The Office of the Papacy in Scripture

[Daniel_Keeran]

This is a thread on whether or not the office of the papacy with qualifications for successors is mentioned in scripture.

1. In order for the papacy or an earthly head of the church with successors to be true as a definer and protector of truth, it would logically have to be described from the beginning of the church in the apostolic period and not as a later development.
2. For the office of papacy to be true, it would need to be described with qualifications for successors, in the inspired writings among the gifts given by Christ for church unity when he ascended into heaven in Ephesians 4:7-16, yet the papacy is conspicuously absent.
3. Such a fundamentally important central role as the papacy, in order to be true, would be a central repeated theme of writings by the first Christians: Luke, James, John, Paul, and Peter himself, yet there is not a single mention.
4. Although “head of the church” is a phrase, office, and title in scripture, only Christ and never Peter was ever referred to as such.
5. Peter is not explicitly identified as the head of the church in the Jerusalem council in Acts.15; rather James makes the closing summary, although even James is not identified as sole head or bishop of the Jerusalem church.
6. Peter is never identified in scripture as the singular bishop of the Jerusalem diocese or of any diocese.
7. If there was an infallible head of the church and voice of Christ on earth with successors after Peter, there are no claims, writings, or pronouncements from them until Victor blunders onto the scene with his error, even though the period was fraught with heresies, and the entire NT was written when the apostles and church were persecuted from the beginning.

If the church was intended to be built on none other than the pope or person of Peter, why is he not mentioned at all by one of the most important first Christians in the following passage speaking of who the church is built upon?

Ephesians 2:19-22 “Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.”

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Daniel,

I am going to address the primacy of Peter, using scriptures and other arguments, even though I feel it unfair for you to start another thread as opposed to addressing the questions and points raised by you, and responses from others, in another thread.

The incident in Matthew took place at Caesarea Philippi, so named by Herod Philip. However, it was originally Panion, the city of Pan…dedicated to the Greek god Pan. The mountain where Christ was transfigured was above the spot where there remains, to this day, a site honoring Pan, who was, at that time, considered by pagans to be the “great god” who ruled the world. Pan’s essence was sexual and leaned toward depravity, i.e., to Christians, it represents the power of evil. (Remember that with the exchange immediately following Christ’s proclamation!) The altar to Pan was just below the city that represented the evil, and was hidden in the cliffs.

Why this spot? Why, of all the places to which Jesus journeyed, would he choose (and don’t think it wasn’t chosen!) a place so antithetical to the Kingdom of God? Obviously, because Christ, through the Church He was then establishing, is the antithesis to everything which kept men from the Kingdom. And even the gates of hell (a site so named in a niche in the same mountain, which some claim to be the “abyss”) will not prevail over that Kingdom!

But the Kingdom is to be established in the “now” of time, in order for man to live a life of genuine holiness through which he may enter into the eternal Kingdom. Hence, a kingdom needs a King – the King of Kings. However, when the King, established by God through David, is absent from the physical kingdom, it cannot be left unattended. Hence, the keeper of the keys, the “prime minister” or “vicar”, is charged with the full authority of the king over all his lands, peoples, and possessions. He can make law or repeal it. He can make any decisions the King would make. And he is responsible to the King for every action he takes.

The “short” form of my position on Matthew 16:

1. The “petros/petra” issue would not have occurred, since Jesus was not speaking Greek, but Aramaic, wherein there is ONE word form: Kepha.
2. A change in name in Scripture ALWAYS came with a significant change in stature and responsibility. It wasn’t a “whim” of Christ’s to change Simon’s name to Peter. And we know that change was real, as it’s referred to throughout the NT. What is the significance of the name change, if not to designate Peter as the primate over all the followers of Christ? Note that whenever a name change was made in the OT, there was an explanation for it – Abram becomes Abraham because God will make of him a great nation. Jacob becomes Israel because he contended and had power with God and with men and prevailed. Likewise, Simon becomes Peter because upon his strength in faith the sacred community of the faithful, the Church, would be founded.
3. The keeper of the keys is not simply noted in Isaiah. 1Chron 9 details the specifics of the keys. The person who was designated as the keeper of the keys was the “right hand man” of the king. He literally sat at the right hand of the king’s throne.
4. The throne of David was considered by Jews to be the throne of God. (Ref. 1Chron 29:23 Then Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord as king instead of lithos
   lee’-thos
   Apparently a primary word; a stone (literally or figuratively): - (mill-, stumbling-) stone.
   David his father; and he prospered, and all Israel obeyed him.
5. The keeper of the keys is, therefore, the Lord’s vicar, who occupies the earthly throne until Christ returns.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

**Mat 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Mat 16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

Luk 22:32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren.

Joh 21:17 He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep.

Mar 16:7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee. There you shall see him, as he told you.

Luk 24:34 Saying: The Lord is risen indeed and hath appeared to Simon.

Act 1:13 And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode Peter and John, James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James of Alpheus and Simon Zelotes and Jude the brother of James.
Act 1:14 All these were persevering with one mind in prayer with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.
Act 1:15 In those days Peter rising up in the midst of the brethren, said (now the number of persons together was about an hundred and twenty):
Act 1:16 Men, brethren, the scripture must needs be fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost spoke before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who was the leader of them that apprehended Jesus:
Act 1:17 Who was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry.
Act 1:18 And he indeed hath possessed a field of the reward of iniquity, and being hanged, burst asunder in the midst: and all his bowels gushed out.
Act 1:19 And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem: so that the same field was called in their tongue, Haceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.
Act 1:20 For it is written in the book of Psalms: Let their habitation become desolate, and let there be none to dwell therein. And his bishopric let another take.
Act 1:21 Wherefore of these men who have companied with us, all the time that the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us,
Act 1:22 Beginning from the baptism of John, until the day wherein he was taken up from us, one of these must be made a witness with us of his resurrection.
Act 1:23 And they appointed two, Joseph, called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
Act 1:24 And praying, they said: Thou, Lord, who knowest the heart of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,
Act 1:25 To take the place of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas hath by transgression fallen, that he might go to his own place.
Act 1:26 And they gave them lot, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

Act 2:14 But Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and spoke to them: Ye men of Judea, and all you that dwell in Jerusalem, be this known to you and with your ears receive my words.

Act 2:41 They therefore that received his word were baptized: and there were added in that day about three thousand souls.

Act 3:6 But Peter said: Silver and gold I have none; but what I have, I give thee. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, arise and walk.
Act 3:7 And taking him by the right hand, he lifted him up: and forthwith his feet and soles received strength.

Act 5:1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Saphira his wife, sold a piece of land,
Act 5:2 And by fraud kept back part of the price of the land, his wife being privy thereunto: and bringing a certain part of it, laid it at the feet of the apostles.
Act 5:3 But Peter said: Ananias, why hath Satan tempted thy heart, that thou shouldst lie to the Holy Ghost and by fraud keep part of the price of the land?
Act 5:4 Whilst it remained, did it not remain to thee? And after it was sold, was it not in thy power? Why hast thou conceived this thing in thy heart? Thou hast not lied to men, but to God.
Act 5:5 And Ananias, hearing these words, fell down and gave up the ghost. And there came great fear upon all that heard it.
Act 5:6 And the young men rising up, removed him, and carrying him out, buried him.
Act 5:7 And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what had happened, came in.
Act 5:8 And Peter said to her: Tell me, woman, whether you sold the land for so much? And she said: Yea, for so much.
Act 5:9 And Peter said unto her: Why have you agreed together to tempt the spirit of the Lord? Behold the feet of them who have buried thy husband are at the door: and they shall carry thee out,
Act 5:10 Immediately, she fell down before his feet and gave up the ghost. And the young men coming in found her dead: and carried her out and buried her by her husband.
Act 5:11 And there came great fear upon the whole church and upon all that heard these things.

Act 8:21 Thou hast no part nor lot in this matter. For thy heart is not right in the sight of God. **

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

**Act 10:44 While Peter was yet speaking these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them that heard the word.
Act 10:45 And the faithful of the circumcision, who came with Peter, were astonished for that the grace of the Holy Ghost was poured out upon the Gentiles also.
Act 10:46 For they heard them speaking with tongues and magnifying God.

Act 15:7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter, rising up, said to them: Men, brethren, you know that in former days God made choice among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.

Act 15:19 For which cause, judge that they who from among the Gentiles are converted to God are not to be disquieted:

Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema.**

Peter’s name always heads the list of Apostles

**Mat 10:1 And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities.
Mat 10:2 And the names of the twelve Apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother,
Mat 10:3 James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus,
Mat 10:4 Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.

Mar 3:16 And to Simon he gave the name Peter:
Mar 3:17 And James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and he named them Boanerges, which is, The sons of thunder.
Mar 3:18 And Andrew and Philip, and Bartholomew and Matthew, and Thomas and James of Alpheus, and Thaddeus and Simon the Cananean:
Mar 3:19 And Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.

Luk 6:14 Simon, whom he surnamed Peter, and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew,
Luk 6:15 Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alpheus, and Simon who is called Zelotes,
Luk 6:16 And Jude the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, who was the traitor.

Act 1:13 And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode Peter and John, James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James of Alpheus and Simon Zelotes and Jude the brother of James.**

Peter and his companions

**Luk 9:32 But Peter and they that were with him were heavy with sleep. And waking, they saw his glory and the two men that stood with him.

Mar 16:7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee. There you shall see him, as he told you.**

Peter spoke for the Apostles

**Mat 18:21 Then came Peter unto him and said: Lord, how often shall my brother offend against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?

Mar 8:29 Then he saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? Peter answering said to him: Thou art the Christ.

Luk 8:45 And Jesus said: Who is it that touched me? And all denying, Peter and they that were with him said: Master, the multitudes throng and press thee; and dost thou say, who touched me?

Luk 12:41 And Peter said to him: Lord, dost thou speak this parable to us, or likewise to all?

Joh 6:68 (6:69) And Simon Peter answered him: Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. **

Peter’s name appears 195 times in the New Testament, more than all the other Apostles put together.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Clement of Rome
Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobeys the things which have been said by him [Jesus] through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in no small danger. We, however, shall be innocent of this sin and will pray with entreaty and supplication that the Creator of all may keep unharmed the number of his elect (Letter to the Corinthians 58:2, 59:1[A.D. 95]).
Ignatius of Antioch
You [the See of Rome] have envied no one, but others have you taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force (Epistle to the Romans 3:1 [A.D. 110]).
Irenaeus
But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles. Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition (Against Heresies 3:3:2 [inter A.D. 180-190]).
Clement of Alexandria
[T]he blessed Peter, the chosen, the preeminent, the first among the disciples, for whom alone with himself the Savior paid the tribute [Matt. 17:27], quickly grasped and understood their meaning. And what does he say? “Behold, we have left all and have followed you” [Matt. 19:2 7, Mark 10:28] (Who is the Rich Man That is Saved? 21:3-5 [A.D. 200]).
Tertullian
[T]he Lord said to Peter, “On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven” [Matt. 16:18-19]. … Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church; and whatever you shall have bound or you shall have loosed, not what they shall have bound or they shall have loosed (Modesty 21:9-10 [A.D. 220]).
Letter of Clement to James
Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first-fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D, 221]).
Cyprian
With a false bishop appointed for themselves by heretics, they dare even to set sail and carry letters from schismatics and blasphemers to the Chair of Peter and to the principal church [at Rome], in which sacerdotal unity has its source" (Epistle to Cornelius [Bishop of Rome] 59:14 [A.D. 252]).
The Lord says to Peter: “I say to you,” he says, “that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church” . . . On him he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was , but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church? (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4 [A.D. 251]).
Cyril of Jerusalem
In the power of the same Holy Spirit, Peter, both the chief of the apostles and the keeper of the keys of the kingdom of heaven, in the name of Christ healed Aeneas the paralytic at Lydda, which is now called Diospolis [Acts 9 ;3 2-3 4] (Catechetical Lectures 17;27 [A.D. 350]).
Optatus
In the city of Rome the Episcopal chair was given first to Peter, the chair in which Peter sat, the same who was head — that is why he is also called Cephas — of all the apostles, the one chair in which unity is maintained by all. Neither do the apostles proceed individually on their own, and anyone who would [presume to] set up another chair in opposition to that single chair would, by that very fact, be a schismatic and a sinner. . . . Recall, then, the origins of your chair, those of you who wish to claim for yourselves the title of holy Church" (The Schism of the Donatists 2:2 [circa A.D. 367]).
Ambrose of Milan
[Christ] made answer: “You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church . . .” Could he not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on his own authority, he gave the kingdom, whom he called the rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church [Matt. 16:18]? (The Faith 4:5 [A.D. 379]).
Augustine
Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear “I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Sermons 295:2 [A.D. 411]).
Who is ignorant that the first of the apostles is the most blessed Peter? (Commentary on John 56:1 [A.D. 416]).

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The primacy of Peter has always been, since the scriptures were written and documented in the writings of the early Church fathers. It is logically there, in all respects. One either chooses to believe, or reject, usually the latter is to fit scriptures to a theology. I prefer the former, which is to fit a theology to scriptures.

 

[Daniel_Keeran]

Clement of Rome
Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . .

None of the scriptures you list explicitly define and identify the office of Pope with qualifications for successors. The quotes from the early post-NT literature provide good documentation of the emergence of the papacy but not its defined existence from the beginning.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

None of the scriptures you list explicitly define and identify the office of Pope with qualifications for successors. The quotes from the early post-NT literature provide good documentation of the emergence of the papacy but not its defined existence from the beginning.

See, now we’re back to private interpretation of scriptures. Catholics are united on the scriptures provided, but Protestants have several different views according to their individual interpretation.

Those examples show that Christ was chosen by God and verified in the words of our Lord, the Son.

Mat 16:17 And Jesus answering said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven.
Mat 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Mat 16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

Christ singled Peter out before the ascension. When Peter brought up the other Apostle, the Lord specified that Peter had a task commanded of Him.

**Joh 21:14 This is now the third time that Jesus was manifested to his disciples, after he was risen from the dead.
Joh 21:15 When therefore they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me more than these? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs.
Joh 21:16 He saith to him again: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? He saith to him: yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs.
Joh 21:17 He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep.
Joh 21:18 Amen, amen, I say to thee, When thou wast younger, thou didst gird thyself and didst walk where thou wouldst. But when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee and lead thee whither thou wouldst not.
Joh 21:19 And this he said, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had said this, he saith to him: Follow me.
Joh 21:20 Peter turning about, saw that disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also leaned on his breast at supper and said: Lord, who is he that shall betray thee?
Joh 21:21 Him therefore when Peter had seen, he saith to Jesus: Lord, and what shall this man do?
Joh 21:22 Jesus saith to him: So I will have him to remain till I come, what is it to thee? Follow thou me.
Joh 21:23 This saying therefore went abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die. And Jesus did not say to him: He should not die; but: So I will have him to remain till I come, what is it to thee? **

There was no question of the primacy of Peter until after the Protestant reformation in the 1500. This makes questioning his primacy a product of modern day thinking, or thinking far removed from the ordination and belief itself. Who do you purpose we listen too and please verify that person’s authority so we can understand where we are in error?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

None of the scriptures you list explicitly define and identify the office of Pope with qualifications for successors. The quotes from the early post-NT literature provide good documentation of the emergence of the papacy but not its defined existence from the beginning.

If you’re specifically looking for the word “Pope” in scriptures, it’s not there, just as sola scriptura is not there and any scriptures supporting private interpretation is not there.

The scriptures provided clearly show Peter was set apart, in a leadership position, with the power to bind and loose. Apostolic succession is clearly shown, as called for by Peter.

As I said, we’re at an impasse over interpretation. By what authority can you say my interpretation is incorrect?

 

[Daniel_Keeran]

If you’re specifically looking for the word “Pope” in scriptures, it’s not there, just as sola scriptura is not there and any scriptures supporting private interpretation is not there.

The scriptures provided clearly show Peter was set apart, in a leadership position, with the power to bind and loose. Apostolic succession is clearly shown, as called for by Peter.

As I said, we’re at an impasse over interpretation. By what authority can you say my interpretation is incorrect?

Scriptures that show Peter was A LEADER do not state he was THE LEADER of the apostles or of the church on earth. If Peter was to occupy the office of head of the church on earth with qualifications for successors, there is not a single mention of him in scripture in such an office.

Jesus gave power to bind and loose to all the apostles:

Matthew 18:1 “At that time **the disciples **came to Jesus…15"If your brother sins against you,go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ 17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. 18"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. 19"Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. 20For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them.”

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

If Peter was to occupy the office of head of the church on earth with qualifications for successors, there is not a single mention of him in scripture in such an office.

According to your private interpretation.

I have shown where Christ told Peter his confession of faith was made known to him by the Father who is in heaven. I have shown where Christ stated He would built His Church upon Kipha, Peter. I have shown where Christ told Peter He would give Him the keys to the kingdom of heaven. I have shown where the typology of keys was told in Isaiah 22:22 and 1 Chronicles 9. I have shown where Christ told Peter, whatsoever he bound on earth would be bound in heaven and whatsoever he loosed on earth would be loosed in heaven. I have shown the significance of name changes in scriptures. I have shown where Peter stood up at the council of Jerusalem and the arguing stopped. I have shown you where Peter called for the replacement of Judas Iscariot. I have shown where Peter spoke after Pentecost and thousands were converted. I have shown where Peter healed…

Christ said there would be one shepherd and one flock. Christ told Peter 3 TIMES to feed his sheep.

How much proof do you need? You appear to accept the belief of sola scriptura, yet that teaching is NOWHERE in scriptures…

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Scriptures that show Peter was A LEADER do not state he was THE LEADER of the apostles or of the church on earth. If Peter was to occupy the office of head of the church on earth with qualifications for successors, there is not a single mention of him in scripture in such an office.

Jesus gave power to bind and loose to all the apostles:

Matthew 18:1 “At that time **the disciples **came to Jesus…15"If your brother sins against you,go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ 17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. 18"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. 19"Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. 20For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them.”

Let’s look at the passage you’re providing, yet leaving some out whether intentionally or not is debatable at this time. Who spoke for the Apostles for a clarification of Christ’s words about the authority of His Church?

Mat 18:21 Then came Peter unto him and said: Lord, how often shall my brother offend against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?

You, in my opinion, offer one example of a private interpretation, with only a portion provided to support your view. I have offered many examples of Peter’s leadership. I offered the writings of the early Church fathers, some who were successors, affirming Peter’s role in the Church, yet I should change my thinking for your one example, again, taken out of context in my opinion.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Jesus gave power to bind and loose to all the apostles:

Before Christ gave the power to bind and loose to ALL the Apostles, He gave it to Peter first. The same author that wrote and told us about Christ affirming the authority of His Church, wrote and told us that Christ first gave the Authority to the one He gave the keys to the kingdom of heaven too. Leader first, others secondly…

 

[Daniel_Keeran]

According to your private interpretation.

I have shown where Christ told Peter his confession of faith was made known to him by the Father who is in heaven.

Peter WITH the confession of Christ, is Rock, not Peter alone.

I have shown where Christ stated He would built His Church upon Kipha, Peter. I have shown where Christ told Peter He would give Him the keys to the kingdom of heaven. I have shown where the typology of keys was told in Isaiah 22:22 and 1 Chronicles 9.

Peter WITH the confession of Christ, is Rock, not Peter alone.
Keys may refer to the role of Peter to first open the kingdom to Jews (Acts 2) and Gentiles (Acts 10). Peter as THE HEAD of the church on earth is not mentioned or played out in scripture. You read too much into OT passages re a full blown infallible office with successors.

I have shown where Christ told Peter, whatsoever he bound on earth would be bound in heaven and whatsoever he loosed on earth would be loosed in heaven.

Spoken to all the apostles in Matt.18

I have shown the significance of name changes in scriptures.

Yes, Simon WITH his confession of Christ, is Peter the Rock, but not Peter alone.

I have shown where Peter stood up at the council of Jerusalem and the arguing stopped.

The passage conspicuously leaves out any mention of Peter as THE HEAD of the church. There were no other ecumenicsl councils until Nicea called by Constantine which is proof of the lack of successors to Peter as Pope. There is not a single claim or proclamation from anyone claiming authority as singular head of the church until Victor blunders onto the scene with his error. This has to mean there was no intended establishment of an office for the voice of Christ on earth.

I have shown you where Peter called for the replacement of Judas Iscariot.

Yes, Peter exercised leadership but was not THE LEADER of the apostles nor of the church.

I have shown where Peter spoke after Pentecost and thousands were converted.

Yes, perhaps he used the keys to open the kingdom.

I have shown where Peter healed…

Not relevant.

Christ said there would be one shepherd and one flock. Christ told Peter 3 TIMES to feed his sheep.

The one shepherd is Christ, and it was he who reinstated Peter 3 times corresponding to his 3 denials. All the apostles were shepherds.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Peter WITH the confession of Christ, is Rock, not Peter alone.

Peter WITH the confession of Christ, is Rock, not Peter alone.
Keys may refer to the role of Peter to first open the kingdom to Jews (Acts 2) and Gentiles (Acts 10). Peter as THE HEAD of the church on earth is not mentioned or played out in scripture. You read too much into OT passages re a full blown infallible office with successors.

Spoken to all the apostles in Matt.18

Yes, Simon WITH his confession of Christ, is Peter the Rock, but not Peter alone.

The passage conspicuously leaves out any mention of Peter as THE HEAD of the church. There were no other ecumenicsl councils until Nicea called by Constantine which is proof of the lack of successors to Peter as Pope. There is not a single claim or proclamation from anyone claiming authority as singular head of the church until Victor blunders onto the scene with his error. This has to mean there was no intended establishment of an office for the voice of Christ on earth.

Yes, Peter exercised leadership but was not THE LEADER of the apostles nor of the church.

Yes, perhaps he used the keys to open the kingdom.

Not relevant.

The one shepherd is Christ, and it was he who reinstated Peter 3 times corresponding to his 3 denials. All the apostles were shepherds.

Again, and last time for me I despise circular discussions, according to your private interpretation. Where do you get authority to tell another their interpretation is wrong?

Please show any documentation for your interpretations since the beginning of Christ’s Church. The interpretations I have provided come from 2000 years of Church history.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Keys may refer to the role of Peter to first open the kingdom to Jews (Acts 2) and Gentiles (Acts 10). Peter as THE HEAD of the church on earth is not mentioned or played out in scripture. You read too much into OT passages re a full blown infallible office with successors.

The Old Testament prefigures the New and the New fulfills the Old. Let’s phrase it this way. You don’t read enough into the prophecies of the Old Testament.

Spoken to all the apostles in Matt.18

Spoken only to Peter in Matthew 16.

Not relevant.

Is that supposed to be a masterful refutation of all the scriptures, explanations and early Church father writings?

The one shepherd is Christ, and it was he who reinstated Peter 3 times corresponding to his 3 denials. All the apostles were shepherds.

And you really can’t see the asking Peter 3 times was a reversal of Peter’s denial? Christ was about to leave the earth, until He returns again. He was not abandoning His Church or His teachings. He was making sure Peter understood his appointment.

Please, please, please, tell me where your authority to say another’s interpretation is incorrect and that only your intepretation is correct comes from? You question the authority of the Catholic Church but fail to address where your authority comes from!!!

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

You read too much into OT passages re a full blown infallible office with successors.

Did I read too much into Peter’s name always being first when the Apostles are listed by name?

Did I read too much into Peter always speaking for all the Apostles?

Did I read too much into Peter being named in verses where those with him were not referred too by name? (But Peter and they that were with him… But go, tell his disciples and Peter…)

Did I read too much into Peter’s name appearing 195 times in the New Testament, more than all the other Apostles put together?

 

[pipper]

None of the scriptures you list explicitly define and identify the office of Pope with qualifications for successors. The quotes from the early post-NT literature provide good documentation of the emergence of the papacy but not its defined existence from the beginning.

Daniel, you will never give up until you try and proseletyse every single Catholic into your self named “Church of Christ”, will you?

We have very different frames of reference, don’t you realise that? Not a single person here will agreea with your criteria, that everything absolutely must “explicitly define and identify” most anything at all.

We do absolutely, not agree with your “sola scriptura” argument and you have been trying to persuade us with your snipping of the Fathers for over 30 pages in the “babies who die without baptism” thread alone.

Please give it up, I know you are extremely stubborn, well so am I having come from the same background, and I know how people in the church of Christ love to argue, but please throw in the towel, people here are strong in their Catholic Christian faith and you won’t convert a soul.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Daniel, is it your goal to proseltyze Catholics away from the Catholic Church and become members in another Church?

 

[pipper]

The Old Testament prefigures the New and the New fulfills the Old. Let’s phrase it this way. You don’t read enough into the prophecies of the Old Testament.

Spoken only to Peter in Matthew 16.

Is that supposed to be a masterful refutation of all the scriptures, explanations and early Church father writings?

And you really can’t see the asking Peter 3 times was a reversal of Peter’s denial? Christ was about to leave the earth, until He returns again. He was not abandoning His Church or His teachings. He was making sure Peter understood his appointment.

Please, please, please, tell me where your authority to say another’s interpretation is incorrect and that only your intepretation is correct comes from? You question the authority of the Catholic Church but fail to address where your authority comes from!!!

PS1., Dan’s authority he will say comes from Sola Scritura, which to him means his authority comes from God, since he believes God wrote or dictated the Bible word-for-word.

He is a member of the so-called, one and only “church of Christ.” They beleive they are the only church contianing the ONLY Christians. This is in spite of the fact his denomination never existed before 1906, people born before 1906 are all going to hell. They also think the true church stopped following the Bible exclusively and ceased to exist until the founders of his denomination (Alexander and Thomas Campbell, Barton Stone, Ben Franklin and others) restored the church back into existence.

You are wasting your key strokes conversing with him.