Peter Is Not The Rock!

[ScottBot]

This is not even a proven fact. He called Him Petros and what He built His church on Petra? Taking a word from the greek and putting it into Aaramiac you have to find out exactly what He was saying. Then translate it to Aaramiac. Other wise you change what Jesus was even Saying.

YOu have absolutely no creditble historical proof that Jesus spoke with his Apostles in Greek. None, zero, nada zip niente. YOu couldn't, because it doesn't exist. Jesus and the Apostles spoke in Aramaic, not Greek.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

YOu have absolutely no creditble historical proof that Jesus spoke with his Apostles in Greek. None, zero, nada zip niente. YOu couldn't, because it doesn't exist. Jesus and the Apostles spoke in Aramaic, not Greek.

Didn't Daniel write in Aramaic?

Strong's Number H69 matches the Hebrew אבן ('eben (Aramaic)).
feminine noun

Daniel 2:35 then broken small together have been the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, and they have been as chaff from the summer threshing-floor, and carried them away hath the wind, and no place hath been found for them: and the stone/'eben that smote the image hath become a great mountain, and hath filled all the land.

Matthew 24:1 And having gone forth, Jesus departed from the temple, and his disciples came near to show him the buildings of the temple,

 

[ScottBot]

Didn't Daniel write in Aramaic?

Strong's Number H69 matches the Hebrew אבן ('eben (Aramaic)).
feminine noun

Daniel 2:35 then broken small together have been the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, and they have been as chaff from the summer threshing-floor, and carried them away hath the wind, and no place hath been found for them: and the stone/'eben that smote the image hath become a great mountain, and hath filled all the land.

Matthew 24:1 And having gone forth, Jesus departed from the temple, and his disciples came near to show him the buildings of the temple,

If Daniel would have written in Aramaic, it would have been rejected by the Council of Jamnia and not included in the Protestant cannon.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

If Daniel would have written in Aramaic, it would have been rejected by the Council of Jamnia and not included in the Protestant cannon.

What language was Ezra written in?

Ezra 5:8 Be it known unto the king, that we journeyed into the province of Y@huwd, unto the house of the Great God/0426 'elahh, and, the same, is being built with large stones/069 'eben, and, timber, is being laid in the walls,--and, this work, with speed, is being done, and is prospering in their hands.

 

[Optimax]

The Word of Yahuweh can't be any plainer than this.

The Savior for whom the Rock was named, asked His disciples the most important question ever posed: "Who do you say (lego - affirm and maintain, advise and teach) I Am (eimi - I exist and am present as)?" To which, a disciple named for the astuteness of his revelation, responded: "Simon (a transliteration of the Hebrew name Shim’own, meaning to listen, understand, discern, regard, and proclaim) Petros (a masculine proper name meaning pebble or stone) gave the answer, ‘The Messiah, the Son of the living God.’" (Matthew 16:15-16)

Affirming this live-saving truth, "Yahushua said (lego), ‘Blessed (makarios - a poetic term denoting transcendent happiness in a life beyond labor and death) are you Shim’own (the one who listens, understands, discerns, regards, and proclaims), son of (bar) Yonah (from yownah, meaning the dove; the name of a Yahudi sent to Nineveh, Assyria whose life and book serve as a prophetic metaphor for Yahushua saving Gentiles), because flesh and blood did not make this manifest (apokalupto - disclose by baring), but My Father who is in Heaven." (Matthew 16:17) As is usually true with Scripture, every name and nuance was carefully chosen, revealing subtle and profound truths.

What follows is important. Petros/Peter isn’t the petra/bedrock. The recognition that "Yahushua is the Messiah, the Son of the living God," is the foundation upon which the ekklesia/called-out assembly would be restored and established. Beyond the evidence sprinkled throughout the Tanach, identifying the Rock with Yahshua, "Petros" was a man and every reference to "petra/bedrock" is feminine.

"Indeed (de), I (kago) say (logos) concerning this (hoti - as a marker of equivalence for identifying and explaining this) to you (soi), you (su) are (ei) Petros (a masculine proper noun meaning pebble or stone), and (kai) upon/by/in/with (epi - "upon" when used with things that are at rest, "by" when used in relationship to people, "with" when used in connection with authority, and "in" used in reference to an observation) this one (taute - singular feminine demonstrative pronoun) Rock (petra - bedrock, a feminine noun; a large stone which projects itself) I shall build by edifying, promoting, and restoring (oikodomeo - rebuild and establish, strengthen and enable, instruct and improve) My (mou) called out gathering (ekklesia)." (Matthew 16:18)

English translations all leave "hoti/concerning this" out of their renderings of Yahshua’s answer. Had it been included, no rational person would have thought that Petros, rather than his answer, was the foundation of the ekklesia. The source of edification and restoration is the Savior, not his flawed and imperfect disciple.

Believing Peter is the Rock is irrational and delusional. The evidence of Yahuweh's Word is irrevocable/irrefutable and supercedes, trumps, pre-empts, negates, refutes, and proves to be a lie all that oppose/contradict it, whether said opposition is human or church dogma.

You are correct in that Peter is not the rock.

The rock Jesus referred to is that the Holy Spirit revealed to Peter truth.

The Holy Spirit is today, still revealing the truth of God's Word to born again Christians.

That is what the church is built on, the revealed knowledge of God's Word.

When a person hears the word concerning Jesus and that a person must be born again.

The Holy Spirit reveals the truth of Jesus to them and they believe in their heart that God raised Jesus from the dead and the person confesses with their mouth that Jesus is Lord and that person is right there on the spot made a new creature in Christ Jesus.

Scripture for that is:

Ro 10:9-10
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
KJV

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

You are correct in that Peter is not the rock.

The rock Jesus referred to is that the Holy Spirit revealed to Peter truth.

The Holy Spirit is today, still revealing the truth of God's Word to born again Christians.

That is what the church is built on, the revealed knowledge of God's Word.

When a person hears the word concerning Jesus and that a person must be born again.

The Holy Spirit reveals the truth of Jesus to them and they believe in their heart that God raised Jesus from the dead and the person confesses with their mouth that Jesus is Lord and that person is right there on the spot made a new creature in Christ Jesus.

Scripture for that is:

Ro 10:9-10
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
KJV

The greek doesn't show an article "the" before Lord so I put "lord of us".

Acts 2:21 And it shall be--all who ever shall call upon the name of Lord-of-us/kuriou <2962> , shall be saved.

Romans 10:13 For, Whosoever shall call upon the name of Lord-of-us/kuriou <2962> , shall be saved:--

Daniel 12:1 And, at that time, will Michael, the great ruler who standeth for the sons of thy people, make a stand, and there will be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation, up to that time,--and, at that time, shall thy people, escape

 

[ScottBot]

You are correct in that Peter is not the rock.

The rock Jesus referred to is that the Holy Spirit revealed to Peter truth.

The Holy Spirit is today, still revealing the truth of God's Word to born again Christians.

That is what the church is built on, the revealed knowledge of God's Word.

When a person hears the word concerning Jesus and that a person must be born again.

The Holy Spirit reveals the truth of Jesus to them and they believe in their heart that God raised Jesus from the dead and the person confesses with their mouth that Jesus is Lord and that person is right there on the spot made a new creature in Christ Jesus.

Scripture for that is:

Ro 10:9-10
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
KJV

Then why didn't Jesus just be overt and say that thie Holy Spirit is the Rock? Why the ambiguity? So that someone 2,000 years later can find a different interpretation than has always been understood?

 

[Optimax]

Then why didn't Jesus just be overt and say that thie Holy Spirit is the Rock? Why the ambiguity? So that someone 2,000 years later can find a different interpretation than has always been understood?

I could ask you a simular question.

Then why didn't Jesus just be overt and say that Peter was the Rock instead of saying "this rock"? Why the ambiguity? So that someone 2,000 years later can find a different interpretation than has always been understood?

Depends on where one is at as to what has been "always understood".

 

[ScottBot]

I could ask you a simular question.

Then why didn't Jesus just be overt and say that Peter was the Rock instead of saying "this rock"? Why the ambiguity? So that someone 2,000 years later can find a different interpretation than has always been understood?

Depends on where one is at as to what has been "always understood".

He wasn't ambiguous. He was very clear.

He said (in Aramaic)

You are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church.

Anyone listening would have no doubt what Jesus was implying. The church for over 1,600 years understood it the same way. Early writings are rife with it. This whole "Jesus was talking about Peter's confession" or "Jesus was talking about Himself" is a modern construct.

 

[mont974x4]

There is no doubt, Peter is not the foundation, the rock. The whole of Scripture disputes that asertion.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

He wasn't ambiguous. He was very clear.

He said (in Aramaic)

You are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church.

Anyone listening would have no doubt what Jesus was implying. The church for over 1,600 years understood it the same way. Early writings are rife with it. This whole "Jesus was talking about Peter's confession" or "Jesus was talking about Himself" is a modern construct.

So we should ditch all the Koine Greek MSS? That would be like asking the Jews to give up their Hebrew MSS>

Byz./Maj.) Matthew 16:18 kagw de soi legw oti su ei petroV kai epi tauth th petra oikodomhsw mou thn ekklhsian kai pulai adou ou katiscusousin authV

W-H ) Matthew 16:18 kagw de soi legw oti su ei petroV kai epi tauth th petra oikodomhsw mou thn ekklhsian kai pulai adou ou katiscusousin authV

Textus Rec.) Matthew 16:18 kagw de soi legw oti su ei petroV kai epi tauth th petra oikodomhsw mou thn ekklhsian kai pulai adou ou katiscusousin authV

 

[Optimax]

He wasn't ambiguous. He was very clear.

He said (in Aramaic)

You are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church.

Anyone listening would have no doubt what Jesus was implying. The church for over 1,600 years understood it the same way. Early writings are rife with it. This whole "Jesus was talking about Peter's confession" or "Jesus was talking about Himself" is a modern construct.

I understand what and why you believe what you do.

We do disagree on "the rock".

Hopefully we can agree that Jesus through the new birth is the ONLY way to the Father, or heaven, or Eternal Life.

 

[ScottBot]

There is no doubt, Peter is not the foundation, the rock. The whole of Scripture disputes that asertion.

Jesus is the cornerstone, no doubt about that. However, when GOd changes someone's name, it is always a significant event that affects everything that comes after it.

See
Abram (exhaulted father) - Abraham (father of many nations)
Jacob (holds the heel) - Israel (struggled with God)
Simon (listening) - Kephas (Rock)

 

[ScottBot]

I understand what and why you believe what you do.

We do disagree on "the rock".

Hopefully we can agree that Jesus through the new birth is the ONLY way to the Father, or heaven, or Eternal Life.

Amen.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Jesus is the cornerstone, no doubt about that. However, when GOd changes someone's name, it is always a significant event that affects everything that comes after it.

See
Abram (exhaulted father) - Abraham (father of many nations)
Jacob (holds the heel) - Israel (struggled with God)
Simon (listening) - Kephas (Rock)

I will stick with the Greek bro, but as bstow said, we are all of the CHRIST.

Byz./Maj.) Matthew 16:18 kagw de soi legw oti su ei petroV kai epi tauth {this/that?} th {THE} petra {ROCK} oikodomhsw mou thn ekklhsian kai pulai adou ou katiscusousin authV

 

[mont974x4]

It is usually significant, and yes, he was called rock..a small lovely stone, just like the rest of us. Remember, we ALL have new names.


NASB
Rev 2:17'He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, to him I will give some of the hidden manna, and I will give him a white stone, and a new name written on the stone which no one knows but he who receives it.'

BTW

1Co 1:12 Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, "I am of Paul," and "I of Apollos," and "I of Cephas," and "I of Christ."
1Co 1:13 Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
1Co 1:14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius,
1Co 1:15 so that no one would say you were baptized in my name.

 

[Hentenza]

He wasn't ambiguous. He was very clear.

He said (in Aramaic)

You are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church.

Anyone listening would have no doubt what Jesus was implying. The church for over 1,600 years understood it the same way. Early writings are rife with it. This whole "Jesus was talking about Peter's confession" or "Jesus was talking about Himself" is a modern construct.

Hey AVO,

Couple of problems. The aramiac is not extant so there is no proof of this.

Also, reading the narrative in context, Jesus is asking the disciples who is the son of man, verse 13. Some of the disciples tell Jesus that the son of man is John the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. Jesus is clearly looking for a profession of faith. He wants them to answer that Jesus is the son of man, verse 14. In verse 15, Jesus asks Peter directly. Obviously Peter had not answered in verse 14. In verse 16, Peter makes his profession of faith by telling Jesus that He is the son of man. In verse 17, Jesus tells Peter that his knowledge came from the Father not from himself. This verse is talking about revelation by the HS to Peter. In verse 18, Jesus tells Peter that He will change his name to Peter, petra, and that in this rock, petros, He will build His church. Everything preceding this verse is talking about faith, not Peter. In verse 19, Jesus tells Peter that He will give Peter the keys to the kingdom. This verse talks about Peter preaching the gospel and whomever accepts his gospel will be given the kingdom of heaven and those who don't will not. The terms bind and loose are jewish legal terms that refer to keeping or letting go. You can see this in action in Acts 2:14-47.
In verse 20, Jesus tells the disciples not to tell anyone yet because Jesus time was not yet come.
So, the rock is faith in Jesus Christ. That is the only foundation that would have made the church and survive. Peter was just a regular fallible person which was prong to sin the same as us. Any other foundation would have crumbled quickly. The foundation and cornerstone is Christ.

 

[mont974x4]

(Mat 10:32) "Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven.

(Luk 12:8) "And I say to you, everyone who confesses Me before men, the Son of Man will confess him also before the angels of God;

(Rom 10:9) that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;

(Phi 2:11) and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.


(1Jo 4:3) and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.




Who should we confess, Peter or Christ?

 

[Fireinfolding]

Jesus is the cornerstone, no doubt about that. However, when GOd changes someone's name, it is always a significant event that affects everything that comes after it.

See
Abram (exhaulted father) - Abraham (father of many nations)
Jacob (holds the heel) - Israel (struggled with God)
Simon (listening) - Kephas (Rock)

Mat 7:24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto ~a wise man~, which built his house upon a rock:

So listening Simon (hearing His words) and doing them is as one who builds his house upon a rock.

He is considered wise

Ecc 12:11 The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by the masters of assemblies, which are given from one shepherd.


And the words of the wise (given of ONE Shepherd) appear to be shown as MASTERS

Luke 6:40 The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be ~as~ his master.

Apparently when He turned and looked on his disciples and rebuked Peter calling ~him~ SATAN was obviously showing he was NOT YET PERFECT

That was a major event

Peter is Satan... see that name change?

Cant be ANYTHING he SAID

Hes building his church on Satan?

Peace

Fireinfolding

 

[Matthan]

People use scripture to satisfy their individual purpose resulting in people departing from what Scripture mandates concerning "one Lord, one faith and one baptism."

Your post clearly demonstrates the truth of my post that you quoted. You see, to you baptism is the sprinkling of water, a few words, and eventual salvation. But Scripture, (God's only Truth) also clearly tells us that our real baptism in Christ is spiritual in nature, by the indwelling of the Holy Ghost inside all true believers. Your church teaches that baptism brings a person a little grace, but true spiritual baptism is by God, and it brings with it a full and very complete measure of His Grace.

Still, you will believe your traditions and legends, and not what God clearly and patiently tells you is His truth. And you will come up with all sorts of reasons for denying His truth while clinging to your legends. You will never admit that the Bible is our only source of His Truth.

I sure hope your teeth are in good order and your vocal cords are well rested....

Matthan