Posted on 06/28/2023 4:27:11 AM PDT by RaceBannon
Each time the word ROCK is used in the Bible in reference to any providing of the people, it is used as God being the one provided. Here is the first verse in the Bible in the KJV showing just that.
(Exo 17:6 KJV) Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel.
Who pointed out where the ROCK was? God did. What came out of the ROCK? Water, water to drink. Who is referred to as LIVING WATER, water that must be drunk to live eternally? Jesus.
(John 7:38 KJV) He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. Each time the word ROCK is used, where God provides the ROCK, it is either a literal ROCK, like just above, where WATER came out of, water to allow the Isralites to live, it came from GOD, not a man.
Check out Revelation 15…. Those that overcome will be singing the song of Moses…. Otherwise known as Deuteronomy 32. Now for the unlearned this is about all that overcome, not limited to race or creed.
Yes. We get that. Thank you for your contribution. But if there was a “rock” it was James the brother of Jesus.
Christ did not build his church upon a man. He built his church up on the idea that he would be the sacrifice for the sin of the world. To think in terms of a human being being in the cornerstone of his church is ridiculous.
Yes, that’s exactly what Jesus did. He built his church, his holy church, directly and squarely upon the shoulders of one human being. Do you comprehend how ridiculous that is?
If this wasn't part of a Divine plan, then Christ would still be walking around on earth in His resurrected form today.
You are 100% correct, but don’t expect Catholic FReepers to pay any attention to all the references you give. Most have been indoctrinated since birth that Peter was the rock upon which the church was built, even though it, of course, must be Jesus.
Do you comprehend how ridiculous it is to say that Jesus fed 5000+ people with only 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish?
If you doubt that Peter is the Rock, please explain Mark 3:16:
“He appointed the twelve: Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter);”
Peter = Cephas = Rock
Are you suggesting The Lord was lying?
Fair enough. :-)
Could only imagine those first few years after his death. Sheesh.
God is the ascent, Jesus is a Path, churches are merely a sign post.
Stop with this nonsense of my Church is better than yours for if you truly believe u don't need to peck.
Please take your meds.
CC
Tired and dishonest to interject the worn out trope of Sola Scriptura.
Since you went there consider this. The prophets when speaking God’s word risked death if proven false, who risks that now when speaking orally of catholic tradition that has no scriptural support?
I have no problem with oral tradition. I have a problem with oral tradition that contradicts or has no support or a contrived support in scripture when such a tradition is presented with doctrinal authority.
What standard do you use when confronted with an oral tradition as to whether is is a Godly practice or not? If not the Bible then what.
Why do so many Catholics actively disapprove of others searching the scripture for the truth of those who present orally a doctrinal issue given those in the early church were commended for doing that very thing?
Should we just ignore this scripture?
Acts 17:11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.
Peter is a man not the Rock of my salvation
Something else to consider:
While Simon (Peter, Rock) was building the church, Paul (Saul of Tarsus) was busy martyring as many Christians as he could find.
Yes, Christ converted Paul, and Paul became a great church father. But Paul was not the founder of the church.
Christ is the Corner Stone, and Peter is the foundation.
4074 Pétros (a masculine noun) – properly, a stone (pebble), such as a small rock found along a pathway. 4074 /Pétros (”small stone”) then stands in contrast to 4073 /pétra (”cliff, boulder,” Abbott-Smith).
You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.
Jesus renamed Simon bar-Jona with the name "Petros" ("Kepha" in Aramaic, which the NT renders as "Cephas"). "Petros" is simply the masculine form of "petra", "rock" in Greek, just as "Kepha" is "rock" in Aramaic.
Jesus named Peter "Rock". Your quarrel is with Jesus, not with us. He didn't name Peter's confession of faith "Rock," he named Peter personally "Rock," on account of his confession.
Anything else is just trying to obscure the plain meaning of the text.
That’s ridiculous. Now count how many times Jesus is mentioned
Jesus is my hope and my salvation. Peter is not
I think, too, that we can safely guarantee that the actual conversation between first-century Galilean Jews was conducted in Aramaic, not Greek. (Paul, not Peter, was specifically sent to the Gentiles because Paul was fluent in Greek.) In Aramaic, both Peter's name and the word for "rock" are "kepha".
And, we're the ones with the interpretation problem?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.