Posted on 01/08/2024 1:18:20 PM PST by OneVike
Until now I have not shared my opinion of what I think of the many inherent ways the Catholic Church has misinterpreted Scripture throughout the years. I can no longer be silent on the subject, because it is one that the Catholic Church has used to teach heresy.
To begin with, the Catholic Church has been making a mockery of Scripture for many years. There are many beliefs the Catholic Church holds that I have problems with, but for now I will explain why they are wrong in their interpretation that Peter is the rock upon which Christ has built His church.
Jesus is the ONLY foundation which His church can and is built upon. The only rock of truth is Jesus Christ and we need to keep our eyes on him, not some man chosen by flawed men. We need not pay attention to what color of smoke is billowing from a building built by flawed men to learn who the voice of God will be, because we already know. We are to look to no one else as the foundation or the hope on which the church is built, but Jesus, The Son of God.
“For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ,”
(1 Corinthians 3:11)
When Peter answered Jesus by stating,
“You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,”
(Matthew 16:16)
Jesus answered and said to him,
“Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.
(Matthew 16:17-18)
To begin with, when you look at the original wording of Matthew, it was written in Koinonia Greek, which was the language of the common man in the day of Christ. Koinonia Greek was what today’s modern American English is to everyone from America to Korea, the universal language spoken around the world. So when you look at the original language Matthew was written in you will see something that is not readily apparent. When Jesus said,
“…you are Peter [(πΠέτρος) (petros)] and upon this
Rock [(πέτρᾳ) (petra)] I will build My church…”
(Matthew 18a)
Greek nouns have genders, which is similar to the English words actor and actress. The first is masculine and the second is feminine. Likewise, the Greek word, “petros”, is masculine; “petra” is feminine. Peter, the man, is appropriately referred to as, “Petros.” But Jesus said that the rock he would build his church on was not the masculine, “petros”, rather the feminine, “petra.”
A good example of this would be Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, where he refers to Jesus as the rock that followed the Israelites through the desert;
“and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were
drinking from a spiritual rock [(πέτρᾳ) (petras)] which
followed them; and the Rock [(πέτρᾳ) (petra)] was Christ.”
(1Corinthians 10:4)
It must be pointed out that in Peter’s 1st letter, he refers to Jesus as the “Rock”,
Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture,
“Behold, I lay in Zion
A chief cornerstone, elect, precious,
And he who believes on Him will
by no means be put to shame.” (Isaiah 28:16)
Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient,
“The stone which the builders rejected
Has become the chief cornerstone,” (Psalms 118:22)
“A stone of stumbling”
And
“a Rock of offense.” (Isaiah 8:14)
(1Peter 2:7-8)
So the word translated in this passage is not the same word as Peter, and nothing can be more wrong than to suppose Jesus meant Peter the person. It’s ludicrous to claim that Jesus would build HIS church upon a sinful flawed individual. HE emphatically stated HE would build it upon the “truth” of which Peter recognized. That truth being, “Jesus is The Christ, The Son of The Living God!” Something we know Peter himself understood by reading his first epistle, as I pointed out above.
Thus if Peter himself used the word, “petra” to refer to Jesus, then shouldn’t we? We can also see where Paul referred to Jesus as the rock, “petra”.
“Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a Rock of offense,
and he who believes in Him will not be disappointed.”
(Romans 9:33)
We also see the word, "Rock," used throughout the Old Testament to refer to GOD.
“The Rock! His work is perfect, for all His ways are just;
a God of faithfulness and without injustice.”
(Deuteronomy 32:4)
“The Lord is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer;
My God, my Rock, in whom I take refuge.”
(2 Samuel 22:2-3)
“And who is a Rock, except our God.”
(Psalms 18:31)
“Is there any God besides Me, or
is there any other Rock? I know of none.”
(Isaiah 44:8)
Finally, I challenge anyone to prove to me that, at any time in the Scriptures, GOD ever referred to any man as a rock. However, throughout Scriptures we are told about the perfection of the Rock which is Christ, not a sinful man named Peter. So why would Jesus build His church upon an unstable human who needs to be saved? He wouldn't, and He didn't. It should be obvious from the Word of God that the Rock Jesus was referring to was not Peter, but himself.
“For no man can lay a foundation other than the
one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ,”
(1 Corinthians 3:11)
In a word: "duh."
Lost count of how many "discussions" I've been in with Catholics (of which I count myself as a former one) where I've said exactly this: The rock was the truth Peter spoke, not Peter the man."
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out God's perfect truth was placed upon an imperfect man (Peter) to build God's church.
You’ve been asked that before and have always refused to answer.
So then, another question. Why criticize others for rejecting the very same popes YOU reject constantly?
Or why do you expect others to put themselves in submission to and under the authority you yourself refuse to recognize and don’t put yourself under the authority of?
I don’t answer to apostates.
“ If anything other than simple faith is required for salvation, then Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross was insufficient”
The thief on the cross finding salvation in his dying moments with Jesus is a perfect example.
Zero works salvation paradise
If any non-Catholic posted the number of Francis hit pieces you do on almost a daily basis, we’d be accused of Catholic church bashing. Why are you exempt? Or why do you exempt yourself?
Scripture itself says that Peter is a translation of Cephas.
John 1:42.
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/1-42.htm
Heck, there’s not even any reliable historical record of Peter ever having been in Rome.
“
To: metmom
The irony of your posts coming from one of the biggest rejecters of Francis as pope this site has ever seen.”
I thought that was me. I must be slipping
Clearly.....
Scripture cannot contradict itself.
It is Truth and there cannot be two true opposing truths at the same time.
No one can even come to Christ without God drawing him or her.
So yes, even ordinary believers are given divine insight like that.
Because I’m a catholic and you’re no longer one.
What part of that do you not understand?
There is nothing in the Bible calling anyone a pope or a Catholic. Catholic Church made that up
The evidence of Peter in Rome is far, far stronger than for anywhere else on the planet, and it begins in the very first century. Not even the Eastern Orthodox, who disagree vehemently with us on the papal issue, will dispute that.
Jesus never did anything but condemn tradition that was added to Scripture.
He ALWAYS used the Word to validate Himself, His miracles, and against Satan in His temptation.
Big “Thank you” to Chuck for this information. Unfortunately, few Catholics will be persuaded to actually think or consider the facts. They are usually locked into a cognitive dissonance of circular logic.
But I applaud the effort to show the truth of Scripture.
*This* is NOT referring to a person.
The correct way would be *you* or *He*.
Exactly right. Thank you.
The subject is whether Christ was clearly stating that "...you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church,..."
And the answer is YES, Christ was referring to Peter!
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.