The missing piece of the YOU ARE PETER puzzle

[Metal Minister]

BobRyan, you wrote: "I fully expect that Peter would be just as opposed to the Papal succession doctrines and all that comes with it - as many other Christians are."

I see not one word from Peter in the Bible where he squabbled with Jesus about his name change or his acceptance of the Keys as stated in Matt.16:15:-19.

I'm sorry Barry, I don't mean to offend, but is English not your first language? I only ask because many of your arguments don't make sense. Bob said Peter would be opposed to the Papacy (which we see is true in his admission that he is a fellow elder.) So why would we think he would "squabble with Jesus" over an authority Jesus gave to all the apostles?

In this verse of Matt.28:20 " Teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you " Do you think that Jesus only came for the 1st century Christians alone and not for generations of future members of His Church? There is only ONE CHURCH that has these qualities and that church is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, no matter how much you anti-Catholics rant and rave against these Words from Jesus you can never change the Truth from our Lord as found here in [ Luke 10: 16 ] Now instead of your bombastic excuse's for denial of that Bible verse try refuting it from your Bible.
Must I remind you of further bible verses that show Jesus intended for a continuation of successors as explained in the Book of Acts and Titus.

We've been over this before Barry. There is no line of papal succession found within the pages of scripture. The only people mentioned are those who were apostles appointing elders of churches. This would make sense since there was no uniformity yet. The first Church was a conglomeration of small scattered churches and believers with no central authority. (Aside from Chrst, there were many apostles, no one bowed the knee to Rome or Peter. This is absent from the pages of scripture.)

You wrote: "as many other Christians are."

The only other Christians that squawked about Jesus and His Teachings were the future protestors aka Protestants

*sigh* No. We "protesters" as you'd like to say (which the way you are using it seems as though you're trying to hurl an insult) weren't "sqwaking against the teachings of Jesus", the early Protestants were "protesting" the abuses and overreach of the RCC. If they were against what Jesus said, they wouldn't have been Christians now would they.

 

[barryatlake]

Metal, you misunderstand. I was implying that no where in Holy Scripture does Peter squabble with Jesus about Jesus changing his name from Peter, Simon to Cephas, Kapas, a name change by God/ Jesus meant an important role i.e .as in Abram to Abraham

Apostolic Succession is shown from Books of Acts and Titus.

As far as calling you and your ilk Christians,anybody that believes in the concept [ biblically implicit ] of "Trinity" is considered a Christian.

 

[Metal Minister]

Metal, you misunderstand. I was implying that no where in Holy Scripture does Peter squabble with Jesus about Jesus changing his name from Peter, Simon to Cephas, Kapas, a name change by God/ Jesus meant an important role i.e .as in Abram to Abraham

Apostolic Succession is shown from Books of Acts and Titus.

As far as calling you and your ilk Christians,anybody that believes in the concept [ biblically implicit ] of "Trinity" is considered a Christian.

"You and your ilk" is an insulting phrase....

 

[Tallguy88]

MOD HAT ON

Closed for review.

MOD HAT OFF