Posted on 12/13/2013 11:31:40 AM PST by Gamecock
Copyright Dr Joe Mizzi. Permission to copy and distribute this article without textual changes.
Question: Jesus installed Peter as the chief steward or prime minister under the King of kings by giving him the keys to the kingdom. As can be seen from Isaiah 22:22, kings appointed a chief steward to serve under them in a position of great authority to rule over the inhabitants of the kingdom. Jesus quotes almost verbatim from this passage in Isaiah, and so it is clear what he has in mind. Christ appointed Peter to lead them and guide the flock (John 21:15-17).
Answer: Christ gave Peter authority in the church and he was certainly a prominent leader. Peter is consistently mentioned first in the list of the apostles; he is often their spokesman; and he had the privilege of first preaching the Gospel to the Jews at Pentecost and then to the Gentiles at Cornelius' house.
Peter was prominent, yet that is not sufficient to prove that he was pope. The bishop of New York is more prominent than the bishop of Malta, yet the former does not exercise authority over the latter. Prominence is different from primacy and predominance.
To prove the papacy, you must show that Peter was the head of the apostles and that he exercised full, immediate and universal power in the Church. For that is exactly what is claimed by Rome:
"The office uniquely committed by the Lord to Peter, the first of the Apostles, and to be transmitted to his successors, abides in the Bishop of the Church of Rome. He is the head of the College of Bishops, the Vicar of Christ, and the Pastor of the universal Church here on earth. Consequently, by virtue of his office, he has supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church, and he can always freely exercise this power" (The canon law, 331).
It is evident that Christ gave authority to the apostle Peter. "And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:19). At issue is whether this authority was unique to Peter. Evidently it was not, for soon afterwards Jesus gave exactly the same authority to all the apostles, "Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 18:18). Hence Peter had an authority similar to the other apostles, and not an authority over them.
The apostles did not understand Jesus' words in Matthew 16 as Roman Catholics interpret them. If He made him 'chief steward' and 'prime minister' and 'the head of the college of bishops', why is it that even up to the day before Christ suffered, they were still arguing among themselves who should be considered the greatest? (Luke 22:24-26). Jesus' reply is very significant. He did not remind them what He told Peter at Caesarea Philippi, but simply scolded them for their pagan-like reasoning. "The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them...but not so among you." Peter knew nothing of the "supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power" over the other apostles and the church. Ironically, later on in history, the bishops of Rome - who were supposedly the successors of Peter - strove and fought to gain lordship over the universal church.
Again, it is true that Jesus commissioned Peter to feed the sheep (John 21:15-17). However, this was not a unique office committed to Peter alone. The apostle Paul tells the elders of Ephesus, "Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood" (Acts 20:28). The apostle Peter himself says, "The elders who are among you I exhort, I who am a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that will be revealed: shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers, not by compulsion but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly; nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock; and when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that does not fade away." (1 Peter 5:1-4). The elders are called to feed the sheep too.
You refer to Isaiah 22:22. "The key of the house of David I will lay on his shoulder; so he shall open, and no one shall shut; and he shall shut, and no one shall open." As a matter of fact this verse is quoted "almost verbatim" in the New Testament, specifically in Revelation 3:7 and not in Matthew 16. "These things says He who is holy, He who is true, He who has the key of David, He who opens and no one shuts, and shuts and no one opens" The key of the house of David is in the hand of Christ, not Peter!
Rome would make Peter the "supreme pastor" or chief shepherd of the church (Catechism, para. 857). Peter himself would never usurp the title of His Master. Jesus Christ alone is "the Chief Shepherd" of the church (1 Peter 5:4).
Interesting. When was Paul saved? Acts, Chapter 9. To whom was the gospel of the grace of God given? Paul. When Peter went to Cornelius’ house, Acts, Chapter 10, on God’s timeline, was the gospel of the grace of God already on the scene? Have you ever wondered why Peter was sent to Cornelius in the first place? And how his conversion intersects with Peter and his kingdom message, and Paul and his grace message?
A Jew, but not a Marxist.
“Ah, no. He was a Jew.”
The two were not mutually exclusive at the time.
“When was Paul saved?”
“The Bible actually speaks of three tenses when it comes to salvation: we have been saved (in the past: Eph. 2:5,8, 2 Tim. 1:9, Tit. 3:5), we also will ultimately be saved (in the future: Rom, 5:91 Thess. 5:9-10, 1 Pet. 1:5), and we are being saved now (in the present: 1 Cor. 1:18, 15:1-2, 2 Cor. 2:15).”
A Catholic did not write that by the way. A Protestant did: http://www.fundamentallyreformed.com/2011/01/18/salvation-in-the-present-tense/
So the putative “Father of Church History” was an anti-Catholic bigot. Who knew?
Interesting. When was Paul saved? Acts, Chapter 9.
Also there were Christians at Rome called Babylon before Paul ever got there.
Whats more i have no inclination to say what Peter said is untrue.
It has been said that Luke wrote acts, since he could not have been every where at once it must have came from at least a few different sources so probably not necessarily the order of the chapters.
Actually, archeology proves that Iraq was Bablyon of the Bible. The Bible always distinguished Rome. I’m not going to argue with Catholics who refuse to see anything except what they want to see, and who refuse to seek out the truth for themselves rather than being spoon fed what their church teaches. The Bible NEVER sets up a hierachy such as seen at the Vatican. If you want to refer to Rome as being called Babylon - then I guess you can say that the Catholic Church is the false religion of Revelation - mystery Babylon?
The city of Babylon was the capital of the ancient land of Babylonia in southern Mesopotamia. It was situated on the Euphrates River about 50 miles south of modern Baghdad, just north of what is now the modern Iraqi town of al-Hillah.
The tremendous wealth and power of this city, along with its monumental size and appearance, were certainly considered a Biblical myth, that is, until its foundations were unearthed and its riches substantiated during the 19th century. Archaeologists stood in awe as their discoveries revealed that certain stories in the Bible were an actual situation that had happened in time.
They were all given the keys...The binding/losing...remitting/retaining...
You'll have to do better than early day bloggers to impress me.
To know how many had keys, first determine how many gates there are.
Maybe the Simon (Peter) of Acts Chapter 8.
Peter and the 11 all had the God-given authority to retain/remit sins. They could let in or keep out people of the Kingdom, all by God’s authority. The only one who did NOT have any keys was Paul. Imagine that...no keys to the Body of Christ...And people want to believe that Peter, the eleven, and Paul all preached the same message...
But which Peter??? It likely was Peter Magus...According to the apostle Paul, even tho there were Christians in Rome, there was not a church established til Paul got there...
Rom_1:11 For I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established;
According to some Historians Simon Peter Magus (Acts 8:9) had a church in Rome at the same time Paul was there, with a mixture of Christianity and paganism (sound familiar?)...Peter Magus also died in Rome...
On His mother’s side.
Linus. Then Cletus.
1Co 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
1Co 15:2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
2Co 2:15 For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:
Sorry, no kewpie doll for you...Try again...
He had that in common with more popes than I'd be able to list.
In Mat 18, the same authority was given to the disciples...There were a lot of disciples beyond the 12...Appears this commission was given to all the disciples, not just one of the apostles as the Catholic religion teaches...So I guess they were all popes...
A pity your religion didn't fashion it's popes after the apostle Paul instead...Wouldn't have had that problem...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.