Announcement

Collapse

Ecclesiology 201 Guidelines

Discussion on matters of general mainstream Christian churches. What are the differences between Catholics and protestants? How has the charismatic movement affected the church? Are Southern baptists different from fundamentalist baptists? It is also for discussions about the nature of the church.

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and theists. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions. Additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

What is the biblical justification for Peter as the first Pope?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What is the biblical justification for Peter as the first Pope?

    1. Whereas Peter demonstrated leadership with the Jews it was Paul whom God primarily used for the Gentiles.
    for He who effectually worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised effectually worked for me also to the Gentiles (Galatians 2:8, NASB)

    2. Peter is not given supremacy above all other apostles.
    and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, so that we might go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. (Galatians 2:9, NASB)

    3. There is no mention of a "Pope" in the list of church offices.
    And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues. (1 Corinthians 12:28, NASB)

    4. Paul labored more than all the apostles.
    But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me did not prove vain; but I labored even more than all of them, yet not I, but the grace of God with me. (1 Corinthians 15:10, NASB)

    5. In his epistle Peter does not make a claim for supremacy as Pope.
    Therefore, I exhort the elders among you, as your fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is to be revealed (1 Peter 5:1, NASB)

    6. The decision made by James was authoritative at the "Jerusalem Council".
    Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles (Acts 15:19, NASB)

    7. The right to bind and loose given to Peter is also given to the other Apostles.
    "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven." (Matthew 16:19, NASB)
    Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven. (Matthew 18:18, NASB)

    8. Out of curiosity why aren't Popes allowed to be married since Peter was married?
    When Jesus came into Peter's home, He saw his mother-in-law lying sick in bed with a fever. (Matthew 8:14, NASB)

    9. What is the biblical justification for Peter as the first Pope?
    Last edited by foudroyant; 05-30-2014, 08:11 PM.

  • #2
    "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

    Comment


    • #3
      Actually, the pope is allowed to marry. It is is only church discipline, ie, a man-made law of the church, which requires a promise of celibacy for those desiring to be ordained priests. According to canon law, the ultimate authority to make or promulgate laws cannot himself be bound by those laws (though he might voluntarily submit to them) otherwise he would not be free to change human laws.
      βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
      ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

      אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
        7. The right to bind and loose given to Peter is also given to the other Apostles.
        "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven." (Matthew 16:19, NASB)
        Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven. (Matthew 18:18, NASB)
        Personally, I see the papacy as a human institution, which represents one among several models for leadership in the church, all of which have some merits and shortcomings. But surely you must know that those who do see the Petrine office as authorized in scripture point especially to Mt 16,18. While some argue about the meaning of Peter's name, in the early church tradition there was a tendency to consider Peter, and the Roman See, as in some sense first among equals, what some might call a primacy of honor. Why do you think Matthew portrays the Peter as being given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven and the power of binding and loosing first, before the other disciples?
        βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
        ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

        אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by robrecht View Post
          Why do you think Matthew portrays the Peter as being given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven and the power of binding and loosing first, before the other disciples?
          Please see Point #1 in the OP. Peter was viewed as the leader in the Gospels as well as in the first chapters of Acts but from Acts 11:19 on the situation changed.
          Last edited by foudroyant; 05-31-2014, 03:06 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
            Please see Point #1 in the OP. Peter was viewed as the leader in the Gospels as well as in the first chapters of Acts but from Acts 11:19 on the situation changed.
            Did Jesus take back his keys? Did Peter lose them? Did Paul or James steal them from him? Why do you think Paul laid out his gospel before the leaders of the church in Jerusalem lest he had run in vain?
            βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
            ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

            אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by robrecht View Post
              Did Jesus take back his keys? Did Peter lose them? Did Paul or James steal them from him? Why do you think Paul laid out his gospel before the leaders of the church in Jerusalem lest he had run in vain?

              The Lord simply had others in position of prominence at various times.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
                The Lord simply had others in position of prominence at various times.
                Sorry, but you did not answer my question. Why do you think Paul laid out his gospel before the leaders of the church in Jerusalem lest he had run in vain?
                βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                Comment


                • #9
                  You asked several nonsensical questions.
                  Paul did lay out the gospel he preached before the leaders (plural) of the church. No supremacy is given to Peter above all others - James and John were viewed in equality with him (See Point #2 in the OP).

                  Vincent: In consulting the Christians at Jerusalem Paul had principally in view the formal indorsement of his work by the church and its leaders. Their formal declaration that he had not been running in vain would materially aid him in his mission.
                  http://www.studylight.org/commentari...cgi?bk=47&ch=2

                  I'm still waiting for you or anyone else to show me the supremacy of Peter after Acts 11:19.
                  Last edited by foudroyant; 05-31-2014, 11:38 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
                    You asked several nonsensical questions.

                    Vincent: In consulting the Christians at Jerusalem Paul had principally in view the formal indorsement of his work by the church and its leaders. Their formal declaration that he had not been running in vain would materially aid him in his mission.
                    http://www.studylight.org/commentari...cgi?bk=47&ch=2

                    I'm still waiting for you or anyone else to show me the supremacy of Peter after Acts 11:19.
                    I did not speak of supremacy, but of a primacy of honor. If Peter was the first to be given the power of loosing and binding, he still remained the first to have received this authority even after Acts 11,19 or any other time subsequent to the event described in the gospel of Matthew. Do you really consider it nonsense that Matthew says Peter was given by Jesus the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven?
                    βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                    ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                    אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I already answered your question in Post #7.

                      primacy: (1) the state of being first in order, rank, importance, etc.
                      (3) Roman Catholic Church . the jurisdiction of a bishop, as a patriarch, over other bishoprics, or the supreme jurisdiction of the pope as supreme bishop.
                      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/primacy?s=t

                      James and John were viewed in equality. (See Point #2 in the OP).

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
                        I already answered your question in Post #7.

                        primacy: (1) the state of being first in order, rank, importance, etc.
                        (3) Roman Catholic Church . the jurisdiction of a bishop, as a patriarch, over other bishoprics, or the supreme jurisdiction of the pope as supreme bishop.
                        http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/primacy?s=t

                        James and John were viewed in equality. (See Point #2 in the OP).
                        A dictionary will not help resolve the various meanings and disputes continuing to this day regarding the 'primacy of honor', applied first to Rome and later to Constantinople. I use the term only in the chronological sense and in whatever sense helps to serve the purpose of Christian unity in various times and places. Any Christian interpretation of a primacy of honor must respect Jesus' teaching that whoever would be first must be last of all and the the servant and slave of all. James and John desired to be given positions of honor at Jesus' side, but Peter was first among equals.
                        Last edited by robrecht; 05-31-2014, 12:24 PM.
                        βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                        ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                        אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Zero Scriptural support for the primacy of Peter after Acts 11:19.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
                            Zero Scriptural support for the primacy of Peter after Acts 11:19.
                            As I said above, it all depends on what you man by primacy. Certainly, Paul submitted to the collegial authority of James, Cephas and John after that point in time. If one views the apostles or original disciples of Jesus as having equal authority with respect to binding and loosing, Paul seems to have recognized this authority, even though he certainly considered himself to be an apostle as well.
                            βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                            ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                            אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Peter is not singled out as having primacy among the three.
                              Paul would later correct Peter for his sin (Galatians 2). Paul would write more letters than Peter - the same with John. Paul labored more than Peter (See Point #4). James would make the authoritative decision in Acts 15 (See Point #6).

                              Comment

                              widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                              Working...
                              X