Sola Scriptura

[Thinkingstuff]

This has been an interesting thread, and there's a lot I could say about the relationship between Church, Scripture and Tradition. But time's short, so I'll make a comment on the issue of Roman primacy. Thinkingstuff quoted Irenaeus to demonstrate that Rome wasn't just like any other congregation:



This quote shows that the Roman church certainly had a primacy of sorts, but looking carefully at his words, this primacy doesn't necessarily entail the same kind of things modern day RCC apologist suppose. Note first that Ireanaeus points to the dual role of Peter and Paul in 'founding' the church without singling out Peter as the alleged sole vicar of Christ. Also, note that the reason given for other churches to agree with Rome is not due to some alleged supremacy of the Roman BISHOP let alone for an alleged charism of infalliblity given to the same, but because at Rome "the apostolic tradition has been ever preserved by the faithful from all parts of the world." Rome had a strong reputation because of the roles of two chief apostles in forming/shaping that church in the capital of the empire and the orthodoxy that was well maintained there by faithful believers from "all parts of the world". Nothing in Irenaeus's statement suggests that such an orthodox maintenance of apostolic tradition would always exist by divine charism into perpetuity, but Rome was definitely looked to at that time as a standard of orthodoxy (for the reasons Ireneaus gave). Indeed, for the first 4-5 centuries the Roman church was generally on the right side of the issues that were debated in ecumenical councils (with perhaps very few exceptions), but this doesn't prove papal supremacy or papal infallibility...though I don't think anyone was actually making those particular arguments here. :smilewinkgrin:

You've made good points here which if you read an early post of mine to Biblicist you would see that I did say in reply to his statement

Quote:
The dominance of Rome was gradual.

This is actually true but not in the sense you mean it. More and More responsibility fell to the Bishop of Rome as thing progressed. Until when Rome fell all that held the west together secularily as well as spiritually was the Bishop in Rome.

The Role of the Papacy did grow a bit. I will agree with your statements here

but because at Rome "the apostolic tradition has been ever preserved by the faithful from all parts of the world." Rome had a strong reputation because of the roles of two chief apostles in forming/shaping that church in the capital of the empire and the orthodoxy that was well maintained there by faithful believers from "all parts of the world".

However, for your point to be valid here

Indeed, for the first 4-5 centuries the Roman church was generally on the right side of the issues that were debated in ecumenical councils (with perhaps very few exceptions)

You will have to admit that for a 1,000 years the Church was on the wrong side of things and thus there was no true orthodoxy over that period of time and the corrupted church of the fourth century which taugh heresy on fundamental issues of the faith was not corrected and thus Jesus words about the Gates of hell were not true.

 

[The Biblicist]

This has been an interesting thread, and there's a lot I could say about the relationship between Church, Scripture and Tradition. But time's short, so I'll make a comment on the issue of Roman primacy. Thinkingstuff quoted Irenaeus to demonstrate that Rome wasn't just like any other congregation:



This quote shows that the Roman church certainly had a primacy of sorts, but looking carefully at his words, this primacy doesn't necessarily entail the same kind of things modern day RCC apologist suppose. Note first that Ireanaeus points to the dual role of Peter and Paul in 'founding' the church without singling out Peter as the alleged sole vicar of Christ. Also, note that the reason given for other churches to agree with Rome is not due to some alleged supremacy of the Roman BISHOP let alone for an alleged charism of infalliblity given to the same, but because at Rome "the apostolic tradition has been ever preserved by the faithful from all parts of the world." Rome had a strong reputation because of the roles of two chief apostles in forming/shaping that church in the capital of the empire and the orthodoxy that was well maintained there by faithful believers from "all parts of the world". Nothing in Irenaeus's statement suggests that such an orthodox maintenance of apostolic tradition would always exist by divine charism into perpetuity, but Rome was definitely looked to at that time as a standard of orthodoxy (for the reasons Ireneaus gave).

Indeed, for the first 4-5 centuries the Roman church was generally on the right side of the issues that were debated in ecumenical councils (with perhaps very few exceptions), but this doesn't prove papal supremacy or papal infallibility...though I don't think anyone was actually making those particular arguments here. :smilewinkgrin:

For the most part, well stated. I do not believe the Roman church was generally on the right side of the issues for the first 4-5 centuries. It went astray on vital issues prior to the fourth century.

 

[The Biblicist]

For the most part, well stated. I do not believe the Roman church was generally on the right side of the issues for the first 4-5 centuries. It went astray on vital issues prior to the fourth century.

Back to the OP which is "sola scriptura." The advocates of rome are fleeing to their source of authority or fallible traditions of men. However, Scriptures deny that Roman Catholicism can possibly be the Apostolic church. There is not Vatican city in the New Testament. There is no marriage between state and church in the New Testament. There is no pope, college of Cardinals in the New Testament. There no justification BEFORE GOD by works in the New Testament. There are no sacraments in the New Testament. There is no teaching that the church makes efficasious the Word of God, sacraments or works in the New Testament. These things are as opposed to the New Testament and the congregations of Christ as ECF is opposed to the Scriptures.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

You will have to admit that for a 1,000 years the Church was on the wrong side of things and thus there was no true orthodoxy over that period of time and the corrupted church of the fourth century which taugh heresy on fundamental issues of the faith was not corrected and thus Jesus words about the Gates of hell were not true.

How so specifically? (Also I don't believe I said the fourth century church was corrupted or that it taught heresy on fundamental issures of the faith)

 

[Thinkingstuff]

How so specifically? (Also I don't believe I said the fourth century church was corrupted or that it taught heresy on fundamental issures of the faith)

Didn't you say

Indeed, for the first 4-5 centuries the Roman church was generally on the right side of the issues that were debated in ecumenical councils (with perhaps very few exceptions)

So wouldn't that mean that after 5 century the "Roman Church" would be generally on the wrong side of the issues which were fundamental to the faith?

 

[lakeside]

Protestants, OK, so you don't believe Peter was in Rome, so what, I do believe it because Peter handed over the episcopate to Linus the 2nd Pope of the Catholic Church in ROME, the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church was formed way before Constantine was ever thought of. You anti-Catholics let your prejudice override reason.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

So wouldn't that mean that after 5 century the "Roman Church" would be generally on the wrong side of the issues which were fundamental to the faith?

Nope--that doesn't logically follow, nor is that what I meant. But even it it was, that would not mean that orthodoxy vanished from the Church for the next thousand years, because Rome is not the sole repository of orthodoxy in the Church. Local churches may err. Jesus never promised the gates of Hell would not prevail against Rome or any other particular congregation.

 

[lakeside]

Nope--that doesn't logically follow, nor is that what I meant. But even it it was, that would not mean that orthodoxy vanished from the Church for the next thousand years, because Rome is not the sole repository of orthodoxy in the Church. Local churches may err. Jesus never promised the gates of Hell would not prevail against Rome or any other particular congregation.

Back to Matt.16:15-19. you mention in Matt 16:18 "that the gates of hell shall not prevail against my church' . Well Thomas in that verse Jesus was speaking to St.Peter not to one of your Protestant ministers.
Jesus taught His Apostles for three years plus , nobody else received the complete instructions for the "Fullness of the Christian Faith", only His apostles and Jesus commanded them to go out into the whole world and teach everything that he taught them, Luke 10:16 , it is you Doubting Thomas, you, and all other Protestants that reject the teachings of the apostles . It is you and all other Protestants that reject the only Church that has these qualities as explained in that verse. In rejecting His Church and His Apostolic Teachings you are also rejecting Jesus and the Father who sent Him.

 

[The Biblicist]

Back to Matt.16:15-19. you mention in Matt 16:18 "that the gates of hell shall not prevail against my church' . Well Thomas in that verse Jesus was speaking to St.Peter not to one of your Protestant ministers.

He was not addressing Peter as an individual but as a representative of the kind of disciples He uses to build His congregations.

1. The Question is directed toward a plural "you" with Peter given the response

2. The same promise is directed toward PLURAL "you" - Mt. 18:17-18

3. Peter characterizes the church to be composed of "lively stones" - 1 Pet. 2:5

4. Peter is subjected to the church for his actions - Acts 11:1-10

5. In church council James presides with Peter there - Acts 15

6. Paul has superior apostleship over gentile congregations (Rome) - Gal. 3:10

7. Nowhere does Peter claim any position even remotely similar to a Pope

8. Peter denes his position is any greater than any other Elder - 1 Pet. 5:1-3

 

[lakeside]

Matt. to Rev. - Peter is mentioned 155 times and the rest of apostles combined are only mentioned 130 times. Peter is also always listed first except in 1 Cor. 3:22 and Gal. 2:9 (which are obvious exceptions to the rule).

Matt. 10:2; Mark 1:36; 3:16; Luke 6:14-16; Acts 1:3; 2:37; 5:29 - these are some of many examples where Peter is mentioned first among the apostles.

Matt. 14:28-29 - only Peter has the faith to walk on water. No other man in Scripture is said to have the faith to walk on water. This faith ultimately did not fail.

Matt. 16:16, Mark 8:29; John 6:69 - Peter is first among the apostles to confess the divinity of Christ.

Matt. 16:17 - Peter alone is told he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation from God the Father.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus builds the Church only on Peter, the rock, with the other apostles as the foundation and Jesus as the Head.

Matt. 16:19 - only Peter receives the keys, which represent authority over the Church and facilitate dynastic succession to his authority.

Matt. 17:24-25 - the tax collector approaches Peter for Jesus' tax. Peter is the spokesman for Jesus. He is the Vicar of Christ.

Matt. 17:26-27 - Jesus pays the half-shekel tax with one shekel, for both Jesus and Peter. Peter is Christ's representative on earth.

Matt. 18:21 - in the presence of the disciples, Peter asks Jesus about the rule of forgiveness. One of many examples where Peter takes a leadership role among the apostles in understanding Jesus' teachings.

Matt. 19:27 - Peter speaks on behalf of the apostles by telling Jesus that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 10:28 - here also, Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples by declaring that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 11:21 - Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples in remembering Jesus' curse on the fig tree.

Mark 14:37 - at Gethsemane, Jesus asks Peter, and no one else, why he was asleep. Peter is accountable to Jesus for his actions on behalf of the apostles because he has been appointed by Jesus as their leader.

 

[lakeside]

Mark 16:7 - Peter is specified by an angel as the leader of the apostles as the angel confirms the resurrection of Christ.

Luke 5:3 – Jesus teaches from Peter’s boat which is metaphor for the Church. Jesus guides Peter and the Church into all truth.

Luke 5:4,10 - Jesus instructs Peter to let down the nets for a catch, and the miraculous catch follows. Peter, the Pope, is the "fisher of men."

Luke 7:40-50- Jesus addresses Peter regarding the rule of forgiveness and Peter answers on behalf of the disciples. Jesus also singles Peter out and judges his conduct vis-à-vis the conduct of the woman who anointed Him.

Luke 8:45 - when Jesus asked who touched His garment, it is Peter who answers on behalf of the disciples.

Luke 8:51; 9:28; 22:8; Acts 1:13; 3:1,3,11; 4:13,19; 8:14 - Peter is always mentioned before John, the disciple whom Jesus loved.

Luke 9:28;33 - Peter is mentioned first as going to mountain of transfiguration and the only one to speak at the transfiguration.

Luke 12:41 - Peter seeks clarification of a parable on behalf on the disciples. This is part of Peter's formation as the chief shepherd of the flock after Jesus ascended into heaven.

Luke 22:31-32 - Jesus prays for Peter alone, that his faith may not fail, and charges him to strengthen the rest of the apostles.

Luke 24:12, John 20:4-6 - John arrived at the tomb first but stopped and waited for Peter. Peter then arrived and entered the tomb first.

Luke 24:34 - the two disciples distinguish Peter even though they both had seen the risen Jesus the previous hour. See Luke 24:33.

John 6:68 - after the disciples leave, Peter is the first to speak and confess his belief in Christ after the Eucharistic discourse.

John 13:6-9 - Peter speaks out to the Lord in front of the apostles concerning the washing of feet.

John 13:36; 21:18 - Jesus predicts Peter's death. Peter was martyred at Rome in 67 A.D. Several hundred years of papal successors were also martyred.

John 21:2-3,11 - Peter leads the fishing and his net does not break. The boat (the "barque of Peter") is a metaphor for the Church.

John 21:7 - only Peter got out of the boat and ran to the shore to meet Jesus. Peter is the earthly shepherd leading us to God.

John 21:15 - in front of the apostles, Jesus asks Peter if he loves Jesus "more than these," which refers to the other apostles. Peter is the head of the apostolic see.

John 21:15-17 - Jesus charges Peter to "feed my lambs," "tend my sheep," "feed my sheep." Sheep means all people, even the apostles.

Acts 1:13 - Peter is first when entering upper room after our Lord's ascension. The first Eucharist and Pentecost were given in this room.

Acts 1:15 - Peter initiates the selection of a successor to Judas right after Jesus ascended into heaven, and no one questions him. Further, if the Church needed a successor to Judas, wouldn't it need one to Peter? Of course.

Acts 2:14 - Peter is first to speak for the apostles after the Holy Spirit descended upon them at Pentecost. Peter is the first to preach the Gospel.

Acts 2:38 - Peter gives first preaching in the early Church on repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

Acts 3:1,3,4 - Peter is mentioned first as going to the Temple to pray.

Acts 3:6-7 - Peter works the first healing of the apostles.

Acts 3:12-26, 4:8-12 - Peter teaches the early Church the healing through Jesus and that there is no salvation other than Christ.

Acts 5:3 - Peter declares the first anathema of Ananias and Sapphira which is ratified by God, and brings about their death. Peter exercises his binding authority.

Acts 5:15 - Peter's shadow has healing power. No other apostle is said to have this power.

Acts 8:14 - Peter is mentioned first in conferring the sacrament of confirmation.

Acts 8:20-23 - Peter casts judgment on Simon's quest for gaining authority through the laying on of hands. Peter exercises his binding and loosing authority.

Acts 9:32-34 - Peter is mentioned first among the apostles and works the healing of Aeneas.

Acts 9:38-40 - Peter is mentioned first among the apostles and raises Tabitha from the dead.

Acts 10:5 - Cornelius is told by an angel to call upon Peter. Angels are messengers of God. Peter was granted this divine vision.

Acts 10:34-48, 11:1-18 - Peter is first to teach about salvation for all (Jews and Gentiles).

Acts 12:5 - this verse implies that the "whole Church" offered "earnest prayers" for Peter, their leader, during his imprisonment.

Acts 12:6-11 - Peter is freed from jail by an angel. He is the first object of divine intervention in the early Church.

Acts 15:7-12 - Peter resolves the first doctrinal issue on circumcision at the Church's first council at Jerusalem, and no one questions him. After Peter the Papa spoke, all were kept silent.

Acts 15:12 - only after Peter (the Pope) speaks do Paul and Barnabas (bishops) speak in support of Peter's definitive teaching.

Acts 15:13-14 - then James speaks to further acknowledge Peter's definitive teaching. "Simeon (Peter) has related how God first visited..."

Rom. 15:20 - Paul says he doesn't want to build on "another man's foundation" referring to Peter, who built the Church in Rome.

1 Cor. 9:5 – Peter is distinguished from the rest of the apostles and brethren of the Lord.

1 Cor. 15:4-8 - Paul distinguishes Jesus' post-resurrection appearances to Peter from those of the other apostles. Christ appeared “to Cephas, then to the twelve.”

Gal.1:18 - Paul spends fifteen days with Peter privately before beginning his ministry, even after Christ's Revelation to Paul.

1 Peter 5:1 - Peter acts as the chief bishop by "exhorting" all the other bishops and elders of the Church.

1 Peter 5:13 - Some Protestants argue against the Papacy by trying to prove Peter was never in Rome. First, this argument is irrelevant to whether Jesus instituted the Papacy. Secondly, this verse demonstrates that Peter was in fact in Rome. Peter writes from "Babylon" which was a code name for Rome during these days of persecution. See, for example, Rev. 14:8, 16:19, 17:5, 18:2,10,21, which show that "Babylon" meant Rome. Rome was the "great city" of the New Testament period. Because Rome during this age was considered the center of the world, the Lord wanted His Church to be established in Rome.

2 Peter 1:14 - Peter writes about Jesus' prediction of Peter's death, embracing the eventual martyrdom that he would suffer.

2 Peter 3:16 - Peter is making a judgment on the proper interpretation of Paul's letters. Peter is the chief shepherd of the flock.

Matt. 23:11; Mark 9:35; 10:44 - yet Peter, as the first, humbled himself to be the last and servant of all servants.


taken from WWW Scripture Catholic .com

 

[The Biblicist]

Matt. to Rev. - Peter is mentioned 155 times and the rest of apostles combined are only mentioned 130 times. Peter is also always listed first except in 1 Cor. 3:22 and Gal. 2:9 (which are obvious exceptions to the rule).

Matt. 10:2; Mark 1:36; 3:16; Luke 6:14-16; Acts 1:3; 2:37; 5:29 - these are some of many examples where Peter is mentioned first among the apostles.

Matt. 14:28-29 - only Peter has the faith to walk on water. No other man in Scripture is said to have the faith to walk on water. This faith ultimately did not fail.

Matt. 16:16, Mark 8:29; John 6:69 - Peter is first among the apostles to confess the divinity of Christ.

Matt. 16:17 - Peter alone is told he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation from God the Father.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus builds the Church only on Peter, the rock, with the other apostles as the foundation and Jesus as the Head.

Matt. 16:19 - only Peter receives the keys, which represent authority over the Church and facilitate dynastic succession to his authority.

Matt. 17:24-25 - the tax collector approaches Peter for Jesus' tax. Peter is the spokesman for Jesus. He is the Vicar of Christ.

Matt. 17:26-27 - Jesus pays the half-shekel tax with one shekel, for both Jesus and Peter. Peter is Christ's representative on earth.

Matt. 18:21 - in the presence of the disciples, Peter asks Jesus about the rule of forgiveness. One of many examples where Peter takes a leadership role among the apostles in understanding Jesus' teachings.

Matt. 19:27 - Peter speaks on behalf of the apostles by telling Jesus that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 10:28 - here also, Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples by declaring that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 11:21 - Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples in remembering Jesus' curse on the fig tree.

Mark 14:37 - at Gethsemane, Jesus asks Peter, and no one else, why he was asleep. Peter is accountable to Jesus for his actions on behalf of the apostles because he has been appointed by Jesus as their leader.

So your response is merely numerical listings? You provide nothing but scriptures that demand YOUR inferences. However, the hard line fact is that James was in charge of the first church cousel in Acts 15 and Peter was present. That very fact shows that your INFERENCES are not true to facts.

 

[lakeside]

Biblicist, i'll grt back with you on the issue of James, of course you are again wong in your understanding about James and Peter.
These two verses have to do with a closed post that i never got a chance to correct you, strange how you people conveniently close your threads.
Rom. 4:9-17 - Paul provides further discussion that righteousness God seeks in us does not come from Mosaic law, but through faith. But notice that Paul also never says “faith alone.”

Rom. 9:31-32 - righteousness is pursued through faith, not works of the law. Again, "works of law" does not mean "good works."

Rom. 11:6,11 - justification is no longer based on "works" of the law, but on the grace of Christ. Why? Because salvation is also for the Gentiles.

 

[lakeside]

So your response is merely numerical listings? You provide nothing but scriptures that demand YOUR inferences. However, the hard line fact is that James was in charge of the first church cousel in Acts 15 and Peter was present. That very fact shows that your INFERENCES are not true to facts.

Biblicist, if James was the leader, as you try to proclaim in Acts 15 ,then why aren't his successors the head of Christ's One Universal Church ?

In Acts, Peter gave the sermon at Pentecost (Acts 1:14-36), led the replacing of Judas (1:22), worked the first miracle of the Church age (3:6-12), and condemned Ananias and Sapphira (5:2-11). His mere shadow worked miracles (5:15); he was the first person after Christ to raise the dead (9:40), and he took the gospel to the Gentiles (Acts 10). Peter’s name appears at least 54 times in Acts; James appears a total of four times.

 

[DHK]

Biblicist, if James was the leader, as you try to proclaim in Acts 15 ,then why aren't his successors the head of Christ's One Universal Church ?

In Acts, Peter gave the sermon at Pentecost (Acts 1:14-36), led the replacing of Judas (1:22), worked the first miracle of the Church age (3:6-12), and condemned Ananias and Sapphira (5:2-11). His mere shadow worked miracles (5:15); he was the first person after Christ to raise the dead (9:40), and he took the gospel to the Gentiles (Acts 10). Peter’s name appears at least 54 times in Acts; James appears a total of four times.

Acts is divided into two portions. From chapter one to twelve the emphasis is on Peter's ministry; from chapter 13 to the end the emphasis is on Paul's ministry. Why not concentrate on the last half instead of the first half?

 

[lakeside]

DHK, i was answering to The Biblicists post, where he was trying to buffalo us into believing that James had more clout than Peter.

 

[The Biblicist]

Biblicist, if James was the leader, as you try to proclaim in Acts 15 ,then why aren't his successors the head of Christ's One Universal Church ?

Neither has successors in any church

Peter’s name appears at least 54 times in Acts; James appears a total of four times.

Paul's name occurs 129 times in the book of Acts and another 23 times as Saul or a total of 152 times to Peter's 54

Paul wrote 13 books but Peter only wrote 2.

Paul is the subject from Acts 8-9,11-28 or a total of 19 chapters in the book of Acts but Peter only Acts 1-6,10, 11:18 or a total of 8 chapters

Paul's name occurs a total of 159 times in the New Testament plus the name "Saul" another 23 times for a total of 182 times to Peter's 156 times

Paul is the Apostle to the Gentiles including the church at Rome but Peter is to the circumicison of Jews (Gal. 3:10).

Peter never worked any greater miracles than Paul or any other apostle.


The bottom line is when the ONLY church council is called at Jerusalem it is James not Peter that presides. Tell mr, in Rome today, if a church council was called would the Pope preside or a lower bishop WITH the Pope present and submitted to the leadership of a lower Bishop? Catholicism is Biblically bankrupt

 

[The Biblicist]

Neither has successors in any church



Paul's name occurs 129 times in the book of Acts and another 23 times as Saul or a total of 152 times to Peter's 54

Paul wrote 13 books but Peter only wrote 2.

Paul is the subject from Acts 8-9,11-28 or a total of 19 chapters in the book of Acts but Peter only Acts 1-6,10, 11:18 or a total of 8 chapters

Paul's name occurs a total of 159 times in the New Testament plus the name "Saul" another 23 times for a total of 182 times to Peter's 156 times

Paul is the Apostle to the Gentiles including the church at Rome but Peter is to the circumicison of Jews (Gal. 3:10).

Peter never worked any greater miracles than Paul or any other apostle.


The bottom line is when the ONLY church council is called at Jerusalem it is James not Peter that presides. Tell mr, in Rome today, if a church council was called would the Pope preside or a lower bishop WITH the Pope present and submitted to the leadership of a lower Bishop? Catholicism is Biblically bankrupt

Acts 15:13 And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me:
14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
15 And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
17 That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.
19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:


The word "sentence" translates the Greek term "krino" and is translated 88 times "judge" and refers to the "sentence" pronounced by a Judge hearing a case and so it is translated "sentence."

This makes the doctrine of the Papacy null and void! James not Peter is the one sitting in judgement over this church council.

Second, This "sentence" by James is not the decree of a Pope but the judgement of the "whole church" under the leadership of the Apostles and elders at Jerusalem:

22 ¶ Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren:
23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren

If there was any such thing as the PAPAL sense of Peter's primacy, then Peter not James would be making this "sentence."

 

[DHK]

DHK, i was answering to The Biblicists post, where he was trying to buffalo us into believing that James had more clout than Peter.

Well, what did happen at the Jerusalem? They came together to settle the dispute whether or not keeping the law and circumcision should be required for salvation. This is the definition of legalism, and also salvation by works. Both Peter and Paul were there, along with James.

And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. (Acts 15:6)

First they heard from Peter:
And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. (Acts 15:7)

Then they heard from Paul:
Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them. (Acts 15:12)

And then finally, they heard from James:
And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: (Acts 15:13)

James speaks longer than any of the others, and verse 19 is the key verse:
Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: (Acts 15:19)
--The other apostles (Peter and Paul), had their input, but the decision was James' to make. His sentence or judgment was "that we trouble them not,"
But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. (Acts 15:20)
--Those were the stipulations that they wanted to put on the Gentiles, and they were not necessary for salvation. They were for sanctification. These are the same things that we as believers do today. We don't worship idols. We avoid fornication. And most of us don't eat meat with blood in it (like German blood sausage). That was a principle that went as far back as Lev.17:11.
The important fact here is that it was James that gave the judgment. It was James that was the Pastor of the church at Jerusalem. It was not Peter. James had more influence than Peter here, for James was the pastor of this church at Jerusalem.
Apollos became the pastor of the church at Corinth.
Timothy became the pastor of the church at Ephesus.
Titus became the pastor of the church at Crete.
And at Rome the most influential people that had a part in the early church were Priscilla and Aquila who had a church in their house. It is possible that the church started there. But Peter wasn't there, and neither was Paul.

3 Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus:
4 Who have for my life laid down their own necks: unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles.
5 Likewise greet the church that is in their house. (Romans 16:3-5)

 

[lakeside]

Paul, Barnabas, and James all reinforced and agreed with Peter’s declaration, albeit in different ways. The first two related “the signs and wonders God” had been working “among the Gentiles” (v. 12). James pointed first to the words of Peter and then to the Prophets (vs. 14-15). Those who claim James’s speech was the definitive one point to the language in verse 19 (“Therefore it is my judgement . . .”) as evidence for James’s primacy. Yet James is simply suggesting a way of implementing what Peter had already definitively expressed. “Peter speaks as the head and spokesman of the apostolic Church,” He formulates a doctrinal judgment about the means of salvation, whereas James takes the floor after him to suggest a pastoral plan for inculturating the gospel in mixed communities where Jewish and Gentile believers live side by side (15:13-21).