle To Cyprian, Epistle 75(74):17(A.D. 256).
    “…Peter, that strongest and greatest of all the apostles, and the one who on account of his virtue was the speaker for all the others…” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 2:14 (A.D. 325).

    “And Peter,on whom the Church of Christ is built, ‘against which the gates of hell shall not prevail’” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6:25 (A.D. 325).

    “…the chief of the disciples…the Lord accepted him, set him up as the foundation, called him the rock and structure of the church.” Aphraates, De Paenitentibus Homily 7:15 (A.D. 337).

    “Peter, the foremost of the Apostles, and Chief Herald of the Church…” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures,1 1:3 (A.D. 350).
    “[B]lessed Simon, who after his confession of the mystery was set to be the foundation-stone of the Church, and received the keys of the kingdom…” Hilary de Poiters, On the Trinity, 6:20(A.D. 359).

    “[F]or the good of unity blessed Peter, for whom it would have been enough if after his denial he had obtained pardon only, deserved to be placed before all the apostles, and alone received the keys of the kingdom of heaven, to be communicated to the rest.” Optatus of Milevis, De Schismate Donatistorum, 7:3(A.D. 370).

    “[T]he Lord spoke to Peter a little earlier; he spoke to one, that from one he might found unity, soon delivering the same to all.” Pacian, To Sympronianus, Epistle 3:2 (AD 372).

    “Simon, My follower, I have made you the foundation of the Holy Church. I betimes called you Peter (Kepha), because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on earth a Church for me…I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, have given you authority over all my treasures.” Ephraim, Homily 4:1, (A.D. 373).

    “[T]he first of the apostles, the solid rock on which the Church was built.” Epiphanius, In Ancorato, 9:6 (A.D. 374).
    “Peter upon which rock the Lord promised that he would build his church.” Basil, In Isaias, 2:66 (A.D. 375).
    “As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the church is built!” Jerome, To Pope Damasus, Epistle 15 (A.D. 375).

    “Seest thou that of the disciples of Christ, all of whom were exalted and deserving of choice, one is called rock, and is entrusted with the foundations of the church.” Gregory of Nazianzen, Oration 32:18 (A.D. 380).

    “[W]e have considered that it ought be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it…”…The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the Apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither the stain nor blemish nor anything like it.” Pope Damasus, Decree of Damasus, 3 (A.D. 382).

    ”It was right indeed that he (Paul) should be anxious to see Peter; for he was the first among the apostles, and was entrusted by the Savior with the care of the churches.” Ambrosiaster, Commentary on Galatians, PL 17:344 (A.D. 384).

    “Peter bore the person of the church.” Augustine, Sermon 149:7 (inter A.D. 391-430).

    “Number the priests even from that seat of Peter. And in that order of fathers see to whom succeeded: that is the rock which the proud gates of hades do not conquer.” Augustine, Psalmus contro Partem Donati (A.D. 393).

    “But you say, the Church was rounded upon Peter: although elsewhere the same is attributed to all the Apostles, and they all receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the strength of the Church depends upon them all alike, yet one (Peter) among the twelve is chosen so that when a head has been appointed, there may be no occasion for schism.” Jerome, Against Jovinianus, 1 (A.D. 393).

    “The memory of Peter, who is the head of the apostles…he is the firm and most solid rock, on which the savior built his Church.” Gregory of Nyssa, Panegyric on St. Stephen, 3 (ante A.D. 394).

    “Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church,” Wherefore where Peter is the Church is…” Ambrose, Commentary on the Psalms, 40:30 (AD 395).

    “At length, after being tempted by the devil, Peter is set over the Church.” Ambrose, Commentary on the Psalms, 43:40 (AD 397).

    “In order that he may show his power, God has endowed none of his disciples with gifts like Peter. But, having raised him with heavenly gifts, he has set him above all. And, as first disciple and greater among the brethren, he has shown, by the test of deeds, the power of the Spirit. The first to be called, he followed at once…The Saviour confided to this man, as some special trust, the whole universal Church, after having asked him three times ‘Lovest thou me?’ And he receive the world in charge…” Asterius, Homily 8 (A.D. 400).

    “(Peter) The first of the Apostles, the foundation of the Church, the coryphaeus of the choir of disciples.” John Chrysostom, Ad eos qui scandalizati 17(ante A.D. 407).

    “Peter, that head of the Apostles, the first in the Church, the friend of Christ, who received revelation not from man but from the Father…this Peter, and when I say Peter, I mean that unbroken Rock, the unshaken foundation, the great Apostle, the first of the disciples, the first called, the first to obey.” John Chrysostom, De Eleemosyna, 3:4 (ante A.D. 407).

    “This Peter on whom Christ freely bestowed a sharing in his name. For just as Christ is the rock, as the Apostle Paul taught, so through Christ Peter is made rock, when the Lord says to him: “Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church…” Maximus of Turin, Homily 63 (A.D. 408).
    “…the most firm rock, who (Peter) from the principal Rock received a share of his virtue and his name.” Prosper of Aquitaine, The Call of All Nations, 2:28(A.D. 426).
    “He promises to found the church, assigning immovableness to it, as He is the Lord of strength, and over this he sets Peter as shepherd.” Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Matthew (A.D. 428).
    “[B]ut that great man, the disciple of disciples, that master among masters, who wielding the government of the Roman Church possessed the authority in faith and priesthood. Tell us therefore, tell us we beg of you, Peter, prince of the Apostles, tell us how the churches must believe in God.” John Cassian, Contra Nestorium, 3:12 (A.D. 430).
    “There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the Apostles, pillar of faith, and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to to-day and forever, lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed Pope Celestine, according to due order, is his successor and holds his place…” Philip, Council of Ephesus, Session III (A.D. 431).
    “[B]lessed Peter preserving in the strength of the Rock, which he has received, has not abandoned the helm of the Church, which he under took…And so if anything is rightly done and rightly decreed by us, if anything is won from the mercy of God by our daily supplications, it is of his work and merits whose power lives and whose authority prevails in his See…to him whom they know to be not only the patron of this See, but also primate of all bishops. When therefore…believe that he is speaking whose representative we are:..” Pope Leo the Great, Sermon 3:3-4 (A.D. 442).
    “We exhort you, honourable brother, to submit yourself in all things to what has been written by the blessed Bishop of Rome, because St. Peter, who lives and presides in his see, gives the true faith to those who seek it. For our part, for the sake of peace and the good of the faith, we cannot judge questions of doctrine without the consent of the Bishop of Rome.” Peter Chrysologus, Epistle 25 of Leo from Peter (A.D. 449).
    “If Paul, the herald of the truth, the trumpet of the Holy Ghost, hastened to the great Peter in order that he might carry from him the desired solution of difficulties to those at Antioch who were in doubt about living in conformity with the law, much more do we, men insignificant and small, hasten to your apostolic see in order to receive from you a cure for the wounds of the churches. For every reason it is fitting for you to hold the first place, inasmuch as your see is adorned with many privileges.” Theodoret of Cyrus, To Pope Leo, Epistle 113 (A.D. 449).
    “[T]he Lord wished to be indeed the concern of all the Apostles: and from him as from the Head wishes His gifts to flow to all the body: so that any one who dares to secede from Peter’s solid rock may understand that he has no part or lot in the divine mystery.” Pope Leo the Great, To Bishops of Vienne, Epistle 10 (A.D. 450).
    “Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith…” Council of Chalcedon, Session III (A.D. 451).
    “Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith, hath stripped him of the episcopate, and hath alienated from him all hieratic worthiness. ‘Peter, the apostle, who is the rock and support of the Catholic Church.’” Paschasinus, Council of Chalcedon, Session III (A.D. 451).
    “Peter is again called ‘the coryphaeus of the Apostles.’” Basil of Seleucia, Oratio 25 (ante A.D. 468).
    “The holy Roman Church is senior to the other churches not by virtue of any synodal decrees, but obtained the primacy from Our Lord and Savior in the words of the Gospel, ‘Thou art Peter…’” Pope Gelasius, Decree of Gelasium (A.D. 492).
    “[T]he statement of Our Lord Jesus Christ who said, ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,’…These (words) which were spoken, are proved by the effects of the deeds, because in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved without stain.’” Pope Hormisdas, Libellus professionis fidei, (A.D. 519).
    “To Peter, that is, to his church, he gave the power of retaining and forgiving sins on earth.” Fulgentius, De Remissione Peccatorum, 2:20 (A.D. 523).
    “Who could be ignorant of the fact that the holy church is consolidated in the solidity of the prince of the Apostles, whose firmness of character extended to his name so that he should be called Peter after the ‘rock’, when the voice of the Truth says, ‘I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven’. To him again is said “When after a little while thou hast come back to me, it is for thee to be the support of thy brethren.” Pope Gregory the Great, Epistle 40 (A.D. 604).
    “The decrees of the Roman Pontiff, standing upon the supremacy of the Apostolic See, are unquestionable.” Isidore of Seville, (ante A.D. 636).
    “For the extremities of the earth, and all in every part of it who purely and rightly confess the Lord, look directly towards the most holy Roman Church and its confession and faith, as it were a sun of unfailing light, awaiting from it the bright radiance of our fathers, according to what the six inspired and holy Councils have purely and piously decreed, declaring most expressly the symbol of faith. For from the coming down of the Incarnate Word among us, all the churches in every part of the world have possessed that greatest church alone as their base and foundation, seeing that, according to the promise of Christ Our Savior, the gates of hell do never prevail against it, that it possesses the Keys of right confession and faith in Him, that it opens the true and only religion to such as approach with piety, and shuts up and locks every heretical mouth that speaks injustice against the Most High.” Maximus the Confessor, Opuscula theologica et polemica (A.D. 650).
    “Peter was pronounced blessed by the Lord…the duty of feeding the spiritual sheep of the Church under whose protecting shield, this Apostolic Church of his has never turned away from the path of truth in any direction of error, whose authority, as that of the Prince of all the Apostles, the whole Catholic Church and the Ecumenical Synods have faithfully embraced…” Pope Agatho, To Ecumenical Council VI at Constantinople, (A.D. 680).
    “A copy of the letter sent by the holy and Ecumenical Sixth Council to Agatho, the most blessed and most holy pope of Old Rome…Therefore to thee, as to the bishop of the first see of the Universal Church, we leave what must be done, since you willingly take for your standing ground the firm rock of the faith, as we know from having read your true confession in the letter sent by your fatherly beatitude to the most pious emperor: and we acknowledge that this letter was divinely written (perscriptas) as by the Chief of the Apostles, and through it we have cast out the heretical sect of many errors which had recently sprung up..” Constantinople III, Council to Pope Agatho, (A.D. 680).
    “For, although the devil desired to sift all the disciples, the Lord testifies that He Himself asked for Peter alone, and wished that the others be confirmed my him; and to Peter also was committed the care of ‘feeding the sheep’(John 21:15);and to him also did the Lord hand over the ‘keys of the kingdom of heaven’(Matthew 16:19),and upon him did He promise to ‘build His Church’ (Matthew 16:18);and He testified that ‘the gates of Hell would not prevail against it’ (Matthew 16:19).” Pope Pelagius II, Quod Ad Dilectionem (c. A.D. 685).
    “’Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, and to thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven’? When Wilfrid spoken thus, the king said, ‘It is true, Colman, that these words were spoken to Peter by our Lord?’ He answered, ‘It is true O king!’ Then says he, ‘Can you show any such power given to your Columba?’ Colman answered, ‘None.’ Then added the king, “Do you both agree that these words were principally directed to Peter, and that the keys of heaven were given to him by our Lord?’ They both answered, ‘We do.’” Venerable Bede, (A.D. 700), Ecclesiastical History, 3:5 (A.D. 700).
    Link:

    Ang mga ginamit ni Paisones na mga nagpatotoo na hindi matuwid na patotoo”mga commentaries ,pansinin nyo sa taas hindi naman sila nangatwiran ayon sa biblia,at ang mga ginamit nyang ito na mga church fathers kuno,ay si pedro lang ang tinuturo na foundation,!!pero kaya paisones iba naman at sabi ni Paisones ay ganito….

    G-paisones-said, peru kung sa buong biblia na pag-uusapan abay hindi ko sinasabing si San Pedro lamang ang Foundation ng Iglesia; pati narin ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo, mga Apostol at mga Propeta ay Foundation rin ng tunay na Iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo (Efe. 2:20).

    ikaw ang humatol paisones kung parehas kayo ng mga church fathers mong yan…

    ISA pang mali ni Paisones…basahin muna natin ang tanong ko na mali ang sagot nya..

    Henry:
    G-paisones-said, peru kung sa buong biblia na pag-uusapan abay hindi ko sinasabing si San Pedro lamang ang Foundation ng Iglesia; pati narin ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo, mga Apostol at mga Propeta ay Foundation rin ng tunay na Iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo (Efe. 2:20).
    sa sagot mong ito Paisones ay maraming pundasyun ang iglesia..KUNG MAY MABASA AKONG BERSIKULO NA ISA LANG ANG PUNDASYUN NG IGLESIA SI CRISTO LANG AAMININ MO BA NA FALSE CHURCH ANG KATOLIKO?

    G-one:
    Siguro ang nasa isipan ni Henry Arganda na gagamitin niya ay ang 1 Cor 3:11? Peru ganito po ang tamang interpretation sa 1 Cor. 3:11:

    Paisonesssssssss!!!!!mali ka!!!! ang sagot ko ay sa Isaias 26:16-“kaya’t ganito ang sabi ng Panginoong Dios,narito aking inilalagay,sa Sion na pinakapatibayan ang ISANG BATO,ISANG BATONG SUBOK,ISANG MAHALAGANG BATONG PANULOK NA MAY MATIBAY NA PATIBAYAN,ang naniniwala ay hindi magmamadali…

    yan ilan daw paisones???? ISA!!! kay paisones ilan ???MARAMI!!!

    G-one – “peru kung sa buong biblia na pag-uusapan abay hindi ko sinasabing si San Pedro lamang ang Foundation ng Iglesia; pati narin ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo, mga Apostol at mga Propeta ay Foundation rin ng tunay na Iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo (Efe. 2:20).”

    next na mali ni Paisones at ng lahat ng cfd..”yang ginamit mong jerusalem bible ay catholic translation..na apostles its foundation..ang maraming translation ay walang “its”dagdag ng katoliko yan..gamitin mo lahat ng biblia paisones..

    At payo sayo paisones wag kang maglalagay ng maling isip sa mga mambabasa na sasabihin mo wala akong alam sa Biblia..hindi ko nga sinasabi na wala kang alam sa biblia …ang sabi ko lang mga mali ang unawa mo sa biblia…at para kang si satanas gumamit ng biblia..para ka ring si ela soriano laban laban ang sinasabi.

    next na mali ni paisones..

    Ang sumusunod ay ang mga Argumento:

    Henry Arganda: (4th Watch PMCC) – Sa Efe. 2:20 “Hindi foundation ang mga Apostolis” – (Ito po ay implicit basi narin sa mga comento ni Henry Arganda)

    G-one Paisones (Catholic Faith Defender) – Sa Efe. 2:20 “Ang mga Apostolis ay foundation”

    sagot ko hindi foundation ang mga apostol,kundi haligi.Gal.2:9,(hindi mabali ni paisones ang galatia 2;9,tingnan natin kung kayang baliin nya)isa lang ang faundation or cornerstone Isa 28:16(di rin ito pinapansin ni paisones di nya kasi kaya itong baluktutin puro mat 16:18 lang ang nakikita bulag talaga,vias gumamit,)samantalang kay Cristo lahat ng kasulatan ang nagpapatotoo,Juan 5:39 paki basa ng mga reader dyan!wag si paisones at cfd isang verse lang ang pinagbabatayan.

    hintayin natin kung kakalabitin ni paisones ang Galatia 2:9,at isa 28:16,paano nya kaya ito babaliin…tingnan natin………abangan

    abangan ang mga mali ni Paisones at ng lahat ng cfd…abangan……

  8. catholicfaithdefender said

    Author : henry arganda (IP: 64.228.74.19 , bas2-windsor12-1088702995.dsl.bell.ca)
    E-mail : henri_4w@yahoo.ca
    URL : http://www.pmcc4thwatch.com
    Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=64.228.74.19
    Comment:

    Black: -Henri Arganda (New Comments)
    Red: -Henri’s Old Replies
    Blue: -G-one Paisones’ Old Reply
    Green:-G-one Paisones (New Reply)

    HENRY: PANSININ NATIN ANG MGA MALING SAGOT NI PAISONES,

    G-ONE: PANSININ PO NATIN ANG FALLACIOUS ARGUMENTS NI HENRY.

    G-ONE (alyas paisones),Sa itaas malinaw na malinaw ang kamalian ni Henry Arganda dahil sabi nya na ang “Rock petra i will build my church a large piece of rock like gibraltar.. means ng gibraltar na syang petra (Christ) Peru ang footnote nang nasabing Amplified Bible ay hindi naman pala. Kaya po nabuko po natin ang kamalian ni Henry Arganda.

    Henry: tingnan naman natin kung anong sagot nya dun sa isang pahayag nya tungkul sa footnote,itong si paisones..laking kalituhan..mahirap kasi ang lumaban sa katotohanan ng bible laging mabubuking..katakot takot na panglulubid ang ginagawa nya,

    G-one (Old Replies):
    Footnotes:

    e. Matthew 16:18 The rock on which the church is built is traditionally interpreted as either Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah, or it may be Peter himself (see Eph. 2:20).
    Basahin mo ulit at unawain mo,…”or it may be…” nagpapahayag ng isang sugestion at hindi absolute conclusion na si pedro ang pagtatayuan

    G-one:
    Hindi nga absolute conclusion na si Pedro ang pagtatayuan sa Amplified Bible dahil sa conjunction na “OR” peru ipinahiwatig ng may akda (Amplified Bible) na “either Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah, or it may be Peter himself –is the rock on which the church is built. Samakatuwid dalawa lang ang pinag-pipilian ng may akda at salungat ito sa pahayag mo na si Cristo ang “bato” sa Matt. 16:18 (nang ginamit mo ang Amplified Bible sa contention mo)

    HENRY:
    HINDI DAW ABSOLUTE CONCLUSION NA SI PEDRO ANG PAGTATAYUAN,.

    G-ONE-Ang sabi ko na si Pedro lamang ang Pundation na tinotokoy na pagtatayuan ng Iglesia sa Matt. 16:18 (specific verse in the Bible; not whole Bible)

    HENRY:
    TINGNAN MO YAN PAISONES HULING HULI KA yang salitang “LAMANG”absolute conclusion yan..oopps baka tumakas ka na naman..sabi pa nya dalawa lang ang pinagpipilian ng may akda..pero sa kanya(paisones)pinili agad si pedro..

    G-ONE: Mr. Arganda Henry ang sabi ko saiyo na mag review ka muna ng Argumentation at Logic kasi you’ve always committing fallacious arguments.

    Para sa bumabasa narito ang ponto ko:

    Ang Amplified Bible ay ginamit ko bilang ebidensya kay Henry arganda dahil ginamit niya ito bilang proof sa kanyang argumento. Para magiba ko ang argumento niya tungkol sa Matt. 16:18 ginamit ko rin ang Amplified Bible para malaman nang madla ang pagkakamali niya. Hindi ibig sabihin na sumasang-ayon na ako sa pahayag ng may akda ng Amplified Bible, ginamit kolang ito para makiba ang argumento ni Henry. Kayat wala pong contradictory ang mga pahayag ko.

    Ito po kasi ang ponto ng pinagdedebatihan:

    G-one (Catholic Faith Defender): Contention
    Si San Pedro ang Bato na pinag-uusapan sa Matt. 16:18.

    Henry Arganda (4th Watch PMCC) : Contention
    Si Cristo ang Bato na pinag-uusapan sa Matt. 16:18.

    Burden of Proof- is the risk of the proposition, the duty to of the affirmative to prove what he alleges, otherwise he loses his case (The Art of Argumentation and Debate, by: Francisco M. Africa, Page 21)

    Burden of Proof- never shifts: it always lies on the affirmative side (The Art of Argumentation and Debate, by: Francisco M. Africa, Page 22)

    Burden of Rebuttal- is the duty of presenting arguments and evidences at any given stage of the case to counteract the influence of the opposing case (The Art of Argumentation and Debate, by: Francisco M. Africa, Page 22)

    Burden of Rebuttal-shifts from side to side as debate progresses (The Art of Argumentation and Debate, by: Francisco M. Africa, Page 22)

    Henry Arganda (4th Watch PMCC): Burden of Proof
    Amplified Bible (upon this Rock petra i will build my church a large piece of rock like gibraltar..means ng gibraltar na syang petra (Christ)pagkalakilaki basahin mo ang gibraltar..kung anong klasing bato”)

    G-one (Catholic Faith Defender): Burden of Rebuttal
    “Eh sabi ni Henry na si Cristo raw ang Gibraltar peru nang tiningnan ko ang Amplified Bible hindi naman pala si Cristo.” Narito po ang dati kong reply kay Henry Arganda tungkol sa topic na ito:

    At salamat na mismo kay brad Henry dahil sa kanyang information na ibinigay sa atin na buko na natin ang pag sisinungalin nya para lang masiraan ang Doctrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica hinggil kay San Pedro. Ang sabi nya kasi “well alam ko ginagamit nyo ang amplified bible..and i tell you peter(grk petros)a large piece of rock and upon this Rock petra i will build my church a large piece of rock like gibraltar.. means ng gibraltar na syang petra (Christ) pagkalakilaki basahin mo ang gibraltar..kung anong klasing bato” –PERU ang katotohanan po, nang binasa ko po sa online ang footnote nang nasabing Amplified Bible (na inakala ni Henry na ginamit ko sa mga pagpapatotoo ko na si Pedro ay ang Bato) ang nakalagay doon ay Si Pedro or Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah is the rock on which the church is built. Narito ang boong minsahi sa Amplified Bible:

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=16&version=45

    Matthew 16 (Amplified Bible)
    18And I tell you, you are [e]Peter [Greek, Petros–a large piece of rock], and on this rock [Greek, petra–a [f]huge rock like Gibraltar] I will build My church, and the gates of Hades (the powers of the [g]infernal region) shall [h]not overpower it [or be strong to its detriment or hold out against it].

    Footnotes:

    e. Matthew 16:18 The rock on which the church is built is traditionally interpreted as either Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah, or it may be Peter himself (see Eph. 2:20).
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=16&version=45

    Malinaw po sa itaas na ang Ampified Bible ay ginamit kolang bilang pang giba (Burden of Rebuttal) sa argumento (Burden of Proof) ni Henry Arganda.

    Dahil itoy isang argumentation ginamit ko ang Amplified Bible para magiba ang ina-akala (ni henry) niyang ang Gibraltar ay si Cristo.

    Ang conclusion ni Mr. Arganda na contradict ang mga pahayag ko ay nag papakita lang po na hindi alam ni Mr. Arganda ang rules of Argumentation.

    Sumatotal ang Amplified Bible ay ginamit ko contra (Burden of Rebuttal) sa argumento ni Henry, hindi ibig sabihin na sumang-ayon na ako sa statement ng may akda (Amplified Bible). Ang Argumento (STAND) ko ay “si San Pedro ang Bato na pinag-uusapan sa Matt. 16:18.”

    KAYA SI HENRY ARGANDA PO ANG NALILITO KASI INAKALA NIYA NA CONTINTION KO ANG FOOTNOTE NG AMPLIFIED BIBLE; ANG AMPLIFIED BIBLE’ FOOTNOTE AY BURDEN OF REBUTTAL KO LANG LABAN KAY HENRY. Henry sabi ko sa iyo mag review ka muna dahil wala ka pang background sa Argumentation and Logic. Para hindi ka malilito dapat mag-aral ka ng logic at para hindi ka basta gawa ng gawa ng mga fallacious arguments.

    Sa mga bumabasa si Mr. Arganda ay nakapag gawa po ng maling contention na tinatawag na FALLACY. At ang klasi po ng Fallacy na nagawa niya, ay tinatawag na Fallacy of Composition.

    Fallacy –errors in reasoning (Logical Fallacies) & error in understanding (Rhetorical Fallacies). The Art of Argumentation and Debate by: Africa, Page 92

    Fallacy of Composition- consists of taking a group of words or phrase as a unit instead of taking them separately as it should be. (LOGIC- The Essentials of Deductive Reasoning By: Ramon B. Agapay- Page 193)

    Ito po ang argumento ni Henry (implicit): (ang mga sumusunod ay basi sa mga argumento ni Henry Arganda at hindi sa may akda na si G-one Paisones)

    G-one Major premise: Amplified Bible’ Footnote- The rock on which the church is built is traditionally interpreted as either Peter’s inspired confession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah, or it may be Peter himself.
    G-one Minor premise: Ang sabi ko na si Pedro lamang ang Pundation na tinotokoy na pagtatayuan ng Iglesia sa Matt. 16:18 (specific verse in the Bible; not whole Bible)
    Conclusion: TINGNAN MO YAN PAISONES HULING HULI KA yang salitang “LAMANG”absolute conclusion yan..oopps baka tumakas ka na naman..sabi pa nya dalawa lang ang pinagpipilian ng may akda..pero sa kanya(paisones)pinili agad si pedro..

    Sa itaas ay ang argumento ni Mr. Arganda na isang halimbawa ng Fallacy of Composition. Fallacy of composition sapagkat ang:

    -Inaakala ni Henry Arganda na Major Premise ko ay ang Burden of Rebuttal ko
    -Inaakala ni Henry Arganda na Minor Premise ko ay ang Contention (stand) ko
    -Inaakala ni Henry Arganda na tama ang conclusion niya ay isang Fallacy of Composition pala

    Ang Burden of Rebuttal ay ginamit ko pang contra sa Burden of Proof ni Henry Arganda, at ito po ay magkaiba (different) sa Contintion (stand) ko. Ang mali ni Henry ay pinagsama niya ang mga ito para makagawa siya ng conclusion na animoy makatutuhanan peru isa namang pandaraya sa panganagtwirang logical. Alam natin na hindi sinasadya ni bro. Henry ang kanyang Fallacious Arguments (pandaraya sa pangangatwirang logical) dahil wala kasi syang background sa Argumentation at Logic.

    HENRY: but let us once more study the petros and petra..The rcc apologists claim that “Petros” [masculine in gender] is the proper word to address “Simon Peter” since it is grammatically incorrect to call a male man, “Petra” [feminine in gender].

    Is it really grammatically incorrect to call Simon Peter, a male man, “Petra” – a Greek word feminine in gender?

    Based on biblical use of the word, “Petra”, this so called grammatical prohibition is suspect. Paul calls Christ “Petra” [feminine in gender] in 1 Cor. 10:4.

    1 Cor 10:4

    And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock [petra] was Christ.

    In the Greek NT, Christ has many names or titles that are feminine in gender such as; Power or “Dunamis”, Wisdom or “Sophia”, Resurrection or “Anastasis”, Way or “Hodos” , Truth or “Aletheia”, and the Life or “Zoe”

    1 Cor. 1:24

    But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power [duvnamin] of God, and the wisdom [sofivan] of God.

    John 11:25

    Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection [ajnavstasiß], and the life [zwhv]: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

    John 14:6

    Jesus saith unto him, I am the way [oJdo], the truth [ajlhvqeia], and the life [zwhv]: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

    If the feminine gender “PETRA” can be used for Christ (a male man) how can there be an objection on grammatical ground on the use of “Petra” for Peter (also a male man)? IOW, Matt. 16:18 could have been written this way:

    “You are Petra and on this Petra I will build my church.”

    However, it is interesting to ask why the Gospel Writer did not use “Petra” to address Simon Peter.

    A very good reason is to differentiate the person of Peter (“Petros”) from the person of Christ the “Petra.”

    It is highly probable that the Greek Gospel Writer wanted to retain the original “word play” as he heard Christ say it verbatim in the Aramaic; “Kepha” for “Petros” and “Shua” for “Petra.”

    Christ is the only person ever explicitly called “Petra” in the NT Scriptures. Likewise, “Petros,” is used to refer to Peter alone.

    “Shua” for “Petra.”

    Is it any wonder that the Aramaic name of Jesus is YeSHUA.

    Matthew 16:18: The Petros-petra Wordplay — Greek, Aramaic, or Hebrew?

    by David Bivin, Member of the Jerusalem School.
    Published: 01-Jan-2004
    David Bivin

    The pinnacle of the gospel story may be Jesus’ dramatic statement, “You are Petros and on this petra I will build my church.” The saying seems to contain an obvious Greek wordplay, indicating that Jesus spoke in Greek. However, it is possible that “Petros…petra” is a Hebrew wordplay.

    The recognition that the synoptic gospels are derived from a Semitic source or sources seems essential to any productive methodology of interpretation. Scholars of the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research have found that often unless one translates the Greek texts of the synoptic gospels to Hebrew, one cannot fully understand their meaning.

    G-ONE:
    Narito po ang pahayag nang isang dating protestante na ngayon ay nag katoliko sa pagkat nakita niya ang katotohanan:

    Born Fundamentalist Born Again Catholic by: David B. Curie
    David B. Currie was raised in a devout Christian family whose father was a fundamentalist preacher and both parents’ teachers at Moodey Bible Institute. Currie’s whole upbringing was immersed in the life of fundamentalist Protestantism- theology professors, seminary presidents and founders of evangelical mission agencies were frequent guest at his Trinity International University and studied in the Master of Divinity program at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.

    This book was written as an explanation to his fundamentalist and evangelical friends and family about why he became a Roman Catholic. Currie presents a very lucid, systematic and intelligible account of his conversion to the ancient Church that Christ founded. He gives a detailed discussion of the important theological and doctrinal beliefs Catholic and evangelicals hold in common, as well as the key doctrines that separate us, particularly the Eucharist, the Pope, and Mary.

    (This book is available at WORD OF JOY FOUNDATION INCORPORATE, Unit 2, 127 A. Roces Ave., Laging Handa, Quezon City, Tel. Nos.: 374-2229/ 3738960-61 Telefax: 4159757, E-mail: wordjoy@insclub.net)

    (Nag papasalamat rin ako kay Fr. Abe sa kanyang pagbigay nang magandang libro na ito)

    PAGE 62- 64

    Mat 16:13-20 Peter did not conclude that Jesus was the Messiah on the basis of his own experience or his superior intellect. This is important. God the Father intervened in history to reveal it directly to Peter: “This was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven.” This revelation from God, and from Peter’s willingness to verbalize it, is what separates Peter from the other disciples from point forward. Jesus’ words in verses 18 and 19 are all addressed to the second person singular. There could be no mistaking what Jesus said meant for Peter alone. All successors of the apostles would have supernatural powers and responsibilities, but Peter’s would be special.

    Fist of all, Jesus calls Peter by his new name. Jesus renamed Simon to emphasize the qualities of this new name. This would be analogous to my naming a friend “spaghetti-head” because his hair is always tangled and sticky. A name can also emphasize a position or a role. That is what Jesus is emphasizing in this passage: Peter’s new role.

    “Peter” is a transliteration; the word used was “rock”. Evangelicals point out that in the Greek text of this passage there are two words for rock: that referring to Peter is masculine, while that referring to the foundation of the Church is feminine. Because of these differences, Evangelicals teach that the foundation rock of the church is the faith of Peter, as opposed to Peter himself. Peter’s faith was not the focus of this promise, not Peter. Even as an Evangelical, I thought this seemed an odd way for Jesus to express himself. Why make all these promises to Peter if “rock” refers to the faith, not the man? To claim the rock was Peter’s faith seemed to me nonsense of the rest of the paragraph.

    The insurmountable problem with Evangelical analysis of the Greek text is that in Aramaic, the language of Jesus, there was only one word for rock (Kepha). The Greek text is itself a translation of the original Aramaic. There was no possibility of the original hearers being confused about Jesus’ meaning. The disciples had to have heard Jesus Saying, in Aramaic, “I tell you that you are Rock (Kepha), and on this Rock (Kepha) I will build my church.” There is not the slightest room for any other meaning in the words originally uttered! The Church would be built on the Peter as “rock”, as distinguished from the other apostles there that day with him. The Aramaic word for “rock”, transliterated into English, can be written Cephas, that this name of Peter is used elsewhere in the Scripture lends further support for the Catholic understanding of this Passage (see Jn 1:42; 1 Cor 1:12, 3:22, 4:5, 15:5; Gal 2:9-14).

    So why would the translator (in the case Matthew) use two different words with different genders? The reason seems rather simple. The best translation for the Aramaic “rock” was feminine Greek word meaning “large rock”. The problem with using that same word for a man’s name is obvious. Naming Peter “Petrina” would awkward. Faced with this problem, often inherent translation, Matthew chose another word for “rock”, a masculine word. We are not used to these gender problems in English, but they are common in many languages. In English the Greek would be roughly equivalent to “I tell you that you are Rocky (masculine), and on this Rockette (feminine) I will build my Church.”

    Yan po ang sabi ng dating protestante na ngayon ay nag Katoliko na.

    HENRY:
    BALIKAN NATIN ANG MGA MALING SAGOT PA NI PAISONES,(G-0)

    G-one:
    Peter is the Rock on which the Church is Built
    (Taken from ScriptureCatholic.com)

    “Peter, who is called ‘the rock on which the church should be built,’ who also obtained ‘the keys of the kingdom of heaven…’” Tertullian, On the Prescription Against the Heretics, 22 (c. A.D. 200).

    “And Peter, on whom the Church of Christ is built, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail…” Origen, Commentary on John, 5:3 (A.D. 232).

    “By this Spirit Peter spake that blessed word, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ By this Spirit the rock of the Church was established.” Hippolytus, Discourse on the Holy Theophany, 9 (ante A.D. 235).

    “’…thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church’ … It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church’s) oneness…If a man does not fast to this oneness of Peter, does he still imagine that he still holds the faith. If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church?” Cyprian, De Unitate Ecclesiae (Primacy text), 4 (A.D. 251).

    “…folly of (Pope) Stephen, that he who boasts of the place of the episcopate, and contends that he holds the succession from Peter, on whom the foundation of the Church were laid…” Firmilian, Epistle To Cyprian, Epistle 75(74):17(A.D. 256).
    “…Peter, that strongest and greatest of all the apostles, and the one who on account of his virtue was the speaker for all the others…” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 2:14 (A.D. 325).

    “And Peter,on whom the Church of Christ is built, ‘against which the gates of hell shall not prevail’” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6:25 (A.D. 325).

    “…the chief of the disciples…the Lord accepted him, set him up as the foundation, called him the rock and structure of the church.” Aphraates, De Paenitentibus Homily 7:15 (A.D. 337).

    “Peter, the foremost of the Apostles, and Chief Herald of the Church…” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures,1 1:3 (A.D. 350).

    “[B]lessed Simon, who after his confession of the mystery was set to be the foundation-stone of the Church, and received the keys of the kingdom…” Hilary de Poiters, On the Trinity, 6:20(A.D. 359).

    “[F]or the good of unity blessed Peter, for whom it would have been enough if after his denial he had obtained pardon only, deserved to be placed before all the apostles, and alone received the keys of the kingdom of heaven, to be communicated to the rest.” Optatus of Milevis, De Schismate Donatistorum, 7:3(A.D. 370).

    “[T]he Lord spoke to Peter a little earlier; he spoke to one, that from one he might found unity, soon delivering the same to all.” Pacian, To Sympronianus, Epistle 3:2 (AD 372).

    “Simon, My follower, I have made you the foundation of the Holy Church. I betimes called you Peter (Kepha), because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on earth a Church for me…I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, have given you authority over all my treasures.” Ephraim, Homily 4:1, (A.D. 373).

    “[T]he first of the apostles, the solid rock on which the Church was built.” Epiphanius, In Ancorato, 9:6 (A.D. 374).

    “Peter upon which rock the Lord promised that he would build his church.” Basil, In Isaias, 2:66 (A.D. 375).

    “As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the church is built!” Jerome, To Pope Damasus, Epistle 15 (A.D. 375).

    “Seest thou that of the disciples of Christ, all of whom were exalted and deserving of choice, one is called rock, and is entrusted with the foundations of the church.” Gregory of Nazianzen, Oration 32:18 (A.D. 380).

    “[W]e have considered that it ought be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it…”…The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the Apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither the stain nor blemish nor anything like it.” Pope Damasus, Decree of Damasus, 3 (A.D. 382).

    ”It was right indeed that he (Paul) should be anxious to see Peter; for he was the first among the apostles, and was entrusted by the Savior with the care of the churches.” Ambrosiaster, Commentary on Galatians, PL 17:344 (A.D. 384).

    “Peter bore the person of the church.” Augustine, Sermon 149:7 (inter A.D. 391-430).

    “Number the priests even from that seat of Peter. And in that order of fathers see to whom succeeded: that is the rock which the proud gates of hades do not conquer.” Augustine, Psalmus contro Partem Donati (A.D. 393).

    “But you say, the Church was rounded upon Peter: although elsewhere the same is attributed to all the Apostles, and they all receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the strength of the Church depends upon them all alike, yet one (Peter) among the twelve is chosen so that when a head has been appointed, there may be no occasion for schism.” Jerome, Against Jovinianus, 1 (A.D. 393).

    “The memory of Peter, who is the head of the apostles…he is the firm and most solid rock, on which the savior built his Church.” Gregory of Nyssa, Panegyric on St. Stephen, 3 (ante A.D. 394).

    “Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church,” Wherefore where Peter is the Church is…” Ambrose, Commentary on the Psalms, 40:30 (AD 395).

    “At length, after being tempted by the devil, Peter is set over the Church.” Ambrose, Commentary on the Psalms, 43:40 (AD 397).

    “In order that he may show his power, God has endowed none of his disciples with gifts like Peter. But, having raised him with heavenly gifts, he has set him above all. And, as first disciple and greater among the brethren, he has shown, by the test of deeds, the power of the Spirit. The first to be called, he followed at once…The Saviour confided to this man, as some special trust, the whole universal Church, after having asked him three times ‘Lovest thou me?’ And he receive the world in charge…” Asterius, Homily 8 (A.D. 400).

    “(Peter) The first of the Apostles, the foundation of the Church, the coryphaeus of the choir of disciples.” John Chrysostom, Ad eos qui scandalizati 17(ante A.D. 407).

    “Peter, that head of the Apostles, the first in the Church, the friend of Christ, who received revelation not from man but from the Father…this Peter, and when I say Peter, I mean that unbroken Rock, the unshaken foundation, the great Apostle, the first of the disciples, the first called, the first to obey.” John Chrysostom, De Eleemosyna, 3:4 (ante A.D. 407).

    “This Peter on whom Christ freely bestowed a sharing in his name. For just as Christ is the rock, as the Apostle Paul taught, so through Christ, Peter is made rock, when the Lord says to him: “Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church…” Maximus of Turin, Homily 63 (A.D. 408).

    “…the most firm rock, who (Peter) from the principal Rock received a share of his virtue and his name.” Prosper of Aquitaine, The Call of All Nations, 2:28(A.D. 426).

    “He promises to found the church, assigning immovableness to it, as He is the Lord of strength, and over this he sets Peter as shepherd.” Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Matthew (A.D. 428).

    “[B]ut that great man, the disciple of disciples, that master among masters, who wielding the government of the Roman Church possessed the authority in faith and priesthood. Tell us therefore, tell us we beg of you, Peter, prince of the Apostles, tell us how the churches must believe in God.” John Cassian, Contra Nestorium, 3:12 (A.D. 430).

    “There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the Apostles, pillar of faith, and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to to-day and forever, lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed Pope Celestine, according to due order, is his successor and holds his place…” Philip, Council of Ephesus, Session III (A.D. 431).

    “[B]lessed Peter preserving in the strength of the Rock, which he has received, has not abandoned the helm of the Church, which he under took…And so if anything is rightly done and rightly decreed by us, if anything is won from the mercy of God by our daily supplications, it is of his work and merits whose power lives and whose authority prevails in his See…to him whom they know to be not only the patron of this See, but also primate of all bishops. When therefore…believe that he is speaking whose representative we are:..” Pope Leo the Great, Sermon 3:3-4 (A.D. 442).

    “We exhort you, honourable brother, to submit yourself in all things to what has been written by the blessed Bishop of Rome, because St. Peter, who lives and presides in his see, gives the true faith to those who seek it. For our part, for the sake of peace and the good of the faith, we cannot judge questions of doctrine without the consent of the Bishop of Rome.” Peter Chrysologus, Epistle 25 of Leo from Peter (A.D. 449).

    “If Paul, the herald of the truth, the trumpet of the Holy Ghost, hastened to the great Peter in order that he might carry from him the desired solution of difficulties to those at Antioch who were in doubt about living in conformity with the law, much more do we, men insignificant and small, hasten to your apostolic see in order to receive from you a cure for the wounds of the churches. For every reason it is fitting for you to hold the first place, inasmuch as your see is adorned with many privileges.” Theodoret of Cyrus, To Pope Leo, Epistle 113 (A.D. 449).

    “[T]he Lord wished to be indeed the concern of all the Apostles: and from him as from the Head wishes His gifts to flow to all the body: so that any one who dares to secede from Peter’s solid rock may understand that he has no part or lot in the divine mystery.” Pope Leo the Great, To Bishops of Vienne, Epistle 10 (A.D. 450).

    “Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith…” Council of Chalcedon, Session III (A.D. 451).

    “Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith, hath stripped him of the episcopate, and hath alienated from him all hieratic worthiness. ‘Peter, the apostle, who is the rock and support of the Catholic Church.’” Paschasinus, Council of Chalcedon, Session III (A.D. 451).

    “Peter is again called ‘the coryphaeus of the Apostles.’” Basil of Seleucia, Oratio 25 (ante A.D. 468).

    “The holy Roman Church is senior to the other churches not by virtue of any synodal decrees, but obtained the primacy from Our Lord and Savior in the words of the Gospel, ‘Thou art Peter…’” Pope Gelasius, Decree of Gelasium (A.D. 492).

    “[T]he statement of Our Lord Jesus Christ who said, ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,’…These (words) which were spoken, are proved by the effects of the deeds, because in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved without stain.’” Pope Hormisdas, Libellus professionis fidei, (A.D. 519).

    “To Peter, that is, to his church, he gave the power of retaining and forgiving sins on earth.” Fulgentius, De Remissione Peccatorum, 2:20 (A.D. 523).

    “Who could be ignorant of the fact that the holy church is consolidated in the solidity of the prince of the Apostles, whose firmness of character extended to his name so that he should be called Peter after the ‘rock’, when the voice of the Truth says, ‘I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven’. To him again is said “When after a little while thou hast come back to me, it is for thee to be the support of thy brethren.” Pope Gregory the Great, Epistle 40 (A.D. 604).

    “The decrees of the Roman Pontiff, standing upon the supremacy of the Apostolic See, are unquestionable.” Isidore of Seville, (ante A.D. 636).

    “For the extremities of the earth, and all in every part of it who purely and rightly confess the Lord, look directly towards the most holy Roman Church and its confession and faith, as it were a sun of unfailing light, awaiting from it the bright radiance of our fathers, according to what the six inspired and holy Councils have purely and piously decreed, declaring most expressly the symbol of faith. For from the coming down of the Incarnate Word among us, all the churches in every part of the world have possessed that greatest church alone as their base and foundation, seeing that, according to the promise of Christ Our Savior, the gates of hell do never prevail against it, that it possesses the Keys of right confession and faith in Him, that it opens the true and only religion to such as approach with piety, and shuts up and locks every heretical mouth that speaks injustice against the Most High.” Maximus the Confessor, Opuscula theologica et polemica (A.D. 650).

    “Peter was pronounced blessed by the Lord…the duty of feeding the spiritual sheep of the Church under whose protecting shield, this Apostolic Church of his has never turned away from the path of truth in any direction of error, whose authority, as that of the Prince of all the Apostles, the whole Catholic Church and the Ecumenical Synods have faithfully embraced…” Pope Agatho, To Ecumenical Council VI at Constantinople, (A.D. 680).

    “A copy of the letter sent by the holy and Ecumenical Sixth Council to Agatho, the most blessed and most holy pope of Old Rome…Therefore to thee, as to the bishop of the first see of the Universal Church, we leave what must be done, since you willingly take for your standing ground the firm rock of the faith, as we know from having read your true confession in the letter sent by your fatherly beatitude to the most pious emperor: and we acknowledge that this letter was divinely written (perscriptas) as by the Chief of the Apostles, and through it we have cast out the heretical sect of many errors which had recently sprung up..” Constantinople III, Council to Pope Agatho, (A.D. 680).

    “For, although the devil desired to sift all the disciples, the Lord testifies that He Himself asked for Peter alone, and wished that the others be confirmed my him; and to Peter also was committed the care of ‘feeding the sheep’(John 21:15);and to him also did the Lord hand over the ‘keys of the kingdom of heaven’(Matthew 16:19),and upon him did He promise to ‘build His Church’ (Matthew 16:18);and He testified that ‘the gates of Hell would not prevail against it’ (Matthew 16:19).” Pope Pelagius II, Quod Ad Dilectionem (c. A.D. 685).

    “’Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, and to thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven’? When Wilfrid spoken thus, the king said, ‘It is true, Colman, that these words were spoken to Peter by our Lord?’ He answered, ‘It is true O king!’ Then says he, ‘Can you show any such power given to your Columba?’ Colman answered, ‘None.’ Then added the king, “Do you both agree that these words were principally directed to Peter, and that the keys of heaven were given to him by our Lord?’ They both answered, ‘We do.’” Venerable Bede, (A.D. 700), Ecclesiastical History, 3:5 (A.D. 700).
    Link:

    HENRY:
    Ang mga ginamit ni Paisones na mga nagpatotoo na hindi matuwid na patotoo”mga commentaries ,pansinin nyo sa taas hindi naman sila nangatwiran ayon sa biblia,at ang mga ginamit nyang ito na mga church fathers kuno,ay si pedro lang ang tinuturo na foundation,!!pero kaya paisones iba naman at sabi ni Paisones ay ganito….

    G-paisones-said, peru kung sa buong biblia na pag-uusapan abay hindi ko sinasabing si San Pedro lamang ang Foundation ng Iglesia; pati narin ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo, mga Apostol at mga Propeta ay Foundation rin ng tunay na Iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo (Efe. 2:20).

    ikaw ang humatol paisones kung parehas kayo ng mga church fathers mong yan…

    ISA pang mali ni Paisones…basahin muna natin ang tanong ko na mali ang sagot nya..

    G-ONE:
    Mr. Arganda hindi ako gumamit ng hindi matuwid na patotoo dahil ang mga Church Fathers ay ang sinaunang Cristiano na nagsulat sa kanilang mga pang-unawa sa Biblia at galling sa Apostolic Tradition; naiilang ka kasi brother Henry Arganda dahil ang mga church fathers ay hindi kasapi ng 4th Watch PMCC. Ang mga church fathers ay nangangatwiran ayon sa Biblia at Apostolic tradition (ito po ay taliwas sa sinasabi ni Henry Arganda: “hindi naman sila (church fathers) nangatwiran ayon sa biblia”- ).

    Mapapansin po natin ang kamalian nanaman ni Henry Arganda dahil sabi niya na: “hindi naman sila (church fathers) nangatwiran ayon sa biblia”-
    Peru hindi ngaba nangangatwiran ang mga church fathers ayon sa Biblia? MALI PO SI HENRY ARGANDA dahil ang ilan sa mga church fathers (sa itaas) ay nangangatwiran ayon sa Biblia at Apostolic Tradition. Narito po ang ating mga ebedensya:

    “And Peter, on whom the Church of Christ is built, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail…” Origen, Commentary on John, 5:3 (A.D. 232).

    “Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church,” Wherefore where Peter is the Church is…” Ambrose, Commentary on the Psalms, 40:30 (AD 395).

    “At length, after being tempted by the devil, Peter is set over the Church.” Ambrose, Commentary on the Psalms, 43:40 (AD 397).

    “Peter upon which rock the Lord promised that he would build his church.” Basil, In Isaias, 2:66 (A.D. 375).

    “He promises to found the church, assigning immovableness to it, as He is the Lord of strength, and over this he sets Peter as shepherd.” Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Matthew (A.D. 428).

    Hindi po kami nagkakaiba sa mga Church Fathers dahil, ang mga commentaries po sa itaas ay nakatoon sa AUTHORITY ni San Pedro na higit pa sa mga ibang mga Apostol, kaya nga sinabi ko na “si Pedro lamang ang Pundation na tinotokoy na pagtatayuan ng Iglesia sa Matt. 16:18 (specific verse in the Bible; not whole Bible); hindi ko sinabing si Pedro LAMANG ang Foundation ng Iglesia na mababasa sa Buong Biblia. Para maintindihan ng lahat… Sa Matt. 16:18 si Pedro lamang ang tinutukoy na syang pagtatayuan ng Iglesia (kung sa Matt. 16:18 lamang ang pag-uusapan) peru kung sa buong biblia na pag-uusapan abay hindi ko sinasabing si San Pedro lamang ang Foundation ng Iglesia; pati narin ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo, mga Apostol at mga Propeta ay Foundation rin ng tunay na Iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo (Efe. 2:20).

    Bakit po ba si San Pedro lang ang subject ni Cristo sa Matt. 16:18? -Sapagkat mas mataas pa ang Authority ni San Pedro kaysa sa ibang mga apostol.

    Pansinin po natin ang quote ni Cyprian: “…thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church’ … It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church’s) oneness…If a man does not fast to this oneness of Peter, does he still imagine that he still holds the faith. If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church?” Cyprian, De Unitate Ecclesiae (Primacy text), 4 (A.D. 251). Dito malinaw na wala pong contradiction ang aking pahayag at sa mga church fathers.

    Sa boung Biblia ang mga apostol, propeta at si Cristo (main cornerstone) ang foundation ng Iglesia (Efe. 2:20), peru sa Matt. 16:18 si Pedro ang foundation ng Iglesia sapagkat may mataas na katungkolan at authority siya kaysa sa ibang mga apostol na ibinigay sa kanya ng Panginoong Jesu-Cristo. Kaya po sa ang mga church fathers sa itaas ay nakatoon lamang ni san Pedro dahil may mataas pa siyang authority kaysa sa mga Apostol. Ang mga church fathers rin ay naniniwala na ang mga apostol ay foundation.

    Para po mapagtibay ko po ang aking mga argumento sa itaas na ang mga apostol ay foundation ayon rin mismo sa mga church fathers; narito ang mga sumusunod na mga ebedensya:

    “In a foreign country were the twelve tribes born, the race of Israel, inasmuch as Christ was also, in a strange country, to generate the twelve-pillared foundation of the Church.” IRENAEUS AGAINST HERESIES — BOOK IV, CHAP. XXI: 3

    “Thus we find from this passage also, that there was in Christ a fleshly body, such as was able to endure the cross. “When, therefore, He came and preached peace to them that were near and to them which were afar off,” we both obtained “access to the Father,” being “now no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God” (even of Him from whom, as we have shown above, we were aliens, and placed far off), “built upon the foundation of the apostles”(12)–(the apostle added), “and the prophets;” these words, however, the heretic erased, forgetting that the Lord had set in His Church not only apostles, but prophets also. He feared, no doubt, that our building was to stand in Christ upon the foundation of the ancient prophets,(13) since the apostle himself never fails to build us up everywhere with (the words of) the prophets. For whence did he learn to call Christ “the chief corner-stone,”(14) but from the figure given him in the Psalm: “The stone which the builders rejected is become the head (stone) of the corner?”” THE FIVE BOOKS AGAINST MARCION — (REST OF BOOK V) -CHAP.XVII

    “And if, further, temples are to be compared with temples, that we may prove to those who accept the opinions of Celsus that we do not object to the erection of temples suited to the images and altars of which we have spoken, but that we do refuse to build lifeless temples to the Giver of all life, let any one who chooses learn how we are taught, that our bodies are the temple of God, and that if any one by lust or sin defiles the temple of God, he will himself be destroyed, as acting impiously towards the true temple. Of all the temples spoken of in this sense, the best and most excellent was the pure and holy body of our Saviour Jesus Christ. When He knew that wicked men might aim at the destruction of the temple of God in Him, but that their purposes of destruction would not prevail against the divine power which had built that temple, He says to them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it again. … This He said of the temple of His body.”(3) And in other parts of holy Scripture where it speaks of the mystery of the resurrection to those whose ears are divinely opened, it says that the temple which has been destroyed shall be built up again of living and most precious stones, thereby giving us to understand that each of those who are led by the word of God to strive together in the duties of piety, will be a precious stone in the one great temple of God. Accordingly, Peter says, “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ;”(4) and Paul also says, “Being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ our Lord being the chief cornerstone.”(5) And there is a similar hidden allusion in this passage in Isaiah, which is addressed to Jerusalem: “Behold, I will lay thy stones with carbuncles, and lay thy foundations with sapphires. And I will make thy battlements of jasper, and thy gates of crystal, and all thy borders of pleasant stones. And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord; and great shall be the peace of thy children. In righteousness shall thou be established.”(6)” ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS — BOOK VIII -CHAP. XIX

    Malinaw po na hindi po nag contradict ang mga contention ko at sa mga church fathers.

    Henry:
    G-paisones-said, peru kung sa buong biblia na pag-uusapan abay hindi ko sinasabing si San Pedro lamang ang Foundation ng Iglesia; pati narin ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo, mga Apostol at mga Propeta ay Foundation rin ng tunay na Iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo (Efe. 2:20).
    sa sagot mong ito Paisones ay maraming pundasyun ang iglesia..KUNG MAY MABASA AKONG BERSIKULO NA ISA LANG ANG PUNDASYUN NG IGLESIA SI CRISTO LANG AAMININ MO BA NA FALSE CHURCH ANG KATOLIKO?

    G-one:
    Siguro ang nasa isipan ni Henry Arganda na gagamitin niya ay ang 1 Cor 3:11? Peru ganito po ang tamang interpretation sa 1 Cor. 3:11:

    HENRY:
    Paisonesssssssss!!!!!mali ka!!!! ang sagot ko ay sa Isaias 26:16-“kaya’t ganito ang sabi ng Panginoong Dios,narito aking inilalagay,sa Sion na pinakapatibayan ang ISANG BATO,ISANG BATONG SUBOK,ISANG MAHALAGANG BATONG PANULOK NA MAY MATIBAY NA PATIBAYAN,ang naniniwala ay hindi magmamadali…

    yan ilan daw paisones???? ISA!!! kay paisones ilan ???MARAMI!!!

    G-one – “peru kung sa buong biblia na pag-uusapan abay hindi ko sinasabing si San Pedro lamang ang Foundation ng Iglesia; pati narin ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo, mga Apostol at mga Propeta ay Foundation rin ng tunay na Iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo (Efe. 2:20).”

    G-ONE:
    Sa Isa. 28:16 ganito ang nakalagay “Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner [stone,] a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.” (Isa. 28:16 KJV)

    Ang ibis sabihin po sa Isa. 28:16 na “foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner [stone,] a sure foundation” ay isang Messianic Methapor.

    Sa pagiging Messiah (sa pagtatag ng kanyang Iglesia) ni Jesus siya ay isa lang at hindi kalian man magagaya ng ibang tao katulad ni Arsenio Ferriol na nagtatag nang kanyang sariling iglesia na tinatawag na 4th Watch PMCC.

    Si Cristo lang ang syang nag tatag ng kanyang Iglesia at hindi kalian man ito itatag ng kahit nasinong mga taong nag-aangkin na sila ay sugo ng Dios sapagkat sabi ng Biblia “Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner [stone,] a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.” (Isa. 28:16 KJV)

    Para sa karagdagang ebedensya sa ating sagot:

    CORNERSTONE- (Heb. Pinnah, Gr. Akrogoniaios). Usually used figuratively (e.g., Job 38:6; Ps 118:22; Isa 28:16; Zech 10:4). The synoptic Gospels validate Jesus’ claim to messiahship by citing Psalm 118:22 (Mat 21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17). Peter and Paul’s use of the word is similar (see Rom 9”33, quoting Isa 28:16 and 8:14, following LXX; Eph 2:20; 1 Peter 2:6). NIV Compact Dictionary of the Bible (The Zondervan Corporation-OMF Literature Phil.) Page 132.

    Malinaw po na ang ang Isa 28:16 ay Messianic Methapor at ito ay nangangahulugan sa pagiging Messiah ni Cristo- sa pag tatag Niya sa kanyang Iglesia na hindi madadaig ng Kamatayan (Dan. 2:44, Matt. 16:18). Sa Isa. 28:16 hindi po ibig sabihin na hindi foundation ang mga apostol sapagkat ang pagiging ISANG bato ay sa pagiging Messiah ni Cristo sa kanyang pagtatag ng tunay na Iglesia.

    FOUNDATION- (Heb. Yasadh, to found, Gr. katabole, themelios). The word is used of the foundation of the earth (Job 38:4; Ps 78:69; Isa 24:18), the righteous (Prov 10:25 KJV), and as the basis of a person’s life (Luke 6:48), Christ (1 Cor 3:11), the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20), the proper use of wealth (1 Tim 6:17-19), and God’s truth (2 Tim 2:19). NIV Compact Dictionary of the Bible (The Zondervan Corporation-OMF Literature Phil.) Page 209

    Sa itaas mapapansin natin na si Cristo, mga apostol at mga propeta ay foundation. Kaya po napatunayan po natin na mali ang exegesis ni Henry Arganda sa Isa. 28:16.

    -Napansin po ba ninyo (mga bumabasa) na hindi sinagutan ni Henry ang tanong ko sa Kanya: “Makapagbigay kaba ng Bible scholar na nagsasabing hindi foundation ang mga apostol sa Efe. 2:20?”

    HENRY:
    next na mali ni Paisones at ng lahat ng cfd..”yang ginamit mong jerusalem bible ay catholic translation..na apostles its foundation..ang maraming translation ay walang “its”dagdag ng katoliko yan..gamitin mo lahat ng biblia paisones..

    At payo sayo paisones wag kang maglalagay ng maling isip sa mga mambabasa na sasabihin mo wala akong alam sa Biblia..hindi ko nga sinasabi na wala kang alam sa biblia …ang sabi ko lang mga mali ang unawa mo sa biblia…at para kang si satanas gumamit ng biblia..para ka ring si ela soriano laban laban ang sinasabi.

    G-one:
    Granting without admitting na mali ang Jerusalem Bible dahil ito ay Catholic translation, ang tanong mali then ba mga translation na ito? Take note Protestant Translation yan (except for Magandang Balita Biblia).

    Ephesians 2:20 (The Message)
    19-22That’s plain enough, isn’t it? You’re no longer wandering exiles. This kingdom of faith is now your home country. You’re no longer strangers or outsiders. You belong here, with as much right to the name Christian as anyone. God is building a home. He’s using us all—irrespective of how we got here—in what he is building. He used the apostles and prophets for the foundation. Now he’s using you, fitting you in brick by brick, stone by stone, with Christ Jesus as the cornerstone that holds all the parts together. We see it taking shape day after day—a holy temple built by God, all of us built into it, a temple in which God is quite at home.
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians%202:20&version=65

    Ephesians 2:20 (Contemporary English Version)
    20You are like a building with the apostles and prophets as the foundation and with Christ as the most important stone.

    Ephesians 2:20 (New International Reader’s Version)
    20 You are a building that is built on the apostles and prophets. They are the foundation. Christ Jesus himself is the most important stone in the building.
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians%202:20&version=76

    Ephesians 2:20 (Worldwide English (New Testament)
    20God’s family is like a house and you are part of the building. The apostles and prophets are like the lower walls of the house and you are the building on this foundation. Jesus Christ is the big stone at the corner.
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians%202:20&version=73

    Ephesians 2:20 (Tyndale Bible)
    What a foundation you stand on now: the apostles and the prophets; and the cornerstone of the building is Jesus Christ himself!

    Ephesians 2:20 (Magandang Balita Biblia)
    Kayo’y itinayo rin sa Saligan ng mga Apostol at mga popeta, na ang batong panulukan ay si Cristo Jesus.

    Ang payo ko sa iyo Mr. Arganda dapat mag-aral ka nang maigi sa Biblia dahil wala ka talagang alam sa Biblia. Napakalinaw ng Efe. 2:20 na ang mga Apostol ay foundation minamali mo pa. Hindi po mali ang pang-unawa ko sa Biblia, may marami akong ebedensya sa mga contentions hindi gaya kay Henry Arganda na wala nga siyang ipinapakita sa atin kahit isang Bible scholar nag papatotoo sa contention niya na “hindi foundation ang mga Apostol sa Efe. 2:20”.

    HENRY:
    next na mali ni paisones..

    Ang sumusunod ay ang mga Argumento:

    Henry Arganda: (4th Watch PMCC) – Sa Efe. 2:20 “Hindi foundation ang mga Apostolis” – (Ito po ay implicit basi narin sa mga comento ni Henry Arganda)

    G-one Paisones (Catholic Faith Defender) – Sa Efe. 2:20 “Ang mga Apostolis ay foundation”

    sagot ko hindi foundation ang mga apostol,kundi haligi.Gal.2:9,(hindi mabali ni paisones ang galatia 2;9,tingnan natin kung kayang baliin nya) isa lang ang faundation or cornerstone Isa 28:16(di rin ito pinapansin ni paisones di nya kasi kaya itong baluktutin puro mat 16:18 lang ang nakikita bulag talaga,vias gumamit,)samantalang kay Cristo lahat ng kasulatan ang nagpapatotoo,Juan 5:39 paki basa ng mga reader dyan!wag si paisones at cfd isang verse lang ang pinagbabatayan.

    hintayin natin kung kakalabitin ni paisones ang Galatia 2:9,at isa 28:16,paano nya kaya ito babaliin…tingnan natin………abangan

    abangan ang mga mali ni Paisones at ng lahat ng cfd…abangan……

    G-ONE:
    Sa mga bumabasa pakitingnan po ninyo ang statement ni Henry Arganda sa itaas; wala talagang alam sa argumentation; kasi:

    -sumasagot si Mr. Henry Arganda na hindi tinatanong!
    -Pag tinatanong si Mr. Henry Arganda hindi naman sumasagot!
    -hahay (ika nga sa Cebuano: “kalaay”)

    Bakit koba babaliin ang Gal. 2:9 eh nasa Biblia yan at kahit suriin mopa Mr. Arganda ang mga post ko laban sa saiyo, hindi ka makakahanap na kahit isang pangungusap na itinatanggi ko ang Gal. 2:9. Sa totoo nga e-pang support sa amin mga Catholic Faith Defender ang verse nayan.

    May Marami tayong mga verses sa Biblia na ginamit natin para mapagtibay natin ang ating contention. Kayat mali po ang sinabi ni Mr Arganda na “puro mat 16:18 lang ang nakikita bulag talaga,vias gumamit,” Kung bibilangin pa po natin ay mas marami akong verses na sinulat kaysa kay Henry Arganda.

    Sa Isa. 28:16 nasagot na natin to at na ipaliwanag nang maigi sa pamamagitan ng ating mga ebedensya sa pamamagitan na mga factual references. Sa nasambit na natin sa unahan na ang Isa. 28:16 ay ang isang Messianic Methapor na ibig sabihin ay pagiging Messiah ni Jesus sa kanyang pagtatag ng kanyang Iglesia siya ay ISA at hindi kalian man maihahalintulad ni Arsenio Ferriol na nagtatag rin nang kanyang sariling iglesia na tinatawag na 4th Watch PMCC, nakinabibilangan ni Henry Arganda.

    Abangan na naman po natin ang mga walang logic na pangangatwiran ni Henry Arganda…….

    Mga tanong na HINDI PA NASAGOT ni MR. HENRY ARGANDA:

    1. Makapagbigay kaba ng Bible scholar na nagsasabing hindi foundation ang mga apostol sa Efe. 2:20?
    2. Dahil sang-ayon ka na ang tunay na iglesia ay sasamahan ni Cristo araw-araw hanggang sa kataposan ng mundo at sinabi mong hindi kayo (Catholic Church) yun; ang follow-up question ko sa iyo Henry Arganda (At pakisunod narin ng mga iba kong tanong) itong iglesia na ito; ito ba ay ang 4th Watch PMCC?
    3. Si Pedro ba ay Bato?
    4. Kung ang sagot mo ay Bato, ito ba ay malaking bato o maliit na bato?
    5. Basi sa sagot mo sa Q#2-Sang-ayon kaba sa sinasabi ko na ang tunay na Iglesia ay narito pa sa ating kasalukoyang panahon?
    6. Kailan na itatag ang 4th Watch PMCC?
    7. Kung ang sagot mo sa (#6) ay 33 A.D.; may maipapakita kabang mga standard na mga referencia na nagpapatunay sa sagot mo?
    8. Saan mababasa sa Biblia na ang 4th Watch PMCC ay itinatag ni Cristo letra-4-letra (at word-4-word)?
    9. Saan mababasa sa standard na mga references na ang 4th Watch PMCC ay itinatag ni Cristo letra-4-letra (at word-4-word)??
    10. Saan mababasa sa Biblia 4th Watch PMCC (Sa Chapter at verses nito)?
    11. (At yong Question number 13 sa Reply#2 ko sa iyo Henry)…

  9. teds said

    ano ba ang pinagtatalunan nyo…..magdebate na lang kayo sa public wag dito lang para may makarinig naman…ayus ba?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: