“Why do people have problems understanding that the Catholic Church was founded by Peter? Catholics don’t teach that the only way to understand the bible is through the church.”
Lets deal with the second statement first.
This is paragraph 100 of the Catholic Catechism;
"The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him."
This is what they are taught as children and grow up believing, along with many other things that deal with the pope and the church authority. According to this the pope has the sole authority of interpreting the scriptures according to the way he see's fit. Who gave him this authority? The Pope. He had the final authority over the draft that was to become this document. Even though this document gives him the authority to interpret scripture, the bible argues otherwise. Two other religious beliefs also believe and teach that you have to have the scriptures interpreted for understanding; Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses.
The bible says this about the word of God,
Acts 17: 10-11
And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
They searched the scripture daily, as the gospel was brought to them, to check what they heard as being the truth or not. Now keep in mind that as the brought the gospel to the Bereans the only scriptures were the OT writings. They searched the OT writings to check that the Gospel was true. Not accepting the message until it was researched. Many people today, in all churches, lack in this and believe what is told to them by the church leaders. They accept what is told to them without question because they feel that it needs to be interpreted in order to understand the scriptures. Why read or study the bible when you are told that you can only understand it through one mans interpretation?
2 Timothy 3: 16-17
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
Paul didn't mention "as it is interpreted for you". Scripture is given to all men and is interpreted according to scripture through the Holy Spirit. And this scripture is for our benefit as to growth and being equipped for the ministry.
2 Peter 1:20
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
“When the light of the Scripture is darted into the blind mind and dark understanding, by the Holy Spirit of God, it is like the day-break that advances, and diffuses itself through the whole soul, till it makes perfect day. As the Scripture is the revelation of the mind and will of God, every man ought to search it, to understand the sense and meaning. The Christian knows that book to be the word of God, in which he tastes a sweetness, and feels a power, and sees a glory, truly divine. And the prophecies already fulfilled in the person and salvation of Christ, and in the great concerns of the church and the world, form an unanswerable proof of the truth of Christianity. The Holy Ghost inspired holy men to speak and write. He so assisted and directed them in delivering what they had received from him, that they clearly expressed what they made known. So that the Scriptures are to be accounted the words of the Holy Ghost, and all the plainness and simplicity, all the power and all the propriety of the words and expressions, come from God.”
Matthew Henry
“The verse he used was in Matthew, somewhere after chapter 20... the verse where he tells Peter that he is the rock and a pillar of the church and of truth, and he gave him the "keys to heaven", and that whatever he locked would remain locked and vice versa. This shows the authority Peter had for starting the church in Rome”
This is how Peter describes himself:
1 Peter 1:1
Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
Peter didn't think himself anything other than an Apostle of Jesus Christ. Not the Apostle, not the leader of the church, not the pope. He considered himself an apostle, one of many, of our Lord and Savior. If he would have been anything more his letter would have carried more credibility if it contained a leadership title.
1 Peter 5:1-3
The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.
Peter once again says that he is not over the elders, but considers himself as one of them. He puts himself on the same level of leadership as the elders in the churches that the letter was written. And he in these verses calls them not to be Lords over God's heritage to the flock. But to be examples. It sounds as though even Peter understood that the elders, of which he was one, was not to be Lord over God's heritage, which the pope is set up to be.
Matthew 16:13-19
When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
I have heard a lot about these verses, even more than you have asked.
Peter answered this question for not only himself but for the group. The question was directed to the group: first, who do men say that I am; second, who do you say that I am. The rock that he is talking about was that of himself and who he was, not upon Peter, but the declaration of what had been revealed not only to him but to the whole group. The foundation that Jesus was the Christ, or the messiah and promised one, and the Son of God. That was the rock that the church was built upon.
The Catholics say that they follow an apostolic succession and that the authority given to Peter is passed down through the generations unto the current Pope. This apostolic succession is not mentioned in the bible and would have been recorded if it had been so, and would have been mentioned by Paul if it was to make up the church. According to the bible you are an apostle only if you had seen the risen Savior, Paul became one on the road to Damascus when Jesus appeared to him. And would have been surely mentioned by Peter if it had been revealed to him that some power that he had was to be passed down through the ages. If we look further in the bible then we will see that while Peter was just an apostle, he was present when the Holy Spirit fell upon three different groups of people. The Israelite's who believed, the Samaritans and the Gentiles. And it is noted that when he saw that they had believed, the Spirit came upon them. I believe, as I have been taught, that this was in reference to the keys that had been given. The Catholics have taught and still teach that this power has been passed down and that the Pope has authority over heaven and who is admitted. According to the word of God the only one who has the power over who is admitted into heaven is God and entrance is gained only through Christ Jesus.
The Catholic church places Peter as the leader and the greatest over all the Apostles and use these verses in Matthew to do it, but two chapters later the apostles ask who is the greatest among them. If it would have been Peter they would have known and Jesus would have said.
All the Catholic Bishops and Bishops of other systems which have their roots based in Catholicism claim this Apostolic succession from Peter being transferred to them by the laying on of hands. Through it they claim to have the power appointed to Peter transferred to themselves. The Pope is chosen from these Bishops by the Bishops. But Peter could not have been chosen as the first Pope over the Roman Catholic Church because the bible disputes this on many fronts.
One, He was appointed a minister unto the Jews and not the Gentiles. Paul was appointed minister to the Gentiles. It was Paul’s appointment to bring the Gospel to them and to form the church among them. Gal. 2:7-8
Two, Peter didn't write the letter to the Romans, Paul did while Peter was in Jerusalem. Paul told the Romans that he had been chosen as their Apostle. Rom. 15:16-18
Three, Paul told the Romans that he was to form the church among them. Rom. 1:11
Four, There was no church already in Rome when Paul wrote his letter or got there, Paul said he wouldn't build upon another mans foundation. So Peter couldn't have had a church established there. Rom. 15:20
Five, Peter was never mentioned in Paul’s writings either in Romans or in the epistles sent from Rome. In 2 Timothy, it is written that only Luke is with him, if Pater had been there then he would have mentioned him.
Six, When Paul got to Rome he went to the leaders of the Jews there and brought and explained the Gospel to them, If Peter would have been there they would have known already. They had received word from Judea about Christianity by letter, that’s how they had heard. Not through another Apostle that had been in Rome for 14 years. Acts 28:17-22
Seven, Peter had changed and refused to be associated with the gentiles out of fear of those of the circumcision. Even Barnabas had joined in with them over this fear. Paul said they "didn't walk uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel". Galatians 2:11-20
Eight, Peter taught a Gospel that was perverted by fear of the Israelites, that the Gentiles had to become Jews in order to become Christians. One point that Paul brings up in Galatians and also Luke in Acts. When it was brought in front of the church in Jerusalem, it was found that the Gentiles didn't have to follow after the laws and customs of the Jews to be Christians as Peter taught. A false Gospel taught by Peter and corrected by Paul, and decided upon by James in Jerusalem. If Peter was who the Catholic Church claimed he was then, James wouldn't have been sitting in judgment over this. Acts 15
To follow after the bible only without the added texts and the stipulation that it can only be understood when enlightened by the thoughts and interpretation of the Pope and the Bishops in Rome, would dispute many of the teachings that the Catholic church has today. It has become a collection of rituals that is added to and taken away from at the whim of the Pope. If God spoke through the Pope only for enlightenment for the people, There would never be changes made according to what the scripture means.
No comments:
Post a Comment