Sunday, September 21, 2025

Peter’s Primacy in the Early Church

 

Peter’s Primacy in the Early Church

In this article I will reference statements from some of the greatest theologians, apologists, scholars, bishops and/or sons to show that the unanimous belief of the universal Church was that Peter was the chief and head of all the holy and blessed Apostles. All emphasis will be mine.

Epistle of Clement to James

Chapter I.-Peter’s Martyrdom.

Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon, who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus Himself, with His truthful mouth, named Peter, the first-fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect, and associate at table and in the journeyings of Christ; the excellent and approved disciple, who, as being fittest of all, was commanded to enlighten the darker part of the world, namely the West, and was enabled to accomplish it,-and to what extent do I lengthen my discourse, not wishing to indicate what is sad, which yet of necessity, though reluctantly, I must tell you,-he himself, by reason of his immense love towards men, having come as far as Rome, clearly and publicly testifying, in opposition to the wicked one who withstood him, that there is to be a good King over all the world, while saving men by his God-inspired doctrine, himself, by violence, exchanged this present existence for life.

Clementine Homilies 

Chapter XIX. Opposition to Peter Unreasonable

If, then, our Jesus appeared to you in a vision, made Himself known to you, and spoke to you, it was as one who is enraged with an adversary; and this is the reason why it was through visions and dreams, or through revelations that were from without, that He spoke to you. But can any one be rendered fit for instruction through apparitions? And if you will say, ‘It is possible,’ then I ask, ‘Why did our teacher abide and discourse a whole year to those who were awake?’ And how are we to believe your word, when you tell us that He appeared to you? And how did He appear to you, when you entertain opinions contrary to His teaching? But if you were seen and taught by Him, and became His apostle for a single hour, proclaim His utterances, interpret His sayings, love His apostles, contend not with me who companied with Him. For in direct opposition to me, who am a firm rock, the foundation of the Church, you now stand. If you were not opposed to me, you would not accuse me, and revile the truth proclaimed by me, in order that I may not be believed when I state what I myself have heard with my own ears from the Lord, as if I were evidently a person that was condemned and in bad repute. But if you say that I am condemned, you bring an accusation against God, who revealed the Christ to me, and you inveigh against Him who pronounced me blessed on account of the revelation. But if, indeed, you really wish to work in the cause of truth, learn first of all from us what we have learned from Him, and, becoming a disciple of the truth, become a fellow-worker with us. (Homily 17)

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA

XXI… Therefore on hearing those words, the blessed Peter, the chosen, the pre-eminent, the first of the disciples, for whom alone and Himself the Saviour paid tributeMatthew 17:27 quickly seized and comprehended the saying. And what does he say? Lo, we have left all and followed You. Now if by all he means his own property, he boasts of leaving four oboli perhaps in all, and forgets to show the kingdom of heaven to be their recompense. But if, casting away what we were now speaking of, the old mental possessions and soul diseases, they follow in the Master’s footsteps, this now joins them to those who are to be enrolled in the heavens. For it is thus that one truly follows the Saviour, by aiming at sinlessness and at His perfection, and adorning and composing the soul before it as a mirror, and arranging everything in all respects similarly. (Who is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved?)

TERTULLIAN

“… For though you think heaven still shut, remember that the Lord left here to Peter and through him to the Church, the keys of it, which every one who has been here put to the question, and also made confession, will carry with him…” (Scorpiace, Chapter 10)

Chapter 22. Attempt to Invalidate This Rule of Faith Rebutted. The Apostles Safe Transmitters of the Truth. Sufficiently Taught at First, and Faithful in the Transmission.

But inasmuch as the proof is so near at hand, that if it were at once produced there would be nothing left to be dealt with, let us give way for a while to the opposite side, if they think that they can find some means of invalidating this rule, just as if no proof were forthcoming from us. They usually tell us that the apostles did not know all things: (but herein) they are impelled by the same madness, whereby they turn round to the very opposite point, and declare that the apostles certainly knew all things, but did not deliver all things to all persons — in either case exposing Christ to blame for having sent forth apostles who had either too much ignorance, or too little simplicity. What man, then, of sound mind can possibly suppose that they were ignorant of anything, whom the Lord ordained to be masters (or teachers), keeping them, as He did, inseparable (from Himself) in their attendance, in their discipleship, in their society, to whom, when they were alone, He used to expound all things Mark 4:34 which were obscure, telling them that to them it was given to know those mysteries, Matthew 13:11 which it was not permitted the people to understand? Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter, who is called the rock on which the church should be built, who also obtained the keys of the kingdom of heaven, with the power of loosing and binding in heaven and on earth? Was anything, again, concealed from John, the Lord’s most beloved disciple, who used to lean on His breast John 21:20 to whom alone the Lord pointed Judas out as the traitor, whom He commended to Mary as a son in His own stead? John 19:26 Of what could He have meant those to be ignorant, to whom He even exhibited His own glory with Moses and Elias, and the Father’s voice moreover, from heaven? Matthew 17:1-8 Not as if He thus disapproved of all the rest, but because by three witnesses must every word be established. After the same fashion, too, (I suppose,) were they ignorant to whom, after His resurrection also, He vouchsafed, as they were journeying together, to expound all the Scriptures. Luke 24:27 No doubt He had once said, I have yet many things to say unto you, but you cannot hear them now; but even then He added, When He, the Spirit of truth, shall come, He will lead you into all truth. John 16:12-13 He (thus) shows that there was nothing of which they were ignorant, to whom He had promised the future attainment of all truth by help of the Spirit of truth. And assuredly He fulfilled His promise, since it is proved in the Acts of the Apostles that the Holy Ghost did come down. Now they who reject that Scripture can neither belong to the Holy Spirit, seeing that they cannot acknowledge that the Holy Ghost has been sent as yet to the disciples, nor can they presume to claim to be a church themselves who positively have no means of proving when, and with what swaddling-clothes this body was established. Of so much importance is it to them not to have any proofs for the things which they maintain, lest along with them there be introduced damaging exposures of those things which they mendaciously devise. (The Prescription Against Heretics)

Chapter 21. Of the Difference Between Discipline and Power, and of the Power of the Keys.

If the apostles understood these (figurative meanings of the Law) better, of course they were more careful (with regard to them than even apostolic men). But I will descend even to this point of contest now, making a separation between the doctrine of apostles and their power. Discipline governs a man, power sets a seal upon him; apart from the fact that power is the Spiritbut the Spirit is God. What, moreover, used (the Spirit) to teach? That there must be no communicating with the works of darkness. Observe what He bids. Who, moreover, was able to forgive sins? This is His alone prerogative: for who remits sins but God alone? and, of course, (who but He can remit) mortal sins, such as have been committed against Himself, and against His temple? For, as far as you are concerned, such as are chargeable with offense against you personally, you are commanded, in the person of Peter, to forgive even seventy times sevenfold. And so, if it were agreed that even the blessed apostles had granted any such indulgence (to any crime) the pardon of which (comes) from God, not from man, it would be competent (for them) to have done so, not in the exercise of discipline, but of power. For they both raised the dead, which God alone (can do), and restored the debilitated to their integrity, which none but Christ (can do); nay, they inflicted plagues too, which Christ would not do. For it did not beseem Him to be severe who had come to suffer. Smitten were both Ananias and Elymas — Ananias with death, Elymas with blindness — in order that by this very fact it might be proved that Christ had had the power of doing even such (miracles). So, too, had the prophets (of old) granted to the repentant the pardon of murder, and therewith of adultery, inasmuch as they gave, at the same time, manifest proofs of severity. Exhibit therefore even now to me, apostolic sir, prophetic evidences, that I may recognise your divine virtue, and vindicate to yourself the power of remitting such sins! If, however, you have had the functions of discipline alone allotted you, and (the duty) of presiding not imperially, but ministerially; who or how great are you, that you should grant indulgence, who, by exhibiting neither the prophetic nor the apostolic character, lack that virtue whose property it is to indulge?

But, you say,  the Church has the power of forgiving sins. This I acknowledge and adjudge more (than you; I) who have the Paraclete Himself in the persons of the new prophets, saying, The Church has the power to forgive sins; but I will not do it, lest they commit others withal. What if a pseudo-prophetic spirit has made that declaration? Nay, but it would have been more the part of a subverter on the one hand to commend himself on the score of clemency, and on the other to influence all others to sin. Or if, again, (the pseudo-prophetic spirit) has been eager to affect this (sentiment) in accordance with the Spirit of truth, it follows that the Spirit of truth has indeed the power of indulgently granting pardon to fornicators, but wills not to do it if it involve evil to the majority.

I now inquire into your opinion, (to see) from what source you usurp this right to the Church.

If, because the Lord has said to Peter, Upon this rock will I build My Church, to you have I given the keys of the heavenly kingdom; or, Whatsoever you shall have bound or loosed in earth, shall be bound or loosed in the heavens, you therefore presume that the power of binding and loosing has derived to you, that is, to every Church akin to Peter, what sort of man are you, subverting and wholly changing the manifest intention of the Lord, conferring (as that intention did) this (gift) personally upon Peter?  On you, He says, will I build My Church; and, I will give to you the keys, not to the Church; and, Whatsoever you shall have loosed or bound, not what they shall have loosed or bound. For so withal the result teaches. In (Peter) himself the Church was reared; that is, through (Peter) himself; (Peter) himself essayed the key; you see what (key)Men of Israel, let what I say sink into your ears: Jesus the Nazarene, a man destined by God for you, and so forth. (Peter) himself, therefore, was the first to unbar, in Christ’s baptism, the entrance to the heavenly kingdom, in which (kingdom) are loosed the sins that were beforetime bound; and those which have not been loosed are bound, in accordance with true salvation; and Ananias he bound with the bond of death, and the weak in his feet he absolved from his defect of health. Moreover, in that dispute about the observance or non-observance of the Law, Peter was the first of all to be endued with the Spirit, and, after making preface touching the calling of the nations, to say, And now why are you tempting the Lord, concerning the imposition upon the brethren of a yoke which neither we nor our fathers were able to support? But however, through the grace of Jesus we believe that we shall be saved in the same way as they. This sentence both loosed those parts of the law which were abandoned, and bound those which were reserved. Hence the power of loosing and of binding committed to Peter had nothing to do with the capital sins of believers; and if the Lord had given him a precept that he must grant pardon to a brother sinning against him even seventy times sevenfold, of course He would have commanded him to bind— that is, to retain — nothing subsequently, unless perchance such (sins) as one may have committed against the Lord, not against a brother. For the forgiveness of (sins) committed in the case of a man is a prejudgment against the remission of sins against God.

What, now, (has this to do) with the Church, and your (church), indeed, Psychic? For, in accordance with the person of Peter, it is to spiritual men that this power will correspondently appertain, either to an apostle or else to a prophetFor the very Church itself is, properly and principally, the Spirit Himself, in whom is the Trinity of the One Divinity — Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. (The Spirit) combines that Church which the Lord has made to consist in three. And thus, from that time forward, every number (of persons) who may have combined together into this faith is accounted a Church, from the Author and Consecrator (of the Church). And accordingly the Church, it is true, will forgive sinsbut (it will be) the Church of the Spirit, by means of a spiritual man; not the Church which consists of a number of bishops. For the right and arbitrament is the Lord’s, not the servant’s; God’s Himself, not the priest’s. (On Modesty)

CYRIL OF JERUSALEM

19. What then? When Nebuchadnezzar, after having done such deeds, had made confession, did God give him pardon and the kingdom, and when you repent shall He not give you the remission of sins, and the kingdom of heaven, if you live a worthy life? The Lord is loving unto man, and swift to pardon, but slow to punish. Let no man therefore despair of his own salvationPeter, the chiefest and foremost of the Apostles, denied the Lord thrice before a little maid: but he repented himself, and wept bitterly. Now weeping shows the repentance of the heart: and therefore he not only received forgiveness for his denial, but also held his Apostolic dignity unforfeited.(Catechetical LecturesLecture 2)

 15. As the delusion was extending, Peter and Paul, a noble pair, chief rulers of the Church, arrived and set the error right; and when the supposed god Simon wished to show himself off, they straightway showed him as a corpse. For Simon promised to rise aloft to heaven, and came riding in a dæmon.’ chariot on the air; but the servants of God fell on their knees, and having shown that agreement of which Jesus spoke, that If two of you shall agree concerning anything that they shall ask, it shall be done unto them Matthew 18:19, they launched the weapon of their concord in prayer against Magus, and struck him down to the earth. And marvellous though it was, yet no marvel. For Peter was there, who carries the keys of heaven : and nothing wonderful, for Paul was there , who was caught up to the third heaven, and into Paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful far a man to utter. These brought the supposed God down from the sky to earth, thence to be taken down to the regions below the earth. In this man first the serpent of wickedness appeared; but when one head had been cut off, the root of wickedness was found again with many heads. (Ibid., Lecture 6)

27. In the power of the same Holy Spirit Peter also, the chief of the Apostles and the bearer of the keys of the kingdom of heaven, healed Æneas the paralytic in the Name of Christ at Lydda, which is now Diospolis, and at Joppa raised from the dead Tabitha rich in good works. And being on the housetop in a trance, he saw heaven opened, and by means of the vessel let down as it were a sheet full of beasts of every shape and sort, he learned plainly to call no man common or unclean, though he should be of the Greeks. Acts 10:11-16 And when he was sent for by Cornelius, he heard clearly the Holy Ghost Himself saying, Behold, men seek you; but arise and get you down, and go with them, nothing doubting; for I have sent them. And that it might be plainly shown that those of the Gentiles also who believe are made partakers of the grace of the Holy Ghost, when Peter had come to Cesarea, and was teaching the things concerning Christ, the Scripture says concerning Cornelius and them who were with him; While Peter yet spoke these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word; so that they of the circumcision also which came with Peter were astonished, and when they understood it said that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Ibid., Lecture 17)

CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE

4. If any one consider and examine these things, there is no need for lengthened discussion and arguments. There is easy proof for faith in a short summary of the truthThe Lord speaks to Peter, sayingI say unto you, that you are Peter; and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven, and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heavenAnd again to the same He says, after His resurrectionFeed my sheep. And although to all the apostles, after His resurrection, He gives an equal power, and says, As the Father has sent me, even so send I you: Receive the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins you remit, they shall be remitted unto him; and whose soever sins you retain, they shall be retained;  John 20:21 yet, that He might set forth unity, He arranged by His authority the origin of that unity, as beginning from one. Assuredly the rest of the apostles were also the same as was Peter, endowed with a like partnership both of honour and power; but the beginning proceeds from unity. Which one Church, also, the Holy Spirit in the Song of Songs designated in the person of our Lord, and says, My dove, my spotless one, is but one. She is the only one of her mother, elect of her that bare herSong of Songs 6:9 Does he who does not hold this unity of the Church think that he holds the faith? Does he who strives against and resists the Church trust that he is in the Church, when moreover the blessed Apostle Paul teaches the same thing, and sets forth the sacrament of unity, saying, There is one body and one spirit, one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God? Ephesians 4:4 (Treatise I, On Unity of the Church)

1. Our Lord, whose precepts and admonitions we ought to observe, describing the honour of a bishop and the order of His Church, speaks in the Gospeland says to PeterI say unto you, That you are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heavenThence, through the changes of times and successions, the ordering of bishops and the plan of the Church flow onwards; so that the Church is founded upon the bishops, and every act of the Church is controlled by these same rulers. Since this, then, is founded on the divine law, I marvel that some, with daring temerity, have chosen to write to me as if they wrote in the name of the Churchwhen the Church is established in the bishop and the clergy, and all who stand fast in the faith. For far be it from the mercy of God and His uncontrolled might to suffer the number of the lapsed to be called the Church; since it is written, God is not the God of the dead, but of the livingMatthew 22:32 For we indeed desire that all may be made alive; and we pray that, by our supplications and groans, they may be restored to their original state. But if certain lapsed ones claim to be the Church, and if the Church be among them and in them, what is left but for us to ask of these very persons that they would deign to admit us into the Church? Therefore it behooves them to be submissive and quiet and modest, as those who ought to appease God, in remembrance of their sin, and not to write letters in the name of the Church, when they should rather be aware that they are writing to the Church. (Epistle 26)

8. I come now, dearest brother, to the character of Cornelius our colleague, that with us you may more justly know Cornelius, not from the lies of malignants and detractors, but from the judgment of the Lord God, who made him a bishop, and from the testimony of his fellow bishops, the whole number of whom has agreed with an absolute unanimity throughout the whole world. For — a thing which with laudable announcement commends our dearest Cornelius to God and Christ, and to His Church, and also to all his fellow priests — he was not one who on a sudden attained to the episcopate; but, promoted through all the ecclesiastical offices, and having often deserved well of the Lord in divine administrations, he ascended by all the grades of religious service to the lofty summit of the Priesthood. Then, moreover, he did not either ask for the episcopate itself, nor did he wish it; nor, as others do when the swelling of their l arrogance and pride inflates them, did he seize upon it; but quiet otherwise, and meek and such as those are accustomed to be who are chosen of God to this office, having regard to the modesty of his virgin continency, and the humility of his inborn and guarded veneration, he did not, as some do, use force to be made a bishop, but he himself suffered compulsion, so as to be forced to receive the episcopal office. And he was made bishop by very many of our colleagues who were then present in the city of Rome, who sent to us letters concerning his ordination, honourable and laudatory, and remarkable for their testimony in announcement of him. Moreover, Cornelius was made bishop by the judgment of God and of His Christ, by the testimony of almost all the clergy, by the suffrage of the people who were then present, and by the assembly of ancient priests and good men, when no one had been made so before him, when the place of Fabian, that is, when the place of Peter and the degree of the sacerdotal throne was vacant; which being occupied by the will of God, and established by the consent of all of us, whosoever now wishes to become a bishop, must needs be made from without; and he cannot have the ordination of the Church who does not hold the unity of the Church. Whoever he may be, although greatly boasting about himself, and claiming very much for himself, he is profane, he is an alien, he is without. And as after the first there cannot be a second, whosoever is made after one who ought to be alone, is not second to him, but is in fact none at all. (Epistle 51)

7. Nor ought it, my dearest brother, to disturb any one who is faithful and mindful of the Gospel, and retains the commands of the apostle who forewarns us; if in the last days certain personsproud, contumacious, and enemies of God’s priests, either depart from the Church or act against the Church, since both the Lord and His apostles have previously foretold that there should be such. Nor let any one wonder that the servant placed over them should be forsaken by some, when His own disciples forsook the Lord Himself, who performed such great and wonderful works, and illustrated the attributes of God the Father by the testimony of His doings. And yet He did not rebuke them when they went away, nor even severely threaten them; but rather, turning to His apostles, He said, Will you also go away?  John 6:67 manifestly observing the law whereby a man left to his own liberty, and established in his own choice, himself desires for himself either death or salvationNevertheless, Peter, upon whom by the same Lord the Church had been built, speaking one for all, and answering with the voice of the Church, says, Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life; and we believe, and are sure that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God:  Matthew 15:13 signifying, doubtless, and showing that those who departed from Christ perished by their own fault, yet that the Church which believes on Christ, and holds that which it has once learned, never departs from Him at all, and that those are the Church who remain in the house of God; but that, on the other hand, they are not the plantation planted by God the Father, whom we see not to be established with the stability of wheat, but blown about like chaff by the breath of the enemy scattering them, of whom John also in his epistle says, They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, no doubt they would have continued with us. 1 John 2:19 Paul also warns us, when evil men perish out of the Church, not to be disturbed, nor to let our faith be lessened by the departure of the faithless. For what, he says, if some of them have departed from the faith? Hath their unbelief made the faith of God of none effect? God forbid! For God is true, but every man a liar. Romans 3:3-4

14. To these also it was not sufficient that they had withdrawn from the Gospel, that they had taken away from the lapsed the hope of satisfaction and repentance, that they had taken away those involved in frauds or stained with adulteries, or polluted with the deadly contagion of sacrifices, lest they should entreat God, or make confession of their crimes in the Church, from all feeling and fruit of repentance; that they had set up outside for themselves — outside the Church, and opposed to the Church, a conventicle of their abandoned faction, when there had flowed together a band of creatures with evil consciences, and unwilling to entreat and to satisfy God. After such things as these, moreover, they still dare — a false bishop having been appointed for them by, heretics— to set sail and to bear letters from schismatic and profane persons to the throne of Peter, and to the chief church whence priestly unity takes its source; and not to consider that these were the Romans whose faith was praised in the preaching of the apostle, to whom faithlessness could have no access. But what was the reason of their coming and announcing the making of the pseudo-bishop in opposition to the bishops? For either they are pleased with what they have done, and persist in their wickedness; or, if they are displeased and retreat, they know whither they may return. For, as it has been decreed by all of us — and is equally fair and just — that the case of every one should be heard there where the crime has been committed; and a portion of the flock has been assigned to each individual pastor, which he is to rule and govern, having to give account of his doing to the Lord; it certainly behooves those over whom we are placed not to run about nor to break up the harmonious agreement of the bishops with their crafty and deceitful rashness, but there to plead their cause, where they may be able to have both accusers and witnesses of their crime; unless perchance the authority of the bishops constituted in Africa seems to a few desperate and abandoned men to be too little, who have already judged concerning them, and have lately condemned, by the gravity of their judgment, their conscience bound in many bonds of sins. Already their case has been examined, already sentence concerning them has been pronounced; nor is it fitting for the dignity of priests to be blamed for the levity of a changeable and inconstant mind, when the Lord teaches and says, Let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay. Matthew 5:37 (Epistle 54)

8. You have written also, that on my account the Church has now a portion of herself in a state of dispersion, although the whole people of the Church are collected, and united, and joined to itself in an undivided concord: they alone have remained without, who even, if they had been within, would have had to be cast out. Nor does the Lord, the protector of His people, and their guardian, suffer the wheat to be snatched from His floor; but the chaff alone can be separated from the Church, since also the apostle says, For what if some of them have departed from the faith? Shall their unbelief make the faith of God of none effect? God forbid; for God is true, but every man a liar. Romans 3:3-4 And the Lord also in the Gospel, when disciples forsook Him as He spoke, turning to the twelve, said, Will you also go away? then Peter answered Him, Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the word of eternal life; and we believe, and are sure, that You are the Son of the living GodJohn 6:67-69 Peter speaks there, on whom the Church was to be built, teaching and showing in the name of the Church, that although a rebellious and arrogant multitude of those who will not hear and obey may depart, yet the Church does not depart from Christ; and they are the Church who are a people united to the priest, and the flock which adheres to its pastor. Whence you ought to know that the bishop is in the Church, and the Church in the bishop; and if any one be not with the bishop, that he is not in the Church, and that those flatter themselves in vain who creep in, not having peace with God’s priests, and think that they communicate secretly with some; while the Church, which is Catholic and one, is not cut nor divided, but is indeed connected and bound together by the cement of priests who cohere with one another. (Epistle 68)

FIRMILIAN

15. But neither must we pass over what has been necessarily remarked by you, that the Church, according to the Song of Songs, is a garden enclosed, and a fountain sealed, a paradise with the fruit of applesSong of Songs 4:12-13 They who have never entered into this garden, and have not seen the paradise planted by God the Creator, how shall they be able to afford to another the bring water of the saving lava from the fountain which is enclosed within, and sealed with a divine seal? And as the Ark of Noah was nothing else than the sacrament of the Church of Christ, which then, when all without were perishing, kept those only safe who were within the ark, we are manifestly instructed to look to the unity of the Church. Even as also the Apostle Peter laid down, saying, Thus also shall baptism in like manner make you safe;  1 Peter 3:21 showing that as they who were not in the ark with Noah not only were not purged and saved by water, but at once perished in that deluge; so now also, whoever are not in the Church with Christ will perish outside, unless they are converted by penitence to the only and saving lava of the Church.

16. But what is the greatness of his error, and what the depth of his blindness, who says that remission of sins can be granted in the synagogues of hereticsand does not abide on the foundation of the one Church which was once based by Christ upon the rock, may be perceived from this, that Christ said to Peter aloneWhatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heavenMatthew 16:19 And again, in the Gospel, when Christ breathed on the apostles alone, saying, Receive the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins you remit they are remitted unto them, and whose soever sins you retain they are retainedTherefore the power of remitting sins was given to the apostles, and to the churches which they, sent by Christ, established, and to the bishops who succeeded to them by vicarious ordination. But the enemies of the one Catholic Church in which we are, and the adversaries of us who have succeeded the apostles, asserting for themselves, in opposition to us, unlawful priesthoods, and setting up profane altars, what else are they than Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, profane with a like wickedness, and about to suffer the same punishments which they did, as well as those who agree with them, just as their partners and abettors perished with a like death to theirs?

17. And in this respect I am justly indignant at this so open and manifest folly of Stephen, that he who so boasts of the place of his episcopate, and contends that he holds the succession from Peter, on whom the foundations of the Church were laid, should introduce many other rocks and establish new buildings of many churches; maintaining that there is baptism in them by his authority. For they who are baptized, doubtless, fill up the number of the Church. But he who approves their baptism maintains, of those baptized, that the Church is also with them. Nor does he understand that the truth of the Christian Rock is overshadowed, and in some measure abolished, by him when he thus betrays and deserts unity. The apostle acknowledges that the Jews, although blinded by ignorance, and bound by the grossest wickedness, have yet a zeal for God. Stephen, who announces that he holds by succession the throne of Peter, is stirred with no zeal against heretics, when he concedes to them, not a moderate, but the very greatest power of grace: so far as to say and assert that, by the sacrament of baptism, the filth of the old man is washed away by them, that they pardon the former mortal sins, that they make sons of God by heavenly regeneration, and renew to eternal life by the sanctification of the divine layer. He who concedes and gives up to heretics in this way the great and heavenly gifts of the Church, what else does he do but communicate with them for whom he maintains and claims so much grace? And now he hesitates in vain to consent to them, and to be a partaker with them in other matters also, to meet together with them, and equally with them to mingle their prayers, and appoint a common altar and sacrifice. (Epistle 74, Firmilian, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, to Cyprian, Against the Letter of Stephen. A.D. 256.)

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM

John 21:19

This spoke He, signifying by what death he should glorify God.

He said not, Should die, but, Should glorify God, that you may learn, that to suffer for Christ, is glory and honor to the sufferer.

And when He had spoken this, He says, Follow Me.

Here again He alludes to his tender carefulness, and to his being very closely attached to Himself. And if any should say, How then did James receive the chair at Jerusalem? I would make this reply, that He appointed Peter teacher, not of the chair, but of the world. (Homilies on the Gospel of JohnHomily 88 John 21:15-25)

AMBROSE OF MILAN

26. Go your way, therefore, to my brethren — that is, to those everlasting doors, which, as soon as they see Jesus, are lifted up. Peter is an everlasting door, against whom the gates of hell shall not prevailMatthew 16:18 John and James, the sons of thunder, to wit, Mark 3:17 are everlasting doom. Everlasting are the doors of the Church, where the prophet, desirous to proclaim the praises of Christ, says: That I may tell all your praises in the gates of the daughter of Sion

57. Moreover, that you may know that it is after His Manhood that He entreats, and in virtue of His Godhead that He commands, it is written for you in the Gospel that He said to PeterI have prayed for you, that your faith fail notLuke 22:32 To the same Apostle, again, when on a former occasion he said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God, He made answer: You are Peter, and upon this Rock will I build My Church, and I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heavenMatthew 16:18 Could He not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on His own authority, He gave the kingdom, whom He called the Rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church? Consider, then, the manner of His entreaty, the occasions of His commanding. He entreats, when He is shown to us as on the eve of suffering: He commands, when He is believed to be the Son of God. (On the Christian Faith (De fide)Book IV)

POPE DAMASUS I

III. Likewise it was said:

The manuscripts of the shorter recension begin at this point, with the following heading:

HERE BEGINS THE DECRETAL ‘ON BOOKS TO BE RECEIVED AND NOT TO BE RECEIVED’ WHICH WAS WRITTEN BY POPE GELASIUS AND SEVENTY MOST ERUDITE BISHOPS AT THE APOSTOLIC SEAT IN THE CITY OF ROME

Both versions then continue as follows:

1. After all these [writings of] the prophets and the evangelical and apostolic scriptures which we discussed above, on which the catholic church is founded by the grace of God, we also have thought necessary to say what, although the universal catholic church diffused throughout the world is the single bride of Christ, however the holy Roman church is given first place by the rest of the churches without [the need for] a synodical decision, but from the voice of the Lord our saviour in the gospel obtained primacy: ‘You are Peter,’ he said, ‘and upon this rock I shall build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; and to you I give the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall bind upon Earth shall be bound also in heaven and whatever you release upon Earth shall also be released in heaven’.

2. In addition there is also the presence of the blessed apostle Paul, ‘the chosen vessel’, who not in opposition, as the heresies jabber, but on the same date and the same day was crowned in glorious death with Peter in the city of Rome suffering under Nero Caesar; and equally they made the above-mentioned holy Roman church special in Christ the Lord and gave preference in their presence and veneration-worthy triumph before all other cities in the whole world.

3Therefore first is the seat at the Roman church of the apostle Peter ‘having no spot or wrinkle or any other [defect]‘.

However the second place was given in the name of blessed Peter to Mark his disciple and gospel-writer at Alexandria, and who himself wrote down the word of truth directed by Peter the apostle in Egypt and gloriously consummated [his life] in martyrdom.

Indeed the third place is held at Antioch of the most blessed and honourable apostle Peter, who lived there before he came to Roma and where first the name of the new race of the Christians was heard. (Decretum Gelasianum (English translation))

POPE INNOCENT I

DOCUMENT 175-Innocent, Ep. 25, to Decentius, bishop of Eugubium (Si instituta). I9 March 416. I1 1 (P.L. 20. 552.) II ~ 1 2.

Who does not know or observe that it [the church order] was delivered by Peter the chief of the apostles to the Roman church, and is kept until now, and ought to be retained by all, and that nothing ought to be imposed or introduced which has no authority, or seems to derive its precedents elsewhere?- especially since it is clear that in all Italy, the Gauls, Spain, Africa, Sicily and the adjacent islands, no one formed these churches except those whom the venerable apostle Peter or his successors made priests. Or let them discover that any other apostle be found to have been or to have taught in these provinces. If not, they ought to follow that which the Roman church keeps, from which they undoubtedly received them first; but while they are keen on foreign statements, they seem to neglect the head of their institution. (Documents Illustrating Papal Authority AD 96-454, edited and introduced by E. Giles [S.P.C.K., London 1952], Chapter XVIII. Pope Innocent I, p. 194)

JEROME

1. Simon Peter

Simon Peter the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galileebrother of Andrew the apostleand himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion — the believers in circumcision, in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia — pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magusand held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord. He wrote two epistles which are called Catholic, the second of which, on account of its difference from the first in style, is considered by many not to be by him. Then too the Gospel according to Mark, who was his disciple and interpreter, is ascribed to him. On the other hand, the books, of which one is entitled his Acts, another his Gospel, a third his Preaching, a fourth his Revelation, a fifth his Judgment are rejected as apocryphal.

Buried at Rome in the Vatican near the triumphal way he is venerated by the whole world. (De Viris Illustribus (Illustrious Men))

2. Yet, though your greatness terrifies me, your kindness attracts me. From the priest I demand the safe-keeping of the victim, from the shepherd the protection due to the sheep. Away with all that is overweening; let the state of Roman majesty withdraw. My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross. As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the church is built! Matthew 16:18 This is the house where alone the paschal lamb can be rightly eatenExodus 12:22 This is the Ark of Noah, and he who is not found in it shall perish when the flood prevailsGenesis 7:23 But since by reason of my sins I have betaken myself to this desert which lies between Syria and the uncivilized waste, I cannot, owing to the great distance between us, always ask of your sanctity the holy thing of the Lord. Consequently I here follow the Egyptian confessors who share your faith, and anchor my frail craft under the shadow of their great argosies. I know nothing of Vitalis; I reject Meletius; I have nothing to do with Paulinus. He that gathers not with you scattersMatthew 12:30 he that is not of Christ is of Antichrist. (LETTER 15 — TO POPE DAMASUS (376 OR 377))

26. Coming to the Gospel he sets before us Zacharias and Elizabeth, Peter and his mother-in-law, and, with a shamelessness to which we have now grown accustomed, fails to understand that they, too, ought to have been reckoned among those who served the Law. For the Gospel had no being before the crucifixion of Christ — it was consecrated by His passion and by His blood. In accordance with this rule Peter and the other Apostles (I must give Jovinianus something now and then out of my abundance) had indeed wives, but those which they had taken before they knew the GospelBut once they were received into the Apostolate, they forsook the offices of marriage. For when Peter, representing the Apostles, says to the Lord: Matthew 19:27 Lo we have left all and followed you, the Lord answered him, Luke 18:29-30 Verily I say unto you, there is no man that has left house or wife, or brethren, or parents, or children for the kingdom of God’s sake, who shall not receive manifold more in this time, and in the world to come eternal life. But if, in order to show that all the Apostles had wives, he meets us with the words Have we no right to lead about women or wives (for γυνή in Greek has both meanings) even as the rest of the apostles, and Cephas, and the brethren of the Lord? let him add what is found in the Greek copies, Have we no right to lead about women that are sisters, or wives? This makes it clear that the writer referred to other holy women, who, in accordance with Jewish custom, ministered to their teachers of their substance, as we read was the practice with even our Lord himself. Where there is a previous reference to eating and drinking, and the outlay of money, and mention is afterwards made of women that are sisters, it is quite clear, as we have said, that we must understand, not wives, but those women who ministered of their substance. And we read the same account in the Old Testament of the Shunammite who was wont to welcome Elisha, and to put for him a table, and bread, and a candlestick, and the rest. At all events if we take γυναίκας to mean wives, not women, the addition of the word sisters destroys the effect of the word wives, and shows that they were related in spirit, not by wedlock. Nevertheless, with the exception of the Apostle Peter, it is not openly stated that the Apostles had wives; and since the statement is made of one while nothing is said about the rest, we must understand that those of whom Scripture gives no such description had no wives. Yet Jovinianus, who has arrayed against us Zacharias and Elizabeth, Peter and his wife’s mother, should know, that John was the son of Zacharias and Elizabeth, that is, a virgin was the offspring of marriage, the Gospel of the law, chastity of matrimony; so that by a virgin prophet the virgin Lord might be both announced and baptized.

But we might say concerning Peter, that he had a mother-in-law when he believed, and no longer had a wife, although in the Sentences we read of both his wife and daughter. But for the present our argument must be based wholly on Scripture. He has made his appeal to the Apostles, because he thinks that they, who hold the chief authority in our moral system and are the typical Christian teachers, were not virgins. If, then, we allow that they were not virgins (and, with the exception of Peter, the point cannot be proved), yet I must tell him that it is to the Apostles that the words of Isaiah relate: Isaiah 1:9 Except the Lord of hosts had left unto us a small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, we should have been like Gomorrha. So, then, they who were by birth Jews could not under the Gospel recover the virginity which they had lost in JudaismAnd yet John, one of the disciples, who is related to have been the youngest of the Apostles, and who was a virgin when he embraced Christianity, remained a virgin, and on that account was more beloved by our Lord, and lay upon the breast of Jesus. And what Peter, who had had a wife, did not dare ask, John 13:25 he requested John to ask. And after the resurrection, when Mary Magdalene told them that the Lord had risen, John 20:4 they both ran to the sepulchre, but John outran Peter. And when they were fishing in the ship on the lake of Gennesaret, Jesus stood upon the shore, and the Apostles knew not who it was they saw; the virgin alone recognized a virgin, and said to Peter, It is the Lord. Again, after hearing the prediction that he must be bound by another, and led whither he would not, and must suffer on the cross, Peter said, Lord what shall this man do? being unwilling to desert John, with whom he had always been united. Our Lord said to him, What is that to you if I wish him so to be? Whence the saying went abroad among the brethren that that disciple should not die. Here we have a proof that virginity does not die, and that the defilement of marriage is not washed away by the blood of martyrdom, but virginity abides with Christ, and its sleep is not death but a passing to another state.

If, however, Jovinianus should obstinately contend that John was not a virgin, (whereas we have maintained that his virginity was the cause of the special love our Lord bore to him), let him explain, if he was not a virgin, why it was that he was loved more than the other Apostles. But you say, Matthew 16:18 the Church was founded upon Peter: although elsewhere the same is attributed to all the Apostles, and they all receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the strength of the Church depends upon them all alike, yet one among the twelve is chosen so that when a head has been appointed, there may be no occasion for schism. But why was not John chosen, who was a virginDeference was paid to age, because Peter was the elder: one who was a youth, I may say almost a boy, could not be set over men of advanced age; and a good master who was bound to remove every occasion of strife among his disciples, and who had said to them, John 14:27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you, and, He that is the greater among you, let him be the least of all, would not be thought to afford cause of envy against the youth whom he had loved. We maybe sure that John was then a boy because ecclesiastical history most clearly proves that he lived to the reign of Trajan, that is, he fell asleep in the sixty-eighth year after our Lord’s passion, as I have briefly noted in my treatise on Illustrious Men. Peter is an Apostle, and John is an Apostle — the one a married man, the other a virginbut Peter is an Apostle only, John is both an Apostle and an Evangelist, and a prophet. An Apostle, because he wrote to the Churches as a master; an Evangelist, because he composed a Gospel, a thing which no other of the Apostles, excepting Matthew, did; prophet, for he saw in the island of Patmos, to which he had been banished by the Emperor Domitian as a martyr for the Lord, an Apocalypse containing the boundless mysteries of the future. Tertullian, more over, relates that he was sent to Rome, and that having been plunged into a jar of boiling oil he came out fresher and more active than when he went in.

But his very Gospel is widely different from the rest. Matthew as though he were writing of a man begins thus: The book of the Generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham; Luke begins with the priesthood of Zacharias; Mark with a prophecy of the prophets Malachi and Isaiah. The first has the face of a man, on account of the genealogical table; the second, the face of a calf, on account of the priesthood; the third, the face of a lion, on account of the voice of one crying in the desertIsaiah 40:3 Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make His paths straight. But John like an eagle soars aloft, and reaches the Father Himself, and says, John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God, and so on. The virgin writer expounded mysteries which the married could not, and to briefly sum up all and show how great was the privilege of John, or rather of virginity in John, the Virgin Mother John 19:26-27 was entrusted by the Virgin Lord to the Virgin disciple. (Against JovinianusBook I)

Jerome’s statements regarding John are rather interesting since he claims that he was not only an Apostle, but a virgin who was an Evangelist and Prophet since he wrote down Revelation.

AUGUSTINE

It was to Peter as representing the Church that the keys of the kingdom of heaven were entrusted

2. Before his passion the Lord Jesus, as you know, chose those disciples of his, whom he called apostles. Among these it was ONLY Peter who almost everywhere was given the privilege of representing the whole Church.2 It was in the person of the whole Church, which he ALONE represented, that he was privileged to hear, To you will I give the keys of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 16: 19). After all, it isn’t just one man that received these keys, but the Church in its unity. So this is the reason for Peter’s acknowledged pre-eminence, that he stood for the Church’s universality and unity, when he was told, To you lam entrusting, what has in fact been entrusted to all. (The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century, translation and notes Edmund Hill, O.P. editor John E. Rotelle, O.S.A [New City Press, Hyde Park, New York 1994], Part III —Sermons Volume 8: Sermons 273-305A, pp. 197-198; Augustine-Sermons-273-305.pdf)

1. Every one who faithfully reads the Acts of the Apostles, acknowledges that this Psalm contains a prophecy of Christ; for it evidently appears that what is here written, let his days be few, and let another take his office, is prophesied of Judas, the betrayer of Christ….For as some things are said which seem peculiarly to apply to the Apostle Peter, and yet are not clear in their meaning, unless when referred to the Church, whom he is acknowledged to have figuratively represented, on account of the primacy which he bore among the Disciples; as it is written, I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heavenMatthew 16:19 and other passages of the like purport: so Judas does represent those Jews who were enemies of Christ, who both then hated Christ, and now, in their line of succession, this species of wickedness continuing, hate Him. Of these men, and of this people, not only may what we read more openly discovered in this Psalm be conveniently understood, but also those things which are more expressly stated concerning Judas himself. (Exposition on Psalm 109)

1. When the Lord was washing the disciples’ feet, He comes to Simon Peter; and Peter says unto Him, Lord, dost Thou wash my feet? For who would not be filled with fear at having his feet washed by the Son of God? Although, therefore, it was a piece of the greatest audacity for the servant to contradict his Lord, the creature his God; yet Peter preferred doing this to the suffering of his feet to be washed by his Lord and God. Nor ought we to think that Peter was one among others who so expressed their fear and refusal, seeing that others before him had suffered it to be done to themselves with cheerfulness and equanimity. For it is easier so to understand the words of the Gospel, because that, after saying, He began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith He was girded, it is then added, Then comes He to Simon Peter, as if He had already washed the feet of some, and after them had now come to the first of them all. For who can fail to know that the most blessed Peter was the first of the apostles? But we are not so to understand it, that it was after some others that He came to him; but that He began with him. When, therefore, He began to wash the disciples’ feet, He came to him with whom He began, namely, to Peter; and then Peter took fright at what any one of them might have been frightened, and said, Lord, dost Thou wash my feet? What is implied in this Thou? And what in my? These are subjects for thought rather than for speech; lest perchance any adequate conception the soul may have formed of such words may fail of explanation in the utterance. (Tractate 56 John 13:6-10)

12. But what follows? For the poor you have always with you, but me ye will not have always. We can certainly understand, the poor you have always; what He has thus said is true. When were the poor wanting in the Church? But me ye will not have always; what does He mean by this? How are we to understand, Me ye will not have always? Don’t be alarmed: it was addressed to Judas. Why, then, did He not say, you will have, but, ye will have? Because Judas is not here a unit. One wicked man represents the whole body of the wicked; in the same way as Peter, the whole body of the good, yea, the body of the Church, but in respect to the good. For if in Peter’s case there were no sacramental symbol of the Church, the Lord would not have said to himI will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven: whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven; and whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heavenMatthew 16:19 If this was said only to Peter, it gives no ground of action to the ChurchBut if such is the case also in the Church, that what is bound on earth is bound in heaven, and what is loosed on earth is loosed in heaven, — for when the Church excommunicates, the excommunicated person is bound in heaven; when one is reconciled by the Church, the person so reconciled is loosed in heaven: — if such, then, is the case in the Church, Peter, in receiving the keys, represented the holy Church. If, then, in the person of Peter were represented the good in the Church, and in Judas’ person were represented the bad in the Church, then to these latter was it said, But me ye will not have always. But what means the not always; and what, the always? If you are good, if you belong to the body represented by Peter, you have Christ both now and hereafternow by faith, by sign, by the sacrament of baptism, by the bread and wine of the altar. You have Christ now, but you will have Him always; for when you have gone hence, you will come to Him who said to the robber, Today shall you be with me in paradiseLuke 23:43 But if you live wickedly, you may seem to have Christ now, because you enter the Church, signest yourself with the sign of Christ, art baptized with the baptism of Christ, minglest yourself with the members of Christ, and approachest His altar: now you have Christ, but by living wickedly you will not have Him always. (Tractate 50 John 11:55-12)

5… So does the Church act in blessed hope through this troublous life; and this Church symbolized in its generality, was personified in the Apostle Peter, on account of the primacy of his apostleship. For, as regards his proper personality, he was by nature one man, by grace one Christian, by still more abounding grace one, and yet also, the first apostle; but when it was said to him, I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heavenhe represented the universal Church, which in this world is shaken by various temptations, that come upon it like torrents of rain, floods and tempests, and falls not, because it is founded upon a rock (petra), from which Peter received his name. For petra (rock) is not derived from Peter, but Peter from petra; just as Christ is not called so from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. For on this very account the Lord said, On this rock will I build my Church, because Peter had said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living GodMatthew 16:16-19 On this rock, therefore, He said, which you have confessed, I will build my ChurchFor the Rock (Petra) was Christ1 Corinthians 10:4 and on this foundation was Peter himself also built. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Christ Jesus1 Corinthians 3:11 The Church, therefore, which is founded in Christ received from Him the keys of the kingdom of heaven in the person of Peter, that is to say, the power of binding and loosing sins. For what the Church is essentially in Christ, such representatively is Peter in the rock (petra); and in this representation Christ is to be understood as the Rock, Peter as the Church. This Church, accordingly, which Peter represented, so long as it lives amidst evil, by loving and following Christ is delivered from evil. But its following is the closer in those who contend even unto death for the truth. But to the universality [of the Church] is it said, Follow me, even as it was for the same universality that Christ suffered: of whom this same Peter says, Christ suffered for us, leaving us an example, that we should follow His footsteps. 1 Peter 2:21… (Tractate 124 John 21:19-25)

Chapter 51.

117. Petilianus said: “If you wretched men claim for yourselves a seat, as we said before, you assuredly have that one of which the prophet and psalmist David speaks as being the seat of the scornful. For to you it is rightly left, seeing that the holy cannot sit therein.”

118. Augustine answered: Here again you do not see that this is no kind of argument, but empty abuse. For this is what I said a little while ago, You utter the words of the law, but take no heed against whom you utter them; just as the devil uttered the words of the law, but failed to perceive to whom he uttered them. He wished to thrust down our Head, who was presently to ascend on high; but you wish to reduce to a small fraction the body of that same Head which is dispersed throughout the entire world. Certainly you yourself said a little time before that we know the law, and speak in legal terms, but blush in our deeds. Thus much indeed you say without a proof of anything; but even though you were to prove it of some men, you would not be entitled to assert it of these others. However, if all men throughout all the world were of the character which you most vainly charge them with, what has the chair done to you of the Roman Church, in which Peter sat, and which Anastasius fills todayor the chair of the Church of Jerusalem, in which James once sat, and in which John sits today, with which we are united in catholic unity, and from which you have severed yourselves by your mad fury? Why do you call the apostolic chair a seat of the scornful? If it is on account of the men whom you believe to use the words of the law without performing it, do you find that our Lord Jesus Christ was moved by the Pharisees, of whom He says, “They say, and do not,” to do any despite to the seat in which they sat? Did He not commend the seat of Moses, and maintain the honor of the seat, while He convicted those that sat in it? For He says, “They sit in Moses’ seat: all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.” Matthew 23:2-3 If you were to think of these things, you would not, on account of men whom you calumniate, do despite to the apostolic seat, in which you have no share. But what else is conduct like yours but ignorance of what to say, combined with want of power to abstain from evil-speaking? (Answer to Letters of Petilian, Bishop of CirtaBook II)

2. For if the lineal succession of bishops is to be taken into account, with how much more certainty and benefit to the Church do we reckon back till we reach Peter himself, to whom, as bearing in a figure the whole Church, the Lord said: Upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it! Matthew 16:18 The successor of Peter was Linus, and his successors in unbroken continuity were these:— Clement, Anacletus, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, TelesphorusIginusAnicetusPiusSoterEleutherius, Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus, Urbanus, Pontianus, Antherus, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius, Stephanus, Xystus, Dionysius, Felix, Eutychianus, Gaius, Marcellinus, Marcellus, Eusebius, Miltiades, Sylvester, Marcus, Julius, Liberius, Damasus, and Siricius, whose successor is the present Bishop Anastasius. In this order of succession no Donatist bishop is found. But, reversing the natural course of things, the Donatists sent to Rome from Africa an ordained bishop, who, putting himself at the head of a few Africans in the great metropolis, gave some notoriety to the name of mountain men, or Cutzupits, by which they were known.

3. Now, even although some traditor had in the course of these centuries, through inadvertence, obtained a place in that order of bishopsreaching from Peter himself to Anastasius, who now occupies that see — this fact would do no harm to the Church and to Christians having no share in the guilt of another; for the Lord, providing against such a case, says, concerning officers in the Church who are wickedAll whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do notMatthew 23:3 Thus the stability of the hope of the faithful is secured, inasmuch as being fixed, not in man, but in the Lord, it never can be swept away by the raging of impious schism; whereas they themselves are swept away who read in the Holy Scriptures the names of churches to which the apostles wrote, and in which they have no bishop. For what could more clearly prove their perversity and their folly, than their saying to their clergy, when they read these letters, Peace be with you, at the very time that they are themselves disjoined from the peace of those churches to which the letters were originally written? (Letter 53 (400) From Augustine, Fortunatus, and Alypius to Generosus)

7. For if, in truth, regard for peace had any place in his heart, he would not afterwards at Carthage have joined those traditors whom he had left to the judgment of God when they were present, and confessed their fault, in passing sentence for the same crime upon others who were absent, and against whom no one had proved the charge. He was bound, moreover, to be the more afraid on that occasion of disturbing the peace, inasmuch as Carthage was a great and famous city, from which any evil originating there might extend, as from the head of the body, throughout all Africa. Carthage was also near to the countries beyond the sea, and distinguished by illustrious renown, so that it had a bishop of more than ordinary influence, who could afford to disregard even a number of enemies conspiring against him, because he saw himself united by letters of communion both to the Roman Church, in which the supremacy of an apostolic chair has always flourished, and to all other lands from which Africa itself received the gospel, and was prepared to defend himself before these Churches if his adversaries attempted to cause an alienation of them from him. Seeing, therefore, that Cæcilianus declined to come before his colleagues, whom he perceived or suspected (or, as they affirm, pretended to suspect) to be biassed by his enemies against the real merits of his case, it was all the more the duty of Secundus, if he wished to be the guardian of true peace, to prevent the condemnation in their absence of those who had wholly declined to compear at their bar. For it was not a matter concerning presbyters or deacons or clergy of inferior order, but concerning colleagues who might refer their case wholly to the judgment of other bishops, especially of apostolic churches, in which the sentence passed against them in their absence would have no weight, since they had not deserted their tribunal after having compeared before it, but had always declined compearance because of the suspicions which they entertained. (Letter 43 (397) From Augustine to Glorius, Eleusius, the two Felixes, Grammaticus, and others)

POPE LEO THE GREAT

I. The solidarity of the Church built upon the rock of St. Peter must be everywhere maintained.

To the beloved brothers, the whole body of bishops of the province of Vienne, Leo, bishop of Rome.

Our Lord Jesus Christ, Saviour of mankind, instituted the observance of the Divine religion which He wished by the grace of God to shed its brightness upon all nations and all peoples in such a way that the Truth, which before was confined to the announcements of the Law and the Prophets, might through the Apostles’ trumpet blast go out for the salvation of all men , as it is written: Their sound has gone out into every land, and their words into the ends of the world. But this mysterious function the Lord wished to be indeed the concern of all the apostles, but in such a way that He has placed the principal charge on the blessed Peter, chief of all the Apostles: and from him as from the Head wishes His gifts to flow to all the body: so that any one who dares to secede from Peter’s solid rock may understand that he has no part or lot in the divine mystery. For He wished him who had been received into partnership in His undivided unity to be named what He Himself was, when He saidYou are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church Matthew 16:18: that the building of the eternal temple by the wondrous gift of God’s grace might rest on Peter’s solid rock: strengthening His Church so surely that neither could human rashness assail it nor the gates of hell prevail against it. But this most holy firmness of the rock, reared, as we have said, by the building hand of God, a man must wish to destroy in over-weaning wickedness when he tries to break down its power, by favouring his own desires, and not following what he received from men of old: for he believes himself subject to no law, and held in check by no rules of God’s ordinances and breaks away, in his eagerness for novelty, from your use and ours, by adopting illegal practices, and letting what he ought to keep fall into abeyance.

II. Hilary is disturbing the peace of the Church by his insubordination.

But with the approval, as we believe, of God, and retaining towards you the fullness of our love which the Apostolic See always, as you remember, expends upon you, holy brethren we are striving to correct these things by mature counsel, and to share with you the task of setting your churches in order, not by innovations but by restoration of the old; that we may persevere in the accustomed state which our fathers handed down to us, and please our God through the ministry of a good work by removing the scandals of disturbances. And so we would have you recollect, brethren, as we do, that the Apostolic See, such is the reverence in which it is held, has times out of number been referred to and consulted by the priests of your province as well as others, and in the various matters of appeal, as the old usage demanded, it has reversed or confirmed decisions: and in this way the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace Ephesians 4:3  has been kept, and by the interchange of letters, our honourable proceedings have promoted a lasting affection: for seeking not our own but the things of Christ Philippians 2:21, we have been careful not to do despite to the dignity which God has given both to the churches and their priests. But this path which with our fathers has been always so well kept to and wisely maintained, Hilary has quitted, and is likely to disturb the position and agreement of the priests by his novel arrogance: desiring to subject you to his power in such a way as not to allow himself to be subject to the blessed Apostle Peter, claiming for himself the ordinations of all the churches throughout the provinces of Gaul, and transferring to himself the dignity which is due to metropolitan priests; he diminishes even the reverence that is paid to the blessed Peter himself with his proud words: for not only was the power of loosing and binding given to Peter before the others, but also to Peter more especially was entrusted the care of feeding the sheep. Yet any one who holds that the headship must be denied to Peter, cannot really diminish his dignity: but is puffed up with the breath of his pride, and plunges himself into the lowest depth. (Letter 10)

XII. In case of difference of opinion between the Vicar and the bishops, the bishop of Rome must be consulted. The subordination of authorities in the Church expounded.

But if in that which you believed necessary to be discussed and settled with the brethren, their opinion differs from your own wishes, let all be referred to us, with the minutes of your proceedings attested, that all ambiguities may be removed, and what is pleasing to God decided. For to this end we direct all our desires and pains, that what conduces to our harmonious unity and to the protection of discipline may be marred by no dissension and neglected by no slothfulness. Therefore, dearly beloved brother, you and those our brethren who are offended at your extravagant conduct (though the matter of complaint is not the same with all), we exhort and warn not to disturb by any wrangling what has been rightfully ordained and wisely settled. Let none seek what is his own, but what is another’s, as the Apostle says: Let each one of you please his neighbour for his good unto edifying. For the cementing of our unity cannot be firm unless we be bound by the bond of love into an inseparable solidity: because as in one body we have many members, but all the members have not the same office; so we being many are one body in Christ, and all of us members one of another.  The connection of the whole body makes all alike healthy, all alike beautiful: and this connection requires the unanimity indeed of the whole body, but it especially demands harmony among the priests. And though they have a common dignity, yet they have not uniform rank; inasmuch as even among the blessed Apostles, notwithstanding the similarity of their honourable estate, there was a certain distinction of power, and while the election of them all was equal, yet it was given to one to take the lead of the rest. From which model has arisen a distinction between bishops also, and by an important ordinance it has been provided that every one should not claim everything for himself: but that there should be in each province one whose opinion should have the priority among the brethren: and again that certain whose appointment is in the greater cities should undertake a fuller responsibility, through whom the care of the universal Church should converge towards Peter’s one seat, and nothing anywhere should be separated from its Head. Let not him then who knows he has been set over certain others take it ill that some one has been set over him, but let him himself render the obedience which he demands of them: and as he does not wish to bear a heavy load of baggage, so let him not dare to place on another’s shoulders a weight that is insupportable. For we are disciples of the humble and gentle Master who says: Learn of Me, for I am gentle and humble of heart, and you shall find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden light Matthew 11:29-30 . And how shall we experience this, unless this too comes to our remembrance which the same Lord says: He that is greater among you, shall be your servant. But he that exalts himself, shall be humbled: and he that humbles himself, shall be exalted. (Letter 14)

COUNCIL OF Ephesus (431) [ECUMENICAL]

Philip, presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See said: We offer our thanks to the holy and venerable Synod, that when the writings of our holy and blessed pope had been read to you, the holy members by our [or your] holy voices, you joined yourselves to the holy head also by your holy acclamations. For your blessedness is not ignorant that the head of the whole faith, the head of the Apostles, is blessed Peter the Apostle. And since now our mediocrity, after having been tempest-tossed and much vexed, has arrived, we ask that you give order that there be laid before us what things were done in this holy Synod before our arrival; in order that according to the opinion of our blessed pope and of this present holy assembly, we likewise may ratify their determination. (Session II, Extracts from the Acts)

Philip the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See said: There is no doubtand in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince (ἔξαρχος) and head of the Apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation (θεμέλιος) of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sinswho down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed pope Cœlestine, according to due order, is his successor and holds his place, and us he sent to supply his place in this holy synod, which the most humane and Christian Emperors have commanded to assemble, bearing in mind and continually watching over the Catholic faith. For they both have kept and are now keeping intact the apostolic doctrine handed down to them from their most pious and humane grandfathers and fathers of holy memory down to the present time, etc. (Session III, Extracts from the Acts)

Allah na Muhammad Wamemkopia Mtume Paulo: Uchanganuzi wa Kitaaluma

 


Allah na Muhammad Wamemkopia Mtume Paulo: Uchanganuzi wa Kitaaluma

Na: Dr. Maxwell Shimba

Utangulizi

Mijadala kuhusu uhusiano kati ya Qur’an na Biblia imekuwa ikijitokeza mara kwa mara katika uwanja wa theolojia na falsafa ya dini. Swali kuu ni: Je, Qur’an ni ufunuo mpya kutoka kwa Allah, au ni mkusanyiko wa masimulizi yaliyotokana na maandiko ya Biblia? Kwa uchunguzi wa kitaaluma, ni wazi kwamba sehemu kubwa ya Qur’an inajengwa juu ya simulizi na mafundisho yaliyokuwepo katika Biblia maelfu ya miaka kabla ya Muhammad. Hoja hii inaleta hitimisho kwamba Muhammad na Allah waliegemea sana mafundisho ya Biblia na kwa namna fulani kumkopia Mtume Paulo, ambaye alieneza Injili ya Yesu Kristo kwa mataifa.


1. Qur’an na Urejeleo wa Biblia

Qur’an imejaa marejeo ya moja kwa moja ya simulizi za kibiblia, zikiwemo:

  • Yusufu (Sura ya 12 – Surat Yusuf), simulizi lililokuwapo katika Biblia takriban miaka 3500 kabla ya Qur’an.

  • Imran na familia yake (Sura ya 3 – Surat Al Imran), iliyoelezwa Biblia miaka 3000 kabla ya Muhammad.

  • Yona mwana wa Mittai (Sura ya 10 – Surat Yunus), simulizi lililojulikana tayari katika Agano la Kale.

  • Ibrahimu (Sura ya 14 – Surat Ibrahim), Baba wa Imani, ambaye simulizi zake ziliandikwa Biblia karne nyingi kabla.

  • Maria mama wa Yesu (Sura ya 19 – Surat Maryam), simulizi la kibiblia lililotangulia sana Qur’an.

Aidha majina na habari za manabii wakubwa kama Musa, Haruni, Daudi, Sulemani, Yakobo, Isa, na Yohana Mbatizaji, yamechukuliwa moja kwa moja kutoka Biblia. Qur’an hata hivyo haijawahi kutoa simulizi mpya, bali imetoa muhtasari usio na kina wa habari zilizokwishajulikana kwa Wayahudi na Wakristo.


2. Ushahidi wa Qur’an Kuhusu Chanzo cha Habari

Qur’an yenyewe inakiri kuwa Muhammad alisimuliwa habari za manabii na hakupewa ufunuo mpya kuhusu wao:

  • Qur’an 4:164 – “...na mitume wengine hatukukuhadithia habari zao, na Mwenyezi Mungu alimsemeza Musa.”

  • Qur’an 40:78 – “...miongoni mwao tumekusimulia, na miongoni mwao hatukukusimulia.”

Aya hizi zinathibitisha kuwa Muhammad alitegemea masimulizi yaliyokuwepo, badala ya kupokea ufunuo wa kipekee. Hii inapingana na madai ya Wahyi mpya, na inathibitisha urejeleo wa maandiko ya Biblia.


3. Qur’an Inavyowaamuru Waislamu Kurudi Kwenye Biblia

Qur’an mara kadhaa inawaelekeza wafuasi wake warejee katika vitabu vya awali (Torati na Injili):

  • Al-An’aam 6:154–155 – Musa alipewa Kitabu kilicho na maelezo ya kila kitu, na watu wakaamrishwa wakifuate.

  • An-Nisaa 4:136 – Waislamu wanahimizwa waamini vitabu vilivyoteremshwa kabla ya Muhammad.

  • Al-Maaida 5:46 – Injili ni nuru na uwongofu; yeyote aikataye hana nuru.

  • Yunus 10:94 – Muhammad mwenyewe aliambiwa akipata shaka, aulize kwa wale wanaosoma Maandiko yaliyokuwa kabla yake.

Kwa hiyo, hoja ya Waislamu kuwa Biblia imechakachuliwa inapingana moja kwa moja na Qur’an. Ikiwa Biblia ingekuwa imepotoshwa, basi Allah asingewaelekeza wafuasi wake warejee humo.


4. Hoja Dhidi ya Waislamu Wapinga Biblia

  1. Kudai Biblia ni ya Paulo – Ikiwa kweli ni ya Paulo, kwa nini simulizi zake zimo katika Qur’an? Hii inamaanisha Allah na Muhammad walimkopa Paulo, na kwa mantiki hiyo Paulo anakuwa “akbar” (mkubwa) mbele ya Allah na Muhammad.

  2. Kudai Biblia imechakachuliwa – Ikiwa imechakachuliwa, kwa nini Qur’an imejaa marejeo yake na kwa nini Allah aliwaamuru warejee humo?


5. Hitimisho

Kwa uchambuzi wa kitaaluma, ni dhahiri kwamba:

  • Qur’an imejengwa juu ya simulizi za Biblia.

  • Muhammad hakupokea ufunuo mpya, bali alisimuliwa habari zilizokuwa tayari katika Biblia.

  • Qur’an yenyewe inakiri na kuthibitisha uhalali wa Maandiko ya awali, ikiwemo Torati na Injili.

  • Hoja za Waislamu dhidi ya Biblia zinapingana na ushahidi wa Qur’an.

Kwa hiyo, hoja inabaki kuwa: Allah na Muhammad walimkopia Mtume Paulo na Biblia nzima. Paulo, kwa maana hiyo, anakuwa mkubwa mbele ya Muhammad na Allah, kwani maandiko yake yamekuwa msingi wa masimulizi ya Qur’an.

Mwisho, wito unabaki pale pale: Njoo kwa Yesu Kristo, Mungu Mkuu, aliyefunuliwa katika Biblia, ambaye ndiye nuru na wokovu wa ulimwengu wote.

Monday, September 15, 2025

Muhammad’s Inconsistencies

 

More of Muhammad’s Inconsistencies –

Doing to others what he didn’t want to be done to him

It comes as no surprise to those who have studied the life of Muhammad with any depth that he was someone that was grossly inconsistent since he failed to practice what he preached, and gave himself certain privileges and favors which he withheld from others. Muhammad was also guilty of doing to others what he did not anyone to do to either himself or his followers.

For example, when a man came to Muhammad to ask him permission to fornicate, or have sex with women, the latter asked him a series of questions in order to highlight just how perverted and selfish his request truly was:

“… Imam Ahmad recorded Abu Umamah saying that a young man came to the Prophet and said, ‘O Messenger of Allah! Give me permission to commit Zina (unlawful sex).’ The people surrounded him and rebuked him, saying, ‘Stop! Stop!’ But the Prophet said…

<<Come close.>> The young man came to him, and he said…

<<Sit down.>> so he sat down. The Prophet said…

<<Would you like it (unlawful sex) for your mother?>> He said, ‘No, by Allah, may I be ransomed for you.’ The Prophet said…

<<Neither do the people like it for their mothers.>> The Prophet said…

<<Would you like it for your daughter?>> He said, ‘No, by Allah, may I be ransomed for you.’ The Prophet said…

<<Neither do the people like it for their daughters.>> The Prophet said…

<<Would you like it for your sister?>> He said, ‘No, by Allah, may I be ransomed for you.’ The Prophet said…

<<Neither do the people like it for their sisters.>> The Prophet said…

<<Would you like it for your paternal aunt?>> He said, ‘No, by Allah, O Allah's Messenger! may I be ransomed for you.’ The Prophet said…

<<Neither do the people like it for their paternal aunts.>> The Prophet said…

<<Would you like it for your maternal aunt?>> He said, ‘No, by Allah, O Allah's Messenger! may I be ransomed for you.’ The Prophet said…

<<Neither do the people like it for their maternal aunts.>> Then the Prophet put his hand on him and said…

<<O Allah, forgive his sin, purify his heart and guard his chastity.>> After that the young man never paid attention to anything of that nature.” (TafsirQ. 17:32)

What makes this advice rather troubling is that Muhammad did not practice it himself, nor did his followers, since he permitted them to take women captive and have sex with them, even married ones whose husbands were still alive!

Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath God ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property, - desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and God is All-knowing, All-wise. S. 4:24 Y. Ali

As shocking as it may sound, this passage is basically stating that the only time a Muslim man (which includes Muhammad) can sleep with a married woman is when she happens to be one of the female slaves that he has taken captive!

Unfortunately, this verse was tragically and shamefully put into practice by the jihadists:

Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa'id al Khadri: O Abu Sa'id, did you hear Allah's Messenger mentioning al-'azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah's Messenger on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for themSo we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger, and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3371)

Abu Said al-Khudri said: The apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse, ‘And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess’. That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Volume 2, Number 2150)

How unfortunate that Muhammad and his deity did not share the shame and concern of their followers regarding the morality of raping captives whose husbands were still alive, but actually rushed in to compose a text to justify such a wicked and perverted act!

This same narration is found in all of the major hadith collections:

Chapter 36. What Has Been Related (About A Man) Who Captures A Slave Woman That Has A Husband, Is It Lawful For Him To Have Relations With Her?

1132. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri narrated: We got some captives on the day of Awtas, and they had husbands among their people. They mentioned that to the Messenger of Allah, so the following was revealed: And women who are already married, except those whom your right hands possess(Hasan) (English Translation of Jami‘ At-Tirmidhi, Compiled by Imam Hafiz Abu ‘Eisa Mohammad Ibn ‘Eisa At-Tirmidhi, From Hadith No. 544 to 1204, translated by Abu Khaliyl (USA), ahadith edited and referenced by Hafiz Tahir Zubair ‘Ali Za’i [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, First Edition: November 2007], Volume 2, p. 502; underline emphasis ours)

(3) 3016. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri said: “On the Day of Awtas, we captured some women who had husbands among the idolaters. SO SOME OF THE MEN DISLIKED THAT, so Allah, Most High, revealed: ‘And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess….’” (Sahih)

[Abu ‘Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan.

(4) 3017. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri said: “we captured some women on the Day of Awtas and they had husbands among their people. That was mentioned to the Messenger of Allah so Allah revealed: ‘…And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess….” (Sahih)

[Abu ‘Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan.

This is how it was reported by Ath-Thawri, from ‘Uthman Al-Batti, from Abu Al-Khalil, from Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri from the Prophet and it is similar. “From Abu ‘Alqamah” is not in this Hadith and I do not know of anyone who mentioned Abu ‘Alqamah in this Hadith except in what Hammam mentioned from Qatadah. Abu Al-Khalil’s name is Salih bin Abi Mariam. (Jami‘ At-Tirmidhi, Volume 5, From Hadith No. 2606 to 3290, Chapter 4. Regarding Surat An-Nisa’, pp. 331-332; capital and underline emphasis ours)

To make matters worse, Muhammad granted his men permission to marry women for a short period of time for the sole purpose of gratifying their sexual cravings:

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah and Salama bin Al-Akwa': While we were in an army, Allah's Apostle came to us and said, "You have been allowed to do the Mut’a (marriage), so do it." Salama bin Al-Akwa' said: Allah's Apostle's said, "If a man and a woman agree (to marry temporarily), their marriage should last for three nights, and if they like to continue, they can do so; and if they want to separate, they can do so." I do not know whether that was only for us or for all the people in general. Abu Abdullah (Al-Bukhari) said: ‘Ali made it clear that the Prophet said, "The Mut’a marriage has been cancelled (made unlawful)." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 52)

Narrated Abdullah:
We used to participate in the holy battles led by Allah's Apostle and we had nothing (no wives) with us. So we said, "Shall we get ourselves castrated?" He forbade us that and then allowed us to marry women with a temporary contract and recited to us: -- ‘O you who believe! Make not unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, but commit no transgression.’ (5.87) (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 13o)

This practice continued to be observed until the time of Umar’s caliphate:

Ibn Uraij reported: 'Ati' reported that Jabir b. Abdullah came to perform 'Umra, and we came to his abode, and the people asked him about different things, and then they made a mention of temporary marriage, whereupon he said: Yes, we had been benefiting ourselves by this temporary marriage during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet and during the time of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3248)

Tragically, there were some instances in which women got pregnant through such unions:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Urwa ibn az-Zubayr that Khawla ibn Hakim came to Umar ibn al-Khattab and said, "Rabia ibn Umayya made a temporary marriage with a woman and she is pregnant by him." Umar ibn al-Khattab went out in dismay dragging his cloak, saying, "This temporary marriage, had I come across it, I would have ordered stoning and done away with it!" (Malik’s Muwatta, Book 28, Number 28.18.42)

Today such a practice would be called prostitution, plain and simple.

With the foregoing in view, it is obvious that Muhammad and his followers did to other people’s mothers, wives, daughters, nieces, aunts etc., the very thing that he did not want to be done to the mothers, wives, daughters, nieces, aunts etc. of Muslims.

In light of this, we would like to ask the followers of Muhammad the very same questions that their prophet asked the young man.

Would the Muslims like it if someone contracted temporary marriage with their mothers? What about with their daughters, sisters, paternal or maternal aunts? How about their grandmothers, granddaughters, female cousins, nieces etc.?

Moreover, would the Muslims be okay with a group of invaders coming to their lands and taking their women captive in order to have sex with them? And would they be perfectly all right with such men taking their wives and having sex with them before selling them off to someone else (or even keeping them as their own personal property)?

If the Muslims would have a problem with all of this then why do they follow a man who permitted his hordes to basically rape captive women, including married ones whose husbands were still alive? And why would they want to believe in a man who virtually allowed women to be treated like prostitutes by permitting his followers to contract temporary marriages whose only objective was to satisfy the carnal, lustful desires of men who didn’t have the will power to control their sexual urges?

The fact is that Muhammad stands condemned by his own teachings and Muslims should therefore abandon such a man and turn to the risen Lord Jesus who is their only hope of salvation and eternal bliss.

Muhammad’s Jewish Sex-Slave

 

According to the Sunni traditions, Muhammad had at least two sex slaves that he did not marry, namely, a Christian Coptic girl named Mariyah and a Jewish concubine named Rayhanah. I have written at length about Mariyah, so here I will focus on Rayhanah.

Here is what a modern biography on Muhammad, which is based on the earliest surviving Islamic sources, writes in respect to this Jewish girl whom Muhammad had taken captive and enslaved:

As to the other women and children, they were divided, together with the property, amongst the men who had taken part in the siege. Many of these captives were ransomed by the Bani Nadir at Khaybar. As part of his share the Prophet had chosen Rayhanah, the daughter of Zayd, a Nadirite, who married her to a man of Qurayzah. She was a woman of great beauty and she remained the Prophet’s slave until she died some five years later. At first he put her in the care of his aunt Salma, in whose house Rifa‘ah had already taken refuge. Rayhanah herself was averse to entering Islam, but Rifa‘ah, and his kinsmen of the Bani Hadl spoke to her about the new religion and it was not long before one of the three young converts, Tha‘labah by name, came to the Prophet and told him that Rayhanah had entered Islam, whereupon he greatly rejoiced. When it became clear that she was not pregnant, he went to her and offered to set her free and to make her his wife. But she said: “O Messenger if God, leave me in thy power; that will be easier for me and for thee.” (Martin Lings, Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources [Inner Traditions International, Ltd., One Park Street, Rochester, Vermont 05767; 1983], p. 233; emphasis mine)

Even the Muslim writings are not able to hide the fact of Muhammad being a vile, immoral, sexual deviant.  

MUHAMMAD’S GOD: A YOUNG CURLY-HAIRED, BEARDLESS BOY!

 

There are “sound” hadiths where Muhammad claimed that Allah appeared to him as a beautiful man, in which his deity then placed his palm between his shoulders, where he then felt the coolness of Allah’s fingers on his chest:

Al-Tirmidhi Hadith – 237

Narrated AbdurRahman ibn A’ish

Allah’s Messenger said: I saw my Lord, the Exalted and Glorious, IN THE MOST BEAUTIFUL FORM. He said: What do the Angels in the presence of Allah contend about? I said: Thou art the most aware of it. He then placed HIS PALM between my shoulders, and I felt its coldness in my chest, and I came to know what was in the Heavens and the Earth. He recited: `Thus did we show Ibrahim the kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth, and it was so that he might have certainty.’ (6:75)

Darimi reported it in a mursal form, and Tirmidhi also reported. (Alim.org http://www.alim.org/library/hadith/TIR/237; capital and underline emphasis mine)

And:

Al-Tirmidhi Hadith – 245

Narrated Mu’adh ibn Jabal

Allah’s Messenger was detained one morning from observing the dawn prayer (in congregation) along with us till the sun had almost appeared on the horizon. He then came out hurriedly, and Iqamah for prayer was observed, and he conducted it (prayer) in brief form. When he had concluded the prayer by saying As-salamu alaykum wa Rahmatullah, he called out to us saying: Remain in your places as you were. Then turning to us, he said: I am going to tell you what detained me from you (on account of which I could not join you in the prayer) in the morning. I got up in the night and performed ablution and observed the prayer as had been ordained for me. I dozed in my prayer till I was overcome by (sleep) and lo, I found myself in the presence of my Lord, the Blessed and the Glorious, IN THE BEST FORM. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these highest angels contend about? I said: I do not know. He repeated it thrice. He said: Then I saw Him put HIS PALMS between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of HIS FINGERS between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me, and I could recognize everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? I said: Going on foot to join congregational prayers, sitting in the mosques after the prayers, performing ablution well despite difficulties. He again said: Then what do they contend? I said: In regard to the ranks. He said: What are these? I said: Providing of food, speaking gently, observing the prayer when the people are asleep. He again said to me: Beg (Your Lord) and say: O Allah, I beg of Thee (power) to do good deeds, and abandon abominable deeds, to love the poor, that Thou forgive me and show mercy to me and when Thou intendst to put people to trial Thou causes me to die unblemished and I beg of Thee Thy love and the love of one who loves Thee and the love for the deed which brings me near to Thy love. Allah’s Messenger said: It is a truth, so learn it and teach it.

Transmitted by Ahmad, Tirmidhi, who said: This is a HASAN SAHIH hadith, and I asked Muhammad ibn Isma’il about this hadith, and he said: It is a SAHIH hadith. (Alim.org http://www.alim.org/library/hadith/TIR/245; capital and underline emphasis mine)

Here’s another version of the foregoing narrative:

Jami` at-Tirmidhi

Chapters on Tafsir

Narrated Mu’adh bin Jabal:

“One morning, the Messenger of Allah was prevented from coming to us for Salat As-Subh, until we were just about to look for the eye of the sun (meaning sunrise). Then he came out quickly, had the Salat prepared for. The Messenger of Allah performed the Salat, and he performed his Salat in a relatively quick manner. When he said the Salam, he called aloud with his voice saying to us: ‘Stay in your rows as you are.’ Then he turned coming near to us, then he said: ‘I am going to narrate to you what kept me from you this morning: I got up during the night, I performed Wudu and prayed as much as I was able to, and I dozed off during my Salat, and fell deep asleep. Then I SAW MY LORD, Blessed and Most High, IN THE BEST OF APPEARANCES. He said: ‘O Muhammad!’ I said: ‘My Lord here I am my Lord!’ He said: ‘What is it that the most exalted group busy themselves with?’ I said: ‘I do not know Lord.’ And He said it three times.” He said: “So I saw Him place HIS PALM between my shoulders, and I sensed the coolness of HIS FINGERTIPS between my breast. Then everything was disclosed for me, and I became aware. So He said: ‘O Muhammad!’ I said: ‘Here I am my Lord!’ He said: ‘What is it that the most exalted group busy themselves with?’ I said: ‘In the acts that atone.’ He said: ‘And what are they?’ I said: ‘The footsteps to the congregation, the gatherings in the Masajid after the Salat, Isbagh Al-Wudu during difficulties.’ He said: ‘Then what else?’ I said: ‘Feeding others, being lenient in speech, and Salat during the night while the people are sleeping.’ He said: ‘Ask.’ I said: ‘O Allah! I ask of you the do of good deeds, avoid the evil deeds, loving the poor, and that You forgive me, and have mercy upon me. And when You have willed Fitnah in the people, then take me without the Fitnah. And I ask You for Your love, the love of whomever You love, and the of the deeds that bring one nearer to Your love.’” The Messenger of Allah said: “Indeed it is true, so study it and learn it.”

Grade: Hasan (Darussalam)

English reference: Vol. 5, Book 44, Hadith 3235

Arabic reference: Book 47, Hadith 3543 (sunnah.com https://sunnah.com/urn/642690; capital emphasis mine)

This report is also found in another hadith collection:

4 Prayer

(8c) Chapter: Mosques and places of Prayer – Section 3

Mu’adh b. Jabal said: God’s Messenger was detained one morning from observing the prayer with us till the sun had almost appeared over the horizon. He then came cut quickly, and when the iqama had been uttered he conducted the prayer in a shortened form; then when he had given the salutation he called out to us saying, “Keep to your rows as you were.” Then turning to us he said, “I shall tell you what detained me from you this morning. I got up during the night, performed ablution, and prayed what I could; but during my prayer I dozed and was overcome, and there and then I saw my Lord in the most beautiful form. He addressed me by name, and when I replied, ‘At Thy service, my Lord,’ He asked, ‘What do the angels near My presence dispute about?’ and I replied that I did not know. He asked it three times. Then I saw Him put the palm of His hand between my shoulder-blades, so that I experienced the coolness of His fingers between my nipples so everything became clear to me and I attained knowledge. He then addressed me by name, and when I replied, ‘At Thy service, my Lord,’ He asked, ‘What do the angels near My presence dispute about?’ I replied, ‘Expiation.’ He asked what they were, and I replied, ‘Walking on foot to the congregational prayers, sitting in the mosques after the prayers are over, and performing complete ablution in difficult circumstances. He asked what next they disputed about, and when I said it was about degrees, He asked what they were and I replied, ‘Providing food, speaking gently, and praying at night when people are asleep.’ He then told me to make a request, and I said, ‘O God, I ask Thee for power to do good things and abandon objectionable things, for love towards the poor, that Thou shouldest forgive me and show mercy to me, and that when Thou intendest to test any people Thou wilt take me to Thyself without being led astray. And I ask for Thy love, the love of those who love Thee, and a love of doing things which will bring me near to Thy love.’” Then God’s Messenger said, “It is true, so study it and learn it.”

Ahmad and Tirmidhi transmitted it, and Tirmidhi said, “This is a hasan sahih tradition. I asked Muhammad b. Isma’il (AL-BUKHARI) about this tradition, and he said it is A SAHIH TRADITION.”

Reference: Mishkat al-Masabih 748

In-book reference: Book 4, Hadith 176 (sunnah.com https://sunnah.com/mishkat:748; emphasis mine)

If this weren’t shocking enough, other versions state that Allah appeared as a beautiful beardless young man with short curly hair!

“I saw my Lord in the most beautiful form like a youth with abundant hair.” (al-Daraqutni, Kitab al-Ru’ya, 332-333; 356-357; similar reports from Umm al-Tufayl, Anas b. Malik, Mu’adh b. ‘Afra, Ibn ‘Umar, ‘A’isha, Ibn ‘Abbas; Reported by Tabarani; Ibn Abi ‘Asim; al-Bayhaqi; al-Suyuti; al-Haythami; Ibn ‘Adi, al-Baghdadi)

I saw my Lord in the form of a young man, beardless (amrad) with short curly hair (ja’d) and clothed in a red garment. (Narrated by Ahmad b. Hanbal in Tabarani; AUTHENTICATED BY AHMAD B. HANBAL in Creed 3 citing isnad, ‘Abd al-Samad b. Yahya in Tabaqat al-Hanabila, 1:218, al-Marrudhi (d. 888) in Tabaqat, 3:81, Ibn ‘Aqil in Makdisi, Ibn ‘Aqil, 130; Ibn ‘Adi al-Qattan, al-Kamil fi du’afa’ al-rijal, 3:49-50, al-Daraqutni, Kitab al-Ru’ya, 332-333, 356-357; al-Tabarani, al-Mu’jam al-Kabir, 25:143; SAHIH BY ABU L-HASAN B. BASHSHAR in Ibn Abi Ya’la, Tabaqat, 2:59; Abu Ya’la, al-Muta’mad, 85; ACCEPTED BY IBN TAYMIYYA in Bayan Tablis al-Jahmiyya, 7:192-198, 290)

Here’s what one of sunni Islam’s greatest hadith scholars said about the aforementioned report:

Ahmad b. Hanbal said about the above hadith: “Report it because the ‘ulama have reported it.” (‘Abd al-Samad b. Yahya reported in Tabaqat al-Hanabila, 1:218)

In case the readers are unaware, ibn Hanbal was not only a compiler of hadiths, whose massive collection of narrations is called Musnad Ahmad, he even has a school of Islamic jurisprudence (madhab) named after him.

There’s more:

The Prophet saw Allah before death as is the doctrine of the majority of Ah al-Sunna thus related from al-Nawawi by al-Qari. The evidence for this is the hadith of Ibn ‘Abbas whereby the Prophet said: “I saw my Lord” (ra’aytu rabbi). Ibn Kathir cited it in his commentary on Sura al-Najm and declared its chain sound, but considered it part of the hadith of the dream cited below. Ibn Qayyim [see excerpt below] relates that Imam Ahmad considered such sight to be in the Prophet’s sleep but remains a true sight – as the dreams of Prophets are true – and that some of the Imam’s companions mistakenly attributed to him the position that the Prophet saw his Lord “with the eyes of his head.”

Al-Bayhaqi also narrated the hadith “I saw my Lord” in al-Asma’ wa al-Sifat WITH A SOUND CHAIN but with the addition: “in the form of a curly-haired, beardless young man wearing a green robe,” a condemned, disauthenticated addition and concatenation with another hadith that refers to Gibril. Hence al-Suyuti interpreted it either as a dream or, quoting his shaykh Ibn al-Humam, as “the veil of form” (hijab al-sura)… (Islamic Doctrines and Beliefs: Volume 1: The Prophets in Barzakh, The Hadith of Isra’ and Mir’aj, The Immense Merits of Al-Sham, The Vision of Allah, Al-Sayyid Muhammad Ibn ‘Alawi al-Maliki, translation and notes by Dr. Gibril Fouad Haddad [As-Sunna Foundation of America 1999], pp. 137-138; bold and capital emphasis mine)

In a footnote the translator mentions another narration that says Allah appeared as a man:

… and from Umm al-Tufayl by al-Tabarani (6:158 #3385). The latter chain actually states: “I saw my Lord in the best form of a beardless young man” and was rejected by al-Dhahabi in Tahdhib al-Mawdua’at (p. 22 #22)… (p. 139, fn. 257; bold emphasis mine)

The aforementioned narrations are either assuming that Allah took the form of a man, or that this is his actual uncreated shape or form.

Commenting on the anthropomorphic beliefs of ibn Hanbal, Islamic scholar Dr. Wesley Williams noted that:   

Ibn Hanbal, then, was an anthropomorphist. He affirmed for the divine a human form, including a face, eyes, curly hair, mouth, voice breath, chest and two elbows, back, arms, hands with a palm, five fingers and fingertips, legs, shin, feet, soul, physical beauty, a limit, and even, shockingly, loins. He affirmed the external meaning of these attributes and refused to qualify them with balkafa. (Williams, “Aspects of the Creed of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal: A study of Anthropomorphism in Early Islamic Discourse,” in International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 34 (2002), 441-463)

Hence, ibn Hanbal like the so-called Salafi Muslims of today, was an anthropomorphist literalist who held that Allah literally has a body of some kind. This explains why Ibn Hanbal was adamant that Muslims must take the apparent words employed in the Quran and Muhammad’s ahadith, and are to refrain from interpreting them in an allegorical or figurative manner:   

One should not dispute with anyone, nor engage in formal debate, nor learn the art of argument. Verily, kalam regarding predestination, the sight (of God in the afterlife), the Qur’an, and other topics of the traditions is rejected and forbidden. Whoever does it, even if his kalam should agree with the Sunna, is not of the people of the Sunna until he rejects argument and surrenders. Ahmad b. Hanbal (‘Aqida III, in Ibn Abi Ya’la, Tabaqat al-Hanabila, 2:167, ed. Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin)

God is over [‘ala] the Throne. The Footstool is at the place of His Two Feet… He moves, speaks, observes, looks, laughs [yadhaku], rejoices, and loves… He descends every night to the lowest heaven however He wills… The servants’ hearts are between two of the Most Merciful’s fingers… He will put His foot in the Fire, causing it to recoil. Ahmad b. Hanbal (‘Aqida I, Ibn Abi Ya’la, Tabaqat, 1:61-62)

According to us, Hadith is taken according to its apparent meaning (zahirihi) just as what came from the Prophet. Talking [kalam] about it is an innovation. But we believe in it as it came to its apparent meaning (‘ala zahirihi). Hanbal (‘Aqida III, Ibn Abi Ya’la, Tabaqat, 2:168)

As another Muslim authority explained:

The zahir of the wording is what comes first to the mind from that text, irrespective of whether it is literal [haqiqa] or figurative. (Ibn Qudama, Dhamma al-taw’il, 55)

So, there you have it folks!

Muhammad’s god is a beautiful beardless young pubescent boy with short curly hair who wears a red dress!

Revelation 22 — Paradise Restored, Judgment Declared, the King Returns

 

Revelation 22 — Paradise Restored, Judgment Declared, the King Returns

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute


Introduction

Revelation 22 serves as the climax of the biblical canon, uniting the beginning of Scripture in Genesis with the consummation of God’s redemptive plan. It presents Eden restored and transcended, judgment declared with finality, and the imminent return of Christ, the eternal King. This chapter does not merely close the Apocalypse; it seals the testimony of divine revelation with both warning and invitation.


1. The River and the Tree (vv. 1–2)

The angelic vision opens with the river of the water of life, clear as crystal, flowing directly from the throne of God and the Lamb. This imagery draws from Genesis 2:10–14 and Ezekiel 47:1–12, but unlike Eden, the source here is explicitly divine. The Tree of Life, once barred by cherubim in Genesis 3:24, is now open, bearing twelvefold fruit for perpetual sustenance. This signifies unbroken fellowship with God and an eternal abundance that transcends Eden’s provisional state.


2. The End of the Curse and Eternal Worship (v. 3)

John declares: “No longer will there be anything accursed.” The Edenic curse (Gen. 3:17–19) is decisively removed. Worship (Greek: latreuō) here is not servitude but joyful participation in God’s reign, restoring humanity’s original vocation as image-bearers (cf. Gen. 1:26–28).


3. The Beatific Vision (v. 4)

The most profound promise emerges: “They will see His face.” Throughout Scripture, the divine face is lethal to sinners (Ex. 33:20). Yet in Christ, believers receive the consummation of hope (1 John 3:2). His name on their foreheads signifies eternal identity and belonging, in stark contrast to the mark of the beast (Rev. 13:16–17).


4. Eternal Light and Shared Reign (v. 5)

Here, “Night will be no more.” The Shekinah glory (cf. Isa. 60:19–20) replaces created luminaries. God’s people not only dwell in light but also reign with Christ forever (Rev. 5:10), highlighting the priest-king motif rooted in Israel’s covenantal history (Ex. 19:6; 1 Pet. 2:9).


Final Words of the Coming King (vv. 6–21)

The remainder of the chapter alternates between divine assurances, ethical exhortations, and eschatological warnings.

5. The Truthfulness of Revelation (v. 6)

John affirms the trustworthiness of prophecy. Unlike allegory or myth, this vision comes directly from “the God of the spirits of the prophets.”

6. Christ’s Imminent Return (v. 7)

“Behold, I am coming soon.” The blessing rests upon those who keep (tēreō) the words, emphasizing obedience, not mere intellectual assent.

7. Worship God Alone (vv. 8–9)

John’s attempted prostration before the angel is sharply corrected: “Worship God.” This affirms the exclusivity of divine worship, rejecting angelolatry or idolatry in every age.

8. The Unsealed Prophecy (v. 10)

Unlike Daniel (Dan. 12:4), John is told not to seal the vision. The eschatological urgency demands present proclamation.

9. Eternal Choices (v. 11)

The fixedness of character at Christ’s coming recalls Hebrews 9:27: judgment is final. The righteous remain righteous, and the wicked persist in wickedness—time for repentance closes.

10. Christ the Just Judge (vv. 12–13)

Christ identifies as Alpha and Omega, declaring His eternal sovereignty. He comes with recompense, rewarding faithfulness and executing justice.

11. Right to the Tree (v. 14)

Those who “wash their robes” in the Lamb’s blood (Rev. 7:14) gain access to the Tree of Life and the holy city—salvation rooted in grace, not works.

12. Exclusion of the Wicked (v. 15)

“Outside are dogs, sorcerers, and murderers.” This exclusion underscores God’s holiness; evil cannot coexist with His dwelling.

13. Christ’s Identity Declared (v. 16)

Jesus proclaims: “I am the root and descendant of David, the bright morning star.” He is both David’s progenitor and heir, fulfilling messianic prophecy (Isa. 11:1; 2 Sam. 7:12–16).

14. The Final Invitation (v. 17)

“The Spirit and the Bride say, ‘Come.’” This is the ultimate gospel call—salvation is freely given (Isa. 55:1). Even at Scripture’s end, divine grace extends an open hand.

15. Warning Against Alteration (vv. 18–19)

A solemn curse rests upon anyone who adds to or subtracts from this prophecy, emphasizing the sacred integrity of God’s Word.

16. The Final Promise (v. 20)

Christ’s last words in Scripture are, “Surely I am coming soon.” The Church replies: “Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!”—echoing the early cry: Maranatha!


Spiritual Theological Takeaways

  1. Eden Restored and Surpassed – God’s redemptive plan brings creation not merely back to Eden but forward to eternal perfection.

  2. The Imminence of Christ’s Return – Urgency characterizes the Christian life; obedience is essential.

  3. The Final Invitation Still Stands – Grace remains the last word of Scripture.

  4. Judgment Is Irrevocable – Eternal destinies are sealed at Christ’s coming.


Conclusion

Revelation 22 unites cosmic restoration, divine justice, and the blessed hope of Christ’s imminent return. It closes the canon with both a warning and an invitation: judgment is certain, yet grace is freely offered. For the thirsty, the water of life remains without cost (Rev. 22:17). For the Church, the cry remains: “Come, Lord Jesus!”


📖 Key Reference Verse:
“The Spirit and the Bride say, ‘Come.’ Let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price.” (Revelation 22:17, ESV)

The Return of the Jews to Israel: A Prophetic Fulfillment of Daniel’s 70 Weeks

 

The Return of the Jews to Israel: A Prophetic Fulfillment of Daniel’s 70 Weeks

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute


Introduction

The rebirth of the State of Israel in 1948 is not only a political or historical phenomenon but one of the most staggering fulfillments of biblical prophecy in human history. No other ancient nation has been scattered across the globe for nearly two millennia, preserved its language, faith, and identity, and then returned to its ancestral homeland. This unique event is unparalleled and constitutes clear evidence of divine intervention. It is deeply rooted in the prophetic Scriptures, particularly in the visions of Daniel and the messages revealed through the angel Gabriel concerning the restoration of Israel.


Israel: A Nation Preserved by Providence

Israel’s survival defies the logic of history. Ancient empires such as the Babylonians, Assyrians, Amalekites, and even mighty Rome have disappeared, yet Israel lives. The Jewish people were dispersed in 70 A.D. after the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, leading to nearly 1,900 years of exile. And yet, against every human prediction, the people, the name, the language, and the land converged again in May 1948 when Israel was declared a sovereign state.

Mark Twain, during his visit to the land in 1867, described it as a “desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds… hardly a tree or a shrub anywhere.” Today, Israel flourishes with agriculture, forests, cities, and technological innovation. What Twain witnessed was the “valley of dry bones” (Ezekiel 37), but what we see now is its resurrection.


Prophetic Foundations in the Torah and the Prophets

The restoration of Israel was foretold in multiple passages of the Old Testament:

  • Deuteronomy 30:3–5: “Then the LORD your God will restore your fortunes and have compassion on you… and will bring you into the land that your fathers possessed…”

  • Ezekiel 37:21: “Behold, I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone… and bring them into their own land.”

  • Isaiah 66:8: “Shall a land be born in one day? Shall a nation be brought forth in one moment?”

On May 14, 1948, in a single day, the prophecy was fulfilled as Israel was declared a nation, echoing Isaiah’s vision of a nation born in one day.


Daniel’s Prophecy of the 70 Weeks

Central to understanding the modern rebirth of Israel is Daniel’s prophecy of the 70 weeks (Daniel 9:24–27). The angel Gabriel revealed to Daniel a timeline concerning Israel’s destiny, the coming of the Messiah, and the restoration of the holy city.

  1. Seventy Weeks Decreed: Daniel was told that seventy “weeks” (symbolic of seventy sets of seven years = 490 years) were appointed for his people and his holy city (Daniel 9:24).

  2. Messiah’s Coming: The prophecy pointed to the coming of Messiah the Prince who would be “cut off” (Daniel 9:26), foretelling the crucifixion of Christ.

  3. Desolation of Jerusalem: Following the rejection of the Messiah, Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed in 70 A.D.—precisely as predicted.

  4. Restoration and Final Fulfillment: The prophecy also looks ahead to the ultimate restoration of Israel in the end times, aligning with the reestablishment of the state of Israel in 1948 as a prelude to final redemption.

Thus, Daniel’s prophecy frames Israel’s rebirth not merely as a political event but as a fulfillment within God’s redemptive calendar.


The Exile and the Long-Awaited Return

The exile of nearly 1,900 years was both a divine judgment and a preparatory period. As the prophets warned, disobedience led to dispersion (Leviticus 26:33; Deuteronomy 28:64). Yet the same Scriptures promise regathering: “I will plant them on their land, and they shall never again be uprooted” (Amos 9:15).

Israel’s restoration in 1948 was not accidental but a sovereign act of God aligning with His covenantal promises. It was a necessary stage for the fulfillment of end-time prophecies, particularly concerning the return of Messiah and the establishment of His millennial kingdom.


Expository Commentary on Prophetic Fulfillment

  1. Historical Uniqueness: No other nation in world history has been scattered and preserved in such a manner. This demonstrates God’s covenant faithfulness (Jeremiah 31:35–37).

  2. Linguistic Revival: The revival of Hebrew, once considered a “dead language,” into a national tongue fulfills Zephaniah 3:9, which speaks of a purified language for God’s people.

  3. Geopolitical Witness: The return of the Jews to their homeland in the face of global opposition reflects Zechariah 12:2–3, which foretells Jerusalem as a burdensome stone for all nations.

  4. Spiritual Implication: The rebirth of Israel is a sign of the approaching Messianic age, reminding the Church that God’s prophetic clock revolves around Israel.


Conclusion

The return of the Jews to Israel and the rebirth of their nation in 1948 is one of the clearest demonstrations of fulfilled prophecy in modern history. Daniel’s 70 weeks prophecy, illuminated by the angel Gabriel, connects the first coming of Messiah, the judgment upon Jerusalem, and the latter-day restoration of Israel. The survival, regathering, and flourishing of the Jewish people bear witness to God’s covenant faithfulness and serve as a prophetic signpost for the world.

As Isaiah declared: “Shall a nation be brought forth in one day?”—and history answers with a resounding yes. The restoration of Israel is not merely history; it is theology written in flesh and stone, confirming the reliability of God’s Word and pointing us to the culmination of His redemptive plan.


References and Bibliography

  • The Holy Bible: ESV, NKJV, NASB translations.

  • Twain, Mark. The Innocents Abroad. Hartford: American Publishing Company, 1869.

  • Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology. Ariel Ministries, 1993.

  • Keil, C.F., and Delitzsch, Franz. Commentary on the Old Testament. Hendrickson Publishers, 1989.

  • Walvoord, John F. Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation. Moody Press, 1971.

  • Wright, N.T. The New Testament and the People of God. Fortress Press, 1992.

  • Feinberg, Charles L. The Prophecy of Daniel. Moody Press, 1981.

  • Shimba, Maxwell. Theology of Prophecy and Restoration. Orlando: Shimba Theological Institute Press, 2024.

Jesus is God: “If You’ve Seen Me, You’ve Seen the Father”

 

 Jesus is God — “If You’ve Seen Me, You’ve Seen the Father”

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute


Introduction

The question of Jesus’ divinity lies at the very heart of Christian theology. Among His most striking declarations is found in John 14:9: “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” This statement reveals that in Jesus Christ, the fullness of God’s being and nature is manifested. Unlike prophets, patriarchs, or angels who served as mediators of God’s word and presence, Jesus speaks as the incarnate God. This chapter examines the biblical, theological, and historical dimensions of this claim, showing why the Church affirms that Jesus is God.


1. The Biblical Context

1.1 Old Testament Longing for God’s Presence

Moses pleaded, “Show me Your glory” (Exod. 33:18). Yet God replied, “You cannot see My face, for no man shall see Me and live” (Exod. 33:20). Israel experienced God’s presence in veiled forms: the burning bush, the cloud of glory, the tabernacle. The divine essence remained inaccessible.

1.2 Fulfillment in Christ

In the New Testament, this longing is fulfilled in Christ. Paul proclaims, “He is the image of the invisible God” (Col. 1:15). Likewise, Hebrews 1:3 declares, “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His being.” Thus, when Philip requested, “Show us the Father” (John 14:8), Jesus responded that seeing Him was equivalent to beholding the Father.

1.3 Unity of Father and Son

Jesus’ unity with the Father is explicit throughout John’s Gospel:

  • “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30).

  • “Before Abraham was, I AM” (John 8:58).

  • “All that the Father has is mine” (John 16:15).

These are not metaphors of closeness alone, but ontological claims of shared essence.


2. Theological Foundations

2.1 The Trinity and Homoousios

The doctrine of the Trinity articulates that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct persons yet of one essence (homoousios). The Nicene Creed (AD 325) affirmed Christ as “true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father.” John 14:9 therefore functions as a doctrinal anchor: to see the Son is to encounter the Father’s being.

2.2 Patristic Witness

  • Athanasius, in On the Incarnation, argued that only God Himself could save humanity, hence Christ must be fully divine.

  • Augustine, in De Trinitate, emphasized that the Son reveals the Father’s essence, not merely His works.

  • Gregory of Nazianzus proclaimed, “What is not assumed is not healed.” Since Christ assumed full humanity without losing divinity, salvation becomes complete.

2.3 Christ’s Divine Works

The Gospels attest to divine prerogatives exercised by Christ:

  • Forgiveness of sins (Mark 2:5–7), a right belonging only to God.

  • Authority over nature (Mark 4:39–41), calming storms with divine command.

  • Reception of worship (John 20:28; Matt. 28:9), which would be blasphemy if He were not God.

  • Resurrection power (John 11:25), declaring, “I am the resurrection and the life.”


3. Christ as the Revelation of the Father

3.1 Compassion and Mercy

In His healing of lepers, His mercy toward sinners, and His embrace of the marginalized, Jesus reveals the Father’s love.

3.2 Holiness and Justice

In His rebuke of hypocrisy and cleansing of the temple, He embodies the Father’s holiness and justice.

3.3 Sacrificial Love

The cross is the ultimate revelation of the Father’s heart. In giving His Son, the Father reveals His love for the world (John 3:16). Jesus’ obedience unto death displays divine self-giving love.


4. Implications for Faith and Worship

4.1 Worship of Christ as God

Since Jesus reveals the Father, worship directed to Christ is worship of God. This is why the earliest Church prayed in His name and sang hymns exalting Him (Phil. 2:6–11).

4.2 Assurance of Divine Presence

Believers need not search for hidden revelations of God. In Christ, God is fully present. The believer’s relationship with God is secured in the incarnate Son.

4.3 Hermeneutical Lens

Christ becomes the interpretive key to understanding God. Any conception of God must align with His revelation in Jesus Christ. To see Him is to see the Father.


Conclusion

Jesus’ declaration, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father,” is a cornerstone of Christian faith. It reveals that in Him, the invisible God becomes visible, the transcendent becomes immanent, and the unknowable becomes intimately known. To confess Jesus as God is not merely doctrinal precision but the foundation of salvation, worship, and eternal hope. The fullness of deity dwells bodily in Him (Col. 2:9), and in Him the Father is revealed.


References

  • Athanasius. On the Incarnation. St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1998.

  • Augustine. De Trinitate (On the Trinity). Translated by Edmund Hill. New City Press, 1991.

  • Holy Bible, King James Version (KJV).

  • Holy Bible, Amplified Bible (AMP).

  • Kelly, J.N.D. Early Christian Doctrines. Harper & Row, 1978.

  • Oden, Thomas C. Classic Christianity: A Systematic Theology. HarperOne, 2009.

  • The Nicene Creed, Council of Nicaea (325 AD).

  • Torrance, Thomas F. The Trinitarian Faith: The Evangelical Theology of the Ancient Catholic Church. T&T Clark, 1988.

  • Wright, N.T. Jesus and the Victory of God. Fortress Press, 1996.

Jesus Is God: The Revelation of the Invisible God in Flesh

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Introduction

The central claim of Christianity is that Jesus Christ is God incarnate—God revealed in human flesh. This doctrine is not a theological invention of later centuries but arises directly from the witness of Scripture. The apostle Paul, in Colossians 1:15, declares that Christ “is the image of the invisible God” (KJV), underscoring the truth that in Jesus, the eternal, unseen God has made Himself visible and accessible to humanity. This profound reality lies at the heart of Christian faith: the invisible God of eternity entered human history through the person of Jesus Christ, not merely as a messenger, but as God Himself.

Jesus as the Visible Image of the Invisible God

The invisibility of God is affirmed throughout the Old Testament. Exodus 33:20 records the Lord telling Moses, “You cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.” Likewise, 1 Timothy 1:17 refers to God as “the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God.” Humanity, bound by finitude and sin, cannot behold the infinite divine essence directly.

However, Paul teaches in Colossians 1:15 that Jesus Christ is “the image of the invisible God.” The Greek word for “image” (eikōn) conveys more than a mere likeness; it denotes manifestation, representation, and embodiment. Thus, in Jesus, God is not partially revealed but fully disclosed. As the author of Hebrews affirms: “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” (Heb. 1:3, NIV). To see Jesus is to see God Himself—not in a symbolic sense, but in true and personal reality.

The Incarnation: God in Flesh

The doctrine of the Incarnation is the defining mystery of the Christian faith. John 1:14 states with authority: “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth” (NKJV). The eternal Logos, who was with God and was God (John 1:1), became human without ceasing to be divine.

This means that Jesus Christ is not merely a prophet or moral teacher but the eternal God made flesh. In Him, divine transcendence and human existence unite. As Athanasius, the great fourth-century defender of Christ’s divinity, proclaimed: “He became what we are that He might make us what He is.” The Incarnation is therefore both revelation and redemption: revelation because God makes Himself known in Jesus, and redemption because through His death and resurrection, humanity is reconciled to God.

Jesus’ Self-Revelation as God

Jesus’ words and works further affirm His divine identity. In John 14:9, He declared, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” This statement surpasses the authority of any prophet; it asserts that Jesus is the visible manifestation of the invisible Father. Similarly, in John 10:30, Jesus said, “I and the Father are one,” signifying an essential unity of being, not merely purpose.

The miracles of Jesus, His authority over nature, demons, sin, and death, all reveal divine prerogatives. When Jesus forgave sins (Mark 2:5–7), the scribes rightly recognized that such authority belongs to God alone. When He accepted worship (Matthew 14:33; John 20:28), He did not rebuke His followers, for He Himself is worthy of divine honor.

The Theological Significance

The truth that Jesus is God in flesh has profound theological implications. First, it affirms the reliability of divine revelation. God is not distant or unknowable but has spoken in the clearest possible way—by becoming human. Second, it grounds Christian salvation. Only God Himself could bear the full weight of sin and conquer death. Third, it shapes Christian worship and devotion. To worship Christ is to worship God.

As Paul declares in Philippians 2:6–11, Jesus, though “in very nature God,” humbled Himself in the Incarnation and was exalted so that “at the name of Jesus every knee should bow… and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

Conclusion

Jesus Christ is not simply a reflection of God’s glory but the glory of God incarnate. He is the visible image of the invisible God, the eternal Word who became flesh, the full and final revelation of God to humanity. To know Jesus is to know God, to see Jesus is to see God, and to worship Jesus is to worship God. The Christian confession that “Jesus is Lord” (Romans 10:9) is therefore not merely a title of honor but the acknowledgement of His eternal divinity.

In a world longing for truth, hope, and salvation, the message stands unshaken: Jesus is God—the revelation of the invisible made visible, God in flesh for the redemption of the world.


References

  • Athanasius. On the Incarnation. Translated by John Behr. Yonkers, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2011.

  • Holy Bible, King James Version.

  • Holy Bible, New International Version.

  • Holy Bible, New King James Version.

  • Oden, Thomas C. The Word of Life: Systematic Theology, Volume Two. San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1989.

  • Wright, N.T. Jesus and the Victory of God. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996.

TRENDING NOW