Originally posted by JesusIsAlive Peter is mentioned with preference at times (I concur with you on that) but so is James and John. Time and time again the Scriptures cite the triplets (Peter, James, and John). In fact, it was to the Apostle John that Jesus appeared on the isle of Patmos (I know Peter was already dead by then). But the point is the vision that John (not Peter) received from the Lord is all recorded in the Book of Revelation (some twenty-two chapters of prophecy, which is nearly three times what Peter wrote). Not to mention John wrote the "Gospel According to John" (Twenty-one chapters about the life, teachings, ministry, trial, crucifixion, and glorious resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ). Hmm...I wonder why Peter wasn't given this important assignment of writing one of the four Gospels? Peter's name is not on even one of the Gospels. There is Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, but no Peter (hmm...kinda strange don't you think since he was so important right Grandy?)
But…the entire body of Christ (i.e. Christians) disagree with you and the “Church Fathers” because we know what the Scriptures actually state. We don’t read into the text what we want or wish to be there, we take it for what it is.
[b]
Peter was not “their” leader, but “a” leader [b]among leaders in the early church. This is just how God operates. Someone had to spearhead the church, but [b]not exercise absolute authority over the entire church (ever heard of the “separation of powers?”). Anyhoo, the prerogative of total authority is reserved for Jesus only. God will appoint leaders over local flocks (just as He did with Peter, James, Paul, etc.), but it is completely contrary to Scripture and God’s order to invest total authority in one person, in the church. God just does not do this because of what it can lead do (i.e. cultism such as David Koresh-ism, Jim Jones-ism, polygamist compound-ism, Heaven’s Gate-ism and the like). Peter was a "seeming" pillar (again, I give you that) but so was James and John (go back and read the Scriptures). Don’t have either the time or inclination to look this up? Well, here it is:
Galatians 2:9
And when [b]James, Cephas, and [b]John, who seemed to be [b]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.
Uh oh…did you just see that? The triplets were mentioned again, but…but (lip quivers) Peter (or Cephas, it doesn’t matter because it is referring to the same person) was listed [b]second and not first! What is the Roman Catholic Church going to do now?
(Runs for the hills).
I am just kidding. I did that just to show you that Peter was no Pope and that just because he is mentioned first (most of the time) that does not indicate that he somehow wielded supreme authority over any other apostle (the above verse in Galations 2:9 as well as my entire post refutes this wrong thinking).
[b]
But…notice what is conspicuous in its absence: Jesus [b]never told Peter that He would build His church on Peter. I know you would love for Jesus to have said that but He didn’t (thank God). If Jesus had said,
“You are Peter, and on [b]you, I will build my church.”
Then it would be settled for all eternity. The [b]rock that Jesus was referring to is [b]the rock of revelation of Who Jesus truly is: the Son of the living God (see Matthew 16:16 because it precedes and puts into proper context what Jesus is really saying). Jesus would be a fool to build His church on one fallible, sinful, Christ-disowning man who is in need of the Savior Himself. Jesus did not build His church on a man, [b]but on the reality that He is the Son of the living God. If you don’t believe this then you cannot be saved.
Incidently, Jesus is metaphorically referred to as a “Rock” in the Scriptures:
1 Corinthians 10:4
And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that [b]spiritual Rock that followed them: [b]and that Rock was Christ.
(Thank you Holy Spirit for what you have just revealed to me. The Bible is right, you are the true Teacher of the Word of God).
Hey, Grand_Moff_Gav, I believe that the Holy Spirit just revealed something to me that I have [b]never seen before: [b]Nowhere in Scripture is Peter called a rock. (Again, thank you Holy Spirit.) I mean, here I am going back and forth with you Grandy and all along Jesus never even called Peter a rock. Here is what Jesus said to Peter:
Matthew 16:18
[b]And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.
Did you catch that!? Jesus simply said,
“…you are Peter and on [b]this rock….”
There is not one word about [b]Peter being the rock that Jesus was referring to. Hence, I submit to you Grandy that Peter is not the rock that Jesus has built His church on. Jesus never called Peter a rock (small or large rock). Jesus simply stated the man’s name and then proceeded to tell the man His plans for establishing His church.
Can you see this Grand_Moff_Gav ?
We are the ones who have misinterpreted what Jesus said. It is just a coincidence that Peter’s name means stone or rock, not some God-ordained prophecy that Jesus was announcing for the future. It is no different if Jesus were speaking to you Grandy and He were to say,
“Grand_Moff_Gav, you are Grand and it is going to be a [b]grand moment when I build my church.” It is just a coincidence that your name is Grand in that scenario.
[b]
You are free to characterize my actions as you construe them from your point of view.
No, my faith was not made by any man, [b]my faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God (i.e. the Scriptures which are given by inspiration of God).
[b]
Can I speak candidly?
I believe that everything that I have written to you is in irrefutable accord with the Scriptures.
Paragraph after paragraph after paragraph of self-justifying rhetoric about the words of a single human being that lived 2 millenia ago. Why should any man on earth bend knee to Christ when his own followers tell each other they're going to hell and continue to be such poor examples of his teachings? And the same goes for Islam.