Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The First 10 Popes of the Catholic Church
St. Peter's List ^ | December 17, 2012 | SPL Staff

Posted on 06/20/2015 12:42:46 PM PDT by rwa265

Listers, we’ve catalogued the first ten Vicars of Christ for the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. Save the information on our first pope – St. Peter – all the information presented is taken from the Catholic Encyclopedia and links for further reading are provided.

1. Pope St. Peter (32-67)

St. Peter held a primacy amongst the twelve disciples that earned him the title “Prince of the Apostles.” This primacy of St. Peter was solidified when he was appointed by Jesus to the Office of the Vicar – demonstrated by Christ giving St. Peter the Keys to the Kingdom. To understand St. Peter, one must first understand Christ and the Church Christ came to establish. Jesus is the “Son of David” and his life and ministry fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies of the New Davidic Kingdom and New Jerusalem; hence, we look to the historic kingdom of King David as a guide to the New Davidic Kingdom. King David had a vicar that ruled his kingdom when David was absent and the sign of authority for this vicar was the keys of the kingdom. In the New Davidic Kingdom, Christ the Son of David gave the keys to his Vicar to guide the Kingdom until the return of Christ – we now refer to this vicar as “the pope.” SPL has written extensively on these issue in http://www.stpeterslist.com/45/10-biblical-reasons-christ-founded-the-papacy/ and http://www.stpeterslist.com/94/13-biblical-reasons-st-peter-was-the-prince-of-the-apostles/.

(Excerpt) Read more at stpeterslist.com ...


TOPICS: Catholic; History
KEYWORDS: catholic; church; popes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-299 next last
To: taxcontrol

You’re reading the wrong Bible. The King James and its successors are political documents, not complete Scripture.


41 posted on 06/20/2015 2:24:14 PM PDT by steve8714 (Francis, don't waste the moral authority of the Church on "climate change". Please.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: philetus

You put your own words in now? No wonder you profess such knowledge of Scripture.


42 posted on 06/20/2015 2:28:55 PM PDT by steve8714 (Francis, don't waste the moral authority of the Church on "climate change". Please.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Eusebius: Church history Translated by Phillip Schaff

Catholic author in the time of Constantine; translated by a protestant theologian and posted on a protestant web site.

Eusebius: Church history PDF version

43 posted on 06/20/2015 2:31:52 PM PDT by verga (I might as well be playng chess with pigeons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

Which words was that and I didn’t profess anything.


44 posted on 06/20/2015 2:34:49 PM PDT by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll eventually get what you deserve)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Your degree is in what exactly and where di you earn it?


45 posted on 06/20/2015 2:35:23 PM PDT by verga (I might as well be playng chess with pigeons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Your degree is in what exactly and where did you earn it?


46 posted on 06/20/2015 2:35:36 PM PDT by verga (I might as well be playng chess with pigeons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: rwa265
The assembly of which Jesus Christ instructed Peter in Matthew 16 has not appeared on this earth yet. There is NO "church" on earth since Acts 7 which meets its qualifications or description . . . . only some counterfeits . . . and a whole lot of men and denominations who try to use Matthew 16:13-18 to claim unwarranted authority and control over men and their wealth.

But it, the church of Matthew 16:18, will show up at the end of Daniel's Seventieth Week.

47 posted on 06/20/2015 2:37:02 PM PDT by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MamaB

See post 43 for links to the real truth.


48 posted on 06/20/2015 2:38:03 PM PDT by verga (I might as well be playng chess with pigeons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: metmom

So, the epistles have primacy over the Gospel?


49 posted on 06/20/2015 2:41:04 PM PDT by steve8714 (Francis, don't waste the moral authority of the Church on "climate change". Please.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; Mrs. Don-o; betty boop
Who did Paul say IS the Rock?

I am going to go with Peter on several occasions:

Gal 2:9 and when they perceived the grace that was given unto me, James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision;

1Co 1:12 Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos: and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

1Co 3:22 whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours;

1Co 9:5 Have we no right to lead about a wife that is a believer, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

1Co 15:5 and that he appeared to Cephas; then to the twelve;

And of course you should also remember Jesus Himself:He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, "You are Simon the son of John; you shall be called Cephas " (which is translated Peter).

How do prtos dodge that the ONLY meaning of Cephas is ROCK

50 posted on 06/20/2015 2:52:26 PM PDT by verga (I might as well be playng chess with pigeons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: metmom
If you'll revisit the delightful discussion we had on this just weeks ago

Peter and the Papacy (Free Republic link)

Oh, it seems like only yesterday, and with 835 replies, you will see that the whole thing involved an assiduous study of Classical Greek vs Koine Greek, plus Aramaic and Hebrew with a little Latin and French thrown in, and we came to the consensus position that: nobody here knows what they're talking about!!

No, I mean: THOSE GUYS don't know what they're talking about. Those guys ain't got no book-larnin'. Those guys can't handle the truth. Which then grew ever warmer and more fraternal as we concluded that THOSE GUYS are liars! They are deceivers! They are limbs of Satan!

I have other things to do right now, but if anybody ways the full Golden Treasure of Wisdom without having to labor through Matthew, Mark, Luke and Strong AGAIN --- just follow that link.

Cordial greetings to all.

51 posted on 06/20/2015 2:56:58 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("Make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification." - Romans 14:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: verga; MHGinTN; Mrs. Don-o; Alamo-Girl; caww; marron; hosepipe; YHAOS; Elsie; xzins; metmom
How do prtos dodge that the ONLY meaning of Cephas is ROCK?

Great question, verga: How do they?

BTW, what's a "prtos?"

52 posted on 06/20/2015 3:00:08 PM PDT by betty boop (Science deserves all the love we can give it, but that love should not be blind. — NR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: betty boop

Stupid fat fingers, should read Prot.


53 posted on 06/20/2015 3:02:49 PM PDT by verga (I might as well be playng chess with pigeons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: verga
If you'll revisit the delightful discussion we had on this just weeks ago Peter and the Papacy (Free Republic link)

Oh, it seems like only yesterday, and with 835 replies, you will see that the whole thing involved an assiduous study of Classical Greek vs Koine Greek, plus Aramaic and Hebrew with a little Latin and French thrown in, and we came to the consensus position that: nobody here knows what they're talking about!!

No, I mean: THOSE GUYS don't know what they're talking about. Those guys ain't got no book-larnin'. Those guys can't handle the truth. Which then grew ever warmer and more fraternal as we concluded that THOSE GUYS are liars! They are deceivers! They are limbs of Satan!

I have other things to do right now, but if anybody wants the full Golden Treasure of Wisdom without having to re-invent the Real by laboring through Matthew, Mark, Luke and Strong AGAIN --- just follow that link.

Cordial greetings to all.

54 posted on 06/20/2015 3:05:30 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("Make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification." - Romans 14:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: rwa265

It is also amazing to me that the succession of the Church from Jesus to Peter, something so important, would only be recorded in Matthew’s gospel. Why did the others think it so trivial that they didn’t even mention it?


55 posted on 06/20/2015 3:06:16 PM PDT by crusty old prospector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Talisker

that is then “bound and loosed” in heaven?

I’ve always wondered about this too.


56 posted on 06/20/2015 3:08:33 PM PDT by Paisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; Salvation

Well that’s one theory.

Jesus also called Peter Satan so I guess its also possible that the Roman Catholic church was established on Satan. That would explain whey the gates of hell wouldn’t stand against it, since rather than oppose it, they stand for it.

Just another theory to consider.


57 posted on 06/20/2015 3:18:02 PM PDT by Tramonto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: expat2

“So much anger here over St. Peter’s role.”

For myself it’s not anger but puzzlement. I’d venture that 90+% of Catholics are Gentiles, yet among them they anchor to one of God’s apostles to the JEWS. It is PAUL who was chosen by Christ to preach “my gospel”—the one he received directly from the risen Jesus—to the Gentiles (most likely you).

It seems that re: Peter, Catholics stop after the Gospels. It was Paul whom the Spirit used to confront Peter and frankly knock down the idea that he and James, et. al were the “pillars” they seemed to be vis a vis Paul’s supposedly lesser role.

He tartly adds “Those men added nothing to my message” and “God shows no partiality”.

There is no attempt to negate Peter’s role to the Jews, but Paul vigorously defends his to the Gentiles. God was working through both, but Catholics appear not to have gotten the memo that Paul is THEIR apostle. Thirteen (perhaps fourteen) letters in the NT to Peter’s two (maybe one?)?


58 posted on 06/20/2015 3:30:21 PM PDT by avenir (I'm pessimistic about man, but I'm optimistic about GOD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; All
Christ asked Peter three times if he loved him and then he announced that the Church would be built on him as rock and he gave him the keys to the kingdom.

This is a ridiculous interpretation of that scripture.

The Church would be built on Peter? The Church was already built. Are you trying to claim now that Christ had to rebuild it around Peter?

I have said this many times, after Peter, the RCC claims Linus was the leader of the Church. However, John was on the earth and still speaking with Christ face to face. John was an Apostle. He was the highest authority on earth at that time. Linus could not be the head of the Church.

In order for the RCC to be the one true Church, it would have to have living Apostles. Not to mention a succession from John, not Peter. The RCC was created by Constantine.

You can't get around this fact. You can ignore it, but it totally refutes your claim.

When you look through the events of History, the RCC proves over and over that it's not Christ's true Church.

The hideous epidemic of RCC Priests sexually abusing young boys is outrageous. A Pedophile homosexual priesthood is not of God. What's incredible is that, that statement is not even hyperbole. If anything it's probably an understatement.

If the RCC is the true Church of Christ and if He runs it, what does that say about the nature of Jesus Christ?

The two don't match.
59 posted on 06/20/2015 3:35:41 PM PDT by StormPrepper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector
It is also amazing to me that the succession of the Church from Jesus to Peter, something so important, would only be recorded in Matthew’s gospel. Why did the others think it so trivial that they didn’t even mention it?

Because they didn't have scribes walking around recording everything they did. They wrote when they had time or were instructed to.

The Bible is not the be all end of of history.
60 posted on 06/20/2015 3:41:57 PM PDT by StormPrepper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-299 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson