Indeed, but which simply does not support the church looking to the Peter of Scripture as the first of a line of infallible popes reigning supreme in Rome, which egregious ecclesiastical extrapolation is one giant leap of eisegesis.
Not only that, you admitted the whole (one holy catholic apostolic church) assembly of Apostles, including those eligible to be Apostles and those in communion with them. was given this authority. You also linked it to the Jewish origins of binding and loosing. You have admitted much here. Now, any gainsaying aside, it is simply a matter of succession and provenance.
"Not only that" conclusion is a problem on multiple levels, for the Jewish origins of binding and loosing shows that presuming ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome is unscriptural and presumptuous, as is the premise that one must formally be in communion with the apostles to have this spiritual power, and as is that Rome's so-called apostolic successors do not fail of the qualifications and credentials of manifest Biblical apostles, which they do, (Acts 1:21,22; 1Cor. 9:1; Gal. 1:11,12; 2Co. 6:4-10) and as is that apostolic successors are not simply presbuteros (senior/elder) or episkopos (superintendent/overseer) - not distinctively titled (usually celibate) priests.
Thus the matter of succession and provenance is your undoing, gainsaying aside.
There is no one named "Peter of Scripture;" there is someone called Simon Peter, or Cephas, the Apostle to whom the Messiah said these mighty words, And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Matthew, Catholic chapter sixteen, Protestant verses seventeen to nineteen,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James
I believe Him.
"Not only that" conclusion is a problem on multiple levels, for the Jewish origins of binding and loosing shows that presuming ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome is unscriptural and presumptuous, as is the premise that one must formally be in communion with the apostles to have this spiritual power, and as is that Rome's so-called apostolic successors do not fail of the qualifications and credentials of manifest Biblical apostles, which they do, (Acts 1:21,22; 1Cor. 9:1; Gal. 1:11,12; 2Co. 6:4-10) and as is that apostolic successors are not simply presbuteros (senior/elder) or episkopos (superintendent/overseer) - not distinctively titled (usually celibate) priests.
Thus the matter of succession and provenance is your undoing, gainsaying aside.
Does your faith community have succession and provenance ?
Succession and provenance are not my undoing; I am not in rebellion or protesting. I am in faith believing the words of the LORD Jesus Christ, that He built His church on the Apostle Peter, and there has been one holy catholic apostolic church ever since, to this day.