Is it possible?
Posted on 05/01/2015 2:36:22 PM PDT by NYer
In Attic Greek, maybe: but that's 500 years beside the point.
As for Jesus' next phrase: He would have said "upon Me" if He meant "upon Me." The point here is that He was talking about "THIS" Rock, which would apply to the man he had just named "Rock."
Jesus (God) is the Rock in the ultimate sense; so the sense of this commission of Peter is that Peter is to have a share in Jesus' ministry.
Whch I hope we may all have. I pray for it every day.
That's why the Catholic Church so often goes for the both/and meanings, or even moreso the classical four senses (literal, allegorical, moral, and anagogical.)
What ruffles my feathers is when people get so twisty-tailed around that they force an opposite meaning:
Like, "I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I am NOT building My Church."
Eastern dialects and Aramaic idioms would employ such usages to make a point or a pun.
AND......
When James and John were asking Him to allow them to sit at His right hand, THAT would have been the time to clarify who was in charge, to tell them, *No, you guys. You all need to listen to Peter.* And He didn't.
And He told later them that when the HOLY SPIRIT came, HE would lead them into all truth, another time Jesus could have taken the opportunity to clarify instructions about Peter. And He didn't.
| 552 Simon Peter holds the first place in the college of the Twelve; Jesus entrusted a unique mission to him. Through a revelation from the Father, Peter had confessed: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Our Lord then declared to him: "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it." Christ, the "living Stone", thus assures his Church, built on Peter, of victory over the powers of death. Because of the faith he confessed Peter will remain the unshakable rock of the Church. His mission will be to keep this faith from every lapse and to strengthen his brothers in it. |
| 424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church. |
Jesus IS making a point or a pun. I didn't disagree.
What I disagree with, is people trying to lock Jesus into an opposite point from the one He actually made.
God didn't name Abram "Abraham" to indicate he was NOT to be the father of a multitude.
God didn't name Jacob "Israel" to indicate he had NOT or would NOT "wrestle with God."
God didn't name Simon "Peter" to indicate that he would NOT be athe Rock on which He would build His Church. Since we are all part of the Body of Christ, members of one Body, we all have some share in the mission and ministry of Christ.
Is it possible?
Yup; Augustine is probably doing double facepalms all the time because of you guys.
He and I will probably have a talk about that sometime...
In fact, it’s gramatically preferred.
"Et moi, je te déclare: Tu es Pierre, et sur cette pierre j'édifierai mon Eglise..."
That is complete nonsense...
But Jesus is...That's the point of Petros and Petra...
I don't believe you are going to establish much of anything...This argument has been fought, and lost by your religion for centuries...You guys certainly are persistent tho...
This is so obvious it's getting embarrassing to keep explaining it.
Yah, we're just not as bright as you...But we are bright enough to read and understand what those people who actually ARE experts on the issue who completely disagree with what you have to say about it...
And we are bright enough to know that Jesus never intended that we should be gnawing on a femur or kneecap, and drinking blood...
No, I'm telling YOU how He DID talk.
It's even more strikingly clear because eight times in Paul's Epistles (four times in Galatians and four times in 1 Corinthians) we have the Aramaic form of Simon’s new name preserved for us. In our English Bibles it comes out as Cephas. That isn’t Greek. That’s a transliteration of the Aramaic word Kepha (rendered as Kephas in its Hellenistic form, because the 'C' is always a 'hard C' in Greek, pronounced as "K".)
"And what does Kepha mean? It means a rock, the same as petra/Petros. That's why Paul uses the word: because it means the same.
And what does it mean? Petros = Kepha = Cephas = Rock.
It doesn’t mean gravel, or a little stone, or rubble, or a lump, or a pebble.
So on Paul's authority --- eight times --- we have the explanatory information that the name given to Peter was Cephas (in Aramaic). What Jesus said to Simon in Matthew 16:18 was this: ‘You are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my Church.’
Strong's: Petros: "a stone" or "a boulder," Peter, one of the twelve apostles
Strong goes on to say,
"c. metaphorically, a man like a rock, by reason of his firmness and strength of soul: Matthew 16:18 (some interpretations regard the distinction (generally observed in classic Greek; see the commentaries and cf. Schmidt, Syn., chapter 51, §§ 4-6) between πέτρα, the massive living rock, and πέτρος, a detached but large fragment, as important for the correct understanding of this passage; others explain the different genders here as due first to the personal then to the material reference. Cf. Meyer, Keil, others; Green, Critical Note on John 1:43).
So there's the distinction I've been pressing for 2-3 days: that the alleged "petros=little rock, petra=big rock" distinction, is generally observed in "Classic Greek" --- which is the Attic, not the N.T. Koine.
Koine Greek is the language the Gospels and Epistles were written in. Vindicated by the Lexicon King!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3285355/posts?page=794#794
And when I was talking about a 1,200 pound boulder, I was talking about a metaphor. Literally, neither Jesus nor Peter is a 1,200 pound boulder. Simon-Peter-Kephas is a man. Jesus is the God-Man.
Neither one is a literal ... what shall I say? ...massive mineral monolith.
Really, you should quit now. You've nothing more to say. And as for me, I am grateful to have been challenged to look up a half-a-dozen excellent and dispositive resources and references. Now time for me to eat a very important hamburger.
So just what is wrong with the idea that the body of CHRIST is built on Jesus and not Peter?
I have doubts on that. If Jesus told them all He was building a Church based on Peter or Peters confession ALONE, then they would have been asking questions. If Jesus was giving Peter the keys to the Kingdom ALONE, they would have been asking a LOT of questions. They didn't because they UNDERSTOOD His speech they same way I do. Jesus is The Rock. The Gospel is the Key. 12 Apostles - 12 gates. Peter is no greater or lesser than the others but he is mentioned first a lot (for a reason but not for greater authority reasons).
And he would have said 'upon You' had he been referring to Peter...But he didn't...
The point here is that He was talking about "THIS" Rock, which would apply to the man he had just named "Rock."
That would have been some pretty bad English, and Greek...Jesus called Peter a rock and Jesus knew well that he himself was the rock spoken of in the scriptures...
Jesus was contrasting the rock of Peter with the rock of Himself...
Col_2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.