AJTC - The Succession of Peter

A couple things to keep in mind when looking at the succession of Peter. First is the history, and precedence of a "seat" of authority in the Jewish religion. In the Old Testament Moses was probably the most well known leader of the Israelites, and he had leaders under him.(1) His position was filled by Joshua when he died.

"So the LORD said to Moses, "Take Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the Spirit, and lay your hand on him. Make him stand before Eleazar the priest and all the congregation, and you shall commission him in their sight. You shall invest him with some of your authority, that all the congregation of the people of Israel may obey." Numbers 27:18-20 (See also Deut. 34:9)

In Matthew 23, Jesus makes reference to this leadership position when He tells the multitudes that "The scribes and the Pharisees 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." This is not the clearest sentence structure so you may want to clarify by using a few different versions(2), but basically what Jesus is saying here, is to respect the position that the Pharisees hold (they sit in "Moses' seat") and do what they bid you in spite of how they act.

If you read the rest of Matthew 23, it is quite obvious that Jesus absolutely despises the Pharisees. He spends the majority of the chapter vigorously warning and insulting them. He calls them blind guides, hypocrites, serpents, brood of vipers, etc. I don't remember anyone (with the exception of the money changers in the temple), receiving as much detestation from our Lord.

It's not because of who they are as people that Christ urged the people to obey them, but rather because of their position in leadership. Jesus did not state this as a request, but rather as an imperative command. He did not take pains to explain what he was saying, but rather seemed to assume that it was common knowledge that the Pharisees were occupying "Moses' seat." This would only be the case if it was also common knowledge that there was a successive seat of leadership which was passed down through the generations, much like the priesthood.(3) It is not unreasonable to assume then, that when Jesus spoke in Mathew 16:18 He was referring the transfer of authority in Isaiah 22:20-22. To further this point, you will see that Matthew 1:1 clearly establishes Jesus as a descendant of David. Jesus, by rights, is the King of the House of David, and will assign a chief steward to rule over the house while the He is in heaven.

Even Judas was in a successive seat that required someone to fill it after he had betrayed Christ. "For," said Peter, "it is written in the book of Psalms, 'May his place be deserted; let there be no one to dwell in it, and, May another take his place of leadership.'"(4) This was one of the first things Peter did after Christ's ascension.

If Peter, who was given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, was indeed chosen to replace the Pharisees (who already had a precedence of succession) in the new church that Jesus was establishing, and if even the betrayer of Christ had to have his chair filled, then how much more important would it have been for Peter to have successors to fill his position?


My Thoughts:

"Those convinced against their will are of the same opinion still."




(1)Exodus 18:25-26
(2) I'm using KJV just so that no one can accuse me of falling into the trap of reading a mis-translated or inaccurate version of the Bible.
(3) Exodus 40:15, Numbers 3:3
(4) Acts 1:20