Peter The Rock

[donadams]

Already acting in the person of Christ even acting as intermediary!

It is Jesus Christ who identifies peter with himself!

Matt 17:24 And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute?

25 He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the houser, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?

26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free.

27 Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.

It is Jesus Christ who identifies peter with himself! Matt 17:27

 

[Simons]

Who are the successors of Moses in Matt 23?

The scribes and Pharisees....or said another way: a bunch of guys who valued their man-made traditions over God's law...many of them were hypocrites and valued political power over helping God's children.....none were infallible...basically your typical bunch of religious leaders. Your point?

 

[Simons]

If you agree that Christ is the head of the church then you have consented to the fact there is a hierarchical nature of the new covenant church

An upside down hierarchical nature to be precise. The head is the One who was the greatest servant of all and it is the last who will be first. Who doesn't belong in God's ordained hierarchy is anyone with a "lord it over them" style of leadership (you know....such as a ruler that expected his feet or ring to be kissed). Are you familiar with this quote:

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.

 

[Simons]

It is Jesus Christ who identifies peter with himself!

Yes...merely to identify for whom the temple tax was to be paid. If this is what you must rely upon in your hope to establish a scriptural basis for the papacy, then I (really) think it speaks volumes as to how weak your case must be.

 

[donadams]

The scribes and Pharisees....or said another way: a bunch of guys who valued their man-made traditions over God's law...many of them were hypocrites and valued political power over helping God's children.....none were infallible...basically your typical bunch of religious leaders. Your point?

Did i ask if they were impeccable?

No not scribes and Pharisees but they could be, they had kingdom authority of the keys and power to bind and loose!

And Jesus Christ said: “they must be obeyed”!

This authority taken from them and given to the apostles in the new covenant church!
Matt 21:43 Matt 16:18-19 Matt 28:19 Jn 20:21

And they must be obeyed!

The papacy based on Matt 16:18 and Isa 22:21-22

And no the apostles also are not impeccable but must be obeyed!

Thanks

 

[donadams]

An upside down hierarchical nature to be precise. The head is the One who was the greatest servant of all and it is the last who will be first. Who doesn't belong in God's ordained hierarchy is anyone with a "lord it over them" style of leadership (you know....such as a ruler that expected his feet or ring to be kissed). Are you familiar with this quote:

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.

Order and unity from obedience to proper Authority or spiritual anarchy and chaos! Can’t be both!

 

[Simons]

And Jesus Christ said: “they must be obeyed”!

You are missing something with your simplistic declaration that “they must be obeyed”. First, in Acts 4 (8-20)we have those “sitters in the seat of Moses” issuing a command to Peter and John….yet, John and Peter refuse to obey that command. Second, even though Jesus said “So you must be careful to do everything they tell you.” Jesus dismissed some of the traditions that these “sitters in the seat of Moses” had told the people to do….so we don’t actually see Jesus and the apostles setting a “they must be obeyed” example. For the record, I do obey those who have grabbed power for themselves (such as the bishop of Rome) except I also follow the example provided by Jesus and the apostles and disregard the bad traditions made by those in such power and do the opposite when their commands go against God’s will.

 

[donadams]

You are missing something with your simplistic declaration that “they must be obeyed”. First, in Acts 4 (8-20)we have those “sitters in the seat of Moses” issuing a command to Peter and John….yet, John and Peter refuse to obey that command. Second, even though Jesus said “So you must be careful to do everything they tell you.” Jesus dismissed some of the traditions that these “sitters in the seat of Moses” had told the people to do….so we don’t actually see Jesus and the apostles setting a “they must be obeyed” example. For the record, I do obey those who have grabbed power for themselves (such as the bishop of Rome) except I also follow the example provided by Jesus and the apostles and disregard the bad traditions made by those in such power and do the opposite when their commands go against God’s will.

Only till Christ took it from them Matt 21:43 and gave it to Peter Matt 16:18-19 and the apostles with him Matt 18:18 eph 2:20
Now until Christ returns in glory “Peter and the apostles “must be obeyed”!
Thanks

 

[Simons]

And Jesus Christ said: “they must be obeyed”!

Where? Chapter and verse please

 

[Simons]

Only till Christ took it from them Matt 21:43 and gave it to Peter Matt 16:18-19 and the apostles with him Matt 18:18 eph 2:20
Now until Christ returns in glory “Peter and the apostles “must be obeyed”!
Thanks

Well, if the seat of Moses had been replaced with the seat of Peter (something never named in Scripture) then that would explain why John and Peter didn’t obey the Sanhedrin’s command in Acts 4, but it wouldn’t explain the inconsistency between Jesus saying that the scribes and Pharisees must be obeyed and his dismissal of their traditions.

Also, Peter isn’t always obeyed in Scripture. In Galatians 2 Peter is doing and teaching the wrong thing and because of that, even Barnabas was led astray. Rather than obeying Peter in his hypocrisy, Paul corrected Peter. So much for absolute obedience….

I think Peter gets it right in Acts 5 when he declares, “We must obey God rather than human beings!” Note he doesn’t say “We don’t have to obey you who are in the seat of Moses because your authority has been cancelled and now we have the authority”. Nope. The answer is to obey what we have from God and not what we get from human beings.

 

[Simons]

And no the apostles also are not impeccable but must be obeyed!

I don't know of any non-Catholic Christian that would disagree with this call for obedience (with the exception of the error taught by Peter)....because what we have left (to obey) from the apostles is recognized as scripture

 

[donadams]

Where? Chapter and verse please

Matt 23:2-3
Same kingdom power and authority is taken from them and given to Peter and the apostles
Isa 22/21-2
Lk 10:16
Lk 22:29
Matt 16:18-19
Matt 18:17-18
Matt 28:19-20
Jn 13:20
Jn 20:21-23
Jn 21:17
Acts 1:2-8
Acts 1:15-26
Acts 20:28
Heb 13:7
Heb 13:17

Christians must be taught and that requires humility & obedience! Lk 1:4 matt 28:19-20 matt 16:18-19 & 18:18 acts 2:42 acts 8:31

Thanks

 

[donadams]

Well, if the seat of Moses had been replaced with the seat of Peter (something never named in Scripture) then that would explain why John and Peter didn’t obey the Sanhedrin’s command in Acts 4, but it wouldn’t explain the inconsistency between Jesus saying that the scribes and Pharisees must be obeyed and his dismissal of their traditions.

Their “traditions” do not have “divine origin” but are the tradition of men, “apostolic tradition” and the church is of divine tradition, handed Down, taught, Matt 28:19

They are both of the same kingdom authority and power, same command to bey.

Also, Peter isn’t always obeyed in Scripture. In Galatians 2 Peter is doing and teaching the wrong thing and because of that, even Barnabas was led astray. Rather than obeying Peter in his hypocrisy, Paul corrected Peter. So much for absolute obedience….

I think Peter gets it right in Acts 5 when he declares, “We must obey God rather than human beings!” Note he doesn’t say “We don’t have to obey you who are in the seat of Moses because your authority has been cancelled and now we have the authority”. Nope. The answer is to obey what we have from God and not what we get from human beings.

An apostle can oppose another apostle in matters of discipline and administration

But we must obey the apostles in matters of faith and morals as Jesus commanded Lk 10:16 Matt 18:17 Matt 28:19 etc
Jesus even gives his apostles commands for us to obey Matt 28:20 acts 1:2

Thanks

 

[donadams]

Well, if the seat of Moses had been replaced with the seat of Peter (something never named in Scripture) then that would explain why John and Peter didn’t obey the Sanhedrin’s command in Acts 4, but it wouldn’t explain the inconsistency between Jesus saying that the scribes and Pharisees must be obeyed and his dismissal of their traditions.

Also, Peter isn’t always obeyed in Scripture. In Galatians 2 Peter is doing and teaching the wrong thing and because of that, even Barnabas was led astray. Rather than obeying Peter in his hypocrisy, Paul corrected Peter. So much for absolute obedience….

I think Peter gets it right in Acts 5 when he declares, “We must obey God rather than human beings!” Note he doesn’t say “We don’t have to obey you who are in the seat of Moses because your authority has been cancelled and now we have the authority”. Nope. The answer is to obey what we have from God and not what we get from human beings.

“Seat of Moses” literally means cathedral
Chair of the bishop
Acts 1:20
Bishoprick

All Christians must be in obedience to a bishop heb 13:7 & 13:17 Jn 13:20 “for they care for our souls”!
Thanks

 

[Simons]

“Seat of Moses” literally means cathedral
Chair of the bishop

actually, the cathedral houses the cathedra and yes, cathedra means chair, but not chair of Moses. I too sit on a chair, but that doesn’t make me the successor of Moses or of the scribes or of the Pharisees.

An apostle can oppose another apostle in matters of discipline and administration

a couple of things on this:

• Remember you are trying to tie Apostolic authority to the authority of the seat of Moses in Matt 23. There is says: “So you must be careful to do everything they tell you.” And not, “So you must be careful to do everything they tell you (except you can oppose them on matters of discipline and administration).”
• Paul doesn’t describe Peter’s hypocrisy as pertaining to a matter of discipline and administration. Paul described it as “not acting in line with the truth of the gospel.” From there Paul went on to discuss how Peter was trying to enforce works of the law when that is not how one is justified and saved. Peter had it wrong regarding a “salvation matter”.

But we must obey the apostles in matters of faith and morals as Jesus commanded. Lk 10:16 Matt 18:17 Matt 28:19 etc

you make these claims and provide a bunch of verses, but the cited scripture doesn’t say what you need it to say. Luke 10 is not about the apostles. It is about the 72 sent out on a special mission….and at that point in time, according to your earlier posts, the Pharisees and scribes still possessed the “they must be obeyed” authority….the apostles hadn’t received it yet. Matthew 18 is about Church discipline and while we are on that topic, please note that 1 Timothy 5:17-20 instructs the congregation on how to rebuke a sinful overseer. The congregation had the authority to discipline the sinful bishop and they weren’t simply obligated to obey him because he was a “successor to the apostles”. As a rule, they were to obey the church leaders, but the congregation had the authority to rebuke and ultimately get rid of the sinful bishop.

Jesus even gives his apostles commands for us to obey Matt 28:20 acts 1:2

Jesus gave his disciples commands and instructions and yes, we are to obey those commands and instructions (from Jesus). Again, it is about obeying God and not man.

You are trying so hard to find apostolic succession in the New Testament, but just it isn’t in there. A Catholic scholar studied the matter and offered this conclusion: "One conclusion seems obvious: Neither the New Testament nor early Christian history offers support for a notion of apostolic succession as 'an unbroken line of episcopal ordination from Christ through the apostles down through the centuries to the bishops of today.' Clearly, such a simplistic approach to the problem will not do." (Francis A. Sullivan, S.J., From Apostles to Bishops: The Development of the Episcopacy in the Early Church, Mahwah, NJ: Newman Press, 2001, 15-16.)

Now to be clear, Sullivan believes in Apostolic Succession, but he felt forced to admit it was a later development.

Surely you must wonder why neither Jesus nor the apostles ever spelt out the concept of “apostolic succession” when it is so terribly important for your claim that the Catholic Church is the one, true church. Here are two instances where Paul’s silence on this matter is odd (if your position is correct):

1. In Eph 4: 11-16 Paul wrote: And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith…

Note: He made no mention of “successors to the apostles” even though they would be distinct from all the others and even though their importance would be second only to the apostles themselves.

2. In 1 Corinthians Paul calls for unity: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.” … I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow. … For we are co-workers in God’s service; you are God’s field, God’s building….So then, no more boasting about human leaders! All things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future—all are yours, and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God.

Note: He doesn’t mention that everyone must follow Peter (since he is the Pope). You and other Catholics would do well to note Paul’s command to stop boasting about human leaders (especially given the mention of Peter/Cephas in the very next sentence).

 

[donadams]

Undeniable Apostolic succession in scripture!

Acts 1:15-26
Judas valid apostle succeeded by Mathias

The authority of the successors of Moses taken from them Matt 21:43 given to Peter and the apostles Matt 16:18-19 & 18:18

Must hear the apostolic church
Matt 18:17
Are we really just Relying on our own private judgement of scripture?

Instead of Christ the light of the world, and the way, the truth, and the Life!

And Christ and His church are one unity in all truth and grace!

Really we are just believing in our own private fallible judgment!

Private judgement produces spiritual anarchy!

When Christ established the church to teach and sanctify all men unto eternal salvation! Matt 28:19

Christians must be taught or instructed by the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church! Lk 1:4
Matt 28:19, Lk 10:16, Jn 20:21
Acts 8:31, Colossians 2:7

Our understanding, study, interpretation, judgment, are all adding to scripture!


Truth known by “hearing” the apostles not the “Bible alone”!

1 John 4:6 We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

The apostles in person:

2 John 1:12
Having many things to write unto you, I would not write with paper and ink: but I trust to come unto you, and speak face to face, that our joy may be full.

Doctrine of the apostles: acts 2:42

And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

Matt 5:14 the apostles are the light of the world until Christ returns in glory!

Jesus Christ extends his mission, power, and authority to His church of His apostles! The apostles have the same mission, ministry, power, and authority as Christ! Jn 20:21 as the father sent me, so I send you!

Even His judging!
Matt 19:28 and 1 cor 6:2
His teaching authority!
Matt 28:19 and Jn 20:21
His power to forgive sins!
Jn 20:23
Jn 17:22 / rom 2:10 / 1 pet 1:7 Christ shares His glory with His saints!
His being the light of the world!
Matt 5:14
Must hear church Matt 18:18
His ministry of reconciliation!
2 cor 5:18
His authority in governing the church and administering the kingdom!
Matt 16:18-19 & 18:18 Jn 21:17
Lk 22:29
Apart from me you can do nothing. Jn 15:5
Acts 2:42 doctrine of the apostles!
So the church is subject to Christ!
Eph 5:24
Christ shares His glory! 2 thes 1:10 rev 12:1

The pillar and foundation of TRUTH!
1 Tim 3:15

The TWO EDGE SWORD!
To proclaim the truth! Matt 28:19
To condemn error! 1 cor 16:22

Jesus Christ founded the new covenant church for the salvation of all men! (Jn 1:16-17) Christ is the truth! (Jn 14:6) Christ and his church are one!
(Acts 9;4 Jn 15:1 eph 5:32)
The church is the pillar of truth
(1 Tim 3:15) that must teach all men (Matt 28:19) without error guided by the Holy Spirit
(Jn 16:13) Thru the grace of God in the sanctification of souls applied in the seven sacraments!

 

[Simons]

Really we are just believing in our own private fallible judgment!

Well, we really don’t have a choice…now do we? Jesus made some serious claims about himself, and he asked, “But who do you say that I am?” and not “But who do those that sit in the seat of Moses say that I am?” Likewise, the Catholic church has made some serious claims about itself and both you and I must ask, “ But is the Catholic church the one true church?” We must assess the evidence for ourselves and exercise our fallible judgment on deciding that matter. Now you might be inclined to exercise your fallible judgment and simply accept the Catholic claims hook, line and sinker or maybe you investigated the matter thoroughly before you exercised your fallible judgment and concluded that the Catholic church is the one, true church. Any way you cut it, you have relied upon your own private fallible judgment!

FYI before I rely upon my own private fallible judgment, I like to look at what scholars have said on the matter and let their insight shape my judgment. That is why I look at the work of someone such as F. Sullivan (who I quoted earlier). Here is some more from him:

It seems that (with respect to the situation at the time of 1st Clement) there is a "general agreement among scholars that the structure of ministry in the church of Rome at this time would have resembled that in Corinth: with a group of presbyters sharing leadership, perhaps with a differentiation of roles among them, but with no one bishop in charge." (Sullivan in From Apostles to Bishops p 100)​

Note this is not just Sullivan’s opinion, but it reflects a general agreement among scholars.

The consensus is that the monarchical bishopric in Rome developed gradually over time…a long time after Peter could have been in Rome. Without such a monarchical bishop in existence, the Catholic claim that Peter was the first Pope (and that the papal office attached to the bishopric of Rome to be passed onto the single monarchical successor bishop of Peter) becomes untenable.

When one must end up relying on one’s own fallible judgment it is nice to have a scholarly consensus on one’s side.

 

[donadams]

Well, we really don’t have a choice…now do we? Jesus made some serious claims about himself, and he asked, “But who do you say that I am?” and not “But who do those that sit in the seat of Moses say that I am?” Likewise, the Catholic church has made some serious claims about itself and both you and I must ask, “ But is the Catholic church the one true church?” We must assess the evidence for ourselves and exercise our fallible judgment on deciding that matter. Now you might be inclined to exercise your fallible judgment and simply accept the Catholic claims hook, line and sinker or maybe you investigated the matter thoroughly before you exercised your fallible judgment and concluded that the Catholic church is the one, true church. Any way you cut it, you have relied upon your own private fallible judgment!

FYI before I rely upon my own private fallible judgment, I like to look at what scholars have said on the matter and let their insight shape my judgment. That is why I look at the work of someone such as F. Sullivan (who I quoted earlier). Here is some more from him:

It seems that (with respect to the situation at the time of 1st Clement) there is a "general agreement among scholars that the structure of ministry in the church of Rome at this time would have resembled that in Corinth: with a group of presbyters sharing leadership, perhaps with a differentiation of roles among them, but with no one bishop in charge." (Sullivan in From Apostles to Bishops p 100)​

Note this is not just Sullivan’s opinion, but it reflects a general agreement among scholars.

The consensus is that the monarchical bishopric in Rome developed gradually over time…a long time after Peter could have been in Rome. Without such a monarchical bishop in existence, the Catholic claim that Peter was the first Pope (and that the papal office attached to the bishopric of Rome to be passed onto the single monarchical successor bishop of Peter) becomes untenable.

When one must end up relying on one’s own fallible judgment it is nice to have a scholarly consensus on one’s side.

Who did God choose? Acts 15:7

What is significant about Peter standing up? Acts 1:15 & acts 15:7

 

[donadams]

I will assume you don’t know!

God (Jesus Christ) chose Peter Matt 16:18-19

Peter stood up the debate has ended and Peter gives the decree to be obeyed by all

Amen!

 

[Simons]

I will assume you don’t know!

Who did God choose? Acts 15:7

I don’t see any mention of God choosing in Acts 15….have you written that into your bible?

Peter stood up the debate has ended and Peter gives the decree to be obeyed by all

You need to put your pen away and stop adding bits to your bible. In Acts 15 there is no indication that Peter can make doctrinal decisions on his own. In fact, it is James that renders the judgment, and it appears that the involvement of the whole church was vital. Peter stood up at the start and provided evidence and an opinion (that James used in rendering the judgment).

The church is the pillar of truth

Yes, the author of 1st Timothy refers to the church as "the pillar and foundation of truth" (1 Tim. 3:15). A few verses earlier, directions were provided for what characteristics an overseer of THAT church must possess. On many occasions and for long periods of time, the Catholic Church totally disregarded these directions when selecting its overseers, and in particular its overseer of Rome. By its conduct the Catholic Church clearly taught that these scriptural directions could be totally disregarded and distanced itself from the “church” that is identified as the pillar and foundation.

Christians must be taught and that requires humility & obedience!

agreed, by both the teacher and the taught

Order and unity from obedience to proper Authority or spiritual anarchy and chaos! Can’t be both!

well, the proper authority is God and when the leaders are acting within his will then they are acting for that proper authority. Too much freedom (by the congregation) without the necessary humility results in doctrinal chaos. Too much authority (by the leaders) without the necessary humility results in a tyranny…Jesus saw it in the Pharisees where their bad traditions were a burden to God’s children. We can see it in the Catholic Church where the hierarchy has introduced bad traditions and enforced a unity around them. Unity around error is not necessarily the lesser of the two evils.