Peter, the Primacy and the Bible 50 proofs



author unknown

The Catholic doctrine of the papacy is biblically-based, and is derived from the evident primacy of St. Peter among the apostles. Like all Christian doctrines, it has undergone development through the centuries, but it hasn’t departed from the essential components already existing in the leadership and prerogatives of St. Peter. These were given to him by our Lord Jesus Christ, acknowledged by his contemporaries, and accepted by the early Church. The biblical Petrine data is quite strong, and is inescapably compelling by virtue of its cumulative weight. This is especially made clear with the assistance of biblical commentaries. The evidence of Holy Scripture (RSV) follows:

1. Matthew 16:18: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church; and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.”

The rock (Greek, petra) referred to here is St. Peter himself, not his faith or Jesus Christ. Christ appears here not as the foundation, but as the architect who “builds.” The Church is built, not on confessions, but on confessors – living men (see, e.g., 1 Pet 2:5). Today, the overwhelming consensus of the great majority of all biblical scholars and commentators is in favor of the traditional Catholic understanding. Here St. Peter is spoken of as the foundation-stone of the Church, making him head and superior of the family of God (i.e., the seed of the doctrine of the papacy). Moreover, Rock embodies a metaphor applied to him by Christ in a sense analogous to the suffering and despised Messiah (1 Pet 2:4-8; cf. Mt 21:42).Without a solid foundation a house falls. St. Peter is the foundation, but not founder of the Church, administrator, but not Lord of the Church. The Good Shepherd (John 10:11) gives us other shepherds as well (Eph 4:11).

2. Matthew 16:19 “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . .”

The “power of the keys” has to do with ecclesiastical discipline and administrative authority with regard to the requirements of the faith, as in Isaiah 22:22 (cf. Is 9:6; Job 12:14; Rev 3:7). From this power flows the use of censures, excommunication, absolution, baptismal discipline, the imposition of penances, and legislative powers. In the Old Testament a steward, or prime minister is a man who is “over a house” (Gen 41:40; 43:19; 44:4; 1 Ki 4:6; 16:9; 18:3; 2 Ki 10:5; 15:5; 18:18; Is 22:15,20-21).

3. Matthew 16:19 “. . . whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

“Binding” and “loosing” were technical rabbinical terms, which meant to “forbid” and “permit” with reference to the interpretation of the law, and secondarily to “condemn” or “place under the ban” or “acquit.” Thus, St. Peter and the popes are given the authority to determine the rules for doctrine and life, by virtue of revelation and the Spirit’s leading (Jn 16:13), and to demand obedience from the Church. “Binding and loosing” represent the legislative and judicial powers of the papacy and the bishops (Mt 18:17-18; Jn 20:23). St. Peter, however, is the only apostle who receives these powers by name and in the singular, making him preeminent.

4. Peter’s name occurs first in all lists of apostles (Mt 10:2; Mk 3:16; Lk 6:14; Acts 1:13). Matthew even calls him the “first” (10:2). Judas Iscariot is invariably mentioned last.

5. Peter is almost without exception named first whenever he appears with anyone else. In one (only?) example to the contrary, Galatians 2:9, where he (“Cephas”) is listed after James and before John, he is clearly preeminent in the entire context (e.g., 1:18-19; 2:7-8).

6. Peter alone among the apostles receives a new name, Rock, solemnly conferred (Jn 1:42; Mt 16:18).

7. Likewise, Peter is regarded by Jesus as the Chief Shepherd after Himself (Jn 21:15-17), singularly by name, and over the universal Church, even though others have a similar but subordinate role (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet 5:2).

8. Peter alone among the apostles is mentioned by name as having been prayed for by Jesus Christ in order that his “faith may not fail” (Lk 22:32).

9. Peter alone among the apostles is exhorted by Jesus to “strengthen your brethren” (Lk 22:32).

10. Peter first confesses Christ’s divinity (Mt 16:16).

11. Peter alone is told that he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation (Mt 16:17).

12. Peter is regarded by the Jews (Acts 4:1-13) as the leader and spokesman of Christianity.

13. Peter is regarded by the common people in the same way (Acts 2:37-41; 5:15).

14. Jesus Christ uniquely associates Himself and Peter in the miracle of the tribute-money (Mt 17:24-27).

15. Christ teaches from Peter’s boat, and the miraculous catch of fish follows (Lk 5:1-11): perhaps a metaphor for the pope as a “fisher of men” (cf. Mt 4:19).

16. Peter was the first apostle to set out for, and enter the empty tomb (Lk 24:12; Jn 20:6).

17. Peter is specified by an angel as the leader and representative of the apostles (Mk 16:7).

18. Peter leads the apostles in fishing (Jn 21:2-3,11). The “bark” (boat) of Peter has been regarded by Catholics as a figure of the Church, with Peter at the helm.

19. Peter alone casts himself into the sea to come to Jesus (Jn 21:7).

20. Peter’s words are the first recorded and most important in the upper room before Pentecost (Acts 1:15-22).

21. Peter takes the lead in calling for a replacement for Judas (Acts 1:22).

22. Peter is the first person to speak (and only one recorded) after Pentecost, so he was the first Christian to “preach the gospel” in the Church era (Acts 2:14-36).

23. Peter works the first miracle of the Church Age, healing a lame man (Acts 3:6-12).

24. Peter utters the first anathema (Ananias and Sapphira) emphatically affirmed by God (Acts 5:2-11)!

25. Peter’s shadow works miracles (Acts 5:15).

26. Peter is the first person after Christ to raise the dead (Acts 9:40).

27. Cornelius is told by an angel to seek out Peter for instruction in Christianity (Acts 10:1-6).

28. Peter is the first to receive the Gentiles, after a revelation from God (Acts 10:9-48).

29. Peter instructs the other apostles on the catholicity (universality) of the Church (Acts 11:5-17).

30. Peter is the object of the first divine interposition on behalf of an individual in the Church Age (an angel delivers him from prison – Acts 12:1-17).

31. The whole Church (strongly implied) offers “earnest prayer” for Peter when he is imprisoned (Acts 12:5).

32. Peter presides over and opens the first Council of Christianity, and lays down principles afterwards accepted by it (Acts 15:7-11).

33. Paul distinguishes the Lord’s post-Resurrection appearances to Peter from those to other apostles (1 Cor 15:4-8). The two disciples on the road to Emmaus make the same distinction (Lk 24:34), in this instance mentioning only Peter (“Simon”), even though they themselves had just seen the risen Jesus within the previous hour (Lk 24:33).

34. Peter is often spoken of as distinct among apostles (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:28,32; Acts 2:37; 5:29; 1 Cor 9:5).

35. Peter is often spokesman for the other apostles, especially at climactic moments (Mk 8:29; Mt 18:21; Lk 9:5; 12:41; Jn 6:67 ff.).

36. Peter’s name is always the first listed of the “inner circle” of the disciples (Peter, James and John – Mt 17:1; 26:37,40; Mk 5:37; 14:37).

37. Peter is often the central figure relating to Jesus in dramatic gospel scenes such as walking on the water (Mt 14:28-32; Lk 5:1 ff., Mk 10:28; Mt 17:24 ff.).

38. Peter is the first to recognize and refute heresy, in Simon Magus (Acts 8:14-24).

39. Peter’s name is mentioned more often than all the other disciples put together: 191 times (162 as Peter or Simon Peter, 23 as Simon, and 6 as Cephas). John is next in frequency with only 48 appearances, and Peter is present 50% of the time we find John in the Bible! Archbishop Fulton Sheen reckoned that all the other disciples combined were mentioned 130 times. If this is correct, Peter is named a remarkable 60% of the time any disciple is referred to!

40. Peter’s proclamation at Pentecost (Acts 2:14-41) contains a fully authoritative interpretation of Scripture, a doctrinal decision and a disciplinary decree concerning members of the “House of Israel” (2:36) – an example of “binding and loosing.”

41. Peter was the first “charismatic”, having judged authoritatively the first instance of the gift of tongues as genuine (Acts 2:14-21).

42. Peter is the first to preach Christian repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38).

43. Peter (presumably) takes the lead in the first recorded mass baptism (Acts 2:41).

44. Peter commanded the first Gentile Christians to be baptized (Acts 10:44-48).

45. Peter was the first traveling missionary, and first exercised what would now be called “visitation of the churches” (Acts 9:32-38,43). Paul preached at Damascus immediately after his conversion (Acts 9:20), but hadn’t traveled there for that purpose (God changed his plans!). His missionary journeys begin in Acts 13:2.

46. Paul went to Jerusalem specifically to see Peter for fifteen days in the beginning of his ministry (Gal 1:18), and was commissioned by Peter, James and John (Gal 2:9) to preach to the Gentiles.

47. Peter acts, by strong implication, as the chief bishop/shepherd of the Church (1 Pet

5:1), since he exhorts all the other bishops, or “elders.” 

48. Peter interprets prophecy (2 Pet 1:16-21).

49. Peter corrects those who misuse Paul’s writings (2 Pet 3:15-16).

50. Peter wrote his first epistle from Rome, according to most scholars, as its bishop, and as the universal bishop (or, pope) of the early Church. “Babylon” (1 Pet 5:13) is regarded as code for Rome.

In conclusion, it strains credulity to think that God would present St. Peter with such prominence in the Bible, without some meaning and import for later Christian history; in particular, Church government. The papacy is the most plausible (we believe actual) fulfillment of this



8 comments on “Peter, the Primacy and the Bible 50 proofs

  1. toolbox says:

    Think it’s a Fairytale? The Vatican and Masons Know it’s Not!!!

  2. hey PJM are you getting behind ?

    it is interesting to see the differences from the catholic religion invented by Constantine in 315 ad

    it is understandable why he choose the structure of the jewish GOD Yahah, to unify the empire –

    but you can see his belief in baptism– as the story goes– waiting until he is on his death bed?

    what’s up with that ? oh well he is the empire demi-god

  3. Sodom and Gomorrah – Part 1 of 2 – by Michael Rood

    • God’s training on how he is to be worshiped

    • My friend your views are FAR to extreme to allow me prudently to approve your comments.

      However, I’ll discuss your views privately anytime you wish to do so.

      Your comments on Constatine are sadly and greatly misinformed.

      Pick ONE topic at a time and I’ll give it a go. Seeing that you don’t accept the bible, history or FACTS I’m not sure there is a benefit to doing so. But I’m willing to give it a TEST.

      God Bless you, Patrick working4christ2

  4. roman says:

    the one thing that the roman catholic can’t Duplicate — no matter what ceremonies invented by Constantine– is – oh come one– you can guess what it is?

    adjective \ˈdü-pli-kət also ˈdyü-\
    Definition of DUPLICATE
    : consisting of or existing in two corresponding or identical parts or examples
    : being the same as another
    See duplicate defined for English-language learners »
    See duplicate defined for kids »
    Examples of DUPLICATE

    I began receiving duplicate copies of the magazine every month.
    I had a duplicate key made.


    ‘Confessions of a Sociopath,’ by M. E. Thomas

    Jonathon Rosen
    Published: June 14, 2013


    As a teenager, M. E. Thomas — a fittingly egotistic pseudonym — was “so uniquely accomplished, talented and charming that I was naturally included on everyone’s list of people to know.” She went to indie movies and drummed in a rock band. Her friends idolized her. “Musicians are expected to be narcissistic and outrageous,” she writes. “You’re supposed to scream and dance wildly.” Nobody suspected that the screaming and the wild dancing were indicative not of awesomeness but of sociopathy.


    A Life Spent Hiding in Plain Sight

    By M. E. Thomas

    302 pp. Crown Publishers. $25.

    In “Confessions of a Sociopath,” Thomas self-identifies “more as a sociopath than by my gender or profession or race.” People like her are “different from the average person, often in very dangerous or scary ways.” It’s startling to read these statements written so bluntly. As a healthy skepticism of mental health labeling grows, some people question whether sociopaths and psychopaths (Thomas is described in an evaluation as a “ ‘socialized’ or ‘successful’ psychopath”) actually exist, beyond being pejorative terms to describe horrible people. This book dispels that myth.

    It is practically unheard-of for a sociopath to write a memoir — about being a sociopath, I mean. There are presumably lots of memoirs by sociopaths about other things, like how to succeed in business. So I tore through this. How candid would Thomas be about her feelings — or lack of them? Could she solve mysteries that vex clinicians, like how to rein in her criminal counterparts’ notoriously high recidivism rates? (She considers herself a noncriminal sociopath.) Besides, can she write well? Could someone with a clinical absence of emotional depth pull off a book?

    In my experience they can make the best and the worst interviewees. At best their skewed charisma makes them beguiling and quick-witted. Their cruelty can teach us important things about the cruelty of the wider world. And they’re human — and all humans have positive attributes. But at their worst their grandiosity quickly grates. Their charm — defined by the Hare PCL-R checklist, the gold standard of psychopathy diagnosis, as “glib and superficial” — can make them more boring than they think they are. Where would Thomas fall?

    “Confessions of a Sociopath” turns out to be an intermittently gripping and important book — albeit one that sags dramatically in the middle when the author goes on for ages about her not especially interesting childhood. (Here she tries to solve the nature/nurture mystery and concludes that she doesn’t know, but that her sociopathy is probably due to a bit of both.) Otherwise, it is a revelatory if contradictory muddle of a memoir in which she succeeds in simultaneously humanizing and demonizing herself.

    Such is the intense stigma that comes with the label, it’s understandable she adopts a pseudonym. But it means we have only her word that Thomas is the woman she says she is: a sociopath as well as “an accomplished attorney and law professor,” who is just as comfortable “in summer dresses as I am in cowboy boots,” is super-popular — “in a world filled with gloomy, mediocre nothings,” people “are attracted to the sociopath’s exceptionalism like moths to a flame” — has “never had an insecurity,” feels no anxiety and possesses “remarkably beautiful breasts.” She rarely lets her pristine mask slip to reveal the gaping nothingness underneath.

    Although the mask does slip sometimes. There was the occasion she came down with appendicitis and went to school in such pain she forgot to mimic her peers’ social niceties and instead “stared at them with the dead eyes I had previously reserved for when I was alone.” More recently, when a city worker berated her for using an off-limits escalator, Thomas found herself following him, a “metallic” taste in her mouth, fantasizing about murder and “how right that would feel.” She turned around only when she lost sight of him in the crowd. “I’m sure I wouldn’t have been able to actually kill him,” she says, “but I’m also relatively certain I would have assaulted him.” Although sociopaths are relentlessly self-interested, the logic of punishment frequently eludes them. They’re their own worst enemies — reckless, suffering poor precautionary controls,never learning their lesson. Thomas has lost count of the times she’s gotten sick from eating rotten food because the “risk of injury never sinks in.”

    Despite all her claims of Spock-like rational genius, you are frequently reminded that this is a book written by a damaged person. For instance, there’s the implausible claim that although Thomas “has always lived in the worst neighborhoods,” she doesn’t need to worry about her pension because she’s one of the world’s greatest stock-market speculators, averaging a 9.5 percent return. “Beating the market this soundly and consistently is unheard-of,” she writes, putting her success down to her “special vision. When I look at the world, the flaws or vulnerabilities in people and the social institutions that they’ve made jump out at me.”

    During passages like this it’s worth remembering that pathological lying and lack of realistic long-term goals are two of the items on the Hare checklist. And Thomas’s claims of leading a moral life are undermined somewhat by the cheerful accounts of some chillingly cruel deeds she’s committed, from leaving a baby opossum to drown in her swimming pool — “I did not give it a thought” — to the time she cut off all ties to a friend whose father was dying of cancer because the woman wasn’t fun to be around anymore.

    By the book’s final stretch — Thomas’s reminiscences of a hedonistic year abroad in Brazil and her loveless sexual shenanigans — my patience began to wear thin. There’s only so many ways someone can say she doesn’t care about other people’s feelings. Sociopaths are all surface, and so at times is this book. By the end you feel like the partner of a sociopath. You’ve had quite the memorable roller coaster ride, but now you’re sick of the chilliness and the self-absorption, and you want out.

    Jon Ronson is the author of “The Psychopath Test: A Journey Through the Madness Industry” and, more recently, “Lost at Sea.”

    • roman says:

      PJM — it is easy to find roman catholic’s who are mill informed — so you can be the — big teacher guy–

      when Jesus re quested me to function in that teacher “professional ” capacity i told Jesus “no thanks” this was not the 1st time Jesus showed up to give me personal direction,

      because there are plenty of people that are “bible Savy” but big deal– they lack any personal realtionship– they think they are ‘ new’ to quoting scripture..

      Jesus did say “these signs will follow my believers”

      are there any of those signs in your “teaching ministry”?

      or can you convince people that the moon is “really made of green cheese”

      Confessions of a Sociopath…

  5. Impersonation Of Famous Preachers

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s