@
upon which He would build his church. I hear so much about Paul but very little about Peter. Historically speaking, the two didn’t get along very well but if you think about it, Peter was Jesus actual apostle and Paul was roaming around murdering Christians before his conversion. Why trust Paul at all?
@
2 reasons Paul is bigger:
1st he is an example of the radical transformation that can occur when a person is saved.
2nd: he dedicated his life after his conversion to spreading the gospel, which included suffering persecution for his faith and writing many letters that ended up as books of the bible.
Four things.
1. More of Paul’s letters survived, so more of his views and sayings survive, making him more influential in history.
2. Without Peter, there would be no Paul or work for Paul to do, so Peter is still the foundation.
3. Although they did not always get along, there is no evidence that they were opposed to one another. They disagreed on a couple of things. That is it. For the most part, however, when you read their writings in the Bible, the message is more or less the same.
4. Paul’s past is irrelevant. Don’t forget that Peter denied Christ three times and let him die. What’s the difference? The whole point of Christianity and Christ’s message is redemption and forgiveness, so their pasts don’t matter. It is the message that matters.
@
Paul is bigger because he made a religion out of Jesus. Personally, I think Paul was wrong. He never had actual contact with Jesus (other than claims he appeared to him). Paul implies that salvation is by faith, which has become (to many Protestants anyway) that “being born again” is all that’s required to go to heaven. This seems to negate everything Jesus did. If belief in Jesus was all that was required to go to heaven, Jesus must really have liked to hear himself talk. He did an awful lot of it for no apparent reason.
Read it again.
Jesus was telling Peter that the rock that was the cornerstone that the builders had rejected.
Now, who was rejected by the builders? Jesus was rejected by the leaders of the temples, not Peter.
SO, Jesus is the rock, that the church was to be built on, not Peter. We are to follow Jesus, NOT peter.
Peter was never rejected, this is very important and life changing for many who will read it and finally understand that Jesus is whom we need to follow, not Peter, not Apollos, not Paul.
@
I think its because Paul was the one who fought the others over gentiles not having to be circumcized and not having to abide by the Hebrew dietary laws. So basically Paul was the more gentile-friendly of the apostles. I also think that his having been on the other side of the fence made a big difference too. If we get to pick our faves, I’d choose James, but nobody ever seems to ask that one.
@
This is a very good question. I’ve never really thought of it like that. I guess I don’t know why we wouldn’t trust Paul though. Jesus chose Paul to be the apostle to the gentiles (albeit according to the testimony of Paul and a couple others) while Peter stuck primarily with the Jews.
Our test for accuracy must always be to look back at what Jesus taught, and I have had no reason to doubt the teachings of Paul.
If you want more teachings about Jesus that don’t come from Paul, try the Book of Mormon.
You must be logged in to create new topics.
