Proof of Pope

[freudmacher]

Does anyone know of any proof of the Pope in the Acts?

Yes, we know it will not say Pope, but some references. I ask because a protestant said he read the Acts looking for proof of the Pope and he says there is nothing.

 

[FCEGM]

Does anyone know of any proof of the Pope in the Acts?

Yes, we know it will not say Pope, but some references. I ask because a protestant said he read the Acts looking for proof of the Pope and he says there is nothing.

Have a look at acts 15:12 where Peter delivers a binding pronouncement and defined doctrine. Note how after Peter spoke the debating assembly ‘kept silence’. Here are some articles that you may find helpful on the topic as a whole (not just relating to Acts):

catholic-legate.com/articles/caesarea.html

catholic-legate.com/articles/tract9.html

catholic-legate.com/dialogues/peterpope.html

 

[thistle]

Does anyone know of any proof of the Pope in the Acts?

Yes, we know it will not say Pope, but some references. I ask because a protestant said he read the Acts looking for proof of the Pope and he says there is nothing.

scripturecatholic.com/primacy_of_peter.html

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Note Acts 8:32

32 Now as Peter went here and there among them all, he came down also to the saints that lived at Lydda.

The others had specific mission territories, but Peter went here and there, overseeing the work of all.

 

[po18guy]

Does anyone know of any proof of the Pope in the Acts?

Yes, we know it will not say Pope, but some references. I ask because a protestant said he read the Acts looking for proof of the Pope and he says there is nothing.

The fatal flaw of sola scriptura is that it leads believers to demand proof in writing before they will believe. This is the opposite of faith. Just as the trinity is shown in the NT, Peter’s primacy is also shown. “Trinity” and “Pope” are terms that came later. Your friends’ faith is shallow and their theology tissue paper thin.

Peter is mentioned 195 times in the NT. The next closest is John, “the beloved disciple” at 29 times. Peter is always listed first among the Apostles (Mt 10:2-5, Mk 3:16-19, Lk 6:14-17, Acts 1:13)

Also, you read “Peter and the rest of the Apostles” or “Peter and his companions” (Lk 9:32, Mk 16:7, Acts 2:37), revealing his position amongst them

Also, Peter was the only Apostle who:

Walked on water (Matthew 14:30) Then Peter got down out of the boat, walked on the water and came toward Jesus…

Raised the dead: (Acts 9:36-42) In Joppa there was a disciple named Tabitha (which, when translated, is Dorcas), who was always doing good and helping the poor. About that time she became sick and died, and her body was washed and placed in an upstairs room. Lydda was near Joppa; so when the disciples heard that Peter was in Lydda, they sent two men to him and urged him, “Please come at once!” Peter went with them, and when he arrived he was taken upstairs to the room. All the widows stood around him, crying and showing him the robes and other clothing that Dorcas had made while she was still with them. Peter sent them all out of the room; then he got down on his knees and prayed. Turning toward the dead woman, he said, “Tabitha, get up.” She opened her eyes, and seeing Peter she sat up. He took her by the hand and helped her to her feet. Then he called the believers and the widows and presented her to them alive. This became known all over Joppa, and many people believed in the Lord.

Peter was sent to the Gentiles as well as Paul: Acts 15:7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe”.

 

[Menorrah]

1. In the account in Acts at the council in Jerusalem, it wasn’t Peter who made the final decision. It was James.

Peter explained his position first (v. 7) and then Barnabas and Paul narrated their stance on the issue (v. 12). Eventually, it was James who said “It is my judgment…” (v. 19).

When they were all talking, everyone was in silence.

1. When Paul was released from prison, he said " But he, beckoning unto them with the hand to hold their peace, declared unto them how the Lord had brought him out of the prison. And he said, Go shew these things unto James, and to the brethren. And he departed, and went into another place " (Acts 12:17).

He instructed them to shew these things to JAMES.

1. Here’s are other accounts:

Acts 21:18
And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.

1 Corinthians 15:7
After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

Galatians 1:19
But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother

 

[po18guy]

1. In the account in Acts at the council in Jerusalem, it wasn’t Peter who made the final decision. It was James.

Peter explained his position first (v. 7) and then Barnabas and Paul narrated their stance on the issue (v. 12). Eventually, it was James who said “It is my judgment…” (v. 19).

When they were all talking, everyone was in silence.

1. When Paul was released from prison, he said " But he, beckoning unto them with the hand to hold their peace, declared unto them how the Lord had brought him out of the prison. And he said, Go shew these things unto James, and to the brethren. And he departed, and went into another place " (Acts 12:17).

He instructed them to shew these things to JAMES.

1. Here’s are other accounts:

Acts 21:18
And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.

1 Corinthians 15:7
After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

Galatians 1:19
But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother

So, you allege that James was the first leader? He’s not given any power or authority in Matthew 16. You are speaking of the embryonic church. Do you think the functioning structure and written rules for the early church were all set in stone while James was yet alive?

Did James preach in Antioch? Did he continue on west? No. He was martyred. Read Acts 1:15-26 and see who addressed the issue of replacing Judas. I think you have some anecdotal evidence, but the bible is a big picture, not a scrapbook

This question was settled nearly 2,000 years ago. This is neither the place nor the time for revisionist history.

Christ’s peace.

 

[Ohwesty]

Nobody reading the Gospels or Acts can deny the Primacy of Peter. Even the Eastern Orthodox accept the Primacy of Peter. According to history, Peter went to Rome and died there, and Rome has been the seat of the bishop of Rome (the Popes) ever since. It’s an unbroken succession, an unbroken line of tradition. We have history on our side.

But this argument probably won’t hold water because most Protestants can’t see it played out in the Bible. It’s a no-win situation. They just can’t accept the fact that the Church, ensouled by the Holy Spirit, is a living organism that develops in structure and wisdom, just as a human infant grows to be a man, a mustard seed to a massive tree.

• Westy

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Note Acts 12:1-5

About that time Herod the king laid violent hands upon some who belonged to the church. 2 He killed James the brother of John with the sword; 3 and when he saw that it pleased the Jews, he proceeded to arrest Peter also. This was during the days of Unleavened Bread. 4 And when he had seized him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four squads of soldiers to guard him, intending after the Passover to bring him out to the people. 5 So Peter was kept in prison; but earnest prayer for him was made to God by the church.

Why did the Church pray for Peter but not for James

 

[po18guy]

Note Acts 12:1-5 Why did the Church pray for Peter but not for James

Peter was guarded by four squads of four soldiers. Yet, the chains fell from his hands without awakening the guards sleeping beside him. Accompanied by the Angel, the gate opened before him automatically and he walked out of prison. This could also have been done for James, no?

Christ’s peace.

 

[Menorrah]

James, the brother of John was not same James, the brother of the Lord.

James, the brother of John was the son of Zebedee while James, the brother of the Lord was the son of Joseph.

The first leader of the church after Jesus left was James, the Lord’s brother, the son of Joseph.

Read Acts 12:17:

Peter motioned with his hand for them to be quiet and described how the Lord had brought him out of prison. “Tell James and the brothers about this,” he said, and then he left for another place.

 

[mercygate]

Does anyone know of any proof of the Pope in the Acts?

Yes, we know it will not say Pope, but some references. I ask because a protestant said he read the Acts looking for proof of the Pope and he says there is nothing.

Petrine primacy is all over the New Testament. Why does your friend believe that reading the Acts of the Apostles should settle the question for him. That is a painfully naive view of the question. But don’t tell him that because he won’t understand what you are talking about.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

So, you allege that James was the first leader? He’s not given any power or authority in Matthew 16. You are speaking of the embryonic church. Do you think the functioning structure and written rules for the early church were all set in stone while James was yet alive?

Did James preach in Antioch? Did he continue on west? No. He was martyred. Read Acts 1:15-26 and see who addressed the issue of replacing Judas. I think you have some anecdotal evidence, but the bible is a big picture, not a scrapbook

This question was settled nearly 2,000 years ago. This is neither the place nor the time for revisionist history.

Christ’s peace.

You’re right. No time for revision.

Eusebius “History of the Church” Book II.1 “The Course pursued by the Apostles after the Ascension of Christ”:

“For they say that Peter and James and John after the ascension of our Saviour, as if also preferred by our Lord, strove not after honor, but chose James the Just bishop of Jerusalem.

It is clear that St Paul went for an answer to St. James and the brethren in Jerusalem, although St. Peter was present and available in Antioch (as Galatians shows).

 

[mercygate]

You’re right. No time for revision.

Eusebius “History of the Church” Book II.1 “The Course pursued by the Apostles after the Ascension of Christ”:

“For they say that Peter and James and John after the ascension of our Saviour, as if also preferred by our Lord, strove not after honor, but chose James the Just bishop of Jerusalem.

It is clear that St Paul went for an answer to St. James and the brethren in Jerusalem, although St. Peter was present and available in Antioch (as Galatians shows).

Interesting. Peter James and John chose the bishop of Jerusalem. Hmmm.

 

[po18guy]

James, the brother of John was not same James, the brother of the Lord.

James, the brother of John was the son of Zebedee while James, the brother of the Lord was the son of Joseph.

The first leader of the church after Jesus left was James, the Lord’s brother, the son of Joseph.

Read Acts 12:17:

Peter motioned with his hand for them to be quiet and described how the Lord had brought him out of prison. “Tell James and the brothers about this,” he said, and then he left for another place.

You err. Jesus was an only child. You will receive no quarter from Catholics there. You defile the Blessed Mother by your insistence that she was just another woman. Study the ancient languages. There was no word in Aramaic for cousin - it was rendered as brother. This also applies to those of your same community. All who lived in your community were considered brothers and sisters. Not by blood, but by geography.

Christ’s peace.

 

[po18guy]

Interesting. Peter James and John chose the bishop of Jerusalem. Hmmm.

You are right. Here we go again. Context context context. No personal interpretation. It’s destroying the separated part of Christ’s body. I get a little tired when isolated verses from any book bounce off my forehead!

 

[po18guy]

James, the brother of John was the son of Zebedee while James, the brother of the Lord was the son of Joseph.

Zero, zip, nada evidence in the NT for your assertion. You base everything on the term “brother” used to describe James. Their was no word for cousin. Tell me this: at a union hall, do all of the union brothers and sister have the same mother?

 

[Menorrah]

Zero, zip, nada evidence in the NT for your assertion. You base everything on the term “brother” used to describe James. Their was no word for cousin. Tell me this: at a union hall, do all of the union brothers and sister have the same mother?

Eusebius “History of the Church: Book II”:

Chapter 1:

1. Then James, whom the ancients surnamed the Just on account of the excellence of his virtue, is recorded to have been the first to be made bishop of the church of Jerusalem. This James was called the brother of the Lord because he was known as a son of Joseph, and Joseph was supposed to be the father of Christ, because the Virgin, being betrothed to him, was found with child by the Holy Ghost before they came together, Matthew 1:18 as the account of the holy Gospels shows.

 

[MarcoPolo]

1. In the account in Acts at the council in Jerusalem, it wasn’t Peter who made the final decision. It was James.

According to Eusebius’ Church History, James was the first bishop of Jerusalem and accordingly, he would have made that local decision, but he still appealed to the counsel of Peter, not in his jurisdiction.

An earlier post I made on the matter:

James utilized the counsel of someone outside his own jurisdiction and said as much Acts 15:14, that he was basing his statement on Peter’s words. And when he said in v. 19 that “we should not trouble the Gentiles,” he is only referring to the Jews, specifically from Judea (v. 1), who were teaching otherwise. It was they who should stop troubling Gentiles. James reaffirms that he was making a judgement specifically regarding these Judeans in his jurisdiction who caused the problem (v. 24). Peter’s knowledge about including Gentiles was directly related to the vision he had in Acts 10, when God revealed to him to include that which he previously thought unclean, namely Gentiles. Later in the chapter, he applies it:
Acts 10:44-47 While Peter was still saying this, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. And the believers from among the circumcised who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared, “Can any one forbid water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.
Again, in Acts 11:2-17 Peter explained his revelation on baptizing Gentiles. James recognized this revelation coming from Peter and so made his local judgement accordingly. Peter had already been baptizing the uncircumcised prior to the Jerusalem council.

Here’s a good article breaking down the matter as well.

 

[Bwsherman]

Zero, zip, nada evidence in the NT for your assertion. You base everything on the term “brother” used to describe James. Their was no word for cousin. Tell me this: at a union hall, do all of the union brothers and sister have the same mother?

With his logic I would have to conclude that Lot and Abraham were brothers too, right?

Gen 13:8- “Abram therefore said to Lot: Let there be no quarrel, I beseech thee, between me and thee, and between my herdsmen and thy herdsmen: for we are brothers.”