C
Catholic_Tom
Guest
I have having trouble with the following, can anyone help? The person in dialogue is not me, but I’d like to help as I’ve used these verses before. They seem to present some good arguments combatting these verses however I am not even close to being an expert apologist…yet. Obviously, the objectors words are in Black.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pax_Vobiscum
First, let’s define terms. “Roman Church” is a pejoritive term used to dismiss any possibility of taking Catholics seriously. The Church is referred to as “Catholic.” The Latin rite of the Catholic Church refers to itself in official documents as, among other things, simply the “Catholic Church.”
Pax, to say “Roman church” means that that the current structure of the Roman Catholic Church was not in place until it was “combined” with Roman government. Peter was clearly not the first pope, and the church structure shown in the Bible does not match with the structure of the Roman Catholic Church.
Quote:
That said, the simple answer is that it goes back to the time of Christ. Christ founded the Church on the apostles, and specifically singled out Peter for special leadership.
Actually, Christ founded the church upon the truth that He is the “Christ, the Son of the Living God.” And while Peter may have been given a certain honor to be the first to proclaim the gospel, this does not amount to leadership over and above any other apostle, as we’ll see below as we examine your points.
Quote:
It was to him that Christ gave the “keys of the kingdom.”
Indeed, Christ said He would give Peter the keys of the kingdom in Matthew 16:19. From scripture we see that Peter used these keys in Acts chapter 2, as he preached the first gospel sermon after the resurrection. He indeed opened wide the kingdom of heaven to all who believing would enter. Does this priviledge mean Peter was higher in status than the others? That would be a stretch of the text, indeed. Someone had to speak first, and Christ chose Peter. We shouldn’t make more of that than the text says.
Besides this, Christ then tells Peter that what he binds on earth will have been bound in heaven, and what he looses on earth will have been loosed in heaven. This seems to point to some king of Petrine authority. Problem is, though, that Christ gives this same statement to ALL the apostles in chapter 18:
Mat 18:18 "Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.
So all the apostles were on an even footing in this respect.
Quote:
There were numerous other incidents that showed Christ singling out Peter for this burden of leadership. For example, Jesus repeatedly asks Peter if he loved Him, then saying “feed my sheep” repeatedly.
Well, sure. But are we told the significance of this from the text? No. But since Peter denied the Lord openly three times, many see this as Peter’s restoration to his position as apostle. So I don’t think this is strong evidence for any special authority over other apostles.
Quote:
Jesus prays for Peter in the singular when he says (rough paraphrase) “I have prayed for YOU, that YOUR (singular) faith will not fail…”
Jesus said this in regard to Peter’s coming denial of Him:
Luk 22:32 but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers."
Jesus prayed for Peter that his faith would. But He also says, “when once you have turned again,” meaning that when Peter returns from his denial, he was to strengthen his brothers. This is a prophecy of what Peter would do, but it’s certainly not an indication of “popehood.” Any Christian can strengthen other Christians. Timothy could, 1 Thess. 3:2, and he was no pope.
Quote:
Jesus also preaches from Peter’s boat…
You just threw that one in for kicks, didn’t you? bibleforums.org
Jesus preached in a lot of places, but I don’t think we can assign Peter head status because Jesus preached from his fishing boat. bibleforums.org Jesus also kept the Passover an an unmentioned person’s house. He also used a person’s donkey to ride into Jerusalem at the triumphal entry. But those weren’t indicators of any special status for those who owned the things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pax_Vobiscum
First, let’s define terms. “Roman Church” is a pejoritive term used to dismiss any possibility of taking Catholics seriously. The Church is referred to as “Catholic.” The Latin rite of the Catholic Church refers to itself in official documents as, among other things, simply the “Catholic Church.”
Pax, to say “Roman church” means that that the current structure of the Roman Catholic Church was not in place until it was “combined” with Roman government. Peter was clearly not the first pope, and the church structure shown in the Bible does not match with the structure of the Roman Catholic Church.
Quote:
That said, the simple answer is that it goes back to the time of Christ. Christ founded the Church on the apostles, and specifically singled out Peter for special leadership.
Actually, Christ founded the church upon the truth that He is the “Christ, the Son of the Living God.” And while Peter may have been given a certain honor to be the first to proclaim the gospel, this does not amount to leadership over and above any other apostle, as we’ll see below as we examine your points.
Quote:
It was to him that Christ gave the “keys of the kingdom.”
Indeed, Christ said He would give Peter the keys of the kingdom in Matthew 16:19. From scripture we see that Peter used these keys in Acts chapter 2, as he preached the first gospel sermon after the resurrection. He indeed opened wide the kingdom of heaven to all who believing would enter. Does this priviledge mean Peter was higher in status than the others? That would be a stretch of the text, indeed. Someone had to speak first, and Christ chose Peter. We shouldn’t make more of that than the text says.
Besides this, Christ then tells Peter that what he binds on earth will have been bound in heaven, and what he looses on earth will have been loosed in heaven. This seems to point to some king of Petrine authority. Problem is, though, that Christ gives this same statement to ALL the apostles in chapter 18:
Mat 18:18 "Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.
So all the apostles were on an even footing in this respect.
Quote:
There were numerous other incidents that showed Christ singling out Peter for this burden of leadership. For example, Jesus repeatedly asks Peter if he loved Him, then saying “feed my sheep” repeatedly.
Well, sure. But are we told the significance of this from the text? No. But since Peter denied the Lord openly three times, many see this as Peter’s restoration to his position as apostle. So I don’t think this is strong evidence for any special authority over other apostles.
Quote:
Jesus prays for Peter in the singular when he says (rough paraphrase) “I have prayed for YOU, that YOUR (singular) faith will not fail…”
Jesus said this in regard to Peter’s coming denial of Him:
Luk 22:32 but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers."
Jesus prayed for Peter that his faith would. But He also says, “when once you have turned again,” meaning that when Peter returns from his denial, he was to strengthen his brothers. This is a prophecy of what Peter would do, but it’s certainly not an indication of “popehood.” Any Christian can strengthen other Christians. Timothy could, 1 Thess. 3:2, and he was no pope.
Quote:
Jesus also preaches from Peter’s boat…
You just threw that one in for kicks, didn’t you? bibleforums.org
Jesus preached in a lot of places, but I don’t think we can assign Peter head status because Jesus preached from his fishing boat. bibleforums.org Jesus also kept the Passover an an unmentioned person’s house. He also used a person’s donkey to ride into Jerusalem at the triumphal entry. But those weren’t indicators of any special status for those who owned the things.
Some bibles make the translation automatically and have “James and Peter and John”.
There is virtually no question among biblical scholars (of any stripe) that the whole thing about Jesus and Peter/keys is referring to Isaiah–i.e., the Kingdom of David and the new worldwide Kingdom of Jesus. Every jew in those days knew exactly what Jesus was referring to. That office was extremely important and Eliakim was last in a long line of keepers of the keys. You are exactly wrong in saying it was Eliakim and not the office which was exalted. You’re right in saying that particular office was not hereditary, but I don’t think it was meant that way by the poster. The position was an extremely important one of overseer or steward of the House of David. There were scarcely any more important positions anywhere.