Guy, you forgot to mention Kephas is real similar to "key has". Get it? Who has the key according to Rome? Why, it's a slam dunk.
IOW by other than grammatical historical methods, we can make Scripture into a wax nose that looks like Pinocchio's. You are welcome to it, but prots don't buy it.
2. So, Cephas sounds like Caiaphas. I'm trying to find a more refined way of asking, "So, what?" Even if I accepted this line of reasoning wouldn't that mean that Peter is the high priest of the new covenant and not Jesus?
3-5. In Matthew 16, the giving of the keys is linked to the power of binding and loosing. Matthew 18 uses the same exact language as Matthew 16 with regard to binding and loosing. Doesn't it make sense that, even though keys are not specifically mentioned in Matthew 18, it is clear that that is what is being discussed? Furthermore, Peter does not receive any keys in Matthew 16. He is given the promise that he will be given the keys some time in the future. There is no mention in Scripture of Peter being given the keys separate from the other apostles.
You said that Peter's office continued after his death. So, the pope is an apostle? If you say that only Peter's role as head of the church (which is actually Christ's title) is passed on and not his apostleship, then I will ask you for the basis of this distinction. Also, why would this only apply to Peter. Following this logic what should be said about the successors of the other apostles? This actually sounds closer to a defense of the Greek Orthodox position and not Roman Catholicism.
Yes, the office of bishop (i.e. overseer/elder) is most certainly passed on in Scripture. That is exactly what protestants believe. Feel free to present evidence that the Scripture establishes a chief shepherd other than Christ.
"He that has ever so little examined the citations of writers cannot doubt how little credit the quotations deserve when the originals are wanting"
xx
Looking for an Obscure Luther Quote? Chances are if you've wound up on this site, you're looking for information on an obscure quote said to come from Martin Luther or one of the other Protestant Reformers. This blog has been compiling information on obscure Reformation quotes for over a decade. Use the search engines below to look for your particular obscure quote.
“Let nobody suppose that he has tasted the Holy Scriptures sufficiently unless he has ruled over the churches with the prophets for a hundred years. Therefore there is something wonderful, first, about John the Baptist; second, about Christ; third, about the apostles...“We are beggars. That is true.” - Martin Luther
"It is true that the best apologetics can be given only when the system of truth is well known. But it is also true that the system of truth is not well known except it be seen in its opposition to error."- Cornelius Van Til
"But a most pernicious error widely prevails that Scripture has only so much weight as is conceded to it by the consent of the church. As if the eternal and inviolable truth of God depended upon the decision of men!"- John Calvin
"The Scriptures obtain full authority among believers only when men regard them as having sprung from heaven, as if there the living words of God were heard."- John Calvin
This is the best book available on Sola Scriptura. For Protestants, it will help you understand and defend sola scriptura. For Catholics, this book will help you understand exactly what Protestants mean by sola scriptura, rather than what you think it means. I highly recommend getting this book, it never leaves my desk, and serves as a valuable reference tool.
4 comments:
The problem is that in Matthew 18 the power of binding and loosing (which was associated with the keys in Matthew 16) was given to all the apostles.
The pope is not an apostle nor is there anywhere in God's word where the keys are said to be passed from apostle to non-apostle.
Guy, you forgot to mention Kephas is real similar to "key has".
Get it? Who has the key according to Rome? Why, it's a slam dunk.
IOW by other than grammatical historical methods, we can make Scripture into a wax nose that looks like Pinocchio's.
You are welcome to it, but prots don't buy it.
1. And?
2. So, Cephas sounds like Caiaphas. I'm trying to find a more refined way of asking, "So, what?" Even if I accepted this line of reasoning wouldn't that mean that Peter is the high priest of the new covenant and not Jesus?
3-5. In Matthew 16, the giving of the keys is linked to the power of binding and loosing. Matthew 18 uses the same exact language as Matthew 16 with regard to binding and loosing. Doesn't it make sense that, even though keys are not specifically mentioned in Matthew 18, it is clear that that is what is being discussed? Furthermore, Peter does not receive any keys in Matthew 16. He is given the promise that he will be given the keys some time in the future. There is no mention in Scripture of Peter being given the keys separate from the other apostles.
You said that Peter's office continued after his death. So, the pope is an apostle? If you say that only Peter's role as head of the church (which is actually Christ's title) is passed on and not his apostleship, then I will ask you for the basis of this distinction. Also, why would this only apply to Peter. Following this logic what should be said about the successors of the other apostles? This actually sounds closer to a defense of the Greek Orthodox position and not Roman Catholicism.
Yes, the office of bishop (i.e. overseer/elder) is most certainly passed on in Scripture. That is exactly what protestants believe. Feel free to present evidence that the Scripture establishes a chief shepherd other than Christ.
Post a Comment