Help me answer this...

[Hoonbaba]

Here's what one Protestant commentary says on Petra/petros:

The Aram. Cepha(s), which is not used in the Synoptics, but usually by Paul, cf. Jn 1:42, is identical in form as a name and as meaning 'rock'. This name has nothing to do with stability of character; 17 indicates that Peter's personal qualifications matter little. But Peter is made the leader of the church, cf. especially Lk. 22:31-4; Jn 21:15f.....

On the history of exegesis of 17-20, see O. Cullmann, Peter (1953), 158-69, where also the different attempts to interpret the 'Rock' as something else than 'Peter in person' are in most cases shown to be expressions of Protestant bias. The distinction between the person Peter and the faith which he has presupposed a sophistication of a sort not to be expected in our text. On the other hand, the role of Peter is here understood as unique at a specific juncture of God's history, and its repetition in the bishops of Rome is quite another matter. PEAKE'S COMMENTARY ON THE BIBLE (p. 787-788, 1997)


​

And another commentary:

The name Peter means 'Rock', and Jesus played on this meaning to designate Peter was the foundation fo the new people of God. His leadership would involve the authority of the steward, whose keys symbolized his responsibility to regulate the affairs of the household. Peter would exercise his leadership by his authority to declare what is and is not permissible in the kingdom of heaven (to bind and to loose have this meaning in rabbinic writings). The story of the early years of the chruch in Acts show how Peter fulfilled this role....


The church would be built by Jesus, not by Peter. To refer to it as my church was to make a remarkable claim, since the Gk ekklesia ('church') is the OT word for the people of God! The gates of Hades is a poetic expression for death; this new community of those who follow Jesus will never die....

18 It is sometimes suggested that because the word for 'rock' (petra) differs from the name Petros, the 'rock' referred to is not Peter himself but the confession he has just made of Jesus as Messiah. In Aramaic, however, the same term kefa would appear in both places; the change in Greek is due to the fact that petra, the normal word for rock, is feminine in gender, and therefore not suitable as a name for Simon! The echo of Peter's name remains obvious, even in Greek; he is the rock, in the sense outlined above. The text does not of course say anything about the church in Rome, or about any succession beyond the unique founding role of Peter himself. NEW BIBLE COMMENTARY (p. 925, 1994)

​

 

[pmarquette]

We get caught up in " semantics " between denominations .... what we speak of and what the words mean in the respective camps are not one and the same things .
We have 2 slightly different books , we look at doctrine and dogma a bit differently , we approach prayer , reconciliation from a different vantage point ....

Yet we both love and desire to serve the Lord to the best of our ability ....
can we both seek to find points of agreement and build up each other's faith ( edify ) and forget what is behind ( contention ) and go forward and do the Lords work ...?

 

[Benedicta00]

We get caught up in " semantics " between denominations .... what we speak of and what the words mean in the respective camps are not one and the same things .
We have 2 slightly different books , we look at doctrine and dogma a bit differently , we approach prayer , reconciliation from a different vantage point ....

Yet we both love and desire to serve the Lord to the best of our ability ....
can we both seek to find points of agreement and build up each other's faith ( edify ) and forget what is behind ( contention ) and go forward and do the Lords work ...?

The papacy isn't semantics, it is a biblical reality. It isn't something that we can just sweep under the rug. Christ left us a visible Church with a visible head that he gave His own authority to bind and lose for our own good, so we won't be fooled or lead into error and I think that's pretty cool.

 

[Polycarp1]

Simon bar Jonah was called "Cephas" in the same way as we might nickname somebody "Rocky" today, and for much the same reasons. Jesus made a wordplay on that nickname to designate Peter as leader of the Apostles.

With reference to the Galatians quote, you might take your interlocutor directly to the full Scriptural account of that incident, in Acts 15. The story is a bit differently told there, and Peter states the standard policy that will be adopted with reference to ignoring the Jewish ceremonial law among Christians (which was a big step for them at the time), then James, as the host bishop of the council, sums up, making reference to Peter's account of evangelizing the Gentiles, and the apostles commission Barnabas and Paul to lead the mission to the Gentiles.

 

[Benedicta00]

Simon bar Jonah was called "Cephas" in the same way as we might nickname somebody "Rocky" today, and for much the same reasons. Jesus made a wordplay on that nickname to designate Peter as leader of the Apostles.

With reference to the Galatians quote, you might take your interlocutor directly to the full Scriptural account of that incident, in Acts 15. The story is a bit differently told there, and Peter states the standard policy that will be adopted with reference to ignoring the Jewish ceremonial law among Christians (which was a big step for them at the time), then James, as the host bishop of the council, sums up, making reference to Peter's account of evangelizing the Gentiles, and the apostles commission Barnabas and Paul to lead the mission to the Gentiles.

I always love that part of scripture where it says that it is the authority of the CHURCH who says that Paul is an authentic disciple of Christ. He received his authority to preach from the Church. How did they know that Jesus really called him? No bible to match up his words against. They matched up his words with the oral word of God that Christ taught them.

 

[JeffreyLloyd]

amen michelle

 

[Michelina]

Notice the manner in which Paul reports the incident, DF.
"I told him right to his face" is saying that he recognized who Peter was in the Church but told him anyway. It's like "I went into the boss's office and told him straight out that he was X.

Notice too that Peter exercises his Office with regard to Paul.

"Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction."

Peter states that Paul's letters are 'scriptures' but should be taken in a balanced and intelligent way. This reflects the difference between the different emphases of Paul and James and the conflict between Paul and the Judaizers. That conflict was sometimes fairly hot as can be noted in Paul's remark in Gal 5:12.

Peter backs Paul and simultaneously says his writings should be taken cum grano salis.

 

[Polycarp1]

Notice the manner in which Paul reports the incident, DF.
"I told him right to his face" is saying that he recognized who Peter was in the Church but told him anyway. It's like "I went into the boss's office and told him straight out that he was X.

Notice too that Peter exercises his Office with regard to Paul.

"Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction."

Peter states that Paul's letters are 'scriptures' but should be taken in a balanced and intelligent way. This reflects the difference between the different emphases of Paul and James and the conflict between Paul and the Judaizers. That conflict was sometimes fairly hot as can be noted in Paul's remark in Gal 5:12.

Peter backs Paul and simultaneously says his writings should be taken cum grano salis.

Very nice post!! May I quote that last sentence, which I've bolded and italicized, sometime when a near-Bibliolater quotes Paul out of context to prove some half-baked theory about the characteristics of "the true Church" or "a real Christian"?

 

[Michelina]

Sounds like a great idea, Poly. I think that the conflict with the Judaizers should be used as a constant contextual backdrop to understand Paul's writings. When he says "Law" it is mostly Mosaic Law he is addressing.

 

[pmarquette]

The papacy isn't semantics, it is a biblical reality.
correct .... but within the other side of the fence , they tend to forget what Jethro spoke to Moses , that Peter and James would use what was already in place because of the Law and the Law giver : the rulers of the congretation
those which the church now calls : monsignor , bishop , cardinal , appostalic delegate , Pope ...
Exd 34:31 And Moses called unto them; and Aaron and all the rulers of the congregation returned unto him: and Moses talked with them.

Exd 18:21 Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place [such] over them, [to be] rulers of thousands, [and] rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:


Exd 18:25 And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens.


Exd 34:31 And Moses called unto them; and Aaron and all the rulers of the congregation returned unto him: and Moses talked with them.

It isn't something that we can just sweep under the rug. Christ left us a visible Church with a visible head that he gave His own authority to bind and lose for our own good, so we won't be fooled or lead into error and I think that's pretty cool.

correct , both ministry and laity ...

we both speak of similar things ( rulers of the congregation and the magesterium ,,, but because they have different names , we assume that they represent different things , when one is the extension of the other ... )

or we freak at the mention of the rock , a rock , eternal rock....
And it is spoken of The Rock - God the father , and the rock of offense and stumbling -- Jesus , and the rock the first bishop -- peter ...

and the authority of the 12 - Luke 9.1 , the 70 Luke 10.9 , and the laity Ephesians 4.12 ...