Following is to explain, in case any of you are wondering, why I have not engaged much on the theological debate of whether Peter is the Rock.
The premise which I am attempting to uphold or debunk in this research project has three parts:
(b) the name has been erased and/or lost in certain translations and
(c) thus has had an effect on how Christians understand certain passages in Scripture.
Now that the three points seem to be established and/or evidenced on the thread, I will enter the debate – just a little bit - on Matthew 16.
First of all, it is quite apparent by the excerpt from Pope Benedict posted by betty boop at 43 that the name, God is the Rock, is proclaimed at the highest authority of the temporal Roman Catholic Church – even though it may be perhaps not so clearly understood among the laity.
And that to me is the great tragedy: losing the Name, God is the Rock, in the common vernacular of all Christians - because names are more than a little bit important.
The Jews of course have always known this and have carefully guarded the Names of God over the millennia.
The importance of a name is also evidenced in common parlance among Christians. Witness all the hostile sidebars contesting the names ascribed to Mary.
And please do not let this thread devolve into yet another such hostile sidebar. The point is that a name ascribes honor (or dishonor) and thus becomes a core issue in theology and, I aver, in the sanctification of the Christian believer as follows.
A name itself is a meditation – whether the Name of God or of any of His saints or fellowservants of Almighty God.
How many of us begin a meditation or prayer contemplating names like these: I AM, Messiah, YHWH, Jesus Christ, The Rock, Immanuel, Rose of Sharon, Lily of the Valley, Bright and Morning Star, Elohim, El Shaddai, Adonai, HaShem, Almighty God, Word of God, Alpha and Omega, King of Kings, Lord of Lords, and so on?
I assert that when we contemplate a Name of God, we are also worshipping Him through one of His revelations to us. He is the Rock, He is Alpha and Omega, He is the Word of God, He is God with us, He is the Vine, and so on.
Thus I assert that when we think of Peter in Matthew 16 – and Abraham in Isaiah 51:1-2 – we should be thinking of them, not as “The Rock” which is a Name of God specially announced in the Song of Moses, the Torah, Deut 32:1-4 ---– but rather as fellowservants, each as first “rocks” in the construction of His believers - both Christian and Jew - but neither one exclusive nor the cornerstone nor the foundation nor the head of His Body.
I agree with what you state. And, in the case of Peter, you do not see any other place in the New Testament where he is spoken of as "the rock". Rather, you see him, along with James and John, "reputed to be" pillars of the church. He certainly took an active role in the leadership of the early church. But one does not see him as being the prime apostle at any time after Pentecost.
Amen.
Excellent.
Thanks.
And thanks for all your prayers--chest congestion is abating.
Exactly
Great thread. Bookmarked.
How many of us begin a meditation or prayer contemplating names like these: I AM, Messiah, YHWH, Jesus Christ, The Rock, Immanuel, Rose of Sharon, Lily of the Valley, Bright and Morning Star, Elohim, El Shaddai, Adonai, HaShem, Almighty God, Word of God, Alpha and Omega, King of Kings, Lord of Lords, and so on?
I assert that when we contemplate a Name of God, we are also worshipping Him through one of His revelations to us. He is the Rock, He is Alpha and Omega, He is the Word of God, He is God with us, He is the Vine, and so on.
Bumpworthy insights here! Thank you so much for including me in the ping!
(re: paragraph two in italics above: ME! Count me in that number!)