I'm stumped (about the primacy of Peter)

  • Thread starter Thread starter adam_in_ohio
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
sandusky said:
That’s both ridiculous and backwards thinking; none of those men deny that the papacy existed; what they assert is that the papacy has neither a biblical authority, a biblical basis, nor a biblical reason for its existence. 😉
Click to expand...
One could say the same about the canon of the New Testament. 😉
 
sandusky said:
Athanasius, in the East, had the 27 books of the NT listed decades before the Roman Church adopted Athanasius’ canon. 😉
Click to expand...
May I ask when the Roman Catholic Church adopted Athanasius’ canon?

God Bless,
Michael
 
sandusky said:
Athanasius, in the East, had the 27 books of the NT listed decades before the Roman Church adopted Athanasius’ canon. 😉
Click to expand...
In 397 AD, when the canon of Scripture was ratified, there was no East/West division. The Great Schism was still more than 650 years away.
 
The name Peter has its origins from the Greek word Petros, and Petra. In ancient Aramaic, the word for Rock is Kepha or Cephas.

So if you were to read this in Aramaic language the language of Jesus.

“Simon Son of Bar Jona, you are Kepha and upon this Kepha I will build My Church.” Jesus change Simon’s name to Peter. In the ancient times, when God changes a name it was very important. God change Abram to Abraham, Jacob to Israel.
 
adam_in_ohio said:
Ok I’m stumped. In talking about the primacy of Peter I pointed out Matthew 16:18-19

“Mat 16:18 And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.Mat 16:19 I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

I pointed all the normal Catholic stuff of what is being said. I asked what he thought, and after a number of trys, he has not given a interprtation that deels with every thing in these verses.

Now my problem, he asked whats up with matthew 18:18

Mat 18:17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.Mat 18:18 Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.Mat 18:19 Again, (amen,) I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything for which they are to pray, it shall be granted to them by my heavenly Father.

I know their is no mention of keys. The keys in mat 16:19 is authortive? Right? But other than that I have no idea how to explain 18:18 in a way that is correct and dosn’t let them pounce all over me, to say Peter had no primancy.
Click to expand...
What was given to Peter alone was also given to the Apostles together as a whole. This is exactly what Catholic teach concerning the college of bishops and the supremecy of the Pope. What’s the problem?
 
sandusky said:
Only the RCC hierarchy is free to take a both/and position on anything; for everyone else it’s EITHER you submit to the pope, OR you’re a heretic.
Click to expand...
Actually, I think you’d probably be quick to say that either someone has said the sinner’s prayer and accepted Jesus as his personal Lord and Savior or he has not. Either someone is saved or he is not. Some things are like that.
The reformers weren’t the only group who had a problem with the papacy; were they?
Click to expand...
No, but what does that prove?
And how many of the those protestant writers that you quote emphatically deny that the passage in question gives any basis for a papacy?

I’d wager all of them.
Click to expand...
So would I. Otherwise, they’d become Catholic.
So what’s your point in quoting them? :hmmm:
Click to expand...
What these Protestant scholars DO demolish is the absolutely absurd claim by ignorant non-Catholics that Peter is NOT the rock to which Jesus was referring.

That dog simply won’t hunt any more.

Now we can move on to discussing the next step in your conversion which is based on the implications of the fact that Peter was the rock upon which Jesus built the Church.

👍
 
List of Popes
newadvent.org/cathen/12272b.htm

e. The Keys to the Kingdom

As Solomon appointed 12 officers to administer his kingdom (see 1 Kings 4:7), Jesus appoints His 12 Apostles to positions of leadership in His kingdom (see Matthew 19:28).

He appoints, one, Simon, to a special post, changing his name to Peter. Peter is from the Greek Petros, which means “rock.” Jesus tells him, “On this rock I will build my Church” (see Matthew 16:18).

This may be a reference to Solomon, who built the Temple, the house of God, on a large foundation stone (see Isaiah 28:16).

Earlier, Jesus had made another reference to Solomon and the rock - saying that people who live by His new law are like “a wise man who built his house on rock.” Solomon was known for his wisdom (see 1 Kings 3:10-12) and built the Temple on a rock (see 1 Kings 5:17; 7:10).

My Church is the name that Jesus gives to the Kingdom He has come to announce.

And Jesus gives Peter supreme authority in His Kingdom, His Church. He gives Peter the “keys to the kingdom of heaven” and the powers to “bind and loose.”

The only other place in Scripture where such “keys” are mentioned is in a passage about the Davidic kingdom found in a prophecy from Isaiah (see Isaiah 22:15-24).

There, Isaiah prophesies God’s transfer of “the key of the House of David” from a corrupt “master of the palace” named Shebna to a righteous servant, Eliakin. Of Eliakin, the prophet says:

He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the House of Judah. I will place the key of the House of David on his shoulder - when he opens, no one shall shut; when he shuts, no one shall open.

This sounds a lot like what Jesus says to Peter:

I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

In the Davidic Kingdom, the king appointed, in effect, a prime minister to handle the day-to-day affairs of the Kingdom. He was called the royal “vizier” or “major-domo,” the “superintendent” or “master of the palace.” He is considered, as Isaiah said, to be “a father to the inhabitants” of the Kingdom (see 1 Kings 4:1-6; 16:9; 18:3; 2 Kings 15:5; 18:18,37; 19:2; Isaiah 22:22).

Jesus appoints Peter to be “prime minister” of the restored Kingdom of David, the Kingdom of Heaven that Jesus proclaimed, the Church He called His own.

The “keys” are a symbol of the King’s power, authority, and control (see also Revelation 22:16; 3:7; 1:18).

Jesus’ reference to “binding” and “loosing” alludes to the authority of rabbis in Jesus’ time. The rabbis had the power to make “binding” and “loosing” decisions about the interpretation and enforcement of the Law - they could declare what is permitted and what is not permitted according to the Law.

As prime minister of the Kingdom, rock of the Church, Peter is, in effect, the chief rabbi, with ultimate teaching authority.

Learn more here
salvationhistory.com/online/beginner/walkgen.cfm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top