Succession of Bishops

[bibleapologist]

Notworthy,

Your reference to John’s manner of death being no matter to Peter does not confirm or deny Peter’s authority. It simply means that Peter does not need to know how John will die.

John 21:22, and Jesus’ response to Peter had nothing to do with John’s manner of death… but rather what John’s duty would be concerning the gospel.

John
www.gideonsword.net

 

[NotWorthy]

Notworthy,

John 21:22, and Jesus’ response to Peter had nothing to do with John’s manner of death… but rather what John’s duty would be concerning the gospel.

???

Joh 21:21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what [shall] this man [do]?
Joh 21:22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what [is that] to thee? follow thou me.

** Are those words in brackets yours? Peter says, “and what this man”? Jesus just described Peter’s death and further reveals this in following passages.

From the NAB:

*** When Peter saw him, he said to Jesus, “Lord, what about him?” Jesus said to him, “What if I want him to remain until I come***? What concern is it of yours? You follow me.” So the word spread among the brothers that that disciple would not die. But Jesus had not told him that he would not die, just “What if I want him to remain until I come? (What concern is it of yours?)”**

 

[bibleapologist]

Notworthy,

Are those words in brackets yours? Peter says, “and what this man”?

The words in [brackets] are the words inserted by the King James Version translators. They are words that are necessary to complete the translation… but are not directly translated from words in the original languages (some words in the original languages translate to more than one English word).

Jesus just described Peter’s death and further reveals this in following passages.

I’m sorry, I don’t see where Jesus described John’s death… in fact Jesus explicitly said in verse 23 that He was NOT speaking of John’s death.

The statement Jesus made; “If I will that he tarry till I come, what [is that] to thee?” in verse 22 and 23 means; If Jesus doesn’t have anything for John to do, but wait until Jesus comes… what is that to you?"

The word “tarry” means to wait; or in this context; wait for Jesus to return. Of course all of the Apostles, including Peter were going to wait for Christ’s return, so what was so special about Jesus talking about John “tarrying”.

Jesus was making a point to Peter, because when Peter saw John and asked Jesus “Lord, and what [shall] this man [do]?”. Jesus reply to Peter was; it is no concern of yours what I will have this man do… even if I have him do nothing until I return… “what [is that] to thee?”

John
www.gideonsword.net

 

[NotWorthy]

When Peter saw him, he said to Jesus, “Lord, what about him?” Jesus said to him, “What if I want him to remain until I come? What concern is it of yours? You follow me.” So the word spread among the brothers that that disciple would not die. But Jesus had not told him that he would not die, just “What if I want him to remain until I come? (What concern is it of yours?”

You could use the same logic that Jesus had not told him not to do anything with any authority, or that Jesus had not told him he would not die.It would seem that since Jesus is talking of Peter’s death, and Peter says, “What about John”, then Jesus’ words “What if I want him to remain until I come” would follow the context of the conversation, unless Jesus points to a different topic.

 

[bibleapologist]

Notworth,

You could use the same logic that Jesus had not told him not to do anything with any authority, or that Jesus had not told him he would not die.It would seem that since Jesus is talking of Peter’s death, and Peter says, “What about John”, then Jesus’ words “What if I want him to remain until I come” would follow the context of the conversation, unless Jesus points to a different topic.

The whole topic of this conversation beginning in verse 20 is referring to Jesus’ statement to Peter to “follow me”.

I don’t see anything in that passage that alludes to Peter not doing anything without any authority. I only see that Jesus was exhorting Peter to not concern himself with what Jesus requires of anyone else… only that Peter himself follows Jesus.

This conversation regarding John is in reference to the statement Jesus made in verse 19… “follow me”.

John
www.gideonsword.net

 

[NotWorthy]

Notworth,

The whole topic of this conversation beginning in verse 20 is referring to Jesus’ statement to Peter to “follow me”.

I don’t see anything in that passage that alludes to Peter not doing anything without any authority. I only see that Jesus was exhorting Peter to not concern himself with what Jesus requires of anyone else… only that Peter himself follows Jesus.

This conversation regarding John is in reference to the statement Jesus made in verse 19… “follow me”.

John
www.gideonsword.net

That’s interesting, but verse 23 proves that Jesus was referring to John’s manner of death (being none of Peter’s business).

***So the word spread among the brothers that that disciple would not die. But Jesus had not told him that he would not die, just “What if I want him to remain until I come? (What concern is it of yours?)”

*** P.S. Oh, and I’m “Notworth” now!!! NotWorth what? A plug nickel? A dime? A darn thing? Now you’re cutting below the quick, John…

 

[bibleapologist]

Notworthy,

P.S. Oh, and I’m “Notworth” now!!! NotWorth what? A plug nickel? A dime? A darn thing? Now you’re cutting below the quick, John…

Sorry about that… that was a typo.

You have no idea how many times I caught myself missing the “y” and corrected it (typing too fast I guess). I have also tried to call you “noteworthy” many times too.

I won’t be offended if you accidently type an “s” while tying BA.

John
www.gideonsword.net

 

[bibleapologist]

Noteworthy,

That’s interesting, but verse 23 proves that Jesus was referring to John’s manner of death (being none of Peter’s business).

So the word spread among the brothers that that disciple would not die. But Jesus had not told him that he would not die, just “What if I want him to remain until I come? (What concern is it of yours?)”

You cannot ignore verse 21 though, in which Peter asked Jesus… “what will this man do?” Jesus’ repsonse to Peter was to the question Peter asked, what will John do.

Now, there is no question that everyone ‘thought’ Jesus response was alluding to John’s death. But, Jesus was responding to Peter’s question concerning what John will “do”.

Jesus’ answer to Peter was “follow thou me”. It was no concern of Peter’s what Jesus would have John to “do”, because John’s only authority was Christ Himself (as Christ want’s to be for all of us).

John
www.gideonsword.net

 

[Eden]

Noteworthy,

You cannot ignore verse 21 though, in which Peter asked Jesus… “what will this man do?” Jesus’ repsonse to Peter was to the question Peter asked, what will John do.

Now, there is no question that everyone ‘thought’ Jesus response was alluding to John’s death. But, Jesus was responding to Peter’s question concerning what John will “do”.

Jesus’ answer to Peter was “follow thou me”. It was no concern of Peter’s what Jesus would have John to “do”, because John’s only authority was Christ Himself (as Christ want’s to be for all of us).

John
www.gideonsword.net

Jesus was simply checking Peter’s idle curiousity. It is Peter to whom Jesus gave charge of His Church. You are ignoring the significance of that, yet again.

 

[NotWorthy]

Noteworthy,

You cannot ignore verse 21 though, in which Peter asked Jesus… “what will this man do?” Jesus’ repsonse to Peter was to the question Peter asked, what will John do.

BS, er…BA ,

This might be a good time to go to the Greek, for the NAB says, When Peter saw him, he said to Jesus, "Lord, what about him?" That’s why I originally asked, who’s putting in the brackets on your quote, for they seem to change the intention of Peter’s query.

Unfortunately, I’m in no way a Greek translator, even though it’s all Greek to me!

 

[peary]

I am attempting, at the request of a non-Catholic family member, to prepare a list of scriptural passages which support the idea that Christ established a Church with a teaching authority, excersised by bishops, in succession from the apostles.

What I have so far:

In Matthew 23:2-3, Jesus clearly endorses the idea that the scribes and Pharisees possessed an authority which even his disciples were to submit to because they sat on the chair of Moses. This idea of a teaching authority illuminates Jesus’ granting of the authority to “bind and loose” in Matthew 16 and 18 and John 20:22-23.

In writing to Timothy about the offices of bishops and deacons, Paul refers to the Church as “the pillar and foundation of truth.” (I Timothy 3:15). He then proceeds to tell Timothy that through his ordination, “the imposition of hands of the presbyterate,” Timothy received a gift of teaching which he should not neglect. (4:14). in 2 Timothy, Paul again reminds Timothy of the “gift of God that you have through the imposition of my hands,” (1:6) and instructs him to “Guard this rich trust with the help of the holy Spirit that dwells within us.” (1:14)

Paul calls bishops God’s stewards in Titus 1:7, and entrusts Titus with the job of appointing prebyters in every town in Crete. and admonishing the Cretans for their failings. (1:5, 13) Titus is to “exhort and correct with all authority.” (2:15) Titus, as bishop, also has the authority to excommunicate heretics (3:10).

Furthermore, Paul commands the church at Thessalonica to "respect those who are laboring among you and who are over you in the Lord and who admonish you, and to show esteem for them with special love on account of their work. (I Thess. 5:12-13).

Are there any significant passages I am leaving out? Any help would be appreciated.

**Try these:

scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html

scripturecatholic.com/primacy_of_peter.html

scripturecatholic.com/apostolic_succession.html

That should answer any of their concerns…and yours too.**