• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

Jesus is the Rock His Church is built upon, according to Mt.16:18-19

Discussion in 'General Theology' started by Quasar92, Jun 15, 2017.

  1. Goatee

    Goatee Jesus, please forgive me, a sinner.

    +3,562
    United Kingdom
    Catholic
    Divorced
    Backhand? I don't understand?

    Look my friend, I think you have YOUR interpretation a bit out of line with reality. You cannot take scripture out of context like you do to fit your view!

    Again:

    Matthew 16:17-19
    17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

     
  2. OrthodoxyUSA

    OrthodoxyUSA Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,341
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    US-Republican
    That's too bad. You insult me and call me friend.

    Forgive me...
     
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2017
  3. Goatee

    Goatee Jesus, please forgive me, a sinner.

    +3,562
    United Kingdom
    Catholic
    Divorced
    Insult? How?
     
  4. nonaeroterraqueous

    nonaeroterraqueous Nonexistent Member

    +2,665
    United States
    Protestant
    Married
    (John 2:19) Jesus was standing in front of the temple when he announced, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." It was plain that he was talking about the temple. It was right there, after all. If you cannot see that then I don't know what you are reading.

    Well, except that he wasn't talking about the temple. He was talking about himself. It's an understandable mistake. So is yours.

    That's about fifty percent better than what I usually get from people. I say you take what you can get and run with it.
     
  5. Goatee

    Goatee Jesus, please forgive me, a sinner.

    +3,562
    United Kingdom
    Catholic
    Divorced
    You wish!
     
  6. OrthodoxyUSA

    OrthodoxyUSA Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,341
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    US-Republican
    Matthew 18:18 please... who is being spoken too? I believe the answer comes from 18:1.

    Forgive me...
     
  7. OrthodoxyUSA

    OrthodoxyUSA Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,341
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    US-Republican
    What about the years 38-42ad. Was Antioch in charge then? When Peter served in Antioch as Bishop and had not yet gone to Rome?

    Forgive me...
     
  8. Lily of Valleys

    Lily of Valleys Well-Known Member

    786
    +417
    Australia
    Christian
    Married
    Here is a link if you are interested in the background of Isaiah 8:
    5. The Announcement of Judgment (Isaiah 8:1-22)

    But the point is, God has always been referred to as the "Rock" (Hebrew: tsuwr) throughout the Old Testament, so the disciples must have been familiar with that metaphor:

    The Rock (tsuwr)—how faultless are his deeds,
    how right all his ways!
    A faithful God, without deceit,
    just and upright is he!
    (Deuteronomy 32:4 NABRE)

    Truly, who is God except the Lord?
    Who but our God is the rock (tsuwr)?
    (2 Samuel 22:32 NABRE)

    The Lord lives! Blessed be my rock (tsuwr)!
    Exalted be God, the rock (tsuwr) of my salvation.
    (2 Samuel 22:47 NABRE)

    God alone is my rock (tsuwr) and my salvation,
    my fortress; I shall not fall.
    My deliverance and honor are with God,
    my strong rock (tsuwr);
    my refuge is with God.
    (Psalm 62:7-8 NABRE)

    So when Jesus said on this rock (Greek: petra) I will build My church (Matthew 16:18), it should be immediately obvious to the disciples that the rock (Greek: petra) was referring to Jesus, the Messiah, the Son of the living God :

    He will be as a sanctuary, But a stone of stumbling and a rock (Hebrew: tsuwr) of offense (Isaiah 8:14 NKJV)

    “A stone of stumbling And a rock (Greek: petra) of offense.” (1 Peter 2:8 NKJV)

    Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock (Greek: petra) of offense,
    And whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.
    (Romans 9:33 NKJV)
     
  9. OrthodoxyUSA

    OrthodoxyUSA Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,341
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    US-Republican
    Nothing was obvious to the disciples at this point, the rest of Matthew shows them questioning even further. This was a time still shrouded in mystery for them. After the resurrection they would be taught the full meaning.

    Christ was not speaking of HIMSELF directly when he named Peter. That would not have been apparent to these unlettered fishermen. This was an indirect reference.

    It was the statement itself that was so amazing. Christ pointed out that Peter had been blessed from the Father to know as much and to be able to articulate the fact.

    He named Peter after his own statement which of course is "Thou art the Christ the Son of The Living God." For a Hebrew he could have said "You are the Rock", it would have carried the same meaning.

    The statement of Peter now became the baptismal confession of faith (The 1st baptismal creed.) A verbal confession of faith.

    Act 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

    We can easily see how the statement points back to what you have shown in the OT. That Christ was refereed to as THE ROCK. This adds great clarity for us, but not for them at the time.

    The keys of salvation are the sacraments of The Church where grace is poured out for salvation.

    1. Verbal Confession
    2. Baptism
    3. Partaking of Communion

    These were not given just to Peter by Christ, but to James, John and Paul as well. If St. Peter ever played the part of first among equals (president of council) it was after St. Jame's (the brother of our Lord) was killed in Jerusalem. James was elected first among equals by the Apostles when he joined them after the resurrection of Christ.

    All of the sees of The Church were seen as being equal. Each of them being complete for the needs of the salvation of those membered within them, with no need of external authority. They were autonomous. Led by Christ and The Holy Spirit.

    The way Rome became the center figure "of the Church" has nothing to do with the book of Matthew; which was written and translated to Greek from the school at Antioch, where St. Peter was Bishop from 38-42ad. (I note that St. Peter never ruled over the Church at large from there. Antioch says as much.)

    Rome was given providence, not by Christ, but by council.

    It was the Bishop of Constantinople who wanted Rome to be first among equals, and Constantinople to be second among equals due to the governmental structure of Roman Empire. This was done by establishing Pentarchies (government structure in the 300's) over Metropolitans (government structure in the 200's).

    Funny enough, the bishop of Rome at the time Serguis I (a Syrian) disagreed and refused the honor saying that was not how things had been done from the beginning. He is quoted as saying he would "to die rather than consent to erroneous novelties".

    Later still the emperor forced the bishop of Rome into the position. Naming "Rome" as being the head of All the Church. Himself being the "Supreme Pontiff" because Christ obviously approved and the bishop of Rome being the "Vicar or the Emperor".

    History goes on... the Bishops of Rome try changing the wording a bit so that the bishop of Rome is seen as the Vicar of Christ instead of the emperor.

    Many RC's have pointed to Christ's words in Matthew in an attempt to re-enforce the idea that everyone was to follow Rome. This was always done retrospectively. Even if it was that The Lord appointed Peter to be in charge, it's still a broad jump to make that intend that Rome should be the head Church. Like using a shoehorn to make something fit. It was not the government style from the beginning.

    Forgive me...
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2017
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  10. Goatee

    Goatee Jesus, please forgive me, a sinner.

    +3,562
    United Kingdom
    Catholic
    Divorced
    Obviously, non-catholics, RC, are going to argue against what we believe. The argument can fill hundreds and hundreds of pages!

    To us, the text in Matthew is VERY clear indeed.
     
  11. OrthodoxyUSA

    OrthodoxyUSA Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,341
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    US-Republican
    Goatee,

    To me that would mean that RC are closing their eyes to history and going full sola scriptura, even at the expense of the rest of scripture, on that subject.

    Let's skip forward just a bit... let's assume you are correct and Jesus left Peter in charge of all the keys to the kingdom of heaven.

    How does that infer that the bishop of Rome now holds that authority?

    St. Peter has a proper lineage in Antioch as well.

    Forgive me...
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2017
  12. Goatee

    Goatee Jesus, please forgive me, a sinner.

    +3,562
    United Kingdom
    Catholic
    Divorced
    RC are not skipping history through. As you know, we are both Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture.

    Apostolic Tradition / Succession. The Pope can be traced right back to Peter. Of course, some will refute that!
     
  13. W2L

    W2L Well-Known Member

    +10,881
    Christian
    Private
    I agree. The Rock has always been the Lord himself.
     
  14. W2L

    W2L Well-Known Member

    +10,881
    Christian
    Private
    The wording is similar here. Jesus is refering to himself as the Rock and the temple.


    Matthew 16: 18 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.

    John 2:19 Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • List
  15. Goatee

    Goatee Jesus, please forgive me, a sinner.

    +3,562
    United Kingdom
    Catholic
    Divorced
  16. ~Cassia~

    ~Cassia~ pondering the things of God Supporter

    +11,310
    Canada
    Christian
    Private
    That may be true but how few actually read and listen to what Peter says? Also fishers of mankind can do little without the Sons of Thunder's mending of the nets.
    strengthen the things which remain . . .Revelation 3:2
     
  17. LittleLambofJesus

    LittleLambofJesus Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git! Supporter

    +28,467
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    US-Libertarian
    That is what I have always been taught.
    [Btw, doesn't M. Slick run the CARM forum?]

    Psa 18:2
    The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer;
    My God, my strength, in whom I will trust;
    My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.
    Psa 18:31
    For who is God, except the LORD?
    And who is a rock, except our God?
    Psa 28:1
    A Psalm of David.
    To You I will cry, O LORD my Rock:
    Do not be silent to me,
    Lest, if You are silent to me,
    I become like those who go down to the pit.
    1Co 10:4
    and all drank the same spiritual drink.
    For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.
     
  18. LittleLambofJesus

    LittleLambofJesus Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git! Supporter

    +28,467
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    US-Libertarian
    Protestant Scholars agree - Peter is the Rock in Matthew 16:18

    Twelve Quotations from Ten Protestant Biblical Scholars


    William Hendriksen
    member of the Reformed Christian Church
    Professor of New Testament Literature at Calvin Seminary
    The meaning is, “You are Peter, that is Rock, and upon this rock, that is, on you, Peter I will build my church.” Our Lord, speaking Aramaic, probably said, “And I say to you, you are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church.” Jesus, then, is promising Peter that he is going to build his church on him! I accept this view.
    New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew
    (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1973), page 647
    JPK page 14

    Gerhard Maier
    leading conservative evangelical Lutheran theologian
    Nowadays a broad consensus has emerged which — in accordance with the words of the text — applies the promise to Peter as a person. On this point liberal (H. J. Holtzmann, E. Schweiger) and conservative (Cullmann, Flew) theologians agree, as well as representatives of Roman Catholic exegesis.
    “The Church in the Gospel of Matthew: Hermeneutical Analysis of the Current Debate”
    Biblical Interpretation and Church Text and Context
    (Flemington Markets, NSW: Paternoster Press, 1984), page 58
    JPK pages 16-17

    Donald A. Carson III
    Baptist and Professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Seminary
    (two quotations from different works)
    Although it is true that petros and petra can mean “stone” and “rock” respectively in earlier Greek, the distinction is largely confined to poetry. Moreover the underlying Aramaic is in this case unquestionable; and most probably kepha was used 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 Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses. The Greek makes the distinction between petros and petra simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine petra could not very well serve as a masculine name.
    The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 8 (Matthew, Mark, Luke)
    (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), page 368
    JPK pages 17-18
    The word Peter petros, meaning “rock” (Gk 4377), is masculine, and in Jesus’ follow-up statement he uses the feminine word petra (Gk 4376). On the basis of this change, many have attempted to avoid identifying Peter as the rock on which Jesus builds his church. Yet if it were not for Protestant reactions against extremes of Roman Catholic interpretations, it is doubtful whether many would have taken “rock” to be anything or anyone other than Peter.
    Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary — New Testament, vol. 2
    (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), page 78

    JPK page 18
    John Peter Lange
    German Protestant scholar
    The Saviour, no doubt, used in both clauses the Aramaic word kepha (hence the Greek Kephas applied to Simon, John i.42; comp. 1 Cor. i.12; iii.22; ix.5; Gal. ii.9), which means rock and is used both as a proper and a common noun.... The proper translation then would be: “Thou art Rock, and upon this rock”, etc.
    Lange’s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: The Gospel According to Matthew, vol. 8
    (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1976), page 293
    JPK page 19

    John A. Broadus
    Baptist author
    (two quotations from the same work)
    Many insist on the distinction between the two Greek words, thou art Petros and on this petra, holding that if the rock had meant Peter, either petros or petra would have been used both times, and that petros signifies a separate stone or fragment broken off, while petra is the massive rock. But this distinction is almost entirely confined to poetry, the common prose word instead of petros being lithos; nor is the distinction uniformly observed.
    But the main answer here is that our Lord undoubtedly spoke Aramaic, which has no known means of making such a distinction [between feminine petra and masculine petros in Greek]. The Peshitta (Western Aramaic) renders, “Thou are kipho, and on this kipho”. The Eastern Aramaic, spoken in Palestine in the time of Christ, must necessarily have said in like manner, “Thou are kepha, and on this kepha”.... Beza called attention to the fact that it is so likewise in French: “Thou art Pierre, and on this pierre”; and Nicholson suggests that we could say, “Thou art Piers (old English for Peter), and on this pier

    Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew
    (Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1886), pages 355-356
    JPK page 20

    J. Knox Chamblin
    Presbyterian and New Testament Professor
    Reformed Theological Seminary
    By the words “this rock” Jesus means not himself, nor his teaching, nor God the Father, nor Peter’s confession, but Peter himself. The phrase is immediately preceded by a direct and emphatic reference to Peter. As Jesus identifies himself as the Builder, the rock on which he builds is most naturally understood as someone (or something) other than Jesus himself. The demonstrative this, whether denoting what is physically close to Jesus or what is literally close in Matthew, more naturally refers to Peter (v. 18) than to the more remote confession (v. 16). The link between the clauses of verse 18 is made yet stronger by the play on words, “You are Peter (Gk. Petros), and on this rock (Gk. petra) I will build my church”. As an apostle, Peter utters the confession of verse 16; as a confessor he receives the designation this rock from Jesus.
    “Matthew”
    Evangelical Commentary on the Bible
    (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1989), page 742
    JPK page 30

    Craig L. Blomberg
    Baptist and Professor of New Testament
    Denver Seminary
    Acknowledging Jesus as The Christ illustrates the appropriateness of Simon's nickname “Peter” (Petros = rock). This is not the first time Simon has been called Peter (cf. John 1:42), but it is certainly the most famous. Jesus’ declaration, “You are Peter”, parallels Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ”, as if to say, “Since you can tell me who I am, I will tell you who you are.” The expression “this rock” almost certainly refers to Peter, following immediately after his name, just as the words following “the Christ” in v. 16 applied to Jesus. The play on words in the Greek between Peter’s name (Petros) and the word “rock” (petra) makes sense only if Peter is the rock and if Jesus is about to explain the significance of this identification.
    The New American Commentary: Matthew, vol. 22
    (Nashville: Broadman, 1992), pages 251-252
    JPK pages 31-32

    David Hill
    Presbyterian minister and Senior Lecturer in the Department of Biblical Studies
    University of Sheffield, England
    On this rock I will build my church: the word-play goes back to Aramaic tradition. It is on Peter himself, the confessor of his Messiahship, that Jesus will build the Church. The disciple becomes, as it were, the foundation stone of the community. Attempts to interpret the “rock” as something other than Peter in person (e.g., his faith, the truth revealed to him) are due to Protestant bias, and introduce to the statement a degree of subtlety which is highly unlikely.
    “The Gospel of Matthew”
    The New Century Bible Commentary
    (London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1972), page 261
    JPK page 34

    Suzanne de Dietrich
    Presbyterian theologian
    The play on words in verse 18 indicates the Aramaic origin of the passage. The new name contains a promise. “Simon”, the fluctuating, impulsive disciple, will, by the grace of God, be the “rock” on which God will build the new community.
    The Layman’s Bible Commentary: Matthew, vol. 16
    (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1961), page 93
    JPK page 34

    Donald A. Hagner
    Fuller Theological Seminary
    The natural reading of the passage, despite the necessary shift from Petros to petra required by the word play in the Greek (but not the Aramaic, where the same word kepha occurs in both places), is that it is Peter who is the rock upon which the church is to be built.... The frequent attempts that have been made, largely in the past, to deny this in favor of the view that the confession itself is the rock... seem to be largely motivated by Protestant prejudice against a passage that is used by the Roman Catholics to justify the papacy.
    Matthew 14-28
    Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 33b
    (Dallas: Word Books, 1995), page 470
    JPK pages 36-37
     
  19. LittleLambofJesus

    LittleLambofJesus Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git! Supporter

    +28,467
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    US-Libertarian
    Protestant Scholars agree - Peter is the Rock in Matthew 16:18

    As late as 396 Church theologians were teaching the rock on which the church was built was a confession of faith.

    ...Why have I wanted to make this little introduction? In order to suggest to you that in Peter the Church is to be recognized. Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter's confession. What is Peter's confession? 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' There's the rock for you, there's the foundation, there's where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer.
    Augustine
    Sermons, Volume III/6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327.

    In Matt 16 Jesus asked his disciples what people were saying about Him Peter responds under the illumination of the Holy Spirit

    "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God."

    Peter's CONFESSION OF FAITH IN CHRIST is the ROCK upon which the true church is built - not Peter the STONE.

    Shortly later Jesus says this to Peter

    Matt 16:23 "But he turned and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offense unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men"

    So which is it Rock or Satan?

    Not ONE apostle or early father ever even hinted that Jesus made Peter the head of the church. Peter never claimed it for himself. Such silence is deafening. The first person to propose this was a Bishop of Rome in the 4th century. Over 300 years after Christ

    Christ is the cornerstone, the stone the builders rejected.

    Who did Peter believe the Rock was?


    [ READ the words of Peter

    1Pe 2:4 To whom coming, [as unto]a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, [and] precious,

    1Pe 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

    1Pe 2:6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.[/size]
     
  20. Quasar92

    Quasar92 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,932
    Christian
    Single

    Yes, Matt Slick is the founder and President of CARM.


    Quasar92
     
Loading...