The Primacy of Peter

[GodsGrace]

"Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;" (Matthew 10:2)

Scripture calls Peter the protos, that is, the first in rank and honor.

Yes.
Peter was the first in rank and honor.
Jesus gave to him this honor.

When John was running to the tomb with Peter on resurrection morning,
John waited for Peter to arrive at the entrance and did not enter the tomb.
John 20:3-6

And this is told by John himself.

 

[GodsGrace]

The topic is not Peter. It is the Primacy of Peter.

The topic is the primacy of Peter.
Which he had.

I think it's a bit tricky to call him the first Pope.
At the time of Peter there were 5 popes, of the five major churches:
Rome
Jerusalem
Antioch
Alexandria
Constantinople

The heads, or Bishops, of these regions/churches, were called PAPA...an endearing term.

However, when there was a problem or something had to be clarified, the others did turn to Rome for advice.
This proves that Peter was first in rank at that time.

At some point it became obvious that Rome was the center of the new religion, maybe in the 600's, can't remember,
and it was decided that only the Bishop of Rome would be called Papa...Pope.

This is like calling every championship game in football The Super Bowl,,,,
back to the beginnings of championship games, even before they were called Super Bowl.
Thus making it easier to speak of EVERY Super Bowl game.

I understand that the CC is tracing back its beginnings to Peter and Jesus, which I totally agree with - it is
in fact the first organized church - but is it right to call Peter the first Pope?

Personally, I have no big problem with this...
but shouldn't the history at least be explained??

 

[WIP]

I'm not debating this Jaybo.
If you think Jesus was calling Peter satan, when Peter was the head of the early church and Jesus gave him the keys to the Kingdom, and right after this happened,
then so be it.

Jesus was addressing satan: Get thee behind me satan. Very clear.
Then He told Peter he was a stumbling block...IOW get our of the way of Jesus.
Which Peter learned to do.

Some things should just not be debated.

I agree that although Jesus was looking at Peter, He was actually addressing Satan and not Peter.

 

[GodsGrace]

I agree that although Jesus was looking at Peter, He was actually addressing Satan and not Peter.

Absolutely.
It cannot be otherwise.

 

[Walpole]

The topic is the primacy of Peter.
Which he had.

I think it's a bit tricky to call him the first Pope.
At the time of Peter there were 5 popes, of the five major churches:
Rome
Jerusalem
Antioch
Alexandria
Constantinople

The heads, or Bishops, of these regions/churches, were called PAPA...an endearing term.

However, when there was a problem or something had to be clarified, the others did turn to Rome for advice.
This proves that Peter was first in rank at that time.

At some point it became obvious that Rome was the center of the new religion, maybe in the 600's, can't remember,
and it was decided that only the Bishop of Rome would be called Papa...Pope.

This is like calling every championship game in football The Super Bowl,,,,
back to the beginnings of championship games, even before they were called Super Bowl.
Thus making it easier to speak of EVERY Super Bowl game.

I understand that the CC is tracing back its beginnings to Peter and Jesus, which I totally agree with - it is
in fact the first organized church - but is it right to call Peter the first Pope?

Personally, I have no big problem with this...
but shouldn't the history at least be explained??

As you pointed out, "pope" is a simple term of endearment, not an official title. It means "father."

 

[GodsGrace]

As you pointed out, "pope" is a simple term of endearment, not an official title. It means "father."

It's a little less formal than father...
But it also does not mean daddy.
I can't think of an equivalent english word.
Papa shows respect and love.
Maybe honor...just as we're told to honor our parents. Which might or might not include love from the heart.

 

[GodsGrace]

As you pointed out, "pope" is a simple term of endearment, not an official title. It means "father."

PS
I thought Pope is a title for the Bishop of Rome to distinguish him from other Bishops.

 

[Niblo]

PS
I thought Pope is a title for the Bishop of Rome to distinguish him from other Bishops.

Yes.

The Basilica of Saint John Lateran is the cathedral church of the Diocese of Rome; and the seat of the Bishop of Rome....the Pope.

 

[Mungo]

The Coptic Orthdox use the title Pope for the head of their church. The current one is Pope Tawadros II.

 

[Mungo]

Yes.

The Basilica of Saint John Lateran is the cathedral church of the Diocese of Rome; and the seat of the Bishop of Rome....the Pope.

Yes.
A lot of people think it is St. Peter's Basilica.

 

[Walpole]

Yes.
A lot of people think it is St. Peter's Basilica.

Yes.

The Basilica of Saint John Lateran is the cathedral church of the Diocese of Rome; and the seat of the Bishop of Rome....the Pope.

Here’s some trivia for you…

The Lateran Basilica was not completed and dedicated until the early 4th century. Which church served as the home to the bishops of Rome prior to the Lateran?

I’ll post the answer later.

 

[Mungo]

Here’s some trivia for you…

The Lateran Basilica was not completed and dedicated until the early 4th century. Which church served as the home to the bishops of Rome prior to the Lateran?

I’ll post the answer later.

I think I know the answer to this but I'll wait for suggestions from others.
The answer I've found is in the book The Eternal City by Taylor R. Marshall.

 

[Walpole]

I think I know the answer to this but I'll wait for suggestions from others.
The answer I've found is in the book The Eternal City by Taylor R. Marshall.

The answer is actually the oldest Christian Church in Rome, which is a former domus ecclesiae named Santa Pudenziana. It belonged to St. Pudens (cf. 2 Tim 4:21), who was the son of the Roman senator Quintus Cornelius Pudens and St. Priscilla, two of Rome's earliest converts. The church served as the church for all the bishops of Rome from the time Christianity arrived in the first century until the Lateran Basilica was completed and dedicated in the fourth century.

It's a hidden gem in Rome and many Christian pilgrims do not even know about it. It contains some of Rome's earliest Christian mosaics and even has a section of the original altar used by the early Christians of Rome for Mass. The current church has been built on top of the original, but you can still descend to the lower levels to see what was the first century church.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Pudenziana

 

[Mungo]

The answer is actually the oldest Christian Church in Rome, which is a former domus ecclesiae named Santa Pudenziana. It belonged to St. Pudens (cf. 2 Tim 4:21), who was the son of the Roman senator Quintus Cornelius Pudens and St. Priscilla, two of Rome's earliest converts. The church served as the church for all the bishops of Rome from the time Christianity arrived in the first century until the Lateran Basilica was completed and dedicated in the fourth century.

It's a hidden gem in Rome and many Christian pilgrims do not even know about it. It contains some of Rome's earliest Christian mosaics and even has a section of the original altar used by the early Christians of Rome for Mass. The current church has been built on top of the original, but you can still descend to the lower levels to see what was the first century church.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Pudenziana

Yes, and Taylor Marshall also suggests that the "family allowed Saint Peter to use Quintus' senatorial chair or cathedra for liturgical ceremonies. Hence, Pudens' home was the first cathedral of Rome."

 

[Walpole]

Yes, and Taylor Marshall also suggests that the "family allowed Saint Peter to use Quintus' senatorial chair or cathedra for liturgical ceremonies. Hence, Pudens' home was the first cathedral of Rome."

History is an amazing thing.

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes.

The Basilica of Saint John Lateran is the cathedral church of the Diocese of Rome; and the seat of the Bishop of Rome....the Pope.

I believe it used to be the home of the popes when they were seated in Rome.

Across the street are the Sacred Steps.

Legend has it that Jesus actually used these wooden steps. Persons go there for confession or to pray.

We cannot know for sure if this is true.

 

[God Is My Judge]

It is obvious from this subject and the others you have posted that you just want to promote Catholic beliefs, whether or not they are supported by Scripture. As a Protestant, I look to the Bible as the source of God's truth, not to the inventions of fallible men.

You can cite all kinds of out-of-context theories, but that doesn't make them true. Here is what the Bible says...

"On the contrary, when they saw that I was entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised] just as Peter was entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised (for he who empowered Peter for his apostleship to the circumcised also empowered me for my apostleship to the Gentiles) and when James, Cephas, and John, who had a reputation as pillars, recognized the grace that had been given to me, they gave to Barnabas and me the right hand of fellowship, agreeing that we would go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised." Galatians 2:7-9

That is directly from God's word. It says that Peter, a.k.a. Cephas, was entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised [only], not to everyone!

If Peter was the person that you claim he was, why didn't God entrust him with the gospel to the Gentiles?

This claim of the primacy of Peter is in direct conflict with what the Bible says. Should I believe your repetition of Catholic propaganda or God's word?

Thought you were nondenominational? Add liar to your list of bull. Hope everyone else you attempt to debate has short term memory loss, Dorothy . But you just keep swimming, just keep swimming . Lol! Unreal. Can't imagine ever being this phony before God. I really think half these forums are filled with shills.

 

[GodsGrace]

Thought you were nondenominational? Add liar to your list of bull. Hope everyone else you attempt to debate has short term memory loss, Dorothy . But you just keep swimming, just keep swimming . Lol! Unreal. Can't imagine ever being this phony before God. I really think half these forums are filled with shills.

Judge
Try answering the post instead of attacking the poster.

It works much better when debating a topic.
Try it
You'll like it

 

[GodsGrace]

It's not interpretation. It's what scripture actually says

You are adding to God's word. Scripture doesn't say Peter would go only to the Jews. The incident with Cornelius shows that God sent Peter to Gentiles.

No it wasn't.
"One of the often-thought-of “name changes” in the Bible is that of Saul to Paul. The change is commonly linked to Saul’s conversion on the Damascus Road, when the Lord Jesus commissioned him to take the gospel to the Gentiles (Acts 9:1–19). However, at the time of Saul’s conversion, Jesus still addressed him as “Saul.” Later, Jesus told Ananias to find “Saul” in Damascus and restore his sight. Acts 9 goes on to describe “Saul” as increasing in spiritual strength and understanding of Jesus as the Messiah. So, it was not Jesus who changed his name on the road to Damascus. If it wasn’t Jesus’ doing, how did the change from Saul to Paul happen, and when?

The answer is that Saul’s name was also Paul. The custom of dual names was common in those days. Acts 13:9 describes the apostle as “Saul, who was also called Paul.” From that verse on, Saul is always referred to in Scripture as “Paul.”

When and why was Saul’s name changed to Paul? | GotQuestions.org

When and why was Saul’s name changed to Paul? Did Jesus change Saul’s name to Paul when Saul began following Jesus?

www.gotquestions.org

Actually it means a lot.
Claiming it means nothing is just your opinion.

Miracles is not the same as binding and loosing.
The fact remains that Jesus only gave that authority to Peter. I believe scripture not your fanciful interpretations.

You are easily surprised.

The incident with Cornelius shows that God sent Peter to Gentiles.

Could you explain what binding and loosing means?

 

[Mungo]

Could you explain what binding and loosing means?

I know there are various interpretations of this.
I believe it is about authority and is connected to Peter being given the keys of the kingdom of heaven.
If you want more on this I suggest I start a new thread on the topic of the keys, and binding and loosing.