-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Why did Jesus address Peter as "Bar Jonah" in Matt 16:17?
- Thread starter Squidward
- Start date
- Status
It does, but I was curious as to why Jesus referred to him as the son of Jonah at that moment yet called him Simon Peter or just Simon any other time. My thought is Jesus wanted it to be clear as to which Simon he referred to, then Jesus called him simply "Peter."
Cuz his dads name was Jonah....not that Jonah but Jonah...
Tom Butler
New Member
The modern equivalent would be Pete Johnson.
Or Simon P. Johnson.
Or S. Peter Johnson.
Or Simon P. Johnson.
Or S. Peter Johnson.
Right. I understand that. My questions is referring to why Jesus referred to him as Bar Jonah at that moment instead of Simon or Simon Peter.
As I said, there were two Simons in the group. Since this was an era before surnames when people were referred to as "the offspring of" or "of insert generic city name here" did Jesus refer to him as "son of" to avoid confusion as to which Simon he was referring to? Afterall, this was a great call Jesus put on Peter and he knew it so he referred to him as "the son of" to be specific as to which Simon he was speaking to.
Last edited by a moderator:
This is what I was thinking. This was equal to today's standards of Bob Smith and Bob Jones, and the importance of the moment. If I said "I'm giving you a $100 bill, Bob," that wouldn't be near as clear as saying "I'm giving you a $100 bill, Bob Smith."
The blessing of Jesus at that moment was so grand that there did not need to be any confusion as to which Simon he spoke to.
Just wondering if anyone agrees with this observation.
Don't make this too tough folks.
What was the context.
"Who do you say that I am?"
"You are the Christ the son of the Living God."
"Blessings to you Simon, son of Jonah."
Jesus was confirming the difference, in a gentle but magnificent way. It is absolutely georgeous. The Son of Man blessing a son of a man.
What was the context.
"Who do you say that I am?"
"You are the Christ the son of the Living God."
"Blessings to you Simon, son of Jonah."
Jesus was confirming the difference, in a gentle but magnificent way. It is absolutely georgeous. The Son of Man blessing a son of a man.
James Benjamin
New Member
"And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven." As human beings our focus is always on blessings. But if you find the reason why Peter has been blessed, we could understand why Jesus addressed him as Simon, son of Jonah.
Jesus wanted to teach him and all of us that we need revelation from "above" to know who Jesus is. It is not acquired but revealed. It is not from earth but from heaven. It is not through flesh and blood (Jonah, father on earth) but by Spirit (Father in heaven)
Thank God for the revelation that Jesus is the Messiah! Praise the Lord!
Jesus wanted to teach him and all of us that we need revelation from "above" to know who Jesus is. It is not acquired but revealed. It is not from earth but from heaven. It is not through flesh and blood (Jonah, father on earth) but by Spirit (Father in heaven)
Thank God for the revelation that Jesus is the Messiah! Praise the Lord!
It was probably the gravity of the occasion. Jesus confirms that Simon has just stated a profound truth. He is about to change his name to Peter and confer a blessing upon him. We see the same formality in a modern day baptism. The administrator doesn't use just a first name or a nickname, he uses the full name of the candidate.
There is a TV commercial where it is said that when a father uses his son's middle name, it is not good.
First, I do not think the bible tells us why Jesus uses a more expansive designation. And so for anyone to say Jesus did it because of "x" or "y" or "z" would be error. But we are free to speculate as long as it is clearly seen as our speculation and not something found in scripture.
Jesus uses a similar designation at John 21:15, and 16, and 17. I believe Jesus was focusing attention of Peter, just as He has now brought Peter to the center of our attention. And what were the circumstances, Peter realizing that Jesus was the Messiah, and Peter (eventually) realizing that Jesus wanted him just as he was, warts and all, and that one day, Peter would love Jesus unconditionally. Praise God indeed.
First, I do not think the bible tells us why Jesus uses a more expansive designation. And so for anyone to say Jesus did it because of "x" or "y" or "z" would be error. But we are free to speculate as long as it is clearly seen as our speculation and not something found in scripture.
Jesus uses a similar designation at John 21:15, and 16, and 17. I believe Jesus was focusing attention of Peter, just as He has now brought Peter to the center of our attention. And what were the circumstances, Peter realizing that Jesus was the Messiah, and Peter (eventually) realizing that Jesus wanted him just as he was, warts and all, and that one day, Peter would love Jesus unconditionally. Praise God indeed.
Red.Letter
New Member
Hi Squid... maybe it points to what the Master said about 4 verses earlier, "4"A wicked and adulterous generation seeks a sign, and a sign is not given to it, but the sign of Jonah The Prophet." And he left them and departed."
- Status