Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Peter as rock
Archdiocese of Washington ^ | 05-30-18 | Msgr, Charles Pope

Posted on 06/02/2018 6:34:56 AM PDT by Salvation

Peter as rock

Question: A Protestant told me recently that Peter can’t be the rock since Jesus is described as the rock and cornerstone of the Church, and he showed me a couple of places where Jesus is described as the cornerstone and even a stumbling block to unbelievers. Is there an answer for this? Allen Desome, Washington, D.C.

Answer: Of course Jesus, Peter and others who are called “rock” or stone are not literally chunks of stone. What we have in such attestations is the application of a metaphor. Scripture, like any lengthy document uses many metaphors, similes and analogies. Such things can be true in different ways.

In the Scriptures we see that Peter is called “the rock” by Jesus (Mt 16:18). Jesus is also called a stone (1 Pt 2:6). And the apostles and prophets are called foundation stones and Jesus as the cornerstone (Eph 2:20). The Book of Revelation describes the Twelve Apostles as foundation stones (Rev 21:14). So there are a number of “stone” references that need not be mutually exclusive.

Jesus is the deepest and surest foundation of the Church. That the Apostles, prophets and, in a special way, Peter are rock is understood in a subordinate sense. That is, they are rock and foundation for the Church on account of the grace and support of Jesus.

The Protestant to whom you refer fails to see the context and metaphorical sense of the texts and terms. He also fails to see that Jesus, while not abandoning his Church as her true head and foundation, does assign Peter a unique status to be the visible and identifiable rock on which the Church will be built. Peter (and his successors) is the rock, but he does not stand in midair. He is supported by Christ and his grace and affirmed by him as the visible rock and head of the Church. The Protestant approach is to see the Church as invisible. But Jesus did not establish an invisible Church. It is visible and with a visible rock and head: Peter and his successors.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History; Theology
KEYWORDS: apostolic; catholic; catholicchurch; firstpope; kephas; papacy; petros; pope; saintpeter; stpeter; succession; therock; vicarofchrist; vicarofchristonearth
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 501-517 next last
To: Fantasywriter

My thought is that this is fundamentally dishonest.


You think that Jesus was dishonest when he told peter you shall be called Cephas which means a rock?

Cephas means rock in both Hebrew and Aramaic, what it meas in Greek means nothing.

The Bible was written in Greek but most scholars agree that Jesus spoke in Aramaic.

John 1:42
And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.

The interpretation stone is Greek but if you look in the dictionary you will see that Cephas means rock.

So i will repeat myself, what it means in Greek means nothing.


61 posted on 06/02/2018 10:12:56 AM PDT by ravenwolf (Left lane drivers and tailgaters have the smallest brains in the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ravenwolf

If you don’t believe in the divine, God-breathed inspiration of Scripture and Divine Providence, then there’s nothing to say.

If you believe in these things, then you understand that God preserved this text in Greek because he willed for us to have it in Greek. One reason for Greek’s superiority: it is clearer, linguistically, than Aramaic.


62 posted on 06/02/2018 10:19:40 AM PDT by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

The author has evidently never heard of divine providence.


Whether it was divine providence or not it was preserved in Aramaic, the rest was written in Greek as you say but i don`t think it being written in Greek could change the original meaning because nothing is more divine than Jesus himself.

So lets not sell the chief Apostle short because of our distrust of the Catholic Religion.


63 posted on 06/02/2018 10:29:26 AM PDT by ravenwolf (Left lane drivers and tailgaters have the smallest brains in the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter; Campion
"On Christ The Solid Rock I stand, all other ground is sinking sand. All other ground is sinking sand" (hymn by Edward Mote/William Bradbury).

Good theology for me. All through the First Covenant's Hebrew/Aramaic text God alone is figuratively equated with rock-like stedfastness and authority. Should David, who attributed such qualities to God, and who is to be the Viceroy of Christ his Lord over the millennial Kingdom of Heaven on the earth, kow-tow to Simon bar Jonah in that phase of God's covenantal relationship to mankind?

For David, it is Christ Alone Who is The Rock.

64 posted on 06/02/2018 10:31:01 AM PDT by imardmd1 (Fiat Lux)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

If you don’t believe in the divine, God-breathed inspiration of Scripture and Divine Providence, then there’s nothing to say.


I believe God only allowed it it to be written in Greek, but he inspired the word Cephas to be kept in the way Jesus said it so people could not trash Peter with any honesty.


65 posted on 06/02/2018 10:34:30 AM PDT by ravenwolf (Left lane drivers and tailgaters have the smallest brains in the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: imardmd1

That is an excellent point I hadn’t even considered. Yes, even in the Old Testament the Rock is not a sinful or fallible image. It is a divine image.

Psalm 61:2

From the end of the earth I call to You when my heart is faint; Lead me to the rock that is higher than I.

2 Samuel 22:2

He said, “The Lord is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer;

2 Samuel 22:3

My God, my rock, in whom I take refuge, My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold and my refuge; My savior, You save me from violence.

2 Samuel 22:47

“The Lord lives, and blessed be my rock; And exalted be God, the rock of my salvation,

Psalm 18:2

The Lord is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer, My God, my rock, in whom I take refuge; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.


66 posted on 06/02/2018 10:43:46 AM PDT by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
The Protestant to whom you refer fails to see the context and metaphorical sense of the texts and terms.

The irony again is not lost on the reader.

Couple this one with the msgr talking about context, context, context.

The RCs may get there one day.

67 posted on 06/02/2018 10:44:17 AM PDT by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

There are so many more divine rock allusions in the OT, but here is just one additional example. It equates the rock to our Redeemer.

Psalm 19:14

Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart Be acceptable in Your sight, O Lord, my rock and my Redeemer.


68 posted on 06/02/2018 10:47:53 AM PDT by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Campion; aimhigh; Fantasywriter; aMorePerfectUnion; Elsie; MHGinTN; boatbums
Peter's "confession" in Matthew 16:16 does not come out of his intellect or soul. It was a foundational doctrine given to him by The Father to speak as an unwitting prophet, like the words given to Balaam's ass. Jesus, in no uncertain terms, pointed this out to him and to all observing and reporting on it:

"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 16:17 AV).

Actually, Peter's responses out of his soulish, foolish, carnal mind were generally those ones prompted by Satan who was yet his master, even though he professed following Jesus. In that same context, Jesus had to strongly reprove Simon for his asinine domineering uninvited counsel:

"But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men" (Mat 16:23 AV).

Scripture is the scalpel with which Simon's statement of revealed truth (which you call his "confession," but was not) is carved away from him , for our sake, and attributed to The Heavenly Father by His Son.

The story, its grammar, and its context is written for our instruction, that we may never, ever confuse Simon with the True and Sole Head of the Church, invisible to us but apparent to all in the sphere of The Heaven (see Heb. 12:22,23,24), to which all graciously saved faithful saints belong, and no one else.

69 posted on 06/02/2018 11:15:19 AM PDT by imardmd1 (Fiat Lux)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ADSUM

I find it interesting that those who insist that the Holy Spirit inspired the NT in Greek also insist that the Holy Spirit did not inspire some of the OT books written in Greek.


70 posted on 06/02/2018 11:17:27 AM PDT by rwa265
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Campion

I have not read all of Augustine, so correct me if I am wrong. But didn’t Augustine believe that Jesus appointed Peter to be the leader of the Catholic Church?


71 posted on 06/02/2018 11:24:51 AM PDT by rwa265
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter
Be careful. Oldest manuscript may not necessarily mean the best. Presuming so is a logical and unwarranted argument, when it is to the pillar and foundation of the Truth that the doctrine and effecting preservation that God has entrusted it.

In fact, that error is demonstrated inasmuch as the foundation of the synthetic "critical" "eclectic" Greek text, never seen by human eyes before prior to 1891, was three corrupted texts which did not even agree with each other, as opposed to the Byzantine/Majority Textform.

"Older" may mean simply that a manuscript was rejected by authorities closer to its writing, and preserved only through determined disuse as not worthily authentic. Such is particularly true of the Sinaitic codex, found in the St. Catherine's monastery burn barrel by Tischendorf.

72 posted on 06/02/2018 11:40:53 AM PDT by imardmd1 (Fiat Lux)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: rwa265

Eleven


73 posted on 06/02/2018 11:42:43 AM PDT by imardmd1 (Fiat Lux)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

What about all the other references mentioned?


74 posted on 06/02/2018 11:47:25 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ADSUM

Excellent post.


75 posted on 06/02/2018 11:49:20 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rwa265

No ... next question.


76 posted on 06/02/2018 11:50:31 AM PDT by MHGinTN (A dispensational perspective is a powerful tool for discernment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Such as?


77 posted on 06/02/2018 11:52:32 AM PDT by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; Elsie

Here we go again...

Peter himself called Jesus the Rock, not himself.

I’m gonna believe the Apostle himself over the Romanists, thanks.


78 posted on 06/02/2018 11:53:54 AM PDT by Luircin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Here’s another one:

Isaiah 44:8

‘Do not tremble and do not be afraid; Have I not long since announced it to you and declared it? And you are My witnesses. Is there any God besides Me, Or is there any other Rock? I know of none.’”


79 posted on 06/02/2018 11:56:28 AM PDT by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: ADSUM
You asserted: "Take for example Matthew 16:18-19: Jesus promises to make Peter the rock upon which he will build his church, which indicates Jesus’ intention for Peter to be the visible foundation for the Church of Christ on Earth"

When you purposely conflate the institutional church with the Ekklesia which Jesus established based upon the revelation spoken by Peter under the leadership of The Holy Spirit, you are deceiving people. Is it okay for a Preist to deceive people?

80 posted on 06/02/2018 11:59:25 AM PDT by MHGinTN (A dispensational perspective is a powerful tool for discernment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 501-517 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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