Christ gives that to all of them in Matthew 18:18. Peter is still not the supreme. What about that don’t you understand?
Christ did not mean to exalt Peter to supreme authority above all the other apostles, or to say that he was the only one upon whom he would rear his church. See Acts 15, where the advice of James, and not that of Peter, was followed. See also Galatians 2:11, where Paul withstood Peter to his face, because he was to be blamed (and read what he was being blamed for - a thing which could not have happened if Christ meant that Peter was absolute and infallible. More than all, it is not said here, or anywhere else in the Bible, that Peter would have infallible successors who would be the vicegerents of Christ and the head of the church. The book of Timothy lays out the qualifications for a Bishop/Pastor and that is penned by Paul and not Peter. You would think that something that important would come from the *leader* of the NT church but it did not unless you consider Paul to be that leader. The Bible is completely silent about the supreme authority of Peter which is a horrible thing for it to be silent about don’t you think?
Is that your private interpretation?
Let us remember:
“As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and a rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on Him shall not be ashamed.” (Romans 9:33)
“And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.” (1 Corinthians 10:4)
In Acts 14:23 Paul ordains Elders.
Yes. “Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;” - Ephesians 2:20
Note the “s” at the end of apostles. Note who the chief stone is.
“For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” - I Corinthians 3:11
Matt 16:18-19 rejects your assertion and highlights your lack of understanding.
“And I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Iwill give your the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
So, zero, what do you suppose is meant when Christ says “And I say to you, you are Peter....etc.”? How many people was Christ speaking to at that moment?
“... a thing which could not have happened if Christ meant that Peter was absolute and infallible.”
Again you illustrate a complete lack of understanding, regarding “infallibility”.
It doesn’t mean Peter couldn’t make math or spelling errors!
Infallibility applies only to ex-cathedra pronouncements on matters of faith and morals.
As for “infallible successors”, what kind of non-sense are you proposing here?
Do you suppose Christ’s authority presented in 16:18-19, was meant to end with the life of Peter or the other Apostles? How meaningless would that be?
As for your weak opinion regarding the meaning of Timothy and your alleged “silence” regarding Peter’s authority, try these on for size:
Mt 16:18-19
Lk 22:32
Jn 21:17
Mk 16:7
Lk 24:34
Acts 1:13-26, 2:14, 2:41, 3:6-7, 5:1-11, 8:21, 10:44-46, 15:7, 15:19
Gal 2:11-14
Peter’s name ALWAYS heads the list of Apostles and occurs 195 times, more than all of the rest put together.