Paul Did NOT See Peter as Head of the Church

[Tomyris]

Randy,

I think you’ve worked long and hard to develop a case for the papacy that will appeal to Protestants in a desire to see Protestants reunited with the One True Church. I think it is probably very difficult when you encounter a blockhead like me who argues with everything you say, but that is what both of us are here for. You have obviously done a lot of reading and work to write as much as you have, which means it is a major-type commitment on your part, and the fruit is slow and frustrating.

I wish you joy in your journey with Christ.

-Tomi

 

[Randy_Carson]

Whoopee. It’s an argument from authority. The statement is right, you think, because someone says it is right, regardless of how it relates to truth.

F.F. Bruce is widely respected. I respect him.

What if I had 17 that agreed with me? Then you’d come up with 18? And I’d come back with 19? The whole premise is silly. I am not going to play that game.

Have you read verse 25 of Isaiah 22? “In that day,” declares the Lord of hosts, “the peg driven in a firm place will give way; it will even break and fall, and the load hanging on it will be cut off, for the Lord has spoken.” (NASB).

Sounds like if the pope IS the steward, we had best avoid him. We’ve been warned.

Jesus is an eternal king. The office of His royal steward is, therefore, eternal. Further, the steward SERVES the king; the Holy Spirit does not serve the Son.

“In that day” of v. 25 is referring to the same day of v. 20…the day that SHEBNA would be cut down…not Eliakim.

There are popes that come and go, of course. However, the office of the Pope, established by Jesus, remains.

 

[Tomyris]

Eduard Schweizer (Presbyterian/Reformed)

“In Jewish interpretation, the key of David refers to the teachers of the Law (exiled in Babylon); according to Matthew 23:13, the ‘keys of the Kingdom of heaven’ are in the hands of the teachers of the Law. A contrast is here drawn between them and Peter. He is thus not the gatekeeper of heaven, but the steward of the Kingdom of heaven upon earth. His function is described in more detail as ‘binding and loosing’ …the saying must from the very outset have referred to an authority like that of the teachers of the Law. In this context, 'binding” and ‘loosing’ refer to the magisterium to declare a commandment binding or not binding…For Matthew, however, there is only one correct interpretation of the Law, that of Jesus. This is accessible to the community through the tradition of Peter…Probably we are dealing here mostly with teaching authority, and always with the understanding that God must ratify what Petrine tradition declares permitted or forbidden in the community." (Schweizer, page 343)

Have you read verse 25 of Isaiah 22? “In that day,” declares the Lord of hosts, “the peg driven in a firm place will give way; it will even break and fall, and the load hanging on it will be cut off, for the Lord has spoken.” (NASB).

Sounds like if the pope IS the steward, we had best avoid him. We’ve been warned.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Have you read verse 25 of Isaiah 22? “In that day,” declares the Lord of hosts, “the peg driven in a firm place will give way; it will even break and fall, and the load hanging on it will be cut off, for the Lord has spoken.” (NASB).

Jesus is an eternal king. The office of His royal steward is, therefore, eternal. Further, the steward SERVES the king; the Holy Spirit does not serve the Son.

“In that day” of v. 25 is referring to the same day of v. 20…the day that SHEBNA would be cut down…not Eliakim.

There are popes that come and go, of course. However, the office of the Pope, established by Jesus, remains. It’s a perpetual office because Jesus is an eternal king.

 

[Tomyris]

So if this is against hierarchy, Jesus isn’t a leader then too?

Nonsense.

Nonetheless which early Church father used the verses from Matthew and Luke to signify that the said passages proclaim no hierarchy?

MJ

Ah, so you admit Scripture is on my side and flee to the ECFs?

We are not done with the New Testament, not by a long way.

Observe that in the NT leadership is ALWAYS plural, NEVER singular.

Exactly where did Jesus tell the eleven they were to obey Peter?

 

[Tomyris]

Jesus is an eternal king. The office of His royal steward is, therefore, eternal. Further, the steward SERVES the king; the Holy Spirit does not serve the Son.

“In that day” of v. 25 is referring to the same day of v. 20…the day that SHEBNA would be cut down…not Eliakim.

There are popes that come and go, of course. However, the office of the Pope, established by Jesus, remains. It’s a perpetual office because Jesus is an eternal king.

Well, since he didn’t establish the office of pope, the whole argument falls down. Your argument is circular.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Well, since he didn’t establish the office of pope, the whole argument falls down. Your argument is circular.

The office of the Royal Steward and the office of the papacy are one and the same.

 

[MartinJordan]

Nonsense.

Why is it nonsense?

Ah, so you admit Scripture is on my side and flee to the ECFs?

No and why is it deeming “fleeing” when those who came before us probably have a better understanding than us? After all the Bible is for the Church by the Church. Not the interpretation of one person (or bunch of people) who came 2000 years after ( i include myself).

We are not done with the New Testament, not by a long way.

I’m glad you feel same. Context is integral.

Observe that in the NT leadership is ALWAYS plural, NEVER singular.

So when Jesus tells Simon Peter strengthen your brothers. How many people are involved in strengthening? One person (Peter) or Peter, Andrew, James, Matthew. etc ?

Where did Jesus tell the eleven they were to obey Peter?

Because he changed his name?

MJ

 

[MartinJordan]

Nonsense.

Why is it nonsense?

Ah, so you admit Scripture is on my side and flee to the ECFs?

No. What gave you that idea? and why is it deeming “fleeing” when those who came before us probably have a better understanding than us? After all the Bible is for the Church by the Church. Not the interpretation of one person (or bunch of people) who came 2000 years after ( i include myself).

We are not done with the New Testament, not by a long way.

I’m glad you feel same. Context is integral.

Observe that in the NT leadership is ALWAYS plural, NEVER singular.

So when Jesus tells Simon Peter strengthen your brothers. How many people are involved in strengthening? One person (Peter) or Peter, Andrew, James, Matthew. etc ?

where did Jesus tell the eleven they were to obey Peter?

See above.

MJ

 

[catholictiger]

I know I’m late to the thread but I want to see if I can bump in.

1. Peter isn’t the head of the Church, Christ is.
2. yes I understand this relates to the visible Church, Peter was the head of the visible Church on earth.
3. I think it is obvious that Christ appointed Peter the head of the Church under himself.
4. so it doesn’t really matter what Paul thought, Christ thought other wise.
5. I would be shocked if Paul thought peter wasn’t the head.

 

[KathleenGee]

The Jews living within 100 years of Christ knew very well what the steward of the keys was.

This person was chosen to wear a large key on his lapel to show his authority, this demonstrated in Isaiah 22 as Randy has shown.

We cannot either dismiss 25 Protestant theologians who affirm the Church is correct in verifying that Peter is the rock upon which Christ heads His Church.

If you do not get it who the ancient steward was, then you are not either understanding how the Jews understood Christ’s directive in those times either, irregardless of 25 Protestant theologians agreement with the Church.

You either follow your personal interpretation out side the Church or you enter the Church in Christ and likewise encounter His living presence among us.

I love the Lutherans on those Sunday’s and miss seeing them again. And I experienced the same Christ, the same presence of God.

But it was like they were out there in the peripheries and were missing out on so much more there is to be Christian that we can experience in the Church with our hierarchy, the pope, the countless races and cultures, the sacraments, the lives of the saints, the Liturgy of the Hours where we continue on beyond the Mass to praise the Lord through various times of the day.

People can say they have communion…but then at the end of the service, the wine and bread are discarded in the garbage…so where is Christ in that?

 

[benhur]

Paul missed the memo then

Haven’t had my cup of coffee yet but I got my recommended morning laugh in.

 

[benhur]

How many times?

188.But it was a couple of years ago that I counted in concordance. Just knew it was more, only a slight fraction more, than Peter.

 

[benhur]

Indeed!

He allowed it? As in, “This is my will to have 2 different beliefs about my teachings”?

I don’t think so, ben.

Allowed or not, liked or not , endured or not,differences existed. The kingdom does not have full reign on earth yet, and there is free will, and the wheat and the tares are even in the best place on this earth, the church, as it was then in the nation of Israel whilst Jesus walked with no steward but with twelve,Peter being the captain and Christ the coach.

 

[benhur]

I know I’m late to the thread but I want to see if I can bump in.

1. Peter isn’t the head of the Church, Christ is.
2. yes I understand this relates to the visible Church, Peter was the head of the visible Church on earth.
3. I think it is obvious that Christ appointed Peter the head of the Church under himself.
4. so it doesn’t really matter what Paul thought, Christ thought other wise.
5. I would be shocked if Paul thought peter wasn’t the head.

A Tiger can bump in any time.

head as the top figure of visible power as in a flow chart, no.

head as in leader by example and deed of eleven other equals, yes, and is quite universal

 

[benhur]

The Jews living within 100 years of Christ knew very well what the steward of the keys was.

This person was chosen to wear a large key on his lapel to show his authority, this demonstrated in Isaiah 22 as Randy has shown.

OK. But as Tommy points out Christ qualifies this. It will not be as lording over, or as the world knows visible hieirarchy, or even as Israel knew it.

We cannot either dismiss 25 Protestant theologians who affirm the Church is correct in verifying that Peter is the rock upon which Christ heads His Church.

Well, the Rock is in reference to building upon, not heading/hierarchy. The keys is in the leading by example.

Tell me, once a door is open, do you need the keys anymore, especially if no man can shut the door(s) ?

How many of those theologians agree with Tertullian, that the keys stopped with Peter ?

How many see in those passages the “modern” day papacy ?

 

[benhur]

People can say they have communion…but then at the end of the service, the wine and bread are discarded in the garbage…so where is Christ in that?

Sorry if you had to see that. Nothing is wasted, and hopefully it is done discreetly.

Still, the CC regulations on such matters seems reverent but also reminds me of the Pharisees and all their reverential rules.

“The sacrarium provides for the proper disposal of sacred substances.
In this way any remaining particles of communion are washed into the earth, beneath the church building, we honor them, the ground over which we worship” rpinet.com/ml/2505bi2.html

‘‘If you have difficulty removing wine stains, many relig
ious supply stores sell a product called Red Wine
Away. Spray a little on the stain, let it dry, and then appl
y again. After three or four times, the wine should
completely disappear. Another useful
product may also be wax-remover’’ stmarysutah.org/AltarSociety/PolicyandProcedureforCleaningLiturgicalLinens.pdf

The whole earth is the Lords and we worship,in many places, even on line.

I will grant you the Catholic way for disposal seems more reverential, but in the end, all of it returns to earth, even what we consume.

As always thanks for sharing things from the heart, and please, I mean no disrespect and can empathize with your reverence though still humbly disagree on the transubstantiation matter.

 

[ericc]

So, after Paul has gone persecuting the Church and got blinded for 3 days and changed over a new leaf and is in need of guidance from the existing Christians, who do you think he reckon is the head of the Church? If Protestants didn’t think Peter is the logical choice, what other names would you put up as the best candidate?

James the Just? He could be one of the disbelieving adelphoi of Jesus and not of the Twelve. James Zebedee got himself killed pretty early. Matthias and others are of the seventy disciples secondary tier therefore unlikely. Doubting Thomas? Scratch him out. I heard he went to India. The other apostles were pretty low key and their names hardly mentioned.

Among the Twelve, I think it is indisputable that Peter is the head. Christ has charged him with feeding his lamb and sheep in front of the other apostles. Christ has declared he is building his Church on Peter.

I have seen the argument that Peter is not in the running since Paul rebuked Peter for bad eating etiquette. Nevertheless, it does not seem that takes away Peter leadership position at all. Anyway, what kind of rebuke is that? It doesn’t appear to be a challenge for the leadership position. And Paul himself admitted he is the least of the apostles for being guilty of persecuting the Church. But he tries very hard to redeem himself.

I’d like to see by process of elimination, whether Peter will be the last man standing for the leadership position.

Any takers?

 

[KathleenGee]

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut, Benhur…and please note, no offense. You speak honestly and sincerely and that is what makes good dialogue.

Likewise as a child, I never believed unbaptized babies go to hell…it never a doctrine of faith. I am with JPII who said we entrust them to Our Lord’s mercy.

When you say the use of keys now…we then fall back on the universal catechism…in fact, it is our norm and guidance if we are dealing with confusion or downright sin from our popes.

Our faith is defined in creed and practice…orthodoxy and orthopraxis.

But what is important is to separate large Tradition…that which I just shared on orthodoxy and orthopraxis…and the small ‘t’ traditions…those that are local, porous, or fleeting.

It is the spirit of the Church we are in the end upholding here…this being none other the Holy Trinity at work and the author of this communion we so wish to share with others.

The Church allows biblical studies, where one can utilize one’s personal interpretation and understanding…but as Church…we follow belief and practice based on the Creed, morality, worship…as defined by our catechism…the last part is on “Prayer” and the only one used is that of Christ, ‘The Our Father’.

The Our Father is the prayer we as Christians all pray together and as unity is a sign of faith, perhaps we should pray more Our Fathers every day for common belief and unity.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Who’s the leader?

I’m the leader!

No, I’m the leader!

No, I’m the leader!

Follow me I’m the leader!

Who’s the leader?

Tag, you are it.

Run!!!