Peter, The First Pope?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
D

Depleted

Guest
#41
If you do not understand Oldandthenew's response, pray the Holy Spirit reveal this to you . I cannot force anything on anyone who believes Jesus Christ.
I'm not really into the whole "the whore is Rome" belief, but I'm still a believer in Christ. The two can be true together.
 
D

Depleted

Guest
#42
==========================================

there can only be ONE group of people who are NOT GUILTY of THIS...

Cross, we are surprised in a lack of 'discernment' of Jaume's Heart,,,
you know good and well where his HEART is coming from,,,

look inside of yourself and find where the 'prickly words' roots are coming from...
And that ONE GROUP crosses the vast majority of denominations. Baptists don't save. Presbyterians don't save. Catholics don't save. And yet there are some saved in all those denominations. "One Group." God's peeps!
 
Dec 10, 2015
494
14
0
#43
Peter was sent to the Jewish people and Paul was sent to the gentiles. If anything Paul would have been the first Pope since it was his commission to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles, not Peter.
 

prove-all

Senior Member
May 16, 2014
5,977
400
83
63
#44
Nicolaitans

The root of the word Nicolaitans comes from Greek nikao, to conquer or overcome,
and laos, which means people and which the word laity comes from.

The two words together especially means the destruction of the people and refers
to the earliest form of what we call a priestly order or clergy which later on in
church history divided people and allowed for leadership other than those led
by the spirit of the risen Lord.


A good translation of Nicolaitan would be "those who prevail over the people."


This clerical system later developed into the papal hierarchy
of priests and clergy lording over the flock.

The Council of Trent stated, "If anyone shall say that there
is not in the Catholic Church a hierarchy established by the divine ordination,
consisting of bishops, presbyters and ministers, let him be anathema."

It is not the question of the ministries but rather in the separation of them into
a hierarchy over the people. This very idea was taken over by the Protestants
with their own corruption of leadership roles and coverings.

The Church of Ephesus was commended for hating the deeds of the Nicolaitans.
The wrong separation of the clergy from the laity is a great evil in God's sight
and He hates the lust for religious power over others.
 
K

Karraster

Guest
#45
The "Reformers" knew who the "woman" was that rode "the beast". Somehow over time, that has all been swept under the carpet..the Protestants are no longer protesting. In fact, as many of you know, Rome has joined hands with almost every denomination (leader). Then again, far too many are not paying attention.

Fourteen world religions and over 1,000 religious leaders participated in the 1st Annual Commemoration World Alliance of Religion’s Peace Summit , a signing ceremony for the ultimate forger of the One World Religion. They signed the Unity of Religion Agreement, a promise of religions to unite unconditionally and without discrimination to achieve “world peace.” Religious leaders who attended the ceremony included those from Shia Islam faith, to those of the Evangelical faith, to Catholicism, to Hinduism, to Buddhism, to Anglican, to Sheik, to Judaism and many others. Their goal? A One World Religion under the Papacy. [/COLOR]http://beforeitsnews.com/christian-news/2016/02/attention-christians-100-proof-the-one-world-religion-isnt-coming-its-here-now-2523180.html
 
R

RobbyEarl

Guest
#46
Pope is not biblical as the definition of the Pope is Jesus replacement on Earth I.E. the head of the church. This is not biblical and gives too much power to one man. Jesus is the head and we are the branches. Already the axe is laid to the root. To worship the Pope and kiss his ring is blasphemy, to pray to Mary is blasphemy.
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
21,195
6,508
113
#47
I was born "Baptist," but I attended many Protestant Denominationed assemblies by the time I was and adolescent.

Living in Bell Trailer park in the late 2940's my youngest sister and I were sent off to Bible School in the summer, and my basic theology began then when I learned from the song that Jesus loves me. This, in fact, is still my foundation for belief, though I was not convinced until the Holy Spirit entered into me in 1969, and since then I know all Jesus says is worthy to learn and share.

Aside from that early Bibles school, and attending many of those denominational churches while growing to adolescence, I had no mentoring from adults on faith and keeping in the Way. It was not until the wonderful receiving of the HOly Spirit. I had abandoned all assemblies ntil that time from childhood.

Now I am gifted to be able to fellowship with any and all who truly love Jesus Christ no matter what denomination they think they are.

I pray all learn from God, all are invited to do just this, amen


Fancy canoodling on the historic record by the RCC. (They fudged the numbers for about the first 300-400 years of Christianity to make it look like they are the original church.)

It's rather interesting to read up on what they consider the "historic record." I haven't read it in decades, but my mind seems to remember the first four "popes" were all "popes" for roughly 100 years each. Considering Peter was no kid when Jesus called him to be the rock, it just seems wrong that Rome (the nation, not the seat of the RCC) killed such an old man, also from the RCC "records" by, apparently, crucifying him upside down, simply because he asked to be crucified like that. They didn't give Jesus the option to choose between nails and rope, considering most people crucified were placed on the wood by ropes, not nails.

(I really was a Catholic, did have questions about my denomination, did look it up -- even before Al Gore invented the Internet lol -- and the numbers didn't work for me. That wasn't the reason I quit being a Catholic, since I do allow every church to have some stuff wrong and still doesn't stop people from being believers through it. Just found it interesting what they thought we'd buy it without checking up on it.)


BUT, queston for you, now that I clarified what the RCC teaches on this one. Back when you were a young man in the Lord, did you not get mentored/discipled by someone older in the faith? I consider several men who came into my life at different times father-figures. There's my real dad, who I have no problems calling him "my father." There's the missionary who brought me to the Lord. He was my first "spiritual father," even if I could look back and see where he got some stuff wrong. (Of course, I was 16 and he was 24, so he knew more than I did by a long shot, but not like he had studied God for decades yet either.) My second-father was an older man who took future-hubby into his home when future-hubby needed a place to live in a hurry, and we both learned how to have a good marriage from him and his wife (Second-Mom) while they got the privilege of chaperoning us when we needed some chaperoning during our dating season. My uncle is the patriarch on my mom's side of the family, so he's like a father. And, truthfully, I consider you someone who is a spiritual father to me too at times. (Old Hermit too. Oldethennew too, although half of Oldethennew is more like a spiritual Mom. lol)

I don't see what the problem is considering older men as father figures, just as long as we know they're not God, simply usually more mature than us with a thing or two to teach, if we but listen. So, do you really have a problem with calling anyone "father," or just get bugged that "pope" means "papa?"
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
21,195
6,508
113
#48
Being a whore in relation to God is always likened to any assembly that has known God and has changed His message to conventions and traditions of mankind. This applies to the great whore and all of her daughters, tha is unless you can name a denomination Jesus Christ has named as His won. I cannot. God bless you dear one.


I'm not really into the whole "the whore is Rome" belief, but I'm still a believer in Christ. The two can be true together.
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
#49
Hi brother JaumeJ

Paul taught the spirit of the anti-christ was already among us, and that in his time. He also taught the false brethren with doctrines of demons also had managed to wangle themselves into the assemblies, and that too was in his time.
The key seems to be the antichrists were and still are among us, but went out from us, as those of the confederacy .The proper manner of us must be distinguished from them that went out from us, called the wrong manner of spirit, or again the confederacy..

We can see Peter is used as one of the many antichrists seduced by the one antichrist Satan in Mathew 16. A distinction should be made between the singular use of the word antichrist (Satan no form) and the plural form antichrists (men as that seen) .seeing they are two different entities . Humans who have form and the father of lies who has no form.

1Jo 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

Many times Peter denied Christ in unbelief(no faith) but in the end remained one of the us in Christ and not those who went out from us a stayed out as them who do try and seduce us.. (us , the true union and them, the confederacy )

In that portion of scripture Peter fits all of the requirements of one of the many antichrists in regard to the human form needed to seduce men by Satan who has no form the antichrist (one).It’s the same kind of deception used in the garden to destroy the faith principle making the word of God without effect.

Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: “thou art an offence unto me”: for thou savourest not the “things that be of God”, but “those that be of men”. Mat 16:22

He was not called the father of lies a man.

The “things of God” are the unseen things ,the faith of Christ, in God .It is Satan goal from the beginning to make it that kind of faith without effect.


We have a warning in 1 John 2 which is one of the clearest chapters that speaks of the methodology of the antichrist(one) Satan, the spirit of error, the father of lies, using human form, the antichrists(many) to seduce others.

These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.But "the anointing" which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the "same anointing" teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him. 1Jo 2:26 (Christ is the anointing Holy Spirit of God.

The goal of the father of lies is to make it, as in as it is written with the word it representing the faith of Christ, that come from hearing Him who has no form , making it to no effect. Again I emphasize Christ alone is the anointing Holy Spirit of God.

The scriptures are God’s interpretation to us, as it teaches us we abide in Him.

Our Lord and Salvation, Jesus Christ, teaches us the before He returns, apostasy shall abound.

Christ's foretelling of the great apostasy, and Paul's indicating false brethren, and the spirit of the anti-christ began coming about two thousand years ago. It began two thousand years ago, and it has progressed since.

There is no denomination applicable to Jesus Christ nor to His disciples. Even the term Judaism is a non-existent denomination in the Word. The only denominational reference to believers is the faith of Abraham taught by Jesus, and even it is not a denomination.
I would be careful not throw out the baby(the denominations) with the bath water, the water of the word.

Although I would agree there is no denomination applicable to Jesus Christ nor to His disciples. The apostles were shown as being identified by one . The word sect/heresy denotes a denomination.

Acts 24:5 For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the “sect of the Nazarenes” (Not the Catholic sect/denomination ) two different kingdoms.

Denominations are needed when many gather together in order to maintain some order. It does make them the authority which is not of us but can be useful in the growth of the individual that are given the gifts of ministry.

God uses the term mountains to indicate the denominations/sects of this world . Where the valley or lowland (Judea) would indicate the believer that has no part of the local congregation, for whatever reason . Perhaps lack of opportunity to find fellowship, or God is hiding them in a cave.

They together would be considered as one. In the end they will come as one bride. This is when the kingdoms as denominations of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

Luk 21:21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter there into.
 
Last edited:
D

Depleted

Guest
#50
Pope is not biblical as the definition of the Pope is Jesus replacement on Earth I.E. the head of the church. This is not biblical and gives too much power to one man. Jesus is the head and we are the branches. Already the axe is laid to the root. To worship the Pope and kiss his ring is blasphemy, to pray to Mary is blasphemy.
Your metaphors aren't working because you're misusing words.

In no religion does pope mean Jesus replacement on earth.

Nor were you able to prove that the church should or shouldn't have one leader biblically. (Biblically, Moses was one man charged with leading God's people. Bibically, Peter was the rock of the church. Bibically, there really never was a defineable structure for God's people except what God ordained at a precise time in history. So you really can't prove nor disprove a one-person leadership biblically.)

And your plant-based metaphor isn't working either. Think of plants with branches. Now try and picture a plant with branches and a head. Even if head doesn't mean the thing on top of our neck, but means the thing that leads the rest. You can't picture that plant, can you? And rightly so, because the important part of a plant is the roots and what they're rooted in. Or it is the trunk/vine of the plant. Meanwhile, you want an axe aiming at the roots.

I have no idea what you were trying to say. All I see is it didn't work on any level.
 
D

Depleted

Guest
#51
The "Reformers" knew who the "woman" was that rode "the beast". Somehow over time, that has all been swept under the carpet..the Protestants are no longer protesting. In fact, as many of you know, Rome has joined hands with almost every denomination (leader). Then again, far too many are not paying attention.

Fourteen world religions and over 1,000 religious leaders participated in the 1st Annual Commemoration World Alliance of Religion’s Peace Summit , a signing ceremony for the ultimate forger of the One World Religion. They signed the Unity of Religion Agreement, a promise of religions to unite unconditionally and without discrimination to achieve “world peace.” Religious leaders who attended the ceremony included those from Shia Islam faith, to those of the Evangelical faith, to Catholicism, to Hinduism, to Buddhism, to Anglican, to Sheik, to Judaism and many others. Their goal? A One World Religion under the Papacy. [/COLOR]http://beforeitsnews.com/christian-news/2016/02/attention-christians-100-proof-the-one-world-religion-isnt-coming-its-here-now-2523180.html
Wow! I didn't know there were still NWO people around.
 
D

Depleted

Guest
#52
Being a whore in relation to God is always likened to any assembly that has known God and has changed His message to conventions and traditions of mankind. This applies to the great whore and all of her daughters, tha is unless you can name a denomination Jesus Christ has named as His won. I cannot. God bless you dear one.
I've never run into any believers who didn't mistakenly adhere to thrown-in manmade mythology into their God-given message. It's kind of like putting a white T-shirt in with a whole box of tissues in the wash, and then spending quite some time removing the lint that got caught on the T-shirt. My T-shirt was cleaned decades ago, but, on occasion, I still have to pull off a little RCC lint, a little pentacostal lint, and a little reformed lint off. By now, it's getting harder and harder to tell.

Since we are the assembly, I'd have to say the whole T-shirt drawer is affected and infected by the lint always, but God is restoring us.
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
21,195
6,508
113
#53
God will remove the lint in His time..............and you are right, it is everywhere...
 
Feb 9, 2010
2,486
39
0
#54
Mat 16:18
And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.

How does anyone derive from this declaration of Jesus Christ that Peter is the first pope? In view of the teaching that we are to call no man father (pope), why would this title be conferred upon any flesh? We are to call no man (spiritually) father, for we have but one Father.

Peter certainly did not refer to himself as pope or father, and there are no humanly named popes until the Catholic church came into being, centuries later.

Do not be taken in by clever misapplication and misappropriation of theWord. Jesus Christ named no man "father," pope that is.
Peter is not the first Pope,for only Christ is the head of the Church.

The Bible says that no other foundation can be laid,but Christ,who is the chief cornerstone of the Church.

Christ is the first one added to the Church,the chief cornerstone,the head of the Church.

Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven,which means Peter preached the first message to get the Church going,in which Jesus said when you are converted strenghten the others.

Peter is the first person to be added to the Church,and is built upon Christ,in which all the saints are built upon each other like a building of bricks.

So when Jesus said Peter is the rock that he will build his Church means Peter is the first one added to the Church,and Peter is built upon Christ,who is the chief cornerstone.

There is no Pope in the Bible,for only Christ is the head of the Church,not the Pope.
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
21,195
6,508
113
#55
Thank you for sharing this. It is important to always keep in mind Christ being the chief and the corner stone of the Temple, and we are the lively (living) stones of the Temple. It is good to consider Christ's remarks about the Temple in Jerusalem when His disciples talked of how beautiful it was.

Jesus said, "I tell you there shall not be one stone left upon the other before I return." He was teh first stone removed from the Temple, taken to Heaven...........

Those with knowledge will be scattered, and they will be holpen (helped) with little help........


Peter is not the first Pope,for only Christ is the head of the Church.

The Bible says that no other foundation can be laid,but Christ,who is the chief cornerstone of the Church.

Christ is the first one added to the Church,the chief cornerstone,the head of the Church.

Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven,which means Peter preached the first message to get the Church going,in which Jesus said when you are converted strenghten the others.

Peter is the first person to be added to the Church,and is built upon Christ,in which all the saints are built upon each other like a building of bricks.

So when Jesus said Peter is the rock that he will build his Church means Peter is the first one added to the Church,and Peter is built upon Christ,who is the chief cornerstone.

There is no Pope in the Bible,for only Christ is the head of the Church,not the Pope.
 

john832

Senior Member
May 31, 2013
11,363
185
63
#56
Mat 16:18
And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.

How does anyone derive from this declaration of Jesus Christ that Peter is the first pope? In view of the teaching that we are to call no man father (pope), why would this title be conferred upon any flesh? We are to call no man (spiritually) father, for we have but one Father.

Peter certainly did not refer to himself as pope or father, and there are no humanly named popes until the Catholic church came into being, centuries later.

Do not be taken in by clever misapplication and misappropriation of theWord. Jesus Christ named no man "father," pope that is.
Some claim Peter was the 1st pope in Rome, Paul shows this cannot be true...

Rom 15:20 And so I have made it my aim to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build on another man's foundation,

Paul plainly says here in his letter to the church of God at Rome that Christ has not been named here and that he would not build on another man's foundation. So if Peter truly was in Rome, Paul lied.
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,704
3,649
113
#57
The "Reformers" knew who the "woman" was that rode "the beast". Somehow over time, that has all been swept under the carpet..the Protestants are no longer protesting. In fact, as many of you know, Rome has joined hands with almost every denomination (leader). Then again, far too many are not paying attention.

Fourteen world religions and over 1,000 religious leaders participated in the 1st Annual Commemoration World Alliance of Religion’s Peace Summit , a signing ceremony for the ultimate forger of the One World Religion. They signed the Unity of Religion Agreement, a promise of religions to unite unconditionally and without discrimination to achieve “world peace.” Religious leaders who attended the ceremony included those from Shia Islam faith, to those of the Evangelical faith, to Catholicism, to Hinduism, to Buddhism, to Anglican, to Sheik, to Judaism and many others. Their goal? A One World Religion under the Papacy. [/COLOR]http://beforeitsnews.com/christian-news/2016/02/attention-christians-100-proof-the-one-world-religion-isnt-coming-its-here-now-2523180.html
Yes, and what do these 'Rodney Kings' have in common? They have all left their founding charters by which they were identified. This is what liberal Christianity, liberal Islam, liberal Judaism etc., all do...they leave their distinctives to blend with each other into one BIG MUSH.
Rome has been going down that path at an accelerated speed since Francis, ISIS is pushing the opposite direction trying to get back to their roots. Much of Evangelicals are beginning to make the slide with their dumbing down of doctrine.
 
D

Depleted

Guest
#58
Yes, and what do these 'Rodney Kings' have in common? They have all left their founding charters by which they were identified. This is what liberal Christianity, liberal Islam, liberal Judaism etc., all do...they leave their distinctives to blend with each other into one BIG MUSH.
Rome has been going down that path at an accelerated speed since Francis, ISIS is pushing the opposite direction trying to get back to their roots. Much of Evangelicals are beginning to make the slide with their dumbing down of doctrine.
I'd like to think my denomination isn't unique, but I don't really keep up with the political side of religion to know for sure. I don't even keep up with the political side of my deomination all that much.

BUT, J.I. Packer, a famous theologian that runs in the reformed waters, (and not of my denomination, althought it's possible Angela may be connected denominationally with him) tried to get us to all agree on Ecumenicalism. Some of us said no way! We're sticking with no way.

We're still out here. You are not alone. (And notice, I'm not knocking you out of the boat, because we disagree on other things. lol)
 
Feb 28, 2016
11,311
2,972
113
#59
odd in one way and not in another, that they would choose Peter as their first pope,
the 'one' who denied Jesus Christ...
there's definitely a pattern here,,,satan's goal is in always trying to create a 'counterfeit' = pope, etc.
that is so close that many never have a clue how to differentiate...we see it in so many things today -

why are there still the 'poor' and why are there still filthy-rich, mega, preachers???
 

tanakh

Senior Member
Dec 1, 2015
4,635
1,040
113
76
#60
I once saw a documentary that revealed that there is a tomb in Israel that is claimed to be the tomb of Peter. It is actually protected by Catholic Monks and is given a very low profile. Whether it is his actual tomb is anyone's guess but it obviously s a source of embarrassment to the Catholic church. The Vatican where it is claimed that Peter is buried is built on a Pagan Cemetery. If Peter died in Rome the question is why would the Roman Christians bury him among Pagans? He could well have visited Rome. According to tradition he appointed a man called Linus to be Bishop there, who according to the RCC was the second Pope, but apart from a dodgy tomb Stone there is very little concrete evidence that he was ever a Bishop there.