Peter Is Not The Rock!

[hogndog]

This "one true church" doctrine can be traced to one verse of Scripture, which, when compared with other Scriptures, is found not to teach this doctrine at all. When Jesus asked his disciples who He was, Peter responded:
"Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. Matthew 16:16"

Then Jesus answered Peter:
"... thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Matthew 16:18

Catholicism contends that the Lord was referring to Peter as the rock, and has since built the entire Catholic religion upon that premise. But all other pertinent Scriptures declare that Jesus was referring to Himself as the rock, not Peter:
"... for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ." 1 Corinthians 10:4

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Btw do ya think Peter and Paul knew about and preached the book of Revelation

They died before it was written.

Forgive me...

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

They died before it was written.

Forgive me...

Does that mean the Gospels and Epistles were also written after the authors died?

If so, then Revelation and the Olivet Discourse would have been written after the fact I would think as I view most if not all of Revelation as fulfilled [as do the RCs I think] .


Luke 21:23 "Woe yet to the-ones in belly having, and to those giving suck in those/ekeinaiV <1565>, the Days/hmeraiV <2250>. For shall be great Distress/necessity on the Land, and Wrath in the People, this;
28 Beginning yet to-be-becoming these-things/toutwn <5130> up-bend! and lift up! the heads of ye, thru-that is nearing the redemption/apo-lutrwsiV <629> of ye

Reve 9:6 and in the Days/hmeraiV <2250>, those/ekeinaiV <1565>, shall be seeking the men, the Death, and not no they shall be finding it/him. And they shall be yearning to be dying, and is fleeing the death from them

http://www.askelm.com/restoring/res026.htm

There have been, however, a good number of scholars over the past hundred and fifty years who have leaned heavily toward the late 50s or early 60s C.E. for the composition of the Book of Revelation simply because the historical indications within the book point more appropriately to that time. And true enough, if John were recording historical events contemporary with the writing of the book, then the composition must be dated to near 60 C.E. Let us look at some of the reasons for this.

 

[Anglian]

It might also be helpful if we remembered that the autocephalous Churches had their own traditions, even as they often received slightly different versions of what became the canon of NT Scripture; the West, for example, doubted that Hebrews was actually by Paul, whilst the East doubted whether LLOJ's favourite book should even be received at all, so fruitful a source of heresy had it proved to be. But St. Jerome accepted the view of St. Athanasius that Hebrews was by Paul, and the East came to accept the view that Revelation was canonical.

It might be worth stressing that many Catholic scholars acknowledge that the understanding of the Petrine primacy developed over time - and then adding that that understanding developed differently; between East and West, and then in the West itself.

The Orthodox have always been happy to read Matthew 16:16 as referring to St. Peter's faith, and to acknowledge that Rome has a primacy of honour. But once, from the fifth century onward, Rome began to understand primacy as meaning authority, then a divergence between East and West began.

With the Western Roman Empire no longer functioning after the mid-fifth century and with the barbarian incursions, Rome became the only focus of unity and civilisation in the West, which is why the developing understanding of the Petrine primacy took the direction it did in the West. In the East there was no corresponding phenomenon, and so no need for any such understanding. Indeed, as Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem fell under Muslim control, the multi polar world of the Early Church where there had been four, and then five patriarchates, collapsed, leaving Constantinople in the East performing the same function there are Rome did in the West - but with the added power of the Eastern Roman Emperor at its disposal. Here, Roman claims to authority were not well-received, and so developed the problems which reached a head in 1054.

Only once the West had reached a level of literacy and civilisation - and safety, did it become possible to question the claims accepted in the West sionce at least the 400s. But, without the influence of Rome in retaining the scholarship of the ancient world for the West, and men like Leo who faced up to Attila, the Faith might have been extinguished in the West.

The tragedy in the West in terms of unity, was that Rome may have continued to make an extreme form of its claims for too long, and thus have precipitated an equally extreme reaction to it. The sadness, perhaps, is that the Petrine claims may continue to be the rock on which unity founders.

Peace,

Anglian

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Does that mean the Gospels and Epistles were also written after the authors died?

If so, then Revelation and the Olivet Discourse would have been written after the fact I would think as I view most if not all of Revelation as fulfilled [as do the RCs I think] .


Luke 21:23 "Woe yet to the-ones in belly having, and to those giving suck in those/ekeinaiV <1565>, the Days/hmeraiV <2250>. For shall be great Distress/necessity on the Land, and Wrath in the People, this;
28 Beginning yet to-be-becoming these-things/toutwn <5130> up-bend! and lift up! the heads of ye, thru-that is nearing the redemption/apo-lutrwsiV <629> of ye

Reve 9:6 and in the Days/hmeraiV <2250>, those/ekeinaiV <1565>, shall be seeking the men, the Death, and not no they shall be finding it/him. And they shall be yearning to be dying, and is fleeing the death from them

http://www.askelm.com/restoring/res026.htm

There have been, however, a good number of scholars over the past hundred and fifty years who have leaned heavily toward the late 50s or early 60s C.E. for the composition of the Book of Revelation simply because the historical indications within the book point more appropriately to that time. And true enough, if John were recording historical events contemporary with the writing of the book, then the composition must be dated to near 60 C.E. Let us look at some of the reasons for this.

How does the fact that Peter and Paul were dead when Revelation was written translate into: "...the Gospels and Epistles were also written after the authors died?" I'm not following you here. This sideline could derail a thread. Perhaps you will start another?

Forgive me...

 

[MamaZ]

The Rock that the Church is built on is Christ life,death and ressurection. This is the bedrock of the Church. That Christ came to sinners and died that they might live. The Gates of Hell will never prevail against that. For this fact was prophecied about and actually did happen.Now to those whom are born again we are indeed all witnesses to that very fact for the Spirit of Christ dwells in each one of us. Christ has opened our Spiritual eyes and ears and we know the very voice of our one and only True shepherd. And that be Christ Jesus the risen King.

 

[katholikos]

....Catholicism contends that the Lord was referring to Peter as the rock, and has since built the entire Catholic religion upon that premise...

Sorry, but you are wrong. "Catholic" just refers to the "whole", as in the whole Body of Christ, which is His Church. Christ built it, not us. And our faith is not built on Peter - it is built on Jesus. Peter and the pope's are merely His earthly shepherds, carrying out the duties He gave to them.

...But all other pertinent Scriptures declare that Jesus was referring to Himself as the rock, not Peter:
"... for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ." 1 Corinthians 10:4

Apple and oranges. You are confusing scriptures and ending up with erroneous interpretations. Our Lord says to Peter, "Blessed are you. . . . And so I say to you, you are Peter. . . . I will give to you the keys to the kingdom. . . . Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven." Jesus uses the word you seven times in just three verses. It doesn&#8217;t follow that Jesus would address so much of this passage to Peter, and then say, "But I will build my Church upon me." The context is clearly one in which Jesus is communicating a unique authority to Peter.

In addition, Jesus is portrayed as the builder of the Church, not the building. He said, "I will build my church." Jesus is "the wise man who built his house upon the rock" (Matt. 7:24) in Matthew&#8217;s Gospel. Once again, the interpretation of Jesus building the Church upon himself does not fit the context.

The changing of Simon&#8217;s name to Peter is also significant and often overlooked. In Scripture, we find that when God revealed a new and radical calling to certain of his people, he sometimes changed their names. In particular, this is true in the calling of the patriarchs. Abram ("exalted father" in Hebrew) was changed to Abraham ("father of the multitudes"); Jacob ("supplanter") was changed to Israel ("one who prevails with God"). In fact, there is an interesting parallel between Abraham and Peter. Isaiah 51:1&#8211;2 says:

Hearken to me, you who pursue deliverance, you who seek the Lord; look to the rock from which you were hewn. . . . Look to Abraham your father.
​

Jesus made Peter a true father over the household of faith, just as God made Abraham our true father in the faith (cf. Rom. 4:1&#8211;18; Jas. 2:21). It is fitting that Peter&#8217;s successors are called "pope" or "papa," as was Abraham (Luke 16:24).


When we understand that Christ is the true son of David who came to restore the prophetic kingdom of David, we understand that in Matthew 16, Christ, like the king of Israel, was establishing a "prime minister" among his ministers, the apostles, in the kingdom. Isaiah 22:20&#8211;22 gives insight into the ministry of the "prime minister" in ancient Israel:

In that day I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your girdle on him, and will commit your authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.
​

In Revelation 1:18, Jesus declares, "I have the keys of Death and Hades," then quotes this very text from Isaiah in Revelation 3:7:

And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: "The words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David, who opens and no one shall shut, who shuts and no one opens."
​

No Christian would deny that Jesus is the King who possesses the keys. To whom does he give the keys? To Peter!

If we examine the text grammatically&#8212;"You are Peter, and on this rock"&#8212;"this rock" must refer to the closest noun. To say "this rock" refers to Jesus, or to Peter&#8217;s declaration of faith, is to completely ignore the structure of the sentence.

As an analogy, consider this sentence: "I have a car and a truck, and it is blue." Which is blue? The truck, because that is the noun closest to the pronoun it. This would be even clearer if the reference to the car were two sentences earlier, as Peter&#8217;s profession is two sentences earlier than the word rock.

If Jesus wanted to distinguish between rocks, he could have said: "You are Peter, but upon this rock I will build my Church." "This rock" would then have clearly referred to something other than Peter.

.


parts of this post from
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0611btb.asp

 

[MamaZ]

In addition, Jesus is portrayed as the builder of the Church, not the building. He said, "I will build my church." Jesus is "the wise man who built his house upon the rock" (Matt. 7:24) in Matthew’s Gospel. Once again, the interpretation of Jesus building the Church upon himself does not fit the context.

He is protrayed as the very foundation layed. Matt 7:24 coincides with John 1:1
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.
Joh 1:4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.

Mat 7:24 "Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock.

 

[ticker]

"There is no Rock...there is no Rock like Peeeeter!"

"...Roch of Aaaaages....Peter is the ROCK!"


See? Just doesn't go.

 

[katholikos]

"There is no Rock...there is no Rock like Peeeeter!"

"...Roch of Aaaaages....Peter is the ROCK!"


See? Just doesn't go.

Brilliant theology

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Brilliant theology

Sounds pretty much like the theology of Roman Catholicism to me

Matthew 23:15 Woe to ye Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! That ye are going about the sea and the dry to make one proselyte, and whenever he may be becoming, ye are making him a son of geennhV twofold-more of ye-selves.........33 Serpents gennhmata of vipers how ye may be fleeing from the judging of the geennhV

Ezekiel 39:12And house of Israel entomb Them so that to cleanse/purify the Land Seven Months. And all of people of the Land entomb them, and He becomes to them for a Name, Day of to be glorified Me, declaration of Adonai YHWH.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Sorry, but you are wrong. "Catholic" just refers to the "whole", as in the whole Body of Christ, which is His Church. Christ built it, not us. And our faith is not built on Peter - it is built on Jesus. Peter and the pope's are merely His earthly shepherds, carrying out the duties He gave to them.

I have no King/Shepherd but JESUS

1Peter 5:4 And of being made manifest the Chief-Shepherd/arci-poimenoV <750>, ye shall be being requitted the unfading crown of the glory

Reve 19:11 And I perceived the heaven having be opened and Lo! A horse, white and the-One sitting upon him being called Faithful and True and in justice He is judging and is battling.

 

[katholikos]

Sounds pretty much like the theology of Roman Catholicism to me...

Right. 2000 years of saints, theologians and doctors of the Church sounds like some half-witted jingle to you.

As long as you're being that unintelligent, why don't you throw is one of your pedophile insults too? Thats about at your level of sophistication

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Right. 2000 years of saints, theologians and doctors of the Church sounds like some half-witted jingle to you.

As long as you're being that unintelligent, why don't you throw is one of your pedophile insults too? Thats about at your level of sophistication

:o As YHWH said, I will destroy the Wisdom of the Wise........

Deuteronomy 28:48 Therefore shalt thou serve thine enemies which YHWH shall send against thee, in hunger, and in thirst, and in nakedness, and in want of all things: and he shall put a yoke of iron upon thy neck, until he have destroyed thee.

Reve 6:5 And when it up opens-up the seal, the third, I hear the third living-one saying: "Be coming!" [*and look]. And I saw and Behold! A horse, black, and the one sitting upon him having a Yoke/zugon <2218> in the Hand of him.[Deut 28:48/Acts 15:10]

 

[visionary]

Peter.... upon this rock.. what rock...oh.. the chief cornerstone the builders rejected.. upon that stone.. gotcha..

 

[squint]

Peter.... upon this rock.. what rock...oh.. the chief cornerstone the builders rejected.. upon that stone.. gotcha..

Your byline expresses quite well how matters of Word should be approached:

"Since the Torah is a finite book expressing the will of an infinite God, many lessons must be derivable from each passage from all the infinite angles."

A hearty AMEN to that statement!

It always puzzled me why the RCC (with whom I was once a member) could take that passage about Peter and not see the obvious. Even in their own writings in the RCC encyclopedia they are very VAGUE about the openly exposed matter of Satan speaking THROUGH Peter in the very texts they use to justify Peter as being 'the rock' and being given the 'key' of understanding. That very KEY is to understand as Jesus advised, that where THE WORD is sown, SATAN, the WICKED ONE does surely arrive PROMPTLY on the scene. Jesus openly rebuked SATAN in Peter. Not Peter, SATAN.

This is at least in part the 'key' that was delivered using Peter as an example of THE FACT.

The RCC however says very little IF ANYTHING about this FACT, and in fact their own workings lay the SINS continually around the necks of the PEOPLE, ever delivering them their temporal absolutions week by week and ever making them return to temporarily dispel those sins via confessions and eating their supposedly transubstantiated wafer meal.

If they like JESUS, drew a clear line between MANKIND/Peter used for example and the working of SATAN where the Word is sown, they'd probably empty the pews overnite because this message is AN OFFENCE. No one wants to admit that the workings of SATAN could be IN THEM! They'd rather be led to blame themselves and anyone else BUT Satan. So the key has obviously been yet again stolen right before their eyes and they didn't even CATCH the THIEF, yet alone BIND that thief by the Truth of God's Words to that THIEF.

Just a few observations on this matter fwiw, and in full expectation of RESISTANCE which Jesus has promised by His Words which we ALL experience here everyday because 'we' handle The Word.

enjoy!

squint

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Peter.... upon this rock.. what rock...oh.. the chief cornerstone the builders rejected.. upon that stone.. gotcha..

And who were those "builders"

John 2:20 Say then the Judeans: "Forty and six to-years was built the Santuary/Sacred-place/naoV <3485>, this, and Thou in three days shall be rousing him"?

Ezekiel 39:12And House of Israel entomb Them so that to Cleanse/Purify the Land Seven Months. And all of people of the Land entomb them, and He becomes to them for a Name, Day of to be glorified Me, declaration of Adonai YHWH.

 

[visionary]

And who were those "builders"

John 2:20 Say then the Judeans: "Forty and six to-years was built the Santuary/Sacred-place/naoV <3485>, this, and thou in three days shall be rousing him"?

Ezekiel 39:12And house of Israel entomb Them so that to Cleanse/Purify the Land Seven Months. And all of people of the Land entomb them, and He becomes to them for a Name, Day of to be glorified Me, declaration of Adonai YHWH.

Romans 3:2
Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Romans 3:2
Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

And what did the corrupt Judean rulers eventually do with those Oracles that were given to the OC Hebrew Israelites at Mt Sinai.

Galatian 4:24 which-any/s is an allegory. For these are the two Covenants, one indeed from mount Sinai into servitude generating/gennwsa <1080> who-any is Hagar;
Gala 4:30 but what saith the Writing? `Be Casting Out!/#1537-#906 ek-bale (5628)] the maid-servant and her son, for the son of the maid-servant may not be heir with the son of the free-one;' [Genesis 21:10]

Reve 11:2 and the Court, the-one with-out of-the Sanctuary, be Casting Out!/#1537-#906 ek-bale (5628)] out-side/exw <1854>

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7272732
The Court in Revelation 11:2

http://www.nsbible.org/sits_ts/v0s1.htm

The Camp--The Court--The Tabernacle--The Brazen Altar--The Laver-- The Table--The Lampstand--The Golden Altar--The Mercy Seat and Ark--The Gate--The First Veil--The Second Veil--The Significance of These and Their Antitypes.

 

[MamaZ]

"There is no Rock...there is no Rock like Peeeeter!"

"...Roch of Aaaaages....Peter is the ROCK!"


See? Just doesn't go.