Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

When it refers to a spiritual meaning, the word ROCK is used to describe God as creator or Saviour! IT IS NEVER USED TO DESCRIBE A MAN!

(Deu 32:1 KJV) Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth.

(Deu 32:2 KJV) My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass: (Deu 32:3 KJV) Because I will publish the name of the LORD: ascribe ye greatness unto our God. (Deu 32:4 KJV) He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he. Who is the ROCK? God is, He is our support, our Saviour, our Creator.NOT A MAN. (Deu 32:18 KJV) Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee. GOD is the ROCK, the Creator, not a man. (Deu 32:30 KJV) How should one chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight, except their Rock had sold them, and the LORD had shut them up? (Deu 32:31 KJV) For their rock is not as our Rock, even our enemies themselves being judges.

Who is the ROCK? It is GOD, not a man!

(1 Sam 2:2 KJV) There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God. Who is the ROCK? It is not a man, it is GOD! (2 Sam 22:2 KJV) And he said, The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; (2 Sam 22:3 KJV) The God of my rock; in him will I trust: he is my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my high tower, and my refuge, my saviour; thou savest me from violence.

Who is the ROCK? It is GOD. NOT a sinful man who denied his God, but GOD Himself.

Peter is NO ONE'S shield.

Peter is NO ONE'S high tower.

Peter is NO ONE'S refuge.

and Peter is NO ONE'S Saviour! To say anything like those statements are true of a sinful man is blasphemy.

Most Catholics never read the section before or after this part:

(Mat 16:18 KJV) And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

That is one reason some people do not find it obvious.

Here is what it says::

(Mat 16:13 KJV) When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

(Mat 16:14 KJV) And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

(Mat 16:15 KJV) He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

(Mat 16:16 KJV) And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

(Mat 16:17 KJV) And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

What was the original topic of discussion?

(Mat 16:13 KJV) When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

Jesus asked,

That was the topic of discussion.

What was the response?

(Mat 16:14 KJV) And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

They were all over the place, it seems that there was not many who were catching on to exactly who Jesus was.

So, what was the next sentence?

(Mat 16:15 KJV) He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

(Mat 16:16 KJV) And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Jesus asked the disciples themselves what THEY thought, not just one disciple, but ALL of them.

Peter gave the best answer, that Jesus IS the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Right from there, many people ignore what was just said, and only concentrate on what comes next.

However, that is where the error lies, in ignoring what was just said.

It is like explaining to someone that people put sodas in the soda machine first, then act surprised when soda comes out of the machine when you put money into it. People forget what happened first: someone loaded the machine.

In the same respect, Jesus set the tone for the conversation: WHO IS HE?

Peter had it right: Jesus IS the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

That was the point of what Jesus was saying. That He was the Christ.

That was what He just said!

We all know what comes next, and it is because people ignore what was just said, that they get this part wrong:The Context of the ongoing conversation is important:

(Mat 16:17 KJV) And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

(Mat 16:18 KJV) And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Jesus explains that Peter's revelation did not come from His logic, it came from God the Father Himself. This type of instruction was done on a spiritual level, not fleshly, it was something that Peter would have never figured out for himself.

What did Jesus say next? Peter is blessed because he was BLESSED with this information.

What information?

That Jesus IS the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

That is the point.

What Jesus said next is the most misused verse in the entire New Testament.

(Mat 16:18 KJV) And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Peter and Rock. Is Peter the rock spoken of here, or is the IMPORTANT POINT THAT GOD REVEALED TO PETER the rock?

17 And [ 2532] Jesus [2424] answered [ 611] (5679) and said [ 2036] (5627) unto him [846], Blessed [ 3107] art thou [ 1488] (5748), Simon [ 4613] Barjona [ 920]: for [ 3754] flesh [ 4561] and [ 2532] blood [ 129] hath [ 601] [0] not [3756] revealed [601] (5656) it unto thee [4671], but [ 235] my [ 3450] Father [ 3962] which [ 3588] is in [ 1722] heaven [ 3772].

18 And [ 1161] I say [ 3004] (5719) also [ 2504] unto thee [ 4671], That [ 3754] thou [ 4771] art [ 1488] (5748) Peter [ 4074], and [ 2532] upon [ 1909] this [ 5026] rock [ 4073] I will build [ 3618] (5692) my [ 3450] church [ 1577]; and [ 2532] the gates [ 4439] of hell [ 86] shall [ 2729] [0] not [ 3756] prevail against [ 2729] (5692) it [ 846].

18 kagw [ 2504] de [ 1161] soi [ 4671] legw [ 3004] (5719) oti [ 3754] su [ 4771] ei [ 1488] (5748) petroj [ 4074] kai [ 2532] epi [ 1909] tauth [ 3778] th [ 3588] petra [ 4073] oikodomhsw [ 3618] (5692) mou [ 3450] thn [ 3588] ekklhsian [ 1577] kai [ 2532] pulai [ 4439] adou [ 86] ou [ 3756] katiscusousin [ 2729] (5692) authj [ 846]

Peter = 4074 petroj Petros pet'-ros apparently a primary word; TDNT - 6:100,835; n pr m AV - Peter 161, stone 1; 162 Peter = "a rock or a stone" 1) one of the twelve disciples of Jesus

rock = 4073 petra petra pet'-ra from the same as 4074; TDNT - 6:95,834; n f AV - rock 16; 16 1) a rock, cliff or ledge 1a) a projecting rock, crag, rocky ground 1b) a rock, a large stone 1c) metaph. a man like a rock, by reason of his firmness and strength of soul

Due to what Jesus was talking about, the ROCK had to be the truth Peter had revealed to him from God the Father, that JESUS IS THE CHRIST, THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD.

There is no other sensible explanation of the verse unless it is twisted to make someone believe what is not there in the text. Because of all the previous uses of the word ROCK to describe the attributes of God as Creator, Deliverer, Saviour, to ascribe those attributes to a man, that is a total misunderstanding of Scripture.

Too many people form what they believe around their doctrine, and then interpret the Bible in the light of that doctrine.

That is wrong. Doctrine should come from what the Bible clearly says, and then base their doctrine on what it clearly says!

The Bible nowhere grants Peter any authority that is not also given to the other disciples.

Jesus is also called the ROCK or CORNER STONE in many other verses, but PETER IS NOT!

Notice what is said in this passage::

(Mat 7:24 KJV) Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

(Mat 7:25 KJV) And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

(Mat 7:26 KJV) And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:

(Mat 7:27 KJV) And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

What is it that a person built their house upon and survived? A ROCK.

If a person is foolish, what does a person build their house upon? SAND. What did Jesus say that those who rejected his words built upon? SAND.

If the foolish reject Jesus and build upon SAND, then those who BELIEVE and RECEIVE what Jesus said, which of the two men is Jesus comparing them to, the SAND builder or the ROCK builder?

It is CLEAR that Jesus is referring to those who BELIEVE on HIM and trust HIM as one who builds their house UPON A ROCK.

That is JESUS own words several chapters before Peter's declaration.

This is repeated in more detail in Luke:: (Luke 6:47 KJV) Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will show you to whom he is like:

(Luke 6:48 KJV) He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.

(Luke 6:49 KJV) But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.

Note again, the PERSON who believes on the WORD OF GOD, is likened to someone building their house UPON A ROCK.

So, what does the reference to A ROCK in ALL these cases refer to?

Is it a MAN or is it the WORD OF GOD revealed?

This is not difficult to read, but too many people have been taught to interpret the passage in Matthew in such a way to twist what is actually being said, and these alternate passages repeat the same basic message: THAT GOD is what matters, not men or a single man.

Paul wrote in Romans 9:: (Rom 9:33 KJV) As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

Who is Paul speaking of when he SAYS A ROCK of offense? A Stumbling stone? It is Jesus, and refers to those who refuse to believe.

(1 Cor 10:4 KJV) And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Who is the ROCK? It plainly says the ROCK WAS JESUS, not Peter.

There is no other place where Peter is praised or given any authority, in fact Peter is rebuked for his actions by other persons.

(Gal 2:11 KJV) But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

(Gal 2:12 KJV) For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.

(Gal 2:13 KJV) And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.

(Gal 2:14 KJV) But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

If PETER is the ROCK of the Church, then WHO IS PAUL to REBUKE PETER?

Paul clearly rebuked Peter in this passage because PETER was WRONG and at FAULT!

The ROCK of the Church CANNOT HAVE ANY FAULT, or else there is NO FOUNDATION to stand upon but error!!

Paul was the Apostle to the Gentiles, not Peter, also. While the book of Acts clearly tells Peter to witness to a Gentile first, Peter is NOWHERE granted any position or title that PETER is the Apostle to the Gentiles, but PAUL clearly IS named as SUCH!

(Rom 15:15 KJV) Nevertheless, brethren, I have written the more boldly unto you in some sort, as putting you in mind, because of the grace that is given to me of God,

(Rom 15:16 KJV) That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

The Book of Galatians is the clearest refutation to many false doctrines concerning this::

(Gal 2:1 KJV) Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also.

(Gal 2:2 KJV) And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.

Now, read the next passage carefully:: WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY??

(Gal 2:7 KJV) But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

(Gal 2:8 KJV) (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)

THE GOSPEL OF THE UNCIRCUMCISION WAS GIVEN TO PAUL, NOT PETER.

PETER WAS TO BE THE APOSTLE TO THE JEWS.

(Eph 3:1 KJV) For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,

WHO WAS? PAUL was, not Peter.

(Eph 3:8 KJV) Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

WHO WAS?? Paul was!!

(1 Tim 2:7 KJV) Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

WHO IS A TEACHER OF THE GENTILES?

Paul is! NOT Peter, every time Peter is mentioned as to WHAT PEOPLE Peter is to be associated with it is the JEWS, WITH ONLY ONE EXCEPTION, and that is Acts chapter 10.

Only ONCE, while PAUL is repeatedly and openly called or referred to as the Apostle of the Gentiles.

In fact, there might even be more references to PAUL witnessing to Jews then there are references to PETER witnessing to Gentiles! And this from the man who is KNOWN as THE APOSTLE OF THE GENTILES!

(Acts 9:19 KJV) And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.

(Acts 9:20 KJV) And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.

(Acts 9:21 KJV) But all that heard him were amazed, and said; Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests?

(Acts 9:22 KJV) But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ.

Acts 13:1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. 2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. 3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. 4 So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus. 5 And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had also John to their minister.

Acts 14:1 And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed. 2 But the unbelieving Jews stirred up the Gentiles, and made their minds evil affected against the brethren.

Acts 17:1 Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: 2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,

Acts 17:(Acts 17:10 KJV) And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.

(Acts 18:4 KJV) And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

(Acts 18:5 KJV) And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ.

(Acts 20:21 KJV) Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.

(2 Tim 1:11 KJV) Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.

(2 Tim 4:17 KJV) Notwithstanding the Lord stood with me, and strengthened me; that by me the preaching might be fully known, and that all the Gentiles might hear: and I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion.

Strengthened who? PETER?? NO! Paul!

The doctrines of Peter being the ROCK are clearly not supported by Scripture.

That cannot be denied by anyone who knows how to read for themselves.

(Acts 17:10 KJV) And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.

(Acts 17:11 KJV) These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

(Acts 17:12 KJV) Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

Neither did Jesus rename Peter, he clearly called Peter a stone. To believe otherwise means you believe Jesus changed the subject of His being the Messiah. Jesus entire passage was n the Church, His founding of it being the Messiah, and the fact that HIS church would have no end.

It had NOTHING to do with a sinful man being any sort of a foundation. The only foundation for the Church was Jesus Christ Himself.

Luke 6:46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?

47 Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will show you to whom he is like:

48 He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.

Jesus clearly says HE is the rock that the man built his house upon, not Peter.

What did Paul say about building upon a MAN'S foundational work?

(Rom 15:20 KJV) Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation:

Paul said he would NOT go anywhere another man had alreayd preached. Since we KNOW Peter was in Rome after Paul, and they may have met there, Peter surely would have known this verse and this course of action and would NOT have built upon Paul's work in Rome.

(1 Cor 3:10 KJV) According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Paul makes it clear: The FOUNDATION of the Church is JESUS CHRIST, not Peter.

(Eph 2:20 KJV) And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

In that last passage, ALL the Apostles are called foundations, NOT JUST PETER, and it is CLEAR:: Jesus Christ is the Chief Cornerstone, NOT PETER, and ALL the Apostles are given the same rank and status, and PETER is NOT NAMED ONCE.

(Gal 2:7 KJV) But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

(Gal 2:8 KJV) (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)

(Gal 2:9 KJV) And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

And Again, Paul clearly states PAUL is the Apostle to the Uncircumcision, and also noteworthy, in Gal 2:9, Look again what PAUL said::

(Gal 2:9 KJV) And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

Paul called 3 men, 3 Apostles the pillars of the Church, 3 men, not just Peter!!

Like I said before: Doctrine needs to be based on the Bible and what it says. People who read the Bible and interpret the Bible in light of their doctrine are in error. The Bible should tell you what your doctrine is, instead of your doctrine telling you what the Bible clearly says.

There are just too many ways to Biblically defeat the doctrine of Peter's supremacy in the Church. He WAS an Apostle, and that is greater than I ever will be, but as far as the FOUNDER or LEADER ALONE of the Church, someone who is considered the foundation of the Christian Church in Europe or something, that is just not Biblical.

You also just showed you do not know your Bible when you said this:

Christ did NOT state to refer to or consult Scripture for disputes and correction. He said to go to the Church as It is the final authority in Christianity.

Well, just what was Jesus doing here in this collection of verses then, if not using SCRIPTURE as the final authority on faith and morals?

(Mat 12:3 KJV) But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;

(Mat 12:5 KJV) Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?

(Mat 19:4 KJV) And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,

(Mat 21:16 KJV) And said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?

(Mat 21:42 KJV) Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?

(Mat 22:31 KJV) But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,

(Mark 2:25 KJV) And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him?

(Mark 12:10 KJV) And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner:

(Mark 12:26 KJV) And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?

(Luke 4:16 KJV) And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.

(Luke 6:3 KJV) And Jesus answering them said, Have ye not read so much as this, what David did, when himself was an hungered, and they which were with him;

Jesus used Scriptue to defeat Satan, not the teachings of the Synagogue, nor the teachings of a future Church that we are disputing about:

(Mat 4:4 KJV) But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

(Mat 4:7 KJV) Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

(Mat 4:10 KJV) Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Paul's statement of the Church being the pillar and ground of the truth in 1 Timothy 3:15 is NOT the subject of what you claimed, either:

(1 Tim 3:15 KJV) But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

IT IS GOD that is the Pillar and ground of truth, and it is the SPIRITUAL Church that it is referring to, not any physical building, nor a any sinful man's creation of a denomination.

=======================

Additional thoughts: It gets worse for the religious. Jesus is not even talking about the ekklesia of the present administration. How could he? The Mystery of the Body of Christ was hidden in God. It was not revealed until Paul received the Revelation from God. How can we force the BOC, the Church of this present dispensation, into a time and revelation that is primarily about Israel?

Matthew 16:19-20 (ASV) 19 I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 20 Then charged he the disciples that they should tell no man that he was the Christ.

What do keys do? They unlock or open. What were they to? The Kingdom of Heaven. What is the KOH? It is an Earthly Kingdom from Heaven, Jewish and exclusive in character, national in its aspect, subject of many OT prophecies, with Jesus as the King. It is the primary theme of Matthew�s Gospel from start to finish. So, how do we force a Christian denomination into that?

Note carefully in Acts that Peter did not go to the nations, but rather, almost exclusively to the Jews - examine Acts for yourself and note who is addressed and where by Peter. He along with the apostles continued following Jewish Law and traditions which caused conflict as Paul started his ministry to the Gentiles. It took a supernatural vision in Acts 10 for Peter to reluctantly share with a Gentile, who just as easily could have been a Jewish proselyte. Even Paul, who was specifically called to go to the Gentiles, still visited synagogues and debated with Jews until God�s final declaration to Israel in Acts 28 to the Jewish leaders in Rome. It was at this point, Paul was given the revelation of the Body of Christ, which was a Mystery hidden in God. This is the dispensation we find ourselves in presently. Like in the wilderness, Israel stumbled because of unbelief for 40 years. The nation was conquered, the people dispersed among the nations, and the KOH postponed.

Binding and loosing, or authority, was given to all Jesus� followers. (see Matthew 18:18-20 and many others). This is a wonderful Revelation for Believers that will have to wait for another time. Let�s continue through Matthew 16.

Peter received this wonderful Revelation from God. When you continually hear God�s Word, the Holy Spirit reveals the Truth. That is exactly what happened in this case with Peter�s confession. Observe what Jesus tells them in verse 20 - tell no man that he was Christ. Why didn�t Jesus restrict them from mentioning that Peter was the rock that the Roman church will be built on, and the first pope in a long line of religious monarchs? (BTW see Matthew 23 for Jesus� indictment of organized religion and religious potentates)

It was the REVELATION from God that Jesus was Christ, the Messiah or Anointed One of prophecy that was his concern. Why do you suppose Jesus told them NOT to share this wonderful revelation? Wouldn�t this Truth be worth sharing with the world?

Matthew 16:21-23 (ASV) 21 From that time began Jesus to show unto his disciples, that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and the third day be raised up. 22 And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall never be unto thee. 23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art a stumbling-block unto me: for thou mindest not the things of God, but the things of men.

Verse 21 provides a clue. Jesus began telling them what was about to happen - the coming rejection, suffering, cross, and the resurrection. Israel was going to reject their King and the KOH, and crucify him. Look what Peter did, the man who moments ago had this wonderful revelation was now under the influence of the enemy. Jesus rebuked the spirit that was influencing Peter, because he had his mind not on God�s Will, but instead the things of men. That in a nutshell, is why you don�t build churches on men. You build them on something that will never fail, the Eternal Word of God. (Deuteronomy 32:1-4, Psalm 119, Matthew 7:24-25, Luke 6:47-49, John 1:1-13, Acts 4:8-11, 1 Peter 1:18-25, 2:6-8)

Matthew 16:23 makes a good case for not putting men on a religious pedestal. However, you don�t even need to go there. A simple understanding of the plan of God revealed in His Word would end all such confusion regarding this passage. You can find bad �popes� in every denomination throughout time. That is why there is only one Head, Jesus, in the Body of Christ.

Matthew 16:24 (ASV) 24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man would come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

Follow a religion? Peter? Or Jesus?

Matthew 16:27 (ASV) 27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then shall he render unto every man according to his deeds.

This is clearly referring to the 2nd Advent of Jesus at the end of the Tribulation. This is most applicable to Israel, which will be the focus of the last 7 years, and the Gentiles who rejected God�s Grace. For further evidence, note the last few words - render unto every man according to his deeds. That has nothing to do with the Body of Christ in this dispensation where there NOW is no condemnation. Also, try finding the title Son of man for Jesus in the Chruch Epistles. He is the Head of the Body, we are joint heirs with him, made alive in Christ and seated in Heavenly Places.

1 Corinthians 3:11 (ASV) 11 For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

1 posted on 06/28/2023 4:27:11 AM PDT by RaceBannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last
To: RaceBannon
For their rock is not as our Rock, even our enemies themselves being judges.

So many 'little rocks' stirring the clear waters ... much 'confusion' ... (Babylon means confusion)...

2 posted on 06/28/2023 4:30:41 AM PDT by Just mythoughts (Psalm 2. Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

Peter = Petra = Rock


3 posted on 06/28/2023 4:31:18 AM PDT by Wpin ("I Have Sworn Upon the Altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon
INCOMING!
4 posted on 06/28/2023 4:31:52 AM PDT by kinsman redeemer (The real enemy seeks to devour what is good. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

Interesting research on our Lord Jesus the solid Rock on which we stand. Thank you!


6 posted on 06/28/2023 4:44:42 AM PDT by ViLaLuz (2 Chronicles 7:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

“Your name is Schneider. I’m going to take my suits to a tailor.”

Schneider, later: “My name means tailor. Why didn’t he bring me any suits?”


7 posted on 06/28/2023 4:44:48 AM PDT by Larry Lucido (Donate! Don't just post clickbait!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

A great book on this subject that not only shows Peter is the Rock but also helped convert a large number of Protestant ministers is

https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Peter-Keys-Scriptural-Handbook/dp/1882972546

Also very worthwhile is

https://www.amazon.com/Upon-This-Rock-Scripture-Apologetics/dp/0898707234/ref=pd_lpo_sccl_2/147-8812487-3766439?pd_rd_w=EH7QI&content-id=amzn1.sym.116f529c-aa4d-4763-b2b6-4d614ec7dc00&pf_rd_p=116f529c-aa4d-4763-b2b6-4d614ec7dc00&pf_rd_r=YX5QX7PGEDTFSYAEKWB5&pd_rd_wg=4ho4g&pd_rd_r=3745ef09-f98b-4403-95bc-fc5615e9067e&pd_rd_i=0898707234&psc=1


8 posted on 06/28/2023 4:45:44 AM PDT by vladimir998 ( Apparently I'm still living in your head rent free. At least now it isn't empty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

By the way, I love and respect my Catholic friends and family, even if I don’t always see eye to eye on interpretation.


9 posted on 06/28/2023 4:46:18 AM PDT by Larry Lucido (Donate! Don't just post clickbait!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

According to my favorite philosopher, Kurt Vonnegut, the “holy man” must be in “the wilderness” to establish the dynamic tension a culture requires. The holy man is the opposite pole against the dictator in the city. Fascinating paradigm to reflect on.


11 posted on 06/28/2023 4:50:04 AM PDT by wastoute (Anyone who believes PsyOps are not involved has never met a PsyOps Officer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon
I don’t know what Christian denomination you belong to … but if I had any interest in joining it when I woke up this morning I surely lost it by the time I got 5% of the way through your exhausting post. :-P

Dumb question: If Peter is not supposed to have a special role to play in salvation history, then why is he mentioned almost 200 times in the Gospels — while John, who is unquestionably Jesus Christ’s most beloved disciple, is mentioned fewer than 50 times?

12 posted on 06/28/2023 4:52:06 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("I've just pissed in my pants and nobody can do anything about it." -- Major Fambrough)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

...aaaand five verses later, Jesus called peter satan.

“But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men”

Three things stand out in that statement by the Lord:
1- Jesus called Peter “an offense” to Jesus.
2- Peter does not savor the things of God.
3- Peter savors the things of men.

Peter is not the rock.

The “rock” is the truth which Peter declared.
“Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God”

This rock of truth didn’t originate from Peter either, it was revealed to him by God.
“...flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven”


29 posted on 06/28/2023 5:38:54 AM PDT by SheepWhisperer (Get involved with, or start a home fellowship group. It will be the final church. ACTS 2:42-47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

This reads just like Leviticus, buy without the Divine Inspiration. I’ll assume the emphasis on ROCK was all yours. Interesting that people cherry pick Scripture to support their prejudices.
The Church has 99 problems but you’re not one.


39 posted on 06/28/2023 5:58:15 AM PDT by steve8714 (Evidently the Oxford comma is racist, sexist, or homophobic. You decide which.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

Check out Revelation 15…. Those that overcome will be singing the song of Moses…. Otherwise known as Deuteronomy 32. Now for the unlearned this is about all that overcome, not limited to race or creed.


42 posted on 06/28/2023 6:07:00 AM PDT by Just mythoughts (Psalm 2. Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

You are 100% correct, but don’t expect Catholic FReepers to pay any attention to all the references you give. Most have been indoctrinated since birth that Peter was the rock upon which the church was built, even though it, of course, must be Jesus.


47 posted on 06/28/2023 6:29:22 AM PDT by Flaming Conservative ((Pray without ceasing)Xvg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

Please take your meds.

CC


51 posted on 06/28/2023 6:36:15 AM PDT by Celtic Conservative (My cats are more amusing than 200 channels worth of TV.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon
So many words, so many scripture citations, but you never deal with a simple fact.

Jesus renamed Simon bar-Jona with the name "Petros" ("Kepha" in Aramaic, which the NT renders as "Cephas"). "Petros" is simply the masculine form of "petra", "rock" in Greek, just as "Kepha" is "rock" in Aramaic.

Jesus named Peter "Rock". Your quarrel is with Jesus, not with us. He didn't name Peter's confession of faith "Rock," he named Peter personally "Rock," on account of his confession.

Anything else is just trying to obscure the plain meaning of the text.

57 posted on 06/28/2023 6:52:25 AM PDT by Campion (Everything is a grace, everything is the direct effect of our Father's love - Little Flower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

Don’t try to burst “their” bubble. The brainwashing has been too extreme.


66 posted on 06/28/2023 7:33:01 AM PDT by MayflowerMadam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon; Flaming Conservative; Alberta's Child
There is no other sensible explanation of the verse unless it is twisted to make someone believe what is not there in the text. Because of all the previous uses of the word ROCK to describe the attributes of God as Creator, Deliverer, Saviour, to ascribe those attributes to a man, that is a total misunderstanding of Scripture.

You do realize that 'petra' is a feminine noun, right? 'Pétros' is the masculine form. A feminine noun would not be used as the name of a man.

When translating from the original Aramaic (wherein Jesus said to that effect "Thou art 'Kepha' and upon this 'Kepha'..."), it is natural that Kepha ("כֵּיפָא", which is a masculine word) would be translated to Kephas/Cephas when writing for Greek readers, since leaving out the sigma would have rendered the word a feminine noun.

But let's look at history: in practice, the early Church — based on extant writings from the likes of Tertullian, Clement, Cyprian of Carthage, and others, well before the time of Emperor Constantine — all wrote about the primacy of Peter and his successors.

Furthermore, recall that Matthew was written for a Jewish audience, who would have had no concept of an 'ecclesia' or 'church', because all of the Old Testament worship had been geared towards the Temple. This is telling because in Luke's retelling of this event (Luke 9:18-22), the emphasis on Peter and the Rock are not mentioned at all, as it is instead focusing on Christ's crucifixion.

But in Matthew He says, “on this rock I will build MY Church.” To what other Church was he contrasting HIS Church to? The idea of building a Church is interesting because, prior to this time, there was no real concept of church amongst the Jews, but, rather, an assembly (the forerunner of the ecclesia; this is likely why the word was used, since "ekklesia" was the word used to describe the assembly of citizens in the city-states of Athens), which met in a Temple to worship God. What rock was the Temple to be built on? It was built on the Temple Mount. The Temple Mount was, according to Jewish tradition, the site on which God chose to, “rest his Name and Divine Presence”. What was built on top of the Temple Mount? Other rocks. Into those gathered and formed rocks (the Temple), the Holy of Holies was placed.

Jesus said that where two or three were gathered together in His name, there He would be in the midst of them. Thus, the Church to which Jesus was referring must have been a place where two or three (or more) could gather and He would be in their midst as God was in the Temple.

The interpretation of either Jesus as the rock or Peter’s confession of faith as the rock in Matthew 16:18 makes no sense in terms of the context of the passage. This is a Jewish passage, written for a Jewish audience. They would have recognized the importance of the sacred assembly in what Jesus was saying. Jesus is saying that He will build His sacred assembly, his Church, around those people who would gather around Peter, just as the Temple was built around the stones that gathered around the Temple Mount and in this Church His Presence would dwell. In His Church, His presence would be in three ways: in the Eucharist (note that this passage follows the feeding of the five-thousand, which prefigures the Eucharist), in Scripture (in the Temple, the Holy of Holies was the tablet of the Ten Commandments and the Law), and in the People.

It is the people that is the new addition to the formula. In the Old Testament, God dwelled WITH His people. In the New Testament, God dwelled IN His people, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, which was merely external to man in the Old Testament because Christ had not yet died and restored man to an intimate relationship with God.

Thus, one may argue that if one wants to understand this passage, one must do so in an anthropological sense. Peter is the person around whom all believers would gather to form the Church which Jesus would build. Now, this is all only possible once the Holy Spirit comes to men after the Resurrection, since it is the Holy Spirit through which God actively dwells when the Church assembles. Thus, the rock of Matthew 16:18 must be capable of receiving the Holy Spirit. This points to a man and the only man mentioned in the passage is Peter.

Lastly: of the Apostles, only Simon, James, and John were given names by Jesus (Peter for the first, and the nickname 'Sons of Thunder' for the latter). These are the only three present who witness His Transfiguration. When God changes someone's name, it is generally indicative of a special grace or meaning for that specific individual (such as when Abram became Abraham, or Jacob became Israel, etc) in their role in the history of God's salvation of mankind.

Why then, in this specific case, would Christ change Simon's name into Peter (if this was indeed the moment Simon's name changed, which is not a given, as Simon is referred to as Peter even earlier on) as a roundabout way of referring back to Himself, instead of specifically indicating what Peter's role would be?

And by the way, these words ("The Bible nowhere grants Peter any authority that is not also given to the other disciples.") are just not true:

Luke 22: 31-32 — And the Lord said, "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren." (KJV)

Luke 22: 31-32 — And the Lord said: "Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren." (Douay Rheims)

When reading this same passage in Greek (Σίμων Σίμων, ἰδοὺ ὁ Σατανᾶς ἐξῃτήσατο ὑμᾶς τοῦ σινιάσαι ὡς τὸν σῖτον: ἐγὼ δὲ ἐδεήθην περὶ σοῦ ἵνα μὴ ἐκλίπῃ ἡ πίστις σου. καὶ σύ ποτε ἐπιστρέψας στήρισον τοὺς ἀδελφούς σου.), we get the following literal translation: "Simon Simon, behold, Satan has sifted you to be sifted like wheat: but I have bound you in order that your faith may not fail. And when you return, support your brothers."

It is to Peter that Jesus entrusted the charge and role of confirming his Apostolic brethren. It is to Peter (at the end of John's Gospel) that the task of feeding Christ's lambs and sheep is given, and not to the others.

It is for these reasons (and many more besides) that Peter is remembered as the Prince of the Apostles.

84 posted on 06/28/2023 8:07:35 AM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007 (There is nothing new under the sun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

Peter can’t be a “rock” of anything, when Jesus yells out that he is literally “Satan.”

And this is who the Catholic church says is their “rock” and founder.

I can’t possibly argue against that, nor can any Catholic.


100 posted on 06/28/2023 8:40:41 AM PDT by ConservativeMind (Trump: Befuddling Democrats, Republicans, and the Media for the benefit of the US and all mankind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

Peter is the fallacy that the Catholic cult is built upon. RCC was founded by Rome. I am sure there are many Christians in the RCC, but the corporation is a hindrance. How many foreigners are flooding into the Western nations because of donations and the likely Trillions of dollars spent on making it happen?


160 posted on 06/28/2023 1:22:07 PM PDT by Glad2bnuts (“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: We should have set up ambushes...paraphrased)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RaceBannon

And many Early Church Fathers AGREE!


As regards the oft-quoted Mt. 16:18, note the following Early Church Fathers promise in the profession of faith of Vatican 1:

 

 

 • Basil of Seleucia, Oratio 25:

'You are Christ, Son of the living God.'...Now Christ called this confession a rock, and he named the one who confessed it 'Peter,' perceiving the appellation which was suitable to the author of this confession. For this is the solemn rock of religion, this the basis of salvation, this the wall of faith and the foundation of truth: 'For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.' To whom be glory and power forever. — Oratio XXV.4, M.P.G., Vol. 85, Col. 296-297.

 

 Bede, Matthaei Evangelium Expositio, 3:

You are Peter and on this rock from which you have taken your name, that is, on myself, I will build my Church, upon that perfection of faith which you confessed I will build my Church by whose society of confession should anyone deviate although in himself he seems to do great things he does not belong to the building of my Church...Metaphorically it is said to him on this rock, that is, the Saviour which you confessed, the Church is to be built, who granted participation to the faithful confessor of his name. — 80Homily 23, M.P.L., Vol. 94, Col. 260. Cited by Karlfried Froehlich, Formen, Footnote #204, p. 156 [unable to verify by me].

 

 Cassiodorus, Psalm 45.5:

'It will not be moved' is said about the Church to which alone that promise has been given: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I shall build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.' For the Church cannot be moved because it is known to have been founded on that most solid rock, namely, Christ the Lord. — Expositions in the Psalms, Volume 1; Volume 51, Psalm 45.5, p. 455

 

 Chrysostom (John) [who affirmed Peter was a rock, but here not the rock in Mt. 16:18]:

Therefore He added this, 'And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church; that is, on the faith of his confession. — Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew, Homily LIIl; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf110.iii.LII.html)

 

 Cyril of Alexandria:

When [Peter] wisely and blamelessly confessed his faith to Jesus saying, 'You are Christ, Son of the living God,' Jesus said to divine Peter: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church.' Now by the word 'rock', Jesus indicated, I think, the immoveable faith of the disciple.”. — Cyril Commentary on Isaiah 4.2.

 

 Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII):

“For a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, 1 Corinthians 10:4 and upon every such rock is built every word of the church, and the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.'

“For all bear the surname ‘rock’ who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved, that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of rock just as Christ does. But also as members of Christ deriving their surname from Him they are called Christians, and from the rock, Peters.” — Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII), sect. 10,11 ( http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/101612.htm)

 

 Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II):

Thus our one immovable foundation, our one blissful rock of faith, is the confession from Peter's mouth, Thou art the Son of the living God. On it we can base an answer to every objection with which perverted ingenuity or embittered treachery may assail the truth."-- (Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II), para 23; Philip Schaff, editor, The Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers Series 2, Vol 9.


184 posted on 06/28/2023 6:24:01 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson