No doubt Peter is mentioned a lot.
Paul was educated and literate. Peter was not. Any wonder who wrote more? Peter had already established the traditions which Paul received. Where do you think Paul got them? Paul gave scripture and tradtion equal weight. You pound Paul’s letters to death. Where’s your mention of his tradition? Paul’s letters were meant to be instructive, but only if used in conjunction with the tradtitions handed on to him, and which he in turn handed on to the early church. Where’d they go? Catholicism.
i think not. Just because something is mentioned more does not mean its the most influential. Paul no doubt has had a greater impact on the church with his theology than Peter.
Yes, if all you do is read. Like I said, you lack 50% of Christianity because the protesting deforrmers threw many of the traditions away. Those who split off from them continued the practice until the present day, where everyone can be a church unto himself, with no authority.
The NT is inspired-inerrant. Nothing else is. It is the foundation for all doctrine and practices because it alone is inspired-inerrant. From it we can have everything we need for salvation.
Who wrote the NT, Christ? No, MEN did. Those men must have been “inspired-inerrant”, right? You have absolute faith in that. That’s human infallibility, which you reject. It documents the Eucharist, which you REJECT. According to Christ, you have no life in you.
If Peter alone was the only head then why don’t the scriptures teach this?
This is beaten to death. If you change the meaning of Christ’s commands you render the NT worthless. Christ commanded Peter to lead and scripture recorded that command. Notice Christ also said that Peter had Divine Revelation “flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father in Heaven” Christ also changed Simon’s name to Peter at that moment. Have you changed the meanings of the words?
Take for example the first council in Acts 15. It was not Peter who finally ruled but James.
James was expressing opinion, not a hard and fast ruling. Scripture gives James no final authority. You conveneintly omit Peter’s statement (Acts 15:7) “My brothers, you are well aware that from early days God made His choice among you that through my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the Gospel and believe” Seems that Peter preached to the Gentiles, too, huh?
Secondly, Paul never acknowledges Peter as the supreme leader of the church but acutally rebukes him.
As did Jesus, but He still made him the “Rock” on which the church was built. So, is Paul your Pope or James?
I go to the inspired-inerrant scriptures as the final authority.
Meaningless tripe! It means whatever you think it does. Why do you think Christ appointed a head? One authority to interpret. One voice, because He did not want 33,000 bickering denominations. He got them anyway.
True biblical faith requires us to have evidence and reason for our beliefs. Jesus Himself taught this principle in a number of places.
Yet you demand everything in print, and it’s not there. The remainder is in tradition, which you don’t have, so all of the missing parts have been made up. OSAS. SF, SS, you name it - Band-Aids to fix broken theology.
Christ be with you and reveal the fullness of truth to you, in the fullness of time.
