Jesus called him a small stone. Jesus built His church on an immovable massive connected rock face.
Peter's rock is detached small therefore can be moved. Peter is petros masculine noun.
Jesus' rock upon which He builds His church is petra feminine noun.
By Jesus' choice of words there can be no way Christ would build His house on a small pebble that can be moved.
The Scriptures teach against ranks among the apostles, superior, chief, prominent, head, greater etc.
Not one scripture in the entire new testament gives any of the apostles any of these titles.
The silence of the scriptures should silence any contemplation leaning in this direction.
The verses we have discussed show prominence among apostles to not be the case.
Jesus condemned this idea when the apostles themselves wondered about who would be greatest in the Kingdom.
Galatians 2:2,
- and I went up by revelation and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the gentiles but privately to those of reputation lest by any means I might run in vain, or had run vain
Two groups that Paul preached the gospel to in this verse.
Gentiles. No gentile was ever given apostleship.
Those of reputation were the jews.Those who were appointed elders and apostles.
Reputation separates Christian brethren in the church from apostles and elders in the church.
It does not seperate apostles into some of reputation(leaders) and some not of reputation.
The private discussion is recorded in Acts 15. Apostles and elders of the church came together to discuss the matter of the Jews binding circumcision and commanding that the gentile Christians keep the law of Moses.
Paul repeats this twice Galatians 2:6 ; 9
Leading men are referred to as Pillars of the church.
That word is reference to elders and apostles in the church.
Specifically James, Cephas, John.
Pillar simply means men that were respected in the church.
This has NOTHING to do with ranking among the apostles.
Proof of this is Cephas was not even an apostle!!! Yet he was one of the Pillars.
So in no way is the context implying greater apostles over other apostles as Pillars in the church.
Your reasoning does not equate to prominence because Peter is recorded as speaking more than the others.
What if Matthew's preaching was recorded instead of Peter's preaching in Acts chapter 2?
Would that make Matthew prominent over Peter?
That's not evidence that's speculation.
If the apostles were here today and all 12 held a gospel meeting at a local church.
It was a 7 day meeting.
Matthew preached Sunday, Monday, Tuesday.
Peter preached on Wednesday.
John preached Thrusday, Friday and Saturday.
Would you reason Matthew and John were prominent apostles over Peter?
Just because they spoke more at the meeting?
Have you forgotten Paul was not yet chosen?
Trying to add up who is recorded the most on preaching is not proof of prominence.
It's not even a fair way of reasoning since Paul has not yet even been given the opportunity to begin his preaching.
So of course Peter preached early on as Paul was not yet preaching!!!
Add up who preached the most from Acts 2 to Acts 9 and Peter wins.
This reasoning cannot be used to come to a sound conclusion that Peter was prominent.
Notice we dont even know how much preaching the other apostles did. The scriptures did not record everything that took place among the apostles evangelism We have missing data to try and come to an honest conclusion of who is the head apostle based on numbers alone.
This reasoning is flawed.
Agreed,
Again, The Scriptures have answered this doctrine. It is unscriptual.
John 13:16,
- verily I say unto you the servant is not greater than his Lord, neither he(Peter, John) that is sent is greater than he(other apostles) that sent him(Peter, John)
Acts 8:14,
- now when the apostles which were in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God they sent unto them Peter and John