Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Peter is NOT the Rock of Matthew 16
self | 6/28/23 | self

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.


TOPICS: Religion
KEYWORDS: learnexegesis; loghorrea; nonsense; peter; petra; petros; truth; vanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 481-490 next last
When it refers to a spiritual meaning, the word ROCK is used to describe God as creator or Saviour! IT IS NEVER USED TO DESCRIBE A MAN!

(Deu 32:1 KJV) Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth.

(Deu 32:2 KJV) My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass: (Deu 32:3 KJV) Because I will publish the name of the LORD: ascribe ye greatness unto our God. (Deu 32:4 KJV) He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he. Who is the ROCK? God is, He is our support, our Saviour, our Creator.NOT A MAN. (Deu 32:18 KJV) Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee. GOD is the ROCK, the Creator, not a man. (Deu 32:30 KJV) How should one chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight, except their Rock had sold them, and the LORD had shut them up? (Deu 32:31 KJV) For their rock is not as our Rock, even our enemies themselves being judges.

Who is the ROCK? It is GOD, not a man!

(1 Sam 2:2 KJV) There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God. Who is the ROCK? It is not a man, it is GOD! (2 Sam 22:2 KJV) And he said, The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; (2 Sam 22:3 KJV) The God of my rock; in him will I trust: he is my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my high tower, and my refuge, my saviour; thou savest me from violence.

Who is the ROCK? It is GOD. NOT a sinful man who denied his God, but GOD Himself.

Peter is NO ONE'S shield.

Peter is NO ONE'S high tower.

Peter is NO ONE'S refuge.

and Peter is NO ONE'S Saviour! To say anything like those statements are true of a sinful man is blasphemy.

Most Catholics never read the section before or after this part:

(Mat 16:18 KJV) And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

That is one reason some people do not find it obvious.

Here is what it says::

(Mat 16:13 KJV) When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

(Mat 16:14 KJV) And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

(Mat 16:15 KJV) He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

(Mat 16:16 KJV) And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

(Mat 16:17 KJV) And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

What was the original topic of discussion?

(Mat 16:13 KJV) When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

Jesus asked,

That was the topic of discussion.

What was the response?

(Mat 16:14 KJV) And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

They were all over the place, it seems that there was not many who were catching on to exactly who Jesus was.

So, what was the next sentence?

(Mat 16:15 KJV) He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

(Mat 16:16 KJV) And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Jesus asked the disciples themselves what THEY thought, not just one disciple, but ALL of them.

Peter gave the best answer, that Jesus IS the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Right from there, many people ignore what was just said, and only concentrate on what comes next.

However, that is where the error lies, in ignoring what was just said.

It is like explaining to someone that people put sodas in the soda machine first, then act surprised when soda comes out of the machine when you put money into it. People forget what happened first: someone loaded the machine.

In the same respect, Jesus set the tone for the conversation: WHO IS HE?

Peter had it right: Jesus IS the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

That was the point of what Jesus was saying. That He was the Christ.

That was what He just said!

We all know what comes next, and it is because people ignore what was just said, that they get this part wrong:The Context of the ongoing conversation is important:

(Mat 16:17 KJV) And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

(Mat 16:18 KJV) And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Jesus explains that Peter's revelation did not come from His logic, it came from God the Father Himself. This type of instruction was done on a spiritual level, not fleshly, it was something that Peter would have never figured out for himself.

What did Jesus say next? Peter is blessed because he was BLESSED with this information.

What information?

That Jesus IS the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

That is the point.

What Jesus said next is the most misused verse in the entire New Testament.

(Mat 16:18 KJV) And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Peter and Rock. Is Peter the rock spoken of here, or is the IMPORTANT POINT THAT GOD REVEALED TO PETER the rock?

17 And [ 2532] Jesus [2424] answered [ 611] (5679) and said [ 2036] (5627) unto him [846], Blessed [ 3107] art thou [ 1488] (5748), Simon [ 4613] Barjona [ 920]: for [ 3754] flesh [ 4561] and [ 2532] blood [ 129] hath [ 601] [0] not [3756] revealed [601] (5656) it unto thee [4671], but [ 235] my [ 3450] Father [ 3962] which [ 3588] is in [ 1722] heaven [ 3772].

18 And [ 1161] I say [ 3004] (5719) also [ 2504] unto thee [ 4671], That [ 3754] thou [ 4771] art [ 1488] (5748) Peter [ 4074], and [ 2532] upon [ 1909] this [ 5026] rock [ 4073] I will build [ 3618] (5692) my [ 3450] church [ 1577]; and [ 2532] the gates [ 4439] of hell [ 86] shall [ 2729] [0] not [ 3756] prevail against [ 2729] (5692) it [ 846].

18 kagw [ 2504] de [ 1161] soi [ 4671] legw [ 3004] (5719) oti [ 3754] su [ 4771] ei [ 1488] (5748) petroj [ 4074] kai [ 2532] epi [ 1909] tauth [ 3778] th [ 3588] petra [ 4073] oikodomhsw [ 3618] (5692) mou [ 3450] thn [ 3588] ekklhsian [ 1577] kai [ 2532] pulai [ 4439] adou [ 86] ou [ 3756] katiscusousin [ 2729] (5692) authj [ 846]

Peter = 4074 petroj Petros pet'-ros apparently a primary word; TDNT - 6:100,835; n pr m AV - Peter 161, stone 1; 162 Peter = "a rock or a stone" 1) one of the twelve disciples of Jesus

rock = 4073 petra petra pet'-ra from the same as 4074; TDNT - 6:95,834; n f AV - rock 16; 16 1) a rock, cliff or ledge 1a) a projecting rock, crag, rocky ground 1b) a rock, a large stone 1c) metaph. a man like a rock, by reason of his firmness and strength of soul

Due to what Jesus was talking about, the ROCK had to be the truth Peter had revealed to him from God the Father, that JESUS IS THE CHRIST, THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD.

There is no other sensible explanation of the verse unless it is twisted to make someone believe what is not there in the text. Because of all the previous uses of the word ROCK to describe the attributes of God as Creator, Deliverer, Saviour, to ascribe those attributes to a man, that is a total misunderstanding of Scripture.

Too many people form what they believe around their doctrine, and then interpret the Bible in the light of that doctrine.

That is wrong. Doctrine should come from what the Bible clearly says, and then base their doctrine on what it clearly says!

The Bible nowhere grants Peter any authority that is not also given to the other disciples.

Jesus is also called the ROCK or CORNER STONE in many other verses, but PETER IS NOT!

Notice what is said in this passage::

(Mat 7:24 KJV) Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

(Mat 7:25 KJV) And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

(Mat 7:26 KJV) And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:

(Mat 7:27 KJV) And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

What is it that a person built their house upon and survived? A ROCK.

If a person is foolish, what does a person build their house upon? SAND. What did Jesus say that those who rejected his words built upon? SAND.

If the foolish reject Jesus and build upon SAND, then those who BELIEVE and RECEIVE what Jesus said, which of the two men is Jesus comparing them to, the SAND builder or the ROCK builder?

It is CLEAR that Jesus is referring to those who BELIEVE on HIM and trust HIM as one who builds their house UPON A ROCK.

That is JESUS own words several chapters before Peter's declaration.

This is repeated in more detail in Luke:: (Luke 6:47 KJV) Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will show you to whom he is like:

(Luke 6:48 KJV) He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.

(Luke 6:49 KJV) But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.

Note again, the PERSON who believes on the WORD OF GOD, is likened to someone building their house UPON A ROCK.

So, what does the reference to A ROCK in ALL these cases refer to?

Is it a MAN or is it the WORD OF GOD revealed?

This is not difficult to read, but too many people have been taught to interpret the passage in Matthew in such a way to twist what is actually being said, and these alternate passages repeat the same basic message: THAT GOD is what matters, not men or a single man.

Paul wrote in Romans 9:: (Rom 9:33 KJV) As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

Who is Paul speaking of when he SAYS A ROCK of offense? A Stumbling stone? It is Jesus, and refers to those who refuse to believe.

(1 Cor 10:4 KJV) And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Who is the ROCK? It plainly says the ROCK WAS JESUS, not Peter.

There is no other place where Peter is praised or given any authority, in fact Peter is rebuked for his actions by other persons.

(Gal 2:11 KJV) But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

(Gal 2:12 KJV) For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.

(Gal 2:13 KJV) And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.

(Gal 2:14 KJV) But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

If PETER is the ROCK of the Church, then WHO IS PAUL to REBUKE PETER?

Paul clearly rebuked Peter in this passage because PETER was WRONG and at FAULT!

The ROCK of the Church CANNOT HAVE ANY FAULT, or else there is NO FOUNDATION to stand upon but error!!

Paul was the Apostle to the Gentiles, not Peter, also. While the book of Acts clearly tells Peter to witness to a Gentile first, Peter is NOWHERE granted any position or title that PETER is the Apostle to the Gentiles, but PAUL clearly IS named as SUCH!

(Rom 15:15 KJV) Nevertheless, brethren, I have written the more boldly unto you in some sort, as putting you in mind, because of the grace that is given to me of God,

(Rom 15:16 KJV) That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

The Book of Galatians is the clearest refutation to many false doctrines concerning this::

(Gal 2:1 KJV) Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also.

(Gal 2:2 KJV) And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.

Now, read the next passage carefully:: WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY??

(Gal 2:7 KJV) But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

(Gal 2:8 KJV) (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)

THE GOSPEL OF THE UNCIRCUMCISION WAS GIVEN TO PAUL, NOT PETER.

PETER WAS TO BE THE APOSTLE TO THE JEWS.

(Eph 3:1 KJV) For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,

WHO WAS? PAUL was, not Peter.

(Eph 3:8 KJV) Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

WHO WAS?? Paul was!!

(1 Tim 2:7 KJV) Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

WHO IS A TEACHER OF THE GENTILES?

Paul is! NOT Peter, every time Peter is mentioned as to WHAT PEOPLE Peter is to be associated with it is the JEWS, WITH ONLY ONE EXCEPTION, and that is Acts chapter 10.

Only ONCE, while PAUL is repeatedly and openly called or referred to as the Apostle of the Gentiles.

In fact, there might even be more references to PAUL witnessing to Jews then there are references to PETER witnessing to Gentiles! And this from the man who is KNOWN as THE APOSTLE OF THE GENTILES!

(Acts 9:19 KJV) And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.

(Acts 9:20 KJV) And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.

(Acts 9:21 KJV) But all that heard him were amazed, and said; Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests?

(Acts 9:22 KJV) But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ.

Acts 13:1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. 2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. 3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. 4 So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus. 5 And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had also John to their minister.

Acts 14:1 And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed. 2 But the unbelieving Jews stirred up the Gentiles, and made their minds evil affected against the brethren.

Acts 17:1 Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: 2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,

Acts 17:(Acts 17:10 KJV) And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.

(Acts 18:4 KJV) And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

(Acts 18:5 KJV) And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ.

(Acts 20:21 KJV) Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.

(2 Tim 1:11 KJV) Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.

(2 Tim 4:17 KJV) Notwithstanding the Lord stood with me, and strengthened me; that by me the preaching might be fully known, and that all the Gentiles might hear: and I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion.

Strengthened who? PETER?? NO! Paul!

The doctrines of Peter being the ROCK are clearly not supported by Scripture.

That cannot be denied by anyone who knows how to read for themselves.

(Acts 17:10 KJV) And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.

(Acts 17:11 KJV) These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

(Acts 17:12 KJV) Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

Neither did Jesus rename Peter, he clearly called Peter a stone. To believe otherwise means you believe Jesus changed the subject of His being the Messiah. Jesus entire passage was n the Church, His founding of it being the Messiah, and the fact that HIS church would have no end.

It had NOTHING to do with a sinful man being any sort of a foundation. The only foundation for the Church was Jesus Christ Himself.

Luke 6:46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?

47 Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will show you to whom he is like:

48 He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.

Jesus clearly says HE is the rock that the man built his house upon, not Peter.

What did Paul say about building upon a MAN'S foundational work?

(Rom 15:20 KJV) Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation:

Paul said he would NOT go anywhere another man had alreayd preached. Since we KNOW Peter was in Rome after Paul, and they may have met there, Peter surely would have known this verse and this course of action and would NOT have built upon Paul's work in Rome.

(1 Cor 3:10 KJV) According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Paul makes it clear: The FOUNDATION of the Church is JESUS CHRIST, not Peter.

(Eph 2:20 KJV) And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

In that last passage, ALL the Apostles are called foundations, NOT JUST PETER, and it is CLEAR:: Jesus Christ is the Chief Cornerstone, NOT PETER, and ALL the Apostles are given the same rank and status, and PETER is NOT NAMED ONCE.

(Gal 2:7 KJV) But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

(Gal 2:8 KJV) (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)

(Gal 2:9 KJV) And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

And Again, Paul clearly states PAUL is the Apostle to the Uncircumcision, and also noteworthy, in Gal 2:9, Look again what PAUL said::

(Gal 2:9 KJV) And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

Paul called 3 men, 3 Apostles the pillars of the Church, 3 men, not just Peter!!

Like I said before: Doctrine needs to be based on the Bible and what it says. People who read the Bible and interpret the Bible in light of their doctrine are in error. The Bible should tell you what your doctrine is, instead of your doctrine telling you what the Bible clearly says.

There are just too many ways to Biblically defeat the doctrine of Peter's supremacy in the Church. He WAS an Apostle, and that is greater than I ever will be, but as far as the FOUNDER or LEADER ALONE of the Church, someone who is considered the foundation of the Christian Church in Europe or something, that is just not Biblical.

You also just showed you do not know your Bible when you said this:

Christ did NOT state to refer to or consult Scripture for disputes and correction. He said to go to the Church as It is the final authority in Christianity.

Well, just what was Jesus doing here in this collection of verses then, if not using SCRIPTURE as the final authority on faith and morals?

(Mat 12:3 KJV) But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;

(Mat 12:5 KJV) Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?

(Mat 19:4 KJV) And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,

(Mat 21:16 KJV) And said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?

(Mat 21:42 KJV) Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?

(Mat 22:31 KJV) But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,

(Mark 2:25 KJV) And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him?

(Mark 12:10 KJV) And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner:

(Mark 12:26 KJV) And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?

(Luke 4:16 KJV) And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.

(Luke 6:3 KJV) And Jesus answering them said, Have ye not read so much as this, what David did, when himself was an hungered, and they which were with him;

Jesus used Scriptue to defeat Satan, not the teachings of the Synagogue, nor the teachings of a future Church that we are disputing about:

(Mat 4:4 KJV) But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

(Mat 4:7 KJV) Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

(Mat 4:10 KJV) Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Paul's statement of the Church being the pillar and ground of the truth in 1 Timothy 3:15 is NOT the subject of what you claimed, either:

(1 Tim 3:15 KJV) But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

IT IS GOD that is the Pillar and ground of truth, and it is the SPIRITUAL Church that it is referring to, not any physical building, nor a any sinful man's creation of a denomination.

=======================

Additional thoughts: It gets worse for the religious. Jesus is not even talking about the ekklesia of the present administration. How could he? The Mystery of the Body of Christ was hidden in God. It was not revealed until Paul received the Revelation from God. How can we force the BOC, the Church of this present dispensation, into a time and revelation that is primarily about Israel?

Matthew 16:19-20 (ASV) 19 I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 20 Then charged he the disciples that they should tell no man that he was the Christ.

What do keys do? They unlock or open. What were they to? The Kingdom of Heaven. What is the KOH? It is an Earthly Kingdom from Heaven, Jewish and exclusive in character, national in its aspect, subject of many OT prophecies, with Jesus as the King. It is the primary theme of Matthew�s Gospel from start to finish. So, how do we force a Christian denomination into that?

Note carefully in Acts that Peter did not go to the nations, but rather, almost exclusively to the Jews - examine Acts for yourself and note who is addressed and where by Peter. He along with the apostles continued following Jewish Law and traditions which caused conflict as Paul started his ministry to the Gentiles. It took a supernatural vision in Acts 10 for Peter to reluctantly share with a Gentile, who just as easily could have been a Jewish proselyte. Even Paul, who was specifically called to go to the Gentiles, still visited synagogues and debated with Jews until God�s final declaration to Israel in Acts 28 to the Jewish leaders in Rome. It was at this point, Paul was given the revelation of the Body of Christ, which was a Mystery hidden in God. This is the dispensation we find ourselves in presently. Like in the wilderness, Israel stumbled because of unbelief for 40 years. The nation was conquered, the people dispersed among the nations, and the KOH postponed.

Binding and loosing, or authority, was given to all Jesus� followers. (see Matthew 18:18-20 and many others). This is a wonderful Revelation for Believers that will have to wait for another time. Let�s continue through Matthew 16.

Peter received this wonderful Revelation from God. When you continually hear God�s Word, the Holy Spirit reveals the Truth. That is exactly what happened in this case with Peter�s confession. Observe what Jesus tells them in verse 20 - tell no man that he was Christ. Why didn�t Jesus restrict them from mentioning that Peter was the rock that the Roman church will be built on, and the first pope in a long line of religious monarchs? (BTW see Matthew 23 for Jesus� indictment of organized religion and religious potentates)

It was the REVELATION from God that Jesus was Christ, the Messiah or Anointed One of prophecy that was his concern. Why do you suppose Jesus told them NOT to share this wonderful revelation? Wouldn�t this Truth be worth sharing with the world?

Matthew 16:21-23 (ASV) 21 From that time began Jesus to show unto his disciples, that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and the third day be raised up. 22 And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall never be unto thee. 23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art a stumbling-block unto me: for thou mindest not the things of God, but the things of men.

Verse 21 provides a clue. Jesus began telling them what was about to happen - the coming rejection, suffering, cross, and the resurrection. Israel was going to reject their King and the KOH, and crucify him. Look what Peter did, the man who moments ago had this wonderful revelation was now under the influence of the enemy. Jesus rebuked the spirit that was influencing Peter, because he had his mind not on God�s Will, but instead the things of men. That in a nutshell, is why you don�t build churches on men. You build them on something that will never fail, the Eternal Word of God. (Deuteronomy 32:1-4, Psalm 119, Matthew 7:24-25, Luke 6:47-49, John 1:1-13, Acts 4:8-11, 1 Peter 1:18-25, 2:6-8)

Matthew 16:23 makes a good case for not putting men on a religious pedestal. However, you don�t even need to go there. A simple understanding of the plan of God revealed in His Word would end all such confusion regarding this passage. You can find bad �popes� in every denomination throughout time. That is why there is only one Head, Jesus, in the Body of Christ.

Matthew 16:24 (ASV) 24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man would come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

Follow a religion? Peter? Or Jesus?

Matthew 16:27 (ASV) 27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then shall he render unto every man according to his deeds.

This is clearly referring to the 2nd Advent of Jesus at the end of the Tribulation. This is most applicable to Israel, which will be the focus of the last 7 years, and the Gentiles who rejected God�s Grace. For further evidence, note the last few words - render unto every man according to his deeds. That has nothing to do with the Body of Christ in this dispensation where there NOW is no condemnation. Also, try finding the title Son of man for Jesus in the Chruch Epistles. He is the Head of the Body, we are joint heirs with him, made alive in Christ and seated in Heavenly Places.

1 Corinthians 3:11 (ASV) 11 For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

1 posted on 06/28/2023 4:27:11 AM PDT by RaceBannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon
For their rock is not as our Rock, even our enemies themselves being judges.

So many 'little rocks' stirring the clear waters ... much 'confusion' ... (Babylon means confusion)...

2 posted on 06/28/2023 4:30:41 AM PDT by Just mythoughts (Psalm 2. Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

Peter = Petra = Rock


3 posted on 06/28/2023 4:31:18 AM PDT by Wpin ("I Have Sworn Upon the Altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon
INCOMING!
4 posted on 06/28/2023 4:31:52 AM PDT by kinsman redeemer (The real enemy seeks to devour what is good. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

Very interesting! A place where multilevel false gods enter.
........................

What does the name Babylon mean?

gate of the god

Name. The spelling Babylon is the Latin representation of Greek Babylṓn (Βαβυλών), derived from the native (Babylonian) Bābilim, meaning “gate of the gods”.

What is Babylon mean in the Bible?

The city is both a prophecy and type of a religious system destroyed by God (Isa. 21:9; Jer. 50:24; 51:64; Rev. 16:19; 17:5; 18:2–3). Although the name “Babylon” is derived from the Akkadian word babilu meaning “gate of god,” it is an evident counterfeit of God’s eternal city.


5 posted on 06/28/2023 4:43:13 AM PDT by ViLaLuz (2 Chronicles 7:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

Interesting research on our Lord Jesus the solid Rock on which we stand. Thank you!


6 posted on 06/28/2023 4:44:42 AM PDT by ViLaLuz (2 Chronicles 7:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

“Your name is Schneider. I’m going to take my suits to a tailor.”

Schneider, later: “My name means tailor. Why didn’t he bring me any suits?”


7 posted on 06/28/2023 4:44:48 AM PDT by Larry Lucido (Donate! Don't just post clickbait!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

A great book on this subject that not only shows Peter is the Rock but also helped convert a large number of Protestant ministers is

https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Peter-Keys-Scriptural-Handbook/dp/1882972546

Also very worthwhile is

https://www.amazon.com/Upon-This-Rock-Scripture-Apologetics/dp/0898707234/ref=pd_lpo_sccl_2/147-8812487-3766439?pd_rd_w=EH7QI&content-id=amzn1.sym.116f529c-aa4d-4763-b2b6-4d614ec7dc00&pf_rd_p=116f529c-aa4d-4763-b2b6-4d614ec7dc00&pf_rd_r=YX5QX7PGEDTFSYAEKWB5&pd_rd_wg=4ho4g&pd_rd_r=3745ef09-f98b-4403-95bc-fc5615e9067e&pd_rd_i=0898707234&psc=1


8 posted on 06/28/2023 4:45:44 AM PDT by vladimir998 ( Apparently I'm still living in your head rent free. At least now it isn't empty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

By the way, I love and respect my Catholic friends and family, even if I don’t always see eye to eye on interpretation.


9 posted on 06/28/2023 4:46:18 AM PDT by Larry Lucido (Donate! Don't just post clickbait!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Interesting. I’ll take a look.


10 posted on 06/28/2023 4:46:48 AM PDT by Larry Lucido (Donate! Don't just post clickbait!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

According to my favorite philosopher, Kurt Vonnegut, the “holy man” must be in “the wilderness” to establish the dynamic tension a culture requires. The holy man is the opposite pole against the dictator in the city. Fascinating paradigm to reflect on.


11 posted on 06/28/2023 4:50:04 AM PDT by wastoute (Anyone who believes PsyOps are not involved has never met a PsyOps Officer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon
I don’t know what Christian denomination you belong to … but if I had any interest in joining it when I woke up this morning I surely lost it by the time I got 5% of the way through your exhausting post. :-P

Dumb question: If Peter is not supposed to have a special role to play in salvation history, then why is he mentioned almost 200 times in the Gospels — while John, who is unquestionably Jesus Christ’s most beloved disciple, is mentioned fewer than 50 times?

12 posted on 06/28/2023 4:52:06 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("I've just pissed in my pants and nobody can do anything about it." -- Major Fambrough)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wpin

peter = petros = pebble


13 posted on 06/28/2023 4:53:22 AM PDT by SheepWhisperer (Get involved with, or start a home fellowship group. It will be the final church. ACTS 2:42-47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/894.htm

Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance
Babel, Babylon
From balal; confusion; Babel (i.e. Babylon), including Babylonia and the Babylonian empire — Babel, Babylon.

see HEBREW balal


14 posted on 06/28/2023 4:55:58 AM PDT by Just mythoughts (Psalm 2. Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

I see no problem even if Jesus was referring to Peter as a rock to begin building with.

My issue is no where biblically does Peter’s received grace, wisdom, nor authority confer or pass down to anyone else.

Yes there is a chain of leaders in the church but my issue is somehow assuming that a role Peter had now makes you infallible under special circumstance just because you fill that role, not because you are actually right with God.


15 posted on 06/28/2023 4:56:51 AM PDT by Skwor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido

“By the way, I love and respect my Catholic friends and family, even if I don’t always see eye to eye on interpretation.”

That’s a very nice and proper sentiment. Just one clarification...protestants interpret...Catholics produced the Bible. Also, protestants mistakenly rely solely on their shortened Bible. There are oral traditions which are needed as well.

I was Protestant but when I actually learned about Catholicism the depth and breadth of the Theology and the fact that it is the Church Jesus created and maintains brought me home.


16 posted on 06/28/2023 4:58:29 AM PDT by Wpin ("I Have Sworn Upon the Altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

It is telling that what Peter spoke of early in the book of Acts is presently unfolding and nary a preacher/priest have a clue. Peter quoted Joel ... and made Joel’s prophecy, one and the same as the gospel..


17 posted on 06/28/2023 4:59:15 AM PDT by Just mythoughts (Psalm 2. Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Skwor

What you’re talking about is shown in the books I linked to above. Those books take you deep into scripture and the early Christian understanding of it.


18 posted on 06/28/2023 5:02:14 AM PDT by vladimir998 ( Apparently I'm still living in your head rent free. At least now it isn't empty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Skwor
I see no problem even if Jesus was referring to Peter as a rock to begin building with. My issue is no where biblically does Peter's received grace, wisdom, nor authority confer or pass down to anyone else. Yes there is a chain of leaders in the church but my issue is somehow assuming that a role Peter had now makes you infallible under special circumstance just because you fill that role, not because you are actually right with God.

Peter's actual words explain much of what is going on today and what to expect as this flesh age (world) winds down. The book of Acts, where Peter brings forth the prophet Joel, one and the same as the gospel of Christ. I and II Peter tells us how the Heavenly Father marks time.

Peter was not the only one given a 'key', not a locksmith shop to recut keys per any newly smoked father... There is also the 'key' of David, few even have a clue what is. Much deception spewed across the world .. Just as Christ said would be happening.

19 posted on 06/28/2023 5:06:49 AM PDT by Just mythoughts (Psalm 2. Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Wpin

Might want to be careful with those traditions of men, Jesus Himself had a very negative opinion of those traditions.

Mark 7:7-13 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:

If my choice is what the written word states via the inspired prophets over a non-scriptural tradition of man, I prefer to go with the bible. I hear this oral tradition argument often and I will ask what I always ask. Where in God’s word doe sit ever justify oral tradition over the scriptures? Does it not seem risky to trust oral tradition which man himself has decided to elevate to the same level as God’s word? The Prophets of old had a very high standard when claiming to speak for God, we do not have any such requirements for the traditions you speak of.


20 posted on 06/28/2023 5:09:31 AM PDT by Skwor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 481-490 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson