- This topic is empty.
- Posts
“Word” in Holy Scripture often refers to a proclaimed, oral teaching of prophets or apostles. What the prophets spoke was the word of God regardless of whether or not their utterances were recorded later as written Scripture. So for example, we read in Jeremiah:
“For twenty-three years . . . the word of the Lord has come to me and I have spoken to you again and again . . . ‘But you did not listen to me,’ declares the Lord. . . . Therefore the Lord Almighty says this: ‘Because you have not listened to my words. . . .’” (Jer. 25:3, 7-8).
This was the word of God even though some of it was not recorded in writing. It had equal authority as writing or proclamation-never-reduced-to-writing. This was true also of apostolic preaching. When the phrases “word of God” or “word of the Lord” appear in Acts and the epistles, they almost always refer to oral preaching, not to Scripture. For example:
“When you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God” (1 Thess. 2:13).
If we compare this passage with another, written to the same church, Paul appears to regard oral teaching and the word of God as synonymous:
“Keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us” (2 Thess. 3:6).
Hi CA,
The musings of your self appointed leaders are not sacred.
They are vain folly not even deserving of the scorn appointed to the traditions of Mk7Nick…dude…you barely had time to read what I posted after I posted it. Did you? Read it that is….? If you did, you have me fooled because you didn't reply based on what I wrote. You're abusing your power yet again here.
Here that is again for you:
“Word” in Holy Scripture often refers to a proclaimed, oral teaching of prophets or apostles. What the prophets spoke was the word of God regardless of whether or not their utterances were recorded later as written Scripture. So for example, we read in Jeremiah:
“For twenty-three years . . . the word of the Lord has come to me and I have spoken to you again and again . . . ‘But you did not listen to me,’ declares the Lord. . . . Therefore the Lord Almighty says this: ‘Because you have not listened to my words. . . .’” (Jer. 25:3, 7-8).
This was the word of God even though some of it was not recorded in writing. It had equal authority as writing or proclamation-never-reduced-to-writing. This was true also of apostolic preaching. When the phrases “word of God” or “word of the Lord” appear in Acts and the epistles, they almost always refer to oral preaching, not to Scripture. For example:
“When you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God” (1 Thess. 2:13).
If we compare this passage with another, written to the same church, Paul appears to regard oral teaching and the word of God as synonymous:
“Keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us” (2 Thess. 3:6).
Hi CA,
PLease do not claim that your ways are following those of the anointed apostles.
There is no comparison possible.Quote (CatholicApologist @ Oct. 08 2009,09:42) “Word” in Holy Scripture often refers to a proclaimed, oral teaching of prophets or apostles. What the prophets spoke was the word of God regardless of whether or not their utterances were recorded later as written Scripture. So for example, we read in Jeremiah: “For twenty-three years . . . the word of the Lord has come to me and I have spoken to you again and again . . . ‘But you did not listen to me,’ declares the Lord. . . . Therefore the Lord Almighty says this: ‘Because you have not listened to my words. . . .’” (Jer. 25:3, 7-8).
This was the word of God even though some of it was not recorded in writing. It had equal authority as writing or proclamation-never-reduced-to-writing. This was true also of apostolic preaching. When the phrases “word of God” or “word of the Lord” appear in Acts and the epistles, they almost always refer to oral preaching, not to Scripture. For example:
“When you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God” (1 Thess. 2:13).
If we compare this passage with another, written to the same church, Paul appears to regard oral teaching and the word of God as synonymous:
“Keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us” (2 Thess. 3:6).
Hi CA:There are prophets even today through whom God will speak to and individual or to the church, and yes, it is the Word of God, but He will not speak contrary to what is written.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (942767 @ Oct. 08 2009,10:02) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Oct. 08 2009,09:42) “Word” in Holy Scripture often refers to a proclaimed, oral teaching of prophets or apostles. What the prophets spoke was the word of God regardless of whether or not their utterances were recorded later as written Scripture. So for example, we read in Jeremiah: “For twenty-three years . . . the word of the Lord has come to me and I have spoken to you again and again . . . ‘But you did not listen to me,’ declares the Lord. . . . Therefore the Lord Almighty says this: ‘Because you have not listened to my words. . . .’” (Jer. 25:3, 7-8).
This was the word of God even though some of it was not recorded in writing. It had equal authority as writing or proclamation-never-reduced-to-writing. This was true also of apostolic preaching. When the phrases “word of God” or “word of the Lord” appear in Acts and the epistles, they almost always refer to oral preaching, not to Scripture. For example:
“When you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God” (1 Thess. 2:13).
If we compare this passage with another, written to the same church, Paul appears to regard oral teaching and the word of God as synonymous:
“Keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us” (2 Thess. 3:6).
Hi CA:There are prophets even today through whom God will speak to and individual or to the church, and yes, it is the Word of God, but He will not speak contrary to what is written.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Not only should he not speak against what is written. But he should not speak against what is spoken. He should not speak against the living teaching of the Catholic Church.Why not come home?
Quote (CatholicApologist @ Oct. 08 2009,10:28) Quote (942767 @ Oct. 08 2009,10:02) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Oct. 08 2009,09:42) “Word” in Holy Scripture often refers to a proclaimed, oral teaching of prophets or apostles. What the prophets spoke was the word of God regardless of whether or not their utterances were recorded later as written Scripture. So for example, we read in Jeremiah: “For twenty-three years . . . the word of the Lord has come to me and I have spoken to you again and again . . . ‘But you did not listen to me,’ declares the Lord. . . . Therefore the Lord Almighty says this: ‘Because you have not listened to my words. . . .’” (Jer. 25:3, 7-8).
This was the word of God even though some of it was not recorded in writing. It had equal authority as writing or proclamation-never-reduced-to-writing. This was true also of apostolic preaching. When the phrases “word of God” or “word of the Lord” appear in Acts and the epistles, they almost always refer to oral preaching, not to Scripture. For example:
“When you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God” (1 Thess. 2:13).
If we compare this passage with another, written to the same church, Paul appears to regard oral teaching and the word of God as synonymous:
“Keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us” (2 Thess. 3:6).
Hi CA:There are prophets even today through whom God will speak to and individual or to the church, and yes, it is the Word of God, but He will not speak contrary to what is written.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Not only should he not speak against what is written. But he should not speak against what is spoken. He should not speak against the living teaching of the Catholic Church.Why not come home?
Hi CA:I will tell Him that you said so.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (942767 @ Oct. 08 2009,10:02) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Oct. 08 2009,09:42) “Word” in Holy Scripture often refers to a proclaimed, oral teaching of prophets or apostles. What the prophets spoke was the word of God regardless of whether or not their utterances were recorded later as written Scripture. So for example, we read in Jeremiah: “For twenty-three years . . . the word of the Lord has come to me and I have spoken to you again and again . . . ‘But you did not listen to me,’ declares the Lord. . . . Therefore the Lord Almighty says this: ‘Because you have not listened to my words. . . .’” (Jer. 25:3, 7-8).
This was the word of God even though some of it was not recorded in writing. It had equal authority as writing or proclamation-never-reduced-to-writing. This was true also of apostolic preaching. When the phrases “word of God” or “word of the Lord” appear in Acts and the epistles, they almost always refer to oral preaching, not to Scripture. For example:
“When you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God” (1 Thess. 2:13).
If we compare this passage with another, written to the same church, Paul appears to regard oral teaching and the word of God as synonymous:
“Keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us” (2 Thess. 3:6).
Hi CA:There are prophets even today through whom God will speak to and individual or to the church, and yes, it is the Word of God, but He will not speak contrary to what is written.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Actually CA is right and if you go by the teachings of Paul you have to agree with him too. Paul did preach some things contrary to what Jesus taught and when God sends someone to a people He may permit something that was not previously permitted or He may restrict something that was previously not restricted.Even Jesus said whatever you loose or whatever you bind
Matthew 16:18-20
18And 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.
19And 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.
Matthew 18:17-19
17And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.18Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
These are the scriptural references.
Today Nick you probably eat pork although at one time it was not permitted.
Hi BD:
Please produce the scriptures which Paul taught that were contrary to what Jesus taught.
The only things that I can say that Paul did add was the following and that is because Jesus did not cover instructions for these circumstances:
Quote 1Cr 7:5 Defraud ye not one the other, except [it be] with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. 1Cr 7:6 But I speak this by permission, [and] not of commandment.
1Cr 7:12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.1Cr 7:13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
1Cr 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
1Cr 7:15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such [cases]: but God hath called us to peace.
Love in Christ,
MartyHi BD,
Anyone offering other teachings usually casts doubt on scripture to give themselves a boost.
But you try to divide the body and offer Jewish Law to us?Quote (942767 @ Oct. 08 2009,12:05) Hi BD: Please produce the scriptures which Paul taught that were contrary to what Jesus taught.
The only things that I can say that Paul did add was the following and that is because Jesus did not cover instructions for these circumstances:
Quote 1Cr 7:5 Defraud ye not one the other, except [it be] with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. 1Cr 7:6 But I speak this by permission, [and] not of commandment.
1Cr 7:12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.1Cr 7:13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
1Cr 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
1Cr 7:15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such [cases]: but God hath called us to peace.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Marty,You're inviting subjective interpretation of the Scriptures from BD.
Don't you know he'll probably do what you do yourself? (i.e. give you his subjective interpretation)
Quote (CatholicApologist @ Oct. 08 2009,12:43) Quote (942767 @ Oct. 08 2009,12:05) Hi BD: Please produce the scriptures which Paul taught that were contrary to what Jesus taught.
The only things that I can say that Paul did add was the following and that is because Jesus did not cover instructions for these circumstances:
Quote 1Cr 7:5 Defraud ye not one the other, except [it be] with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. 1Cr 7:6 But I speak this by permission, [and] not of commandment.
1Cr 7:12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.1Cr 7:13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
1Cr 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
1Cr 7:15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such [cases]: but God hath called us to peace.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Marty,You're inviting subjective interpretation of the Scriptures from BD.
Don't you know he'll probably do what you do yourself? (i.e. give you his subjective interpretation)
Hi CA:I know that Paul did not teach contrary to what Jesus taught, but he seems to think so, and so, how else is he going to learn the truth unless someone is willing to show him.
I love him and want him to understand that there is no other way to be saved except through the Lord Jesus.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (bodhitharta @ Oct. 07 2009,15:47) Quote (942767 @ Oct. 08 2009,10:02) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Oct. 08 2009,09:42) “Word” in Holy Scripture often refers to a proclaimed, oral teaching of prophets or apostles. What the prophets spoke was the word of God regardless of whether or not their utterances were recorded later as written Scripture. So for example, we read in Jeremiah: “For twenty-three years . . . the word of the Lord has come to me and I have spoken to you again and again . . . ‘But you did not listen to me,’ declares the Lord. . . . Therefore the Lord Almighty says this: ‘Because you have not listened to my words. . . .’” (Jer. 25:3, 7-8).
This was the word of God even though some of it was not recorded in writing. It had equal authority as writing or proclamation-never-reduced-to-writing. This was true also of apostolic preaching. When the phrases “word of God” or “word of the Lord” appear in Acts and the epistles, they almost always refer to oral preaching, not to Scripture. For example:
“When you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God” (1 Thess. 2:13).
If we compare this passage with another, written to the same church, Paul appears to regard oral teaching and the word of God as synonymous:
“Keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us” (2 Thess. 3:6).
Hi CA:There are prophets even today through whom God will speak to and individual or to the church, and yes, it is the Word of God, but He will not speak contrary to what is written.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Actually CA is right and if you go by the teachings of Paul you have to agree with him too. Paul did preach some things contrary to what Jesus taught and when God sends someone to a people He may permit something that was not previously permitted or He may restrict something that was previously not restricted.Even Jesus said whatever you loose or whatever you bind
Matthew 16:18-20
18And 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.
19And 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.
Matthew 18:17-19
17And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.18Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
These are the scriptural references.
Today Nick you probably eat pork although at one time it was not permitted.
19And 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.Was it included or implied in scripture that this verse was also to be passed down to 'popes” who claim to be his successor or that it is even passed down to a successor?
I see it was implied to Peter.
Quote (942767 @ Oct. 08 2009,13:39) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Oct. 08 2009,12:43) Quote (942767 @ Oct. 08 2009,12:05) Hi BD: Please produce the scriptures which Paul taught that were contrary to what Jesus taught.
The only things that I can say that Paul did add was the following and that is because Jesus did not cover instructions for these circumstances:
Quote 1Cr 7:5 Defraud ye not one the other, except [it be] with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. 1Cr 7:6 But I speak this by permission, [and] not of commandment.
1Cr 7:12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.1Cr 7:13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
1Cr 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
1Cr 7:15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such [cases]: but God hath called us to peace.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Marty,You're inviting subjective interpretation of the Scriptures from BD.
Don't you know he'll probably do what you do yourself? (i.e. give you his subjective interpretation)
Hi CA:I know that Paul did not teach contrary to what Jesus taught, but he seems to think so, and so, how else is he going to learn the truth unless someone is willing to show him.
I love him and want him to understand that there is no other way to be saved except through the Lord Jesus.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Hi CA:The Catholic church has made it difficult for both Muslims and Jews to accept Jesus as their Lord because of their doctrines and practices.
Is this what you call interpreting the scriptures according to the facts?
Yes, I can read and understand the scriptures for myself, and if I need help in understanding, I can go to God asking Him for Help.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (942767 @ Oct. 08 2009,13:53) Quote (942767 @ Oct. 08 2009,13:39) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Oct. 08 2009,12:43) Quote (942767 @ Oct. 08 2009,12:05) Hi BD: Please produce the scriptures which Paul taught that were contrary to what Jesus taught.
The only things that I can say that Paul did add was the following and that is because Jesus did not cover instructions for these circumstances:
Quote 1Cr 7:5 Defraud ye not one the other, except [it be] with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. 1Cr 7:6 But I speak this by permission, [and] not of commandment.
1Cr 7:12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.1Cr 7:13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
1Cr 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
1Cr 7:15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such [cases]: but God hath called us to peace.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Marty,You're inviting subjective interpretation of the Scriptures from BD.
Don't you know he'll probably do what you do yourself? (i.e. give you his subjective interpretation)
Hi CA:I know that Paul did not teach contrary to what Jesus taught, but he seems to think so, and so, how else is he going to learn the truth unless someone is willing to show him.
I love him and want him to understand that there is no other way to be saved except through the Lord Jesus.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Hi CA:The Catholic church has made it difficult for both Muslims and Jews to accept Jesus as their Lord because of their doctrines and practices.
Is this what you call interpreting the scriptures according to the facts?
Yes, I can read and understand the scriptures for myself, and if I need help in understanding, I can go to God asking Him for Help.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Marty,I am well aware of your Mormon methods.
Hi CA,
The mormons and catholics have so much in common I am surprised at your contempt of them.
Both offer other teachings as equal to sacred scripture.Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 08 2009,13:51) Quote (bodhitharta @ Oct. 07 2009,15:47) Quote (942767 @ Oct. 08 2009,10:02) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Oct. 08 2009,09:42) “Word” in Holy Scripture often refers to a proclaimed, oral teaching of prophets or apostles. What the prophets spoke was the word of God regardless of whether or not their utterances were recorded later as written Scripture. So for example, we read in Jeremiah: “For twenty-three years . . . the word of the Lord has come to me and I have spoken to you again and again . . . ‘But you did not listen to me,’ declares the Lord. . . . Therefore the Lord Almighty says this: ‘Because you have not listened to my words. . . .’” (Jer. 25:3, 7-8).
This was the word of God even though some of it was not recorded in writing. It had equal authority as writing or proclamation-never-reduced-to-writing. This was true also of apostolic preaching. When the phrases “word of God” or “word of the Lord” appear in Acts and the epistles, they almost always refer to oral preaching, not to Scripture. For example:
“When you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God” (1 Thess. 2:13).
If we compare this passage with another, written to the same church, Paul appears to regard oral teaching and the word of God as synonymous:
“Keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us” (2 Thess. 3:6).
Hi CA:There are prophets even today through whom God will speak to and individual or to the church, and yes, it is the Word of God, but He will not speak contrary to what is written.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Actually CA is right and if you go by the teachings of Paul you have to agree with him too. Paul did preach some things contrary to what Jesus taught and when God sends someone to a people He may permit something that was not previously permitted or He may restrict something that was previously not restricted.Even Jesus said whatever you loose or whatever you bind
Matthew 16:18-20
18And 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.
19And 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.
Matthew 18:17-19
17And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.18Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
These are the scriptural references.
Today Nick you probably eat pork although at one time it was not permitted.
19And 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.Was it included or implied in scripture that this verse was also to be passed down to 'popes” who claim to be his successor or that it is even passed down to a successor?
I see it was implied to Peter.
C,We dealt with this in another thread:
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;st=100
Christ is the, of course, the head of the church which is His body. The apostles were the foundation upon which He built it. Peter is the first among apostles since he received the headship among apostles from the Lord. (an office similar to what Joseph received from Pharoah…which we can read about in line of Davidic Kings)
In Matt. 16:19, Jesus gives Peter the keys to the kingdom.
“And I will give you (singular – “thee” in the DRB and KJV) the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed, even in heaven.”
This is a direct parallel with the Old Testament Isaiah 22:20-24:
“And this shall be in that day: I will call my servant Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah. And I will clothe him with your vestment, and I will strengthen him with your belt, and I will give your authority to his hand. And he shall be like a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. And I will place the key of the house of David upon his shoulder. And when he opens, no one will close. And when he closes, no one will open. And I will fasten him like a peg in a trustworthy place. And he will be upon a throne of glory in the house of his father. And they will suspend over him all the glory of his father’s house: various kinds of vessels and every little article, from the vessels of bowls even to every instrument of music. “
We can see this borne out through the book of Acts:1:15-26 – Peter takes leadership of the first apostolic succession
2:14 – Peter preaches the first gospel sermon and takes the leadership on the day of Pentecost
3:6-8 – Peter performs the first miracle after the ascension of Christ
5:1-10 – Peter passes judgment upon Ananias and Saphira
10:9-16 – Peter receives the doing away of the Mosaic Kosher laws
10:44-48 – Peter baptizes the first Gentiles and receives them into the ChurchWhenever the list of apostles is given, Peter is listed first. Matthew 10:2-4, Mark 3:16-19, Luke 6:14-16, and Acts 1:13
In Galatians 1:18, we learn that St. Paul, before beginning his public ministry, spent 15 days with Peter. St. Paul gave as proof of his orthodoxy and veracity of his revelation from Christ that Peter “added nothing to me”….clearly stating the necessity of agreeing with this apostle doctrinally.
So, C, the issue is that this is an office given to Peter and not something just for Peter personally.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
