To whom did he report?
The Council in Jerusalem.
He did go to Jerusalem to be laid hands on and to be commissioned to preach the gospel, but where does it show that Peter had authority over him?
Acts shows that the Council had authority over him. Peter was the head of the Council James was the specific bishop. Peter had general authority.
6 As for those who were held in high esteem whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism they added nothing to my message. 7 On the contrary, they recognized that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised. 8 For God, who was at work in Peter as an apostle to the circumcised, was also at work in me as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9 James, Cephas and John, those esteemed as pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised. ( Galatians 2:6-9)
And if you trace Paul's journeys and actions, you find that he ministered mostly to the Jews.
He said that both he and Peter were equally entrusted with preaching the gospel. Peter to the Jews and Paul to the gentiles. Where is the indicator that Peter was the Pope with authority over Paul?
2) When Paul mentioned the Pillars of the church, it is interesting that Peter (Cephas) was mentioned SECOND, next to James. Why would that be if Peter had jurisdictional primacy over the others? Shouldnt he be mentioned first?
So no, all indications are that ALL APOSTLES held EQUAL positions in the preaching of the gospel. THERE WAS NO INDICATION OF ANY HIERARCHICAL AUTHORITY AT ALL.
Paul is the best indicator in the NT of the hierarchical nature of the Church.
RE: The patriarch of the Latin branch earned the first amongst equals status by being true to the Faith in the first millennium while the Orthodox were not quite, shall we say, orthodox.
And just because you said so, it must be so? Sorry, no dice. I want you to show me WHERE in the early churches ( yes, up to even Nicea ), Rome exercised authority over all the other churches.
It didn't. It became that way after the behaviour of the other bishops.
If Rome held the doctrinal interpretation that everyone had to adhere to, then why did the Bishops not simply ask the Pope ( if indeed such a a position existed ) to speak infallibly for all on the one important doctrine the Nature of God and the Deity of Jesus Christ that separated orthodoxy from heresy?
Why bother meeting at Nicea? It would be a simple matter for the Pope to tell everyone what to believe and all to simply accept it.
Let the Bishop of Rome write a Papal Doctrinal Letter and let all adhere to what he infallibly said.
But no such thing existed.
In fact, it was ATHANASIUS (later Bishop of Alexandria ) who was the champion of the Nicene Creed.
And this invalidates the Creed how?
What Paul is referring to is this The church holds forth the Scripture and the doctrine of Christ, as a pillar holds forth a proclamation. Hence, the church (any church anywhere in the world, be it in Ephesus, Rome or in New York) SHOULD be FAITHFUL to Gods word. How do we know this? Because Paul said so. He said this to Timothy in another letter: All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness
We might keep in mind what 'useful' means. It does not mean sufficient, as a hint.
So, Ive taken it up with Him and I still fail to see how he tells us that one must acknowledge the Papacy of Peter and his successors to be a member of His church.
I fail to see how this reflects on our conversation. If you do not believe in the commandments of God, or in the authority of the Church that Jesus Christ the Lord Almighty created for us, or wish to hedge or shade those commandments, that is up to you.
But I DO follow the teaching authority of the church. I do not even disobey what the Popes teach.
However, in doing that, I must (and so must you) obey the teaching authority of Christ Who taught us to LOVE THE LORD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, WITH ALL YOUR SOUL AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND (Luke 10:27).
That does not mean BLINDLY accepting whatever a Bishop or even Pope teaches without using ones mind (which the Lord Himself tells us to use) to discern whether what they teach are scriptural.
Either you acknowledge the Pope's authority or else you do not.
RE: Thankfully, only the Judge of All gets to decide that.
Of course, that is why I said your statement that one is either Catholic or not is not for you to decide. You agree with me and thats good.
If I had the responsibility to Judge people to their everlasting salvation or damnation, I would be unable to carry it out or even bear it.
RE: Council of Jerusalem.
Let’s look at what the Bible teaches about that Council and see whether what you claim ( that the council had authority over Paul and consequently Peter had authority over him ) is correct.
To summarize, The council decided that Gentile converts to Christianity were not obligated to keep most of the Mosaic law, including the rules concerning circumcision of males. The Council did, however, retain the prohibitions on eating blood, meat containing blood, and meat of animals not properly slain, and on fornication and idolatry. Descriptions of the council are found in Acts of the Apostles chapter 15.
It says in the Bible: “the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.
However, Paul and his companion Barnabas argues thusly: “The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them.”
The Bible says in verse 7,
“After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them:
Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.
So, Peter addresses the council and like Paul and Barnabas, he posits as proof that Good had already accepted the Gentiles.
Now here is the important part not to be missed — THE APOSLTLE JAMES, THE HEAD OF THE BISHOP OF JERUSALEM says (quoting from the Catholic Bible ):
“19 ‘My verdict is, then, that instead of making things more difficult for gentiles who turn to God,
20 we should send them a letter telling them merely to abstain from anything polluted by idols, from illicit marriages, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.
21 For Moses has always had his preachers in every town and is read aloud in the synagogues every Sabbath.”
WHOSE VERDICT? ANSWER: JAMES ( not Peter ).
Peter was stating his view like Paul and Barnabas in an attempt to win adherents, nothing more !
James MADE THE FINAL DECISION.
Paul was a MEMBER of this council stating his experience and his opinion while everyone listened.
So, where in this passage does it tell us that Peter had authority over all the other apostles?
It was JAMES who made the decision, the verdict. Not surprising since he was the head of the church of Jerusalem.
I don’t see ANY HINT of Peter being the Pope in this passage at all.
RE: And if you trace Paul’s journeys and actions, you find that he ministered mostly to the Jews.
He did minister to the Jews of course. However, the “mostly” part I am not sure of.
After all, Paul himself said the following:
“Through him and for his names sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith.” Romans 1:5
“I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that I planned many times to come to you (but have been prevented from doing so until now) in order that I might have a harvest among you, just as I have had among the other Gentiles.” Rom. 1:13
“I have written you quite boldly on some points, as if to remind you of them again, because of the grace God gave me to be a minister of Messiah Jesus to the Gentiles with the priestly duty of proclaiming the gospel of God, so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy Spirit. Therefore I glory in Messiah Jesus in my service to God. I will not venture to speak of anything except what Messiah has accomplished through me in leading the Gentiles to obey God by what I have said and done.” Rom. 15:15-18
“You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols.” 1Cor. 12:2
“Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods.” Gal. 4:8 “they want you to be circumcised that they may boast about your flesh.” Gal. 6:13
“Therefore, remember that formerly you, who are Gentiles in flesh and called “uncircumcised” by those who call themselves “the circumcision” (that done in the body by the hands of men)...” Eph. 2:11
“For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Messiah Jesus for the sake of you Gentiles Surely you have heard about the administration of Gods grace that was given to me for you...To me, the least of all saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unfathomable riches of Messiah...” Eph. 3:1-2,8
“So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the rest of the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking.” Eph. 4:17
“To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Messiah in you, the hope of glory.” Col. 1:27 “In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the flesh, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Messiah...When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Messiah. He forgave us all our sins.” Col. 2:11,13
” ...They tell how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God.” 1Ths. 1:9
“And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle ...and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.” 1Tim. 2:7
So, based on Paul’s own testimony, there is ample proof ( unless you believe he is lying ) that he ministered to the gentiles as was his call.
RE: Paul is the best indicator in the NT of the hierarchical nature of the Church.
Paul taught Timothy how churches ought to be led and ordered in his first letter to Timothy (Chapter 3)
1 Here is a saying that you can rely on: to want to be a presiding elder is to desire a noble task.
2 That is why the presiding elder must have an impeccable character. Husband of one wife, he must be temperate, discreet and courteous, hospitable and a good teacher;
3 not a heavy drinker, nor hot-tempered, but gentle and peaceable, not avaricious,
4 a man who manages his own household well and brings his children up to obey him and be well-behaved:
5 how can any man who does not understand how to manage his own household take care of the Church of God?
6 He should not be a new convert, in case pride should turn his head and he incur the same condemnation as the devil.
7 It is also necessary that he be held in good repute by outsiders, so that he never falls into disrepute and into the devil’s trap.
8 Similarly, deacons must be respectable, not double-tongued, moderate in the amount of wine they drink and with no squalid greed for money.
9 They must hold to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience.
10 They are first to be examined, and admitted to serve as deacons only if there is nothing against them.
11 Similarly, women must be respectable, not gossips, but sober and wholly reliable.
12 Deacons must be husbands of one wife and must be people who manage their children and households well.
13 Those of them who carry out their duties well as deacons will earn a high standing for themselves and an authoritative voice in matters concerning faith in Christ Jesus.
The New Testament speaks of the rulers in the church by the designations of elders, overseers, and shepherds. While these different terms are used, they all refer to the same office: that of the elder.
The terms in the Greek New Testament are presbuteros(elder), episkopos (overseer), and poimeen (shepherd). The words are used interchangeably in the Bible (see Acts 20:17,28; 1 Pet. 5:1-4).
Can you tell me where the Pope comes into the picture?
Peter, in his own epistle to the churches said this:
“I urge the elders among you, as a fellow-elder myself and a witness to the sufferings of Christ, and as one who is to have a share in the glory that is to be revealed:
2 give a shepherd’s care to the flock of God that is entrusted to you: watch over it, not simply as a duty but gladly, as God wants; not for sordid money, but because you are eager to do it (1 Peter 5:1).
Since Peter calls himself a FELLOW ELDER, where does the Pope come into the picture?
RE: And this invalidates the Creed how?
It doesn’t invalidate the creed, but it calls into question your statement that Rome has jurisdiction over all the churches and other churches must bow to its authority.
RE: We might keep in mind what ‘useful’ means. It does not mean sufficient, as a hint.
In his letter to Timothy Scripture is God-breathed, and hence represents God’s very voice speaking, it is profitable for the work of the ministry in the Church of Jesus Christ.
We are told that the work of teaching, and rebuking, and correcting, and training in righteousness, can be undertaken due to the nature of Scripture as God-breathed. What is Paul’s point?
The Church is not left without the voice of God. For when the Church listens to Scripture, she is hearing her Lord speaking to her. The authority of the Church then, in teaching, and rebuking, and instructing, is derived, despite Roman Catholic claims to the contrary, from Scripture itself.
Paul here asserts that the man of God can be complete, capable, proficient, and qualified because he has available to him, always, God’s inspired Scriptures. Surely, here Paul would have to direct us to any and all other rules of faith that we would need to be complete but, he does not.
But, Paul was not satisfied to merely state that the man of God may be a[rtios”, “complete,” but, he goes on to define what he means. “Fully equipped for every good work.”
Paul teaches that the man of God is thoroughly or completely equipped for every good work. Now, what does it mean to say that one “is fully equipped,” if not to say that one is sufficient for a task?
Hence, we see the following:
Number 1: Paul here teaches that the Bible is A rule of faith. For he says the Church’s function of teaching and rebuking and instructing is to be based upon God-inspired Scriptures.
Number 2: We see that this passage teaches the sufficiency of the Scriptures to function in this way.
And, number 3: We see that Paul not only does not refer us to another rule of faith, but implicitly denies the necessity of such a rule of faith by his teaching on the ability of Scripture to COMPLETELY equip the man of God.
RE: Either you acknowledge the Pope’s authority or else you do not.
I acknowledge the Pope’s authority IN SO FAR AS HE TEACHES DOCTRINE COMPATIBLE WITH SCRIPTURE.
If he does not, NO, I do not.
RE: If I had the responsibility to Judge people to their everlasting salvation or damnation, I would be unable to carry it out or even bear it.
I’m glad you acknowledge that.