Does the
Bible teach the Doctrine of the Papacy?
Cross
Examination Session
Examiner: Moses Flores
The
following is a cross-examination session between Moses Flores and Ben Rosado
concerning the office of the Papacy.
Each of the participants met in a private chat room and were given roughly 45 minutes to exchange questions and
answers.
Moses Flores: Ben, I provided you with
numerous scholarly quotations based on scholarly research with original
biblical languages and cultural references of first century
Ben: Yes I do,
at least I hope I can remember them.
Moses Flores: According to several
scholars, the words of Matthew 16:13-20 were more than likely spoken in Greek,
yet you base your arguments for Peter as the Rock on an Aramaic rendering of
that passage. On what basis do you
insist the words of Matthew 16:13-20 were spoken in the Aramaic language as
opposed to the Greek language in which the New Testament was originally written
as God-breathed Scripture?
Ben: I have a
hunch that Jesus spoke Aramaic
Moses Flores: While it is certainly not
denied that Jesus spoke Aramaic, as well as Hebrew and Greek, being that the
only evidence of the words we have in Matthew 16:13-20 were passed down to us
in Greek, isn't it reasonable to believe that those words could have been
spoken in Greek and not Aramaic?
Ben: No I can't
really agree with that.
Moses Flores: why not?
Ben: Well
because Jesus was a Jew speaking only to Jews in those verses.
Moses Flores: But according to numerous
scholars of who I only quoted a few, Jews were more
comfortable speaking Greek since their own language of Hebrew was not as
familiar to them since the Hellenization period of the Greeks. Isn't it at all possible that Jesus spoke those
words in Greek?
Ben: I am sure
there is some chance that He did.
Moses Flores: From your previous
rebuttal [not the out of order one] I’m still not clear on your handling of the
fact that these original inspired manuscripts of Scripture were written in
Greek, noted as the more “official” language of explanation and important
documents. Is it more important how God
chose to transmit and preserve the truths recorded in Scripture or how they
would have been spoken originally?
Ben: Although they were written in Greek, I believe the reason why
was, not because Jesus didn't speak to His disciples in Aramaic, but mainly
because those gospels were to spread over the whole world.
Moses Flores: But you are not answering
the question....I'm asking which is more important: They way that God inspired the Scriptures to
be written and preserved for all time or the way in which it may have happened?
Ben: Oh! I am sorry about that. I missed the question
a bit. Well,
I believe that one is not more important than
the other. Both how Jesus spoke to the
disciples and the written word itself are extremely important because context
is always important in understanding the scriptures.
Moses Flores: But if it is possible
that the way it was written and the way it was spoken can lead to confusion,
wouldn't we look for God to be most clear on such a subject, especially one
that is defined as a "de fide" dogma, one without with one cannot be
saved, according to
Ben: I do
believe that the Lord is clear enough in regards to the scripture.
Moses Flores: Ben, do you have a Bible
handy?
Ben: Yes I do
Moses Flores: Could I ask you to look
up Matthew 16:18-19?
Ben: Yes.
Moses Flores: According to this text,
who does Jesus say he will give the Keys of the Kingdom to?
Ben: Simon
Peter
Moses Flores: Agreed. What is the "function" of the keys
according to verse 19?
Ben: Whatever
he (Simon peter) binds on earth shall be bound in heaven. Whatever he looses on earth shall be loosed
in heaven.
Moses Flores: Could you turn to Matthew
18:18 please?
Ben: Certainly.
Moses Flores: According to this text
who does Jesus give the same power of "binding and loosing" to?
Ben: According
to this text, the church itself (if this is read in context with the above
verses) also has this power to bind and loose.
Moses Flores: Isn't the audience Jesus
is speaking to identified in verse 18:1 as the disciples?
Ben: In 18, 1 it is but,
closer to the point where Jesus speaks this, He is talking specifically about
the church Mt18, 17.
Moses Flores: Could you identify the
word "church" for me in Matthew chapter 18?
Ben: Well in Mt
18, the church seems to be a visible organization where someone can go to bring
a dispute about a brother who sins.
Moses Flores: The point is, that in
Matthew 18 Jesus gives the power of "binding and loosing" associated
with the keys in Matthew 16:19 to all the apostles here...the "you"
in 18:18 is plural in the Greek. My
question is this: Isn't is it possible
that the Matthew 16 Peter was speaking as a representative of all the apostles
and what Jesus promised him was promised to all the apostles but spoken to
Peter who was speaking representatively?
Ben: Yes and no.
Moses Flores: How so as yes?
Ben: Yes as to
Peter being the chief of the apostles. Their
spokesman so to speak, and no as to Peter is the only
one specifically given the keys. Remember
this is all in the same gospel of Matthew.
There is a reason why this is spoken twice. The first time is talks of the keys but the
second time it doesn’t.
Moses Flores: Ben, I have a quote from
a Greek Expository dictionary concerning "rock" as used in Matthew
16:18. Here it is: “
In a wordplay, the name of the apostle Peter (petros) derives from
Ben: Well this
is only if Jesus spoke Greek. But, grammar wise, it is hard to understand the
Lord to be speaking about a rock other that Peter. The sentence right before he says "upon
this rock" he is talking about changing Peter’s name to rock. It is very bad grammar if he isn't talking
about peter here.
Moses Flores: let me rephrase my
question...according to the Scriptures as they were written by the author of
the Gospel of Matthew, could we say that the author of Matthew chose to
represent Jesus' words for "rock" as two different kinds?
Ben: Yes he
did. But Catholics see this to be
because the word for rock is a feminine word.
Moses Flores: In regards to the
grammar, doesn't it make perfect sense that Jesus is not talking about the same
"rock" - already mentioned two different types of rocks - and then the
demonstrative pronoun (Gr. tauth) "this". Again, the function of the demonstrative
pronoun according to Greek grammar is to point out and designate certain
objects in distinction from others (see last rebuttal for source). Doesn't the text clearly say,
that Jesus is not talking about Peter anymore when he says, "upon THIS
rock"?
Ben: Not really
for us. Because at first there is the
confession of Peter (Jesus is the Christ), then the change in Peter’s name, and
then comes the “upon this rock.” The “upon
this rock” refers grammatically, to the sentence before it.
Moses Flores: last questions as time is
fleeting....Could you quote from Ephesians 2:20 for me.
Ben: verse 20
is: “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus
himself as the capstone”
Moses Flores: According to this text,
who is the foundation of the Church?
Ben: The
foundation is the apostles and prophets.
Moses Flores: And could you quote
Revelation 21:14 for me?
Ben: “The wall
of the city had twelve courses of stones as its foundation, on which were
inscribed the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the lamb.”
Moses Flores: According to this text, who
is the foundation of the "Bride, the wife of the Lamb" (identified in
21:9)?
Ben: If you
read these texts by themselves, without Mt 16, 18 included, it seems to be that
the foundation is the apostles.