C
Why is Peter considered the first "Pope", if it was James who Peter and Paul answered to?
- Status
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Daniel,
Not to be silly…
God bless
Not to be silly…
but, Tertullian does not talk about what Peter wore or ate or exactly where he lived or traveled. Obviously Peter did all of these things - but, the lack of mention does not negate their reality.
God bless
T
tqualey
Guest
T
twb1621
Guest
You refused to answer the questions in Post 541 which was posted immediately before your response above.
You make such proclamations of your beliefs in opposition to the Teachings of Christ because you say they are not specifically in written form in Scripture yet I can not find the texts for your proclamations.
Provide the scriptural proof for your proclamations so we may all learn.
Only a hypocrite would claim to be a Christian yet defy and twist scripture and the early Teachers of the Christian faith with such arrogance without proof that these proclamations were inaccurate or deceitful unless of course he could provide such proof from that era by other ECF who certainly would have defended the Faith. Otherwise it would be to say they all were corrupt in their teachings. Seeing as how you are a writer and publically proclaim your version of Christianity in writing, please by all means provide that proof so all may learn. Otherwise you would be the one wo is According to Jesus’ own word, One of the many who will deceive others by twisting Scripture.
T
twb1621
Guest
Daniel Keeran
Reposted for your convenience to respond to;
Now you insist the only teachings of Jesus are those in the written Bible so answer these questions solely from Scriptural quotes as you claim all is needed.
Who saw to it that Paul was accepted by the others as one of them? How do you know? I’ll help you with this one; Peter did, the Bible says it.
What is the original contents supposed to be in the Bible and where is that information presented in Scripture?
Where is it in Scripture that other prophets would come to alter the contents of the Bible and that would be acceptable?
Where does Scripture provide the index or contents of the Bible?
Which Apostle provided the list for an index?
Have you compared your bible to the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate to be sure it has not been edited or censored and were the contents the same?
Where did the Bible you refer to originate from?
Where is it recorded that the Apostles or any of their faithful contemporaries gathered all the inspired Gospels and epistles and declared to the Christian world, “this will be the sole rule of faith after we have gone to the Lord.” ?
Where does it say, the written New Testament would supplant Church Teachings?
Where does it say that Christ intended to leave all His teachings in a single book, not in the Church, whether written, oral or otherwise?
Did Christ promise to give us an authoritative book, or did He promise us an authoritative Church?: “on this rock I will build my Church” (St. Matt. 16:18). St. Paul attests that “the Church of the living God … is the pillar and bulwark of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15).
When Christ ascended into heaven He left behind a hierarchical authority to continue His mission in the world. This hierarchy was invested with divine authority to govern in His name (St. Matt. 16:13; 18:18); is to be obeyed by all the faithful (St. Luke 10:16); and will last until the end of the world (St. Matt. 16:18; 28:20).
Sola Scriptura, by implication, rejects the need for an authoritative body outside of the Bible to determine vital questions of faith and morals. It must be also remembered that it was the Catholic Church who assembled and canonized the books of the Old and New Testaments, translated them faithfully, safeguarded them in times of persecution and interpreted them free from error throughout the rise and fall of every heresy under the sun. Without the Church and Tradition, there would have been no Bible to base Sola Scriptura on in the first place. As another convert from Protestantism, James Akin, states: “The Protestant apologist is in a fix. In order to use Sola Scriptura he is going to have to identify what the scriptures are, and since he is unable to do this from scripture alone, he is going to have to appeal to things outside of scripture to make his case, meaning that in every act of doing this he undermines this case. There is no way to escape the canon of tradition.”
Continued;
Reposted for your convenience to respond to;
Now you insist the only teachings of Jesus are those in the written Bible so answer these questions solely from Scriptural quotes as you claim all is needed.
Who saw to it that Paul was accepted by the others as one of them? How do you know? I’ll help you with this one; Peter did, the Bible says it.
What is the original contents supposed to be in the Bible and where is that information presented in Scripture?
Where is it in Scripture that other prophets would come to alter the contents of the Bible and that would be acceptable?
Where does Scripture provide the index or contents of the Bible?
Which Apostle provided the list for an index?
Have you compared your bible to the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate to be sure it has not been edited or censored and were the contents the same?
Where did the Bible you refer to originate from?
Where is it recorded that the Apostles or any of their faithful contemporaries gathered all the inspired Gospels and epistles and declared to the Christian world, “this will be the sole rule of faith after we have gone to the Lord.” ?
Where does it say, the written New Testament would supplant Church Teachings?
Where does it say that Christ intended to leave all His teachings in a single book, not in the Church, whether written, oral or otherwise?
Did Christ promise to give us an authoritative book, or did He promise us an authoritative Church?: “on this rock I will build my Church” (St. Matt. 16:18). St. Paul attests that “the Church of the living God … is the pillar and bulwark of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15).
When Christ ascended into heaven He left behind a hierarchical authority to continue His mission in the world. This hierarchy was invested with divine authority to govern in His name (St. Matt. 16:13; 18:18); is to be obeyed by all the faithful (St. Luke 10:16); and will last until the end of the world (St. Matt. 16:18; 28:20).
Sola Scriptura, by implication, rejects the need for an authoritative body outside of the Bible to determine vital questions of faith and morals. It must be also remembered that it was the Catholic Church who assembled and canonized the books of the Old and New Testaments, translated them faithfully, safeguarded them in times of persecution and interpreted them free from error throughout the rise and fall of every heresy under the sun. Without the Church and Tradition, there would have been no Bible to base Sola Scriptura on in the first place. As another convert from Protestantism, James Akin, states: “The Protestant apologist is in a fix. In order to use Sola Scriptura he is going to have to identify what the scriptures are, and since he is unable to do this from scripture alone, he is going to have to appeal to things outside of scripture to make his case, meaning that in every act of doing this he undermines this case. There is no way to escape the canon of tradition.”
Continued;
B
benedictus2
Guest
It seems you have not read the read of the NT.
Peter was the Rock Jesus Christ built the Church on and to whom he gave the keys to the kingdom.
Is that not something that is in your Bible?
Also, the men that came from James were the Judaizers who wanted to keep Christianity within the bonds of Judaism. But Peter himself received a revelation from God that this is not to be so. That is why Paul rebuked Peter saying you of all people should know better that this is not the way because it was to you the God revealed the truth about eating with the gentiles.
And another thing, James ministered to the Jews but Peter went out to the gentiles. Peter travelled to Rome and whereever Peter was, that is where the prime episcopacy is. Since Peter was bishop of Rome (and was martyred there) therefore the episcopacy of Rome took primacy.
Your kind of exegesis is what happens when you read bits and pieces of scripture and divorce it from the rest of the word of God.
B
benedictus2
Guest
Who came up with the canon of Scripture? Before the canon was declared we only had tradition.
As a matter of fact the first mention of canon referred to the “canon of our traditions”.
T
twb1621
Guest
Who saw to it that Paul was accepted by the others as one of them? How do you know? I’ll help you with this one; Peter did, the Bible says it.
Notice also Peter “ordered” as in the authority.
ACTS CH10; 44 While Peter was still speaking these things, the holy Spirit fell upon all who were listening to the word. 19 45 The circumcised believers who had accompanied Peter were astounded that the gift of the holy Spirit should have been poured out on the Gentiles also, 46 for they could hear them speaking in tongues and glorifying God. Then Peter responded, 47 “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people, who have received the holy Spirit even as we have?” 48 He (Peter) ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. 49 Then they invited him to stay for a few days.
Notice Peter received the vision from God and Peter was the one summoned and Peter attested to it and to not possessing authority over God’s will, as no one could.
ACTS CH 11 15 As **I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them as it had upon us at the beginning, 16 and I remembered the word of the Lord, how he had said, ‘John baptized with water but you will be baptized with the holy Spirit.’ 17 If then God gave them the same gift he gave to us when we came to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to be able to hinder God?" **18 When they heard this, they stopped objecting and glorified God, saying, “God has then granted life-giving repentance to the Gentiles too.”
Perhaps by your theology this was written as a joke and did not attest to anything.
Answer the previous posted questions if you have the quotes please.
S
stephraim
Guest
So, it is okay for Papias to seek word of mouth (tradition) and not for Irenaeus to trust it?
T
twb1621
Guest
Correction
**This post was intended for Daniel Keeran NOT tqualey **
Who saw to it that Paul was accepted by the others as one of them? How do you know? I’ll help you with this one; Peter did, the Bible says it.
Notice also Peter “ordered” as in the authority.
ACTS CH10; 44 While Peter was still speaking these things, the holy Spirit fell upon all who were listening to the word. 19 45 The circumcised believers who had accompanied Peter were astounded that the gift of the holy Spirit should have been poured out on the Gentiles also, 46 for they could hear them speaking in tongues and glorifying God. Then Peter responded, 47 “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people, who have received the holy Spirit even as we have?” 48 He (Peter) ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. 49 Then they invited him to stay for a few days.
Notice Peter received the vision from God and Peter was the one summoned and Peter attested to it and to not possessing authority over God’s will, as no one could.
ACTS CH 11 15 As **I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them as it had upon us at the beginning, 16 and I remembered the word of the Lord, how he had said, ‘John baptized with water but you will be baptized with the holy Spirit.’ 17 If then God gave them the same gift he gave to us when we came to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to be able to hinder God?" **18 When they heard this, they stopped objecting and glorified God, saying, “God has then granted life-giving repentance to the Gentiles too.”
Perhaps by your theology this was written as a joke and did not attest to anything.
Answer the previous posted questions if you have the quotes please.
**This post was intended for Daniel Keeran NOT tqualey **
Who saw to it that Paul was accepted by the others as one of them? How do you know? I’ll help you with this one; Peter did, the Bible says it.
Notice also Peter “ordered” as in the authority.
ACTS CH10; 44 While Peter was still speaking these things, the holy Spirit fell upon all who were listening to the word. 19 45 The circumcised believers who had accompanied Peter were astounded that the gift of the holy Spirit should have been poured out on the Gentiles also, 46 for they could hear them speaking in tongues and glorifying God. Then Peter responded, 47 “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people, who have received the holy Spirit even as we have?” 48 He (Peter) ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. 49 Then they invited him to stay for a few days.
Notice Peter received the vision from God and Peter was the one summoned and Peter attested to it and to not possessing authority over God’s will, as no one could.
ACTS CH 11 15 As **I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them as it had upon us at the beginning, 16 and I remembered the word of the Lord, how he had said, ‘John baptized with water but you will be baptized with the holy Spirit.’ 17 If then God gave them the same gift he gave to us when we came to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to be able to hinder God?" **18 When they heard this, they stopped objecting and glorified God, saying, “God has then granted life-giving repentance to the Gentiles too.”
Perhaps by your theology this was written as a joke and did not attest to anything.
Answer the previous posted questions if you have the quotes please.
S
stephraim
Guest
Okay, well, here’s St. John Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople (the “New Rome”):
“For what purpose did He shed His blood? It was that He might win these sheep He entrusted to Peter and his successors.” (De Sacerdotio, 53).
“There is inded one passage which may be a categorical affirmation of the primacy of the pope. De Sacerdotio, 53: ‘Why did Christ shed His Blood? To purchase the sheep which He confided to Peter and those who came after him.’ It may be urged that St. Chrysostom means no more by this than all those who have the cure of souls. On the other hand, there may be a reference to Peter only and to his personal commission ‘Feed my sheep’; and Chrysostom soon afterwards actually quotes these words. And when one recalls his comments on them given above, as meaning Peter’s ‘government’ and ‘ruling the brethren,’ it is at least likely that here is a reference to Peter’s successors in the see of Rome” (Scott, S. Herbert. The Eastern Churches and the Papacy. London: Sheed & Ward, 1928. p133.)
S
stephraim
Guest
Amen.
C
Cinette
Guest
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Can you folks believe what we’re being told?
“Cyprian was wrong.”
“Irenaeus made an error.”
“Epiphanius was in error.”
“Augustine…was in error.”
Dan Keeran is right, of course. Trust him instead.
What hubris.
C
Cinette
Guest
:egyptian::bluelite:
Anybody seen Daniel Keeran ?
:nunchuk: Nobody?:coolinoff:
kpeople:kpeople:
Anybody seen Daniel Keeran ?
:nunchuk: Nobody?:coolinoff:
kpeople:kpeople:
P
paul_c
Guest
Daniel is simply a zealot - he believes passionately what he has been taught and is loyal to that. The problem is that he is completely unable at this point to digest any information that shows that his position is in fact, incorrect. We can all understand the difficulty in giving up something that we believe to the core of our souls to be true. Pray that the Spirit opens his mind and his heart to the truth. We can do nothing more . It is in God’s hands.Can you folks believe what we’re being told?
“Cyprian was wrong.”
“Irenaeus made an error.”
“Epiphanius was in error.”
“Augustine…was in error.”
Dan Keeran is right, of course. Trust him instead.
What hubris.
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Sunflower15,
This was an excellent post - a real pleasure to read and one that gave me some new insights!
Thanks for posting! 
This was an excellent post - a real pleasure to read and one that gave me some new insights!
Thanks for posting! God blessAnother reason why Simon Peter proved during the screening process that he was the best man for the job of Pope!
'27But immediately Jesus spoke to them, saying, “Take courage, it is I; do not be afraid.” [sounds familiar?]
28Peter said to Him, “Lord, if it is You, command me to come to You on the water.”
Peter shows here that he ONLY would do AS COMMANDED, not acting on his own, AFTER verification that it IS the LORD who commands him,
29And He said, “Come!” And Peter got out of the boat, and walked on the water and came toward Jesus.
"Peter, fearfully placing himself at risk is willing to follow Jesus STEPS LITERALLY even unto the stormy waters. He did not send someone else…but risked himself first to create a path towards the Lord for the rest…[leadership by example]
30But seeing the wind, he became frightened, and beginning to sink, he cried out, “Lord, save me!”
Direct request of the Lord Himself in times of need, since no one else of higher authority than himself to appeal to is aboard the boat…also proclamation of need to be saved by Jesus AND full trust that He will unequivocally
31Immediately Jesus stretched out His hand and took hold of him, and said to him, “You of little faith, why did you doubt?”
Testament to lack of impeccability…and absolute dependence on Jesus by the Pope to NOT “drown” amidst stormy weather
32When they got into the boat, the wind stopped.’
Jesus IS in charge, HE will lead Peter/Pope to the boat TO the rest of the Apostles, AND the stormy wind will stop…
Matthew 14:27-32 (New American Standard Bible)
:tiphat: The guy simply passed the job screening selection process with the highest marks!
C
Cinette
Guest
Here is evidence that Peter was chosen as leader of the Church:
Lk22:31-32 - Jn21:15-19 - Mt 16:18-19 see parallels in Isaish 22:15-25 regarding Eliakim and his successors and references to the “key”.
Peter’s new name – from Simon to Peter – shows that he was singled out for an important new role, as with Abram to Abraham and Saul to Paul.
Peter’s authority at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) even though James is bishop of Jerusalem, is evident. Even though Paul disagreed with Peter on a matter of discipline, not of doctrine, he never once spurned Peter’s special authority and leadership.
I can quote many more passages to prove Peter was chosen as the leader of the Church – in fact there is overwhelming evidence in Scripture that can prove this.
Daniel is a zealot but I think it is important to pursue the truth always and to have the courage to admit that one is wrong. It would be a good thing for Daniel to answer the questions put to him and not disappear to avoid answering questions. After all, this is Catholic Answers - we come here to find answers on what Catholics believe. We also learn what Protestants believe and when they are right they are right - when they are wrong they are not right
:thumbsup:
Lk22:31-32 - Jn21:15-19 - Mt 16:18-19 see parallels in Isaish 22:15-25 regarding Eliakim and his successors and references to the “key”.
Peter’s new name – from Simon to Peter – shows that he was singled out for an important new role, as with Abram to Abraham and Saul to Paul.
Peter’s authority at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) even though James is bishop of Jerusalem, is evident. Even though Paul disagreed with Peter on a matter of discipline, not of doctrine, he never once spurned Peter’s special authority and leadership.
I can quote many more passages to prove Peter was chosen as the leader of the Church – in fact there is overwhelming evidence in Scripture that can prove this.
Daniel is a zealot but I think it is important to pursue the truth always and to have the courage to admit that one is wrong. It would be a good thing for Daniel to answer the questions put to him and not disappear to avoid answering questions. After all, this is Catholic Answers - we come here to find answers on what Catholics believe. We also learn what Protestants believe and when they are right they are right - when they are wrong they are not right
:thumbsup:
S
steve_b
Guest
i.e. some say it was Peter, some say it is his faith. ERGO it is Peter and his faith.
either way it is Peter because you can’t seperate a man from his faith. They are a package deal.
That is YOUR consensus.
And Peter is the Rock who Jesus builds His Church on…That was easierChrist is the Cornerstone. The Apostles and prophets are the foundation.
You see–that was easy!
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, twb1621,
I think you intended this post for Daniel …
By the time you are finished with him, the “Lion’s Den” may seem like a more secure area for this ‘Daniel’ then the CAF site…
I was challenging him by identifying that the ECF (or anyone else for that matter) did not write down EVERYTHING about the person they were writing about. Peter was accepted as God’s selection as the leader of the Apostles and our First Pope. Daniel has attempted to re-write the teachings of the ECF on this matter and it really is not going to fly. I think Daniel’s reluctance to engage others is telling - and, it tells me that he has decided to invent rather then research issues.
God bless,
I think you intended this post for Daniel …
Feel free to take another bite out of Daniel…
By the time you are finished with him, the “Lion’s Den” may seem like a more secure area for this ‘Daniel’ then the CAF site…I was challenging him by identifying that the ECF (or anyone else for that matter) did not write down EVERYTHING about the person they were writing about. Peter was accepted as God’s selection as the leader of the Apostles and our First Pope. Daniel has attempted to re-write the teachings of the ECF on this matter and it really is not going to fly. I think Daniel’s reluctance to engage others is telling - and, it tells me that he has decided to invent rather then research issues.
God bless,
- Status