Replies

borncatholic The CONFESSION of Peter was what Christ established His church upon, else the rock that Christ built His church upon is dead and buried.

See these comments by some folks you may recognize. Are they preachers of another Gospel as well?

"'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." (A Library of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Oxford: Parker, 1844; Homilies of S. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of Matthew, Homily 54.3)

Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444 A.D.) wrote: "Now by the word 'rock,' Jesus indicated I think the immovable faith of the disciple." (Commentary on Isaiah IV.2, M.P.G., Vol. 70, Col 940.)

Because thou hast said unto me, 'thou art the Christ the Son of the living God;' I also say unto thee, 'Thou art Peter.' For before he was called Simon. Now this name of Peter was given him by the Lord, and in a figure, that he should signify the Church. For seeing that Christ is the rock (Petra), Peter is the Christian people. For the rock (Petra) is the original name. Therefore Peter is also called from the rock; not the rock from Peter; as Christ is not called Christ from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. Therefore he saith, 'Thou art Peter and upon this rock' which thou hast confessed, upon this rock which thou hast acknowledged, saying, 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God' will I build my Church' that is upon Myself, the Son of the living God, 'will I build My Church.' I will build thee upon me, not myself upon thee . . . For men who wished to be built upon men, said 'I am of Paul; and I am of Apollos; and I of Cephas,' who is Peter. But others did not wish to be built upon Peter, but upon the Rock, said,'But I am of Christ.' And when the Apostle Paul ascertained that he was chosen, and Christ despised, he said, 'Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?' And, as not in the name of Paul, so neither in the name of Peter; but in the name of Christ.; that Peter might be built upon the Rock, not the Rock upon Peter." (Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956, Volume VI, St. Augustine, Sermon XXV!.1-2, p. 340)

The church is the Bride of Christ. It is NOT Christ. Jesus doesn't say that the church is Himself. The RC Religion calls Mary the church as well. The church is the makeup of all believers everywhere in every century. Of course, you will not hear this because you have shut your ears off to anything but what has been drilled into your head.

As to who I think I am, I am a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ who takes Him at His word. My question is, who are you to think that we shouldn't? He said the Holy Spirit would guide us into all things. John said we have no need of a teacher to teach us these things. Repeatedly we are commanded to search the Scriptures and told what the Scriptures say. Other than one debatable incident that I can recall, all appeals are made to Scripture. Scripture is where we will find the truth.

As Eck said to Luther when Luther said that to Eck - "It is both."

I already posted previously the relevant Early Church Fathers Comentary from Catena Aurea but such things just end-up being ignored by you.

Here is your brother Baptist D.A. Carson.... The underlying Aramaic is in thios case unquestionable; at most probably Kepha was usd in both clauses (You are kepha and on this Kepha) since the word was used both for a name and for a "rock." The Peshitta (written in Syriac, a language cognate with a dialect pf Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses

IOW< no matte how many times you assert optherwise, it is both that Kepha is kepha AND Kepha's Confession...

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

The church is the Bride of Christ. It is NOT Christ. Jesus doesn't say that the church is Himself.

*Yeah. He does.

And Saul, as yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest, And asked of him letters to Damascus, to the synagogues: that if he found any men and women of this way, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. And as he went on his journey, it came to pass that he drew nigh to Damascus; and suddenly a light from heaven shined round about him. And falling on the ground, he heard a voice saying to him: Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me

*Brother, I think your Bible has been tanpered with. You appear to be using one without all of the words. And the words of Jesus are considered crucial by many Christians

Repeatedly we are commanded to search the Scriptures and told what the Scriptures say

*That refers to the Old Testament. Did you know that in the New Testament there is ONE scripturte which refers to what the Catholic Churech wrote and Canonised as the New Testament.

Do you know what that verse is?

"'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." (A Library of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Oxford: Parker, 1844; Homilies of S. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of Matthew, Homily 54.3)

Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444 A.D.) wrote: "Now by the word 'rock,' Jesus indicated I think the immovable faith of the disciple." (Commentary on Isaiah IV.2, M.P.G., Vol. 70, Col 940.)

Amen. Good post.

The CONFESSION of Peter was what Christ established His church upon, else the rock that Christ built His church upon is dead and buried.

*I post this in response to your unwarranted assertion. I understand you will reject this expert - even though he is a published protestant professor, Gerhard Kittel, who published a ten volume theological dictionary...in his analysis of Matt 16:18, he says...

The obvious pun which has made its was into the GK, text as well suggests a material identity between petra and Petros, the more so as it is impossible to differentiate strictly between the meanings of two words. On the other hand, only the fairly assured Aramaic original of the saying enables us to assert with confidence the formal and material identity between petra and Petros: petra=kepha=Petros..If, then, Mt 16:18 forces us to assume a formal and material identity between petra and Petros, this shows how fully the apostolate, and in it to a special degree the position of Peter, belongs to and is essentially enclosed within, the revelation of Christ, Petros himself is this petra, not just his faith or his confession....In a way which transcends the Rabb. view of Abraham, Peter is brought into this picture of Abraham as the cosmic rock. He takes the place of Abraham, but he does so as the foundation of Israel kata pneuma, the community of the new covenant which Christ builds on the rock Peter.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol 6. (Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 1968)

*You are WAY behind the learning curve most protestants experts are on.

Please google Jesus, Peter, & The Keys where all the evidence - PLENTY from prots - is assembled, and buy and read the book