Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community forums. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Christian Fellowship Community Forums

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Sign in to follow this  
The_Cheeky_Guardian

The Petra we stand on. Was it a grammatical issue that caused the schism of 1054?

Recommended Posts

Recently, i was just browsing through a post of /christian/, and as it typically goes, the post becomes a sh**fest about papal supremacy, but there was an Orthobrox that gave a link full of biblical arguments against the R.Catholic church's authority. One of the link's case demonstrates that for Matthew 16:18 there a definitional distinctions between in Greek for Peter; Petros meaning a small individual stone-masculine(like the ones R.catholics enjoy throwing at our windows), and the 'Rock'; Petra which means rock of a large mass-feminine(it also can refer to a cliff or a boulder).

 

This contrast conceptually makes perfect sense for other verses such as 1 Corinthians 10:4, 1 Peter 2:4-8, etc. as they utilize the term Petra to illustrate the notion that people are the stones(Petros) for the temple of God with Christ as our foundation(Petra). But I researched farther, the Latin Vulgate 'conveniently' omits these characteristics like that of the Greek, with the latin word for 'Rock'(petram) as a very generic description for a stone, and 'Peter' is just a name(Petrus). Although St.Jerome, St.Augustine, and others, seemly understood the Greek translation.

 

f I properly did my research, then here my question: Do you think this division of language between the East, who spoke primarily Greek, and the West, who increasing only spoke Latin, helped to motivate the papal divergence within the schism of 1054? P.S. Please forgive me if I made any grammatical mistakes. English isn't my strongest subject.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
Recently, i was just browsing through a post of /christian/, and as it typically goes, the post becomes a sh**fest about papal supremacy, but there was an Orthobrox that gave a link full of biblical arguments against the R.Catholic church's authority. One of the link's case demonstrates that for Matthew 16:18 there a definitional distinctions between in Greek for Peter; Petros meaning a small individual stone-masculine(like the ones R.catholics enjoy throwing at our windows), and the 'Rock'; Petra which means rock of a large mass-feminine(it also can refer to a cliff or a boulder).

 

This contrast conceptually makes perfect sense for other verses such as 1 Corinthians 10:4, 1 Peter 2:4-8, etc. as they utilize the term Petra to illustrate the notion that people are the stones(Petros) for the temple of God with Christ as our foundation(Petra). But I researched farther, the Latin Vulgate 'conveniently' omits these characteristics like that of the Greek, with the latin word for 'Rock'(petram) as a very generic description for a stone, and 'Peter' is just a name(Petrus). Although St.Jerome, St.Augustine, and others, seemly understood the Greek translation.

 

f I properly did my research, then here my question: Do you think this division of language between the East, who spoke primarily Greek, and the West, who increasing only spoke Latin, helped to motivate the papal divergence within the schism of 1054? P.S. Please forgive me if I made any grammatical mistakes. English isn't my strongest subject.

 

 

 

I haven't anything to add, but I'm sure @Origen can answer your question (is an expert in the Greek, Hebrew and loves history). Just wanted to step in and say hello and welcome you to Christforums The_Cheeky_Guardian!

 

God bless,

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff

As to the 1054 schism, Dr. Reeves (PhD in Historical Theology from Cambridge, Professor of Historical Theology at Gordon-Conwell) does an excellent job of of addressing the issues. One should not think that all the issues were simply theological. There were also political issues.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...