Proving or disproving the papasy of Peter as the first Pope, using scripture alone

  • Thread starter Thread starter SoonerServant
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Soonerservant,

Your scriptural gymnastics are not persuasive.

As for St Paul he did not “correct” Peter in a way that implies Peter teaching wrongly. Peter, after proclaiming correctly, that the gentile converts could eat in accordance with their normal practices [and contrary to Jewish law] and often ate with them and in their households would change his behavior when Jewish Christians from Jerusalem were in town. It was the apperance that the decree of the Council [recorded in Acts] was not official by Peter’s actions that Paul corrected. Peter never changed the teaching.

Two things about this incident:

First, Paul takes great pains to point out his bringing this point out *with Peter. *If Peter was not in the position of leadership, it would not have been so important for Paul to name drop! And this point is not insignificant. After Paul had his conversion experiencce and was converted he had to go to Jerusalem and meet with Peter to get his ministry accepted by the Christian community. Paul had to seek out Peter’s approval not the other way around.

Second, Paull himself gives in to the perception of others when he forces a follower to be circumcised [even though circumcision was not a requirement for conversion] in order to gain acceptance from those Christian Jews who thought differently. Probably the same [or like minded] Christian Jews who thought Peter should not eat unclean foods in gentile Christian households!

Now that is scripture in context, context, context.

True conjecture here but knowing how Paul himself gave in to this pressure…Perhaps after a time and with greater experience, Paul would have discussed the issue with Peter differently…
 
Aalso, SoonerServant,

You make much about Jesus later giving the power to bind and loose to the othr apostles. This is fully recognized by the Church. All of the Bishops hold power annd can ‘bind and loose’. The office of Pope is less hierarchical than you might think. The orthodox have the first amoung equals and that is actually a way of describing the successor of Peter.

Peter was given the '‘keys’ as in the Office of Prime minister. Many of us have pointed out to you the office described in Isaiah that Jesus quotes when he gives to Peter the Keys. This is seperate from the authority to “bind and loose” what is bound on earth and heaven and what is loosed on earth and in heaven. To Peter he gives both…to the rest of the apostles only the binding and loosing.
 
Another thought about St. Paul:

I need to search for the quote but St. Paul instructs the followers of Jesus to listen to their presbyters [bishops] and follow their instructions even if those same bishops do not adhere to those same teachings.

And Paul recognised the office of church leadership and the laying on of hands See 1 Timothy Chapter 4:
Command and teach these things.
12 Let no one have contempt for your youth, 6 but set an example for those who believe, in speech, conduct, love, faith, and purity. 13 Until I arrive, attend to the reading, 7 exhortation, and teaching. 14 Do not neglect the gift you have, which was conferred on you through the prophetic word 8 with the imposition of hands of the presbyterate. 15 Be diligent in these matters, be absorbed in them, so that your progress may be evident to everyone. 16 Attend to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in both tasks, for by doing so you will save both yourself and those who listen to you.
Click to expand...
 
YADA said:
Another thought about St. Paul:

I need to search for the quote but St. Paul instructs the followers of Jesus to listen to their presbyters [bishops] and follow their instructions even if those same bishops do not adhere to those same teachings.
Click to expand...
You might be thinking of this passage from the gospel. It was actually Jesus speaking about the Pharisees, but basically the same idea:
Matthew 23:3
So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.
Click to expand...
This passage, then, fits very well with the fraternal correction we see between St. Paul and St. Peter. St. Peter, by his authority as steward of the Church, preached the gospel of Gentile inclusion, but obviously did not always “practice what he preached.” St. Paul, also an Apostle, saw fit to correct his brother’s inconsistent behavior.
 
JaneFrances said:
You might be thinking of this passage from the gospel. It was actually Jesus speaking about the Pharisees, but basically the same idea:

This passage, then, fits very well with the fraternal correction we see between St. Paul and St. Peter. St. Peter, by his authority as steward of the Church, preached the gospel of Gentile inclusion, but obviously did not always “practice what he preached.” St. Paul, also an Apostle, saw fit to correct his brother’s inconsistent behavior.
Click to expand...
And perhaps also from Hebrews 13:17

Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.
 
mercygate said:
Welcome to the forums, Marcos. Great link. But it doesn’t really address the OP of this thread. I hope you have read the whole thing.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by read the whole thing? The article or this thread.

I disagree with you I think the link is dead on.👍
 
SoonerServant said:
The is a continuation of my quest for the truth concerning Catholic doctrines and traditions. Though the subject is specifically as the title states, I am open for proof or disproof of other Cathic doctrines and traditions.
Click to expand...
The first thing you have to drop is the un-Christian concept of “Sola Scriptura” in this quest.

If you need to prove the Papacy from Scripture alone then we must prove the existance of Scripture, specifically the list of New Testament Scriptures, by Scripture Alone.

Ken
 
Where’d Sooner go? I was hoping he could respond regarding his misinterpretation of Isaiah as this is quite central to the proof of Peter’s role.
 
This is one Oklahoman who would like to thank everyone for their contributions to this thread. As one who is currently swimming the Tiber, this issue of Peter and the papacy has been my last sticking point. I think you all have more than answered every question I had and backed it up with Scripture!
Nancy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top