RE: Rapture September 2015
August 22, 2015 at 3:55 pm
(This post was last modified: August 22, 2015 at 3:56 pm by Randy Carson.)
(August 21, 2015 at 8:05 pm)NoFaith2Burn4 Wrote:(August 21, 2015 at 7:43 pm)abaris Wrote: I'm not known to be in Randy's fanclub, but based on what was Peter a murderous thug?
And if he's supposed to be one, he's on the same lines as Freddy Krueger. Prove that he even existed for starters.
I'm not studied enough to offer proof on Peter's existence, but you know it was somebody who led the first church. He is said to be buried in the Vatican, and those who succeeded him were regarded as Popes, not that his church ruled consistently from the Vatican until centuries after.
My stipulation is from Acts, Chapter 4, and presuming that the story of Ananias and his wife Saphira was true. If not, then it's still no win for Randy's side. The foundation of Randy's Catholic's Cannot Be Wrong arrogance is that the church was commissioned by Jesus to Peter, and that Peter's successors are right necessarily because they are Peter's successors, not the rebels who later challenged Peter's successors. Are you yawning yet? My point of this is that Randy isn't just an arrogant asshole for Xtiandom, but an all-around Catholic bigot.
Anyway, Peter told everyone following him to sell off all of their property and bring him all the money from the transactions. Ananias and his wife Saphira decided to keep some of their own money for themselves. Peter pressed them on whether they gave him all of their money, and Ananias lied. Peter knew they were lying. According to Acts 4, Ananias, and later his wife suddenly dropped dead in front of Peter for that lie. Now I don't believe that even Randy is stupid enough to believe they "just died", especially with Peter being known for his violent temper - fuck that, you know that if this scene with these people took place at all, it was Peter killing them in cold blood. Jesus had a violent side too, as told by his violent rampage through the Jewish temple, therefore it's unsurprising if in fact he chose Peter. Therefore, presuming that the bible is true at all, Peter was a murderous thug.
Is that what the bible ACTUALLY says, NoBrains2Use?
Here's the actual passage:
Quote:32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all 34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.
36 Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means “son of encouragement”), 37 sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles’ feet.
Notice that part in bold? People sold their property voluntarily - not because Peter told them to. And why did they do this? Quite possibly because they were being led by the Spirit to liquidate their landholdings because the temple was going to be destroyed (which occurred in AD 70). Let's continue:
Quote:5 Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. 2 With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.
3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”
5 When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened. 6 Then some young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.
7 About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?”
“Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”
9 Peter said to her, “How could you conspire to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”
10 At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11 Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.
Again, check out the bolded passages. I wonder if Peter himself was not shocked when Ananias died, but when Saphira also lied, Peter knew how God would respond.
So, NoKnowledgeofGod, what is it about this passage that makes Peter a "murderous thug"? Nothing.
However, the verse bolded in blue suggests that just as He did in the Old Testament, God powerfully supported His chosen NT leaders and taught the people a lesson that dramatically benefited the early Church.