Protestant that agree...

[2ndGen]

Hi

Anyone, anybody to provide quotation from NTBible, to satisfy the question.

Thanks

Ok…

Scripture

Matt. to Rev. - Peter is mentioned 155 times and the rest of apostles combined are only mentioned 130 times. Peter is also always listed first except in 1 Cor. 3:22 and Gal. 2:9 (which are obvious exceptions to the rule).

Matt. 10:2; Mark 1:36; 3:16; Luke 6:14-16; Acts 1:3; 2:37; 5:29 - these are some of many examples where Peter is mentioned first among the apostles.

Matt. 14:28-29 - only Peter has the faith to walk on water. No other man in Scripture is said to have the faith to walk on water. This faith ultimately did not fail.

Matt. 16:16, Mark 8:29; John 6:69 - Peter is first among the apostles to confess the divinity of Christ.

Matt. 16:17 - Peter alone is told he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation from God the Father.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus builds the Church only on Peter, the rock, with the other apostles as the foundation and Jesus as the Head.

Matt. 16:19 - only Peter receives the keys, which represent authority over the Church and facilitate dynastic succession to his authority.

Matt. 17:24-25 - the tax collector approaches Peter for Jesus’ tax. Peter is the spokesman for Jesus. He is the Vicar of Christ.

Matt. 17:26-27 - Jesus pays the half-shekel tax with one shekel, for both Jesus and Peter. Peter is Christ’s representative on earth.

Matt. 18:21 - in the presence of the disciples, Peter asks Jesus about the rule of forgiveness. One of many examples where Peter takes a leadership role among the apostles in understanding Jesus’ teachings.

Matt. 19:27 - Peter speaks on behalf of the apostles by telling Jesus that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 10:28 - here also, Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples by declaring that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 11:21 - Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples in remembering Jesus’ curse on the fig tree.

Mark 14:37 - at Gethsemane, Jesus asks Peter, and no one else, why he was asleep. Peter is accountable to Jesus for his actions on behalf of the apostles because he has been appointed by Jesus as their leader.

Mark 16:7 - Peter is specified by an angel as the leader of the apostles as the angel confirms the resurrection of Christ.

Luke 5:3 – Jesus teaches from Peter’s boat which is metaphor for the Church. Jesus guides Peter and the Church into all truth.

Luke 5:4,10 - Jesus instructs Peter to let down the nets for a catch, and the miraculous catch follows. Peter, the Pope, is the “fisher of men.”

Luke 7:40-50- Jesus addresses Peter regarding the rule of forgiveness and Peter answers on behalf of the disciples. Jesus also singles Peter out and judges his conduct vis-à-vis the conduct of the woman who anointed Him.

Luke 8:45 - when Jesus asked who touched His garment, it is Peter who answers on behalf of the disciples.

Luke 8:51; 9:28; 22:8; Acts 1:13; 3:1,3,11; 4:13,19; 8:14 - Peter is always mentioned before John, the disciple whom Jesus loved.

Luke 9:28;33 - Peter is mentioned first as going to mountain of transfiguration and the only one to speak at the transfiguration.

Luke 12:41 - Peter seeks clarification of a parable on behalf on the disciples. This is part of Peter’s formation as the chief shepherd of the flock after Jesus ascended into heaven.

Luke 22:31-32 - Jesus prays for Peter alone, that his faith may not fail, and charges him to strengthen the rest of the apostles.

Luke 24:12, John 20:4-6 - John arrived at the tomb first but stopped and waited for Peter. Peter then arrived and entered the tomb first.

Luke 24:34 - the two disciples distinguish Peter even though they both had seen the risen Jesus the previous hour. See Luke 24:33.

John 6:68 - after the disciples leave, Peter is the first to speak and confess his belief in Christ after the Eucharistic discourse.

John 13:6-9 - Peter speaks out to the Lord in front of the apostles concerning the washing of feet.

John 13:36; 21:18 - Jesus predicts Peter’s death. Peter was martyred at Rome in 67 A.D. Several hundred years of papal successors were also martyred.

John 21:2-3,11 - Peter leads the fishing and his net does not break. The boat (the “barque of Peter”) is a metaphor for the Church.

 

[2ndGen]

(Deep breath…)

John 21:7 - only Peter got out of the boat and ran to the shore to meet Jesus. Peter is the earthly shepherd leading us to God.

John 21:15 - in front of the apostles, Jesus asks Peter if he loves Jesus “more than these,” which refers to the other apostles. Peter is the head of the apostolic see.

John 21:15-17 - Jesus charges Peter to “feed my lambs,” “tend my sheep,” “feed my sheep.” Sheep means all people, even the apostles.

Acts 1:13 - Peter is first when entering upper room after our Lord’s ascension. The first Eucharist and Pentecost were given in this room.

Acts 1:15 - Peter initiates the selection of a successor to Judas right after Jesus ascended into heaven, and no one questions him. Further, if the Church needed a successor to Judas, wouldn’t it need one to Peter? Of course.

Acts 2:14 - Peter is first to speak for the apostles after the Holy Spirit descended upon them at Pentecost. Peter is the first to preach the Gospel.

Acts 2:38 - Peter gives first preaching in the early Church on repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

Acts 3:1,3,4 - Peter is mentioned first as going to the Temple to pray.

Acts 3:6-7 - Peter works the first healing of the apostles.

Acts 3:12-26, 4:8-12 - Peter teaches the early Church the healing through Jesus and that there is no salvation other than Christ.

Acts 5:3 - Peter declares the first anathema of Ananias and Sapphira which is ratified by God, and brings about their death. Peter exercises his binding authority.

Acts 5:15 - Peter’s shadow has healing power. No other apostle is said to have this power.

Acts 8:14 - Peter is mentioned first in conferring the sacrament of confirmation.

Acts 8:20-23 - Peter casts judgment on Simon’s quest for gaining authority through the laying on of hands. Peter exercises his binding and loosing authority.

Acts 9:32-34 - Peter is mentioned first among the apostles and works the healing of Aeneas.

Acts 9:38-40 - Peter is mentioned first among the apostles and raises Tabitha from the dead.

Acts 10:5 - Cornelius is told by an angel to call upon Peter. Angels are messengers of God. Peter was granted this divine vision.

Acts 10:34-48, 11:1-18 - Peter is first to teach about salvation for all (Jews and Gentiles).

Acts 12:5 - this verse implies that the “whole Church” offered “earnest prayers” for Peter, their leader, during his imprisonment.

Acts 12:6-11 - Peter is freed from jail by an angel. He is the first object of divine intervention in the early Church.

Acts 15:7-12 - Peter resolves the first doctrinal issue on circumcision at the Church’s first council at Jerusalem, and no one questions him. After Peter the Papa spoke, all were kept silent.

Acts 15:12 - only after Peter (the Pope) speaks do Paul and Barnabas (bishops) speak in support of Peter’s definitive teaching.

Acts 15:13-14 - then James speaks to further acknowledge Peter’s definitive teaching. “Simeon (Peter) has related how God first visited…”

Rom. 15:20 - Paul says he doesn’t want to build on “another man’s foundation” referring to Peter, who built the Church in Rome.

1 Cor. 9:5 – Peter is distinguished from the rest of the apostles and brethren of the Lord.

1 Cor. 15:4-8 - Paul distinguishes Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances to Peter from those of the other apostles. Christ appeared “to Cephas, then to the twelve.”

Gal.1:18 - Paul spends fifteen days with Peter privately before beginning his ministry, even after Christ’s Revelation to Paul.

1 Peter 5:1 - Peter acts as the chief bishop by “exhorting” all the other bishops and elders of the Church.

1 Peter 5:13 - Some Protestants argue against the Papacy by trying to prove Peter was never in Rome. First, this argument is irrelevant to whether Jesus instituted the Papacy. Secondly, this verse demonstrates that Peter was in fact in Rome. Peter writes from “Babylon” which was a code name for Rome during these days of persecution. See, for example, Rev. 14:8, 16:19, 17:5, 18:2,10,21, which show that “Babylon” meant Rome. Rome was the “great city” of the New Testament period. Because Rome during this age was considered the center of the world, the Lord wanted His Church to be established in Rome.

2 Peter 1:14 - Peter writes about Jesus’ prediction of Peter’s death, embracing the eventual martyrdom that he would suffer.

2 Peter 3:16 - Peter is making a judgment on the proper interpretation of Paul’s letters. Peter is the chief shepherd of the flock.

Matt. 23:11; Mark 9:35; 10:44 - yet Peter, as the first, humbled himself to be the last and servant of all servants.

scripturecatholic.com/primacy_of_peter.html

 

[moondweller]

Matt. 23:11; Mark 9:35; 10:44 - yet Peter, as the first, humbled himself to be the last and servant of all servants.

Yet NONE of the Scriptures you provided called Peter “head of the church.” So I’m still waiting from you to show me where ANY of the writers of Scripture called Peter “head of the church.” Not even Peter himself ever call himself that? Looks like we’re stuck with Col. 1:18. And I can find nowhere where Jesus ever relinquished His job and handed it over to someone else. Don’t know about you, but sure glad He didn’t. Especially based on church history.

 

[jmcrae]

I think you’re pouring a lot of Rome’s theology into those passages, jm. Jesus says nothing there about placing Peter “in charge” of His church. Christ Himself is “Head of the body, the church” (Col. 1:18). I can find no Scriptural passages that teach otherwise. Nor does Jesus in those passages refer to His “flock” as the Roman Catholic church. Peter, in fact, was the Apostle to the “circumcision” (Jews), whereas Paul was the Apostle to the “uncircumcision” (Gentiles). If I went with your logic (interpretation), Christ’s church (flock) would have only been Jewish.

You did not answer my question. What, if not His Church (which I grant to you was 100% Jewish at that time), is the Apostle Peter being placed in charge over, in that passage of Scripture?

What is it that is being signified by the phrases “my lambs,” and “my sheep”?

 

[2ndGen]

Yet NONE of the Scriptures you provided called Peter “head of the church.”

Well Mr./Mrs. Bible Literalist…
show me where the Bible says “Jesus is a member of The Trinity” or “The Holy Bible is The Word of God”.

You won’t find those phrases exactly literally worded like that.

So, does that mean that they don’t exist according to your standards of there being a literal word for word phrase in Scripture?

And I can find nowhere where Jesus ever relinquished His job and handed it over to someone else.

Mark 2:10
“But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”

John 20:
21Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.

22And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

23Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

 

[2ndGen]

Moondweller,

Is Jesus’ flock (His sheep and lambs) The Church?

And if the flock is The Church,
what does that make the person that feeds them?

 

[moondweller]

You did not answer my question. What, if not His Church (which I grant to you was 100% Jewish at that time), is the Apostle Peter being placed in charge over, in that passage of Scripture?

What is it that is being signified by the phrases “my lambs,” and “my sheep”?

Where does He say in that passage, “Take charge of My sheep?” You’re asking me a question that does not pertain to the passage.

 

[moondweller]

Moondweller,

Is Jesus’ flock (His sheep and lambs) The Church?

And if the flock is The Church,
what does that make the person that feeds them?

A “sheep feeder.” It could be a shepherd. But not necessarily the “chief shepherd.” Jesus doesn’t say to Peter, “Be My chief shepherd.” He simply tells him to shepherd My sheep, tend My lambs. He was giving him an Apostolic assignment, but there’s not even a hint of Jesus exalting him to “chief shepherd.”

Nor did Peter ever refer to himself as numero uno. In 1 Pet. 5:1-2 he exhorts elders, calling himself a "fellow-elder, to shepherd the flock of God among them. In fact in verse five he refers to Jesus Christ as the “Chief Shepherd.”

There is no “Chief Shepherd” or “Head of the church” besides Christ. Peter knew that. Those titles were given to Peter by men posthumously. He would have never tolerated them.

 

[2ndGen]

A “sheep feeder.”

So a person who shephards a flock is a sheep feeder. Interesting invention of phrase there. Then you freely admit that only Peter was told by Jesus to “feed” His sheep, right?

Jesus never told anybody else to do this, right?

Now, what does “feed” mean? What “food” is Peter, wait, since you want to be all literal and such;
What “food” did “rock” feed Jesus’ sheep with?

It could be a shepherd.

Well, I think the world would agree that a persons who’s job it is to take the sheep out to pastor is a shephard without a doubt.

But not necessarily the “chief shepherd.”

Jesus is The Chief Shephard, but on earth, He gave Peter the authority to lead the sheep. The only way that a shephard can feed sheep is by “leading” them to pasture.

Jesus doesn’t say to Peter, “Be My chief shepherd.”

That’s not the debate here. You’re switching the term. My statement is that Peter was commissioned by Jesus to shephard His flock.

He simply tells him to shepherd My sheep, tend My lambs. He was giving him an Apostolic assignment, but there’s not even a hint of Jesus exalting him to “chief shepherd.”

If there were 11 sheep, how many shephards would that flock need? 2? 3? 4? No, just one would be enough. One shephard can tend hundreds of sheep.

Imagine a shephard empowered and assigned by Jesus Christ…how many more sheep can that one shephard assigned by Jesus shephard? Because God has no limits, neither does His flock and therefore, He would not “assigng” a shephard that was anything less than up to the task.

He is The Shephard of Jesus’ flock.

Nor did Peter ever refer to himself as numero uno.

No human ever said he was, but The Word of God (The Holy Bible) does.

There is no “Chief Shepherd” or “Head of the church” besides Christ. Peter knew that. Those titles were given to Peter by men posthumously. He would have never tolerated them

Again, you’re introducing concepts here never discussed. Let’s stick to the topic…Jesus being the shephard of Jesus’ flock. We’re not discussing chief shephards or heads of churches.

Once we establish that Peter is the shephard of Jesus’ flock, then we can move on to his being the head of The Church.

Oh wait, we did establish that already and I quote:

“He simply tells him to shepherd My sheep, tend My lambs. He was giving him an Apostolic assignment,…”

Now, what is “the flock”?

 

[moondweller]

So a person who shephards a flock is a sheep feeder.

No. One might “feed” sheep but simply feeding sheep doesn’t make that one a “shepherd.” He may be just a hireling. And of course, as Jesus pointed out, there are good shepherds and bad shepherds.

Then you freely admit that only Peter was told by Jesus to “feed” His sheep, right?

Wrong. That was a recorded conversation between Jesus and Peter. A personal conversation no doubt Peter needed based on his previous acts of denial.

Jesus never told anybody else to do this, right?

Inconclusive evidence. What Jesus did not do in that intimate conversation was announce to Peter and to the others that Peter was “Chief Shepherd” on earth. Nor did Peter himself ever admit to being so. But he himself testified as to who the Chief Shepherd is.

It seems Rome has made the same kind of erroneous interpretation of Jesus’ words in that passage that the brethren did concerning John just a few verses down (see Jn. 21:23).

Jesus is The Chief Shephard, but on earth, He gave Peter the authority to lead the sheep.

I see no such earthly assignment recorded in Scripture. And certainly not in that passage in John’s gospel. It’s taught, self-servingly, from the Vatican balcony, but no such earthly assignment is recorded in Scripture. Such a high position would surely have been explicitly recorded to inform following generations of believers. But the Scriptures are deafly silent. So was Jesus in that conversion with Peter.

That’s not the debate here. You’re switching the term. My statement is that Peter was commissioned by Jesus to shephard His flock.

Your statement is that Peter was “Chief Shepherd” on earth. A statement you have yet to prove. How you ever will is beyond me since your statement and Rome’s claim is beyond divine revelation.

Once we establish that Peter is the shephard of Jesus’ flock, then we can move on to his being the head of The Church.

Why? Did you not read Col. 1:18?

Based on divine revelation it is established that Peter was “a” shepherd of Christ’s flock - Peter testifying that Christ Himself is the “Chief Shepherd” (1 Pet. 5:4). But your task is to prove that Peter was assigned by Christ to be His “vicar” on earth. So far you have not done that.

 

[jmcrae]

No. One might “feed” sheep but simply feeding sheep doesn’t make that one a “shepherd.” He may be just a hireling. And of course, as Jesus pointed out, there are good shepherds and bad shepherds.Wrong. That was a recorded conversation between Jesus and Peter. A personal conversation no doubt Peter needed based on his previous acts of denial.

How does the fact that Jesus gave this position to Peter while having a conversation with him invalidate that he actually did so?

How else was He supposed to do it? Perhaps He should have filled out some kind of form and asked for approval from the other Apostles in an Annual General Meeting?

Such a high position would surely have been explicitly recorded to inform following generations of believers.

And it was. Take a look at history. The next Pope after Peter was Linus, in 67 AD. After Linus was Anacletus, in 76 AD. After Anacletus was Clement, who wrote the third* Epistle to the Corinthians* - he became Pope in 88 AD. After him came Evaristus, in 97 AD.

We had five Popes during the Apostolic Age - so yeah, the information was definitely passed along that we are supposed to have a Pope.

 

[2ndGen]

No. One might “feed” sheep but simply feeding sheep doesn’t make that one a “shepherd.”

 

[2ndGen]

Moonwalker,

While you’re (not) it, show me in The Bible where it says “Bible”.

If you don’t find it in Scripture, does that mean that it does not exist or was never meant to exist?

 

[moondweller]

How does the fact that Jesus gave this position to Peter while having a conversation with him invalidate that he actually did so?

Position? The words “tend” and “shepherd” in John 21:15-17 are verbs, not nouns.

If you’re going to make someone “chief” of anything or anyone, or “head” of something, you eventually need to make the appointment public. Such a public announcement by Christ never happened.

And it was. Take a look at history. The next Pope after Peter was Linus, in 67 AD. After Linus was Anacletus, in 76 AD. After Anacletus was Clement, who wrote the third Epistle to the Corinthians - he became Pope in 88 AD. After him came Evaristus, in 97 AD.

We had five Popes during the Apostolic Age - so yeah, the information was definitely passed along that we are supposed to have a Pope.

Can you point me to any literature contemporary with Peter that refers to him as “Pope,” or even called “Bishop of Rome?” Keep in mind the word I underlined. It’s also quite strange that the Holy Spirit used Paul rather than “Pope Peter” to doctrinally educate the Roman church (the Book of Romans).

 

[moondweller]

First you said that Jesus never told Peter to feed His sheep.

Nope! Never said that.

I never used the term chief shephard. You did. But I’ll tell you what, the truth is in the text. Copy, Paste and Quote where I said what you claimed. If you don’t, it will be the 2nd time that you will be proven a lier and a pattern will be established that you are “less than” completely honest.

So, it’s time to show and prove.

By all means, quote where I’ve said that that Peter is the chief shephard:

Insert Quote Here:

From your post #141"Luke 12:41 - Peter seeks clarification of a parable on behalf on the disciples. This is part of Peter’s formation as the chief shepherd of the flock after Jesus ascended into heaven."

Based on divine revelation, Peter is the “only” shephard, therefore we can reasonably state that he was “the” shephard…that is unless you can prove scritpurally that Jesus called another of The Apostles a shephard.

As I pointed out to “mcrae” above, the words “tend” and “shepherd” (“feed” in the KJV) in John 21:15-17 are verbs, not nouns. Can you show me where Jesus actually called any of the Apostles “shepherds?” And then in turn called Peter “the” (i.e., “chief”) shepherd?

Moondweller: Peter testifying that Christ Himself is the “Chief Shepherd” (1 Pet. 5:4).
2ndGen: Off topic. Never an issue.

Totally on topic. The point being Peter himself identifes who the Chief Shepherd is in 1 Pet. 5:4. And this was said in the context of Peter exhorting the elders he was writing to shepherd the flock of God among them.

Peter referred to himself as a “fellow-elder” who witnessed the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker of the glory that is to be revealed, but he did not identify himself as “Chief Shepherd” among them. This title he reserved for Christ alone (read again 1 Pet. 5:1-4).

Now if Jesus never called Peter “Chief Shepherd,” but Peter himself called Jesus “Chief Shepherd,” where does that leave your argument? Do you have a face mask on to protect you from the dust?

No, the accuser that he “isn’t” is the one who must provide the proof. I am defending his position. The burden of proof is on the accuser…which is you.

Sorry, but the one making the assertion must provide the proof of his/her assertion. This you have yet to do.

 

[2ndGen]

The “Jesus never told Jesus to feed his sheep” quote? I would’ve bet my soul on that you said that because I replied to that with the literal verse. I’ve searched the thread and can’t find it so I either confused you with someone else or it’s been deleted. If I confused you with someone else, my bad, I apologize.

#141

 

[jmcrae]

Position? The words “tend” and “shepherd” in John 21:15-17 are verbs, not nouns.

Yes, and if a boss says, 'Do this," and outlines the job description (the “do list”) of a shepherd, then I take it that I am being appointed as his shepherd, do I not? I don’t stand there and wait for him to say, “Oh and by the way, you now have a new job title …” because (not being a congenital idiot) I already know that.

Peter, though he was often impetuous and hard headed, was not a congenital idiot - he knew that he was being appointed Shepherd of the Church.

If you’re going to make someone “chief” of anything or anyone, or “head” of something, you eventually need to make the appointment public. Such a public announcement by Christ never happened.Can you point me to any literature contemporary with Peter that refers to him as “Pope,” or even called “Bishop of Rome?” Keep in mind the word I underlined. It’s also quite strange that the Holy Spirit used Paul rather than “Pope Peter” to doctrinally educate the Roman church (the Book of Romans).

St. Paul wrote to them because he was distant from them. I don’t know who the first Bishop of Rome was, but he was not the Pope; Peter, no matter what his location at the time was, was always the Pope. It is the fact that he died as Bishop of Rome and passed his inheritance into the Bishopric of Rome that his papal authority arrived there. It remained there because for three hundred years it was too dangerous to return to Jerusalem, and then after 300 years when it became safe to return, they just said skip it, we are not going back to Jerusalem; there is nothing left there to return to, and all of our stuff is here, anyway, and besides, the Church is world-wide, now, and sending out the change-of-address cards would be too big of a head-ache. (Or something to that effect … )

They didn’t use the word “Pope” yet because the language from which we get that word did not yet exist, but yes, Peter was certainly recognized by both his enemies and his friends as the head of the Church - he is the one who preached at Pentecost; he is the one who made the final decision at the Council of Jerusalem; his name is always at the top of every list of the Apostles (and Judas’ is always at the bottom) even though he was not the first Apostle chosen, in chronological order (Andrew was the first one chosen, yet he always comes fourth in the list).

The Romans certainly knew that Peter was the head of the Church; they crucified him - most Christians including the majority of the Apostles, they either beheaded or sent to the lions, but Peter, they singled out and crucified, because they knew that he was the Vicar of Christ on earth, and they intended that he should die like Christ, since he was the of Christ’s Church. They also paid special and particular attention of a similar kind to his successors.

 

[2ndGen]

Yes, and if a boss says, 'Do this," and outlines the job description (the “do list”) of a shepherd, then I take it that I am being appointed as his shepherd, do I not? I don’t stand there and wait for him to say, “Oh and by the way, you now have a new job title …” because (not being a congenital idiot) I already know that.

Peter, though he was often impetuous and hard headed, was not a congenital idiot - he knew that he was being appointed Shepherd of the Church.

St. Paul wrote to them because he was distant from them. I don’t know who the first Bishop of Rome was, but he was not the Pope; Peter, no matter what his location at the time was, was always the Pope. It is the fact that he died as Bishop of Rome and passed his inheritance into the Bishopric of Rome that his papal authority arrived there. It remained there because for three hundred years it was too dangerous to return to Jerusalem, and then after 300 years when it became safe to return, they just said skip it, we are not going back to Jerusalem; there is nothing left there to return to, and all of our stuff is here, anyway, and besides, the Church is world-wide, now, and sending out the change-of-address cards would be too big of a head-ache. (Or something to that effect … )

They didn’t use the word “Pope” yet because the language from which we get that word did not yet exist, but yes, Peter was certainly recognized by both his enemies and his friends as the head of the Church - he is the one who preached at Pentecost; he is the one who made the final decision at the Council of Jerusalem; his name is always at the top of every list of the Apostles (and Judas’ is always at the bottom) even though he was not the first Apostle chosen, in chronological order (Andrew was the first one chosen, yet he always comes fourth in the list).

The Romans certainly knew that Peter was the head of the Church; they crucified him - most Christians including the majority of the Apostles, they either beheaded or sent to the lions, but Peter, they singled out and crucified, because they knew that he was the Vicar of Christ on earth, and they intended that he should die like Christ, since he was the of Christ’s Church. They also paid special and particular attention of a similar kind to his successors.

Hey…Moon,

Is the phrase word “Bible” in scripture?

And if it isn’t, then does that mean that The Holy Bible too is not to be accepted by Christians because it didn’t exist until the 4th century?

 

[Singinbeauty]

Hey…Moon,

Is the phrase word “Bible” in scripture?

And if it isn’t, then does that mean that The Holy Bible too is not to be accepted by Christians because it didn’t exist until the 4th century?

Let me ask you this…

Did the scripture contained within the collection of books in the bible exist in the time of Peter and Paul?

 

[jmcrae]

Let me ask you this…

Did the scripture contained within the collection of books in the bible exist in the time of Peter and Paul?

No. They died in 67 AD. The Gospels of Matthew and Mark were completed in the early 70s AD, Luke wrote his Gospel and its sequel, the Book of Acts, later in the same decade. The Gospel of John and the Book of Revelation were written in the 80s and 90s AD.