Posted on 06/03/2009 12:00:38 PM PDT by blue-duncan
I don't understand what you're tyring to implicate by capitalizing rock in this context. I made a comment to another poster that a plain reading of Matthew 16:17 indicates that Jesus is speaking of Peter and not of Peter's profession of faith.
I'll add to it that a plain reading of the verse in context doesn't allow that Jesus is speaking of himself in that verse because then the verse doesn't make sense, as has been pointed out already in this thread.
I've also pointed out that 1 Peter refers to other christians as living rocks immediately after using that very same phrase in reference to Jesus. My point in all of this is to say that the main premise of the article in this thread is, in my opinion, mistaken.
I'm happy to grant to you that when the word rock appears in the Old Testament, it is usually (if not always) referring to God. However, it does not follow from that fact that Jesus must therefore have been referring to himself in verse 17 and not to Peter.
To sum up, I dispute the premise (and I believe that this very discussion amply supports my position) that the Bible is an easily approachable book that anyone with an open mind can read and understand, and I dispute the logic in the conclusion of your exigetical post.
Now, how does any of that impugn Jesus with the Tradition of man? And also allow me to add, at the risk of being uncharitable, that for someone so sensitive to being unfairly accused of something, you seem to me a little quick on the aspersion-casting trigger.
You know which falsehood you spoke.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
NAsbU 1 Corinthians 4:5 Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time,
but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness
and disclose the motives of men's hearts; and then each man's praise will come to him from God.
What I have learned from my Jesuit training
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach.
is to be able to identify the parsing of words
Mazol Tovshalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiachHave a wonderful life on the wide road.
I'll ask again, in what way did I impugn Jesus with the "Tradition of man"?
If you're not going to answer the question, common courtesy would dictate that you retract the accusation.
Amen.
You’re rude. Go back to DU.
True enough. It all starts with cracking it open and reading it, though; which so many "Christians" do not do...sadly.
You’re absolutely right. Jesus is the Rock; Peter was a pebble. He was no Pope, he was a simple shepherd to his people.
If you're not going to answer the question, common courtesy would dictate that you retract the accusation.
Instead of answering the simple question, you have rattled on and on. I have put this question to you more than once. Do believe that Peter is the ROCK of Matthew 16:18 ? Or is Peter a small stone as it is stated in the text. A simple yes or no will suffice. I asked you a simple question.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
No, he hasn’t.
Amen Sistershalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiachThank you for your support of the Holy Word of Elohim.
Get ready for war?
I always give his posts consideration, seriously.
Any time, my FRiend.
May the Blessing of YHvH be on you and yours.shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
And also on yours.
The Bible is pre-eminently a manual of life and conduct for the layman.Stopped reading after that little bit of claptrap.
Sounds like law to me, not gospel.
Well, I can see why the first guy left town.
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.