Christ Did NOT make Peter the head of the church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tomyris
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
House_Harkonnen said:
No Lutheran accepts everything Luther wrote. Just like no Thomist accepts everythig. Thomas Aquinas wrote, or Basilian accepts everything Basil wrote, etc. They continue to honor those men despite not accepting everything they wrote.

Asking them to do so simply because of their namesake is silly, and against the rules of the forum to boot.
Click to expand...
Well, that’s some comfort for you, I guess.

Still, no Thomist has to disown the kind of stuff that Luther was spewing…:nope:
 
Randy_Carson said:
Oh, now I get it. You’re just fooling around. 'Cause we both know that while the renowned Protestant church historian J.N.D. Kelly dates the usage of the name “Catholic” after the death of the Apostle John, he also acknowledges that the original Church founded by Jesus called itself the “Catholic Church”.]
Click to expand...
Why am I bound to accept Kelly’s opinion on the matter?
Sure. All the heretics want to be called “Catholic”. Augustine saw that in his day.
Click to expand...
And all churches want to be called orthodox, but if I showed up in your town asking you to take me to the nearest Orthodox Church, I doubt you would venture your own denomination. That must mean the RC denomination is unorthodox, right?
 
Randy_Carson said:
Well, that’s some comfort for you, I guess.

Still, no Thomist has to disown the kind of stuff that Luther was spewing…:nope:
Click to expand...
No. Catholics all the time have to disavow their saints and church fathers as many of them were on the supply side of meanness towards Jews, and they did much more than write and talk. They actually carried it out, as opposed to Dr. Luther who simply prattled on.
 
House_Harkonnen said:
Why am I bound to accept Kelly’s opinion on the matter?
Click to expand...
You’re not. But the fact that he is a renowned scholar with a great reputation and solid academic credentials might at least give you some reason to consider what he has to say. Relative to your own opinions, anyway.
And all churches want to be called orthodox, but if I showed up in your town asking you to take me to the nearest Orthodox Church, I doubt you would venture your own denomination. That must mean the RC denomination is unorthodox, right?
Click to expand...
Actually, I would drive him the long way to MY church in order to have time to explain to him why Peter really is the rock, the shepherd, the keeper of the keys and the royal steward.

By the time we arrived, he would be grateful that he was taken to a Church that teaches orthodox theology, the Roman Catholic Church.

(See what I did there? :)}
 
House_Harkonnen said:
No. Catholics all the time have to disavow their saints and church fathers as many of them were on the supply side of meanness towards Jews, and they did much more than write and talk. They actually carried it out, as opposed to Dr. Luther who simply prattled on.
Click to expand...
Oh, Lord…my dad can beat up your dad.

:rolleyes:

G’nite, House.
 
Randy_Carson said:
You’re not. But the fact that he is a renowned scholar with a great reputation and solid academic credentials might at least give you some reason to consider what he has to say. Relative to your own opinions, anyway.

Actually, I would drive him the long way to MY church in order to have time to explain to him why Peter really is the rock, the shepherd, the keeper of the keys and the royal steward.

By the time we arrived, he would be grateful that he was taken to a Church that teaches orthodox theology, the Roman Catholic Church.

(See what I did there? :)}
Click to expand...
Wow…. Just wow…. Forum Master indeed:) 👍
 
House_Harkonnen said:
No matter how many times I read them there still won’t be any reference to Peter declaring that he has any greater authority than any other apostle, nor acting with the authority that modern day popes claim to possess.

No. He acted as a prominent apostle, and was held accountable by another apostle.
Click to expand...
Peter was in charge and did indeed lead the flock. Lets talk about Authority…

Authority is not taken, Authority must be given. And Jesus gave Peter authority in Matthew 16:18.

Read the scriptures where Jesus tells the Apostles to tell no one He was the Messiah… Learn from Jesus about humility and the need for time for growing in understanding that led Peter and the disciples to the ultimate truth about His identity, the coming of the Kingdom and His Church…

Peter acted as lead apostle and wasn’t so arrogant as to think that no one elses voice mattered… Peter led with humility as great leaders should, and Jesus worked at making Peter even more humble… A person who is a leader doesn’t boast or isn’t proud but leads with humility in order to lift those who they lead… Jesus called the pharisee leavened (puffed up) because they boasted and denied Jesus miracles even after they saw them. Peter was the opposite… What did Jesus teach Peter??

Mark 8: 15 And he cautioned them, saying, “Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod.”

Jesus also said:

Matthew 23:11 The greatest among you will be your servant. 12 All who exalt themselves will be humbled, and all who humble themselves will be exalted.

And you expect that Peter should boast about having authority over the flock? I would answer with this about that…

Matthew 6:1 "Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.

It also asks the question, how many times did Jesus admit who He was but we know who He is.
 
DaddyGirl said:
In the “keys to the kingdom” quote, it reads to me as though he is talking to all of them when he says that, not just Peter.

.
Click to expand...
Start with Matt 16:16 and it’s crystal clear the dialog is between Jesus and Peter.
 
DaddyGirl said:
I think he rebukes him because Peter disagrees with what he says next.
Jesus is telling them he’s now going to suffer, etc…and Peter tells him Noooo……of course that’s not gonna happen!!!
So Jesus gets angry at him for misunderstanding him and calls him…Satan.
Kinda harsh.

.
Click to expand...
Satan means adversary. He wasn’t calling him Lucifer.
 
ptisme said:
You’ll either read this and question why you left or you’ll ignore it and carry on.
catholic-pages.com/pope/hahn.asp
Click to expand...
Ok I finished it. I am not a fan of Scott Hahn and this doesn’t help his case IMO. His argument is based on ad hoc explanations, half truths, and question begging. He is supposed to be a scholar, a pop scholar but still a scholar.
 
House_Harkonnen said:
Ok I finished it. I am not a fan of Scott Hahn and this doesn’t help his case IMO. His argument is based on ad hoc explanations, half truths, and question begging. He is supposed to be a scholar, a pop scholar but still a scholar.
Click to expand...
such as?
 
Karen107 said:
Peter was in charge and did indeed lead the flock. Lets talk about Authority…

Authority is not taken, Authority must be given. And Jesus gave Peter authority in Matthew 16:18.

Read the scriptures where Jesus tells the Apostles to tell no one He was the Messiah… Learn from Jesus about humility and the need for time for growing in understanding that led Peter and the disciples to the ultimate truth about His identity, the coming of the Kingdom and His Church…

Peter acted as lead apostle and wasn’t so arrogant as to think that no one elses voice mattered… Peter led with humility as great leaders should, and Jesus worked at making Peter even more humble… A person who is a leader doesn’t boast or isn’t proud but leads with humility in order to lift those who they lead… Jesus called the pharisee leavened (puffed up) because they boasted and denied Jesus miracles even after they saw them. Peter was the opposite… What did Jesus teach Peter??

Mark 8: 15 And he cautioned them, saying, “Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod.”

Jesus also said:

Matthew 23:11 The greatest among you will be your servant. 12 All who exalt themselves will be humbled, and all who humble themselves will be exalted.

And you expect that Peter should boast about having authority over the flock? I would answer with this about that…

Matthew 6:1 "Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.

It also asks the question, how many times did Jesus admit who He was but we know who He is.
Click to expand...
No one is arguing that Peter is not the princeps of the apostles.

What I am arguing is that nowhere did Peter claim the office of “Royal Steward” nor did his successors in Rome excercise a universal, total jurisdiction for hundreds of years. In fact the early church fathers clearly disputed that doctrine. That doctrine would take hundreds of years to develop.
 
ptisme said:
Satan means adversary. He wasn’t calling him Lucifer.
Click to expand...
Right Peter at that point was thinking carnally, calling Jesus the Messiah, in terms of being an earthly King so Jesus was correcting Peter on that account because it was a Gods heavenly Kingdom He wanted Peter to think about.
 
House_Harkonnen said:
No one is arguing that Peter is not the princeps of the apostles.

What I am arguing is that nowhere did Peter claim the office of “Royal Steward” nor did his successors in Rome excercise a universal, total jurisdiction for hundreds of years. In fact the early church fathers clearly disputed that doctrine. That doctrine would take hundreds of years to develop.
Click to expand...
Thats not true… We see Linus written about in the scriptures.

Here’s a list of the Popes. Off the top of my head St. Clement was one of the Church Fathers.

newadvent.org/cathen/12272b.htm
 
House_Harkonnen said:
No one is arguing that Peter is not the princeps of the apostles.

What I am arguing is that nowhere did Peter claim the office of “Royal Steward”
Click to expand...
This has already been explained to you very clearly and I have to say most here are much more patient than I.

Jesus gave Peter the office of Royal Steward, Peter did not claim it. How could he? The keys are given and passed down, not taken.
 
SteveVH said:
This has already been explained to you very clearly and I have to say most here are much more patient than I.

Jesus gave Peter the office of Royal Steward, Peter did not claim it. How could he? The keys are given and passed down, not taken.
Click to expand...
If he had the office of Royal steward with universal jurisdiction, he didn’t mention it at all, nor did any pope for hundreds of years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top