Nope! The Bible never calls Peter the bishop of Rome or the pope, and it also says that he was a minister to the Jews. So his primary mission field was Jewish people, not Roman gentiles. Not to mention, the Bible hints at James being the leader of the early Christian church in Jerusalem, not Peter. Even though Peter was a prominent member. After discovering these, and other Bible truths, I decided to leave the Catholic Church. I grew up Catholic but I couldn't remain in a church that was perverting the Word of God and misleading people.
@@nitrojanks2977 We must not be reading the same Bible: "And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your young men shall see visions, Your old men shall dream dreams." - Acts 2:17, NKJV
And I will give you(Simon) the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall release on earth shall be released, even in heaven.” Matthew 16:19
Praying for you, brother. God loves you. It is His Spirit that is drawing you. Please don't resist. We have an eternity to win. This world has nothing for us, and is almost over. It's time to get ready for the coming conflict. Please don't be long in the valley of decision. God wants you! Blessings...
I know it has been a year Nicholas, and I hope that you have found your way back into faith. Please consider looking into the Church established by Jesus Christ: The Catholic Church. God Bless You!
Peter's name was originally "Simon." Jesus changed his name to "Peter" -- a name that means "rock." As John said, Jesus gave Simon a name that means "a stone." [Cephas] (John 1:42 KJV). Jesus then said, "Upon this rock I will build my Church" and "I will give to you (peter/cephas) the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven" (Mt 16:17-18). Peter presided over the Church in Jerusalem along with John and James (Galatians 2:1-9) and he died in Rome as did St. Paul. St. Peter's basilica was built over Peter's grave and his remains are still there today to be studied and they bear the marks of a man who was crucified upside-down in the first century just as the early Church said. After Peter's death, came Pope Linus, then Cletus, then Clement -- all whom were martyred -- and an unbroken list of popes whose names and whose writings still exist, up to Pope Francis today. I hope this helps explain the Catholic position on this susubject. May Christ love you all! Fr. David
It wasn't the man that the Church was to be built on, it was the revelation of who Christ was, is, and is to come. " "Upon this ROCK (revelation) I will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it." Peter you tell them who I am and what to do. Acts 2:37, "Men and brethren, what shall we do? (38) Then Peter said unto them, Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost".
@@garyblacksher7206 but there actually was a giant rock foundation. And there is a church. And there is a hole (I don’t know if it’s there anymore) that the non-believers at the time actually thought was hades, behind the actuall church. So Jesus told Peter to build his church on the foundation (rock) and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. This passage is literal
Peter WAS the 'Rock'....and Jesus also said to him....'What you ordain on Earth is also done in Heaven' ... 'Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven...whose sins you retain, they are retained'. Peter WAS the first Pope. All the Catholic Sacraments, traditions and ceremonies started with Peter and grew from there. Jesus wouldn't leave without putting someone in charge of 'operations'.
Yet, Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He renamed Simon as Cephas, which is Aramaic for rock, ( John 1:42), as and built His Church on Peter, and gave Peter alone the keys of the Kingdom. Biblically, keys denote primacy. The office of sole key holder is one of succession. The same Church authority in Peter the rock and sole key holder, who stood up and put an end to all the debating at the council in Jerusalem,since Scripture alone could not, as the manifold wisdom of God is revealed through the Church. You are in my prayers! Peace always in Jesus Christ, the Divine Bridegroom, He whose Flesh is True food and Blood True drink
Matthew Broderick May God bless you. Peter was used to build the church by preaching the gospel as the Holy Spirit led him. He was not the foundation or cornerstone of the church. Jesus is the rock which the church is ultimately built on and we are the ones who are given authority by Christ to preach Gods word with power opening the gates of heaven. May the Lord Jesus be the foundation that your life is built upon. 😁❤️🙏
What about this :Peter the Apostle Luke 22:31-32 [31]“Simon, Simon! Listen! Satan has received permission to test all of you, to separate the good from the bad, as a farmer separates the wheat from the chaff.[32]But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith will not fail. And when you turn back to me, you must strengthen your brothers.”(Note that Jesus uses the Name Simon in this context , not the devine Name he gave to Simon ,that of Peter , So Simon can fail but Peter can not fail) AFTER RESURRECTION: John 21:15-19 [15]After they had eaten, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you love me more than these others do?”“Yes, Lord,” he answered, “you know that I love you.”Jesus said to him, “Take care of my lambs.”[16]A second time Jesus said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?”“Yes, Lord,” he answered, “you know that I love you.”Jesus said to him, “Take care of my sheep.”[17]A third time Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you love me?”Peter was sad because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” so he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you!”Jesus said to him, “Take care of my sheep.[18]I am telling you the truth: when you were young, you used to get ready and go anywhere you wanted to; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands and someone else will bind you and take you where you don't want to go.”[19](In saying this, Jesus was indicating the way in which Peter would die and bring glory to God.) Then Jesus said to him, “Follow me!” Peter Exercises the powers At Petecost : Acts 2:12-17 [12]Amazed and confused, they kept asking each other, “What does this mean?”[13]But others made fun of the believers, saying, “These people are drunk!”[14]Then Peter stood up with the other eleven apostles and in a loud voice began to speak to the crowd: “Fellow-Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, listen to me and let me tell you what this means.[15]These people are not drunk, as you suppose; it is only nine o'clock in the morning.[16]Instead, this is what the prophet Joel spoke about:[17]‘This is what I will do in the last days, God says: I will pour out my Spirit on everyone. Your sons and daughters will proclaim my message; your young men will see visions, and your old men will have dreams. FISRT BINDING & LOOSING: First death penalty in the church Acts 5:3-5,7-9 [3]Peter said to him, “Ananias, why did you let Satan take control of you and make you lie to the Holy Spirit by keeping part of the money you received for the property? [4]Before you sold the property, it belonged to you; and after you sold it, the money was yours. Why, then, did you decide to do such a thing? You have not lied to human beings - you have lied to God!”[5]As soon as Ananias heard this, he fell down dead; and all who heard about it were terrified.[7]About three hours later his wife, not knowing what had happened, came in.[8]Peter asked her, “Tell me, was this the full amount you and your husband received for your property?”“Yes,” she answered, “the full amount.”[9]So Peter said to her, “Why did you and your husband decide to put the Lord's Spirit to the test? The men who buried your husband are now at the door, and they will carry you out too!”
In my humble understanding Jesus told Peter to take care of his lambs because Peter was the apostle to the Jews. Simon and Peter are the same person so I don’t understand what you mean when you say Simon can fail but Peter cannot. Peter /Simon , however you wish to identify him was a man. I am 100 percent certain Jesus was not inferring that he was going to build his church upon a man. That doesn’t make sense. Christ is the Rock. Peter is a pebble from The Rock- Christ.
Dear Friends, please read Dr Scott Hahn. He completely answers all the Catholic Church teachings correctly from the Bible. Sadly, the man in this video, is very bigoted and ignorant in his understandings of Catholic teaching.
Scott Hahn is most definitely a man of God! Keep the faith, My friend...One of these days people will see how their misconception of the Catholic Church was due to hatred and the Devil guiding them rather than truth! Doug Batchelor once told me "we will have to agree to disagree" when I attempted to show him how the Catholic Church was not the Antichrist. I dont know why people, especially 'men of God' would not at least give Islam a look to see how they more closely tie in with the End Times Beast. There is so much truth in our faith yet it has been tarnished by people like this who will not give it up until they see the beast at their door.
@@jeffandchrissiepimentel3761 Satan has sons and daughters: those who do not act in righteousness and do not love their brothers (1 Jn 3:8, 10). When an attacker against the Church says "Oh I love Catholics but I hate the Catholic Church!" The fool doesn't understand Catholics are the Church. 👍
@@stevensonrf Actually the bible teaches we have all sinned, Mary did not remain a virgin, had other children, and is dead and buried, not a queen in heaven.
Paul himself said that Peter, John & James were the leaders/pillars of the early Church (Galatians 2:9) so I won't even entertain an argument that Peter was not a leader in the early Church. The only question is whether Christ gave Peter a primacy that He did not give to John and James, which he clearly did: "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter (kephas/rock) and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of the hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Mathew 16:17-19). While Jesus gave all the Apostles power to bind and loose (Mathew 18:18), only Simon had his name changed to rock/Kephas (John 1:42) and was given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven (Mathew 16:19). Your brother in Christ! Fr. David
Of course Christ is the true rock but he shared that authority with Simon by changing his name to “rock” and saying, “I will give you (peter/rock) the keys to the kingdom.” In Christ, Fr. Dave
With deepest respect, my brother, your Greek needs an adjustment: First, Jesus did not name Peter in Greek but in the Aramaic, "Cephas" which just means "rock" or "stone." (John 1:42, Galatians 2:9, 1 Corinthians 1:12, 3:22, 9:5) KJV Second, the Greek version of Mathew 16:18 uses two different words for Peter because Greek grammar requires it. In Greek, objects have different word-endings than persons. When you give a person (Simon) the name of an object (rock), you use the word ending for a person (petros), not the word ending of an object (petra). Greek words also have a gender that is identified by the word ending. In Mathew 16:18, petros (the man) indicates a male while petras (the stone) is female. However, in Greek, they mean neither male, female, big or little rock -- but just "rock" because that's how there grammar works. The Aramaic that Jesus used when giving Peter his name is not like that: "You are kephas (rock) and upon this kephas (rock) I will build my Church." As St. John said, "And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone." John 1:42 (KJV). May Christ love you and bless you! Fr. David
Fr. David…Another issue is He didn’t address the verse after which Jesus emphatically states: “And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”” Matthew 16:18-19 It’s obvious Jesus directed this declaration to Peter. Sadly, I believe this Pastor is being dishonest and using fallacious claims to land his points. A lot of what this pastor is saying is rather arbitrary and his on personal conclusions. I pray the Lord have mercy on all of us.
@@initialthought6831 Thanks, Jay! Yes, it is not rational or honest to say that Jesus changed Simon's name to "rock" but that Jesus was not referring to Simon as "rock." Of course, Jesus is the true Rock but he shared his "rockness" with Simon when he changed his name to "Rock" and said upon this "rock" I will build my Church and gave to "Peter/Rock" the keys to the Kingdom. In Christ, Fr. Dave
@@FrDavid-wy2qt Amen!! Also in Acts 15 The Pastor forgot to add: “And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: “Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.” Acts 15:7 Peter says “God chose among us, that by MY mouth the gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. Showing that Peter is the head or leader “And after they had become silent, James answered, saying, “Men and brethren, listen to me: Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name.” Acts 15:13-14 James Alludes to Simeon/Simon/Peter declaration of (Acts 10) The vision.. establishing Peters testimony as infallible and binding. Also I think he forgot John 21: 15-18 “So when they had eaten breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me more than these?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Feed My lambs.” He said to him again a second time, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Tend My sheep.” He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?” Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, “Do you love Me?” And he said to Him, “Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.” Jesus said to him, “Feed My sheep. Most assuredly, I say to you, when you were younger, you girded yourself and walked where you wished; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish.”” John 21:15-18 Jesus himself also gives him some what a responsibility to be an overseer. Fr David , bless you. Pray for The Lord to have mercy on me a sinner and bless me.
@@initialthought6831 Great points, Jay. Also, have a native Greek speaker explain Luke 22:31-32 which, I believe in Greek, says: "Simon Peter, Satan has demanded to sift you (all of you) as wheat but I have prayed for you ( Peter) that your faith (Peter) will not fail. Once you have recovered thus from your fall, strengthen your brothers." Peter was clearly the leader of the Apostles in the Bible. You are certainly in my prayers! Pray for me as well! In Christ, Fr. Dave
@@FrDavid-wy2qt That’s amazing. Even the Greek refutes the Pastors position. Lord have mercy on us. Fr David, is it possible If I could contact you directly/privately to make some inquiries please..
Matthew 16:18-19 New International Version 18 And *I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church,* and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 *I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven;* *whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”* *NOT ONLY JESUS FOUNDED HIS CHURCH ON PETER, HE ALSO GAVE HIM THE KEYS TO HIS EARTHLY KINGDOM/CHURCH* List of Popes: St. Peter (32-67) St. Linus (67-76) St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88) St. Clement I (88-97) St. Evaristus (97-105) St. Alexander I (105-115) St. Sixtus I (115-125) Also called Xystus I St. Telesphorus (125-136) St. Hyginus (136-140) St. Pius I (140-155) St. Anicetus (155-166) St. Soter (166-175) St. Eleutherius (175-189) St. Victor I (189-199) St. Zephyrinus (199-217) St. Callistus I (217-22) Callistus and the following three popes were opposed by St. Hippolytus, antipope (217-236) St. Urban I (222-30) St. Pontian (230-35) St. Anterus (235-36) St. Fabian (236-50) St. Cornelius (251-53) Opposed by Novatian, antipope (251) St. Lucius I (253-54) St. Stephen I (254-257) St. Sixtus II (257-258) St. Dionysius (260-268) St. Felix I (269-274) St. Eutychian (275-283) St. Caius (283-296) Also called Gaius St. Marcellinus (296-304) St. Marcellus I (308-309) St. Eusebius (309 or 310) St. Miltiades (311-14) St. Sylvester I (314-35) St. Marcus (336) St. Julius I (337-52) Liberius (352-66) Opposed by Felix II, antipope (355-365) St. Damasus I (366-84) Opposed by Ursicinus, antipope (366-367) St. Siricius (384-99) St. Anastasius I (399-401) St. Innocent I (401-17) St. Zosimus (417-18) St. Boniface I (418-22) Opposed by Eulalius, antipope (418-419) St. Celestine I (422-32) St. Sixtus III (432-40) St. Leo I (the Great) (440-61) St. Hilarius (461-68) St. Simplicius (468-83) St. Felix III (II) (483-92) St. Gelasius I (492-96) Anastasius II (496-98) St. Symmachus (498-514) Opposed by Laurentius, antipope (498-501) St. Hormisdas (514-23) St. John I (523-26) St. Felix IV (III) (526-30) Boniface II (530-32) Opposed by Dioscorus, antipope (530) John II (533-35) St. Agapetus I (535-36) Also called Agapitus I St. Silverius (536-37) Vigilius (537-55) Pelagius I (556-61) John III (561-74) Benedict I (575-79) Pelagius II (579-90) St. Gregory I (the Great) (590-604) Sabinian (604-606) Boniface III (607) St. Boniface IV (608-15) St. Deusdedit (Adeodatus I) (615-18) Boniface V (619-25) Honorius I (625-38) Severinus (640) John IV (640-42) Theodore I (642-49) St. Martin I (649-55) St. Eugene I (655-57) St. Vitalian (657-72) Adeodatus (II) (672-76) Donus (676-78) St. Agatho (678-81) St. Leo II (682-83) St. Benedict II (684-85) John V (685-86) Conon (686-87) St. Sergius I (687-701) Opposed by Theodore and Paschal, antipopes (687) John VI (701-05) John VII (705-07) Sisinnius (708) Constantine (708-15) St. Gregory II (715-31) St. Gregory III (731-41) St. Zachary (741-52) Stephen II followed Zachary, but because he died before being consecrated, modern lists omit him Stephen II (III) (752-57) St. Paul I (757-67) Stephen III (IV) (767-72) Opposed by Constantine II (767) and Philip (768), antipopes (767) Adrian I (772-95) St. Leo III (795-816) Stephen IV (V) (816-17) St. Paschal I (817-24) Eugene II (824-27) Valentine (827) Gregory IV (827-44) Sergius II (844-47) Opposed by John, antipope St. Leo IV (847-55) Benedict III (855-58) Opposed by Anastasius, antipope (855) St. Nicholas I (the Great) (858-67) Adrian II (867-72) John VIII (872-82) Marinus I (882-84) St. Adrian III (884-85) Stephen V (VI) (885-91) Formosus (891-96) Boniface VI (896) Stephen VI (VII) (896-97) Romanus (897) Theodore II (897) John IX (898-900) Benedict IV (900-03) Leo V (903) Opposed by Christopher, antipope (903-904) Sergius III (904-11) Anastasius III (911-13) Lando (913-14) John X (914-28) Leo VI (928) Stephen VIII (929-31) John XI (931-35) Leo VII (936-39) Stephen IX (939-42) Marinus II (942-46) Agapetus II (946-55) John XII (955-63) Leo VIII (963-64) Benedict V (964) John XIII (965-72) Benedict VI (973-74) Benedict VII (974-83) Benedict and John XIV were opposed by Boniface VII, antipope (974; 984-985) John XIV (983-84) John XV (985-96) Gregory V (996-99) Opposed by John XVI, antipope (997-998) Sylvester II (999-1003) John XVII (1003) John XVIII (1003-09) Sergius IV (1009-12) Benedict VIII (1012-24) Opposed by Gregory, antipope (1012) John XIX (1024-32) Benedict IX (1032-45) He appears on this list three separate times, because he was twice deposed and restored Sylvester III (1045) Considered by some to be an antipope Benedict IX (1045) Gregory VI (1045-46) Clement II (1046-47) Benedict IX (1047-48) Damasus II (1048) St. Leo IX (1049-54) Victor II (1055-57) Stephen X (1057-58) Nicholas II (1058-61) Opposed by Benedict X, antipope (1058) Alexander II (1061-73) Opposed by Honorius II, antipope (1061-1072) St. Gregory VII (1073-85) Gregory and the following three popes were opposed by Guibert ("Clement III"), antipope (1080-1100) Blessed Victor III (1086-87) Blessed Urban II (1088-99) Paschal II (1099-1118) Opposed by Theodoric (1100), Aleric (1102) and Maginulf ("Sylvester IV", 1105-1111), antipopes (1100) Gelasius II (1118-19) Opposed by Burdin ("Gregory VIII"), antipope (1118) Callistus II (1119-24) Honorius II (1124-30) Opposed by Celestine II, antipope (1124) Innocent II (1130-43) Opposed by Anacletus II (1130-1138) and Gregory Conti ("Victor IV") (1138), antipopes (1138) Celestine II (1143-44) Lucius II (1144-45) Blessed Eugene III (1145-53) Anastasius IV (1153-54) Adrian IV (1154-59) Alexander III (1159-81) Opposed by Octavius ("Victor IV") (1159-1164), Pascal III (1165-1168), Callistus III (1168-1177) and Innocent III (1178-1180), antipopes Lucius III (1181-85) Urban III (1185-87) Gregory VIII (1187) Clement III (1187-91) Celestine III (1191-98) Innocent III (1198-1216) Honorius III (1216-27) Gregory IX (1227-41) Celestine IV (1241) Innocent IV (1243-54) Alexander IV (1254-61) Urban IV (1261-64) Clement IV (1265-68) Blessed Gregory X (1271-76) Blessed Innocent V (1276) Adrian V (1276) John XXI (1276-77) Nicholas III (1277-80) Martin IV (1281-85) Honorius IV (1285-87) Nicholas IV (1288-92) St. Celestine V (1294) Boniface VIII (1294-1303) Blessed Benedict XI (1303-04) Clement V (1305-14) John XXII (1316-34) Opposed by Nicholas V, antipope (1328-1330) Benedict XII (1334-42) Clement VI (1342-52) Innocent VI (1352-62) Blessed Urban V (1362-70) Gregory XI (1370-78) Urban VI (1378-89) Opposed by Robert of Geneva ("Clement VII"), antipope (1378-1394) Boniface IX (1389-1404) Opposed by Robert of Geneva ("Clement VII") (1378-1394), Pedro de Luna ("Benedict XIII") (1394-1417) and Baldassare Cossa ("John XXIII") (1400-1415), antipopes Innocent VII (1404-06) Opposed by Pedro de Luna ("Benedict XIII") (1394-1417) and Baldassare Cossa ("John XXIII") (1400-1415), antipopes Gregory XII (1406-15) Opposed by Pedro de Luna ("Benedict XIII") (1394-1417), Baldassare Cossa ("John XXIII") (1400-1415), and Pietro Philarghi ("Alexander V") (1409-1410), antipopes Martin V (1417-31) Eugene IV (1431-47) Opposed by Amadeus of Savoy ("Felix V"), antipope (1439-1449) Nicholas V (1447-55) Callistus III (1455-58) Pius II (1458-64) Paul II (1464-71) Sixtus IV (1471-84) Innocent VIII (1484-92) Alexander VI (1492-1503) Pius III (1503) Julius II (1503-13) Leo X (1513-21) Adrian VI (1522-23) Clement VII (1523-34) Paul III (1534-49) Julius III (1550-55) Marcellus II (1555) Paul IV (1555-59) Pius IV (1559-65) St. Pius V (1566-72) Gregory XIII (1572-85) Sixtus V (1585-90) Urban VII (1590) Gregory XIV (1590-91) Innocent IX (1591) Clement VIII (1592-1605) Leo XI (1605) Paul V (1605-21) Gregory XV (1621-23) Urban VIII (1623-44) Innocent X (1644-55) Alexander VII (1655-67) Clement IX (1667-69) Clement X (1670-76) Blessed Innocent XI (1676-89) Alexander VIII (1689-91) Innocent XII (1691-1700) Clement XI (1700-21) Innocent XIII (1721-24) Benedict XIII (1724-30) Clement XII (1730-40) Benedict XIV (1740-58) Clement XIII (1758-69) Clement XIV (1769-74) Pius VI (1775-99) Pius VII (1800-23) Leo XII (1823-29) Pius VIII (1829-30) Gregory XVI (1831-46) Blessed Pius IX (1846-78) Leo XIII (1878-1903) St. Pius X (1903-14) Benedict XV (1914-22) Biographies of Benedict XV and his successors will be added at a later date Pius XI (1922-39) Pius XII (1939-58) St. John XXIII (1958-63) Paul VI (1963-78) John Paul I (1978) St. John Paul II (1978-2005) Benedict XVI (2005-2013) Francis (2013-)
These are awful arguments against Papal primacy which have been addressed endlessly by theologians. To even suggest Augustine did not support the idea that Bishop of Rome held primacy over the Church is ridiculous. And saying “Christ is really the Rock not Peter”, shows a lack of understanding when it comes to Catholic theology. And the fact that the “keys of the kingdom”, which were given to Peter in that same chapter (Mt 16), wasn’t even brought up is a major sign that this man (no offense) does not understand the fact of papal primacy. The keys were a sign of authority. But don’t believe me, do your own research. Study what scripture means by “keys of the kingdom” and how it’s rooted in the Davidic Kingdom, study what the “office” is about in Acts ch. 1, study the history of the Bishop of Rome, and then come back to this video and see this video for what it is: a strawman fallacy. God bless!
@@CelestialQuestTV why are your Popes not married when Peter was married. (1 Timothy 3:2 KJV) A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Your Popes doesn't fit biblically. It's because it's a false claim.
You called James Jesus' older brother. I'm going to assume you meant the oldest of his brothers, since Jesus, having been born of a virgin, would by necessity be the oldest 😅
Jesus reestablished the Kingdom of David. Jesus made Peter the prime minister of the kingdom. Please see the parallel verse in Isiah 22. Unfortunately this false teacher is turning people away from the true Church.
A few things: - What Mr. Batchelor is forgetting at 4:55 is that Christ would not have been speaking to Peter in Greek in Matthew 16. He would have been speaking to Peter in Aramaic. There is only one word for "rock" in that language (kefa). - Greek uses masculine and feminine words. Petros is the masculine form of "rock" while petra is the "feminine" form of the same word. It would make very little grammatical sense for the New Testament writers to use the feminine form of the word when Jesus is addressing a man. - He is completely ignoring the historical context. What we see in Matthew 16 is a name change. God is changing his name from Simon to Peter. We see this throughout the Old Testament when God is granting someone some special authority or greater commission (God changing Abram's name to Abraham and Jacob's name to Israel, just to name two examples). - I also find it interesting that the remainder of what Christ said to Peter ("...I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven..." and "...whatsoever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatsoever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven...") were totally ignored. You might want to look up Isaiah 22 and compare it to Matthew 16. Peter and the disciples, being good Jewish men well-instructed in Torah, would have known EXACTLY what Jesus was doing here. - St. Peter was very humble and self-depricating in his writings so, of course, he would never claim to be anything more than just a humble priest. - There isn't a single writing from the early Church (going all the way back to the second century) that disputes Peter as the rock on which the Church was built. So this teaching of Mr. Batchelor's is new and flies in the face of 2,000 years of history. It wasn't until the Protestant Reformation that you finding writings from Christians doubting Peter as the rock upon which Christ built His church. - There is nothing in Church teaching that says Peter was flawless and never made mistakes. And there is absolutely NOTHING in Church teaching that says his successors were flawless and never made mistakes. - His interpretation of "ex cathedra" is all wrong and I suggest you do your own research on the subject. - I'm not sure where Mr. Batchelor got his information on St. Augustine but here are his actual words on Peter and the papacy from his writings: ""If all men throughout the world were such as you most vainly accuse them of having been, what has the chair of the Roman church done to you, in which Peter sat, and in which Anastasius sits today?" - St. Augustine of Hippo, Against the Letters of Petilani (AD 402) ""Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear 'I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven.'" - St. Augustine of Hippo, Sermon 235 (AD 411) "If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly and safely do we number them from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, 'Upon this rock I will build my Church...' Peter was succeeded by Linus, Linus by Clement, Clement by Anacletus, Anacletus by Evaristus...." - St. Augustine of Hippo, Letter 53 (AD 412) "Who is ignorant that the first of the apostles is the most blessed Peter?" - St. Augustine of Hippo, Commentary on St. John (AD 416) - St. James the Greater was the head of the church in Jerusalem but not the head of the universal church. And speaking of St. James, I find it interesting that Mr. Batchelor is willing to use Peter's moral and spiritual failings as an argument AGAINST him being the head of the early church while also ignoring the fact that James all but disowned and disbelieved in Jesus until after the Resurrection. - Mr. Batchelor also cherry picks Acts 15. Before James tells those gathered in the room to listen to him, Peter had just made a grand speech that ended ALL debate on the issue they were discussing (circumcision in regards to newly converted gentiles). - The title of "pope" is merely a transliteration of the Greek word "pappas" which means "father." Every bishop in the early church was referred to by this title. The title, however, means nothing. The authority is what matters and the authority of the Bishop of Rome has existed since the earliest days of the church in Rome thanks to the primacy of St. Peter. - Your argument that no early Christian held the belief that a primacy had been transmitted from Peter to any successors is patently false. All you need to do is read St. Irenaeus of Lyons, who lived in the mid/late 2nd century, to understand this. And he's not the only one. There are plenty of quotes from ante-Nicene Fathers in support of the primacy of Peter and his successors in Rome.
Thank you for taking the time to write all this, it’s very helpful for me, I am a new believer in Christ and are looking to find the right church. Thanks and blessings from Australia.
When did Christ the keys to heaven and what is the key to heaven? Did Christ's church confiscate people's property? Did Christ's church burn people at the stake? Did Christ's church force people to be Christian of kill them? The answer is no, but the catholic church did.
Here is the Aramaic. (The Stone) apak (are) wh (that you) tnad (to you) Kl (am) ana (saying) rma (I) ana (also) Pa (My church) ytdel (I shall build) hynba (stone) apak (this) adh (& upon) lew (will withstand it) hnwnoxn (not) al (of Sheol) lwysd (& the gates) aertw
You missed very important verses here in your argument.".And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven" . I encourage all of you who watched this to see the Catholic side as well.. watch the explanation from Catholic and protestant perspectives then pray to God for wisdom to see the truth 🙏
Correct me if I'm wrong, Pastor Doug, I thought Mary was a virgin when she was pregnant with Jesus? And Joseph did not have any child when he married Mary! Where is the older brother of Jesus coming from? Did you mean the younger brother because you missed spoke? You must explain that to us Pastor because your subscribers are confused.
From what I understand, there is a thought that Joseph might have had another wife before Mary. One piece of evidence to back this up is at the cross when Jesus told John to take care of Mary. If Mary had any other biological children, they would've been expected to carry out this duty. So by Jesus giving his mother into the care of John, it could be assumed that his brothers (mentioned in Matthew 13 I believe) were not his biological siblings. Mary was indeed a virgin when she was pregnant with Jesus, and the Bible does not explicitly say that Joseph was married before, but it is possible. And since Joseph died a lot sooner than Mary, he might've been a good deal older than her, so there's a possibility that he was married before. Like I said, the Bible doesn't explicitly say this so I'm not going to state it as fact, but it's possible. I hope that helps a bit! And happy Sabbath! ❤️
SUNSHINE JOSEPH Doug is a brilliant Bible teacher,but he is a man and men make errors.Jesus was the only perfect man .So you go with what the Bible says. Correction is good, it’s scriptural and Doug will learn from it,but give him grace. God bless
@@Sandra-gk3ct why wouldn't it be? Remarriage after death of spouse is not forbidden, and the bible leaves out years worth of details of it's characters, if it was not important for the story it was omitted. Is it okay with you that from age 13-30 we know literally nothing about what Jesus did? Did he do nothing because it wasn't recorded? See where i'm going with this?
@@danielrobertson2154 Guessing and unsubstantiated scenarios (unwarranted as well) are not acceptable except to those who do not trust in God's power to have fully established his Complete Word. Since all legitimate historical sources about Jesus and his family has been combed through and investigated as much as possible beginning with Constantine in 306 AD, there has been nothing ever documented there to warrant such specious speculations.
@@Sandra-gk3ct I did a quick Google search and I don't find any scriptureds that mention it 😕 Only "Saint Peter" came up. Freaky. Considering that Catholics use upside down crosses alot, this explanation lines up with that eerily.
@@earlwhite3760, I know it doesn't say that in the scriptures , ( neither does it say Joseph hadn't been married before.) the scriptures doesn't say Peter was the first Pope either , It does say Peter was a married man , and according to the Papacy Roman Catholic Church, Popes & priests couldn't be married. Heavenly Father's word , does not say , to Worship the Blessed Mary either , But that's what the Popes claim, therefore the masses believe the Popes , over The Heavenly Father's word. ....
The earliest record of the use of the title of 'pope' was in regard to the by-then-deceased patriarch of Alexandria, Heraclas (232-248). Therefore while Peter (basically an illiterate) may have been first Bishop of Roman Catholic church. The other eastern Catholic churches were also autocephalous (being self governing).
Isaiah 22:22 in the old testament the successor of authority to the King was given the keys to the House of David. This was common Jewish practice. Jesus knew this. This is an important verse/ chapter to understand Jesus giving Peter the key's in Matthew. And among other important verses Peter leading in choosing the replacement of Apostle Judas, led in the first Jerusalem religious court,. He's listed first every time the apostles are listed in the bible, and his name is mentioned more times in the bible than any other apostle, by far. John the only apostle to not be martyred, taught Ignatius who said Peter went to Rome in his "Letter to the Romans" one of his seven Epistles, taught Polycarp who taught Irenaeus, who listed the first 12 bishops of Rome and wrote that Peter and his successors have authority over all the churches in "Against the Heresies" book III, Ch. 3
Was Marys husband Joseph not years older than her ,and a widower, having had a family prior to marrying Mary. Therefore jesus would have had older brothers and possibly sisters
7:43: this statement on St. Augustine is erroneous. Here's what he actually said in a number of his writings. "Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear ‘I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven’” (Sermons 295:2 [A.D. 411]). “Some things are said which seem to relate especially to the apostle Peter, and yet are not clear in their meaning unless referred to the Church, which he is acknowledged to have represented in a figure on account of the primacy which he bore among the disciples. Such is ‘I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ and other similar passages” (Commentary on Psalm 108 1 [A.D. 415]). “Who is ignorant that the first of the apostles is the most blessed Peter?” (Commentary on John 56:1 [A.D. 416]).
You think you know enough about history to think your right but not enough about history to know your wrong. The Catholic Church existed for over 300 years without a finalized Bible. It wasn’t until the year 382 at the counsel of Roam during the year Pope Damasus the first that we get the cannon of scripture just as we have it today, 46 Book in the Old Testament, and 27 Bools in the New Testament. Got it Hmm.
Peter faith waiver also denied jesus 3x if he was a pope he would be a false prophet, but good video nowhere in bible is catholic church mentioned or pope although Catholic church has Peter's body and rome st peters bascialia is on hill not a rock
@Paul Beduhn KJV Matthew 13 54 And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works? 55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? 56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?
the Bible is a Catholic book. All you need to know. Find a local Catholic parish and you will find peace in the Lord that defies understanding. God bless!
Brother or Sister, how is the Bible “a Catholic book”? when the Catholic system has changed the 10 commandments, among other things, that’s isn’t very biblical to me and seems like something you need to know about that system.
@@marcussofly32 just do some research and you will find out that the Catholics compiled the Bible. Also check out Catholic Answers channel here on RUclips. God bless.
The papacy is not found in the Bible. It’s true the word papacy is not in the Bible, but neither are the words Trinity or Bible found there. This argument assumes that all Christian doctrine is explicitly described in the Bible, even though this teaching itself is not found in Scripture. Catholics believe, on the other hand, that divine revelation comes from God’s word given to us in written form (Sacred Scripture) and oral form (Sacred Tradition), both of which testify to the existence of the papacy. According to Scripture, Christ founded a visible Church that would never go out of existence and had authority to teach and discipline believers (see Matt. 16:18-19, 18:17). St. Paul tells us this Church is “the pillar and foundation of truth” (1 Tim. 3:15) and it was built on “the foundation of the apostles” (Eph. 2:20). Paul also tells us the Church would have a hierarchy composed of deacons (1 Tim. 2:8-13); presbyters, from where we get the English word priest (1 Tim. 5:17); and bishops (1 Tim. 3:1-7). Paul even instructed one of these bishops, Titus, to appoint priests on the island of Crete (Titus 1:5). In A.D. 110, St. Ignatius of Antioch told his readers, “Follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop.” Unlike the apostles, Christ’s Church would exist for all ages, so the apostle’s passed on to their successors the authority to bind and loose doctrine (see Matt. 18:18), forgive sins (see John 20:23), and speak on behalf of Christ (see Luke 10:16). Acts 1:20, for example, records how after Judas’s death Peter proclaimed that Judas’s office (or, in Greek, his bishoporic) would be transferred to a worthy successor. In 1 Timothy 5:22, Paul warned Timothy to “not be hasty in the laying on of hands” when he appointed new leaders in the church. At the end of the first century, Clement of Rome, who according to ancient tradition was ordained by Peter himself, wrote, “Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop . . . [so they made preparations that] . . . if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry” (Letter to the Corinthians 44:1-3). Just as the apostles’ authority was passed on their successors, Peter’s authority as the leader of the apostles was passed on to his successor. This man inherited the keys to the kingdom of heaven (see Matt. 16:18-19) and Peter’s duty to shepherd Christ’s flock (see John 21:15-17). Peter’s successor was the pastor of Christ’s church and a spiritual father to the Lord’s children (1 Cor. 4:15), thus explaining his offices future title pope, which comes from papa, the Latin word for father.💖💖
Why do you miss the most important part of that scripture. Jesus said I give you the keys to the kingdom and whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth is loose in heaven. That man is complete authority over the church on earth, you can’t get over that hump. And Peter is Latin for Petra and rock. A neuter word. Not feminine nor masculine. Also all through the New Testament Simon is referred to as Rock. Eg. Simon Peter. You can’t submit to the Pope so to you the only way to substantiate the Pope as fake is to say that he does not exist just like satin. Scripture verifies the Pope you just passed over that section. A Comandment says not to bare false witness against thy neighbor and thus you have done. The greatest liar is Satin and you are his follower. Speak the truth.
There are married priests and there can be a married Pope. Priestly celibacy is just a discipline practiced by Latin Catholics. Why does this bad argument made every time there’s a video on the papacy.
Possibly this could refer to either a child of Joseph from a previous marriage or a cousin, since the Aramaic word for brother would also mean cousin or other relative.
Note that the Bible was written from an observer point of view and not from God's point of view. So from our human perspective, the human Jesus whose parents were Mary and Joseph, also had his own half brothers and sisters. James was a son of Mary and Joseph and therefore a half-brother to Jesus and brother to Joseph, Simon, Judas, and their sisters (Read Matthew 13:55).
You’ve just been corrected ; now get your truth right and stop with this nonsense that you didn’t understand or know that Joseph was married before and had children carried into the marriage to Mary!
There is absolutely no doubt that Peter was the first Pope even if the term Pope was not in vogue those days, and even if Peter himself and other Apostles including Paul had not fully comprehended his primacy in the Church. When you read Matthew 16:18-19 with a logical lens, it becomes amply clear that it was Peter on whom Jesus intended to build his Church. Just take these words of Jesus, "You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church" - read logically the words Peter and this rock cannot be different things; 'this rock' cannot but refer to the previous closest name, namely, Peter. Jesus is speaking to Peter and suddenly he cannot change the subject to himself. He is not the one who creates the confusion, but people like Dough Batchelor. If Jesus meant himself to be the rock in this passage, he would not have changed the name of Simon into Peter, and he would have simply said, say, 'I am the rock and on this rock I shall build my Church.' I think Protestants are doing injustice to both Jesus and Peter through their false interpretation of this passage.
Some of the biggest problems with main stream Christianity is that so many people follow men like popes, pastors, apostles, etc., rather than or above following Jesus teachings/examples & his holy spirit. Often the church sermon is all about opinions & well meaning words of apostles like Paul, written in letters such as to the Hebrews, Timothy, etc., etc.. They often take those words as if every word written was the word of God given through the holy spirit, but as you study it becomes very apparent that their words were not "perfect" & they were often just well meaning opinions, just as we still have our own opinions today, even though we too have the holy spirit. A relationship with Jesus & his words & doing all in love & compassion for one another is really where it's at! Jesus has always been the rock, all through history!
@Desire Of All Nations everything that Paul spoke was not Jesus' example. For instance Paul says that we should submit to authorities, because they were put in place by God. Well in some instances that may be true, but in some instances it isn't true. Jesus submitted to authorities when it was his time to be crucified, but much of his life he fled from the authorities, even when he was a toddler he fled to Egypt with Mary & Joseph to avoid being slaughtered by the authorities. It's safe to say that they were not put in place by God, but instead by the enemy who has power over the nations of this world. The apostles also fled the authorities at times & submitted at other times when necessary. This one well meaning, but misleading piece of advice by Paul has led so many astray over the years. Just look how many people around the globe including here in America have gone to unjust wars, killing for the politicians & leaders, often believing that they were justified & were doing God's will, while actually they were doing the will of the enemy, he's the one who likes killing. I could go on & on.....
@Desire Of All Nations I guess you just ignored everything in my previous comment? You're free to ignore & stick with pushing your ideology, but it isn't really productive.
Um what about telling Peter whatever he binds and loosens on earth will be bound and loosened in Heaven which means indisputable authority as used in Isaiah?
How could James be the older brother of Jesus if Jesus was the first born to Mary (and Joseph wasn’t previously married)?…this James you refer to is the brother of John, who together were the “Sons of Thunder”. I know you only brought it up to bring the point home about James being an elder, but this is important. Jesus could not have older brothers/sisters or Mary would not have been a virgin then.
I am thinking he just misspoke but the Catholic church at one time held they were stepchildren from an earlier marriage of Joseph. Now they say they were cousins.
I am hoping he said that in error, but the Catholic church once held Joseph was married before and had children. They would have been younger than Christ.
In the book of Acts, the Apostle Paul appointed elders in the early church, and in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:6-9, the office of elder was instituted. The biblical requirements of an elder are described in these passages. Paul says an elder must be blameless: James was elder in the church it dosent mean he was an older brother of Jesus
At about 9:30 you totally lost me, you said "James, Jesus's Older Brother???" Jesus had brothers and sisters yes, after him for he was born of a Virgin. Did you misspeak? Am I missing something here?
Thank you to everyone who watched and commented on this video! We welcome your participation. If you would like to learn more exciting things from the Bible, you can follow the link below to access FREE Bible study opportunities online. www.amazingbiblestudies.com/home/afgd/M1571 Many of you have expression questions regarding the James the brother of Jesus. Here is a small discussion we hope will shed more light on the subject. Four men-James, Joses, Simon, and Judas-are mentioned as the brothers or siblings of Jesus. (See Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3.) There has been much discussion through the centuries as to the exact relationship of these men to Jesus. So the question remains, did Jesus have siblings? Three principal views have been advanced: (1) that they were Jesus' actual siblings/brothers, that is, half-brothers, sons of Joseph and Mary (and therefore younger than Jesus); Those who hold the first view argue that this is the most natural way to understand the various references to these brothers; also that this is the most obvious intent of Matthew 1:25 and Luke 2:7. (2) that they were His stepbrothers, that is, children of Joseph by a previous marriage (and thus all older than He and not His blood relatives at all); Those who hold the second view argue that family ethics would not permit younger siblings to taunt or otherwise meddle with an older brother as Jesus' brothers taunted Him (see Mark 3:31; John 7:3-4). They point out further that the fact that Jesus left His mother in the care of the apostle John (John 19:26-27) rather than with one of His brothers strongly implies that Mary had no other children. (3) that they were the cousins of Jesus on the mother's side, according to some, or on Joseph's side, according to others. The view that these brothers were the cousins of Jesus on Joseph's side is based on pure conjecture. That they were cousins on Mary's side is based on the unproven identity of "Mary, the wife of Cleophus" with the sister of Mary (John 19:25; Mark 15:40), and on the unproven identity of "Clopas" with Alphaeus (Mark 3:18). Jesus' siblings are mentioned as accompanying Jesus and his mother to Capernaum after the marriage at Cana (John 2:12). Later Mary and these brothers are recorded as seeking an audience with Jesus (Matthew 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21). Toward the end of Jesus' ministry, His brethren are mentioned as urging Jesus to prove His Messiahship, which they themselves doubted (John 7:3-5). That they were later converted is clear, for they are described in Acts as uniting with the disciples and others in "prayer and supplication" prior to Pentecost (Acts 1:13-14). Paul implies that they were all married (1 Corinthians 9:5). Many commentators hold that the author of the epistle of Jude, who identifies himself as the "brother of James," was one of these brothers (Jude 1). It is also generally believed that the leader of the church at Jerusalem was James the brother of Jesus, (see Acts 12:17; 15:13). This seems to be confirmed by Paul's reference to his visit to Jerusalem, in which he states that he saw only Peter, and "James, the Lord's brother" (Galatians 1:18-19). May God bless you in the study of His word, - The Amazing Facts team
@@hiphop74100 This is called prodestant theology even Jewish believers know Jesus had real brothers. Crazy this just supports Catholic theology who the 7 day ascents hate so much. They created and invented this myths. Apparently they don't believe the bible as much as they claim to, they'd rather believe some mid evil commentaries.
I respect your understanding and interpretation but everything you've said in this video makes it clear to me personally and I'm sure other Catholics what Jesus intended to do with Peter which was to make him the Pope and I must say it's interesting to me how many Christians don't see it. Though I respect your take I do wanna remind you guys that Jesus said that some things will make sense to some and not to others. I really advise everyone to do some research and pray for clarity. It's not right or just to compare Jesus to peter because obviously the church is BUILT on Jesus but he gave Peter the duty to keep his ministry going even though he didn't understand at the time, like many other things of which Jesus spoke of. The Catholic Church has been standing to this day. One day, it will not be and it's coming soon and then we will know we are in the last days, though I'm sure you guys already see things taking place. I don't worry for your salvation because as long as we follow scripture and live according to Jesus he has promised us eternal life but it's a beautiful thing to dive in deeper to your faith. Honestly I would say Catholicism is just a deeper conversation of Christianity so I would really recommend praying about it rather than taking someone else's understanding for it because we are all flawed humans and Jesus will never lead you stray for he is the good shepherd. God bless you all and much love from Arizona!!!
Thank you pastor now I understand it clearly because some of my Catholic friends always made their argument about this matter that Peter is the pope, higher position.
Brother. Originally, Jesús called him Cephas... not Petro or Petra. Ceras means rock. In any other way it means the same thing. John 1:42 he says, "He led him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon, son of John. You will be called Cephas [Aramaic rock]” (which is translated Peter [Greek rock])."
“It is easier to fool someone, Than to 'convince' them they have been fooled.” ~ Mark Twain ~~~ Please 'Continue to Evangelize' Roman Catholics !!! ~~~ :)
The Rock upon which the church is built is the understanding that Jesus, is the Anointed Son of God come down from heaven, and cannot in any way be replaced by a common sinful man.
..."Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” That declaration itself is sufficient to be the Rock upon which the church of The Lord Jesus Christ is built. That is my humble opinion.
I have no doubt that all the apostles were part of the foundation with Christ the cornerstone. Catholics have to push the Peter connection so they can say there is an unbroken secession making them Christ's church. The word pope was not used, and the Catholic church did not come about for hundreds of years after Peter's death. Christ's church either morphed into the catholic church or was hijacked over time. The apostles never held many beliefs of the Catholic church. Christ also said the gates of hell would not prevail against His church is the reason God set forth the reformation.
Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” Then he ordered his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah. Why didn't you refer to this part ?: " I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[d] bound in heaven" To me seems clear that Peter is the disciple anointed by Christ to realize the church of Christ. Then you go on a use: Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.” But are you implying that Jesus committed the mistake of giving the keys to satan?? Is easy to understand that satan is the "accuser" or "adversary", and is derived from a verb meaning primarily "to obstruct, oppose"... that was an act of Peter, not the essence of Peter. You know that Satan even tempted Jesus but couldn't win. Is easy to understand that was Satan influencing Peter's words to obstruct the prophecy since Peter is fallible because he is human (differently from Jesus Christ, that is god). If only we Christians were more concerned with practicing Jesus' teachings instead of this Christendom institutional battles, we would achieve much more. We don't have to convert to be 100% right nor shall we idolize the political role of the Pope, just respect it... But always focusing on god word and command. Protestant Christianity could have perfectly evolved inside the then Catholic church if wasn't for the dogmatic political interests of the then holy see. Reforms are important and I think god has a marvelous way to make us realizes we sometimes are wrong, I think that a protestant reformation was a way of showing that the catholic church needed to change.
Simple. Because Jesus said you meaning all apostles not just peter. When jesus refer to peter or one apostle he called them by their name or nickname which is little stone pebble piedra Pedro Peter
This man looks really sweet so I dont want to accuse him of being deliberately deceptive, but he has to be extremely biased to come up with his nonsensical conclusion
Just asked the same "someone", apparently Peter was widowed by the time he became an apostle. That's the first reason they say the pope doesn't get married. Second, 1 Corinthians 7: 28, 32-35.
Point them to 1 Corinthians 9:5 "Do we have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas (Peter)?" It says right there that Peter took his wife with him.
The problem with prots is when you proof text it’s ok. When the Catholic Church proves its doctrine biblicallly, you make excuses. This petros-petra issue has long been debunked! Its kepha in aramaic, the language Jesus used! There is no difference!
Don't blame Doug. It is the Catholics who always bring up Matthew 16:18 first as the primary passage to support the papacy. Turn out it is a weak passage defending the papacy because there is no strong biblical evidence elsewhere. John 1:40-42: 1) Andrew is the first one to recognize Jesus as Messiah, not Peter. 2) Jesus already named Peter "cephas" (rock) when they met for the first time, before Peter's confession in Matthew 16:18.
@@txu9272 That is not true, sir. There IS STRONG BIBLICAL EVIDENCE at Matthew 16: 18, 19 that Jesus is instituting an office within the Church. The "binding" and "loosing" statement that Jesus makes in the Matthean passage is a nearly word for word quote from out of Isaiah 22: 15-25, "I will place the key of the House of David on his shoulder; what he opens no one will shut; what he shuts no one will open". And what is the context of the passage at Isaiah 22:15-25, so we can understand why Jesus would quote it (Isaiah 22:22) to Peter? It is about the installation of the Davidic king's chief steward, Eliakim, an office which Jesus is heir to. He is telling Peter, you are my Eliakim, my Chief Steward, my Master of the Palace. Notice at Isaiah 22:15-25 that it is an office, with unique vestments, with athe deputed authority of the king himself to "bind" and "loose" in the king's name, it is an office with authority, and the inhabitants of Israel as well as the house of Judah are to consider him a "FATHER", the very meaning of the word "pope" which comes from the word "papa". You Protestants call yourself "biblical Christians". You don't know the Bible at all.
James and Jesus' other siblings were children of Joseph, not Mary. In fact it seems Mary had no other children, because at His death Jesus asked the apostle John to care for His mother.
@@naciamaJYute Also, Jesus didn't have the same regard that we do for blood relation. He was sent to reconcile the world back to the father as many as received him, to them he gave power to become the sons of God
@@naciamaJYute The children were that of Joseph and Mary. Christ asked John to take care of His mother because at the time His siblings did not believe. Remember Christ's word when He said something to the effect of, "Who are my brothers and sisters and mother, the ones that do the will of the Father"
Regarding Jesus having older brothers, when Joseph & Mary fled to Egypt did the older children go with them? It seems unlikely, as they left in haste. Perhaps relatives were caring for the others (who were likely still very young).
you know there is a reference of His brothers and sisters looking for Him and He says that whoever does the will of His Father is His brother and sister
@@beyondworth9420 oh come on now, does the bible say he had just parents or family. I'm sure the pastor misspoke. But some say they were his step sisters or brothers (joseph married before marry) or mary had more children after jesus born
@@rickkelly5652 Bible also says that Joseph knew his wife after Jesus was born. Yes Joseph and Mary had more children after Jesus was born. Catholicism in nothing short of a satanic cult
@@beyondworth9420 even Martin Luther and Ulrich Zwingli taught Mary remained a virgin after having Jesus! Had Mary planned on having future relations, she would not have questioned the Archangel Gabriel on how a future conception would take place. No where does the Holy Scriptures teach Mary had other biological children other than Jesus. You are in my prayers! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is True food and Blood True drink
@@matthewbroderick8756 Are you Catholic? References are all over the bible, you can do a google search even. Matthew 1:25 says that Joseph knew Mary after Jesus was born. Do you esteem Mary as that great sacrilegious cult does? The one that says to bless me FOR I HAVE SINNED? the one that calls an earthly man in need of forgiveness like any other man father. James commands not to have faith in the Lord with respect of persons! But you revere the pope and as though he is greater than God!
We appreciate your feedback/commentary on this video. Pastor Doug doesn't respond directly on this platform, but If you would like to discuss your opinions on these topics with someone from our team, we would love to chat with you! Clicking the link below will send you to the Q&A page on our website, there you will receive a personalized email from someone here at Amazing Facts that can hopefully provide clarity or reassurance on what you are gaining from our content here on RUclips! www.amazingfacts.org/about-us/bible-questions God Bless -The Amazing Facts Team
He should stop attacking the Church that brought Christianity to him. I am no longer a practicing Catholic but l condemn lies when l see one. The only disciple that Jesus remotely called a demon was Judas iscariot whom he called the son of perdition.
Great question! We invite you to submit it to us on our website by using the link below, and you will receive a response. God bless you. www.amazingfacts.org/about-us/bible-questions - The Amazing Facts team
Matthew 23:9 KJV And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. John 6:44 KJV No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Paul called himself a "father" to the Corinthians. Was he wrong in doing so? 1 Cor 4:15 If he is right in doing so, why is it wrong for a priest or pope to do so, in principle?
Jude For some godless people have slipped in unnoticed among us,person who distort the message about the grace of our God in order to excuse their immoral ways, and who reject Jesus Christ, our only Master and Lord, Long ago the Scriptures predicted, you believe the Jewish people instead of Jesus Christ SDA false prophets
@@wesleysimelane3423 Where to start…. It’s going to be a long post to answer that sufficiently, so I’m going to try to put it in a nutshell for now. For starters, Jesus didn’t speak Greek, He spoke Aramaic. The only reason why we have the Greek words “Petros” and “petra,” are because the writer of Matthew’s Gospel WROTE it in Greek. Interestingly, we have a precursor to Matt 16:18 in the Gospel of John 1:42, where Jesus foretells of Simon being called “Cepha” (some translations use the phonetic “Kepha,” and others “Cephas,” but they’re all the same Aramaic word). This word is Aramaic for ROCK. It does NOT mean “chip off the ol’ block,” as Doug quite stupidly says. And it does NOT refer to the pronunciation of Jesus as the Christ (because it hadn’t been said yet, and would be another three YEARS later). So, when we see “you are Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church,” we have a transliteration of a translation of an idiomatic phrase from ARAMAIC. So, we need to work backwards from English, to Greek, to Aramaic, to get the whole meaning and the wordplay Jesus used! So here we go: I’m the Greek, the words used indeed are “Petros” and “petra.” We must first understand that Greek is a language with masculine and feminine words (like Spanish or French) and the word for “rock” is a FEMININE word (ie petra). However, it would be quite rude of the Greek linguist to give Simon a girl’s name, so there is a transliteration of “Petros” for the NAME given to a MAN, Simon. At this point I’ll remind you that Jesus did NOT speak this in Greek! He spoke ARAMIAC. So, before the Gospel was written, Jesus would have said to Simon, “You are “Cepha,” and upon this “Cepha,” I will build my Church.” This makes a WHOLE LOT more sense in context, especially when you recall that the Gospel of John FORETELLS of the event in saying SIMON (not the phrase he utters) is the “Cepha” (ROCK) that Jesus will build upon! Plus, here’s the kicker on why Doug’s statement is so pathetically wrong: what is a Church? Is it a statement, or is it a GROUP of PEOPLE who believe in the statement? If anyone has two brain cells, they know a Church is a PEOPLE who are believers. Why would Jesus say He would build a CHURCH if He’s NOT referring to a PERSON who would be the foundation of it?? You can’t build on a statement. You build on a person. Further, there is a REASON Jesus took the disciples particularly to Caesarea Philippi. I could go on for a novel about this, but I will try to be brief. Caesarea Philippi is a place where there is a huge rock (hint, hint!) where people used to worship false gods, including CAESAR Philip (hence the name). The Caesar was believed to be “god on earth” to the Romans, and so Jesus, being the great teacher He is, used this place of false worship as a backdrop to one of His greatest lessons: that Jesus is the TRUE God on earth, and that his TRUE Rock (Peter) would be the foundation of TRUE worship (the Church). As to the Keys to the kingdom, this refers back to Isaiah 22:22, where almost word-for-word, Jesus repeats the concept of “whatever you open shall be opened; whatever you shut shall be shut.” These are words of AUTHORITY being passed down to the person who holds the KEYS. In other words, the KING is telling him, “whatever you say, everyone must listen to you and do it.” By telling Peter that he has the keys, Jesus is saying, “you have my authority.” Lastly (for now), all of the supposed instances wherein Peter shows “weakness” are simply pointing out that Peter is a HUMAN BEING. Even the phraseology, “get thee behind me, satan,” is NOT saying that Peter is an “evil devil,” but is an idiom for “don’t you dare say that.” It’s pretty obvious when you think of their relationship together. Jesus was trying to get Peter to realize that as someone with authority, he must know what is NECESSARY for the Son of God to suffer, so that the Church would know and understand who Jesus is. Peter was JUST starting out as Jesus’s Rock, so Jesus was harsh with him to make him understand the importance of Jesus’s suffering. You will notice that throughout the New Testament, Peter is highlighted and mentioned first more than ANY other Apostle. Peter is seen healing the sick just like Jesus did, and historically speaking, Peter and his successors are differed to by his contemporaries and high-ranking individuals in extra-biblical documents. This is just the tip of the iceberg for showing how completely WRONG Doug is in this stupid video.
@@wesleysimelane3423 By the way, one of the dumbest things Doug says is that James is Jesus’s “older brother.” Does he mean older than Jesus, or did he misspeak? Either way, he seems to have forgotten a BASIC tenet of Jesus being the Christ, because it was prophesied that Jesus would be born of a VIRGIN. She can’t be a virgin if she already had Jesus’s “older brother.”
@@dinopad10 You were right it was a long response. I will not respond to you point by point because mostly, you settle on one point using many exegesies, typologies and early language intepretations which catholics like to get to, which might not be necessarily true eg calling Jesus' brothers and sisters cousins or half siblings (depending on the catholic), but that is a debate for another day. Here is my long response. Catholics tend identify themselves with their church, not with Jesus. Further, they believe in a whole lot more than the Gospel of the New Testament. There is MUCH about the Catholic Church that is not even OF the Bible. Catholicism is like fake money---if you counterfeit money, you want to make it as close to the real thing as possible so you can use it as if it is real. THAT is Catholicism. By the way, the Protestant Reformation which began with Martin Luther was because Luther saw how much the Church at the time was off the track, and he was bringing things to light and urging his fellow believers to repent. But instead of repenting, they threw him out of the church, and wrote down a new number of anathemas as a result. I am not talking about denominations, I am saying that the Catholic Church and the Christian Church are two separate and different religions. They view the Bible differently, they view Jesus differently, and a whole bunch of other things as well. The true Gospel is a message of grace, Catholicism is a religion of works. Two completely different theologies...... Here is the interpretation of Matthew 16:19 Jesus is still responding to Peter's simple acknowledgement that Jesus is the Christ--or Messiah--and the Son of the living God. Jesus has said Peter is blessed to understand this, an understanding given to him by God the Father. Jesus then tells Peter that He will build His church on "this rock," meaning the truth Peter just declared, or the declaration of that truth itself (Matthew 16:13-18). Now Jesus gives authority to Peter to act on His behalf. He has done this before in sending out the twelve to represent Him in Israel (Matthew 10:5-15). Jesus will give this same authority to all twelve disciples both before and after His resurrection (Matthew 18:18; John 20:23). Jesus describes the authority He is delegating to them as the "keys to the kingdom of heaven." He says that whatever they bind or loose on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven. Only the most trusted servant in the household would be given the keys to the doors of the estate. In handing them over, the master of the house would be sharing His authority to open and close, to lock and unlock, the entrance to His home. Peter and, eventually, the rest of the apostles, are being assigned a crucial role in introducing the gospel to the world. In Christ's name, they will declare He is the Messiah and that faith in Him is the only entrance into His kingdom. In His name, they will also exercise discipline within the church, setting the standard for both what is true and how that truth will be practiced. When the apostles declare something bound or loosed in Jesus' name, the power that resides in heaven will respond and make it so. What Jesus is NOT doing is freeing the disciples to act on their own wisdom and will as they lead His church in the coming years. He is giving them responsibility, authority, and supernatural power to lead the church according to HIS will and HIS teaching. Nowhere is Peter shown to be the leader. A few times he made decisions, like a number of decisions that were made against him. Jesus remains the TRUE leader and one TRUE ROCK! “All ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.” 1 Corinthians 10:3-4 NKJV And to prove even further that Peter was not the Rock, notice how over and over in scripture we are told that God is our rock. "I will proclaim the name of the Lord. Oh, praise the greatness of our God! He is the Rock, His works are perfect, and all His ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is He.” Deuteronomy 32:3-4 NIV “They abandoned the God who made them and rejected the Rock their Saviour. They made Him jealous with their foreign gods and angered Him with their detestable idols (RCC). They sacrificed to false gods, which are not God- gods they had not known, gods that recently appeared, gods your ancestors did not fear. You deserted the Rock, who fathered you; you forgot the God who gave you birth.” Deuteronomy 32:15-18 NIV “There is no one holy like the Lord; there is no one besides you; there is no Rock like our God.” 1 Samuel 2:2 NIV “For who is God besides the Lord? And who is the Rock except our God?” 2 Samuel 22:32 NIV “The LORD is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer; my God is my Rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.” Psalm 18:2 NIV “May these words of my mouth and this meditation of my heart be pleasing in your sight, LORD, my Rock and my Redeemer.” Psalm 19:14 NIV “I say to God my Rock, “Why have you forgotten me? Why must I go about mourning, oppressed by the enemy?” Psalm 42:9 NIV “Truly my soul finds rest in God; my salvation comes from Him. Truly He is my Rock and my salvation; He is my fortress, I will never be shaken.” Psalm 62:1-2 NIV “They remembered that God was their Rock, that God Most High was their Redeemer.” Psalm 78:35 NIV “They will still bear fruit in old age, they will stay fresh and green, proclaiming, “The LORD is upright; He is my Rock, and there is no wickedness in Him.” Psalm 92:14-15 NIV “Come, let us sing for joy to the LORD; let us shout aloud to the Rock of our salvation. Let us come before Him with thanksgiving and extol Him with music and song.” Psalm 95:1-2 NIV “You have forgotten God your Saviour; you have not remembered the Rock, your fortress." Isaiah 17:10 NIV “And you will sing as on the night you celebrate a holy festival; your hearts will rejoice as when people playing pipes go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the Rock of Israel.” Isaiah 30:29 NIV “Do not tremble, do not be afraid. Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago? You are my witnesses. Is there any God besides me? No, there is NO other Rock; I know not one.” Isaiah 44:8 NIV “LORD, are you not from everlasting? My God, my Holy One, you will never die. You, LORD, have appointed them to execute judgment; you, my Rock, have ordained them to punish.” Habakkuk 1:12 NIV “Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand (RCC). The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.” Matthew 7:24-27 NIV “As it is written: “See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame.” Romans 9:33 NIV
The idea Peter even stepped foot in Rome does not fit the biblical narrative at all. Writings claiming Peter was in Rome are either modifications or fabrications using Peters name to legitimize their churches. After exhaustive study, Peter was in Babylon Egypt during his final days feeding Jerusalem (John 21), during their judgment. He was a fisherman, who would have fished on his way back and forth between his family and Jerusalem.
Through reading the scripture, pastor Doug clearly refuted the downright falsehood of the claim of Roman Catholic Church. It is why have they been persecuting those Bible translators for 1,260 years. Such wicked acts belong to the deceivers. .
He didn’t refute anything. It was all his opinion from his reading. Church in Hebrew literally means congregation and or meeting house. Literally a church.
"Blessed are you, son of Jonah, your name will now be pebbe and I will build my church on that rock over there, whatever that means, in order to belittle you. Also here is an insane gift, the keys to the kingdom of heaven, which is not awkward to say after humiliating you (after I blessed you)" Protestant Matthew 16:17-19
Also to add ," do protestants know Jesus himself Named Simon Peter when He had called HimJohn 1:42 [42]Then he took Simon to Jesus.Jesus looked at him and said, “Your name is Simon son of John, but you will be called Cephas.” (This is the same as Peter and means “a rock”.) , Now can a protestant tell us whether it is a coincidence that Jesus Re-named Simon and then in Mathew 16, Refers to the Name , & indeed as you say , Protestants would call it insanity , Jesus gives the keys of the Kingdom to a man ,to bind & loose !this is only a power unto God ,but why give it to the office of the Apostles?Does this power end with the Apostles ?Catholic Church : The power is successive , we are Apostolic , Protestant : The power ended with the Apostles , we are not Apostolic !!
MR Doug. I am not a preacher but l had no problem understanding the fact that God is organised. GOD created just one man and one woman. He could have created 100 pairs. Indeed Jesus would have started his church with his 12 disciples under the leadership of one man, Peter. You can deny and deny. I am no longer a practicing Catholic but l fully respect the contribution of the Catholic Church to the Christian faith. Without the Catholic Church you wouldn't have the bible you now use to criticise her.
I hope to live to see Christ's coming you're such a blessing to this dismal world. Pleasant Sabbath.
Nope! The Bible never calls Peter the bishop of Rome or the pope, and it also says that he was a minister to the Jews. So his primary mission field was Jewish people, not Roman gentiles. Not to mention, the Bible hints at James being the leader of the early Christian church in Jerusalem, not Peter. Even though Peter was a prominent member. After discovering these, and other Bible truths, I decided to leave the Catholic Church. I grew up Catholic but I couldn't remain in a church that was perverting the Word of God and misleading people.
Hi Bible Flock. Nice to see you around here. Also follow your channel
The Bible also says there would be no more prophets after Jesus
@@syala1083 Praise God 🙌
@@nitrojanks2977 We must not be reading the same Bible: "And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your young men shall see visions, Your old men shall dream dreams." - Acts 2:17, NKJV
@@GregSereda trying reading that whole chapter
And I will give you(Simon) the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall release on earth shall be released, even in heaven.”
Matthew 16:19
And when did Christ give him the keys, and what is the key to heaven?
@@sammygomes7381 🤣🤣🤣
@@sammygomes7381 that was authority bro.
@@paolopaolo9353 That didn't answer the question. When did Christ give Peter the keys and what is the key?
@@sammygomes7381 the key's that the Lord mentioned was "Authority" and it was given to Saint Peter the time that the Lord Said it!
Coming back to the faith slowly. Amen to this.
Praying for you, brother. God loves you. It is His Spirit that is drawing you. Please don't resist. We have an eternity to win. This world has nothing for us, and is almost over. It's time to get ready for the coming conflict. Please don't be long in the valley of decision. God wants you! Blessings...
I know it has been a year Nicholas, and I hope that you have found your way back into faith. Please consider looking into the Church established by Jesus Christ: The Catholic Church. God Bless You!
Which faith?
@@albertd.6179 the true faith of our Lord Jesus Christ
Happy Sabbath everyone!
Happy Sabbath :)
Happy sabbath⚘⚘
HAPPY SABBATH DAY TO YOU TOO MY BEAUTIFUL SISTER! ✝️💜🥺
Thanks for sharing with us these interesting true facts . Special greetings to you from Zimbabwe.
Peter's name was originally "Simon." Jesus changed his name to "Peter" -- a name that means "rock." As John said, Jesus gave Simon a name that means "a stone." [Cephas] (John 1:42 KJV). Jesus then said, "Upon this rock I will build my Church" and "I will give to you (peter/cephas) the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven" (Mt 16:17-18). Peter presided over the Church in Jerusalem along with John and James (Galatians 2:1-9) and he died in Rome as did St. Paul. St. Peter's basilica was built over Peter's grave and his remains are still there today to be studied and they bear the marks of a man who was crucified upside-down in the first century just as the early Church said. After Peter's death, came Pope Linus, then Cletus, then Clement -- all whom were martyred -- and an unbroken list of popes whose names and whose writings still exist, up to Pope Francis today.
I hope this helps explain the Catholic position on this susubject.
May Christ love you all!
Fr. David
It wasn't the man that the Church was to be built on, it was the revelation of who Christ was, is, and is to come. " "Upon this ROCK (revelation) I will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it." Peter you tell them who I am and what to do. Acts 2:37, "Men and brethren, what shall we do? (38) Then Peter said unto them, Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost".
@@garyblacksher7206 exactly ! "The rock is the unity of faith - not the person of Peter" - Saint Cyprian, III century (also venerated in RCC)
@@garyblacksher7206 but there actually was a giant rock foundation. And there is a church. And there is a hole (I don’t know if it’s there anymore) that the non-believers at the time actually thought was hades, behind the actuall church. So Jesus told Peter to build his church on the foundation (rock) and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. This passage is literal
@@aleksandarstavric2226 that’s not true though. There’s no inclination backing that up.
As I Pentecostal Christian i view pope as a leader of a church, like a president or shall we say patriarch
Peter WAS the 'Rock'....and Jesus also said to him....'What you ordain on Earth is also done in Heaven' ... 'Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven...whose sins you retain, they are retained'.
Peter WAS the first Pope. All the Catholic Sacraments, traditions and ceremonies started with Peter and grew from there. Jesus wouldn't leave without putting someone in charge of 'operations'.
Yes that's indeed true
Lies
Peter hypocrisy in galatians
Jesus is the rock of rocks and cornerstone whom all of us are firm upon thanks be to God. 😃❤️🙏
Yet, Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He renamed Simon as Cephas, which is Aramaic for rock, ( John 1:42), as and built His Church on Peter, and gave Peter alone the keys of the Kingdom. Biblically, keys denote primacy. The office of sole key holder is one of succession. The same Church authority in Peter the rock and sole key holder, who stood up and put an end to all the debating at the council in Jerusalem,since Scripture alone could not, as the manifold wisdom of God is revealed through the Church. You are in my prayers! Peace always in Jesus Christ, the Divine Bridegroom, He whose Flesh is True food and Blood True drink
Matthew Broderick May God bless you. Peter was used to build the church by preaching the gospel as the Holy Spirit led him. He was not the foundation or cornerstone of the church. Jesus is the rock which the church is ultimately built on and we are the ones who are given authority by Christ to preach Gods word with power opening the gates of heaven. May the Lord Jesus be the foundation that your life is built upon. 😁❤️🙏
Amen 🙏
AMEN🙏🙏
@@matthewbroderick8756 WAS THERE ANY PROVE PETER WAS EVER IN ROME
What about this :Peter the Apostle
Luke 22:31-32
[31]“Simon, Simon! Listen! Satan has received permission to test all of you, to separate the good from the bad, as a farmer separates the wheat from the chaff.[32]But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith will not fail. And when you turn back to me, you must strengthen your brothers.”(Note that Jesus uses the Name Simon in this context , not the devine Name he gave to Simon ,that of Peter , So Simon can fail but Peter can not fail)
AFTER RESURRECTION:
John 21:15-19
[15]After they had eaten, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you love me more than these others do?”“Yes, Lord,” he answered, “you know that I love you.”Jesus said to him, “Take care of my lambs.”[16]A second time Jesus said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?”“Yes, Lord,” he answered, “you know that I love you.”Jesus said to him, “Take care of my sheep.”[17]A third time Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you love me?”Peter was sad because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” so he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you!”Jesus said to him, “Take care of my sheep.[18]I am telling you the truth: when you were young, you used to get ready and go anywhere you wanted to; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands and someone else will bind you and take you where you don't want to go.”[19](In saying this, Jesus was indicating the way in which Peter would die and bring glory to God.) Then Jesus said to him, “Follow me!”
Peter Exercises the powers
At Petecost :
Acts 2:12-17
[12]Amazed and confused, they kept asking each other, “What does this mean?”[13]But others made fun of the believers, saying, “These people are drunk!”[14]Then Peter stood up with the other eleven apostles and in a loud voice began to speak to the crowd: “Fellow-Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, listen to me and let me tell you what this means.[15]These people are not drunk, as you suppose; it is only nine o'clock in the morning.[16]Instead, this is what the prophet Joel spoke about:[17]‘This is what I will do in the last days, God says: I will pour out my Spirit on everyone. Your sons and daughters will proclaim my message; your young men will see visions, and your old men will have dreams.
FISRT BINDING & LOOSING: First death penalty in the church
Acts 5:3-5,7-9
[3]Peter said to him, “Ananias, why did you let Satan take control of you and make you lie to the Holy Spirit by keeping part of the money you received for the property?
[4]Before you sold the property, it belonged to you; and after you sold it, the money was yours. Why, then, did you decide to do such a thing? You have not lied to human beings - you have lied to God!”[5]As soon as Ananias heard this, he fell down dead; and all who heard about it were terrified.[7]About three hours later his wife, not knowing what had happened, came in.[8]Peter asked her, “Tell me, was this the full amount you and your husband received for your property?”“Yes,” she answered, “the full amount.”[9]So Peter said to her, “Why did you and your husband decide to put the Lord's Spirit to the test? The men who buried your husband are now at the door, and they will carry you out too!”
In my humble understanding Jesus told Peter to take care of his lambs because Peter was the apostle to the Jews. Simon and Peter are the same person so I don’t understand what you mean when you say Simon can fail but Peter cannot. Peter /Simon , however you wish to identify him was a man. I am 100 percent certain Jesus was not inferring that he was going to build his church upon a man. That doesn’t make sense. Christ is the Rock. Peter is a pebble from The Rock- Christ.
Happy Sabbath Pastor and saints...
Happy sabbath Pastor Doug
Thank You Pastor Doug For Sharing This Inspiring Message. God Blessing.
Thank you Pastor Doug!
Dear Friends, please read Dr Scott Hahn. He completely answers all the Catholic Church teachings correctly from the Bible. Sadly, the man in this video, is very bigoted and ignorant in his understandings of Catholic teaching.
Scott Hahn is most definitely a man of God! Keep the faith, My friend...One of these days people will see how their misconception of the Catholic Church was due to hatred and the Devil guiding them rather than truth! Doug Batchelor once told me "we will have to agree to disagree" when I attempted to show him how the Catholic Church was not the Antichrist. I dont know why people, especially 'men of God' would not at least give Islam a look to see how they more closely tie in with the End Times Beast. There is so much truth in our faith yet it has been tarnished by people like this who will not give it up until they see the beast at their door.
@@jeffandchrissiepimentel3761 Satan has sons and daughters: those who do not act in righteousness and do not love their brothers (1 Jn 3:8, 10). When an attacker against the Church says "Oh I love Catholics but I hate the Catholic Church!" The fool doesn't understand Catholics are the Church. 👍
Really, you want people to read a book by a man that thinks Mary was without sin, remained a virgin, ascended into heaven and is a queen? Right
@@sammygomes7381 Yes because that’s what the Bible teaches
@@stevensonrf Actually the bible teaches we have all sinned, Mary did not remain a virgin, had other children, and is dead and buried, not a queen in heaven.
Paul himself said that Peter, John & James were the leaders/pillars of the early Church (Galatians 2:9) so I won't even entertain an argument that Peter was not a leader in the early Church. The only question is whether Christ gave Peter a primacy that He did not give to John and James, which he clearly did: "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter (kephas/rock) and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of the hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Mathew 16:17-19). While Jesus gave all the Apostles power to bind and loose (Mathew 18:18), only Simon had his name changed to rock/Kephas (John 1:42) and was given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven (Mathew 16:19).
Your brother in Christ!
Fr. David
and you know for a fact that Christ didn't tap himself on His chest when He said "and on this rock I will build my church?"
Of course Christ is the true rock but he shared that authority with Simon by changing his name to “rock” and saying, “I will give you (peter/rock) the keys to the kingdom.”
In Christ,
Fr. Dave
@@FrDavid-wy2qt When was it Christ gave him that authority and what is that authority?
With deepest respect, my brother, your Greek needs an adjustment:
First, Jesus did not name Peter in Greek but in the Aramaic, "Cephas" which just means "rock" or "stone." (John 1:42, Galatians 2:9, 1 Corinthians 1:12, 3:22, 9:5) KJV
Second, the Greek version of Mathew 16:18 uses two different words for Peter because Greek grammar requires it. In Greek, objects have different word-endings than persons. When you give a person (Simon) the name of an object (rock), you use the word ending for a person (petros), not the word ending of an object (petra).
Greek words also have a gender that is identified by the word ending. In Mathew 16:18, petros (the man) indicates a male while petras (the stone) is female. However, in Greek, they mean neither male, female, big or little rock -- but just "rock" because that's how there grammar works.
The Aramaic that Jesus used when giving Peter his name is not like that: "You are kephas (rock) and upon this kephas (rock) I will build my Church." As St. John said, "And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone." John 1:42 (KJV).
May Christ love you and bless you!
Fr. David
Fr. David…Another issue is He didn’t address the verse after which Jesus emphatically states:
“And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.””
Matthew 16:18-19
It’s obvious Jesus directed this declaration to Peter. Sadly, I believe this Pastor is being dishonest and using fallacious claims to land his points. A lot of what this pastor is saying is rather arbitrary and his on personal conclusions.
I pray the Lord have mercy on all of us.
@@initialthought6831 Thanks, Jay! Yes, it is not rational or honest to say that Jesus changed Simon's name to "rock" but that Jesus was not referring to Simon as "rock." Of course, Jesus is the true Rock but he shared his "rockness" with Simon when he changed his name to "Rock" and said upon this "rock" I will build my Church and gave to "Peter/Rock" the keys to the Kingdom.
In Christ,
Fr. Dave
@@FrDavid-wy2qt Amen!! Also in Acts 15 The Pastor forgot to add:
“And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: “Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.”
Acts 15:7
Peter says “God chose among us, that by MY mouth the gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. Showing that Peter is the head or leader
“And after they had become silent, James answered, saying, “Men and brethren, listen to me: Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name.”
Acts 15:13-14
James Alludes to Simeon/Simon/Peter declaration of (Acts 10) The vision.. establishing Peters testimony as infallible and binding.
Also I think he forgot John 21: 15-18
“So when they had eaten breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me more than these?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Feed My lambs.” He said to him again a second time, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Tend My sheep.” He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?” Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, “Do you love Me?” And he said to Him, “Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.” Jesus said to him, “Feed My sheep. Most assuredly, I say to you, when you were younger, you girded yourself and walked where you wished; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish.””
John 21:15-18
Jesus himself also gives him some what a responsibility to be an overseer.
Fr David , bless you. Pray for The Lord to have mercy on me a sinner and bless me.
@@initialthought6831 Great points, Jay. Also, have a native Greek speaker explain Luke 22:31-32 which, I believe in Greek, says: "Simon Peter, Satan has demanded to sift you (all of you) as wheat but I have prayed for you ( Peter) that your faith (Peter) will not fail. Once you have recovered thus from your fall, strengthen your brothers." Peter was clearly the leader of the Apostles in the Bible.
You are certainly in my prayers! Pray for me as well!
In Christ,
Fr. Dave
@@FrDavid-wy2qt That’s amazing. Even the Greek refutes the Pastors position. Lord have mercy on us.
Fr David, is it possible If I could contact you directly/privately to make some inquiries please..
Matthew 16:18-19
New International Version
18 And *I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church,* and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
19 *I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven;* *whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”*
*NOT ONLY JESUS FOUNDED HIS CHURCH ON PETER, HE ALSO GAVE HIM THE KEYS TO HIS EARTHLY KINGDOM/CHURCH*
List of Popes:
St. Peter (32-67)
St. Linus (67-76)
St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)
St. Clement I (88-97)
St. Evaristus (97-105)
St. Alexander I (105-115)
St. Sixtus I (115-125) Also called Xystus I
St. Telesphorus (125-136)
St. Hyginus (136-140)
St. Pius I (140-155)
St. Anicetus (155-166)
St. Soter (166-175)
St. Eleutherius (175-189)
St. Victor I (189-199)
St. Zephyrinus (199-217)
St. Callistus I (217-22) Callistus and the following three popes were opposed by St. Hippolytus, antipope (217-236)
St. Urban I (222-30)
St. Pontian (230-35)
St. Anterus (235-36)
St. Fabian (236-50)
St. Cornelius (251-53) Opposed by Novatian, antipope (251)
St. Lucius I (253-54)
St. Stephen I (254-257)
St. Sixtus II (257-258)
St. Dionysius (260-268)
St. Felix I (269-274)
St. Eutychian (275-283)
St. Caius (283-296) Also called Gaius
St. Marcellinus (296-304)
St. Marcellus I (308-309)
St. Eusebius (309 or 310)
St. Miltiades (311-14)
St. Sylvester I (314-35)
St. Marcus (336)
St. Julius I (337-52)
Liberius (352-66) Opposed by Felix II, antipope (355-365)
St. Damasus I (366-84) Opposed by Ursicinus, antipope (366-367)
St. Siricius (384-99)
St. Anastasius I (399-401)
St. Innocent I (401-17)
St. Zosimus (417-18)
St. Boniface I (418-22) Opposed by Eulalius, antipope (418-419)
St. Celestine I (422-32)
St. Sixtus III (432-40)
St. Leo I (the Great) (440-61)
St. Hilarius (461-68)
St. Simplicius (468-83)
St. Felix III (II) (483-92)
St. Gelasius I (492-96)
Anastasius II (496-98)
St. Symmachus (498-514) Opposed by Laurentius, antipope (498-501)
St. Hormisdas (514-23)
St. John I (523-26)
St. Felix IV (III) (526-30)
Boniface II (530-32) Opposed by Dioscorus, antipope (530)
John II (533-35)
St. Agapetus I (535-36) Also called Agapitus I
St. Silverius (536-37)
Vigilius (537-55)
Pelagius I (556-61)
John III (561-74)
Benedict I (575-79)
Pelagius II (579-90)
St. Gregory I (the Great) (590-604)
Sabinian (604-606)
Boniface III (607)
St. Boniface IV (608-15)
St. Deusdedit (Adeodatus I) (615-18)
Boniface V (619-25)
Honorius I (625-38)
Severinus (640)
John IV (640-42)
Theodore I (642-49)
St. Martin I (649-55)
St. Eugene I (655-57)
St. Vitalian (657-72)
Adeodatus (II) (672-76)
Donus (676-78)
St. Agatho (678-81)
St. Leo II (682-83)
St. Benedict II (684-85)
John V (685-86)
Conon (686-87)
St. Sergius I (687-701) Opposed by Theodore and Paschal, antipopes (687)
John VI (701-05)
John VII (705-07)
Sisinnius (708)
Constantine (708-15)
St. Gregory II (715-31)
St. Gregory III (731-41)
St. Zachary (741-52) Stephen II followed Zachary, but because he died before being consecrated, modern lists omit him
Stephen II (III) (752-57)
St. Paul I (757-67)
Stephen III (IV) (767-72) Opposed by Constantine II (767) and Philip (768), antipopes (767)
Adrian I (772-95)
St. Leo III (795-816)
Stephen IV (V) (816-17)
St. Paschal I (817-24)
Eugene II (824-27)
Valentine (827)
Gregory IV (827-44)
Sergius II (844-47) Opposed by John, antipope
St. Leo IV (847-55)
Benedict III (855-58) Opposed by Anastasius, antipope (855)
St. Nicholas I (the Great) (858-67)
Adrian II (867-72)
John VIII (872-82)
Marinus I (882-84)
St. Adrian III (884-85)
Stephen V (VI) (885-91)
Formosus (891-96)
Boniface VI (896)
Stephen VI (VII) (896-97)
Romanus (897)
Theodore II (897)
John IX (898-900)
Benedict IV (900-03)
Leo V (903) Opposed by Christopher, antipope (903-904)
Sergius III (904-11)
Anastasius III (911-13)
Lando (913-14)
John X (914-28)
Leo VI (928)
Stephen VIII (929-31)
John XI (931-35)
Leo VII (936-39)
Stephen IX (939-42)
Marinus II (942-46)
Agapetus II (946-55)
John XII (955-63)
Leo VIII (963-64)
Benedict V (964)
John XIII (965-72)
Benedict VI (973-74)
Benedict VII (974-83) Benedict and John XIV were opposed by Boniface VII, antipope (974; 984-985)
John XIV (983-84)
John XV (985-96)
Gregory V (996-99) Opposed by John XVI, antipope (997-998)
Sylvester II (999-1003)
John XVII (1003)
John XVIII (1003-09)
Sergius IV (1009-12)
Benedict VIII (1012-24) Opposed by Gregory, antipope (1012)
John XIX (1024-32)
Benedict IX (1032-45) He appears on this list three separate times, because he was twice deposed and restored
Sylvester III (1045) Considered by some to be an antipope
Benedict IX (1045)
Gregory VI (1045-46)
Clement II (1046-47)
Benedict IX (1047-48)
Damasus II (1048)
St. Leo IX (1049-54)
Victor II (1055-57)
Stephen X (1057-58)
Nicholas II (1058-61) Opposed by Benedict X, antipope (1058)
Alexander II (1061-73) Opposed by Honorius II, antipope (1061-1072)
St. Gregory VII (1073-85) Gregory and the following three popes were opposed by Guibert ("Clement III"), antipope (1080-1100)
Blessed Victor III (1086-87)
Blessed Urban II (1088-99)
Paschal II (1099-1118) Opposed by Theodoric (1100), Aleric (1102) and Maginulf ("Sylvester IV", 1105-1111), antipopes (1100)
Gelasius II (1118-19) Opposed by Burdin ("Gregory VIII"), antipope (1118)
Callistus II (1119-24)
Honorius II (1124-30) Opposed by Celestine II, antipope (1124)
Innocent II (1130-43) Opposed by Anacletus II (1130-1138) and Gregory Conti ("Victor IV") (1138), antipopes (1138)
Celestine II (1143-44)
Lucius II (1144-45)
Blessed Eugene III (1145-53)
Anastasius IV (1153-54)
Adrian IV (1154-59)
Alexander III (1159-81) Opposed by Octavius ("Victor IV") (1159-1164), Pascal III (1165-1168), Callistus III (1168-1177) and Innocent III (1178-1180), antipopes
Lucius III (1181-85)
Urban III (1185-87)
Gregory VIII (1187)
Clement III (1187-91)
Celestine III (1191-98)
Innocent III (1198-1216)
Honorius III (1216-27)
Gregory IX (1227-41)
Celestine IV (1241)
Innocent IV (1243-54)
Alexander IV (1254-61)
Urban IV (1261-64)
Clement IV (1265-68)
Blessed Gregory X (1271-76)
Blessed Innocent V (1276)
Adrian V (1276)
John XXI (1276-77)
Nicholas III (1277-80)
Martin IV (1281-85)
Honorius IV (1285-87)
Nicholas IV (1288-92)
St. Celestine V (1294)
Boniface VIII (1294-1303)
Blessed Benedict XI (1303-04)
Clement V (1305-14)
John XXII (1316-34) Opposed by Nicholas V, antipope (1328-1330)
Benedict XII (1334-42)
Clement VI (1342-52)
Innocent VI (1352-62)
Blessed Urban V (1362-70)
Gregory XI (1370-78)
Urban VI (1378-89) Opposed by Robert of Geneva ("Clement VII"), antipope (1378-1394)
Boniface IX (1389-1404) Opposed by Robert of Geneva ("Clement VII") (1378-1394), Pedro de Luna ("Benedict XIII") (1394-1417) and Baldassare Cossa ("John XXIII") (1400-1415), antipopes
Innocent VII (1404-06) Opposed by Pedro de Luna ("Benedict XIII") (1394-1417) and Baldassare Cossa ("John XXIII") (1400-1415), antipopes
Gregory XII (1406-15) Opposed by Pedro de Luna ("Benedict XIII") (1394-1417), Baldassare Cossa ("John XXIII") (1400-1415), and Pietro Philarghi ("Alexander V") (1409-1410), antipopes
Martin V (1417-31)
Eugene IV (1431-47) Opposed by Amadeus of Savoy ("Felix V"), antipope (1439-1449)
Nicholas V (1447-55)
Callistus III (1455-58)
Pius II (1458-64)
Paul II (1464-71)
Sixtus IV (1471-84)
Innocent VIII (1484-92)
Alexander VI (1492-1503)
Pius III (1503)
Julius II (1503-13)
Leo X (1513-21)
Adrian VI (1522-23)
Clement VII (1523-34)
Paul III (1534-49)
Julius III (1550-55)
Marcellus II (1555)
Paul IV (1555-59)
Pius IV (1559-65)
St. Pius V (1566-72)
Gregory XIII (1572-85)
Sixtus V (1585-90)
Urban VII (1590)
Gregory XIV (1590-91)
Innocent IX (1591)
Clement VIII (1592-1605)
Leo XI (1605)
Paul V (1605-21)
Gregory XV (1621-23)
Urban VIII (1623-44)
Innocent X (1644-55)
Alexander VII (1655-67)
Clement IX (1667-69)
Clement X (1670-76)
Blessed Innocent XI (1676-89)
Alexander VIII (1689-91)
Innocent XII (1691-1700)
Clement XI (1700-21)
Innocent XIII (1721-24)
Benedict XIII (1724-30)
Clement XII (1730-40)
Benedict XIV (1740-58)
Clement XIII (1758-69)
Clement XIV (1769-74)
Pius VI (1775-99)
Pius VII (1800-23)
Leo XII (1823-29)
Pius VIII (1829-30)
Gregory XVI (1831-46)
Blessed Pius IX (1846-78)
Leo XIII (1878-1903)
St. Pius X (1903-14)
Benedict XV (1914-22) Biographies of Benedict XV and his successors will be added at a later date
Pius XI (1922-39)
Pius XII (1939-58)
St. John XXIII (1958-63)
Paul VI (1963-78)
John Paul I (1978)
St. John Paul II (1978-2005)
Benedict XVI (2005-2013)
Francis (2013-)
So the papacy is biblical?
@@mariapolakova626 : I'm afraid so...
These are awful arguments against Papal primacy which have been addressed endlessly by theologians. To even suggest Augustine did not support the idea that Bishop of Rome held primacy over the Church is ridiculous. And saying “Christ is really the Rock not Peter”, shows a lack of understanding when it comes to Catholic theology. And the fact that the “keys of the kingdom”, which were given to Peter in that same chapter (Mt 16), wasn’t even brought up is a major sign that this man (no offense) does not understand the fact of papal primacy. The keys were a sign of authority. But don’t believe me, do your own research. Study what scripture means by “keys of the kingdom” and how it’s rooted in the Davidic Kingdom, study what the “office” is about in Acts ch. 1, study the history of the Bishop of Rome, and then come back to this video and see this video for what it is: a strawman fallacy. God bless!
How about Peter being married?
Asher Sian what about it?
@@CelestialQuestTV why are your Popes not married when Peter was married. (1 Timothy 3:2 KJV) A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
Your Popes doesn't fit biblically. It's because it's a false claim.
Have the feeling someone spends to much time saying the rosary. What are the keys to heaven and when did Christ give them to Peter?
You called James Jesus' older brother. I'm going to assume you meant the oldest of his brothers, since Jesus, having been born of a virgin, would by necessity be the oldest 😅
From Korea, happy Sabbath!
Such a wonderful study. Thank you.
And Hello to Korea from Florence, Oregon.
Annyeong! Happy Sabbath from Philippines.
Welcome! Thank you for joining us.
- The Amazing Facts team
Jesus reestablished the Kingdom of David. Jesus made Peter the prime minister of the kingdom. Please see the parallel verse in Isiah 22. Unfortunately this false teacher is turning people away from the true Church.
That's super Clear answer🤗
A few things:
- What Mr. Batchelor is forgetting at 4:55 is that Christ would not have been speaking to Peter in Greek in Matthew 16. He would have been speaking to Peter in Aramaic. There is only one word for "rock" in that language (kefa).
- Greek uses masculine and feminine words. Petros is the masculine form of "rock" while petra is the "feminine" form of the same word. It would make very little grammatical sense for the New Testament writers to use the feminine form of the word when Jesus is addressing a man.
- He is completely ignoring the historical context. What we see in Matthew 16 is a name change. God is changing his name from Simon to Peter. We see this throughout the Old Testament when God is granting someone some special authority or greater commission (God changing Abram's name to Abraham and Jacob's name to Israel, just to name two examples).
- I also find it interesting that the remainder of what Christ said to Peter ("...I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven..." and "...whatsoever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatsoever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven...") were totally ignored. You might want to look up Isaiah 22 and compare it to Matthew 16. Peter and the disciples, being good Jewish men well-instructed in Torah, would have known EXACTLY what Jesus was doing here.
- St. Peter was very humble and self-depricating in his writings so, of course, he would never claim to be anything more than just a humble priest.
- There isn't a single writing from the early Church (going all the way back to the second century) that disputes Peter as the rock on which the Church was built. So this teaching of Mr. Batchelor's is new and flies in the face of 2,000 years of history. It wasn't until the Protestant Reformation that you finding writings from Christians doubting Peter as the rock upon which Christ built His church.
- There is nothing in Church teaching that says Peter was flawless and never made mistakes. And there is absolutely NOTHING in Church teaching that says his successors were flawless and never made mistakes.
- His interpretation of "ex cathedra" is all wrong and I suggest you do your own research on the subject.
- I'm not sure where Mr. Batchelor got his information on St. Augustine but here are his actual words on Peter and the papacy from his writings:
""If all men throughout the world were such as you most vainly accuse them of having been, what has the chair of the Roman church done to you, in which Peter sat, and in which Anastasius sits today?" - St. Augustine of Hippo, Against the Letters of Petilani (AD 402)
""Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear 'I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven.'" - St. Augustine of Hippo, Sermon 235 (AD 411)
"If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly and safely do we number them from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, 'Upon this rock I will build my Church...' Peter was succeeded by Linus, Linus by Clement, Clement by Anacletus, Anacletus by Evaristus...." - St. Augustine of Hippo, Letter 53 (AD 412)
"Who is ignorant that the first of the apostles is the most blessed Peter?" - St. Augustine of Hippo, Commentary on St. John (AD 416)
- St. James the Greater was the head of the church in Jerusalem but not the head of the universal church. And speaking of St. James, I find it interesting that Mr. Batchelor is willing to use Peter's moral and spiritual failings as an argument AGAINST him being the head of the early church while also ignoring the fact that James all but disowned and disbelieved in Jesus until after the Resurrection.
- Mr. Batchelor also cherry picks Acts 15. Before James tells those gathered in the room to listen to him, Peter had just made a grand speech that ended ALL debate on the issue they were discussing (circumcision in regards to newly converted gentiles).
- The title of "pope" is merely a transliteration of the Greek word "pappas" which means "father." Every bishop in the early church was referred to by this title. The title, however, means nothing. The authority is what matters and the authority of the Bishop of Rome has existed since the earliest days of the church in Rome thanks to the primacy of St. Peter.
- Your argument that no early Christian held the belief that a primacy had been transmitted from Peter to any successors is patently false. All you need to do is read St. Irenaeus of Lyons, who lived in the mid/late 2nd century, to understand this. And he's not the only one. There are plenty of quotes from ante-Nicene Fathers in support of the primacy of Peter and his successors in Rome.
Thank you for taking the time to write all this, it’s very helpful for me, I am a new believer in Christ and are looking to find the right church. Thanks and blessings from Australia.
When did Christ the keys to heaven and what is the key to heaven? Did Christ's church confiscate people's property? Did Christ's church burn people at the stake? Did Christ's church force people to be Christian of kill them? The answer is no, but the catholic church did.
Here is the Aramaic. (The Stone) apak (are) wh (that you) tnad (to you) Kl (am) ana (saying) rma (I) ana (also) Pa (My church) ytdel (I shall build) hynba (stone) apak (this) adh (& upon) lew (will withstand it) hnwnoxn (not) al (of Sheol) lwysd (& the gates) aertw
You missed very important verses here in your argument.".And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven" . I encourage all of you who watched this to see the Catholic side as well.. watch the explanation from Catholic and protestant perspectives then pray to God for wisdom to see the truth 🙏
If pope is the successor of Peter why are popes not free to marry....
If then peter was the first pope, why then was he MARRIED...
When did Christ give this key to Peter and what is the key?
Jesus refer peter as petra( a rock) and not aspotle Peter
That's the point you have missed
Happy Sabbath everyone from Toronto Canada
Welcome! God bless you.
- The Amazing Facts team
Happy Sabbath
Correct me if I'm wrong, Pastor Doug, I thought Mary was a virgin when she was pregnant with Jesus? And Joseph did not have any child when he married Mary! Where is the older brother of Jesus coming from? Did you mean the younger brother because you missed spoke? You must explain that to us Pastor because your subscribers are confused.
From what I understand, there is a thought that Joseph might have had another wife before Mary. One piece of evidence to back this up is at the cross when Jesus told John to take care of Mary. If Mary had any other biological children, they would've been expected to carry out this duty. So by Jesus giving his mother into the care of John, it could be assumed that his brothers (mentioned in Matthew 13 I believe) were not his biological siblings. Mary was indeed a virgin when she was pregnant with Jesus, and the Bible does not explicitly say that Joseph was married before, but it is possible. And since Joseph died a lot sooner than Mary, he might've been a good deal older than her, so there's a possibility that he was married before. Like I said, the Bible doesn't explicitly say this so I'm not going to state it as fact, but it's possible. I hope that helps a bit! And happy Sabbath! ❤️
@@misselizabethbennetp2185 You should post this as a public comment on this video, because lots of people are asking the same question.
SUNSHINE JOSEPH Doug is a brilliant Bible teacher,but he is a man and men make errors.Jesus was the only perfect man .So you go with what the Bible says. Correction is good, it’s scriptural and Doug will learn from it,but give him grace. God bless
@@Sandra-gk3ct why wouldn't it be? Remarriage after death of spouse is not forbidden, and the bible leaves out years worth of details of it's characters, if it was not important for the story it was omitted. Is it okay with you that from age 13-30 we know literally nothing about what Jesus did? Did he do nothing because it wasn't recorded? See where i'm going with this?
@@danielrobertson2154 Guessing and unsubstantiated scenarios (unwarranted as well) are not acceptable except to those who do not trust in God's power to have fully established his Complete Word. Since all legitimate historical sources about Jesus and his family has been combed through and investigated as much as possible beginning with Constantine in 306 AD, there has been nothing ever documented there to warrant such specious speculations.
How could Peter have been the first Bishop of Rome when he had never been to Rome in his life?
Good point!
@@Sandra-gk3ct I did a quick Google search and I don't find any scriptureds that mention it 😕 Only "Saint Peter" came up. Freaky. Considering that Catholics use upside down crosses alot, this explanation lines up with that eerily.
Thanks very informative.
Yes, that’s right God bless you Pastor Dough Batchelor.
No such thing in the bible
You said James was Jesus' older brother. How can Jesus have an older brother if Mary was a virgin and her first child?
Joseph , had been married before , his wife passed away, So yes James could have been Christ Jesus , older brother ..
@@CeliaYatesyet GOD'S Word doesn't say that
@@earlwhite3760, I know it doesn't say that in the scriptures , ( neither does it say Joseph hadn't been married before.) the scriptures doesn't say Peter was the first Pope either , It does say Peter was a married man , and according to the Papacy Roman Catholic Church, Popes & priests couldn't be married. Heavenly Father's word , does not say , to Worship the Blessed Mary either , But that's what the Popes claim, therefore the masses believe the Popes , over The Heavenly Father's word. ....
The Bible is not a diary. It doesn't include every detail about everyone
The earliest record of the use of the title of 'pope' was in regard to the by-then-deceased patriarch of Alexandria, Heraclas (232-248). Therefore while Peter (basically an illiterate) may have been first Bishop of Roman Catholic church. The other eastern Catholic churches were also autocephalous (being self governing).
church fathers including agustine taught peter was the rock on which christ built his church. this guy has no idea what he is talking about
Isaiah 22:22 in the old testament the successor of authority to the King was given the keys to the House of David. This was common Jewish practice. Jesus knew this. This is an important verse/ chapter to understand Jesus giving Peter the key's in Matthew. And among other important verses Peter leading in choosing the replacement of Apostle Judas, led in the first Jerusalem religious court,. He's listed first every time the apostles are listed in the bible, and his name is mentioned more times in the bible than any other apostle, by far. John the only apostle to not be martyred, taught Ignatius who said Peter went to Rome in his "Letter to the Romans" one of his seven Epistles, taught Polycarp who taught Irenaeus, who listed the first 12 bishops of Rome and wrote that Peter and his successors have authority over all the churches in "Against the Heresies" book III, Ch. 3
With all due respect where do you site scripture denoting James to be older than Jesus? Thanks in advance.
I think he misspoke on that one. If Mary was a virgin until after she had Jesus and was married, we know James can't be the older brother.
Was Marys husband Joseph not years older than her ,and a widower, having had a family prior to marrying Mary. Therefore jesus would have had older brothers and possibly sisters
7:43: this statement on St. Augustine is erroneous. Here's what he actually said in a number of his writings.
"Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear ‘I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven’” (Sermons 295:2 [A.D. 411]).
“Some things are said which seem to relate especially to the apostle Peter, and yet are not clear in their meaning unless referred to the Church, which he is acknowledged to have represented in a figure on account of the primacy which he bore among the disciples. Such is ‘I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ and other similar passages” (Commentary on Psalm 108 1 [A.D. 415]).
“Who is ignorant that the first of the apostles is the most blessed Peter?” (Commentary on John 56:1 [A.D. 416]).
I have the amazing facts Revelation: The Bride, The Beast and Babylon DVD with me! 😃🦋😃
You think you know enough about history to think your right but not enough about history to know your wrong. The Catholic Church existed for over 300 years without a finalized Bible. It wasn’t until the year 382 at the counsel of Roam during the year Pope Damasus the first that we get the cannon of scripture just as we have it today, 46 Book in the Old Testament, and 27 Bools in the New Testament. Got it Hmm.
At 9.:28 in the video I think you miss spoke you say James is Jesus older brother
Peter faith waiver also denied jesus 3x if he was a pope he would be a false prophet, but good video nowhere in bible is catholic church mentioned or pope although Catholic church has Peter's body and rome st peters bascialia is on hill not a rock
When you say James as the older brother of Jesus, you mean Joseph has children before marrying Mary?
That is correct.
Jesus was Mary's 1st born. And his older brother is from where??
@Paul Beduhn Matthew
@Paul Beduhn
KJV Matthew 13
54 And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works?
55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?
Also Mark 6:3
Not all RCC teachings are Biblical and even biblically, when Jesus was surrounded by illiterates, who was there to record all Jesus words?
the Bible is a Catholic book. All you need to know. Find a local Catholic parish and you will find peace in the Lord that defies understanding. God bless!
Brother or Sister, how is the Bible “a Catholic book”? when the Catholic system has changed the 10 commandments, among other things, that’s isn’t very biblical to me and seems like something you need to know about that system.
@@marcussofly32 just do some research and you will find out that the Catholics compiled the Bible. Also check out Catholic Answers channel here on RUclips. God bless.
The papacy is not found in the Bible.
It’s true the word papacy is not in the Bible, but neither are the words Trinity or Bible found there. This argument assumes that all Christian doctrine is explicitly described in the Bible, even though this teaching itself is not found in Scripture. Catholics believe, on the other hand, that divine revelation comes from God’s word given to us in written form (Sacred Scripture) and oral form (Sacred Tradition), both of which testify to the existence of the papacy.
According to Scripture, Christ founded a visible Church that would never go out of existence and had authority to teach and discipline believers (see Matt. 16:18-19, 18:17). St. Paul tells us this Church is “the pillar and foundation of truth” (1 Tim. 3:15) and it was built on “the foundation of the apostles” (Eph. 2:20). Paul also tells us the Church would have a hierarchy composed of deacons (1 Tim. 2:8-13); presbyters, from where we get the English word priest (1 Tim. 5:17); and bishops (1 Tim. 3:1-7).
Paul even instructed one of these bishops, Titus, to appoint priests on the island of Crete (Titus 1:5). In A.D. 110, St. Ignatius of Antioch told his readers, “Follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop.”
Unlike the apostles, Christ’s Church would exist for all ages, so the apostle’s passed on to their successors the authority to bind and loose doctrine (see Matt. 18:18), forgive sins (see John 20:23), and speak on behalf of Christ (see Luke 10:16). Acts 1:20, for example, records how after Judas’s death Peter proclaimed that Judas’s office (or, in Greek, his bishoporic) would be transferred to a worthy successor. In 1 Timothy 5:22, Paul warned Timothy to “not be hasty in the laying on of hands” when he appointed new leaders in the church.
At the end of the first century, Clement of Rome, who according to ancient tradition was ordained by Peter himself, wrote, “Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop . . . [so they made preparations that] . . . if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry” (Letter to the Corinthians 44:1-3).
Just as the apostles’ authority was passed on their successors, Peter’s authority as the leader of the apostles was passed on to his successor. This man inherited the keys to the kingdom of heaven (see Matt. 16:18-19) and Peter’s duty to shepherd Christ’s flock (see John 21:15-17). Peter’s successor was the pastor of Christ’s church and a spiritual father to the Lord’s children (1 Cor. 4:15), thus explaining his offices future title pope, which comes from papa, the Latin word for father.💖💖
James was NOT the older brother of Jesus. JESUS WAS MARYS First-BORN!
James was the older brother of Jesus, as Joseph clearly had other children before he married Mary, the mother of Jesus. They were still his brothers.
@@amapparatistkwabena Please site your source for such a statement.
It is a possibility from the text. "Brother" could refer to cousin or relative or biological brothers, or half-brothers.
@@amapparatistkwabena aenseoni ya
is Korean for Anthony
still big brother. whether cousin or half brother. still brother. blessed Sabbath
Why do you miss the most important part of that scripture. Jesus said I give you the keys to the kingdom and whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth is loose in heaven. That man is complete authority over the church on earth, you can’t get over that hump. And Peter is Latin for Petra and rock. A neuter word. Not feminine nor masculine. Also all through the New Testament Simon is referred to as Rock. Eg. Simon Peter. You can’t submit to the Pope so to you the only way to substantiate the Pope as fake is to say that he does not exist just like satin. Scripture verifies the Pope you just passed over that section. A Comandment says not to bare false witness against thy neighbor and thus you have done. The greatest liar is Satin and you are his follower. Speak the truth.
Thank you and may God bless you and yours ps looking forward to the video
There are married priests and there can be a married Pope. Priestly celibacy is just a discipline practiced by Latin Catholics. Why does this bad argument made every time there’s a video on the papacy.
9:28 Jesus did not have a older brother. wasn’t he born from a Virgin? Correct me if I am wrong
Possibly this could refer to either a child of Joseph from a previous marriage or a cousin, since the Aramaic word for brother would also mean cousin or other relative.
Note that the Bible was written from an observer point of view and not from God's point of view. So from our human perspective, the human Jesus whose parents were Mary and Joseph, also had his own half brothers and sisters. James was a son of Mary and Joseph and therefore a half-brother to Jesus and brother to Joseph, Simon, Judas, and their sisters (Read Matthew 13:55).
You’ve just been corrected ; now get your truth right and stop with this nonsense that you didn’t understand or know that Joseph was married before and had children carried into the marriage to Mary!
@@jamesbarfield6870 Well you don’t sound very happy, maybe you should consider finding peace
There is absolutely no doubt that Peter was the first Pope even if the term Pope was not in vogue those days, and even if Peter himself and other Apostles including Paul had not fully comprehended his primacy in the Church.
When you read Matthew 16:18-19 with a logical lens, it becomes amply clear that it was Peter on whom Jesus intended to build his Church. Just take these words of Jesus, "You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church" - read logically the words Peter and this rock cannot be different things; 'this rock' cannot but refer to the previous closest name, namely, Peter. Jesus is speaking to Peter and suddenly he cannot change the subject to himself. He is not the one who creates the confusion, but people like Dough Batchelor. If Jesus meant himself to be the rock in this passage, he would not have changed the name of Simon into Peter, and he would have simply said, say, 'I am the rock and on this rock I shall build my Church.' I think Protestants are doing injustice to both Jesus and Peter through their false interpretation of this passage.
Of course as a protestant it's our job to protest about the 1st pope.
Catholic false claim about Bible. 😅
GO BACK TO YOUR ENGLISH LESSONS SIR. DON'T TWIST LANGUAGE. ANYWAY JESUS SPOKE ARAMIAC. AUGUSTINE ALSO SPOKE OF PETER IN ROME,
Praise Father YAHweh His Sacrifice has taken our sins away.
Deceptive. Read the scripture he outlines for yourself and see if they say what he says they say
Some of the biggest problems with main stream Christianity is that so many people follow men like popes, pastors, apostles, etc., rather than or above following Jesus teachings/examples & his holy spirit. Often the church sermon is all about opinions & well meaning words of apostles like Paul, written in letters such as to the Hebrews, Timothy, etc., etc.. They often take those words as if every word written was the word of God given through the holy spirit, but as you study it becomes very apparent that their words were not "perfect" & they were often just well meaning opinions, just as we still have our own opinions today, even though we too have the holy spirit. A relationship with Jesus & his words & doing all in love & compassion for one another is really where it's at! Jesus has always been the rock, all through history!
@Desire Of All Nations everything that Paul spoke was not Jesus' example. For instance Paul says that we should submit to authorities, because they were put in place by God. Well in some instances that may be true, but in some instances it isn't true. Jesus submitted to authorities when it was his time to be crucified, but much of his life he fled from the authorities, even when he was a toddler he fled to Egypt with Mary & Joseph to avoid being slaughtered by the authorities. It's safe to say that they were not put in place by God, but instead by the enemy who has power over the nations of this world. The apostles also fled the authorities at times & submitted at other times when necessary. This one well meaning, but misleading piece of advice by Paul has led so many astray over the years. Just look how many people around the globe including here in America have gone to unjust wars, killing for the politicians & leaders, often believing that they were justified & were doing God's will, while actually they were doing the will of the enemy, he's the one who likes killing. I could go on & on.....
@Desire Of All Nations I guess you just ignored everything in my previous comment? You're free to ignore & stick with pushing your ideology, but it isn't really productive.
Um what about telling Peter whatever he binds and loosens on earth will be bound and loosened in Heaven which means indisputable authority as used in Isaiah?
But is not Saint Peters grave under the Vatican ?
Yes it is lol
If Peter is buried under the Vatican where was his body for the thousand years before they built the church? Are you sure Grant is in Grant's tomb?
How could James be the older brother of Jesus if Jesus was the first born to Mary (and Joseph wasn’t previously married)?…this James you refer to is the brother of John, who together were the “Sons of Thunder”. I know you only brought it up to bring the point home about James being an elder, but this is important. Jesus could not have older brothers/sisters or Mary would not have been a virgin then.
I am thinking he just misspoke but the Catholic church at one time held they were stepchildren from an earlier marriage of Joseph. Now they say they were cousins.
James was Jesus older brother (9:31-32)??? Jesus was the first born.
I am hoping he said that in error, but the Catholic church once held Joseph was married before and had children. They would have been younger than Christ.
So, in John 21: 15-17 Christ was telling Satan to feed and tend His sheep?
That means Peter was not always filled with the Holy Spirit. He could be fallible. However, a sinner can be saved and used for His kingdom.
Your response is on the spot.
In the book of Acts, the Apostle Paul appointed elders in the early church, and in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:6-9, the office of elder was instituted. The biblical requirements of an elder are described in these passages. Paul says an elder must be blameless: James was elder in the church it dosent mean he was an older brother of Jesus
Thank you🙂
yes
Happy Sabbath saints of GOD
Happy Sabbath!
At about 9:30 you totally lost me, you said "James, Jesus's Older Brother???"
Jesus had brothers and sisters yes, after him for he was born of a Virgin.
Did you misspeak? Am I missing something here?
Brother is a very loose term used in the ancient times and in the bible. It probably refers to cousins or josephs children from first marriage
Thank you to everyone who watched and commented on this video! We welcome your participation. If you would like to learn more exciting things from the Bible, you can follow the link below to access FREE Bible study opportunities online. www.amazingbiblestudies.com/home/afgd/M1571
Many of you have expression questions regarding the James the brother of Jesus. Here is a small discussion we hope will shed more light on the subject. Four men-James, Joses, Simon, and Judas-are mentioned as the brothers or siblings of Jesus. (See Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3.)
There has been much discussion through the centuries as to the exact relationship of these men to Jesus. So the question remains, did Jesus have siblings? Three principal views have been advanced:
(1) that they were Jesus' actual siblings/brothers, that is, half-brothers, sons of Joseph and Mary (and therefore younger than Jesus);
Those who hold the first view argue that this is the most natural way to understand the various references to these brothers; also that this is the most obvious intent of Matthew 1:25 and Luke 2:7.
(2) that they were His stepbrothers, that is, children of Joseph by a previous marriage (and thus all older than He and not His blood relatives at all);
Those who hold the second view argue that family ethics would not permit younger siblings to taunt or otherwise meddle with an older brother as Jesus' brothers taunted Him (see Mark 3:31; John 7:3-4). They point out further that the fact that Jesus left His mother in the care of the apostle John (John 19:26-27) rather than with one of His brothers strongly implies that Mary had no other children.
(3) that they were the cousins of Jesus on the mother's side, according to some, or on Joseph's side, according to others.
The view that these brothers were the cousins of Jesus on Joseph's side is based on pure conjecture. That they were cousins on Mary's side is based on the unproven identity of "Mary, the wife of Cleophus" with the sister of Mary (John 19:25; Mark 15:40), and on the unproven identity of "Clopas" with Alphaeus (Mark 3:18).
Jesus' siblings are mentioned as accompanying Jesus and his mother to Capernaum after the marriage at Cana (John 2:12). Later Mary and these brothers are recorded as seeking an audience with Jesus (Matthew 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21). Toward the end of Jesus' ministry, His brethren are mentioned as urging Jesus to prove His Messiahship, which they themselves doubted (John 7:3-5). That they were later converted is clear, for they are described in Acts as uniting with the disciples and others in "prayer and supplication" prior to Pentecost (Acts 1:13-14). Paul implies that they were all married (1 Corinthians 9:5).
Many commentators hold that the author of the epistle of Jude, who identifies himself as the "brother of James," was one of these brothers (Jude 1). It is also generally believed that the leader of the church at Jerusalem was James the brother of Jesus, (see Acts 12:17; 15:13). This seems to be confirmed by Paul's reference to his visit to Jerusalem, in which he states that he saw only Peter, and "James, the Lord's brother" (Galatians 1:18-19).
May God bless you in the study of His word,
- The Amazing Facts team
But Jesus was the first born of Mary... So James could not have been Jesus's older brother. Please may you explain to me
The ANSWER is , JESUS was the first Apostle because He was sent.
I Hope you did a mistake when you say James was Jesus older brother, remember Mary was a virgin and Jesus is the first borne.
@@hiphop74100
This is called prodestant theology even Jewish believers know Jesus had real brothers. Crazy this just supports Catholic theology who the 7 day ascents hate so much. They created and invented this myths. Apparently they don't believe the bible as much as they claim to, they'd rather believe some mid evil commentaries.
@@Moe-bb3bm I know Jesus have other brothers but he was the first one.
I respect your understanding and interpretation but everything you've said in this video makes it clear to me personally and I'm sure other Catholics what Jesus intended to do with Peter which was to make him the Pope and I must say it's interesting to me how many Christians don't see it. Though I respect your take I do wanna remind you guys that Jesus said that some things will make sense to some and not to others. I really advise everyone to do some research and pray for clarity. It's not right or just to compare Jesus to peter because obviously the church is BUILT on Jesus but he gave Peter the duty to keep his ministry going even though he didn't understand at the time, like many other things of which Jesus spoke of. The Catholic Church has been standing to this day. One day, it will not be and it's coming soon and then we will know we are in the last days, though I'm sure you guys already see things taking place. I don't worry for your salvation because as long as we follow scripture and live according to Jesus he has promised us eternal life but it's a beautiful thing to dive in deeper to your faith. Honestly I would say Catholicism is just a deeper conversation of Christianity so I would really recommend praying about it rather than taking someone else's understanding for it because we are all flawed humans and Jesus will never lead you stray for he is the good shepherd. God bless you all and much love from Arizona!!!
Peter the hypocrite in Galatians
Thank you pastor now I understand it clearly because some of my Catholic friends always made their argument about this matter that Peter is the pope, higher position.
Brother. Originally, Jesús called him Cephas... not Petro or Petra. Ceras means rock. In any other way it means the same thing. John 1:42 he says, "He led him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon, son of John. You will be called Cephas [Aramaic rock]” (which is translated Peter [Greek rock])."
Exactly!
Amen Pastor Doug! Amen! And Happy Sabbath
Why did Jesus need to change name Simon to Peter?
Preach it!!!
“It is easier to fool someone,
Than to 'convince' them they have been fooled.”
~ Mark Twain
~~~
Please 'Continue to Evangelize' Roman Catholics !!!
~~~
:)
The Rock upon which the church is built is the understanding that Jesus, is the Anointed Son of God come down from heaven, and cannot in any way be replaced by a common sinful man.
..."Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
That declaration itself is sufficient to be the Rock upon which the church of The Lord Jesus Christ is built.
That is my humble opinion.
I have no doubt that all the apostles were part of the foundation with Christ the cornerstone. Catholics have to push the Peter connection so they can say there is an unbroken secession making them Christ's church. The word pope was not used, and the Catholic church did not come about for hundreds of years after Peter's death. Christ's church either morphed into the catholic church or was hijacked over time. The apostles never held many beliefs of the Catholic church. Christ also said the gates of hell would not prevail against His church is the reason God set forth the reformation.
God bless you, Pastor Doug and happy Sabbath day to you from Australia.🇦🇺☺💙❤
So glad you could join us! May God bless you.
- The Amazing Facts team
Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” Then he ordered his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.
Why didn't you refer to this part ?:
" I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[d] bound in heaven"
To me seems clear that Peter is the disciple anointed by Christ to realize the church of Christ.
Then you go on a use:
Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”
But are you implying that Jesus committed the mistake of giving the keys to satan??
Is easy to understand that satan is the "accuser" or "adversary", and is derived from a verb meaning primarily "to obstruct, oppose"... that was an act of Peter, not the essence of Peter.
You know that Satan even tempted Jesus but couldn't win. Is easy to understand that was Satan influencing Peter's words to obstruct the prophecy since Peter is
fallible because he is human (differently from Jesus Christ, that is god).
If only we Christians were more concerned with practicing Jesus' teachings instead of this Christendom institutional battles, we would achieve much more.
We don't have to convert to be 100% right nor shall we idolize the political role of the Pope, just respect it... But always focusing on god word and command.
Protestant Christianity could have perfectly evolved inside the then Catholic church if wasn't for the dogmatic political interests of the then holy see.
Reforms are important and I think god has a marvelous way to make us realizes we sometimes are wrong, I think that a protestant reformation was a way of showing that the catholic church needed to change.
Simple. Because Jesus said you meaning all apostles not just peter.
When jesus refer to peter or one apostle he called them by their name or nickname which is little stone pebble piedra Pedro Peter
This man looks really sweet so I dont want to accuse him of being deliberately deceptive, but he has to be extremely biased to come up with his nonsensical conclusion
Just asked the same "someone", apparently Peter was widowed by the time he became an apostle. That's the first reason they say the pope doesn't get married. Second, 1 Corinthians 7: 28, 32-35.
Point them to 1 Corinthians 9:5 "Do we have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas (Peter)?" It says right there that Peter took his wife with him.
@@hirakisk I always say, "any religion that tells a man that he can't have a wife ain't the one for me. Lol
The problem with prots is when you proof text it’s ok. When the Catholic Church proves its doctrine biblicallly, you make excuses. This petros-petra issue has long been debunked! Its kepha in aramaic, the language Jesus used! There is no difference!
Don't blame Doug. It is the Catholics who always bring up Matthew 16:18 first as the primary passage to support the papacy. Turn out it is a weak passage defending the papacy because there is no strong biblical evidence elsewhere.
John 1:40-42: 1) Andrew is the first one to recognize Jesus as Messiah, not Peter. 2) Jesus already named Peter "cephas" (rock) when they met for the first time, before Peter's confession in Matthew 16:18.
@@txu9272
That is not true, sir. There IS STRONG BIBLICAL EVIDENCE at Matthew 16: 18, 19 that Jesus is instituting an office within the Church. The "binding" and "loosing" statement that Jesus makes in the Matthean passage is a nearly word for word quote from out of Isaiah 22: 15-25,
"I will place the key of the House of David on his shoulder; what he opens no one will shut; what he shuts no one will open".
And what is the context of the passage at Isaiah 22:15-25, so we can understand why Jesus would quote it (Isaiah 22:22) to Peter? It is about the installation of the Davidic king's chief steward, Eliakim, an office which Jesus is heir to. He is telling Peter, you are my Eliakim, my Chief Steward, my Master of the Palace. Notice at Isaiah 22:15-25 that it is an office, with unique vestments, with athe deputed authority of the king himself to "bind" and "loose" in the king's name, it is an office with authority, and the inhabitants of Israel as well as the house of Judah are to consider him a "FATHER", the very meaning of the word "pope" which comes from the word "papa". You Protestants call yourself "biblical Christians". You don't know the Bible at all.
Pastor Doug, you said James was Jesus older brother? Jesus was Mary's firstborn son, by the Holy Spirit. Can you explain please?
James and Jesus' other siblings were children of Joseph, not Mary. In fact it seems Mary had no other children, because at His death Jesus asked the apostle John to care for His mother.
@@naciamaJYute He said that because John was the closest apostle to him, hence the title BELOVED
@@naciamaJYute Also, Jesus didn't have the same regard that we do for blood relation. He was sent to reconcile the world back to the father as many as received him, to them he gave power to become the sons of God
@@naciamaJYute The children were that of Joseph and Mary. Christ asked John to take care of His mother because at the time His siblings did not believe. Remember Christ's word when He said something to the effect of, "Who are my brothers and sisters and mother, the ones that do the will of the Father"
Happy Sabbath from Ga
Regarding Jesus having older brothers, when Joseph & Mary fled to Egypt did the older children go with them? It seems unlikely, as they left in haste. Perhaps relatives were caring for the others (who were likely still very young).
you know there is a reference of His brothers and sisters looking for Him and He says that whoever does the will of His Father is His brother and sister
@@beyondworth9420 oh come on now, does the bible say he had just parents or family. I'm sure the pastor misspoke. But some say they were his step sisters or brothers (joseph married before marry) or mary had more children after jesus born
@@rickkelly5652 Bible also says that Joseph knew his wife after Jesus was born. Yes Joseph and Mary had more children after Jesus was born. Catholicism in nothing short of a satanic cult
@@beyondworth9420 even Martin Luther and Ulrich Zwingli taught Mary remained a virgin after having Jesus! Had Mary planned on having future relations, she would not have questioned the Archangel Gabriel on how a future conception would take place. No where does the Holy Scriptures teach Mary had other biological children other than Jesus. You are in my prayers! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is True food and Blood True drink
@@matthewbroderick8756 Are you Catholic? References are all over the bible, you can do a google search even. Matthew 1:25 says that Joseph knew Mary after Jesus was born. Do you esteem Mary as that great sacrilegious cult does? The one that says to bless me FOR I HAVE SINNED? the one that calls an earthly man in need of forgiveness like any other man father. James commands not to have faith in the Lord with respect of persons! But you revere the pope and as though he is greater than God!
Doug with all respect Jesus was rebuking the demon in Peter. He never called Peter the devil. You are being dishonest
We appreciate your feedback/commentary on this video. Pastor Doug doesn't respond directly on this platform, but If you would like to discuss your opinions on these topics with someone from our team, we would love to chat with you! Clicking the link below will send you to the Q&A page on our website, there you will receive a personalized email from someone here at Amazing Facts that can hopefully provide clarity or reassurance on what you are gaining from our content here on RUclips!
www.amazingfacts.org/about-us/bible-questions
God Bless
-The Amazing Facts Team
He should stop attacking the Church that brought Christianity to him. I am no longer a practicing Catholic but l condemn lies when l see one. The only disciple that Jesus remotely called a demon was Judas iscariot whom he called the son of perdition.
Happy Sabbath to everyone
How can James be Jesus older brother when Mary was a virgin with Jesus?
Only question I have is why does Jesus say "what you will bind on earth is bound in heaven and what you loose on earth is loosed in heaven." ??
Great question! We invite you to submit it to us on our website by using the link below, and you will receive a response. God bless you.
www.amazingfacts.org/about-us/bible-questions
- The Amazing Facts team
Matthew 23:9 KJV
And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. John 6:44 KJV
No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Paul called himself a "father" to the Corinthians. Was he wrong in doing so?
1 Cor 4:15
If he is right in doing so, why is it wrong for a priest or pope to do so, in principle?
Have you watched Brant Pitre’s video on the “Jewish roots of the Papacy” ?
God bless you and your beautiful family. Thankyou so much for your time. Love from SDA Spotswood church
Australia.
So glad you could join us, Juliana! May God bless you.
- The Amazing Facts team
Jude For some godless people have slipped in unnoticed among us,person who distort the message about the grace of our God in order to excuse their immoral ways, and who reject Jesus Christ, our only Master and Lord, Long ago the Scriptures predicted, you believe the Jewish people instead of Jesus Christ SDA false prophets
Yes. Peter was the first Pope.
Very informative. Thank you Doug
Nope. This is MISinformation. He’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
@@dinopad10 which parts are the misinformation????/
@@wesleysimelane3423
Where to start…. It’s going to be a long post to answer that sufficiently, so I’m going to try to put it in a nutshell for now.
For starters, Jesus didn’t speak Greek, He spoke Aramaic. The only reason why we have the Greek words “Petros” and “petra,” are because the writer of Matthew’s Gospel WROTE it in Greek. Interestingly, we have a precursor to Matt 16:18 in the Gospel of John 1:42, where Jesus foretells of Simon being called “Cepha” (some translations use the phonetic “Kepha,” and others “Cephas,” but they’re all the same Aramaic word). This word is Aramaic for ROCK. It does NOT mean “chip off the ol’ block,” as Doug quite stupidly says. And it does NOT refer to the pronunciation of Jesus as the Christ (because it hadn’t been said yet, and would be another three YEARS later).
So, when we see “you are Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church,” we have a transliteration of a translation of an idiomatic phrase from ARAMAIC. So, we need to work backwards from English, to Greek, to Aramaic, to get the whole meaning and the wordplay Jesus used!
So here we go:
I’m the Greek, the words used indeed are “Petros” and “petra.” We must first understand that Greek is a language with masculine and feminine words (like Spanish or French) and the word for “rock” is a FEMININE word (ie petra). However, it would be quite rude of the Greek linguist to give Simon a girl’s name, so there is a transliteration of “Petros” for the NAME given to a MAN, Simon. At this point I’ll remind you that Jesus did NOT speak this in Greek! He spoke ARAMIAC. So, before the Gospel was written, Jesus would have said to Simon, “You are “Cepha,” and upon this “Cepha,” I will build my Church.” This makes a WHOLE LOT more sense in context, especially when you recall that the Gospel of John FORETELLS of the event in saying SIMON (not the phrase he utters) is the “Cepha” (ROCK) that Jesus will build upon!
Plus, here’s the kicker on why Doug’s statement is so pathetically wrong: what is a Church? Is it a statement, or is it a GROUP of PEOPLE who believe in the statement? If anyone has two brain cells, they know a Church is a PEOPLE who are believers. Why would Jesus say He would build a CHURCH if He’s NOT referring to a PERSON who would be the foundation of it?? You can’t build on a statement. You build on a person.
Further, there is a REASON Jesus took the disciples particularly to Caesarea Philippi. I could go on for a novel about this, but I will try to be brief. Caesarea Philippi is a place where there is a huge rock (hint, hint!) where people used to worship false gods, including CAESAR Philip (hence the name). The Caesar was believed to be “god on earth” to the Romans, and so Jesus, being the great teacher He is, used this place of false worship as a backdrop to one of His greatest lessons: that Jesus is the TRUE God on earth, and that his TRUE Rock (Peter) would be the foundation of TRUE worship (the Church).
As to the Keys to the kingdom, this refers back to Isaiah 22:22, where almost word-for-word, Jesus repeats the concept of “whatever you open shall be opened; whatever you shut shall be shut.” These are words of AUTHORITY being passed down to the person who holds the KEYS. In other words, the KING is telling him, “whatever you say, everyone must listen to you and do it.”
By telling Peter that he has the keys, Jesus is saying, “you have my authority.”
Lastly (for now), all of the supposed instances wherein Peter shows “weakness” are simply pointing out that Peter is a HUMAN BEING. Even the phraseology, “get thee behind me, satan,” is NOT saying that Peter is an “evil devil,” but is an idiom for “don’t you dare say that.” It’s pretty obvious when you think of their relationship together. Jesus was trying to get Peter to realize that as someone with authority, he must know what is NECESSARY for the Son of God to suffer, so that the Church would know and understand who Jesus is. Peter was JUST starting out as Jesus’s Rock, so Jesus was harsh with him to make him understand the importance of Jesus’s suffering.
You will notice that throughout the New Testament, Peter is highlighted and mentioned first more than ANY other Apostle. Peter is seen healing the sick just like Jesus did, and historically speaking, Peter and his successors are differed to by his contemporaries and high-ranking individuals in extra-biblical documents.
This is just the tip of the iceberg for showing how completely WRONG Doug is in this stupid video.
@@wesleysimelane3423
By the way, one of the dumbest things Doug says is that James is Jesus’s “older brother.”
Does he mean older than Jesus, or did he misspeak? Either way, he seems to have forgotten a BASIC tenet of Jesus being the Christ, because it was prophesied that Jesus would be born of a VIRGIN. She can’t be a virgin if she already had Jesus’s “older brother.”
@@dinopad10 You were right it was a long response. I will not respond to you point by point because mostly, you settle on one point using many exegesies, typologies and early language intepretations which catholics like to get to, which might not be necessarily true eg calling Jesus' brothers and sisters cousins or half siblings (depending on the catholic), but that is a debate for another day.
Here is my long response. Catholics tend identify themselves with their church, not with Jesus. Further, they believe in a whole lot more than the Gospel of the New Testament. There is MUCH about the Catholic Church that is not even OF the Bible. Catholicism is like fake money---if you counterfeit money, you want to make it as close to the real thing as possible so you can use it as if it is real. THAT is Catholicism. By the way, the Protestant Reformation which began with Martin Luther was because Luther saw how much the Church at the time was off the track, and he was bringing things to light and urging his fellow believers to repent. But instead of repenting, they threw him out of the church, and wrote down a new number of anathemas as a result. I am not talking about denominations, I am saying that the Catholic Church and the Christian Church are two separate and different religions. They view the Bible differently, they view Jesus differently, and a whole bunch of other things as well. The true Gospel is a message of grace, Catholicism is a religion of works. Two completely different theologies......
Here is the interpretation of Matthew 16:19 Jesus is still responding to Peter's simple acknowledgement that Jesus is the Christ--or Messiah--and the Son of the living God. Jesus has said Peter is blessed to understand this, an understanding given to him by God the Father. Jesus then tells Peter that He will build His church on "this rock," meaning the truth Peter just declared, or the declaration of that truth itself (Matthew 16:13-18). Now Jesus gives authority to Peter to act on His behalf. He has done this before in sending out the twelve to represent Him in Israel (Matthew 10:5-15). Jesus will give this same authority to all twelve disciples both before and after His resurrection (Matthew 18:18; John 20:23). Jesus describes the authority He is delegating to them as the "keys to the kingdom of heaven." He says that whatever they bind or loose on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven. Only the most trusted servant in the household would be given the keys to the doors of the estate. In handing them over, the master of the house would be sharing His authority to open and close, to lock and unlock, the entrance to His home. Peter and, eventually, the rest of the apostles, are being assigned a crucial role in introducing the gospel to the world. In Christ's name, they will declare He is the Messiah and that faith in Him is the only entrance into His kingdom. In His name, they will also exercise discipline within the church, setting the standard for both what is true and how that truth will be practiced. When the apostles declare something bound or loosed in Jesus' name, the power that resides in heaven will respond and make it so. What Jesus is NOT doing is freeing the disciples to act on their own wisdom and will as they lead His church in the coming years. He is giving them responsibility, authority, and supernatural power to lead the church according to HIS will and HIS teaching.
Nowhere is Peter shown to be the leader. A few times he made decisions, like a number of decisions that were made against him. Jesus remains the TRUE leader and one TRUE ROCK!
“All ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.” 1 Corinthians 10:3-4 NKJV And to prove even further that Peter was not the Rock, notice how over and over in scripture we are told that God is our rock. "I will proclaim the name of the Lord. Oh, praise the greatness of our God! He is the Rock, His works are perfect, and all His ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is He.” Deuteronomy 32:3-4 NIV “They abandoned the God who made them and rejected the Rock their Saviour. They made Him jealous with their foreign gods and angered Him with their detestable idols (RCC). They sacrificed to false gods, which are not God- gods they had not known, gods that recently appeared, gods your ancestors did not fear. You deserted the Rock, who fathered you; you forgot the God who gave you birth.” Deuteronomy 32:15-18 NIV “There is no one holy like the Lord; there is no one besides you; there is no Rock like our God.” 1 Samuel 2:2 NIV “For who is God besides the Lord? And who is the Rock except our God?” 2 Samuel 22:32 NIV “The LORD is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer; my God is my Rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.” Psalm 18:2 NIV “May these words of my mouth and this meditation of my heart be pleasing in your sight, LORD, my Rock and my Redeemer.” Psalm 19:14 NIV “I say to God my Rock, “Why have you forgotten me? Why must I go about mourning, oppressed by the enemy?” Psalm 42:9 NIV “Truly my soul finds rest in God; my salvation comes from Him. Truly He is my Rock and my salvation; He is my fortress, I will never be shaken.” Psalm 62:1-2 NIV “They remembered that God was their Rock, that God Most High was their Redeemer.” Psalm 78:35 NIV “They will still bear fruit in old age, they will stay fresh and green, proclaiming, “The LORD is upright; He is my Rock, and there is no wickedness in Him.” Psalm 92:14-15 NIV “Come, let us sing for joy to the LORD; let us shout aloud to the Rock of our salvation. Let us come before Him with thanksgiving and extol Him with music and song.” Psalm 95:1-2 NIV “You have forgotten God your Saviour; you have not remembered the Rock, your fortress." Isaiah 17:10 NIV “And you will sing as on the night you celebrate a holy festival; your hearts will rejoice as when people playing pipes go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the Rock of Israel.” Isaiah 30:29 NIV “Do not tremble, do not be afraid. Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago? You are my witnesses. Is there any God besides me? No, there is NO other Rock; I know not one.” Isaiah 44:8 NIV “LORD, are you not from everlasting? My God, my Holy One, you will never die. You, LORD, have appointed them to execute judgment; you, my Rock, have ordained them to punish.” Habakkuk 1:12 NIV “Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand (RCC). The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.” Matthew 7:24-27 NIV “As it is written: “See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame.” Romans 9:33 NIV
Happy Sabbath everyone! God bless :)
The idea Peter even stepped foot in Rome does not fit the biblical narrative at all. Writings claiming Peter was in Rome are either modifications or fabrications using Peters name to legitimize their churches.
After exhaustive study, Peter was in Babylon Egypt during his final days feeding Jerusalem (John 21), during their judgment. He was a fisherman, who would have fished on his way back and forth between his family and Jerusalem.
Happy Sabbath!!! 🌷🌷🌷Good content Pastor.
Secular historians agree that the first pope is a man named Leo.
Through reading the scripture, pastor Doug clearly refuted the downright falsehood of the claim of Roman Catholic Church. It is why have they been persecuting those Bible translators for 1,260 years. Such wicked acts belong to the deceivers. .
He didn’t refute anything. It was all his opinion from his reading. Church in Hebrew literally means congregation and or meeting house. Literally a church.
The Catholic Church has been stopping Bible translators for 1,260 years because they were trying to change the Bible
Then how did bible reach you??
"Blessed are you, son of Jonah, your name will now be pebbe and I will build my church on that rock over there, whatever that means, in order to belittle you. Also here is an insane gift, the keys to the kingdom of heaven, which is not awkward to say after humiliating you (after I blessed you)" Protestant Matthew 16:17-19
Also to add ," do protestants know Jesus himself Named Simon Peter when He had called HimJohn 1:42
[42]Then he took Simon to Jesus.Jesus looked at him and said, “Your name is Simon son of John, but you will be called Cephas.” (This is the same as Peter and means “a rock”.) , Now can a protestant tell us whether it is a coincidence that Jesus Re-named Simon and then in Mathew 16, Refers to the Name , & indeed as you say , Protestants would call it insanity , Jesus gives the keys of the Kingdom to a man ,to bind & loose !this is only a power unto God ,but why give it to the office of the Apostles?Does this power end with the Apostles ?Catholic Church : The power is successive , we are Apostolic , Protestant : The power ended with the Apostles , we are not Apostolic !!
@@balukuroben7458 Seems those other popes had the power to burn people at the stake.
MR Doug. I am not a preacher but l had no problem understanding the fact that God is organised. GOD created just one man and one woman. He could have created 100 pairs. Indeed Jesus would have started his church with his 12 disciples under the leadership of one man, Peter.
You can deny and deny. I am no longer a practicing Catholic but l fully respect the contribution of the Catholic Church to the Christian faith.
Without the Catholic Church you wouldn't have the bible you now use to criticise her.