Was Peter a Pope?

And yes, I believe every thing the bible says.

You just said you don't believe everything the bible says...You said you believe Peter but not Paul...

So you must believe that both Peter and Paul were sent to preach the Gospel to the gentiles because that is what the Bible says.

Absolutely...

You think that because you don't get it that the bible is wrong??? Sorry, if you chose to believe only one side or only part of the scriptues, it is you who are wrong...Something's wrong with your understanding...

Peter was given the task of admitting a Gentile into the flock...The Jewish flock...The flock where the law was still in effect...And then of course it was given to the rest of the 12 to allow Gentiles into the flock...

Act 15:7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Act 15:8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
Act 15:9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

Peter's commission was NOT to take the word of God to the Gentiles...It was to show the Jews that the Gentiles were to allowed the same religious benefits as the Jews...No one at that time, including Peter was taking the gospel to the Gentiles...

Mat 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: Mat 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Mat 10:7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

It was some time later that Jesus informed Paul that a new plan had come into play...At that time, Jesus separated the 12 Jewish apostles from Paul...

Act 13:1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.
Act 13:2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.

Act 13:46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. Act 13:47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.

Peter was sent to the Gentiles to provoke the Jews to jealousy since they were not flocking to Jesus as they should have...

Rom_11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

And why again???

Act_28:27 For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

It was Paul then who was commissioned to reach out to the Gentiles to bring them in...

Jewish apostles reaching out to Jews and a Roman apostle reaching out to Gentiles...

When you don't get it, you can't just pick and choose what fits your understanding...The first rule is to BELIEVE...Without belief, one will never get the understanding...

Eph 3:3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
Eph 3:4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

2Pe_3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

The Catholics don't even get this verse...

When you leave or do not believe scripture and turn it into something you can believe and understand, you are wresting the scriptures...

We are to believe ALL the scriptures, not just some...And when we do, God will open up the scriptures and provide the understanding...

Sorry, no, Linus was chosen by God. The earliest witness to Linus's status as bishop was Irenaeus, who in about the year 180 wrote, "The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate."

Your "historical facts" are baseless...

I do believe you are in error regarding the reading of the Scriptures by the lord. He read from the Old Testament, which was all that was available at that time. When you put the church above the Word of God - you fall into serious error. Matthew 4:4: But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

No, private interpretation isn’t encouraged, but neither is blind faith to what one group teaches helpful. Acts 17:11:

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily , whether those things were so. Paul called the Bereans noble because they didn’t just take his word for what he taught - they searched the Scriptures to determine if what he was teaching was true. So, I would suggest that you spend some time in prayer seeking God’s face regarding what you believe. There are many false teachings and teachers out there, always has been and always will be.

I’m hardly stiff necked, but I will allow you to believe what you want. I urge you to, however, search out the scriptures and pray over them.

I do believe you are in error regarding the reading of the Scriptures by the lord.

Are we having the same conversation? When did this part of the conversation take place?

When you put the church above the Word of God - you fall into serious error.

When you fail to recognize that the Word is a man, Jesus, and not just a Book... you fall into very serious error. Go read the end of the Gospel of John again.

Paul called the Bereans noble because they didn’t just take his word for what he taught - they searched the Scriptures to determine if what he was teaching was true.

Which Scripture? The Old Testament. Just as Christ opened the hearts of His Apostles on the road to Emmaus, so St Paul opened the hearts of his fellow Jews to see Christ in Old Testament Scripture. When understood, the Old Testament is all about Christ.

So, I would suggest that you spend some time in prayer seeking God’s face regarding what you believe.

You just can't help yourself, can you?

There are many false teachings and teachers out there, always has been and always will be.

Might I suggest that the teachings which have been true, unchanged from the beginning, might hold some authority? Those which have been promulgated outside of the Church built by Christ might be more suspect? Just a thought.

"Sorry, no, Linus was chosen by God. The earliest witness to Linus's status as bishop was Irenaeus, who in about the year 180 wrote, "The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate."

Which is not proof. That's called back filling. Again, if God recognized Linus, He would have actually spoken to him. The Lord proved that He was still talking to His real Church leaders even when Linus claimed the leadership for himself.

Linus claimed to take over in 67AD, God spoke to John face to face in 70AD. He never once spoke to Linus.

Again, if God recognized Linus, He would have actually spoken to him.

Is it possible that God has His own way of doing things or must he conform to StormPrepper's rules? Perhaps Our Lord spoke directly to His Apostles because that was the revelation they received. After the Apostles, the Church was meant to rely on the Holy Spirit revealed through the Magisterium (body of bishops). Surely you can understand the chaos that could ensue from having a church where each of its ministers claimed a private revelation. It would be very difficult to navigate and discern the truth. But if they had to discern together...

"Is it possible that God has His own way of doing things or must he conform to StormPrepper's rules?"

God reveals how He does things in the scriptures. If God is real and the scriptures are true, then I should be able to compare the things He does and says to real world events and they should match.

"Perhaps Our Lord spoke directly to His Apostles because that was the revelation they received."

And if God is unchanging it is correct to assume that He will continue to do so.

"After the Apostles, the Church was meant to rely on the Holy Spirit revealed through the Magisterium (body of bishops)."

Then why was Judas replaced? Because no where did the Lord say He would replace the Apostles with a "body of bishops". This was made up by the Catholics to justify their new church organization. In other words, they created an interpretation of the events to match the outcome.

The world fell into complete and total apostasy. You only need to look at history to see this is true.

Amos prophesied of a time when the word of the Lord would not be on the earth. By verse 10, when a prophet says the "only son" he means the only Son of God. After the death of Jesus.

Amos 8:
10 ...and I will make it as the mourning of an only son, and the end thereof as a bitter day.
11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord:

12 And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it.

I believe this is true because after John there were no prophets on the earth.

But...Amos also said...

Amos 3:
7 Surely the Lord God will do nothing, abut he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.

God will do nothing without a prophet. Which must be true, because in Rev 11 shows there will be real prophets in the last days.

So sometime along the line, the famine spoken of by Amos ended and the Lord restored prophets to the earth.

The term "Catholic" means universal. IT is in all places at all times. IT is the union of Heaven and Earth. As Peter was told, what is bound on Earth is bound in Heaven...IT is One Kingdom. This is not so in denominational Protestantism.

(Well, I see at least one of your foundational problems, PG. To you it appears the Body of Christ is an impersonal "IT")

Organization, or Organism?

Perhaps an impersonal organization -- vs. a living, breathing, indwelled Body, -- a true ORGANISM, eh, PG?

Plus, perhaps a Rome-based hierarchy? Did God brand Rome as the permanent center of this "IT" of your creation?

Tell us, PG, where the Church in the Scriptures is presented as this Impersonal "IT" of your creation & imagination?

The Church of Christ, PG, is a living body.

The Greek word for CHURCH -- is ecclesia/ekklesia -- literally meaning "called-out ONES"...

Highly peopled...ONLY personal...

Not brick & mortar...but people...

Not a Rome-based hierarchical institution.

You see, institutions come & go as man-made things.

Same with man-arranged hierarchies.

But people are a specialty creation of God. And a specialized "temple" of the Holy Spirit.

It isn’t that Peter was more of a man than others or had unshakeable faith (clearly)... he was given a special commission by Christ to feed His flock. He was chosen to be servant of the others just as the Pope is called the “servant of the servants of God.”

And I know nowhere in Scripture where God deals with "solo servants" who rule over others.

Even in the local churches in the New Testament, elders were plural.

As for the apostles, note that the apostle Paul said:
* "I was in no way inferior to these [so-called] 'superapostles'" (2 Cor. 12:11);
* In fact, at one point, Paul rebuked Peter (Gal. 2:11-21);
* Paul claimed to be on the same level as Peter (Gal. 2:8);
* Paul wrote half of the NT -- compared to Peter's two epistles;
* BOTH Peter & John were sent by the apostles on a mission (Acts 8:4-13)
* Peter wasn't "THE pastor of the church but only a 'fellow presbyter [elder]' (1 Peter 5:1-2)." (Rhodes & Geisler, p. 113)
* "In view of the New Testament titles used of Peter, it is clear that he would never have accepted the terms used of the Roman Catholic Pope today: 'Holy Father' (cf. Matt. 23:9) or 'Supreme Pontiff' and "Vicar of Christ.'" (Rhodes & Geisler, p. 193)

Oh...+ The Holy Spirit is our Vicar (John 14:16,26; 16:13-14)!

You are dealing with a brain-washed Catholic. What you wrote is truth, but they aren’t allowed to accept anything unless its from their “church.” I guess the best thing you can do is pray for these poor, misguided souls who will hang onto their false teachings with their dying breath.