Why waste the energy?

[Fiosh]

Why omit so many verses? Why tell only half the story?? Are you afraid of the truth?

Omit verses?  What are you talking about?  There are more verses than I could begin to type, though I will try, that show the primacy of Peter. And, a handful that might be misinterpreted.

Let's go ahead and look at the REST of what happened at this meeting in Acts 15

Like I've never read it before?  I've debated this issues with a Protestant friend who holds a PhD in theology.  I've heard ALL the arguments.  I'm not saying I'm nearly as smart or learned as he is, but I was never "stumped". Why?  Because what I believe is true.  And I don't have to twist Scripture to try to prove it.

WARNING!!!!  This is the Word of God!

(oh pah-leeze! )

you are more dramatic than my 7 year old niece!

James's Judgment

  13After they had stopped speaking, James answered, saying, "Brethren, listen to me.   14"Simeon (why wasn't he called Peter or Pope?) has related how God first concerned Himself about taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name.

  19"Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles,

James made the ruling. Simeon (Peter) is clearly UNDER his authority

Think again.  In my Church, the bishop has jurisdiction over his territory in many areas.  He can look to the Vatican for guidance, but he often has the final say.

Theoretically speaking, let's say a bishop in a war zone knew that his priests didn't have access to churches. He could allow them to say weekly Mass in tents.

Notice that Peter is the first to speak (you left out those verses). Peter delivers the revelation that makes the room fall silent.  James merely confirms what Peter has already laid the groundwork for. James makes the judgement for his local church. No biggie.

However, what is more exciting in this chapter happens later in verse 28 "For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things..."

Herein is a perfect example of the practice modeled by my Church.  The Church leaders, meeting in council, led by the Holy Spirit, settle matters of interpretation and doctrine.  Every individual is not left to decide on their own.  It's Biblical.

===============================================

Another example?

WARNING; This is the Word of God!

Gee, I wonder if I ever read this passage before???

Let's check it out.

Galatians 2

  11 But when Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.  

Paul rebuked the Pope? Of course not...Peter was not the Pope nor in authority over Paul

12 For prior to the coming of certain men from James, (another indication that James was the leader) he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision.

why was Peter afraid of the authority of James? Because James HAD authority.

  13The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy.

(How does an infallible Pope fall into hypocrisy in matters like these?)

 

Yep! Sounds vaguely familiar. 

No one EVER said the pope does not err. He does.  He also sins. 

Infallibility is only applied in cases where the pope speaks to the Church specifically to teach in the area of faith or morals. 

Peter, did a stupid thing. Yup.  Other Popes have done stupid things.

No pope has ever erred in the teaching of doctrine.

Peter was under the authority of Paul AND James here. It's just painfully obvious to anyone who will read the text with an intellectually honest analysis.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nope, wrong again. Peter was not under their "authority". Sure, they corrected his behavior. Any brother has the right, no the duty, to correct another brother who is in error.

In my next post I will list all the passages I can that show the primacy of Peter...until my fingers fall off. Let's see...you have 5 that you question. And, I've given you my response to each one.

I'd like to to reply to each of mine.

Peace,

Fiosh

[Assisi]

This one verse wipes out your entire premise

Galatians 2:9 and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars,

Do you realize what this is saying? Paul says that they are "reputed" to be the leaders. In other words, they are the leaders by reputation...not appointment.

Why didn't Paul say that Peter (Cephas) was appointed by Jesus to be the leader even once in all of his writings?

Because it isn't true. Simple logic.

It's up to you to believe the truth or swallow a camel. If you deny the obvious there is no reason to talk further. I have no desire to destroy Catholics...my only desire is to find the truth.

In some things I find Catholics and their doctrine more truthful than Protestants...but no one gets a pass.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Christ established

[Guest yod]

Deftly avoiding the point

Evidently you have no answer?

Notice that Peter is the first to speak (you left out those verses).

They were already stated and I never said that he wasn't in the room or incapable of speaking

Peter delivers the revelation that makes the room fall silent.  James merely confirms what Peter has already laid the groundwork for. James makes the judgement for his local church. No biggie.

James heard Peter, Paul, and Barnabas testify and made the ruling. This was THE original church at Jerusalem and this meeting was about the nations. It wasn't a "local church" issue.

These things were discussed and James made the ruling which was carried to the gentile churches.

OK...I am now convinced that you are happy ignoring the truth.

Wouldn't want to wake you up from the pleasant sleep.

Good night

[mrs]

No pope has ever erred in the teaching of doctrine.

[Assisi]

Deftly avoiding the point

Evidently you have no answer?

Notice that Peter is the first to speak (you left out those verses).

They were already stated and I never said that he wasn't in the room or incapable of speaking

Peter delivers the revelation that makes the room fall silent.

[Fiosh]

Deftly avoiding the point

Evidently you have no answer?

Why don't we start in Chap 1: 18  (seems you left out some of the story)  "Then after 3 years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and remained with him 15 days.

then in Chap 2: 8 " ( for he who worked thru PETER for the mission to the circumcised worked thru me also for the Gentiles)

I am not impressed by all your bluster, yod.  You really have no point.  So Paul, Peter, James and John were seen as "pillars".

Yeah?  Pope Benedict XVI and the cardinals are seen as pillars.

Here's the list I promised:

(Assisi already mentioned a few)

Peter is mentioned in the New Testament 195 times.

[ John 29 times; James-19 ]

Peter is always listed first when the Apostles are named

Matt 10:2-5

Mark 3:16-19

Luke 6: 14-17

Acts 1:13

more commonly is "Peter and the 12"

He is the only one who receives a name change (different from a nickname) Matt 16:18

He is given the "keys to the kigdom" and is promised "whatever you bind on earth..."  Matt 16:19

Peter walks on water  Matt 1:28-29

John allows Peter to enter the tomb of Jesus first  John 20:6

Peter is the first Apostle to know of the resurrection  Mark 16:7

The risen Christ appears to Peter first of all the Apostles  Luke 24:34

Jesus preaches from Peter's boat  Luke 5:3

Jesus says to Peter, " Simon, Simon, Satan has demanded to sift all of you......And once you have turned  back, you must strengthen your brothers. Luke 22: 31-32

Christ makes Peter shepherd of His Church  John 21: 15-17

Peter leads the Apostles in preaching on Pentecost  Acts 2: 14

He performs the first Pentecost miracle  Acts 3

He speaks for all the Apostles when they are put on trial  Acts 4

Peter first welcomes Gentiles into the Church Acts 11

He ex-communicated the first heretic  Acts 8: 18-23

Peter first declared, "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God".  Jesus answered, " Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven".

I can trace my Church back thru history to Peter and ultimately to Christ.

I do not fear the word of God.

I love God's word.

Peace to you brother yod,

Fiosh

Notice that Peter is the first to speak (you left out those verses).

They were already stated and I never said that he wasn't in the room or incapable of speaking

Then we agree.

Peter delivers the revelation that makes the room fall silent.

[irishcowboy]

I just wanted to say that I'm a non-christian but grew up Pentecostal. I remember reading religious tracts in church by a flaming fundy named Jack Chick telling me how Catholics were in the wrong.

[Guest Ringo]

I just wanted to say that I'm a non-christian but grew up Pentecostal. I remember reading religious tracts in church by a flaming fundy named Jack Chick telling me how Catholics were in the wrong.

[Pax]

I just wanted to say that I'm a non-christian but grew up Pentecostal. I remember reading religious tracts in church by a flaming fundy named Jack Chick telling me how Catholics were in the wrong.

[Guest Ringo]

Oh thanx man Im glad u feel my pain. Yea that Jack Chick man I dont now HOW he can call himself christian.

why so? He preaches what's true instead of what's popular.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Because all he preaches he does in hate. Like the faith or not, are you not suppose to minister to people in LOVE not hate? This i snot what Jack Chick does. Also, he makes wild and outlandish claims about Roman Catholics, almost none of which can he back up with proof. The man has a vendetta against the Church,and I dont think (although Im not God this stems from wat believe) that Jesus would condone such hatred.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Did Jesus preach in hate when He took a whip of scourges and flipped over tables and rebuke the Pharisees and tax collectors and lawyers and call them snakes and hypocrites and open sepulchres...need I go on???

What is love? A gentle, politically-correct speaker like the antichrist who comes in his own name to unite mankind?

Jesus came to send a sword...not peace.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You have the right idea, but the wrong spirit. The only death I wish to impose is upon death itself! When I see "religion" interfering with the real work of bringing God's loving presence into this world, I get a bit testy myself. Catholics are no more wrong, nor right, than the protestant church. Each need to embrace one another in Jesus. In time, the differences will be worked out. I, for one, take my stand with Catholics (e.g., I'm a protestant)!