Papacy is Unbiblical

i. ON THE KEYS OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVENIt is clear that my opponent conceded on my stance about the keys of the kingdom of Heaven. ii. ON SIMON AS PETER"Simon Peter is not the one who will build Jesus’ church... this church is not Peter’s but Christ’s."I do not misunderstood Roman Catholic dogma here. I just explained my stance explicitly. iii. ON THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH AGAINST PAPACYClement 1 ( doctrine not jurisdiction) r. A.D. 88-97 [in the life-time of St. John)To Corinthian church:1) Heal their schism2) Submit to hierarchical authority in their local churchIgnatius ( President of the Society of Love)Refers to the Roman Church not specifically to the Roman Bishop.Irenaeus ( disciple of Polycarp)Against Heretics:Christianity = body of truth handed down by the apostles.Orthodoxy ( correct teaching) must be “apostolic.”“Of these the greatest and most ancient is Rome.” It did NOT say “only” Rome but “of these” which highly implies other churches.Victor 1 ( r. 189-199) – the FIRST assertion of jurisdictional authority.Why would Polycarp not submit to the Pope?Stephen 1 ( 3rd century)Why would Cyprian not submit to the Pope?Pope Leo 1 ( 4th century)Why would the church not submit to the Pope?ANSWER:It is because there is no such thing as “singular” Pope who rules over other bishops in the early church.Conclusion:From the first 4 centuries of the church, the eastern church do not submit to the bishop of Rome as a singular ruler of the entire flock of God.I got all of this info from the Papacy article of Thomas P. Neill in Collier’s Encyclopedia ~ copyright 1986 ( Volume 18) on pages 398 and 399iv. ON THE FIRST CENTURY CHURCH POLITY AGAINST PAPACYThe fact that the first century church polity is consisting only of elders (who functions as bishops) and deacons ( whose function is to serve) reveals that Papacy is non-existent in the first century church. First Century Church Polity Jesus Christ ( the only head)elders ( bishops)deacons (serves) Roman Catholic Church Polity Pope ( Vicar of Christ)Bishops (overseers)Priests (ministers of the sacrament)deacons ( serves) The difference is obvious. The church polity of Roman Catholicism today is not the original church polity recorded in the New Testament Scriptures. This is not to say that church polity evolution in itself is bad but rather, what are we trying to show is that Papacy itself is part of this church polity evolution.It means that it is not an original part of the first century church polity.2. In Support of Papacyi. Biblical SupportJesus did give Simon a new name which is "Peter" but it did not replace Simon's name as "Simon." Jesus still calls him by his name “Simon” even after He gave him the name “Peter” (Luke 22:21-22 and John 21:17). Accoring to Simon himself, he is “Simon Peter” or “Simon the Rock” ( 2 Peter 1:1). Isaiah 22:20-22 is not referring to Matthew 16:18-19. There is none in both texts that correlates them.In fact, the texts are different in focus: Isaiah 22:20-22 is talking about the KEY ( singular) of David.It has the power to shut and open.This indicates that it is Messianic.It's context refers t's purely to Israel. Matthew 16:18-19 is talking about the KEYS ( plural) of the Kingdom of Heaven.It has the power to bound and loose.It's context refers only to the church. Revelation 3:7-8 is clear that Jesus (the Messiah) alone has the keys of David and He alone uses it for his church. It was not Simon Peter who has the keys of David here.Hence, it is very clear that Isaiah 22:20-22 is not pertaining to Simon Peter but to Jesus Christ alone. My opponent quotes Ezekiel 34:22-24 and refers it to Simon Peter, an apostle. This is a blasphemy. The church has only "one Shepherd" who is God alone (Psalm 23:1, John 10:16).ii. Historical SupportThe apostolic succession teaching is not a first century Christian teaching. The NT Christians do not teach that the Christian doctrines would be preserved by a list of people.Rather, the Christian teachings would be preserved by apostolic writings against false teachings ( John 17:17, Acts 20:32).Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth ( John 17:17).And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified ( John 17:17). When Stephen, bishop of Rome, made a claim that he was a bishop over other bishops, Cyprian called a council of 87 north African bishops specifically to deny his claim. Cyprian believed all bishops were the successor of Peter together, representing one united "episcopal throne."Cyprian was overseer ["bishop" in Greek,episkopos, literally means overseer or supervisor] of Carthage from A.D. 249 to 258. He belongs to a period 200 years after the apostles, and he was one of the first to refer to elders as priests (which may have as much to do with his writing in Latin as with his theology). But to him, and to all the bishops of north Africa, there was no pope, not even 200 years after the apostles.No one says Peter's authority was passed on until A.D. 250, when Cyprian does so, and Cyprian specifically rejects the authority of the bishop of Rome.Cyprian called the 7th Council of Carthage in A.D. 258. The council was called specifically because Stephen, bishop of Rome, had condemned the decrees of a previous north African council. There, as he introduced the council to 87 bishops of North Africa, he declared:On this matter, each of us should bring forth what he thinks … for neither does any of us set himself up as a bishop of bishops, nor by tyrannical terror does any compel his colleague to the necessity of obedience; since every bishop … has his own proper right of judgment, and can no more be judged by another than he himself can judge another. (Ante-Nicene Fathersvol. V, "The Seventh Council of Carthage under Cyprian").SOURCES: http://www.christian-history.org...http://carm.org...http://www.gotquestions.org...http://www.gotquestions.org...