re: United Methodist Church votes to allow gay marriage and gay clergy

quote:

---

The clear language of the Bible indicates that Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter, which means "Rock".

---

He did do that. That doesn't mean that Jesus was founding the Church upon Peter as singular person. It was an ironic statement: "Peter, your name means 'rock/pebble' and yet it is this rock (Peter's confession) upon which I will build my church"

quote:

---

Jesus then gave the Keys "to the Kingdom of Heaven", and conferred the "binding and loosing" powers upon Peter.

---

Interestingly, just two chapters after Peter's confession, the disciples were arguing about who was going to be the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven (ch. 18:1-5). If your interpretation is correct, then it is strange that they were arguing over who the greatest of the disciples would be in Heaven since Jesus already said it was Peter. Jesus didn't respond that Peter was the greatest, BTW.

Later in chapter 18, Jesus is teaching the disciples about church discipline and dealing with conflict in the church. Jesus tells the disciples collectively that whatever they (plural) bind and loose will be bound and loosed in Heaven. If Peter alone held the keys, you would think that Jesus would only be talking to Peter instead of all of the disciples. When Jesus talks about where two or three are gathered in His name, there He will be also, He's talking about that in the context of discipline. It's basically Him saying that they can feel confident that if they are using the keys wisely, that their actions have Jesus' authority as the king and head of the Church.

That doesn't even touch on the lack of support of Peter's primacy as head of the Church in the epistles (even his own), but rather the rest of the NT affirms the contrary, that Peter was "a fellow elder" with the rest of the elders and Apostles, that he needed to be personally rebuked by Paul, and his counsel was not sought after individually as some head of the Church. Rather Paul writes about the offices of Deacon and Elder, with the Elders being the rulers that are appointed in each congregation who would be responsible for administering discipline (part of the Keys). Paul points Timothy to the Scriptures to deal with the hardships that would come to the Church, not to Peter.

So no, the context of the Keys do not support Rome's claim about Peter, nor do the Scriptures (or the history of the early church) testify to Rome's teachings on papal infallibility nor the Pope being the head of Christ's Church. Those are man-made traditions that contradict what the Scriptures actually teach.

quote:

---

ALL OF CHRISTENDOM and the entire Christian Church taught these Truths for over Fifteen Centuries - over one-thousand and five hundred years.

---

I already provided an example of Augustine where there was disagreement on who/what the "rock" was that is the foundation of the Church. Do you need others to show that "ALL OF CHRISTENDOM" and "the entire Christian Church" did not teach what you're saying it did, or is one exception good enough?

quote:

---

What kind of sick man would step up and announce that God's children had gotten it all wrong for over 1,500 years?

---

The nation of Israel spent hundreds of years in apostasy over it's time. So yes, "God's children" have certainly "gotten it all wrong" for large periods of time throughout history. The Scriptures speak of a remnant of the faithful to God being preserved. I believe that was true prior to the Reformation and holds true even now.