pastorbill:
“The context of these memorable words spoken by Jesus, is Peter’s attempted rebuke of Jesus, and Jesus’ harsh rebuttal to Peter. Peter was offended by Jesus’ suggestion that He, Jesus, would have to be hated. rejected, and crucified, before he would be glorified.
And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. And he spake that saying openly. And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him. But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men.(Mark 8:31-33)
What we have here is the constant and ongoing tension between God’s values and the things man esteems. Notice that Jesus rebuked Satan in Peter; not for being a Satanist, but for being a humanist! “You savor… the things that be of men…” What are these “things of men”? They all revolve around the Self; self Love, self-righteousness, self-preservation, self-gratification, self-justification, self-seeking, self-glorification, etc.
Peter couldn’t perceive any need for the Messiah to suffer, be rejected, humiliated and killed in order to perform his God-given mission. Such defeat ran so counter to the Jewish expectation of the Messiah. Peter could certainly relate to a Messiah that would crush Israel’s enemies, or who was destined to exalt Israel’s status in the earth. But a suffering Messiah? How could that be of God?”
~ ~ ~
You comment on the verses in the book of Mark, the context of Our Lord’s words, well, what of Peters’ words?
You don’t find Peter’s words in Mark. They are there in Matthew, verse 16:22.
Matt 16:22
And Peter taking him, began to rebuke him, saying: Lord, be it far from thee, this shall not be unto thee.
Satan wasn’t “in” Peter. All the things you say about Peter are negative. With the benefit of history, we know the entire story. It wasn’t “self love” as you wrote. Peter didn’t understand YET on hearing Our Lord’s words, Peter simply did not want Our Lord to die, He loved Him so.
I wanted to share the extraordinary about Peter. Peter’s proclaiming who Christ is and Scripture reference to the healings by Peter, just by his walking in the room!
Another, Peter felt so unworthy, he died, martyred upside
down.
God bless you,
Peter wasn’t impressive in his beginnings, but Peter grew.
Peter is sort of symbolic of all of us.
StPIo, I am not just being “nagative on Peter” I am only commenting on the text. Peter is our Lord’s apostle, I nourish my very soul on the words of Peter,Paul and John, I Love Peter also! But Peter is very honest about himself. Scholars believe that the Gospel of Mark is actually the preaching of Peter,for Mark was his assistant for quite some time. Peter was negative on Peter, telling the truth about who he was before God’s grace got ahold of him. I share your appreciation for Peter, but also am willing to go where Peter went, in his frankness about his own shortcomings, that God’s grace might be magnified.