Peters restoration by the Lord Jesus – Feed my sheep

[Tanner9188]

**Jesus calls Simon and immediate changes his name to Cephas

John 1:42 "One of the two who heard John speak and followed Him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which translated means Christ). He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, "You are Simon the son of John; you shall be called Cephas" (which is translated Peter).

John = “Jehovah is a gracious giver”

Note: This is the first encounter with Jesus; when Peter is called, if you will, and notice Jesus changes His name immediately. Keep in mind and follow along.

** Jesus makes 2 Prophesies **

Mark 14:28 "But after I have been raised, I will go ahead of you to Galilee. [VERY IMPORTANT STATEMENT] " But Peter said to Him, "{Even} though all may fall away, yet I will not. [ARROGENCE & PRIDE] " And Jesus *said to him, “Truly I say to you, that this very night, before a rooster crows twice, you yourself will deny Me three times.” But {Peter} kept saying insistently, “{Even} if I have to die with You, I will not deny You!” And they all were saying the same thing also.

Note: Keep in mind, very important to remember 2 things as we move forward, Peter was prideful and arrogant and Jesus makes 2 prophesies 1) Peter will deny the Lord Jesus 3 times, after being with Him for 3 years (Judas denied Jesus as well) 2) Jesus said, after I am raised I will go ahead of you to Galilee
Peter denies the Lord 3 Times

Mark 14:72 "Immediately a rooster crowed a second time. And Peter remembered how Jesus had made the remark to him, “Before a rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times.” And he began to weep. - One difference between Judas and Peter; Peter was repentant - IMPORTANT to note.

Luke 22:61 "The Lord turned and looked at Peter. And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how He had told him, “Before a rooster crows today, you will deny Me three times.”

Jesus revels Himself for the 3rd time since the resurrection

John 21:1 After these things Jesus manifested Himself again to the disciples at the Sea of Tiberias, and He manifested {Himself} in this way."

NOTE: Tiberias-a city of Galilee near the Lake of Gennesaret

At this point; Peter is the only one; besides Judas, the son of perdition, to deny Jesus after spending 3 years, and this is the 3rd time He appeared, and Peter denied Him 3 times - do you see a pattern here; this is no coincidence; now watch how the Lord addresses Peter, the same as when He first called Peter; no coincidence “Peter, son of John” - not son of Jonah?? Why?
John = “Jehovah is a gracious giver”

Jesus restores Peter and his faith-Do you love Me? - 3 times

He beginning to restore Peter by starting over again with reference to Peter’s first title “son of John”; Peter needed to be restored, He is no different than any of the other apostles as far as messengers go and he was the most outgoing, a natural leader, but also the weakest spiritually; next to Judas Iscariot.

So when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me more than these?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Tend My lambs.” He said to him again a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Shepherd My sheep.” He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me?” Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, “Do you love Me?” And he said to Him, “Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.” Jesus said to him, “Tend My sheep.”

Summary: 3 times Peter denied Jesus after being with Jesus 3 years. On the 3rd visit since His resurrection, He asks Peter 3 times "Do you love Me? 3 times, Peter said he loved him. This was the 3rd time and only time He appeared at Galilee; just as the Scripture said.
Jesus broke him with the 3rd time and Peter was grieved; brought low by the Lord, now Peter is ready to serve and what a service He did. I hope you see this has nothing to do with Peter except a restoration; nothing more.

If you don’t see it read it over again; this is by God’s design and you must connect all the pieces to see and understand; The meaning of the names, particularly John as in “son of John” was no coincidence. This is the type of thing that makes the word of God so deep and rich. God bless!**

 

[OchsFam]

Jesus revels Himself for the 3rd time since the resurrection

Not to pick apart your analysis, but this was the fourth time He revealed Himself in John’s gospel. First was to Mary at the tomb, second was to the group in the locked room, third was to the group a second time with Thomas and fourth was on the shore. Also, we should note that 1 Cor 15:5 says Peter was visited first, before the 12.

He beginning to restore Peter by starting over again with reference to Peter’s first title “son of John”; Peter needed to be restored, He is no different than any of the other apostles as far as messengers go and he was the most outgoing, a natural leader, but also the weakest spiritually; next to Judas Iscariot.

While I would agree that Peter did require restoration, just as everyone does, I do not think that you can say Peter was the weakest spiritually after this restoration. Also, Peter is the most scrutinized of all of the disciples which is why we know about his faults, this does not mean that the others didn’t do things equivalent to what Peter did. In fact, we can be sure that every other disciple sinned against the Lord at some point because that is the nature of man after the fall. These men were not perfect, the fact that Peter was the most heavily written about and scrutinized is a testimony to his primacy among the Apostles.

All men sin and fall short of the glory of God. God has protected a select few from this but we have record that shows this protection was not given to the Apostles. In truth, Paul would have to rank up there with Peter and Judas in his spiritual weakness prior to his conversion and redemption. The truth is, you can say Peter was weak spiritually prior to his redemption, but it is not the same after this. This is true for everyone who finds Christ. We are weak made strong by the grace of God.

So when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me more than these?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Tend My lambs.” He said to him again a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Shepherd My sheep.” He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me?” Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, “Do you love Me?” And he said to Him, “Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.” Jesus said to him, “Tend My sheep.”

Keep in mind through this of John 10:16. There is one flock and one shepherd. This is significant when you look later in the gospel of John regarding these passages commanding Peter to keep care of his flock as its shepherd.

Jesus broke him with the 3rd time and Peter was grieved; brought low by the Lord, now Peter is ready to serve and what a service He did. I hope you see this has nothing to do with Peter except a restoration; nothing more.

If you don’t see it read it over again; this is by God’s design and you must connect all the pieces to see and understand; The meaning of the names, particularly John as in “son of John” was no coincidence. This is the type of thing that makes the word of God so deep and rich. God bless!

While I agree with your assessment of Peter’s requiring redemption through repentance, I think you have overlooked some important aspects of these passages if you contend that this was the only point of Jesus’ dialect with Peter. In fact, Jesus speaks of the importance of this turning point in Peter which reinforces yet again his primacy among the Apostles and his role as leader of Christ’s Church.

Luke 22:31-32
Simon, Simon, behold Satan has demanded to sift all of you like wheat, but I have prayed that your own faith may not fail; and once you have turned back, you must strengthen your brothers.

This restoration was needed so that Peter could lead Christ’s Church. It is true, there is importance with the three denials and three affirmations of love, but the restoration is not the only significant aspects of this. I think you have overlooked some important passages and even some important aspects of these passages if you do not see how they enlighten us to Peter as the first Pope as well.

God Bless.

 

[Tanner9188]

Not to pick apart your analysis, but this was the fourth time He revealed Himself in John’s gospel. First was to Mary at the tomb, second was to the group in the locked room, third was to the group a second time with Thomas and fourth was on the shore. Also, we should note that 1 Cor 15:5 says Peter was visited first, before the 12.

To the disciples themselves; particularly Peter; thanks for the clarification, I have made a notation.

While I would agree that Peter did require restoration, just as everyone does, I do not think that you can say Peter was the weakest spiritually after this restoration. Also, Peter is the most scrutinized of all of the disciples which is why we know about his faults, this does not mean that the others didn’t do things equivalent to what Peter did. In fact, we can be sure that every other disciple sinned against the Lord at some point because that is the nature of man after the fall. These men were not perfect, the fact that Peter was the most heavily written about and scrutinized is a testimony to his primacy among the Apostles.

I agree, not after, but if you look before at Peter’s history prior to the restoration; he was the strongest carnally, but the weakest spiritually. Jesus had to rebuke him several times and even called or implied he was Satan or Satan was in him. He cut off the ear of the Pharisees servant and had to be rebuked, he denied Jesus 3 times etc

All men sin and fall short of the glory of God. God has protected a select few from this but we have record that shows this protection was not given to the Apostles. In truth, Paul would have to rank up there with Peter and Judas in his spiritual weakness prior to his conversion and redemption. The truth is, you can say Peter was weak spiritually prior to his redemption, but it is not the same after this. This is true for everyone who finds Christ. We are weak made strong by the grace of God.

**
Keep in mind through this of John 10:16. There is one flock and one shepherd. This is significant when you look later in the gospel of John regarding these passages commanding Peter to keep care of his flock as its shepherd. **

Matthew 26:31 Then Jesus said to them, “All of you will be made to stumble because of Me this night, for it is written: 'I will strike the Shepherd, And the sheep of the flock will be scattered.” - Here the disciples are referred to as the sheep, because they are all under the “chief” Shepherd; just like the rest of the church.

John 10:11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep.”

John 10:14 “I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own.”

John 10:16 "And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd. When will this be fulfilled?; when all the redeemed throughout history are brought together in the New Heaven and New Earth.

Hebrews 13:20-21 Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, even Jesus our Lord, equip you in every good thing to do His will, working in us that which is pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ

Here are the words of Peter himself:
1 Peter 5:1-4 “Therefore, I encourage the elders among you, as {your} fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is to be revealed, shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to {the will of} God; and not for sordid gain, but with eagerness; nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.” - Peter, nor any other apostle, ever considered himself as more than he ought to be; which is a minister of the gospel according to the will of God. He was a humble person, like the rest of the apostles, which is why God was able to use all of them in building the foundation of the early church and is still using pastors and teachers to this day.

In fact, if you look carefully at the passage, the word “lording” means “to exercise dominion over”. Why would Peter do the exact opposite of what he encourage ministers not to do? In my humble opinion and knowledge; the Roman Catholic Church may be guilty of “Lording” over the church of Christ and using Peter as the reason for doing so, which is contradictory to what Peter taught. Is Peter then a hypocrite?

While I agree with your assessment of Peter’s requiring redemption through repentance, I think you have overlooked some important aspects of these passages if you contend that this was the only point of Jesus’ dialect with Peter. In fact, Jesus speaks of the importance of this turning point in Peter which reinforces yet again his primacy among the Apostles and his role as leader of Christ’s Church.

This restoration was needed so that Peter could lead Christ’s Church. It is true, there is importance with the three denials and three affirmations of love, but the restoration is not the only significant aspects of this. I think you have overlooked some important passages and even some important aspects of these passages if you do not see how they enlighten us to Peter as the first Pope as well.

God Bless.

**No, Jesus is the Builder of His church and used not only the apostles, but other godly pastors during the time of the apostles, after the day of Pentecost; such as Timothy, Mark and Barnabus and many more. Peter never considered himself as more than that as shown be his own words; why would you?

It is the message that has the power to bring men to salvation, not the messenger. This is why we, who know the gospel and believe, are to go to all nations and preach the gospel according to the gifts we have received from the Holy Spirit.**

 

[OchsFam]

John 10:16 "And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd. When will this be fulfilled?; when all the redeemed throughout history are brought together in the New Heaven and New Earth.

I do not believe this is a prophesy. I believe that this speaks of Jesus as the one shepherd but later in John 21, He put Peter in this position for the Church on Earth after His ascension. Ultimately, Jesus is the one shepherd of the flock and it is has been this way, is this way and will always be this way. There is a distinction when the Church on Earth will be perfectly unified with the Church in Heaven in which case a Pope may no longer be needed.

Here are the words of Peter himself:
1 Peter 5:1-4
Peter, nor any other apostle, ever considered himself as more than he ought to be; which is a minister of the gospel according to the will of God. He was a humble person, like the rest of the apostles, which is why God was able to use all of them in building the foundation of the early church and is still using pastors and teachers to this day.

I agree, but being a minister of the gospel and humble is no different than what the Pope today is. This statement does not detract from the leadership role we see Peter playing throughout the Bible. Peter is the one who seems to generally speak for the apostles (Matt. 18:21, Mark 8:29, Luke 12:41, John 6:68-69). It is even more evident after the ascension which would also align with being after his “restoration”. On Pentecost it was Peter who first preached to the crowds (Acts 2:14-40), and he worked the first healing in the Church age (Acts 3:6-7). He headed the meeting that elected Matthias to replace Judas (Acts 1:13-26), and he received the first converts (Acts 2:41). He inflicted the first punishment (Acts 5:1-11), and excommunicated the first heretic (Acts 8:18-23). He led the first council in Jerusalem (Acts 15), and announced the first dogmatic decision (Acts 15:7-11). Notice at this point it speaks of the disciples being “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.” It was to Peter that the revelation came that Gentiles were to be baptized and accepted as Christians (Acts 10:46-48).

In fact, if you look carefully at the passage, the word “lording” means “to exercise dominion over”.Why would Peter do the exact opposite of what he encourage ministers not to do? In my humble opinion and knowledge; the Roman Catholic Church may be guilty of “Lording” over the church of Christ and using Peter as the reason for doing so, which is contradictory to what Peter taught. Is Peter then a hypocrite?

I do not believe Peter or any Pope is “lording” over anyone. Peter and the Popes are charged with perpetuating Christ’s teachings. The teachings of the Church have been constant throughout history. Peter and the Popes teach as Christ taught and ensure Christ’s teachings are not lost or misunderstood. The teachings of Peter and the Popes are Christ’s teachings. It is not a matter of “lording” for it is not Peter or the Popes who are requiring anything of you, it is God. Peter and the Popes have been given a grace of God to ensure the accurate teachings of Christ can be found in every generation unto the end of the world.

It may feel like “lording” because there are often requirements for eternal life that the Church puts forth that people do not want to do. The are requirements for eternal life taught by Christ and handed down through Apostolic succession. No one is FORCING you do anything. One does not HAVE to go to Heaven, but God and His Church would like everyone to be there. Sometimes one may have to do something that is not “fun” or is sometimes downright difficult to accomplish. It does not mean the Church is “lording” it means the Bible was right when it said the path is narrow that leads to life.

No, Jesus is the Builder of His church and used not only the apostles, but other godly pastors during the time of the apostles, after the day of Pentecost; such as Timothy, Mark and Barnabus and many more. Peter never considered himself as more than that as shown be his own words; why would you?

It is the message that has the power to bring men to salvation, not the messenger. This is why we, who know the gospel and believe, are to go to all nations and preach the gospel according to the gifts we have received from the Holy Spirit.

Again, none of this speaks against the primacy of Peter or the role of the Pope. Jesus is the builder and foundation of the Church. God did not leave this Church to its own human devices. God left us a method to ensure His teachings were never distorted so that His Church, which Jesus laid the foundations of, could have walls and a roof. The Church’s growth has been guided by the Holy Spirit through the infallible work of the Popes and Magisteriums. Peter was humble and did not flaunt his primacy about just as the Popes throughout history should not have. It is not to say they were always humble because infallible does not mean sinless.

Jesus’ kingdom was modeled after a Davidic kingdom which has a King (Jesus), Queen Mother (Mary) and Prime Minister (Peter and the Popes). The King and Queen Mother are reigning in Heaven and the Prime Minister has been left in charge on Earth. This Prime Minister is an office that needs succession just as was accomplished for another office in Acts 1. In Matthew 16:19 (also see Isaiah 22) we see that Peter was this Prime Minister as he was the only Apostle to be given the keys to the kingdom of Heaven. These keys have been passed down throughout history and now rest with Benedict XVI.

I believe there is just too much Biblical support for Peter being the primary Apostle or Prime Minister of Jesus’ kingdom. The Bible seems to me to be constantly pointing us toward this truth. Christ’s Church began as just a mustard seed and has grown into the largest of bushes. This is because of the work of the Holy Spirit through Peter and the Popes as well as all the Saints who have come before us. I suppose we could go back and forth over this for hundreds of posts, but maybe these links, which I used an excerpt from one above, will shorten that slightly. They should help provide even more Biblical support as well as what some Church fathers have to say about it.

Peter and the Papacy
Peter’s Primacy

God Bless.

 

[Tanner9188]

I do not believe this is a prophesy. I believe that this speaks of Jesus as the one shepherd but later in John 21, He put Peter in this position for the Church on Earth after His ascension. Ultimately, Jesus is the one shepherd of the flock and it is has been this way, is this way and will always be this way. There is a distinction when the Church on Earth will be perfectly unified with the Church in Heaven in which case a Pope may no longer be needed.

I agree, but being a minister of the gospel and humble is no different than what the Pope today is. This statement does not detract from the leadership role we see Peter playing throughout the Bible. Peter is the one who seems to generally speak for the apostles (Matt. 18:21, Mark 8:29, Luke 12:41, John 6:68-69). It is even more evident after the ascension which would also align with being after his “restoration”. On Pentecost it was Peter who first preached to the crowds (Acts 2:14-40), and he worked the first healing in the Church age (Acts 3:6-7). He headed the meeting that elected Matthias to replace Judas (Acts 1:13-26), and he received the first converts (Acts 2:41). He inflicted the first punishment (Acts 5:1-11), and excommunicated the first heretic (Acts 8:18-23). He led the first council in Jerusalem (Acts 15), and announced the first dogmatic decision (Acts 15:7-11). Notice at this point it speaks of the disciples being “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.” It was to Peter that the revelation came that Gentiles were to be baptized and accepted as Christians (Acts 10:46-48).

I do not believe Peter or any Pope is “lording” over anyone. Peter and the Popes are charged with perpetuating Christ’s teachings. The teachings of the Church have been constant throughout history. Peter and the Popes teach as Christ taught and ensure Christ’s teachings are not lost or misunderstood. The teachings of Peter and the Popes are Christ’s teachings. It is not a matter of “lording” for it is not Peter or the Popes who are requiring anything of you, it is God. Peter and the Popes have been given a grace of God to ensure the accurate teachings of Christ can be found in every generation unto the end of the world.

It may feel like “lording” because there are often requirements for eternal life that the Church puts forth that people do not want to do. The are requirements for eternal life taught by Christ and handed down through Apostolic succession. No one is FORCING you do anything. One does not HAVE to go to Heaven, but God and His Church would like everyone to be there. Sometimes one may have to do something that is not “fun” or is sometimes downright difficult to accomplish. It does not mean the Church is “lording” it means the Bible was right when it said the path is narrow that leads to life.

Again, none of this speaks against the primacy of Peter or the role of the Pope. Jesus is the builder and foundation of the Church. God did not leave this Church to its own human devices. God left us a method to ensure His teachings were never distorted so that His Church, which Jesus laid the foundations of, could have walls and a roof. The Church’s growth has been guided by the Holy Spirit through the infallible work of the Popes and Magisteriums. Peter was humble and did not flaunt his primacy about just as the Popes throughout history should not have. It is not to say they were always humble because infallible does not mean sinless.

Jesus’ kingdom was modeled after a Davidic kingdom which has a King (Jesus), Queen Mother (Mary) and Prime Minister (Peter and the Popes). The King and Queen Mother are reigning in Heaven and the Prime Minister has been left in charge on Earth. This Prime Minister is an office that needs succession just as was accomplished for another office in Acts 1. In Matthew 16:19 (also see Isaiah 22) we see that Peter was this Prime Minister as he was the only Apostle to be given the keys to the kingdom of Heaven. These keys have been passed down throughout history and now rest with Benedict XVI.

I believe there is just too much Biblical support for Peter being the primary Apostle or Prime Minister of Jesus’ kingdom. The Bible seems to me to be constantly pointing us toward this truth. Christ’s Church began as just a mustard seed and has grown into the largest of bushes. This is because of the work of the Holy Spirit through Peter and the Popes as well as all the Saints who have come before us. I suppose we could go back and forth over this for hundreds of posts, but maybe these links, which I used an excerpt from one above, will shorten that slightly. They should help provide even more Biblical support as well as what some Church fathers have to say about it.

Peter and the Papacy
Peter’s Primacy

God Bless.

Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

Neither Peter nor the Pope is the head of the church of God in heaven or on earth; it has been and always will be Jesus Christ; just as the Scripture teaches beyond any shadow of a doubt.

How you don’t see the Pope as lording of the Catholic Church is beyond my understanding, but you have a different faith than I do IMO.

Isaiah 22 is speaking of Christ and nothing to do with Peter; I don’t understand why the your Church teaches that; I have seen over and over again Catholics take the passage out of context and it is very easy to refute. For some reason; that particular passage bugs me because it is so obvious IMO as to what the text is referring to I can’t believe that a plain reading with the knowledge of the work of Christ that anyone could possible render that as Peter. But that is the way it is; I’ve seen it all over CAF. Maybe I’ll call it the “Lording Effect” …kidding.

Anyone can play firsts with Peter in the positive and the negative since; does not imply he is the “President of the Disciples”; Jesus would never see it that way. Some of the firsts you mentioned are explicitly first and some are presumptuous since the Scripture is silent on some of those firsts, meaning that it may have been mentioned in reference to Peter, but other apostles could have done that before Peter did, we don’t know and should not presume. Then, look at Paul - he would have a lot of positive firsts and James and Jude as well. I can’t really buy into that argument unless I was Catholic in faith.

 

[OchsFam]

Neither Peter nor the Pope is the head of the church of God in heaven or on earth; it has been and always will be Jesus Christ; just as the Scripture teaches beyond any shadow of a doubt.

You are correct, but they do share in His headship.

How you don’t see the Pope as lording of the Catholic Church is beyond my understanding, but you have a different faith than I do IMO.

I may have a misunderstanding of what “lording” is. Maybe you can help me here. Do you believe your understanding of scripture to be correct? Is one allowed to believe in a different understanding of the same scripture and still be saved? For example, I assume you believe faith in Christ is necessary for eternal salvation. If someone does not believe even faith in necessary, is that acceptable? Will they be saved? Should they be informed and corrected in their understanding of scripture? If you are correcting their understanding of scripture, would you be “lording” over them? The Church teaches what Christ taught. If you do not agree with the Catholic Church, depending on what it is you do not believe in, your eternal life could be in danger. Is it “lording” then to attempt to correct those who are misguided in their understanding of scripture? Is it “lording” to reprimand those spreading false gospels?

If the Catholic Church is right and has been charged with the protection of the truth in Christ’s gospel, would it be wrong to profess and protect this truth as instructed by Christ? Those who disagree, even with the Church, should be treated as a gentile or tax collector and should be avoided. This is not “lording” for they do not force you to do anything. They simply hope and pray that you believe in what Christ taught which includes accepting the Church’s authority on faith and morals. If you choose to leave the Church, they do not force you back in or punish you for it is your free will to fall. One is free to choose Hell over Heaven, but that does not mean the Church should sit idly by and let it happen when it can attempt to bring people to Christ. The Catholic Church simply professes the fullness of Christ’s truth and defends her faith. She does not let just anyone believe whatever they wish because many beliefs are destructive and lead to damnation. If this is “lording” then every church of Christ is “lording” over their followers in their attempt to defend their understanding of Christian truth. If this is “lording” then I suppose the Pope is “lording” over the Catholic Church.

Isaiah 22 is speaking of Christ and nothing to do with Peter; I don’t understand why the your Church teaches that; I have seen over and over again Catholics take the passage out of context and it is very easy to refute. For some reason; that particular passage bugs me because it is so obvious IMO as to what the text is referring to I can’t believe that a plain reading with the knowledge of the work of Christ that anyone could possible render that as Peter. But that is the way it is; I’ve seen it all over CAF. Maybe I’ll call it the “Lording Effect” …kidding.

Well, lets put the two passages together and see if we can see why the Catholic Church might be teaching the connection between Isaiah 22 and Matthew 16.

Matthew 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."
Isaiah 22:22
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.

If you can’t see the parallels here, then hopefully I can help. First we have the key of the House of David, which is in the fulfillment of Christ the keys to His kingdom which is Heaven. When he opens, no one shall shut…what is bound on Earth will be bound in Heaven. When he shuts, no one shall open…what is loosed on Earth will be loosed in Heaven. The parallel is very clear here. The author of Matthew is clearly trying to draw this parallel with his use of the term keys and speaking in the same manner with binding and loosing as with opening and closing.

The kingdom of Isaiah 22 is a Davidic kingdom as is Jesus’ kingdom. As I mentioned before, all of the leaders of the Davidic kingdom are present in Jesus’ kingdom as well and have much the same role. The Prime Minister of the Davidic kingdom is represented in Christ’s kingdom by what we now call the Pope. Just as the Prime Minister was a position that was constantly filled so long as a Davidic king was on the throne, so too should the Pope’s office be filled so long as Jesus is on the throne and his people are on Earth. Just as the Prime Minister has all of the king’s authority, so too does the Pope have all of Jesus’ authority. Just as only the Prime Minister is given the keys, so too is the Pope only given the keys. Just as the Prime Ministers authority is subject to the king’s commands, so too is the Pope’s authority subject to Christ’s command.

Anyone can play firsts with Peter in the positive and the negative since; does not imply he is the “President of the Disciples”; Jesus would never see it that way. Some of the firsts you mentioned are explicitly first and some are presumptuous since the Scripture is silent on some of those firsts, meaning that it may have been mentioned in reference to Peter, but other apostles could have done that before Peter did, we don’t know and should not presume. Then, look at Paul - he would have a lot of positive firsts and James and Jude as well. I can’t really buy into that argument unless I was Catholic in faith.

It’s not for you to “buy” into. It is an understanding of scripture that further supports Peter’s primacy as related by the fact only Peter was prayed for to strengthen his brethren and only Peter was given the keys to the kingdom. Peter’s apparent leading of the early Church throughout Acts fits with this understanding and seems out of place if he is not in this place of primacy. You could also include the number of times Peter is mentioned in scripture compared to the rest of the Apostles. It all supports the primary point that Peter had particular graces that no other Apostle had which lends itself to his particular purpose in Christ’s kingdom. He was clearly set aside from the beginning, apart from the rest of the Apostles. He was meant to lead them and Christ’s Church and he was given power beyond anyone else to do it.

God Bless.

 

[Tanner9188]

I do not believe this is a prophesy. I believe that this speaks of Jesus as the one shepherd but later in John 21, He put Peter in this position for the Church on Earth after His ascension. Ultimately, Jesus is the one shepherd of the flock and it is has been this way, is this way and will always be this way. There is a distinction when the Church on Earth will be perfectly unified with the Church in Heaven in which case a Pope may no longer be needed.

I agree, but being a minister of the gospel and humble is no different than what the Pope today is. This statement does not detract from the leadership role we see Peter playing throughout the Bible. Peter is the one who seems to generally speak for the apostles (Matt. 18:21, Mark 8:29, Luke 12:41, John 6:68-69). It is even more evident after the ascension which would also align with being after his “restoration”. On Pentecost it was Peter who first preached to the crowds (Acts 2:14-40), and he worked the first healing in the Church age (Acts 3:6-7). He headed the meeting that elected Matthias to replace Judas (Acts 1:13-26), and he received the first converts (Acts 2:41). He inflicted the first punishment (Acts 5:1-11), and excommunicated the first heretic (Acts 8:18-23). He led the first council in Jerusalem (Acts 15), and announced the first dogmatic decision (Acts 15:7-11). Notice at this point it speaks of the disciples being “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.” It was to Peter that the revelation came that Gentiles were to be baptized and accepted as Christians (Acts 10:46-48).
I do not believe Peter or any Pope is “lording” over anyone. Peter and the Popes are charged with perpetuating Christ’s teachings. The teachings of the Church have been constant throughout history. Peter and the Popes teach as Christ taught and ensure Christ’s teachings are not lost or misunderstood. The teachings of Peter and the Popes are Christ’s teachings. It is not a matter of “lording” for it is not Peter or the Popes who are requiring anything of you, it is God. Peter and the Popes have been given a grace of God to ensure the accurate teachings of Christ can be found in every generation unto the end of the world.
It may feel like “lording” because there are often requirements for eternal life that the Church puts forth that people do not want to do. The are requirements for eternal life taught by Christ and handed down through Apostolic succession. No one is FORCING you do anything. One does not HAVE to go to Heaven, but God and His Church would like everyone to be there. Sometimes one may have to do something that is not “fun” or is sometimes downright difficult to accomplish. It does not mean the Church is “lording” it means the Bible was right when it said the path is narrow that leads to life.
Again, none of this speaks against the primacy of Peter or the role of the Pope. Jesus is the builder and foundation of the Church. God did not leave this Church to its own human devices. God left us a method to ensure His teachings were never distorted so that His Church, which Jesus laid the foundations of, could have walls and a roof. The Church’s growth has been guided by the Holy Spirit through the infallible work of the Popes and Magisteriums. Peter was humble and did not flaunt his primacy about just as the Popes throughout history should not have. It is not to say they were always humble because infallible does not mean sinless.EDITEDn Matthew 16:19 (also see Isaiah 22) we see that Peter was this Prime Minister as he was the only Apostle to be given the keys to the kingdom of Heaven. These keys have been passed down throughout history and now rest with Benedict XVI.

I believe there is just too much Biblical support for Peter being the primary Apostle or Prime Minister of Jesus’ kingdom. The Bible seems to me to be constantly pointing us toward this truth. Christ’s Church began as just a mustard seed and has grown into the largest of bushes. This is because of the work of the Holy Spirit through Peter and the Popes as well as all the Saints who have come before us. I suppose we could go back and forth over this for hundreds of posts, but maybe these links, which I used an excerpt from one above, will shorten that slightly. They should help provide even more Biblical support as well as what some Church fathers have to say about it.

What about the other apostles, the ministers that were no apostles and the pastors throughout the ages. No there will not be a large discussion on it because I do not recognize Papal authority; I recognize Jesus authority and I don’t see any evidence at of of Petrine doctrine anywhere in Scripture and was considered a heresy in the first 2-3 hundred years of the church. It wasn’t till Gregory made the official Christian religion as the religion of the empire before we begin to get glimpse of the pope. The melding of Christian faith and Roman paganism was the worse thing to happen to the church IMO. In order to get these pagans on board; instead of praying or worshiping a false god; now you pray to a dead saint for “traveling mercy” for example. This is about the time that widespread praying to dead saints took firm root and out of all of this emerged the Roman Catholic Church IMO and understanding. Now you have a form of Christianity and lost its purity, which is what eventually let to the reformation and I believe God was behind it 100% on the side of the reformers. I’ve showed you an epiphany in Scripture concerning the fall and restoration of Peter; something we don’t see every day, but to you it is nothing; only shows you the primacy of Peter despite the evidence to the contrary. Not a big deal; you have your belief to what the gospel, the work of Christ is in relation to the faith and practice and I have mine. I won’t change you ideas and you cannot change mine.
Unfortunately and not surprising we need another purging to purity from the Protestant divisions IMO, but god will do the purging on His timetable; possible with the cathching away of the church in the very near future, which is my hope and prayer; I’m sick and tired of this sinful and immoral word that despises God.

Peter and the Papacy
Peter’s PrimacyGod Bless.

The whole point of “Lording” is to avoid being overbearing in you control over people you are shepherding. The shepherd is to guide, teach and build up, not be dominate over them in every aspect; that is God’s position IMO.

 

[OchsFam]

What about the other apostles, the ministers that were no apostles and the pastors throughout the ages. No there will not be a large discussion on it because I do not recognize Papal authority; I recognize Jesus authority and I don’t see any evidence at of of Petrine doctrine anywhere in Scripture and was considered a heresy in the first 2-3 hundred years of the church.

Its funny you say that because you have no proof of it. In fact, it is quite the opposite of true. You should look at the faith tracts on this website and you will find multiple quotes from multiple Church fathers regarding the papacy much earlier than 2-3 hundred years after Christ’s death.

It wasn’t till Gregory made the official Christian religion as the religion of the empire before we begin to get glimpse of the pope. The melding of Christian faith and Roman paganism was the worse thing to happen to the church IMO. In order to get these pagans on board; instead of praying or worshiping a false god; now you pray to a dead saint for “traveling mercy” for example. This is about the time that widespread praying to dead saints took firm root and out of all of this emerged the Roman Catholic Church IMO and understanding.

First off, as mentioned above, we see mention of the Pope long before Gregory. Second, turning pagan practices into Christian practices is Biblical. See 1 Cor 9:19-23. Paul was accustomed to using the practices of others to bring the gospel to them. There are many examples of this throughout history though this is another discussion. Lastly, praying to Saints in Heaven is Biblical and even Old Testament Biblical so it is impossible to be an infiltration of paganism. In truth, it doesn’t even make sense to not be praying to the Saints. If we are supposed to pray for each other and those in Heaven are more alive than we are here on Earth, then why should we not also ask them to pray for us? In concept, there is no difference between asking a Saint in Heaven to pray for us or Mary to pray for us and asking your neighbor to pray for us. In reality, the prayer of those in Heaven would be far greater than our prayers on Earth, so you are hamstringing yourself by not praying to those in Heaven. Again, this moves into another discussion so I will leave it at that.

Now you have a form of Christianity and lost its purity, which is what eventually let to the reformation and I believe God was behind it 100% on the side of the reformers. I’ve showed you an epiphany in Scripture concerning the fall and restoration of Peter; something we don’t see every day, but to you it is nothing; only shows you the primacy of Peter despite the evidence to the contrary. Not a big deal; you have your belief to what the gospel, the work of Christ is in relation to the faith and practice and I have mine. I won’t change you ideas and you cannot change mine.

Actually, this fall and restoration of Peter happens every day in the Catholic Church. We refer to it as being human and sinning, repenting to the Lord through His priests and being forgiven of sins and being made spotless again. This is an amazing thing that we can partake in. Again, this is a Biblical practice that has its roots in the Old Testament, has been made perfect through Christ and has been practiced in the early Church from day one.

I am curious how you can say to me it is nothing as I believe it has the importance you speak of as well as showing us more. Just on a analytical level, it would appear that I am the one putting more on this revelation than you. This is a truth with many protestant beliefs when taken against Catholic beliefs. To quote Scott Hahn, “protestants believe much, Catholics believe more”. Protestants are scratching the surface of truth while Catholic accept what protestants believe but see that there is more to it. Faith alone against Faith and works. Prayer from you and your neighbors to Jesus against prayers from you, your neighbor and all those living in Heaven to Jesus. Bible alone against Bible and Church. I could go on but hopefully you see the point. Again, all of this is Biblical and practiced by the early Church.

I understand that we cannot change each other’s views because that is not our role. We are meant to provide a seed of truth that through prayer and study the Holy Spirit can nurture into the fullness of Christ’s truth. I hope you can move past your anti-Catholic bias to see that there is much truth in the Church. If you are truly seeking truth as I am, I hope you may one day come to realize that there is more truth than you realize in His Church, just as I have.

Unfortunately and not surprising we need another purging to purity from the Protestant divisions IMO, but god will do the purging on His timetable; possible with the cathching away of the church in the very near future, which is my hope and prayer; I’m sick and tired of this sinful and immoral word that despises God.The whole point of “Lording” is to avoid being overbearing in you control over people you are shepherding. The shepherd is to guide, teach and build up, not be dominate over them in every aspect; that is God’s position IMO.

I agree that a purge of the 30k+ divisions in Christ’s name is needed and I pray for this to come as well. In the meantime, all I can hope for is that through my prayer and study, I can continue to seek and find His truth. I have yet to be disappointed by the Catholic Church and have yet to find a single protestant denomination that is even close.

If the shepherd is to guide, teach and build up for the sake of God’s kingdom, then the Pope is most certainly doing this. The Pope does not dominate in every aspect of our lives. In fact, he has not called me once to tell me I am doing something wrong. The Pope upholds the teachings of the Catholic Church which sometimes means he has to speak out against others preaching a false gospel and sometimes has to excommunicate those Catholics that perpetuate lies in the Church’s name. This is done for the edification of the person as well as the world. To not reprimand false teachings is to allow 30k+ divisions in Christ’s body which is completely unacceptable.

God Bless.

 

[Tanner9188]

You are correct, but they do share in His headship.I may have a misunderstanding of what “lording” is. Maybe you can help me here. Do you believe your understanding of scripture to be correct? Is one allowed to believe in a different understanding of the same scripture and still be saved? If someone does not believe even faith in necessary, is that acceptable? Will they be saved? Should they be informed and corrected in their understanding of scripture? If you are correcting their understanding of scripture, would you be “lording” over them? The Church teaches what Christ taught. If you do not agree with the Catholic Church, depending on what it is you do not believe in, your eternal life could be in danger. Is it “lording” then to attempt to correct those who are misguided in their understanding of scripture? Is it “lording” to reprimand those spreading false gospels?

A different gospel is just that different; there is only one correct gospel that saves; therefore a different gospel will not save. Do you believe you have a different gospel than the one in Scripture where Peter and the Pope “share” in headship; which is no where in Scripture and steals the honor and glory do to Christ IMO?

If the Catholic Church is right and has been charged with the protection of the truth in Christ’s gospel, would it be wrong to profess and protect this truth as instructed by Christ?

Why would Christ need to protect what is His and He is building; when He is omnipresent, omniscience & omnipotent in 3 persons/essences?

Those who disagree, even with the Church, should be treated as a gentile or tax collector and should be avoided. This is not “lording” for they do not force you to do anything. They simply hope and pray that you believe in what Christ taught which includes accepting the Church’s authority on faith and morals. If you choose to leave the Church, they do not force you back in or punish you for it is your free will to fall. One is free to choose Hell over Heaven, but that does not mean the Church should sit idly by and let it happen when it can attempt to bring people to Christ.

**Who brings people to Christ men or the Holy Spirit, your Church or the Holy Spirit? See the difference? The messenger leads the horse to water, but only the Holy Spirit can make them drink. **

The Catholic Church simply professes the fullness of Christ’s truth and defends her faith. She does not let just anyone believe whatever they wish because many beliefs are destructive and lead to damnation. If this is “lording” then every church of Christ is “lording” over their followers in their attempt to defend their understanding of Christian truth. If this is “lording” then I suppose the Pope is “lording” over the Catholic Church.

That’s is good, because in reality no one can “Lord over”; have dominion over, the church of God; unless God were to allow it, which if He did or is, He would have mentioned it in Scripture on more than one occasion.

Well, lets put the two passages together and see if we can see why the Catholic Church might be teaching the connection between Isaiah 22 and Matthew 16.
If you can’t see the parallels here, then hopefully I can help. First we have the key of the House of David, which is in the fulfillment of Christ the keys to His kingdom which is Heaven. When he opens, no one shall shut…what is bound on Earth will be bound in Heaven. When he shuts, no one shall open…what is loosed on Earth will be loosed in Heaven. The parallel is very clear here. The author of Matthew is clearly trying to draw this parallel with his use of the term keys and speaking in the same manner with binding and loosing as with opening and closing.

Perhaps you are making a big deal out of the single word “key”, which is a metaphor for opening and closing the entry to heaven in the Bible by the “loosing and binding”, an old rabbinic teaching, which when applied to the New Testament goes something like this. Peter was the leader of the apostles as John 21 I believe points to, but more because Jesus needed or wanted a person to lead the apostles, but to put him on such a large pedestal as to steal the honor and glory from Jesus is not Biblical. If you reject the gospel of Christ, which is rejecting Christ you are bound in your sin and heaven is in agreement and vice verse. So who can present the gospel of Jesus Christ? Therefore who has the power to loose and bind, as Matthew 18 shows us?

The kingdom of Isaiah 22 is a Davidic kingdom as is Jesus’ kingdom. As I mentioned before, all of the leaders of the Davidic kingdom are present in Jesus’ kingdom as well and have much the same role. The Prime Minister of the Davidic kingdom is represented in Christ’s kingdom by what we now call the Pope.EDITED _ SPACE.

Based on what I mentioned above concerning the keys and the loosing & binding, in light of the truth of Isaiah 22, which we will see momentarily, and based on the fact that the ECF always considered the Vicar of Christ over the church as the Holy Spirit consider the following:
Revelation Revelation 3:7 “And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: He who is holy, who is true, who has the key of David, who opens and no one will shut, and who shuts and no one opens, says this:”
Is this Peter? Is this the Pope? Who is this that holds the “key” of David? Perhaps He took them back from Peter; or maybe an extra set???
Isaiah 22:"Then it will come about in that day, That I will summon My servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, And I will clothe him with your tunic And tie your sash securely about him.
I will entrust him with your authority, And he will become a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah."Then I will set the key of the house of David on his shoulder,When he opens no one will shut,When he shuts no one will open. "I will drive him like a peg in a firm place, And he will become a throne of glory to his father’s house. This is Jesus Christ!"So they will hang on him all the glory of his father’s house, offspring and issue, all the least of vessels, from bowls to all the jars. “In that day,” declares the LORD of hosts, “the peg driven in a firm place will give way; it will even break off and fall, and the load hanging on it will be cut off, for the LORD has spoken.”
Worth noting IMO:
Eliakim = “God raises”
Hilkiah = "my portion is Jehovah"

It’s not for you to “buy” into.
God Bless.

Then Don’t.

 

[jlhargus]

Tanner9188:

John = *“Jehovah is a gracious giver”*John 1:42 "One of the two who heard John speak and followed Him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which translated means Christ). He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon the son of John; you shall be called Cephas” (which is translated Peter).

Note: this is the first encounter with Jesus; when He is called; if you will and notice He changes His name immediately. Keep in mind and follow along.

Mark 14:28 "But after I have been raised, I will go ahead of you to Galilee. [VERY IMPORTANT STATEMENT] " But Peter said to Him, "{Even} though all may fall away, yet I will not. [ARROGENCE & PRIDE] " And Jesus *said to him, “Truly I say to you, that this very night, before a rooster crows twice, you yourself will deny Me three times.” [3 TIMES & GALILEE] But {Peter} kept saying insistently, “{Even} if I have to die with You, I will not deny You!” And they all were saying the same thing also.

Mark 14:72 "Immediately a rooster crowed a second time. And Peter remembered how Jesus had made the remark to him, “Before a rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times.” And he began to weep. - One difference between Judas and Peter; Peter was repentant - IMPORTANT to note.

Luke 22:61 "The Lord turned and looked at Peter. And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how He had told him, “Before a rooster crows today, you will deny Me three times.”

John 21:1 After these things Jesus manifested Himself again to the disciples at the Sea of Tiberias, and He manifested {Himself} in this way."

NOTE: Tiberias-a city of Galilee near the Lake of Gennesaret At this point; Peter is the only one; besides Judas, the son of perdition, to deny Jesus after spending 3 years, and this is the 3rd time He appeared, and Peter denied Him 3 times - do you see a pattern here; this is no coincidence; now watch How the Lord addresses Peter, the same as when He first called Peter; no coincidence “Peter, son of John” - not son of Jonah?? Why? John = “Jehovah is a gracious giver” He is restoring Peter; Peter needed to be restored, He is no different than any of the other apostles as far as messengers go and he was the most outgoing, a natural leader, but also the weakest spiritually.

JL: Christ declared that this same weak spiritual being as you call Peter, after he turned again, his FAITH WOULD FAIL NOT, the same weak being Christ commissioned to feed and shepherd all his sheep, the same weak being Christ commissioned to strengthen all his brethren, the same weak being Christ gave the keys, the same weak being who can bind and loose apart from the other apostles, the same weak being, who alone of the apostles, had faith enough to step out and walk on water, the same weak being to whom Christ said, you are Rock and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.

I suppose the world would have chosen another but God chooses the weak of this world to show the world it is he, God, who acts thru those weak beings. The Father chose St Rock and Christ confirmed him. Rock is what Christ named him in Jn1:42 as you pointed out and Christ said in Mt16 he would build HIS CHURCH on that ROCK. 1Cor1:25 …THE FOOLISHNESS OF GOD IS WISER THAN MEN the weakness of God is stronger than men. 26…not many of you were wise after the flesh not many powerful, not many of noble birth 27 GOD CHOSE WHAT IS FOOLISH in the world TO SHAME THE WISE …THE WEAK TO SAHME THE STRONG 28 …what is despised …to bring to nothing things that are 29 SO NO FLESH MIGHT BOAST. [God chose David, who was the last one anyone else would have chosen, no one even gave David a thought till Samuel asked if there were any more sons.]
Tanner9188;5532209:

So when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me more than these?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Tend My lambs.” He said to him again a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Shepherd My sheep.” He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me?” Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, “Do you love Me?” And he said to Him, “Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.” Jesus said to him, "Tend My sheep. 3 times He said he loved him; Jesus broke him with the 3rd time and Peter was grieved; brought low by the Lord, now Peter is ready to serve and what a service He did.

I hope you see this has nothing to do with Peter except a restoration; nothing more.
If you don’t see it read it over again; this is by God’s design and you must connect all the pieces to see and understand; this is the type of thing that makes the word of God so deep and rich. God bless!

JL: Yes this is by God’s design, YOU must connect all the pieces, read it over again. I have no problem with connecting Peters denial of Christ with Christ restoring Peter, that is well known nothing new there. But it is much more, Christ also says the first time feed my lambs, the little ones, second time Christ says, tend or shepherd my sheep, third time Christ says, feed my sheep. Why do you overlook those statements? Peter is to shepherd and feed all Christ’s flock as universal pastor on earth from the smallest to the greatest, a ROCK of unity and faith.

Christ said, “WHEN thou art CONVERTED”. Lk 22:29 And I APPOINT UNTO YOU A KINGDOM, as my Father hath appointed unto me; 30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in MY KINGDOM, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 31 And the Lord said, Simon, SIMON, behold, SATAN HATH DESIRED TO HAVE YOU, (all Apostles) that he may sift you (all apostles) as wheat: 32 BUT I HAVE PRAYED FOR THEE, (Peter alone) THAT THY (Peter alone) FAITH FAIL NOT: and WHEN thou art CONVERTED, STRENGTHEN THY BRETHREN. When Peter is CONVERTED his faith will not fail, Christ guarantees Peter’s faith and Peter is to STRENGTHEN, SHEPHERD and FEED the BRETHREN, both LAMBS AND SHEEP, as our Lord commissioned him to do, while restoring him. When Christ said to Peter, “do you love me more than THESE,” who were THESE? none other than the other apostles, who were present. Are the other apostles not sheep and brethren? How many breathren and sheep is Peter to feed? All those purchased by the blood of Christ.

 

[jlhargus]

Tanner9188:

Isa 22:19-22. [CHRIST]-NOT PETER]

You are incorrect in Isa 22:19-22 it is [PETER]-NOT CHRIST], Is22:15 This is what the Lord, the LORD Almighty, says: "Go, say to this steward, to Shebna, who is in charge of the palace: … [Shebna is not king he is STEWARD or First Minister of the king”s household, the key is on his shoulder, he will be replaced by Eliakim, who will have the key placed on his shoulder] 19 I will depose you from your office, and you will be ousted from your position. 20 "In that day I will summon my servant, Eliakim son of Hilkiah. 21 I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. 22 I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. Mt16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

[Peter is an unmovable ROCK or NAIL named and placed by Christ our king in David’s line.[Eliakim will be the new 1st minster and called father of Jerusalem, in the Davidic Kingdom, he will succeed Shebna. In the regenerated Kingdom of David, Peter will be 1st minister and called father=pope in the new Jerusalem=Church. The keys indicate the holder has authority over the other royal ministers as they do not receive keys. When the office is vacant it is filled with another by giving of the keys. Jesus alluded to this passage when giving the keys to Peter, Mt 16:19.] Christ regenerates a new spiritual Davidic Kingdom and gives the keys to his 1st minister Peter in Mt16:19.

JL: Was Shebna who held the keys before he was removed from office, as steward of the house, king of Israel? Was Eliakim made king in David’s line? No. When the keys Shebna held were placed on Eliakim’s shoulder, Is22:19-, as you even say Hezekiah was King of Israel in David’s line. Just as Christ is now KING, in David’s line and by right holds the keys and has the authority to command with the power of the keys at anytime. The king delegates that authority, symbolized by giving of the keys, to his first minister, who acts in the place and authority of the king. As king, Christ always holds the keys (authority). He has delegated authority to Peter and those who succeed him to act in his name, with his authority, in the Church Militant (on earth), along with the other ministers, who must be in union, with the holder of the keys, the first minister, who’s faith WILL NOT FAIL.

According to your interpretation Christ is not king but first minister. Who then is king in David’s line and gives the keys to that first minister? Did king Hezekiah abdicate when he gave the keys to Eliakim thereby raising Eliakim to be king? No, king Hezekiah in David’s line raised Eliakim to the office of first minister by giving Eliakim the keys of the kingdom, with the authority to act in the name of king Hezekiah. Just as Christ our king in David’s line raised Peter to the office of first minister in the kingdom by giving Peter the keys of the kingdom, with the authority to act in the name of the Son of David, Christ our king. [Lk1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord GOD SAHLL GIVE unto HIM the THRONE OF HIS FATHER DAVID:]. Christ is king not first minister, Christ holds the keys by right the first minister Peter by delegation. Is a Prime Minister equal to the king or a servant of the king?

 

[Tanner9188]

Its funny you say that because you have no proof of it. In fact, it is quite the opposite of true. You should look at the faith tracts on this website and you will find multiple quotes from multiple Church fathers regarding the papacy much earlier than 2-3 hundred years after Christ’s death.

**I guess if you get your history within the organization that IMO has distorted the truth of Scripture and the words of some of the “so-called” ECF’s as opposed the actual church father’s; the writers of the NT; then it becomes evident that one is not really seeking after the truth because you will not find accurate rendering of history from an internal source that has an agenda to preserve all they have added and taught over the past 1700 plus years. I would suggest looking at secular sources of history; just a thought.
**

First off, as mentioned above, we see mention of the Pope long before Gregory. Second, turning pagan practices into Christian practices is Biblical. See 1 Cor 9:19-23.

**May I suggest you reread, then reread and then reread and pay careful attention to the last half of verse 21; perhaps, Lord willing, you will reach a different conclusion. **

Paul was accustomed to using the practices of others to bring the gospel to them. There are many examples of this throughout history though this is another discussion. Lastly, praying to Saints in Heaven is Biblical and even Old Testament Biblical so it is impossible to be an infiltration of paganism.

**That is new theology that i have never heard or seen in all of Scripture. However; your Bible is different than mine; so perhaps this would account for the discrepancy??? **

In truth, it doesn’t even make sense to not be praying to the Saints. If we are supposed to pray for each other and those in Heaven are more alive than we are here on Earth, then why should we not also ask them to pray for us? In concept, there is no difference between asking a Saint in Heaven to pray for us or Mary to pray for us and asking your neighbor to pray for us.

Except your neighbor can actually hear a Christian ask them to join one in prayer to the Father through Jesus; whereas the folks in heaven are not and have no capacity to listen and are oblivious to anyone’s prayer request; for they are not omnipresent or omniscience; those are God’s attributes…right?

In reality, the prayer of those in Heaven would be far greater than our prayers on Earth, so you are hamstringing yourself by not praying to those in Heaven.  Again, this moves into another discussion so I will leave it at that.

Bill, you are imposing on Scripture.

Actually, this fall and restoration of Peter happens every day in the Catholic Church. We refer to it as being human and sinning, repenting to the Lord through His priests and being forgiven of sins and being made spotless again. This is an amazing thing that we can partake in. Again, this is a Biblical practice that has its roots in the Old Testament, has been made perfect through Christ and has been practiced in the early Church from day one.

The restoration of Peter only happened once as recorded in Scripture. The only priests the Lord has are His elect, the royal priesthood of believers and only God has the capacity to forgive sins.

I am curious how you can say to me it is nothing as I believe it has the importance you speak of as well as showing us more. Just on a analytical level, it would appear that I am the one putting more on this revelation than you. This is a truth with many protestant beliefs when taken against Catholic beliefs. To quote Scott Hahn, “protestants believe much, Catholics believe more”. Protestants are scratching the surface of truth while Catholic accept what protestants believe but see that there is more to it. Faith alone against Faith and works. Prayer from you and your neighbors to Jesus against prayers from you, your neighbor and all those living in Heaven to Jesus. Bible alone against Bible and Church. I could go on but hopefully you see the point. Again, all of this is Biblical and practiced by the early Church.

Scott Hahn; great apologist As good as one can get defending the Catholic faith. I agree 100% with Scott’s analysis, but not for the same reasons. I do not agree with you concerning Catholic beliefs are in accord with true Protestant beliefs; especially on the core issue of the gospel; of salvation and the completed work of Christ.

I understand that we cannot change each other’s views because that is not our role. We are meant to provide a seed of truth that through prayer and study the Holy Spirit can nurture into the fullness of Christ’s truth. I hope you can move past your anti-Catholic bias to see that there is much truth in the Church. If you are truly seeking truth as I am, I hope you may one day come to realize that there is more truth than you realize in His Church, just as I have.

I’m not sure what you mean by “anti-Catholic”, but if you are referring to the Catholic people, then nothing could be further from the truth; it is the doctrines, not the people.

I agree that a purge of the 30k+ divisions in Christ’s name is needed and I pray for this to come as well. In the meantime, all I can hope for is that through my prayer and study, I can continue to seek and find His truth. I have yet to be disappointed by the Catholic Church and have yet to find a single protestant denomination that is even close.

The 30K or whatever the number actually is; is a good thing as it purges the false from the true already in some fashion. For example, Benny Hinn followers of the “Health and I get your wealth” gospel, which is a blind guide or apostate guide leading the blind and both fall into the pit; so there are many such groups easily identifiably as false.

If the shepherd is to guide, teach and build up for the sake of God’s kingdom, then the Pope is most certainly doing this. The Pope does not dominate in every aspect of our lives. In fact, he has not called me once to tell me I am doing something wrong. The Pope upholds the teachings of the Catholic Church which sometimes means he has to speak out against others preaching a false gospel and sometimes has to excommunicate those Catholics that perpetuate lies in the Church’s name. This is done for the edification of the person as well as the world. To not reprimand false teachings is to allow 30k+ divisions in Christ’s body which is completely unacceptable.
God Bless.

Do they have one of the animated characters that “bites their tongue”? I need one right now; no comment on the last paragraph.

 

[Tanner9188]

You are incorrect in Isa 22:19-22 it is [PETER]-NOT CHRIST], Is22:15 This is what the Lord, the LORD Almighty, says: "Go, say to this steward, to Shebna, who is in charge of the palace: … [Shebna is not king he is STEWARD or First Minister of the king”s household, the key is on his shoulder, he will be replaced by Eliakim, who will have the key placed on his shoulder] 19 I will depose you from your office, and you will be ousted from your position. 20 "In that day I will summon my servant, Eliakim son of Hilkiah. 21 I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. 22 I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. Mt16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

[Peter is an unmovable ROCK or NAIL named and placed by Christ our king in David’s line.[Eliakim will be the new 1st minster and called father of Jerusalem, in the Davidic Kingdom, he will succeed Shebna. In the regenerated Kingdom of David, Peter will be 1st minister and called father=pope in the new Jerusalem=Church. The keys indicate the holder has authority over the other royal ministers as they do not receive keys. When the office is vacant it is filled with another by giving of the keys. Jesus alluded to this passage when giving the keys to Peter, Mt 16:19.] Christ regenerates a new spiritual Davidic Kingdom and gives the keys to his 1st minister Peter in Mt16:19.

JL: Was Shebna who held the keys before he was removed from office, as steward of the house, king of Israel? Was Eliakim made king in David’s line? No. When the keys Shebna held were placed on Eliakim’s shoulder, Is22:19-, as you even say Hezekiah was King of Israel in David’s line. Just as Christ is now KING, in David’s line and by right holds the keys and has the authority to command with the power of the keys at anytime. The king delegates that authority, symbolized by giving of the keys, to his first minister, who acts in the place and authority of the king. As king, Christ always holds the keys (authority). He has delegated authority to Peter and those who succeed him to act in his name, with his authority, in the Church Militant (on earth), along with the other ministers, who must be in union, with the holder of the keys, the first minister, who’s faith WILL NOT FAIL.

According to your interpretation Christ is not king but first minister. Who then is king in David’s line and gives the keys to that first minister? Did king Hezekiah abdicate when he gave the keys to Eliakim thereby raising Eliakim to be king? No, king Hezekiah in David’s line raised Eliakim to the office of first minister by giving Eliakim the keys of the kingdom, with the authority to act in the name of king Hezekiah. Just as Christ our king in David’s line raised Peter to the office of first minister in the kingdom by giving Peter the keys of the kingdom, with the authority to act in the name of the Son of David, Christ our king. [Lk1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord GOD SAHLL GIVE unto HIM the THRONE OF HIS FATHER DAVID:]. Christ is king not first minister, Christ holds the keys by right the first minister Peter by delegation. Is a Prime Minister equal to the king or a servant of the king?

**Follow the meaning of the names and read the passage for the OT points to whom? Christ or Peter and then what do you do with Revelation 3 (Philadelphia)??? You have to believe this lie; you have no choice.

Then what to you do with Isaiah 9:6-7 “For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace There will be no end to the increase of {His} government or of peace, On the throne of David and over his kingdom, To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness From then on and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this.” Peter??? I don’t think so and look again at the full context of Isaiah 22 and Lord willing; you will reach a different conclusion.**

 

[jlhargus]

Follow the meaning of the names and read the passage for the OT points to whom? Christ or Peter

JL: A statement made without evidence is evidence the statement is false. Show me, don’t just make statements, your statements are no good with me, I know you Kevin. You always try to cover by a statement when you have no evidence for your case. So you want me to go on a wild goose chase reading 22 chapters of Isaiah or all the OT? We both know I wont find what you say, otherwise you would have posted the evidence.
Tanner9188;5545736:

and then what do you do with Revelation 3 (Philadelphia)??? You have to believe this lie; you have no choice.

JL: Why so angary Kevin. I have never been into believing lies, that’s why I converted to the Catholic Church the pillar and ground of truth. It seems to me you believe a lie by deliberate choice, as you have no evidence.

[Rv3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;] I have no problem with Revelation 3:7, the king holds the power of keys always, he does not put himself under a first minister when he gives the keys to that minister. The king simply empowers the holder of the keys to act with the kings authority. The king can replace his first minister when he wills. That’s what king Hezekiah did when he replaced Shebna with Eliakim by the word of the prophet Isaiah. Show me your evidence this is a lie.

Is22:15 This is what the Lord, the LORD Almighty, says: "Go, say to this steward, to Shebna, who is in charge of the palace: … – Shebna is not king he is STEWARD or First Minister of the king”s household, the key is on his shoulder, he will be replaced by Eliakim, who will have the key placed on his shoulder, by the KING in David’s line.] – 19 I will depose you from your office, and you will be ousted from your position. 20 "In that day I will summon my servant, Eliakim son of Hilkiah. 21 I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. 22 I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.] Was Shebna who held the keys before he was removed from office, steward of the household or king? Answer STEWARD. Was Eliakim made king in David’s line or steward? Answer STEWARD. Who was the Davidic king at this time? Answer Hezekiah. When the keys Shebna held were taken from him by king Hezekiah, the king placed the keys on Eliakim’s shoulder, Is22:19-, as you even say Hezekiah was King of Israel in David’s line.

[Then what to you do with Isaiah 9:6-7 “For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace There will be no end to the increase of {His} government or of peace, On the throne of David and over his kingdom, To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness From then on and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this.” Peter??? I don’t think so and look again at the full context of Isaiah 22 and Lord willing; you will reach a different conclusion.**

JL: If you are getting this stuff from your bible study group I would look elsewhere. Again I have no problem with Isaiah 9:6-7, it is Christ the King in David’s line, who holds the keys by right and delegates the keys to Peter see Mt16:19. This fits perfectly with Isa22, King Hezekiah forshadowes Christ our King in David’s line, Eliakim forshadowes Peter, The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this and now has.

By the way Kevin I see you have at lest two memberships on this forum at the present. This one under TANNER and another under “rev kevin”,. The rev kevin character, who couldn’t type or spell under another name on Catholic Church Apologetics about a year ago. How obvious I couldn’t miss that one with both eyes closed, you may fool others but hopefully not for long.

 

[PJM]

Jesus calls Simon and immediate changes his name to Cephas

John 1:42 "One of the two who heard John speak and followed Him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which translated means Christ). He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, "You are Simon the son of John; you shall be called Cephas" (which is translated Peter).

John = “Jehovah is a gracious giver”

Note: This is the first encounter with Jesus; when Peter is called, if you will, and notice Jesus changes His name immediately. Keep in mind and follow along.

** Jesus makes 2 Prophesies **

Mark 14:28 "But after I have been raised, I will go ahead of you to Galilee. [VERY IMPORTANT STATEMENT] " But Peter said to Him, "{Even} though all may fall away, yet I will not. [ARROGENCE & PRIDE] " And Jesus *said to him, “Truly I say to you, that this very night, before a rooster crows twice, you yourself will deny Me three times.” But {Peter} kept saying insistently, “{Even} if I have to die with You, I will not deny You!” And they all were saying the same thing also.

Note: Keep in mind, very important to remember 2 things as we move forward, Peter was prideful and arrogant and Jesus makes 2 prophesies 1) Peter will deny the Lord Jesus 3 times, after being with Him for 3 years (Judas denied Jesus as well) 2) Jesus said, after I am raised I will go ahead of you to Galilee
Peter denies the Lord 3 Times

Mark 14:72 "Immediately a rooster crowed a second time. And Peter remembered how Jesus had made the remark to him, “Before a rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times.” And he began to weep. - One difference between Judas and Peter; Peter was repentant - IMPORTANT to note.

Luke 22:61 "The Lord turned and looked at Peter. And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how He had told him, “Before a rooster crows today, you will deny Me three times.”

Jesus revels Himself for the 3rd time since the resurrection

John 21:1 After these things Jesus manifested Himself again to the disciples at the Sea of Tiberias, and He manifested {Himself} in this way."

NOTE: Tiberias-a city of Galilee near the Lake of Gennesaret

At this point; Peter is the only one; besides Judas, the son of perdition, to deny Jesus after spending 3 years, and this is the 3rd time He appeared, and Peter denied Him 3 times - do you see a pattern here; this is no coincidence; now watch how the Lord addresses Peter, the same as when He first called Peter; no coincidence “Peter, son of John” - not son of Jonah?? Why?
John = “Jehovah is a gracious giver”

Jesus restores Peter and his faith-Do you love Me? - 3 times

He beginning to restore Peter by starting over again with reference to Peter’s first title “son of John”; Peter needed to be restored, He is no different than any of the other apostles as far as messengers go and he was the most outgoing, a natural leader, but also the weakest spiritually; next to Judas Iscariot.

So when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me more than these?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Tend My lambs.” He said to him again a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Shepherd My sheep.” He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me?” Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, “Do you love Me?” And he said to Him, “Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.” Jesus said to him, “Tend My sheep.”

Summary: 3 times Peter denied Jesus after being with Jesus 3 years. On the 3rd visit since His resurrection, He asks Peter 3 times "Do you love Me? 3 times, Peter said he loved him. This was the 3rd time and only time He appeared at Galilee; just as the Scripture said.
Jesus broke him with the 3rd time and Peter was grieved; brought low by the Lord, now Peter is ready to serve and what a service He did. I hope you see this has nothing to do with Peter except a restoration; nothing more.

If you don’t see it read it over again; this is by God’s design and you must connect all the pieces to see and understand; The meaning of the names, particularly John as in “son of John” was no coincidence. This is the type of thing that makes the word of God so deep and rich. God bless!

Rom.9:10 "because, if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved.

John 21: 15-17 can be interpeted as Peter lead my Church, Peter lead my Church. Peter Lead My Church!

*John 10: 1"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber; 2 but he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 To him the gatekeeper opens; the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. *

Isaiah 22: Re: PETER(and Jesus)“22 And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. 23 And I will fasten him like a peg in a sure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father’s house. 24 And they will hang on him the whole weight of his father’s house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons

Love and prayers

 

[Tanner9188]

Rom.9:10 "because, if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved.

John 21: 15-17 can be interpeted as Peter lead my Church, Peter lead my Church. Peter Lead My Church!

**No one would argue with what Scripture plainly states, which is feed my sheep, which is preach the word and lead the other apostles, but it stops there upon Peter’s entrance to heaven. The fact that Paul had to rebuke Peter for what amounts to another gospel proves he could not be the head of the church; would a Bishop dare to tell the poope he was wrong in teaching Catholic doctrine; I don’t believe so.
**

*John 10: 1"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber; 2 but he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 To him the gatekeeper opens; the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. *

You should heed the words of this passage; follow Christ.

Isaiah 22: Re: PETER(and Jesus)“22 And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. 23 And I will fasten him like a peg in a sure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father’s house. 24 And they will hang on him the whole weight of his father’s house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons

Love and prayers

**You are halfway to understanding, but 1/2 is not good enough.
**

 

[Tanner9188]

JL: A statement made without evidence is evidence the statement is false. Show me, don’t just make statements, your statements are no good with me, I know you Kevin. You always try to cover by a statement when you have no evidence for your case. So you want me to go on a wild goose chase reading 22 chapters of Isaiah or all the OT? We both know I wont find what you say, otherwise you would have posted the evidence.

JL: Why so angary Kevin. I have never been into believing lies, that’s why I converted to the Catholic Church the pillar and ground of truth. It seems to me you believe a lie by deliberate choice, as you have no evidence.

[Rv3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;] I have no problem with Revelation 3:7, the king holds the power of keys always, he does not put himself under a first minister when he gives the keys to that minister. The king simply empowers the holder of the keys to act with the kings authority. The king can replace his first minister when he wills. That’s what king Hezekiah did when he replaced Shebna with Eliakim by the word of the prophet Isaiah. Show me your evidence this is a lie.

Is22:15 This is what the Lord, the LORD Almighty, says: "Go, say to this steward, to Shebna, who is in charge of the palace: … – Shebna is not king he is STEWARD or First Minister of the king”s household, the key is on his shoulder, he will be replaced by Eliakim, who will have the key placed on his shoulder, by the KING in David’s line.] – 19 I will depose you from your office, and you will be ousted from your position. 20 "In that day I will summon my servant, Eliakim son of Hilkiah. 21 I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. 22 I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.] Was Shebna who held the keys before he was removed from office, steward of the household or king? Answer STEWARD. Was Eliakim made king in David’s line or steward? Answer STEWARD. Who was the Davidic king at this time? Answer Hezekiah. When the keys Shebna held were taken from him by king Hezekiah, the king placed the keys on Eliakim’s shoulder, Is22:19-, as you even say Hezekiah was King of Israel in David’s line.

JL: If you are getting this stuff from your bible study group I would look elsewhere. Again I have no problem with Isaiah 9:6-7, it is Christ the King in David’s line, who holds the keys by right and delegates the keys to Peter see Mt16:19. This fits perfectly with Isa22, King Hezekiah forshadowes Christ our King in David’s line, Eliakim forshadowes Peter, The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this and now has.

By the way Kevin I see you have at lest two memberships on this forum at the present. This one under TANNER and another under “rev kevin”,. The rev kevin character, who couldn’t type or spell under another name on Catholic Church Apologetics about a year ago. How obvious I couldn’t miss that one with both eyes closed, you may fool others but hopefully not for long.

**Who is Kevin? You have me mixed up with someone else. Ask Michael Francis, forum administrator, if you do not believe me; he knows exactly who I am.

God bless!**

 

[Tanner9188]

Since we all agree that John 21 does refer to Peters restoration; there is not much more to say; except goodbye and thanks for the charitable discussion. God bless and we will see you in another thread; Lord willing.

 

[SimonArizona]

Changing names is always a huge significance in Scripture. Jesus changes Simon to Rock, and then in the same breath says I will build my Church upon this Rock ,and you will actually submit that Simon is not the Rock?

 

[jlhargus]

Who is Kevin? You have me mixed up with someone else. Ask Michael Francis, forum administrator, if you do not believe me; he knows exactly who I am. God bless!

JL: Just wanted to let you know, I know. As I said Kevin you can fool others, but I know you and the rev kevin character is unmistakable. It is of no concern of mine how many memberships you have.