Talk:Saint Peter

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Peter

I redirected Peter into Saint Peter. The content of the Peter article had already been moved and merged into Saint Peter. Leopeo 10:11, 12 May 2007 (EDT)

Protestant views of Saint Peter

Since the RCC got to put their view of Saint Peter, I was wondering if I could add some protestant criticisms to the last paragraph of this article?

-- RichardTTalk 19:05, 9 September 2007 (EDT)

Paul Writting from Rome:

Only Luke is with me. Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the ministry.

2 Timothy 4:11

-- RichardTTalk 19:18, 9 September 2007 (EDT)

As one who is a Protestant Richard, I'm not sure how this applies to Peter. Protestant theology usually doesn't tie in Paul's difficulties while under house arrest with Peter. Learn together 00:50, 10 September 2007 (EDT)

re: Peter

"Peter demonstrated the greatest faith in the history of the world, second only to Jesus and Mary."

That is incorrect. The Apostle Paul, who had the greatest zeal in the early church, outdid Peter in both faith and works (Missionary trips, New Testament letters, churches planted, etc). James said that I will show you my faith by my works and that faith without works is dead. Paul had greater works. Conservative 19:43, 3 July 2013 (EDT)

Paul never walked on water, cured people, or recognized immediately and initially that Jesus was the Christ. Paul's faith was immense, but Peter's faith was unsurpassed.--Andy Schlafly 00:14, 4 July 2013 (EDT)
Peter took a few steps on water, doubted, started to sink, was rescued by Jesus who upbraided him for his doubting and having little faith (Matthew 14: 29-31). You can't pick and choose the facts relating to this incident. Also, Peter and Andrew did drop their nets and immediately follow him in Matthew 4: 20. However, the Scripture does not clearly spell out that Peter had the revelation that Jesus was the Christ and the Son of the living God until Matthew 16:16. So you are incorrect to claim that Peter necessarily knew that Jesus was the Christ immediately. Also, in Matthew 16: 23, Jesus tells Peter who allowed Satan to speak through him, "Get behind me, Satan".
Second, Peter denied Christ three times and then had godly sorrow and repented unlike Judas who merely had regret. Paul never denied Christ once after his conversion.
Third, nobody in the first century Christendom can match the zeal of all out Paul nor can they match his accomplishments (number of churches planted in cities, writer of more books of the New Testament, etc). Again, James said, I will show you my faith by my works and true faith has works. Faith without works is dead. Nobody in first century Christendom surpassed the zeal of Paul in the amount of works performed. As far as Paul's zeal, see: 2 Corinthians 11: 23-29.
Fourth, you are incorrect about Paul never being involved in a healing. For example, Paul was involved in the supernatural curing of Publius' father of a serious fever on the Island of Malta (Acts 28:7-10). By the way, I realize that God does the healing and Paul was only a vessel that God used.
At the same time, Paul recognized that he was a servant of Christ and he did not want people to follow him (or Peter) but rather he wanted them to follow Christ (1 Corinthians 1:12-15). Conservative 03:24, 4 July 2013 (EDT)

There is probably about a months worth of things I have to tackle and get off my plate and I am sure it will be replaced by more things when I finish these matters. Accordingly, I have finished what I have to say about the Peter/Paul matter. Conservative 08:05, 4 July 2013 (EDT)

Your comments are interesting, but the fact remains that Peter's faith was at the highest level. He was the first to recognize Jesus as Christ and did so unequivocably. Peter was the only to walk on water. Peter's denial to avoid getting caught was not due to any weakness in faith; his weeping afterward was testimony to how strong his faith was.--Andy Schlafly 22:02, 4 July 2013 (EDT)
Peter's exhibition of bravery during the Passion is often overlooked. When an entire Roman cohort came to arrest Jesus, Peter actually attacked the slave of the high priest who was accompanying them. Now keep in mind that according to wikipedia (I know, not the most reliable source but I don't have time to check anything better) a Roman cohort typically consisted of about 500 soldiers. Peter's willingness to fight for his Lord in such unfavorable odds is nothing short of remarkable. He was both willing to kill and die for Christ.
When you take this act into account, his actions at the temple are to be seen in a completely different light. Surely he was endangering himself by coming into that place, facing the possibility of being apprehended by the Jewish authorities for what he had done to the high priest's slave. With all these facts taken into account, we can clearly see that Peter was the first in faith, even when we acknowledge his denial of Christ. - Markman 23:12, 4 July 2013 (EDT)
I've thought the same about how Peter courageously acted in self-defense against hundreds of Roman soldiers. His "denial" later was a strategic decision, and not any lack in faith.--Andy Schlafly 00:18, 5 July 2013 (EDT)
The ins and outs of who is loyal to Jesus in the last few days of his life is portrayed poignantly in the rock opera Jesus Christ Superstar (it is, by the way, the first record album I ever bought). --Ed Poor Talk 13:28, 6 July 2013 (EDT)
Personal tools