I am borrowing this title from our late brother, Wayne Jackson. Wayne had a series of lessons under this title in which he challenged the sometimes flawed reasoning of some brethren. When trying to arrive at truth, we must use sound reasoning.
Someone may ask, “Does it matter if the reasoning is flawed as long as the right conclusion is reached?” Absolutely, it matters! First, we have an obligation to uphold doctrine with integrity (Titus 2:7). Second, we are to speak authoritatively (Titus 2:15), which cannot be done with flawed reasoning. In fact, in this passage, Titus is told to “let no one despise” him. The word translated “despise” (periphroneito) literally means to “think around.” In other words, Paul instructed Titus to reason in such a way that no one could “think around” him. Or, to say it colloquially, Paul told Titus not to let anyone “think circles around him.”
That said, a few weeks ago, I preached a sermon entitled, “Was Peter the First Pope?” When I advertised my upcoming sermon, I had numerous Christians answer the title of my lesson with a resounding, “No, Peter could never have been the pope because he was married.” Brethren, while the conclusion is true, the reasoning is flawed and thus chips away at our respect and ability to speak authoritatively.
Of course, Peter was married (Matthew 8:14-15; 1 Corinthians 9:5). I might also add that Catholics are well familiar with these verses. We are not surprising them with information they have never read. But here is why this line of reasoning is invalid. The celibacy of the priesthood within the Roman Catholic Church was not imposed until the Second Lateran Council in A.D. 1139. Consequently, the Catholic Church would not oppose married popes prior to this date, and in fact, had over 30 married popes prior to this decision in A.D. 1139.
So, you see, using this flawed argument against Peter being the first pope would only result in a Catholic saying, “So what? Popes didn’t have to be celibate prior to A.D. 1139.”
Brethren, there are plenty of sound, biblical reasons that argue against Peter being the first pope. We do not need to resort to a flawed argument that allows people to “think around us” and, thus, dismiss us. Let us make certain that not only with this issue but all biblical issues, we are not defending the truth with a broken sword.