Where the Gospels speak; where the Lord speaks, that is the pinnacle of the Bible. Where St. Paul or the others speak, in apparent contradiction of the Gospel, since there is no Biblical contradiction, they must be interpreted in the light of the Gospels.
I would concur with giving very strong weight to the words of Jesus, and/or the Gospels. However, I need to know more about this idea of "interpreting in light of the Gospels" or "interpreting through the prism of the Gospels". How is that actually done? Earlier on this thread, I was given an explanation that I could not in good conscience agree with. :)
Sts. Peter and Paul are NOT our Saviours. Jesus is. And what He has to say is absolutely the most important.
I can agree to this, but (and I am not saying you are making this argument) I could not agree that what Jesus said was more true. Is that perhaps where part of the problem is?
And, regardless of personal theology or distaste, Matt 16:19, and Matt 18:18 exist and exist very clearly. We are commanded to do as He instructed us. If we do not, then we are not following His instructions and can hardly claim to be one of the elect hmmm?
Absolutely. But, this may be one of those times when we agree on the same words, but are thinking very different things. :)
Well, in many Bibles, the Words of Jesus are written in red, versus black for the rest of the text, so that they stand out.
We take the Words of Jesus as is and understand them unto themselves. Next, we take the words of the Gospels and fit them to the Words of Jesus. Now we have the basic shape or form of the Word of God while Jesus was on Earth.
The rest of the NT should then be read with one eye on the Gospels so that any apparent interpretational conflict is settled not by passing over or ignoring the Gospels, but by examining the words of the men who came and did after Jesus left. Now, we understand the NT as a whole. Jesus said that He came to show us what the OT really was and meant, so that we must look at the OT once we understand the NT and measure the OT by the NT understanding that we have.
I agree that we do have some divergence here. I have attempted to show that portions of the Bible are more important than others - the Sermon on the Mount versus the list of begettors in Genesis, for instance. They are all the Word of God, certainly and must not be discounted.
But I think that for instruction in our daily lives and in the eternal destination of our souls, the Sermon is more immediately relevant than who begot whom.