I have been looking at this passage a while now, and I have concluded that Peter was the first Pope. But he was the only Pope. Their was no personal succession except that given to the Church at large.
I say this because it does appear that the keys were given [i:4ffd6130f7]especially[/i:4ffd6130f7] to him. He was the first to open the gospel of the NT kingdom on Pentecost etc..
(note: I only used the term "Pope" because it was convienient and throws alot of traditional protestant interpretation off. I believe that every other "Pope" is an antichrist. And that ANY Pope given in the sence of the Roman Church is the antichrist, including Peter.)
Problem with that? Why do you hold to traditional Protestant interpretation?
Rembrandt
[Edited on 5-22-2004 by rembrandt]
I say this because it does appear that the keys were given [i:4ffd6130f7]especially[/i:4ffd6130f7] to him. He was the first to open the gospel of the NT kingdom on Pentecost etc..
(note: I only used the term "Pope" because it was convienient and throws alot of traditional protestant interpretation off. I believe that every other "Pope" is an antichrist. And that ANY Pope given in the sence of the Roman Church is the antichrist, including Peter.)
Problem with that? Why do you hold to traditional Protestant interpretation?
Rembrandt
[Edited on 5-22-2004 by rembrandt]