I'm afraid that I've been thinking (some will say speculating) about Scripture again.

Anyway, my thoughts have led me to ask a question anew. Could the Church and the Reformers, in rightfully rejecting the RCC claim of Peter's apostolic succession in Matthew 16:17-19, have thrown the baby out with the bath water?

Or, to ask this in another way: Was there a unique and very special blessing, other than the affirmation of his elected faith in the Son of God, bestowed upon Peter by our Lord? I've come to believe that there was, and the blessing has to do with the word of God in Scripture and its canonization.

One does not have to go far in studying the canonization of the New Testament documents before discovering that apostolic witness and authority plays the major role. (among many other tests)

What we find is witness to the apostolate of Peter by the Gospels of Matthew and John. The only witness to the apostolicity of Paul, other than Paul himself, is found in 2 Peter 3:15,16. Paul in turn witnesses to the discipleship of Mark and Luke.

It follows then, that Peter is given by the Spirit of God witness, authorship or apostolic authority for fully 18 of the 27 New Testament books. They are, 1 and 2 Peter, the Gospels of Mark and Luke, the book of Acts and all of the Pauline Epistles! No one can deny that this is an unprecedented blessing, as Peter was given a unique and unspeakable, eternal honor in the participation and presentation of the majority of New Testament Scripture and gift of God's Holy Word to the Church.

Does this make sense to anyone, or am I way out of bounds here?

Denny

Roms 3:22-24

Denny

Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life." [John 6:68]