Which church is God's true church? Is it the Roman Catholic Church?

[catholiconce]

Again, read the testimony of the early church fathers.
Do you need them to actually use the word “Pope” to believe he was the pope? Do you need to see the word “Trinity” in the bible to believe in the Trinity?

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. 19:27; Mark 10:28]” (Who Is the Rich Man That Is Saved? 21:3–5 [A.D. 200]).
All good points after the fact to prove what you already believe. Yes Peter was given the Keys to the kingdome and made head of the church. Is evertthing done and said by those that followed what Jesus would have wanted? If Peter was the first pope and all that he had done was as the church was to be Please explain the radical changes in Vatican II. The rules are changed in the middle of the game.

Tertullian
“For though you think that heaven is still shut up, remember that the Lord left the keys of it to Peter here, and through him to the Church, which keys everyone will carry with him if he has been questioned and made a confession [of faith]” (Antidote Against the Scorpion 10 [A.D. 211]).

“[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” (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).

The 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]).

Origen
“*f we were to attend carefully to the Gospels, we should also find, in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter . . . a great difference and a preeminence in the things [Jesus] said to Peter, compared with the second class [of apostles]. For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in [all] the heavens, as in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage with power as Peter to bind and loose in all the heavens” (Commentary on Matthew 13:31 [A.D. 248]).

Cyprian of Carthage*
“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 [Peter] 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; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).

Cyril of Jerusalem*
“The Lord is loving toward men, swift to pardon but slow to punish. Let no man despair of his own salvation. Peter, the first and foremost of the apostles, denied the Lord three times before a little servant girl, but he repented and wept bitterly” (Catechetical Lectures 2:19 [A.D. 350]).

“[Simon Magus] so deceived the city of Rome that Claudius erected a statue of him. . . . While the error was extending itself, Peter and Paul arrived, a noble pair and the rulers of the Church, and they set the error aright. . . . [T]hey launched the weapon of their like-mindedness in prayer against the Magus, and struck him down to earth. It was marvelous enough, and yet no marvel at all, for Peter was there—he that carries about the keys of heaven [Matt. 16:19]” (ibid., 6:14).

“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 9:32–34]” (ibid., 17:27).

Ephraim the Syrian
“[Jesus said:] Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on Earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples. Yours is that life-giving sweetness which I dispense. I have chosen you to be, as it were, the firstborn in my institution so that, as the heir, you may be executor of my treasures. I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, I have given you authority over all my treasures” (Homilies 4:1 [A.D. 351]).

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]).

Pope Damasus I
“Likewise it is decreed . . . that it ought to be announced that . . . the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither stain nor blemish nor anything like it” (Decree of Damasus 3 [A.D. 382]).

Jerome
“‘But,’ you [Jovinian] will say, ‘it was on Peter that the Church was founded’ [Matt. 16:18]. Well . . . one among the twelve is chosen to be their head in order to remove any occasion for division” (Against Jovinian 1:26 [A.D. 393]).

“Simon Peter, the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the apostle, and himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion . . . pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magus, and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord” (Lives of Illustrious Men 1 [A.D. 396]).

Pope Innocent I
“In seeking the things of God . . . you have acknowledged that judgment is to be referred to us [the pope], and have shown that you know that is owed to the Apostolic See [Rome], if all of us placed in this position are to desire to follow the apostle himself [Peter] from whom the episcopate itself and the total authority of this name have emerged” (Letters 29:1 [A.D. 408]).

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]).

“Some things are said which seem to relate especially to the apostle Peter, and yet are not clear in their meaning unless referred to the Church, which he is acknowledged to have represented in a figure on account of the primacy which he bore among the disciples. Such is ‘I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ and other similar passages. In the same way, Judas represents those Jews who were Christ’s enemies” (Commentary on Psalm 108 1 [A.D. 415]).

“Who is ignorant that the first of the apostles is the most blessed Peter?” (Commentary on John 56:1 [A.D. 416]).

Council of Ephesus
“Philip, presbyter and legate of [Pope Celestine I] said: ‘We offer our thanks to the holy and venerable synod, that when the writings of our holy and blessed pope had been read to you . . . you joined yourselves to the holy head also by your holy acclamations. For your blessednesses is not ignorant that the head of the whole faith, the head of the apostles, is blessed Peter the apostle’” (Acts of the Council, session 2 [A.D. 431]).

“Philip, the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See [Rome] said: ‘There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors’” (ibid., session 3).

Pope Leo I
“Our Lord Jesus Christ . . . has placed the principal charge on the blessed Peter, chief of all the apostles, and from him as from the head wishes his gifts to flow to all the body, so that anyone who dares to secede from Peter’s solid rock may understand that he has no part or lot in the divine mystery. He wished him who had been received into partnership in his undivided unity to be named what he himself was, when he said: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church’ [Matt. 16:18], that the building of the eternal temple might rest on Peter’s solid rock, strengthening his Church so surely that neither could human rashness assail it nor the gates of hell prevail against it” (Letters 10:1 [A.D. 445).

“Our Lord Jesus Christ . . . established the worship belonging to the divine [Christian] religion. . . . But the Lord desired that the sacrament of this gift should pertain to all the apostles in such a way that it might be found principally in the most blessed Peter, the highest of all the apostles. And he wanted his gifts to flow into the entire body from Peter himself, as if from the head, in such a way that anyone who had dared to separate himself from the solidarity of Peter would realize that he was himself no longer a sharer in the divine mystery” (ibid., 10:2–3).

“Although bishops have a common dignity, they are not all of the same rank. Even among the most blessed apostles, though they were alike in honor, there was a certain distinction of power. All were equal in being chosen, but it was given to one to be preeminent over the others. . . . [So today through the bishops] the care of the universal Church would converge in the one See of Peter, and nothing should ever be at odds with this head” (ibid., 14:11).

 

[justasking4]

Again, read the testimony of the early church fathers.
Do you need them to actually use the word “Pope” to believe he was the pope? Do you need to see the word “Trinity” in the bible to believe in the Trinity?

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. 19:27; Mark 10:28]” (Who Is the Rich Man That Is Saved? 21:3–5 [A.D. 200]).

Tertullian
“For though you think that heaven is still shut up, remember that the Lord left the keys of it to Peter here, and through him to the Church, which keys everyone will carry with him if he has been questioned and made a confession [of faith]” (Antidote Against the Scorpion 10 [A.D. 211]).

“[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” (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).

The 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]).

Origen
“*f we were to attend carefully to the Gospels, we should also find, in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter . . . a great difference and a preeminence in the things [Jesus] said to Peter, compared with the second class [of apostles]. For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in [all] the heavens, as in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage with power as Peter to bind and loose in all the heavens” (Commentary on Matthew 13:31 [A.D. 248]).

Cyprian of Carthage*
“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 [Peter] 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; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).

Cyril of Jerusalem*
“The Lord is loving toward men, swift to pardon but slow to punish. Let no man despair of his own salvation. Peter, the first and foremost of the apostles, denied the Lord three times before a little servant girl, but he repented and wept bitterly” (Catechetical Lectures 2:19 [A.D. 350]).

“[Simon Magus] so deceived the city of Rome that Claudius erected a statue of him. . . . While the error was extending itself, Peter and Paul arrived, a noble pair and the rulers of the Church, and they set the error aright. . . . [T]hey launched the weapon of their like-mindedness in prayer against the Magus, and struck him down to earth. It was marvelous enough, and yet no marvel at all, for Peter was there—he that carries about the keys of heaven [Matt. 16:19]” (ibid., 6:14).

“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 9:32–34]” (ibid., 17:27).

Ephraim the Syrian
“[Jesus said:] Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on Earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples. Yours is that life-giving sweetness which I dispense. I have chosen you to be, as it were, the firstborn in my institution so that, as the heir, you may be executor of my treasures. I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, I have given you authority over all my treasures” (Homilies 4:1 [A.D. 351]).

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]).

Pope Damasus I
“Likewise it is decreed . . . that it ought to be announced that . . . the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither stain nor blemish nor anything like it” (Decree of Damasus 3 [A.D. 382]).

Jerome
“‘But,’ you [Jovinian] will say, ‘it was on Peter that the Church was founded’ [Matt. 16:18]. Well . . . one among the twelve is chosen to be their head in order to remove any occasion for division” (Against Jovinian 1:26 [A.D. 393]).

“Simon Peter, the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the apostle, and himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion . . . pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magus, and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord” (Lives of Illustrious Men 1 [A.D. 396]).

Pope Innocent I
“In seeking the things of God . . . you have acknowledged that judgment is to be referred to us [the pope], and have shown that you know that is owed to the Apostolic See [Rome], if all of us placed in this position are to desire to follow the apostle himself [Peter] from whom the episcopate itself and the total authority of this name have emerged” (Letters 29:1 [A.D. 408]).

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]).

“Some things are said which seem to relate especially to the apostle Peter, and yet are not clear in their meaning unless referred to the Church, which he is acknowledged to have represented in a figure on account of the primacy which he bore among the disciples. Such is ‘I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ and other similar passages. In the same way, Judas represents those Jews who were Christ’s enemies” (Commentary on Psalm 108 1 [A.D. 415]).

“Who is ignorant that the first of the apostles is the most blessed Peter?” (Commentary on John 56:1 [A.D. 416]).

Council of Ephesus
“Philip, presbyter and legate of [Pope Celestine I] said: ‘We offer our thanks to the holy and venerable synod, that when the writings of our holy and blessed pope had been read to you . . . you joined yourselves to the holy head also by your holy acclamations. For your blessednesses is not ignorant that the head of the whole faith, the head of the apostles, is blessed Peter the apostle’” (Acts of the Council, session 2 [A.D. 431]).

“Philip, the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See [Rome] said: ‘There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors’” (ibid., session 3).

Pope Leo I
“Our Lord Jesus Christ . . . has placed the principal charge on the blessed Peter, chief of all the apostles, and from him as from the head wishes his gifts to flow to all the body, so that anyone who dares to secede from Peter’s solid rock may understand that he has no part or lot in the divine mystery. He wished him who had been received into partnership in his undivided unity to be named what he himself was, when he said: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church’ [Matt. 16:18], that the building of the eternal temple might rest on Peter’s solid rock, strengthening his Church so surely that neither could human rashness assail it nor the gates of hell prevail against it” (Letters 10:1 [A.D. 445).

“Our Lord Jesus Christ . . . established the worship belonging to the divine [Christian] religion. . . . But the Lord desired that the sacrament of this gift should pertain to all the apostles in such a way that it might be found principally in the most blessed Peter, the highest of all the apostles. And he wanted his gifts to flow into the entire body from Peter himself, as if from the head, in such a way that anyone who had dared to separate himself from the solidarity of Peter would realize that he was himself no longer a sharer in the divine mystery” (ibid., 10:2–3).

“Although bishops have a common dignity, they are not all of the same rank. Even among the most blessed apostles, though they were alike in honor, there was a certain distinction of power. All were equal in being chosen, but it was given to one to be preeminent over the others. . . . [So today through the bishops] the care of the universal Church would converge in the one See of Peter, and nothing should ever be at odds with this head” (ibid., 14:11).
i’m familar with these claims. I’m familar what Peter did in the Scriptures but i have yet to see exactly what he did in Rome. There must be something that we can see what he did while he was there as head of the entire church.

 

[MDK]

i’m familar with these claims. I’m familar what Peter did in the Scriptures but i have yet to see exactly what he did in Rome. There must be something that we can see what he did while he was there as head of the entire church.

Denial isn’t a river in Egypt. When one denies and misinterprets the evidence, then there is never sufficient evidence. One must be seeking truth, and seeking to truly follow Christ in order to see and believe. One will never believe truth, who does not want to believe truth.

You imply something that isn’t true in claiming that you are familiar with what Peter did in Scriptures. One of the most critical things is in Matthew, where he is conferred as Rock of the Church, and given the Keys of Heaven. If you are familiar with what happened in Scriptures, then do you admit that Jesus made Peter the rock of the Church and endowed Him with authority that He gave to no other Apostle?

 

[guanophore]

i’m familar with these claims. I’m familar what Peter did in the Scriptures but i have yet to see exactly what he did in Rome. There must be something that we can see what he did while he was there as head of the entire church.

Well, he was not appointed to that job in Rome, but by Jesus, in Palestine. His appointment did not vanish just because he relocated! That is like saying, if Bush leaves WAsh. DC, he is no longer President!

Anyway, Jesus is Head of the Church. The Pope is just His visible stand in (Vicar).

 

[MDK]

The word Protestant is such a 16th century word. I am not anti Catholic or protesting anything

Okay, even so, do you understand the main point being made in PerryJ’s post?

Besides, Catholic is such a 100 AD word, and 200 AD, and 300 AD, and… 2000, and… all of which is good.

If I was in a church founded in 1500’s by a man who wasn’t Christ, who had no authority to make his own doctrine, I wouldn’t feel comfortable about being reminded of it. But then, once I knew that about it, I wouldn’t be in that kind of faith system another millisecond.

 

[steve_b]

This is an important question since so much is claimed that he was the first pope and the Roman Catholic church derives its authority after Christ from Peter and this location.

It’s not the city per se that’s important it’s Peter and where HE or his successors are that’s important.

Peter spent some time in Antioch, but he went to Rome, and was martyred in Rome.
justask:

If Peter was a pope and this is where his chair is then we should see some evidence that he was in Rome known as a pope.

• Peter writes his 1st epistle in Rome
• Ignatius, 1st century bishop of Antioch, one time see of St Peter, disciple of St John, wrote 6 letters to 6 Churches on his way to Rome to be martyred. In all 6 letters, 5 written to Churches in the East, and one written to the Church in the West (Rome), of all these Churches, Ignatius said, the Church of Rome held the presidency. He didn’t say Antioch, even though Peter spent time there.
• After Ignatius, Irenaeus who was from Smyrna (in the East) made bishop of Lyons (France) by the pope. Irenaeus writes (emphasis mine) "Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere." Adversus Haereses (Book III, Chapter 3) read online
  Notice, re: Irenaeus, the pope in Rome establishes Irenaeus an Easterner, Bishop in a Western Region. And nobody either East or West says anything about this? No argument about juristiction. Irenaeus wrote this ~180 a.d. And Irenaeus who came from the East, disciple of Bp Polycarp, who was a discilple of St John the apostle, says everyone everywhere (i.e. East, West, North, South) must agree with Rome because of its pre-eminent authority. Based on what you ask? That the Church of Rome was built up and established by Peter and Paul. And of course because Rome is Peter’s see. All agree with this

If we want to look at a 1st century example, we can quote pope Clement of Rome who settles sedition among bishops in Corinth Greece. Again, because Clement is the successor to Peter. His letter is also available online.

 

[justasking4]

Well, he was not appointed to that job in Rome, but by Jesus, in Palestine. His appointment did not vanish just because he relocated! That is like saying, if Bush leaves WAsh. DC, he is no longer President!

Anyway, Jesus is Head of the Church. The Pope is just His visible stand in (Vicar).

Does not the church claim Peter was the first pope and his ruling place was in Rome? Is this not what the Roman Catholic church claims?

 

[justasking4]

Denial isn’t a river in Egypt. When one denies and misinterprets the evidence, then there is never sufficient evidence. One must be seeking truth, and seeking to truly follow Christ in order to see and believe. One will never believe truth, who does not want to believe truth.

You imply something that isn’t true in claiming that you are familiar with what Peter did in Scriptures. One of the most critical things is in Matthew, where he is conferred as Rock of the Church, and given the Keys of Heaven. If you are familiar with what happened in Scriptures, then do you admit that Jesus made Peter the rock of the Church and endowed Him with authority that He gave to no other Apostle?

There has been much debate on what you write here. It is true that Peter was the first to open the door for people to enter the kingdom. We see this in the early chapters of Acts. He was not the only to do so. Paul also had such authority. So did the other apostles.

 

[MDK]

guanophore;4083026:

Well, he was not appointed to that job in Rome, but by Jesus, in Palestine. His appointment did not vanish just because he relocated! That is like saying, if Bush leaves WAsh. DC, he is no longer President!

Anyway, Jesus is Head of the Church. The Pope is just His visible stand in (Vicar).

Does not the church claim Peter was the first pope and his ruling place was in Rome? Is this not what the Roman Catholic church claims?

Go back and read it again.

That’s exactly what guanophore is saying. Christ endowed Kepha (Peter) with this position and authority while in Palestine, and Peter didn’t lose it by traveling to Rome.

 

[justasking4]

Go back and read it again.

That’s exactly what guanophore is saying. Christ endowed Kepha (Peter) with this position and authority while in Palestine, and Peter didn’t lose it by traveling to Rome.

Where do we see Peter ruling from Rome? Between the time of the resurrection and the death of Peter is there any record that he was known as the leader of the church at Rome?

 

[MDK]

MDK;4082979:

Denial isn’t a river in Egypt. When one denies and misinterprets the evidence, then there is never sufficient evidence. One must be seeking truth, and seeking to truly follow Christ in order to see and believe. One will never believe truth, who does not want to believe truth.

You imply something that isn’t true in claiming that you are familiar with what Peter did in Scriptures. One of the most critical things is in Matthew, where he is conferred as Rock of the Church, and given the Keys of Heaven. If you are familiar with what happened in Scriptures, then do you admit that Jesus made Peter the rock of the Church and endowed Him with authority that He gave to no other Apostle?

There has been much debate on what you write here. It is true that Peter was the first to open the door for people to enter the kingdom. We see this in the early chapters of Acts. He was not the only to do so. Paul also had such authority. So did the other apostles.

Ahhh, you cleverly, but dishonestly dodge my question. If it’s clear, then why don’t you come out an say it. That you have to dodge the painful truth for you tells me that you know the truth doesn’t support what you want, but still won’t go with the truth. My post was asking if you do admit Peter’s primacy, which is something I haven’t seen you do… I’ll lay it out again, and please don’t dodge it again… Since you claim familiarity with Peter in Scriptures (which implies the correct interpretation, not just that something was written).

1. Do you now admit that Jesus made Peter the Rock of the Church?
2. Do you admit that the Keys given only to Peter were a symbol of authority not given to any other Apostle. The statement of Christ that they were the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven… was that made to any other Apostle?

 

[MDK]

Where do we see Peter ruling from Rome? Between the time of the resurrection and the death of Peter is there any record that he was known as the leader of the church at Rome?

Where do you see it… I don’t know. I don’t know that you honestly ever will. No matter how much evidence we have, you say it’s never enough.

Why don’t you try it from another angle… do you have any proof that Peter did not go to Rome?

 

[justasking4]

MDK;4083298]Ahhh, you cleverly, but dishonestly dodge my question. If it’s clear, then why don’t you come out an say it. That you have to dodge the painful truth for you tells me that you know the truth doesn’t support what you want, but still won’t go with the truth. My post was asking if you do admit Peter’s primacy, which is something I haven’t seen you do… I’ll lay it out again, and please don’t dodge it again… Since you claim familiarity with Peter in Scriptures (which implies the correct interpretation, not just that something was written).

1. Do you now admit that Jesus made Peter the Rock of the Church?

Before i answer (not dodge) what does it mean Peter is the rock? Is he himself what the church is built on?

1. Do you admit that the Keys given only to Peter were a symbol of authority not given to any other Apostle.

Do not agree with this. The other apostles also had the authority i.e. keys to open the door to the kingdom via the preaching of the gospel.

The statement of Christ that they were the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven… was that made to any other Apostle?

Yes even though the same wording may not have been used.

 

[justasking4]

MDK;4083317]
Originally Posted by justasking4
Where do we see Peter ruling from Rome? Between the time of the resurrection and the death of Peter is there any record that he was known as the leader of the church at Rome?

MDK
Where do you see it… I don’t know. I don’t know that you honestly ever will. No matter how much evidence we have, you say it’s never enough.

I have yet to see any evidence of Peter ruling from Rome.

Why don’t you try it from another angle… do you have any proof that Peter did not go to Rome?

Its not mentioned as far as i know in Scripture that he was ever in rome. Take Paul’ letter to the Romans. In chapter 16 he mentions a lot of people in this letter who are in Rome but he never mentions Peter. I’m familar of a tradition that says he was marytred in Rome.

 

[MDK]

Before i answer (not dodge) what does it mean Peter is the rock? Is he himself what the church is built on?

Yes, Peter is the Rock of the Church. He is not the Ultimate Rock, which is Christ, but is Rock of the Church because of Christ who made Kepha the Rock of the Church. Christ works through the Rock of the Church to keep His Church from error in faith and morals. It was not on Peter’s merit, and Peter did not build the Church. Christ built His Church.

Do not agree with this. The other apostles also had the authority i.e. keys to open the door to the kingdom via the preaching of the gospel.

I hope you’re being paid by the dodge… clever, but once again, that’s not the question. The question was about the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven given only to Peter. I’ll word it a little differently, so it will give you the opportunity to pretend it’s a new question… Did Christ give Peter more authority, less authority, or exactly the same authority as the rest of the Apostles?

Yes even though the same wording may not have been used.

Where was this expressed or implied? Since you’re such a Scriptures kind of guy… where is it in Scriptures? I don’t believe it would have to be, but you do… so, let’s see it.

 

[MDK]

I have yet to see any evidence of Peter ruling from Rome.

You have to first get the first part. If you don’t admit that Peter was the head of the Apostles, the Rock of the Church established by Christ, then you’re just playing games here. I’m not at all interested in that.

Its not mentioned as far as i know in Scripture that he was ever in rome. Take Paul’ letter to the Romans. In chapter 16 he mentions a lot of people in this letter who are in Rome but he never mentions Peter. I’m familar of a tradition that says he was marytred in Rome.

Do you know what the political climate was in Rome at the time, and whether Peter was a target? What was a code word for Rome?

 

[justasking4]

MDK;4083403]Yes, Peter is the Rock of the Church. He is not the Ultimate Rock, which is Christ, but is Rock of the Church because of Christ who made Kepha the Rock of the Church. Christ works through the Rock of the Church to keep His Church from error in faith and morals. It was not on Peter’s merit, and Peter did not build the Church. Christ built His Church.

I hope you’re being paid by the dodge… clever, but once again, that’s not the question. The question was about the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven given only to Peter. I’ll word it a little differently, so it will give you the opportunity to pretend it’s a new question… Did Christ give Peter more authority, less authority, or exactly the same authority as the rest of the Apostles?

The same even though we see that he had much influnce. All apostles had the authority to preach the gospel and build the church. They all worked together.

Where was this expressed or implied? Since you’re such a Scriptures kind of guy… where is it in Scriptures? I don’t believe it would have to be, but you do… so, let’s see it.

Paul’s work among the churches he founded. He derived his authority directly from Christ. He never appeals to anyone for his authority.

 

[MDK]

The same even though we see that he had much influnce. All apostles had the authority to preach the gospel and build the church. They all worked together.

Doesn’t make sense. Why did Christ change Peter’s name if he didn’t have a lifechanging mission for him? Did God ever change anyone’s name and not have a special purpose for him? Abram to Abraham…, Saul to Paul, etc.

Paul’s work among the churches he founded. He derived his authority directly from Christ. He never appeals to anyone for his authority.

Once again… a dodge… That’s not really the question of having some authority from Christ. We know Christ gave them the Holy Spirit and sent them with a mission as the Father had sent Christ with a mission.

Let me refresh your memory about the line of question you are answering… “The statement of Christ that they were the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven… was that made to any other Apostle?”

Did any other Apostle receive the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven? Since you keep watering this down to some kind of general authority to preach, do you understand what the Keys symbolize and mean? What did they mean in the OT, which was a foreshadowing of the real to come?

 

[justasking4]

MDK;4083415]You have to first get the first part. If you don’t admit that Peter was the head of the Apostles, the Rock of the Church established by Christ, then you’re just playing games here. I’m not at all interested in that.

Do you know what the political climate was in Rome at the time, and whether Peter was a target?

i don’t know.

What was a code word for Rome?

Babylon?

 

[justasking4]

Doesn’t make sense. Why did Christ change Peter’s name if he didn’t have a lifechanging mission for him? Did God ever change anyone’s name and not have a special purpose for him? Abram to Abraham…, Saul to Paul, etc.

Once again… a dodge… That’s not really the question of having some authority from Christ. We know Christ gave them the Holy Spirit and sent them with a mission as the Father had sent Christ with a mission.

Let me refresh your memory about the line of question you are answering… “The statement of Christ that they were the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven… was that made to any other Apostle?”

Did any other Apostle receive the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven? Since you keep watering this down to some kind of general authority to preach, do you understand what the Keys symbolize and mean? What did they mean in the OT, which was a foreshadowing of the real to come?

I am somewhat familar with this. Lots of extrapolations are made to support this.