Posted on 07/28/2008 4:07:43 AM PDT by Gamecock
Who is splitting hairs?
[Galatians 2:9] And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. Peter had no more authority than any of the other Apostles. Paul.....here, makes that very clear.
Paul.....here, absolutely confirms it: [Galatians 2:11] But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. The chief of the Apostles would not have accepted a public criticism such as this: [verse 14] But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
Peter was not a chief Apostle....the keys were given to them all [Matthew 18:18].. The only special thing Peter ever did (by himself) was receive a command from the Holy Spirit [Acts 10:19] to visit Cornelius....and that was because Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles, was still in Arabia [Galatians 1:17] sorting things out. In fact, Peter has never been pinpointed in Rome. He was told by Our Saviour [Matthew 10:5-6] not to go there. That's why you only find him in Asia....in Babylon [ Peter 5:13] and in the vicinity of Judea and Syria [Galatians 2:11]. Tradition does say he was in Rome and since tradition here.....goes against Holy scripture, we know it to be in error.
People in positions of authority make mistakes (Abraham, Moses, Saul, David, Solomon, etc.) but their human failings do not erase their authority.
Peter was not a chief Apostle
Of course he was.
He is mentioned first in every Apostolic list, Scripture literally telling us that he was first among them. He speaks on behalf of the Apostles. Christ gave him alone the commission to feed the flock. Christ named him alone the rock on which He built His church. The Father revealed first and only to him the truth of who Jesus was. He was the Apostle that Christ first revealed Himself to in His glory. He led the Apostles in their public witness.
No serious student of the Scriptures can deny that Peter was the leader of the college.
The reader is free to interpret 1 Peter 5:13 as Peter writing of the Church in the abandoned and desolate ruins of the literal Babylon OR as Peter's commentary on the state of human affairs in Rome, from which he wrote.
That instruction was given to the Apostles for their first mission, before Christ's death and Resurrection.
Later the Risen Christ instructs them to go and teach all nations. Matthew 28:19-20
No....it is you that are confused. Peter did not possess any more authority than the rest. Those who say he did, must...... because of traditional, religious requirements. Scripture does nothing to give Peter any special authority and I understand your dilemma.
If any Apostle were to be considered more influential with the early church.....a name other than Paul would be questionable. He was given authority to evangelize [Acts 9:15] any....and everyone. Peter was only given the responsibility to the House of Israel [Matthew 10:5-6]. This is why you never see Peter evangelizing the Gentiles. He did not evangelize Cornelius as he (Cornelius) was already a God fearing man [Acts 10:2]. This is also why Peter never goes to Rome.
That's not what Jesus said.
If any Apostle were to be considered more influential with the early church.....a name other than Paul would be questionable
Paul himself publicly acknowledged the subordination of his authority to Peter and James.
Influence and authority are two different things - that's why two different words are used to describe them.
Peter was only given the responsibility to the House of Israel
False, as Cornelius shows.
He did not evangelize Cornelius as he (Cornelius) was already a God fearing man
Plenty of people in the Gentile world of the Mediterranean were God-fearers - i.e. they acknowledged the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as the one true God.
But they did not know about His Son, and therefore they needed to be evangelized. Cornelius was just such a man.
This is also why Peter never goes to Rome.
Peter, of course, died in Rome after ministering there. His presence in Rome is attested by his own words.
That was during Christ's life. The Risen Christ instructed them--all of them--differently at the end of †Matthew's Gospel.
Mat 28:19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.
Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.
D1618>...in Babylon [ Peter 5:13]...
The reader is free to interpret 1 Peter 5:13 as Peter writing of the Church in the abandoned and desolate ruins of the literal Babylon OR as Peter's commentary on the state of human affairs in Rome, from which he wrote.
24 posted on July 29, 2008 7:02:48 AM MDT by Petronski
There are records of Jewish fundraising in Babylon for the tribes in JudeaAnyone who is a student of history unless they are invincibly ignorant, know that until
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
Saddam Hussein there has been a large and thriving Jewish community in Babylon.
during the revolts from 100BCE - 100 CE
Babylon was an abandoned heap as early as 100 BC.
Peter was in Rome.
Peter was in Rome.
Talmud Bavli (Babylonian Talmud) The Talmud Bavli was transmitted orally for centuries Since the Exile to Babylonia in 586 BCE, there had been Jewish communities living in Babylonia as well as in Judea, There are some who wish to be invincibly ignorant. Funny History tells us otherwise.Talmud
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
prior to its compilation by Jewish scholars in Babylon about the 5th century AD.
as many of the captives never returned home. From then till the Talmudic period the Babylonian Jewish population
increased through natural growth as well as migration. The most important of the Jewish centres were
Nehardea, Nisibis, Mahoza, Pumbeditha and Sura.
It was no longer necessary for scholars to travel regularly to Israel to gather authentic traditions.
Well....it may have been....but by the first century there were millions of Israelites living in and about the area: Josephus/Antiquities, Book XI, Chapter 58, Paragraph 2 [And when these Jews had understood what piety the king had towards God, and what kindness he had for Esdras, they were all greatly pleased; nay, many of them took their effects with them, and came to Babylon, as very desirous of going down to Jerusalem; but then the entire body of the people of Israel remained in that country; wherefore there are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans, while the ten tribes are beyond Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers.]
The other two tribes still under Rome's influence, of course would be Judah and Benjamin (Judea) and most of the priestly tribe of Levi who were not counted separately.....but as part of other tribes. The rest of the Israelites of the dispersion [II Kings 17:6] have never been shown in scripture to have returned from their exile. Josephus tells us where many of them still were during the first century and many were still in Babylon.....abandoned heap....or not!
Coincidently.....scripture tells us that the Apostle Peter was here [1 Peter 5:13].....evangelizing these folks just as The Lord [Matthew 10:5-6] had told him to do. Scripture never finds Peter in Rome as tradition tells us. He was told not to go there!
If that's the case.....why then do we see all this surprise and indignation when Peter visits Cornelius? [Acts 10:45] And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
And......[Acts 11:1-3] And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God. And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him, Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.
This is at least 6 or 7 years after the resurrection. Why are these folks so surprised....Apostles among them? Are you certain that your understanding of [Matthew 28:19-20] is correct?
Chapter & Verse?
Paul himself publicly acknowledged the subordination of his authority to Peter and James.
Chapter & Verse?
False, as Cornelius shows.
Peter was not sent to evangelize Cornelius. Cornelius was already a god fearing man. He was directed to evangelize the House of Israel.
Plenty of people in the Gentile world of the Mediterranean were God-fearers - i.e. they acknowledged the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as the one true God.
Correct....and this was Paul's task....to bring the "Good News" to these folks. Peter was instructed to go to the Israelites and "Not to go to the Gentiles" [Matthew 10:5-6].
Peter, of course, died in Rome after ministering there. His presence in Rome is attested by his own words.
Peter never set foot in Rome. There was a "Simon" in Rome about that time....but it was not Simon Peter. Justin Martyr was the first "Church Father" to catalog the early events of Rome and he frequently mentions Simon Magus and his deeds. He never mentions Simon Peter. Do you consider this odd? After all....Justin wrote early in the second century....not too far removed from the actual events themselves! Peter had been in Babylon....as The Lord had instructed to be.
False.
Justin Martyr was the first "Church Father" to catalog the early events of Rome...
False.
...and he frequently mentions Simon Magus and his deeds.
Are you saying Pope Peter I was Simon Magus?
Nope. The reference was to Rome.
...evangelizing these folks just as The Lord [Matthew 10:5-6] had told him to do. Scripture never finds Peter in Rome as tradition tells us.
Arguing from silence is very weak.
He was told not to go there!
And later he was told to go everywhere!
Let's look at [John 21:15-17] So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. e saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
Just who were these sheep? It was here in Galilee that Our Lord gave the Apostles their commission again. Our Lord had previously indicated who his commission was directed to: [Matthew 15:24] But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Coincidently, these were the same folks who He had directed the Apostles to go and evangelize in [Matthew 10:5-6].
[Matthew 28:19] Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Nations:1484. ethnos (eth'-nos)a race (as of the same habit), i.e. a tribe; specially, a foreign (non-Jewish) one. And again, scripture confirms scripture. Our Lord had instructed the twelve to go to the tribes (House of Israel). The fact that modern translations show this to be "Nations" just shows a theological bias. Why would Our Lord tell the Apostles to not go among the Gentiles and then turn around and tell them to do exactly what He had said not to do? More importantly.....why were the Apostles....6 years after the crucifixion, so indignant and upset that Peter had been dealing with Gentiles [Acts 10:45][Acts 11:1-3] if The Lord had told them to do it?
And yet moved by the woman's faith, He healed her daughter as she had sought:
Mat 15:28 Then Jesus answering, said to her: O woman, great is thy faith: be it done to thee as thou wilt: and her daughter was cured from that hour.Did He not consider her daughter one of His sheep?
Your attempt fails.
Because that is what He wanted? A mission to the Jews before the Resurrection and a mission to all the world afterwards?
Who are you or I or anyone to tell Him what He can want?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.