If the Roman Catholic Church is so bad...

This is a good point. The only reason Peter was referred to being the "rock", was because he was IN CHRIST, the true Rock and Cornerstone. So it still comes back to Christ as the Rock which the church is built upon...not Peter.

 

When developing theology, the principle is that one verse does not a doctrine make. When it comes to understanding a verse, it must first consider its context. You don't go picking out verse in different contexts to understand the verse at hand.

Some interpretations of the verse at hand just don't make sense grammatically. Do we fear Romanism so much that we must overlook the obvious meaning of the text?

It is obvious that the rock in question has reference to Peter. What is that reference? Is it the man, or is it his faith? I maintain that contextually it is Peter's proclaimed faith that is the rock in this instance, and it is this faith upon which the church will be built.

Cheers,

Jim

 

And I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church

This is the first time Jesus speaks of his church, and here, as not yet founded. Three terms are to be noted: (1) Peter, in the Greek, Petros, meaning a single stone; (2) Rock, in the Greek, Petra, which means the solid, immovable bed-rock, a great mass like a cliff, and (3) church, Greek, ecclesia, those "called out," the fellowship of believers, the organized society of Christ, the kingdom of heaven on earth. There is probably no passage in the word of God that has called forth more discussion. The Papal church insists that Peter is the rock upon which Christ founded his church. The Catholic position is based upon the fact that Peter means a stone (see Joh 1:42), and the Savior's language might be rendered, "Thou art a stone, and upon this rock I will build my church." The Catholic view is untenable, for (1) The Savior does not say, "Thou art a stone, and upon thee I will build," etc., or "Thou art a rock, and upon this rock I will build." He changes the word in the Greek from Petros (Peter, a stone) to Petra, a rock, or ledge of rock--a solid bed-rock. (2) Every saint is a stone (see 1Pe 2:5). The Lord declares that Peter is one these living stones, made such by his confession of faith, and ready to be built into the church, the spiritual temple, formed of living stones, and built upon the rock. So is every confessor of Christ. In order to settle what the Savior does mean by the rock, we must consider Mt 16:18-19 together, and keep in mind the entire figure. This figure portrays (1) a Builder, Christ; (2) a temple to be built, composed of lively stones, the church; (3) a foundation for that temple, the rock; (4) the gates of an unfriendly city or power which shall seek its destruction, hell, or more correctly, Hades, the unseen abode of the dead, the grave; (5) a door-keeper of the church, or spiritual temple, with his keys, Peter. Peter's place in the figure is not that of the foundation, but that of the key-holder, or turnkey. The only difficulty is in settling what the Lord means by the rock. Since this rock is the foundation of the church, the central principle, the fundamental idea, we are aided to a correct decision by the teachings of the Word elsewhere. We learn from 1Co 3:11 "That other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ." This excludes Peter or any human platform. Christ is often called a stone: "the stone that the builders rejected" [Mt 21:42; Mr 12:10; Lu 20:17], "the chief corner stone" [Eph 2:20], "the stone that is the head of the corner" [Mt 21:42; Mr 12:10; Lu 20:17; Ac 4:11; 1Pe 2:7], "the spiritual rock which is Christ" [1Co 10:4]. Faith in Christ held in the heart, and confessed with the lips is the very foundation of the spiritual life and of the church. This constituted the fundamental difference in apostolic days between Christians and unbelievers, the church and the world. It does still. It is the essence of the teaching of the New Testament that the platform or foundation of the Christian society, the church, is this belief that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (see Mt 16:16; Joh 6:69). It is then Peter's grand confession, faith in the Spiritual Rock, the faith that lays hold of Christ, belief that he is the Anointed of God, the Divine Savior, that the Lord pronounces the rock upon which he will found his church. That this view is correct is shown by a correct understanding of the declaration.

(People's NT Commentary)


Peter is a Greek word, meaning rock. Peter held a very prominent and conspicuous place among the apostles, during our Savior's life; and he was afterwards foremost in counsel and action, in the early efforts made for the promulgation of the gospel. This continued until at length the apostle Paul entered the field; and from that time Peter disappears from the sacred history. His prominence while it remained, was due to the boldness and energy, of his personal character--qualities in which he excelled all others, until he was excelled himself by Paul, who united the boldness and energy of Peter with the calmness and steadiness of John.--The Romish church rely mainly on this passage, so far as they rely at all on the direct authority of the Scriptures, for supporting the claims of the bishop of Rome to be the head of the church,--considering him the successor of the apostle Peter. That the apostles, however, did not understand these words as investing Peter with any official supremacy, is evident from the conversation in respect to precedency, which afterwards arose among them, (Mt 18:1, stated more fully in Mr 9:33-34,) and also from Salome's request. (Mt 20:20-21.) The preëminence of Peter was personal, not official; and accordingly we find him acting, after the Savior's ascension with boldness, promptness, energy, but without any traces of official authority over the other apostles.

(Abbott NT Commentary)


Upon what rock? Upon Peter, the rock confessing, say the papists; but if so, no more is said of Peter here, than of all the apostles elsewhere. Ga 2:9.

James and John are called pillars as well as Peter. So that Peter's superiority over the rest of the apostles can with no shew of reason be from hence inferred. "Upon Christ, the rock confessed," says the protestants; for Christ is the foundation-stone upon which his church is built; Eph 2:20.

Ye are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone. So then, not upon Peter the rock confessing, but upon Christ the rock confessed, and upon the rock of Peter's confession, that fundamental truth, that Christ is the Son of the living God, is the church built.

Upon this rock will I build my church, Super hanc confessionis tua Petxam edificabo Ecclesiam meam.

Yet Christ may here be said to build his church upon Peter, because he used St. Peter's ministry in laying the foundation of a christian church among the Jews and Gentiles; he being the first preacher of that faith which he here confessed first to the Jews, Ac 2:29-37. and then to the Gentiles Ac 10:33-43.

(William Burkitt's Expository Notes)


Ray

 

Jim1999 said...

Thats the way I've always viewed it. Christ waited until after Peter said what he said before Christ made His statement about the "rock".

Mike

 

Even if Peter were the first head of the Christian Church, what gives the Roman Catholic Church the claim to that person? The papacy did not come into existence until centuries later. Any denomination could claim such.

 

The whole idea of a thread such as this is irritating and insulting to Catholics. It would be more appropriate to ask if Protestants are really Christian. The Catholic and Orthodox Churches trace their lineages to the Apostles themselves. While they affirm certain things which can't be found in Scripture that is no surprise because Scripture was formulated by the Church not the Church by Scripture.

All the Church Fathers from the second century until Nicea affirmed a belief in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist and the Mass as a re-presentation of Christ's sacrifice at Calvery made for the living and the dead. This was the belief of the universal church for its first 1500 years and is the view of the majority of Christendom to this day. There are more than a billion Catholics worldwide and while that doesn't make them right, it, along with their ancient tradition means there is no need to doubt their Christian credentials.

Protestantism started around 1500. The reformers want us to believe that they discovered new things such as the awful doctrine of penal substutionary atonemnet which those who lived in the century after Jesus had failed to discover. They want us to believe that the whole 1500 years of Christianity, in which most of the core beliefs had remained unchanged, were in error and they got it right. They want us to believe that we are able, on our own, to interpret the Bible when it is full of contradictions and ambiguities.

I think history stacks up much more in favour of Protestantism being in error and when asking who, if anyone is a real Christian, those who have affirmed the creeds of the Church for close to two millennia have every right to look others squarely in the eye with confidence.

 

CHRIST'S CHURCH SUPPLANTED


CHAP. 1 THE ROCK

Matt 16:13-18 13 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?
14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 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.
18 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.


The verses above have been the topic of many a heated debate. The church of Rome contends that the above verses established the apostle Peter as the visible head of Christ's church here on earth. The Popes themselves being one continuous line of Peters successors. The writer contends that the church of Rome has attempted to supplant the church of Christ. This she has done by literalizing the spiritual and eternal truth of the above verses and many others, and applying their literal interpretation toward the establishment of her own power. It is the intention of the writer to examine the above verses, and many others, to reveal the deception practiced by the church of Rome in order to establish herself in a seat of authority, that is, in the very temple of God.

The reader has a decision to make. Was Christ referring to Peter himself when he said, " thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church ", or was he referring to what Peter had just said concerning Christ, " Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God "? Anyone who will study the scriptures, will understand that the church is built upon Christ. Even the church of Rome won't argue that one. The question is, did Christ hand some special power over to Peter above his brethren or not? Is Peter the rock that Christ is referring to, or is the spiritual and eternal truth that Christ is the Son of the living God, the rock that Christ mentions? The following verses pertaining to our Lord as a stone, or rock, may shed some light on the matter.

Ps 118:22-23 22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.
23 This is the LORD's doing; it is marvellous in our eyes.

Isa 28:16 16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.

Dan 2:34-35 34 Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces.
35 Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.

Matt 21:42 42 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?

Ps 18:2 2 The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; my God, my strength, in whom I will trust; my buckler, and the horn of my salvation, and my high tower.

Ps 18:31 31 For who is God save the LORD? or who is a rock save our God?

Ps 18:46 46 The LORD liveth; and blessed be my rock; and let the God of my salvation be exalted.

Ps 28:1 1 Unto thee will I cry, O LORD my rock; be not silent to me: lest, if thou be silent to me, I become like them that go down into the pit.

Ps 31:1-3 1 In thee, O LORD, do I put my trust; let me never be ashamed: deliver me in thy righteousness.
2 Bow down thine ear to me; deliver me speedily: be thou my strong rock, for an house of defence to save me.
3 For thou art my rock and my fortress; therefore for thy name's sake lead me, and guide me.

Ps 42:9 9 I will say unto God my rock, Why hast thou forgotten me? why go I mourning because of the oppression of the enemy?

Ps 62:1-2 1 Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation.
2 He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved.

Ps 62:6 6 He only is my rock and my salvation: he is my defence; I shall not be moved.

Ps 95:1 1 O come, let us sing unto the LORD: let us make a joyful noise to the rock of our salvation.

Isa 8:13-14 13 Sanctify the LORD of hosts himself; and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread.
14 And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

Isa 32:1-3 1 Behold, a king shall reign in righteousness, and princes shall rule in judgment.
2 And a man shall be as an hiding place from the wind, and a covert from the tempest; as rivers of water in a dry place, as the shadow of a great rock in a weary land.
3 And the eyes of them that see shall not be dim, and the ears of them that hear shall hearken.

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

The Lord is referred to as a rock, or stone all through the scriptures. There is no doubt then, that a rock, or stone is a symbol of Christ. This being the case, why would anyone assume that the rock referred to in the scriptures under examination, would be referring to Peter. The Lord Jesus Christ is indeed a rock, and a fortress, unmoving, unchanging, the same yesterday, today, and forever. Our Lord is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient. Why would He build His church upon a man who could not possibly be any of these things, in even the most minute sense? Peter himself demonstrated humanities inconsistency and wavering almost immediately after stating the eternal and spiritual truth that Christ was the Son of the living God. When Christ began to explain that he must suffer and die, Peter rebuked him, saying that these things would not happen. Our Lord's response was to tell Satan, ( Peter ) to get behind him.

Matt 16:21-23 21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.
22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
23 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.

Who knows, but that God in his foreknowledge, had this event recorded immediately following Christ's praise of Peter's acknowledgement of his divinity. If, what Papists claim is true, Peter went from being established by Christ as the visible head of the Lords church on earth, to being called Satan by Christ, in a matter of minutes. He went from speaking that which only the Father could have revealed to him, to speaking that which the father of lies, Satan himself, would purpose. This record, in and of itself, shows the complete fallacy of the Papal assertion of authority based upon these scriptures. This is not to mention the atrocities committed by, and the degradation to which the church of Rome descended, under the leadership of so many Popes.

The scriptures clearly reveal who the rock, or stone is, which the church is built upon.

Eph 2:18-22 18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

So it is, that the church of Rome disregards the biblical symbolism of Christ as the rock, in favor of a literal application of the verses under examination. She then uses this literal application as a bases for the establishment of herself as God's one and only true church on earth. In this manner she seats herself in a position of authority, with the Pope at her head. Many of the Jews thought that because they could trace their lineage back to Abraham, they were God's chosen people. Just so the church of Rome thinks that because she claims to be able to trace a lineage of Popes back to the Apostle Peter, she is God's true church on earth. The following words of John the Baptist to some of the Jews, may well be applied to the church of Rome.

Matt 3:7-10 7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

There is much more that has already been said by others, and that could be said regarding this matter. For the purposes of this book however, it is sufficient to point out Rome's rejection of the spiritual application in favor of a literal one for her own ends. In the following chapters, we will examine more spiritual truths from God's word, that the church of Rome has disregarded, in favor of literal interpretations which establish herself in a position of power. We will also examine some of her teachings, and doctrines that undermine the gospel message, as well as examine some biblical prophecies that meet their fulfillment in her.

 

Jesus said: "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." The word Peter signifies a stone,--a rolling stone. Peter was not the rock upon which the church was founded. The gates of hell did prevail against him when he denied his Lord with cursing and swearing. The church was built upon One against whom the gates of hell could not prevail.

Centuries before the Saviour's advent Moses had pointed to the Rock of Israel's salvation. The psalmist had sung of "the Rock of my strength." Isaiah had written, "Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation." Deut. 32:4; Ps. 62:7; Isa. 28:16. Peter himself, writing by inspiration, applies this prophecy to Jesus. He says, "If ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious: unto whom coming, a living stone, rejected indeed of men, but with God elect, precious, ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house." 1 Peter 2:3-5

"Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ." 1 Cor. 3:11. "Upon this rock," said Jesus, "I will build My church." In the presence of God, and all the heavenly intelligences, in the presence of the unseen army of hell, Christ founded His church upon the living Rock. That Rock is Himself,--His own body, for us broken and bruised. Against the church built upon this foundation, the gates of hell shall not prevail.

Peter had expressed the truth which is the foundation of the church's faith, and Jesus now honored him as the representative of the whole body of believers. He said, "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."

"The keys of the kingdom of heaven" are the words of Christ. All the words of Holy Scripture are His, and are here included. These words have power to open and to shut heaven. They declare the conditions upon which men are received or rejected. Thus the work of those who preach God's word is a savor of life unto life or of death unto death. Theirs is a mission weighted with eternal results.

The Saviour did not commit the work of the gospel to Peter individually. At a later time, repeating the words that were spoken to Peter, He applied them directly to the church. And the same in substance was spoken also to the twelve as representatives of the body of believers. If Jesus had delegated any special authority to one of the disciples above the others, we should not find them so often contending as to who should be the greatest. They would have submitted to the wish of their Master, and honored the one whom He had chosen.

 

Matt Black,

You know, you guys cant keep telling yourselves that little fairy tale, and believe that it is true, until you are blue in the face, and it wont make it true.

Truth...

1) Every born again person can trace their lineage back the the day of pentecost.

1) These monolithic monstrosities...filled with idolatries and false blasphemies...known as the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church bear no resemblance whatsoever to 1st century christianity.

They are...for the most part...white washed tombs filled with dead mens bones.

Praise God \o/ that there are exceptions. Some inside those organisations do in fact know Christ, although in most case they flee the morgue after they come to know Him.

Sadly,

Mike

 

Yes, all the way back to when they were hearing Peter and Paul telling them to "Repent"

 

You know, you guys cant keep telling yourselves that little fairy tale, and believe that it is true, until you are blue in the face, and it wont make it true.</font>[/QUOTE]

Please demonstrate this. Produce your evidence, your historical records.

And you know this how, exactly? Were you there in the first century? And to wehat extent would, say, St Paul recognise what goes on in the average evangelical church as authoentic 1st century Christianity?

 

Catholic trace back to the heresies which were popular around the time of Cyril and the Council of Ephesus.
Paul, Peter never mentioned the papacy, never mentioned Christmas, Mother of God, Immaculate Conception, etc.

 

And they never mentioned the New Testament either - does that mean you don't use that?

 

What they wrote and what they mentioned according to Holy Spirit became the NT. If anyone excuse any heresy by alluding it to the formation of NT is ridiculous.

Buddhism is not mentioned in NT as NT itself is not mentioned, and therefore Buddhism is also truth, is this your logic?

 

And if you call everything heresy simply because it is not referred to in the Bible, that is equally ridiculous.

 

I don't do that, but reject Theotokos because it deface the only deity of God and God's Creatorship over His creature Mary, His servant who was sinful but forgiven by His Grace thru the eternal Redemption of Jesus Christ who shed the blood for her.

 

Actually, theotokos affirms the deity of Christ. Denying the theotokos defaces His divinity

 

Heaven forbid that God would humble Himself to take on a human mother and become man.

Calling Mary, Theotokos, does not deface God's creatorship. It only affirms the truth that God blessed her with the privilege of being His mother.

 

If you want to talk about Theotokos, you may be hijacking this thread to other purpose. But if you want to continue to talk about it, I would let you know simply that:

Bible rejects that Son of God has a Mother.

Read Hebrew 7:2-3.

Son of God doesn't have a Mother ! Why does Bible say so ?

Are you not able top understand what Hebrews 7:2-3 say? Ask any high school students to interpret thos verses.

Is God the Creator of Mary or not?

1) Is Mary the Mother of God?
2)-Is Mary Mother of God the Father ?
3) - Is God the Father not God?

If you answer those questions you will find the dilema.

 

Hey your the one who keeps bringing it up so don't blame us if you keep posting a list that contains truths you reject.

It would help if the verse was actually about Christ and not Melchizedek. Or are you trying to say that Jesus is not man?

.5) He is the creator
1) Yes
2) No
3) Yes God the Father is God, yet at the same time He is not God the Son.

So, where is this dilema I was supposed to find, I don't see any.