Christ as the Rock

LouisBooth · May 21, 2002

"I don't think it makes sense to interpret the word rock *in this sentence* as referring to Christ himself; it should refer either to Simon Peter (the subject of the first part of the sentence) or to his profession of faith (which was what prompted this sentence in response). "

Yup and there you have it. The catholic position (to peter) and the reformed one (to the confession).

JOhnPreparer · May 22, 2002

The New Testament was written in Greek, right????

Therefore, the word for the rock was written very obviously... I meant the meaning... where "petros" and "petra" are written more clearly for the benefit of the entire Church....

On thing to consider - How can Peter who are one of body Church becomes the support (the rock) for the Holy Temple of God. As it is written that on "this rock I will build my Church" The church meant the people of God and Peter is one of the people.

"Petros" - small stone that can be easily removed. Doesn't it sound the bell a bit.... The character of Peter who are always uncertain. One time very holy, the next thinking for himself....

Remember the incidences of
1. Confessing Christ as the Messiah and the next minute, rebuke by CHrist as Satan

2. At the transfiguration of Jesus at the mountain with Elijah and Moses, who is the one who look for the wellfare of himself... by suggestion to built tents for three of them.

3. Who is the one who stand up and said i will never leave you till death... and denied Jesus three times...

A bit similar to the name than was given to Peter isn't, a stone that is easily moved....

Think about it..

MissytheButterfly · May 22, 2002

Well I get your point, John. I believe that Jesus was talking to Peter but he didn't solely mean that Peter should be the head of THEE CHURCH. I believe that Jesus was meaning that Peter because he was an apostle that he would be one of the people to further and help advance THEE CHURCH .

If I were to reguard any earthly leader of the church I would have to say Paul. Because I can't see enough evidence in the scriptures to make Peter as being such. And it seems that Paul according to the scriptures at least gave the guidelines for the Church and how to live a Christian life.

I pesonally recognize Jesus as the foundation or rock that THEE CHURCH should be built upon. And others have helped to spread Jesus' gospel and have helped to bring people to Christ. That is how I reguard Peter..not as the head of the Church. I reserve that spot for Jesus.

Missy

niwde · May 22, 2002

continue your discussion

the interpretation of peter as the rock stood long before the reformation happened.
need not say any further,it speaks for it's own
i do not want to go in and explain more again.
but i want to repeat that those words in matthew was spoken by jesus himsel,which one would u put into authority when compared with the writings of paul or words of christ
u tell me which is stronger
it speaks for it'self.
i do respect paul and the letters he wrote was to encourage his fellow brothers to be strong in a world that was persecuting them

say what you like,be in a position to disagree but one day everything shall be encovered and the truth will prevail

NEVER INSULT THE HOLY EUCHARIST
U CAN DISAGREE WITH THE DOCTRINE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
BUT NEVER DOUBT THE PRESENCE OF JESUS IN THE LITTLE HOST

Andrew · May 22, 2002

Matthew 16:
15* He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16* And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17* 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.
18* 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.
19* And 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 his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

1. Peter is "petros" in the Greek, which means "stone". Rock is "petra" in the Greek and means "rock". IOW Peter is not the "petra".

2. Who is the "rock" Jesus is refering to in v18? It is a ref to v16 -- "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."

3. Only Peter given the keys to binding and loosing? Many Christians down thru history have "bound and loosed" with tremendous authority too.

niwde · May 22, 2002

to me what is the difference with stone and rock
or maybe pebbles
i can say they are the same elements that made out of it
rock is rough,pebbles are small,cute,smooth,that is why girls collect pebbles and not rocks.
stone is still rock and pebble
there are the same
what is the difference
it is still stones right
use to build foundations
depending on the foundation
rough or smooth
which one would you choose
i would surely want to step on the smooth one cause i do not one to injure my foot by stepping on the rough one

had any christian leader declare things that popes declare
i don think so
even if a non catholic christian leader declared something about religion,surely some will oppose it
like what is happening in some non catholic churches in malaysia
it was always like that
some fellow do not agree with pastor of that church and he will come out and setup his own church(that is if he is rich enough to buy a shoplot and covert it into a church)
or he will just simply join another church that suit his belivings.
that is what happened to my neighbours
when i was young they go to the same church(non catholic christians)then don know since when they splited and go to a different church.
if u say it is the same church but only different branches
i would say no
why
because the distance is the same
both churches are in the same area(walking distance)

seebs · May 22, 2002

The "petra" vs. "petros" thing, however, is a pun in Greek. A slight difference in suffix doesn't change the intent.

LouisBooth · May 22, 2002

"the interpretation of peter as the rock stood long before the reformation happened.
"

So? Just because its old doesn't make it right. Take the illiad for example.

jukesk9 · May 22, 2002

While the New Testament was written in Greek, Christ and His Apostles spoke in Aramaic. And here's how Matthew 16:18 reads in Aramaic:

18. I am also telling you that you are the Rock [Peter] and on this rock I am building my Church, and the doors of sheol cannot draw* it in

Simon, meant pebble of sand. Peter means rock. Why the name change if this isn't significant? God's referred to as a rock umpteen times. So how very significant that a title reserved for God is bestowed this one time upon Peter. Christ needed someone to feed His flock while he was gone and left Peter to do so (you mean the Bible didn't fall from the sky?) and he needed someone solid. So, where's your foundation? You gonna build on sand or rock?

Source: http://www.v-a.com/bible/matthew-16.html

Andrew · May 22, 2002

quote: but i want to repeat that those words in matthew was spoken by jesus himsel,which one would u put into authority when compared with the writings of paul or words of christ u tell me which is stronger
---------------------------

Actually, technically, Paul's words becos Paul claims that he speaks by the Spirit of the Risen Christ, the glorified ascended Christ. So in a sense, his words are more current to the church becos they come from the ascended Christ. The words in red are b4 the cross and so a little "outdated" as compared to words that come from the glorified Christ.

IOW which words or teachings from Christ are more relevant to the church? Words from the Christ b4 the cross, or words from the Christ after the cross. The answer is obvious.

----------------
Simon, meant pebble of sand. Peter means rock.
-----------------
I believe Simon means "reed". A reed swaying left and right according to the direction of the wind. ie no backbone/character. but Jesus saw beyond and called him Peter -- stone -- which is more solid in character than a reed in the wind.

--------
to me what is the difference with stone and rock
--------
They're quite diff to me. otherwise, why wld the Greek use 2 diff words.

VOW · May 23, 2002

PAUL's words are more "current" and therefore more important than the pre-Crucifixion words of Jesus? Um, Jesus was and is GOD, both before and after the Crucifixion. And God's words take precendence over anyone else's!

Well, Luther thought the Pauline letters were more important than the Gospel...

Peace,
~VOW

seebs · May 23, 2002

Originally posted by VOW
PAUL's words are more "current" and therefore more important than the pre-Crucifixion words of Jesus? Um, Jesus was and is GOD, both before and after the Crucifixion. And God's words take precendence over anyone else's!

No, no, clearly, the thing about men not having long hair is *WAY* more important than the piddly stuff like "I am the LORD thy God", which we can mostly ignore as old-fashioned. We're *reformers*.

Heh.

JOhnPreparer · May 23, 2002

A matter to reconsider is that We are man and man who confessed CHrist as Master and Saviour is the Church (body of Christ). Now, Peter is a man who confessed that Christ is Lord, the Messiah...... He is a part of the Church..

The verse stated that on this rock, I will build my church ...

Peter is a part of the church that will be builded on the rock.... then, how can he be the "rock" where the church will be establish?

In revelation, twelve foundations of the Holy Temple has stated that it is the twelve apostles of Christ who are the foundations (Peter included) plus the corner stone is Christ - the base(rock) where the foundations are put upon.

Foundations is important but the base where the foundations is laid is even more important that is CHrist.

isshinwhat · May 23, 2002

Andrew said:

They're quite diff to me. otherwise, why wld the Greek use 2 diff words.

The word petra could not gramatically have been used to rename Peter because it was feminine in gender, petros is masculine, that is why the change.

In his letters, Paul refers to Peter as Cephas, which is a Greek transliteration of the Aramaic Kepha, meaning large rock. The Aramaic word for small stone or pebble is different than Kepha. That fact combined with the need for a masculine name leads me to believe that there was no small stone / large stone difference intended between petros/petra in Matthew 16.

Neal

JOhnPreparer · May 23, 2002

Originally posted by isshinwhat

The word petra could not gramatically have been used to rename Peter because it was feminine in gender, petros is masculine, that is why the change.

In his letters, Paul refers to Peter as Cephas, which is a Greek transliteration of the Aramaic Kepha, meaning large rock. The Aramaic word for small stone or pebble is different than Kepha. That fact combined with the need for a masculine name leads me to believe that there was no small stone / large stone difference intended between petros/petra in Matthew 16.

Neal

To take your word for it, then why not you translate for me this verse

1 Cor 10:3-4
all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.

What type of rock is Christ referred to? Kepha, Cephas, or other????

Mat 16:18 On this rock , I will build my Church

Is "this rock" is a spiritual rock??????

have a thought on it....

isshinwhat · May 23, 2002

Well, Corinthians was written in Greek, while Peter was renamed in Aramaic, so the comparison is hardly fair, is it?

Mat 16:18 On this rock , I will build my Church

Is "this rock" is a spiritual rock??????

No, I think this rock is Peter. So does the Greek Orthodox Church, by the way, and Greek is their Liturgical Language and has been for 2000 years now

Neal

isshinwhat · May 23, 2002

from www.pe****ta.org

This site contains the Bible in Aramaic. The following is from the Discussion forum.

Keith "Matthew 16:17-19"
Jan-01-2002 at 08:58 PM (GMT3)
Greetings all,
I am familiar with the Greek and the Evangelical interpretation of Matthew 16:17-19. That is Peter means rock or small rock from the Greek "petros". Whereas the rock referred in this passge is "petra" meaning massive rock. At least that's what the NIV footnote says.

The explanation is (from a Protestant point of view anyway) is that the Lord's church was built on the Rock of Peter's revelation not on Peter himself. I was wondering how this plays in the Aramaic.

The Aramaic word for rock is "0p0k" (word #9774) from the root "P0k". The Aramaic word for Cephas (or Kepha) is the same word for rock, that being "0p0k" (word #9781), but the root is still "0p0k".

Is there anything to this big rock vs. little rock stuff in the PNT? Or is it masculine pronoun (Cephas) vs. feminine noun (rock)?

In Christ,
Keith L. Fuller

Answer

"Paul Younan 1. "RE: Matthew 16:17-19"
Jan-01-2002 at 09:24 PM (GMT3)
Shlama Akhi Keith,
I don't think so. I think it's pretty clear just from the context alone that Mshikha was speaking of building His Church on Keepa. What that means can be up to debate, of course - but linguistically it's a pretty solid case.

The "big/little" argument is based on the Greek which is probably not what was spoken here anyway - and there's no differentiation in Aramaic between big and little rocks.

Even from Greek primacist perspective - it's not proper to call a male 'Petra' since it's a feminine noun. That's the very reason behind the annoying Greek habit of taking Semitic names like "Keepa" and turning it into "Keepas."

So even in the extremely unlikely case that the Carpenter and fisherman were conversing in Greek, the "big/little" argument doesn't pan out - especially considering the context.

Hope this helps!

JOhnPreparer · May 23, 2002

2000 years and it consider the right thing to do.... hmmnn... Pharisees has been praticing what they have believed for centuries and finally turn out to be the one most rejected by Christ....

If "this rock" is not a spiritual rock, then, in the bible, Peter name should be written there instate of "this rock"..........

isshinwhat · May 23, 2002

My point was that they speak the Greek pretty well

Neal

JOhnPreparer · May 23, 2002

The work of a interpretor you accepted but the word from Paul, apostle of God, you ignored it.... well, I'm a bit tired of talking about this topics already as well plus some said that I'm nagging the same questions all the times.
I think I'm out since the Catholics' mindset is fix and will remains as a Catholics until their point of death...

jp-out from debate who is the "rock"

Christ as the Rock

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Back and Better than EVER!

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

God Made Me A Skeptic

Well-Known Member

Dixie Whistlin' Papist

Well-Known Member

Moderator

God Made Me A Skeptic

Active Member

Pro Deo et Patria

Active Member

Pro Deo et Patria

Pro Deo et Patria

Active Member

Pro Deo et Patria

Active Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency