Peter the First Pope?

[Knowledge3]

The formal title of the Pope is;

'Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of the Prince of the Apostles, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Patriarch of the West, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province, Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City, Servant of the Servants of God',

Are you saying those who are not Roman Catholic are to accept the Catholic pope as a direct Successor of Peter?

 

[Knowledge3]

[BIBLE]Matthew 16:18[/BIBLE]

 

[ShammahBenJudah]

So...at His second coming, when Jesus returns to establish His Millenial Kingdom and "rule the nations with a rod of iron" where will He come? Will His feet touch down at the Vatican? Some other place in Rome? It is from or in Rome that His Kingdom was established?

His Kingdom is actually David's Kingdom...or the Kingdom He gave David continuing as prophesied for eternity. David didn't rule from Rome.

Just a few more thoughts on the subject.

 

[ParsonJefferson]

[bible]Matthew 16:18[/bible]

We've been down this road many times before, but...

The rock (Petra) is the confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

The Church is built on the fact of who Jesus is - not on Peter, the human.

 

[Knowledge3]

We've been down this road many times before, but...

The rock (Petra) is the confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

The Church is built on the fact of who Jesus is - not on Peter, the human.

A historic look at Christianity reveals that Peter once held office in Rome.

 

[Knowledge3]

So...at His second coming, when Jesus returns to establish His Millenial Kingdom and "rule the nations with a rod of iron" where will He come? Will His feet touch down at the Vatican? Some other place in Rome? It is from or in Rome that His Kingdom was established?

His Kingdom is actually David's Kingdom...or the Kingdom He gave David continuing as prophesied for eternity. David didn't rule from Rome.

Just a few more thoughts on the subject.

That is the Davidic dynasty of Judges,Ruth,Samuel,Chronicles and Kings . . .The Old Testament.

 

[ShammahBenJudah]

A historic look at Christianity reveals that Peter once held office in Rome.

Aah I see, so when did David's kingdom end?

 

[ParsonJefferson]

A historic look at Christianity reveals that Peter once held office in Rome.

That doesn't make him the first Pope. Nor does it change what Jesus said.

 

[Knowledge3]

Aah I see, so when did David's kingdom end?

The Psalms of David are everlasting.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

That doesn't make him the first Pope. Nor does it change what Jesus said.

.

 

[ShammahBenJudah]

The Psalms of David are everlasting.

Of course they will, they are considered the inspired Word of God, which will never pass away. But...

"Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this." Isaiah 9:7

So...when did David's Kingdom end? Ummm, like never?

 

[Knowledge3]

So...when did David's Kingdom end? Ummm, like never?

I'm not sure how you expect me to know that.

 

[Rick Otto]

is always welcome.
In fact, many of us recommend it soley. Or is that 'sola'?

 

[DArceri]

There is NO salvation outside the RCC.

Can someone please find this in scripture or at least support for this statement in scripture.

I could personally give you scripture to support a statement that says there is no salvation outside of Jesus Christ.

Please help me on this one.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

There is NO salvation outside the RCC.

Can someone please find this in scripture or at least support for this statement in scripture.

I could personally give you scripture to support a statement that says there is no salvation outside of Jesus Christ.

Please help me on this one.

I'll TRY....


1. The Pope declares, "It is essential for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff." - Unam Sanctum 1305.


2. If the RC denomination officially teaches something, then the Bible must be interpreted as teaching it. Otherwise, the Bible would be errant because it doesn't agree with the RCC and that's impossible. The teachings of the RCC are the "lens" by which the Bible is to be read; any interpretation that would seem to not confirm the teachings of the RCC is incorrect and must be rejected. The teaching of the RCC is that no salvation is found outside of her, and therefore the Bible does teach that.


I hope that helps.


Pax!


- Josiah

 

[DArceri]

I'll TRY....


1. The Pope declares, "It is essential for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff." - Unam Sanctum 1305.


2. If the RC denomination officially teaches something, then the Bible must be interpreted as teaching it. Otherwise, the Bible would be errant because it doesn't agree with the RCC and that's impossible. The teachings of the RCC are the "lens" by which the Bible is to be read; any interpretation that would seem to not confirm the teachings of the RCC is incorrect and must be rejected. The teaching of the RCC is that no salvation is found outside of her, and therefore the Bible does teach that.


I hope that helps.


Pax!


- Josiah

Salvation is not in the gift of the Church or the Pope.

The Apostle Peter made that clear in Acts 4:12 'Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved'.


The True Gospel is Christ centered, not Church centered.

 

[DArceri]

I asked for a biblical bases for the statement. Where did RCC get this from? It can be argued that the RCC is adding to scripture by making these new claims. I thought that was a no-no. What your are implying is the bible pages are not closed since the Pope can basically add new teachings to scripture. I guess we should have a new section in the bible entitled "the Gospels of the Pope".

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

1. The Pope declares, "It is essential for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff." - Unam Sanctum 1305.


2. If the RC denomination officially teaches something, then the Bible must be interpreted as teaching it. Otherwise, the Bible would be errant because it doesn't agree with the RCC and that's impossible. The teachings of the RCC are the "lens" by which the Bible is to be read; any interpretation that would seem to not confirm the teachings of the RCC is incorrect and must be rejected. The teaching of the RCC is that no salvation is found outside of her, and therefore the Bible does teach that.


I hope that helps.


Pax!


- Josiah

Salvation is not in the gift of the Church or the Pope.

The Apostle Peter made that clear in Acts 4:12 'Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved'.


The True Gospel is Christ centered, not Church centered.

I didn't mean to imply that I AGREE with the position (I most certainly do not), only to try to explain it from their perspective - as it was essentially explained to me.


God's richest blessings to you and yours.


- Josiah

 

[DArceri]

I didn't mean to imply that I AGREE with the position (I most certainly do not), only to try to explain it from their perspective - as it was essentially explained to me.


God's richest blessings to you and yours.


- Josiah

Sorry, I didn't realize it was you. I thought it was a defense of a Catholic.

 

[Trento]

We've been down this road many times before, but...

The rock (Petra) is the confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

The Church is built on the fact of who Jesus is - not on Peter, the human.

According to Protestant biblical scholars Peter is Rock which the Church will be built on.


According to
William Hendriksen
member of the Reformed Christian Church
Professor of New Testament Literature at Calvin Seminary
The meaning is, "You are Peter, that is Rock, and upon this rock, that is, on you, Peter I will build my church." Our Lord, speaking Aramaic, said, "And I say to you, you are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church." Jesus, then, is promising Peter that he is going to build his church on him! I accept this view.


New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1973), page 647
JPK page 14
Gerhard Maier
leading conservative evangelical Lutheran theologian
Nowadays a broad consensus has emerged which — in accordance with the words of the text — applies the promise to Peter as a person. On this point liberal (H. J. Holtzmann, E. Schweiger) and conservative (Cullmann, Flew) theologians agree, as well as representatives of Roman Catholic exegesis.


"The Church in the Gospel of Matthew: Hermeneutical Analysis of the Current Debate"
Biblical Interpretation and Church Text and Context
(Flemington Markets, NSW: Paternoster Press, 1984), page 58
JPK pages 16-17
Donald A. Carson III
Baptist and Professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Seminary
(two quotations from different works)
Although it is true that petros and petra can mean "stone" and "rock" respectively in earlier Greek, the distinction is largely confined to poetry. Moreover the underlying Aramaic is in this case unquestionable; and most probably kepha was used in both clauses ("you are kepha" and "on this kepha"), since the word was used both for a name and for a "rock". The Peshitta (written in Syriac, a language cognate with Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses. The Greek makes the distinction between petros and petra simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine petra could not very well serve as a masculine name.


The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Volume 8 (Matthew, Mark, Luke)
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), page 368
JPK pages 17-18
The word Peter petros, meaning "rock" (Gk 4377), is masculine, and in Jesus' follow-up statement he uses the feminine word petra (Gk 4376). On the basis of this change, many have attempted to avoid identifying Peter as the rock on which Jesus builds his church. Yet if it were not for Protestant reactions against extremes of Roman Catholic interpretations, it is doubtful whether many would have taken "rock" to be anything or anyone other than Peter.


Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary — New Testament, vol. 2
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), page 78
JPK page 18
John Peter Lange
German Protestant scholar
The Saviour, no doubt, used in both clauses the Aramaic word kepha (hence the Greek Kephas applied to Simon, John i.42; comp. 1 Cor. i.12; iii.22; ix.5; Gal. ii.9), which means rock and is used both as a proper and a common noun.... The proper translation then would be: "Thou art Rock, and upon this rock", etc.


Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: The Gospel According to Matthew, vol. 8
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1976), page 293
JPK page 19
John A. Broadus
Baptist author
(two quotations from the same work)
Many insist on the distinction between the two Greek words, thou art Petros and on this petra, holding that if the rock had meant Peter, either petros or petra would have been used both times, and that petros signifies a separate stone or fragment broken off, while petra is the massive rock. But this distinction is almost entirely confined to poetry, the common prose word instead of petros being lithos; nor is the distinction uniformly observed.
But the main answer here is that our Lord undoubtedly spoke Aramaic, which has no known means of making such a distinction [between feminine petra and masculine petros in Greek]. The Peshitta (Western Aramaic) renders, "Thou are kipho, and on this kipho". The Eastern Aramaic, spoken in Palestine in the time of Christ, must necessarily have said in like manner, "Thou are kepha, and on this kepha".... Beza called attention to the fact that it is so likewise in French: "Thou art Pierre, and on this pierre"; and Nicholson suggests that we could say, "Thou art Piers (old English for Peter), and on this pier."



Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew
(Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1886), pages 355-356
JPK page 20
J. Knox Chamblin
Presbyterian and New Testament Professor
Reformed Theological Seminary
By the words "this rock" Jesus means not himself, nor his teaching, nor God the Father, nor Peter's confession, but Peter himself. The phrase is immediately preceded by a direct and emphatic reference to Peter. As Jesus identifies himself as the Builder, the rock on which he builds is most naturally understood as someone (or something) other than Jesus himself. The demonstrative this, whether denoting what is physically close to Jesus or what is literally close in Matthew, more naturally refers to Peter (v. 18) than to the more remote confession (v. 16). The link between the clauses of verse 18 is made yet stronger by the play on words, "You are Peter (Gk. Petros), and on this rock (Gk. petra) I will build my church". As an apostle, Peter utters the confession of verse 16; as a confessor he receives the designation this rock from Jesus.


"Matthew"
Evangelical Commentary on the Bible
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1989), page 742
JPK page 30
Craig L. Blomberg
Baptist and Professor of New Testament
Denver Seminary
Acknowledging Jesus as The Christ illustrates the appropriateness of Simon's nickname "Peter" (Petros = rock). This is not the first time Simon has been called Peter (cf. John 1:42), but it is certainly the most famous. Jesus' declaration, "You are Peter", parallels Peter's confession, "You are the Christ", as if to say, "Since you can tell me who I am, I will tell you who you are." The expression "this rock" almost certainly refers to Peter, following immediately after his name, just as the words following "the Christ" in v. 16 applied to Jesus. The play on words in the Greek between Peter's name (Petros) and the word "rock" (petra) makes sense only if Peter is the rock and if Jesus is about to explain the significance of this identification.


The New American Commentary: Matthew, vol. 22
(Nashville: Broadman, 1992), pages 251-252
JPK pages 31-32
David Hill
Presbyterian minister and Senior Lecturer in the Department of Biblical Studies
University of Sheffield, England
On this rock I will build my church: the word-play goes back to Aramaic tradition. It is on Peter himself, the confessor of his Messiahship, that Jesus will build the Church. The disciple becomes, as it were, the foundation stone of the community. Attempts to interpret the "rock" as something other than Peter in person (e.g., his faith, the truth revealed to him) are due to Protestant bias, and introduce to the statement a degree of subtlety which is highly unlikely.


"The Gospel of Matthew"
The New Century Bible Commentary
(London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1972), page 261
JPK page 34
Suzanne de Dietrich
Presbyterian theologian
The play on words in verse 18 indicates the Aramaic origin of the passage. The new name contains a promise. "Simon", the fluctuating, impulsive disciple, will, by the grace of God, be the "rock" on which God will build the new community.


The Layman's Bible Commentary: Matthew, vol. 16
(Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1961), page 93
JPK page 34
Donald A. Hagner
Fuller Theological Seminary
The natural reading of the passage, despite the necessary shift from Petros to petra required by the word play in the Greek (but not the Aramaic, where the same word kepha occurs in both places), is that it is Peter who is the rock upon which the church is to be built.... The frequent attempts that have been made, largely in the past, to deny this in favor of the view that the confession itself is the rock... seem to be largely motivated by Protestant prejudice against a passage that is used by the Roman Catholics to justify the papacy.


Matthew 14-28
Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 33b
(Dallas: Word Books, 1995), page 470
JPK pages 36-37