Webster knows Fashion not the Early Church Fathers.
Posted on 05/07/2012 2:39:34 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Although the sinless life of Jesus Christ is a foundational tenet of the Christian faith, a study recently released by the Diocese of Camden found that 60 percent of practicing Catholics in southern New Jersey believe Jesus sinned during his time on Earth.
"The number of Catholics who have a very flawed, a seriously flawed, understanding of who Jesus is, that's troublesome," Bishop Joseph Galante of the Diocese of Camden said during a press conference, USA Today reports. "We've got to re-focus on how we teach and inform people. Jesus is the foundation of who we are as Catholics."
The study was commissioned by the diocese with the hope that the results would help it to better evangelize the communities it serves. The study was conducted by the Barna Group, a Ventura, Calif.-based research organization, which surveyed 612 adults living in the six New Jersey counties within the diocese.
Of those surveyed, 34 percent identified themselves as Catholic, but there are some discrepancies between what the church teaches and what some of them believe.
For example, the study showed that four out of ten of these Catholics disagree with the idea that sex should be reserved solely for marriage. While 38 percent of the total residents living within the Camden Diocese agree strongly with the idea that the Bible is "totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches," only 28 percent of Catholics in the diocese believe the same.
Another major issue Galante discussed during the press conference was the high number of Catholics in his diocese who simply don't attend Mass. One-third of lapsed Catholics said they have other priorities or are too busy to attend, while others said they just aren't interested in church (27 percent).
"What intrigued me in particular was the high number of people who don't attend Mass simply because they have other priorities," said Galante.
"One of the things we need to do is emphasize that worship time can also be part of family time as well. These findings are both troubling and a challenge as we begin to deepen our evangelization efforts."
Peter Feuerherd, director of communications for the Diocese of Camden, told The Christian Post on Monday that another thing that struck him from the study was the low percentage of Catholics who invite others to church. The study found that Catholics (33 percent) were half as likely as Protestants (66 percent) to invite someone to visit their church.
"I find that the 'ask' is so important, and Catholics are not in the habit of the 'ask.' Even our parishes are not in the habit of the ask," said Feuerherd.
He also indicated that a major issue all churches have to deal with is the tendency for people to want to always be productive in the American culture. Those who don't take time off from work on the weekends are honored in our society, he says, and other "distractions" like youth sporting events and various forms of entertainment can sometimes take away from church attendance.
"I think we have lost ... the idea that whatever that Sabbath day is, it is valuable. It's important that people have it," he said.
Other interesting findings from the study:
-Of the Catholics surveyed, 38 percent favor attending church only on holidays.
-Among all of the adults surveyed, 51 percent said churches are "too involved" in opposing abortion or same-sex marriage.
-Nine out of ten (89 percent) adults said they know about the clergy abuse scandals that have occurred within the Catholic Church. Among those who are aware of the scandals, 89 percent consider it a "major issue."
-Only 18 percent of Catholics strongly agree that it is their personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs with others, as compared to 40 percent of Protestants and 36 percent of people who believe in non-Christian faiths.
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? Shouldn’t 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 God’s 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, I’ve 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 one’s 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 that’s 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.
Not surprised by this one bit. I’ve always maintained at most 10% of those who self-identify as Christians in the US would actually qualify as one based on their beliefs.
"The apostles and the elders came together to look into this matter. After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us;" - Acts 15:6-8
Here is a more complete rebuttal with Ray. Unless someone is completely in denial it is not possible to realize how wrong Webster is
http://www.davidmacd.com/downloads/Papacy_early_fathers_debate.pdf
Stumbling “Upon this Rock”
Steve Ray Responds to Bill Webster’s “Rebuttal” of his Book UPON THIS ROCK and Critiques Bill’s Use and Abuse of the Patristic Witness regarding the Primacy of Peter and the Petrine Primacy of Rome
William Webster is aiding satan!Something will come out soon exposing him unless he recants the damage he has caused
Webster knows Fashion not the Early Church Fathers.
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 name’s 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 God’s 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.
And here is Webster’s response(s) to Steve Ray in his website:
http://christiantruth.com/articles/stephenray.html
And here:
http://christiantruth.com/articles/ray2.html
And here:
http://christiantruth.com/articles/ray3index.html
Now, since Steve Ray and William Webster are not present in this forum, maybe you can tell me where Bill Webster errs and in what way he is “aiding satan”.
We have all the time and bytes in the world...
Webster loses completely in all your links,
Even worse he denies that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist.
With all my heart I know for sure that Webster is satanic.
RE: “The apostles and the elders came together to look into this matter. After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us;” - Acts 15:6-8
___________________
Don’t stop there now. Read the rest of the passage:
12 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. 13 When they finished, James spoke up. “Brothers,” he said, “listen to me. 14 Simon has described to us how God first intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles. 15 The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:
16 “‘After this I will return
and rebuild David’s fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
and I will restore it,
17 that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,
even all the Gentiles who bear my name,
says the Lord, who does these things’
18 things known from long ago.
19 “IT IS MY JUDGMENT, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21 For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.”
So, Paul and Barnabas ALSO gave their testimony and opinions as part of the council, as did Peter.
BUT WHO MADE THE FINAL JUDGMENT? (the Roman Catholic Bible uses the word — VERDICT).
ANSWER: JAMES, NOT PETER.
Where in this passage does it show us that the Pope, Peter made the verdict? It was James, who was the Bishop of the church of Jerusalem (where the council was held ) who made the verdict.
RE: With all my heart I know for sure that Webster is satanic.
Saying it and showing it SCRIPTURALLY are two different things.
Your words mean nothing to me if you cannot back it up with God’s word. So please, show me.
I am not afraid to say and I stake my own Salvation and proclaim that William Webster is a tool of satan
I can tell you 100 percent that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist(valid only in the catholic/orthodox church)-Body Blood Soul and Divinity. I have witnessed Eucharist Miracles and have seen prayers answered in the lives of people during prayer at Eucharist Adoration.
I will die in this belief
I wonder what they think the sin was?
Most catholics pray to Mary and other dead people, and that is a gross sin (necromancy) so maybe misery just seeks company.
James offered Peter his advice as he judged it. As for the Catholic Bible, none of my Catholic Bibles, my Douay Rheims, my Revised Standard Version (2nd edition) or my New American Standard Bible use the word "verdict". They all use the word "judgment".
You appear to be attempting (unsuccessfully) to argue two anti-Catholic points; that Peter was not an Apostle to the Gentiles and that Peter was first among equals, the first Pope. The first point is perfectly established by Acts 10 and 15. Peter's primacy is established extensively throughout the Scriptures.
Peace be with you.
It only comes to our realization when going back to the text he presumes to have read. He is either an idiot or a liar. Just read his footnotes. He never has you go to a complete text source. He pumps up alot of nonsense like a lawyer who does not care for the truth.
if you want to see just go to what said writing outside of his so called source/ sites then match up the whole writing you will be truly amazed.
I am not kidding it's that bad.
So, let’s pick just one particular so called “cherry picked” example.
Since we have been discussing Augustine’s view of Matthew 16 ( Peter as the Rock of the church ), maybe we can start with that...
Tell me in what way Webster misrepresented Augustine, and please don’t put another link in your reply.
Just use your own words to describe how he misrepresented Augustine.
RE: I will die in this belief
What you want to do is what you want to do, it’s your life and you are free and responsible to live it. Just as I personally am.
I personally stand by the WORDS of Christ and the Apostle as revealed in God’s word — SCRIPTURE.
RE: I am not afraid to say and I stake my own Salvation and proclaim that William Webster is a tool of satan
Well, then it would not be hard to show in what way he is, right?
So please show me, via documented evidence.
RE: Most catholics pray to Mary and other dead people, and that is a gross sin (necromancy) so maybe misery just seeks company.
Actually it is not accurate to say that Catholics worship Mary or the Saints.
They VENERATE ( as oppose to Worship ) Mary and the Saints.
In the case of Mary, they HYPER-Venerate her above the other saints.
I should know this because I actually went to a Catholic school (taught by Jesuits). Fortunately, they taught me to use my mind and as I did that, I had to conclude that I can be a believer in Christ and the apostles but I cannot be Roman Catholic ( it would be hypocritical of me to be one if I do not accept all her tenets ).
Anyway, in Catholic teaching,The highest honor that is possible is given to God alone, and that is called in Latin “latria.”
The second highest honor that is given is “hyperdulia,” and that is given to the Mary alone.
The third type of honor is “dulia,” and that is given to all the angels and saints in heaven. After that there are various grades of honor.
So, let’s not attack a red herring. Catholics ARE NOT TAUGHT to worship Mary and the Saints and if Catholics do (and many do unfortunately), it is a result of POOR RELIGIOUS EDUCATION.
RE: James offered Peter his advice as he judged it.
Where in the text does it say that James gave Peter advise and where in the text does it say that Peter gave the final judgment?
I was quoting from the Roman Catholic NEW JERUSALEM BIBLE. Are you saying that their translation is misleading?
RE: You appear to be attempting (unsuccessfully) to argue two anti-Catholic points; that Peter was not an Apostle to the Gentiles
Let’s correct that, Peter and Paul BOTH are apostles to Jews and Gentiles (how does one pick and choose who one wants to share the gospel with?).
The question is what was the MAIN work of either one at the start of their ministries?
However, Paul says this (NASV):
7 But on the contrary, seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised 8 (for He who effectually worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised effectually worked for me also to the Gentiles)
This tells me that Peter’s work was MAINLY (not SOLELY) to the Jews and Paul’s was MAINLY (Not SOLELY) to the Gentiles.
Nothing wrong with that. A division of labor goes a long way towards increasing the cause of the Gospel.
We have missionaries right now preaching the gospel MAINLY in Africa and others preaching MAINLY in the middle east. That does not mean that when a middle easterner is encountered by the African missionary he is going to withhold the gospel from him. That would be foolish. Same principle applies to both Peter and Paul.
Also remember this, just because one mainly works to preach the gospel to Jews at the early part of one’s ministry DOES NOT MEAN that at the LATER part of one’s ministry, the focus will not be on gentiles as they start to expand.
Peter can and does expand on Paul’s work in Europe in the later part of his ministry.
I see no contradiction in what I wrote whatsoever.
RE: and that Peter was first among equals, the first Pope.
The Latin Church Father, St. Ambrose, for instance, taught that Peter and Paul were equal: “It was proper that Paul should go to see Peter. Why? was Peter superior to him and to the other Apostles? No, but because, of all the Apostles, he was the first to be entrusted by the Lord with the care of the churches. Had he need to be taught, or to receive a commission from Peter? No, but that Peter might know that Paul had received the power which had also been given to himself.” (The Papacy, by Abbe Guettee, pp. 173-174).
Furthermore, he taught that Peter’s primacy was not one rank, but of faith and confession:
“As soon as Peter heard these words, ‘Whom say ye that I am?’ remembering his place, he exercised this primacy, a primacy of confession, not of honour; a primacy of faith, not of rank.” (The Papacy, by Abbe Guettee, p. 174).
The first point is NOT established at all in Acts 10 or 15. In the case of Acts 15, It was JAMES who made the final judgement or verdict ( as the New Jerusalem, Bible used the word ).
In fact, Paul PUBLICLY states thathe is equal to even the most eminent apostle.
See here:
2 Corinthians 11:4-5 (NASB): “5 For I consider myself not in the least inferior to the most eminent apostles. 6 But even if I am unskilled in speech, yet I am not so in knowledge; in fact, in every way we have made this evident to you in all things.”
HE REPEATS IT TWICE IN FACT:
2 Corinthians 12:11: “ Actually I should have been commended by you, for in no respect was I inferior to the most eminent apostles, even though I am a nobody.”
So, NOPE. Peter’s primacy of jurisdiction or rank is IN NO WAY TAUGHT IN SCRIPTURE.
He is honored, YES, he is in many ways the leader, YES. He is in many ways the most outspoken, YES.
YET, IN NO WAY DOES SCRIPTURE PUT HIM ABOVE ANY OTHER APOSTLE. THEY ARE EQUALS.
Paul himself attests to it.
Peace be with you too.
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.