Was Peter the first pope?
This is a continuation of “Was Peter the first pope?”
We
find in scripture that Christ in heaven, is the head of the church.
“Which
he
wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set
him at his
own right hand in the heavenly places, Far above all principality,
and power,
and might, and dominion, and every name that is
named, not
only in this world, but also in that which is to come: And hath put all
things
under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the
church,
Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.” (Eph
1:20-23)
This
states clearly that Christ was not the head of the church while
he was
on earth and was not made head of the church until he
ascended
into heaven. Clearly then, no man can then be called the head of the
church, as
this title belongs to Christ in heaven.
If
any doubt would still exist in the reader’s mind, we have “For the
husband
is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church:
and
he is the saviour of the body.” (Eph
5:23).
9.
Peter is never called the pope
The word
‘pope’ was
invented around 610 AD and is not a word found anywhere in the
Bible. Neither
are the titles cardinal, archbishop, archpriest, archdeacon and so on.
10. Peter’s elevation above the rest is not in the Bible
We
read “… And
call no man
your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
Neither be ye called masters: for one is your
Master, even
Christ. But he that is greatest among
you shall
be your servant. And whosoever shall
exalt
himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be
exalted.” (Matt
23:8-12)
Of
course calling no man your ‘father’ refers to spiritual matters and not
an
earthly father and this means that Catholicism ignores the Bible yet
again. Being
a father means you give life to your son or daughter in
the physical
sense, so we are not to spiritually call anyone ‘our father’ as there
is only
one father in heaven who gives us spiritual life. Priests do
not give
life to your soul. They do not atone for our souls. They are
not
mediators between man and God. Calling a priest a ‘father’ is
nothing more
than Old Testament paganism (Judges
17:10) and is not found in the New Testament. Christ condemns this
(Matt
23:9).
Furthermore,
if Peter had supremacy, why would Paul rebuke Peter openly because he
was
acting in a blameworthy manner? Peter was being hypocritical and two
faced,
that’s why. Paul writes “But when Peter was come to Antioch, I
withstood
him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before
that
certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when
they
were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing
them which
were of the circumcision.” (Gal
2:11-12)
Now,
surely such behaviour was not becoming of Peter, the supreme and
infallible
head of the church.
Furthermore,
there is a church council taking place in Acts 15, where Peter,
Barnabas and
Paul all gave reports, but it was James, not Peter, who was the
one who
rendered the final decision. What a slap in the face that must have
been for
the first pope.
In
addition, we are reminded that Peter was not elevated
above the
others, being named along- side others as being pillars (Gal
2:9).
Finally,
when the Lord says three times to Peter, and in front of the others,
“…
Peter … lovest thou me more than these? … Feed my lambs.” (John
21:15), he is not addressing him because of his supremacy,
but
in actual fact, just the opposite. Christ is well aware of the
flawed
and sinful nature of Peter, who denied him three times. We read “Then
saith
Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended
because of me
this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep
of the
flock shall be scattered abroad.
… Peter answered
and said unto him, Though all
men shall be offended because of thee, yet will I never be offended.
Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee,
That this
night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.
By
saying this, he infers that he loves the Lord more than any of the
disciples.
But Peter doesn’t believe the words of prophecy that can never be
broken and
must be fulfilled. He should have said in a humble and contrite manner
“Wow
Lord! That includes me. What a wretch I am etc etc .” But he didn’t. In
a proud
and arrogant way, he elevated himself above the scriptures and
boastfully
declared how wonderful he was and although the others would run away -
he
wouldn’t!
So
it is with Peter’s sinful, reprehensible and hateful three-fold denial
of
Christ, that Jesus ‘hammers’ Peter three times, and ‘cuts him down to
size’ in
front of the others, and forces a three-fold profession of his love for
the
Lord.
Peter
the Supreme, infallible, all loving Pontiff? Hardly! No my friends,
just the
opposite.
And
finally, a further insight into the sinful and rebellious nature of
Peter is
found with God’s rebuke from heaven as he frantically wants to erect
three
tabernacles.
“…
let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one
for
Elias: ...
(Luke
9:33). Waiting on the Lord’s instructions? Not Peter the pope.
11.
Peter never forgave sins
I
would urge the reader to get and read the tract “What
is Binding and Loosing?”. In it, you will see that Peter’s gospel
was
that of an earthly kingdom of heaven which was superceded 2,000
years
ago by Paul’s kingdom of God gospel.
Everyone
knows that no man can forgive sins but God only (Mark
2:7), but not Rome. Believing their own scriptures, Rome says that
priests
and popes can forgive sins. Now, Peter could inform that sins were remitted
sins in a similar way that Paul could say to the jailer his sins would
be
forgiven should he “Believe on the
Lord Jesus Christ, and
thou shalt be saved …” (Acts
16:31). Now
remission of sins concerned only past sins and not future sins.
You
see, today if a person is saved, all future sins are paid for as well.
But the
best Peter could do was to inform people that should they believe what
he was
saying about the earthly kingdom of heaven, he could assure them that
their
past sins were covered, but not washed away (Rev
1:5) as Paul could. An inferior gospel indeed. Was Peter robbed to pay
Paul? Christians are glad he was, otherwise we would still be without
eternal
security.
But
as Roman Catholicism has based itself on Peter with his temporary
salvation
concerning sins past, it is no wonder that millions of Catholics are
rocketing
straight into the lake of fire. What can you say? Bad roots – bad
fruits!
Someone’s
telling a lie? No, not at all. Peter was telling the truth for another
time
2,000 years ago, but it has since become obsolete with Paul’s gospel.
Cast
your eyes over the following:
1 Cor 11:1 Wherefore
I beseech you, be ye followers of me, even
as I also am of Christ.”
Gal
1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but
by
the revelation of Jesus Christ.
(Philippians
4:9) Those things, which ye have both
learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of
peace
shall be with you.
1Thess
1:6 And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having
received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost:
13.
Paul is the ensample and pattern to follow not Peter
Gal
4:12 Brethren, I beseech you, be as I am…
Phil
3:17 Brethren, be followers together of me, and
mark
them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.
2Thess
3:9 Not because we have not power, but to make
ourselves an
ensample unto you to follow us.
1Tim
1:16 … that in me first Jesus Christ might show
forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter
believe
on him to life everlasting.
14. It’s Paul’s gospel, not Peter’s.
Romans
2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus
Christ according
to my gospel.
2 Tim
3:10 But thou
hast
fully kown my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith,
longsuffering,
charity, patience …
1Cor
9:17 … a dispensation of the gospel is committed
unto
me.
2Cor
4:3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are
lost:
1Thess
1:5 For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but
also in
power, and in the Holy Ghost, …
2 Tim 2:8 Remember
that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was
raised from the dead according to my gospel:
Harley
Hitchcock
www.
AustralianBibleMinistries
.com
Continued in “Was Peter the first pope?”
Part 3 OF 3.
“CONTACT US”
Australian Bible Ministries, PO
Box 5058 Mt. Gravatt East 4122 Qld, Australia
www.AustralianBibleMinistries.com