SUBJECT:
Peter
QUESTIONS:
Was Peter a catholic or a pope? Was Peter the bishop at
Rome?
ANSWERS:
PETER vs. the POPES
September 3, 1996 (David
W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist News Service, 1701 Harns Rd.,
Oak Harbor, WA 98277) -The Roman Catholic Church
claims that its popes have inherited the seat and authority
of the Apostle Peter. That this is a gross error is evident
by a simple comparison of Peter's life and teaching with the
lives and teaching of the Catholic popes:
1. There is no evidence that
Peter was in Rome (Romans 16), and there is no evidence in
the New Testament that there was anything special about the
congregation at Rome, but the popes rule in Rome and claim
that it is the "mother church." Peter's first epistle was
written from Babylon, not from Rome, and the popes' claim
that "Babylon" stands for Rome is mere conjecture. The
biblical evidence that Peter was not a leader in the church
at Rome is overwhelming. Paul wrote TO the church at Rome in
A.D. 58, but though he mentions 27 people by name, he does
not mention Peter. That would have been an inexcusable
affront if Peter had been the pope at Rome. Later, Paul
writes FROM Rome to the Galatians, the Ephesians, the
Philippians, the Colossians, and to Philemon, but not once
does he mention that Peter is in Rome. In 2 Timothy 4:16
Paul said that no man stood with him and all forsook him
when he answered his charges. Where was Pope Peter? The fact
is that Peter was not a pope and he was not in Rome.
2. Peter was married
(Matthew 8:14), but the popes cannot marry.
3. Peter said Holy Scripture
is the sure Word of God and to this alone we are to give
heed (2 Peter 1:19-21), but the popes say we are also to
heed their uninspired traditions.
4. Peter warned of false
teachers who would make merchandise of God's people (2 Peter
2:1-3), but the popes have not feared to sell their masses
and their prayers and their indulgences.
5. Peter said baptism is a
figure, a symbol, and that it is not water which saves us,
but the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Peter 3:21), but the
popes say that baptism itself brings salvation and that it
is not merely symbolic.
6. Peter refused worship
(Acts 10:25-26), but the popes have accepted honor and
bowings and kissings which border on worship and have
allowed themselves to be treated almost as gods.
7. Peter taught that
salvation is strictly through the righteousness of Jesus
Christ (2 Peter 1:1), but the popes claim that their
sacraments are also necessary for salvation.
8. Peter taught against
hierarchicalism, warning the pastors against "being lords
over God's heritage" (1 Peter 5:1-4), and Peter mentioned no
church office other than that of the elder; but the popes
have set up a system of ecclesiastical lordship over the
churches, and have added many offices which are never
mentioned in the New Testament.
9. Peter taught that the
only priesthood in the New Testament dispensation is the
High priesthood of Jesus Christ and the general priesthood
of all believers (1 Peter 2:9), but the popes say that their
"church" has a special priesthood which is ordained to
distribute sacraments.
10. Peter taught that Jesus
Christ is the rock upon which the church is founded (1 Peter
2:4-8), but the popes say that Peter was the rock.
11. Peter taught that men
are born again through the Word of God (1 Peter 1:23), but
the popes say that men are born again through baptism.
12. Peter taught that Christ
has "once suffered for sins" (1 Peter 3:18), and "bare our
sins in his own body on the tree" (1 Peter 2:24); but the
popes say that Christ is sacrificed anew in each mass and
that having Jesus Christ and his cross is not enough, that a
believer also needs the Roman Catholic Church and its
sacraments and priesthood.
13. Peter taught that the
believer has a living hope, that he has an inheritance
reserved in heaven, and that he is kept by the power of God
(1 Peter 1:2-5); but the popes say that a believer cannot
know for sure that he has a home in heaven.
14. Peter taught that the
believer is not to be a murderer, or a thief, or an
evildoer, or a busybody in other men's matters (1 Peter
4:15); but the popes have been all of these things.
WAS PETER THE BISHOP AT
ROME?
September 25, 1996 (David
W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist News Service, 1701 Harns Rd.,
Oak Harbor, WA 98277) - The Roman Catholic Church
claims that Peter was the bishop of the church at Rome and
that he held the position as the first Pope. The Bible
record conclusively testifies against this. The following
study by Henry Hudson is from his book Papal Power: Its
Origins and Development--
"In A.D. 58 Paul wrote to
the Romans, but does not mention Peter. In Romans 1:11, he
wants to impart
special gifts, and in Romans
1:15 he is ready to preach there. He sends greetings to
twenty-seven persons,
but none to Peter.
"In 61 Paul is conveyed a
prisoner to Rome, and certain brethren go to meet him, but
not Peter.
"At Rome Paul writes to the
Galatians, and mentions Peter, but not as being there or as
having been pontiff
there for twenty years [as
the Roman Catholic Church claims].
"The Epistles to the
Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians and Philemon were all
written from Rome; but while
others are mentioned as
sending messages, or as being associated with Paul, Peter is
never once mentioned.
"From Rome also Paul's last
letter is written (the
Second Epistle to Timothy). He says, 'At my first
answer
no man stood with me, but
all men forsook me' (2 Timothy 4:16). So that if Peter were
Bishop of Rome he
enjoyed an immunity which
was not accorded to Paul, and is guilty of having forsaken
the great apostle.
"And, finally, in this very
Epistle, written from Rome immediately before his martyrdom,
Paul says, 'Only
Luke is with me' (2 Timothy
4:11). This is conclusive.
"So Paul had written to
Rome, he had been in Rome, and at the end he writes from
Rome, and not only
never once mentions Peter,
but declares, 'Only Luke is with me.'"
While it is possible that
Peter visited Rome briefly at some point, the biblical
record testifies conclusively that he was not the bishop of
the church at Rome. |