Did Peter Really Walk On The Water Or Was It Symbolic ?

[Miss Hepburn]

Kinda sounds like a word of faith message MH, Who and what do you believe man is?

Not necessarily in this order - or no order at all...

1. An extension of God (that forgot that he was an extension of God except for a few, of course.)
2. Part of God, like my toe is a part of me (but my toe is not me)
3. Enjoyment to God
4. One of zillions of His creation in this limited 3rd dimension.
5. Another way for God's experience to expand more and more
6. A way for God to feel more - more than He would from a dolphin or an insect or a rock.
7. His potential lover - His bride that He waits for.

And no one needs to think or feel as I do...just sayin'.


I may think of others things for the list later - that was off the top.

 

[goodshepard55]

100% I believe Peter walked on the water.
100%.


When Man understands who and what he is - what he is made of - what we call real, substance and matter is
he will also be able to 'control' atoms with his knowledge, faith and understanding - easily walking through
walls that seem to be 'real' or 'solid' or 'dense'.

When the limitations of Man's perceptions are overcome we will be able to see these things as common place -
when the Supernatural is natural.

Amen and Amen

 

[Rach1370]

I think, both. Walking on water vs sinking is symbolic of several things. Sinking symbolic of what happens with lack of faith. Seas symbolic of sin and mans in ability to overcome without Christ. Walking symbolic of walking in the spirit. I have more thoughts but I'm on my phone will add more later.

I completely agree that it is both. The bible is awesome! How many times did something happen in the OT that was symbolic of things to come? Isaac...the son carrying wood for his own death on his back. The exodus...God leading his people out of slavery...setting them free! On and on it goes.
I, without doubt, believe that Peter walked on water, and I also believe that that physical act had a greater meaning...keep your eyes on Jesus, because the moment you look away, you'll begin to sink.

 

[Shirley]

Amen Rach!

 

[[email protected]]

My Mom seems to think that Peter walking on the water was symbolic for how we are to walk by faith and not by sight and the consequences of each. I however, believe that Peter literally walked on the water just as it was written. What do you guys think ?

The question has nothing to do with Peter walking on water. What it's really asking is whether the Bible ought to be believed as the Word of God or just a collection of simple stories.

The Bible is the Word of God and what it says is true!

To assume otherwise is to call God a liar as well as those who recorded the miraculous events they witnessed. If one doesn't believe what is written within the Bible's pages, then one is doomed. Quite literally doomed, for what then shall one believe?

The idea has gone abroad in the land that the Bible isn't really what it says it is. And look what that idea has brought us to; rampant narcissism, social disintegration, moral relativism, governmental debauchery, economic crisis and constant war.

If a man will not believe the Bible and esteem it as the ultimate source of truth, then he is left with nothing but subjective opinion.

The rise of personal opinion over objective truth, more than any other evidence, is the single greatest proof and cause for the failure of the church and the fall of American civilization. Everybody has an opinion and every opinion is at variance with every other opinion. Therein lies the seeds of social destruction. Where do you suppose that attitude comes from? The same place it has come from since Adam and Eve were first told that God was a liar.

Oddly the only opinion that most seem to agree on is that the Bible isn't what it says it is; THE WORD OF GOD.

but that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

 

[jiggyfly]

Oddly the only opinion that most seem to agree on is that the Bible isn't what it says it is; THE WORD OF GOD.

but that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

Do you have scripture that makes the claim that the bible is the Word of God?

 

[Miss Hepburn]

The question has nothing to do with Peter walking on water. What it's really asking is whether the Bible ought to be
believed as the Word of God or just a collection of simple stories.

The Bible is the Word of God and what it says is true!

To assume otherwise is to call God a liar as well as those who recorded the miraculous events they witnessed.
If one doesn't believe what is written within the Bible's pages, then one is doomed.
Quite literally doomed, for what then shall one believe?

Hi rjp,
Your love of the Bible and your dedication and zeal warms my heart. Thank you.

May I say, though, that if my brother does not take it all literally - he is not calling God a liar. Far from it.
But, he may have doubt in Man and his shenanagans - that someone in power may have altered some things.
( Pls, remember I believe Peter walked on water 100%.)

If a brother or sister doubts some things or questions some things or interprets some things differntly than the mainstream, so to speak,
they are not ''doomed''.
They can question, they can even doubt, they can even come from a different angle - they are still loved by God and all is well.

It's ok to question things in the Bible, that is only natural to scratch our heads and wonder.
As it is ok to believe it is all literal and not a tittle has been altered from the way it literally happened.

No one is ''doomed'', for Heaven's sake. But, I understand that at times our love of the Bible makes us want everyone to
believe it the way we think it should be believed and followed.

It is this very ''doom'' attitude that pushes so many good people from reading the Bible, because they see us as fanatical,
militant or unloving, exactly opposite from Christ-like.
We repel the very people we want to bring to the loving arms of Jesus and His Father.

Thank you for listening, rjp.
Have a blessed day.
Miss Hepburn

I completely agree that it is both. The bible is awesome! How many times did something happen in the OT that was symbolic of things to come? Isaac...the son carrying wood for his own death on his back. The exodus...God leading his people out of slavery...setting them free! On and on it goes.
I, without doubt, believe that Peter walked on water, and I also believe that that physical act had a greater meaning...keep your eyes on Jesus, because the moment you look away, you'll begin to sink.

Can you imagine what it took for Peter to step out of this huge boat and stand on a stormy, wavy lake?
Wow!!!
That thought will carry me throughout today - putting a glow in my heart.
Can you imagine Jesus' face with His hand outstretched!!!! Wow!

 

[prism]

The same dangerous figurative path has been taken concerning Christ's bodiy resurrection. It must be taken literal first and foremost...otherwise we go from literal to allegorical to symbolic to pure mythology. Nope it is historical and literal as was Peter's H2O walk.

 

[lawrance]

Walked on the grass to. did he walk in the air or fly. Bible does not say that but if it did would you believe it.
No if you have a good understanding of the OT then you will know things more in depth as it is like a blueprint. so mainly if we don't see any relation to it in the OT we can see if things are false.
The point is walking on water by it's self means nothing much at all to me. or he may of just always went around doing it not just once.
Remember we are looking back in his days not someone in the USA in the year 2012.
Holy Moses did some things to water as well. and i don't think he walked on but it was what he did do ?
It has to signify something, not just that.

 

[mark s]

I, without doubt, believe that Peter walked on water, and I also believe that that physical act had a greater meaning...keep your eyes on Jesus, because the moment you look away, you'll begin to sink.

OK, there's my thought to carry into today!

God bless you!

Love in Christ,
Mark

 

[prism]

You can bring out significations all you want, but if it did not literally happen in space and time, those significations have no basis in reality as we know it. As far as the OT goes perhaps a human walking on water is a greater work than an ax head, as Jesus is greater than the Prophets.

 

[Foreigner]

Peter did indeed walk on water.
The authors of the Gospels each present it as fact, not as a parable.
Each presented it the exact same way without confering with each other.

To those that say he didn't walk on water and that there are a number of other events in the Bible that didn't really happen, but were rather 'symbolic,' etc.etc. etc., you are heading down a road that you yourself are not qualified to travel.

 

[justaname]

Peter walked on water.

 

[lawrance]

Peter did indeed walk on water.
The authors of the Gospels each present it as fact, not as a parable.
Each presented it the exact same way without confering with each other.

To those that say he didn't walk on water and that there are a number of other events in the Bible that didn't really happen, but were rather 'symbolic,' etc.etc. etc., you are heading down a road that you yourself are not qualified to travel.

Why is the story said then as walking on water etc means nothing at all. but the fact is what it represents and this is the point.
So walking on water, as in the understanding from a atheist simplistic point of view is that the the same thing as you are comming from.

I am not saying he did not walk, but as for you to dictate who is qualified etc come on.

Jesus spoke in parables for a reason and it is the Holy Spirit that guides one to understand in depth, not the worldly simpelton rubbish that one have to put up with all the atheist attacks on Jesus Christ and the Bible.

Simply walking on water or anything as such can or has nothing to do with anything really but when understanding the OT this gives full light to it all. and if you are not up to it all. i am sure one would just see it within only a narrow darkness and simplistic way. just good old foolish blind faith.

My good old pastor was always saying there is nothing to a lot of things in the Bible and i was positive there was more to it as i could see it but he was saying don't seek or knock as his lot know it all.

 

[prism]

Yes Liberal Theology is the Door to Atheism.
The miracles of Jesus showed He had the Father's stamp of approval and that he had power and authority over death,nature,demons and all else.

 

[lawrance]

Yes Liberal Theology is the Door to Atheism.
The miracles of Jesus showed He had the Father's stamp of approval and that he had power and authority over death,nature,demons and all else.

But head in the sand black and white views don't cut it at all.
And i am not talking liberal Theology at all. it's a fact what i am saying
I knew what their point of view was for years there was noting hard to understand about it all and they are more about the NT and like to avoid the OT and push only a simple message as most people are not into looking into things in depth at all. so simplistic Christianity rules the majority and it is failing because it has not much roots.
And it's this type of simpleton rubbish that lead to destroying the Jewish peoples and there home land.

 

[prism]

Even the Tanakh points to Yeshua.

 

[Foreigner]

Why is the story said then as walking on water etc means nothing at all. but the fact is what it represents and this is the point.
So walking on water, as in the understanding from a atheist simplistic point of view is that the the same thing as you are comming from.

-- Please forgive me, but could you try that again?
I know the words were in English, but gramatically that was a train wreck.

I am not saying he did not walk, but as for you to dictate who is qualified etc come on.

-- The authors of each of the Gospels put it forth as an actual event, not a parable.
Each put forth the exact same event as an actual event without conferring with each other beforehand.

There is nothing at all to indicate that while chronicling of Christ's time on earth each of the author's Gospels decided to stop - at the same time in the timeline - to include a parable instead of an actual event.

Parables were shared by Jesus, not STARRING Jesus.

Jesus spoke in parables for a reason and it is the Holy Spirit that guides one to understand in depth, not the worldly simpelton rubbish that one have to put up with all the atheist attacks on Jesus Christ and the Bible.

-- Yes, JESUS spoke in parables. Jesus was - nor did he make Himself - a player within a parable.

And none of those parables started with, "Immediately he made his disciples get into the boat and go before him to the other side.." Mark 6:45

Using your standard then then:
- Jeasus clearing the temple could actually be a parable
- Peter denying Jesus three times before the cock crowed could be a parable
- Jesus getting the coin from the fish's mouth could be a parable
- Jesus' donkeyride into Jerusalem could be a parable
- The story of Thomas refusing to believe until he touched Jesus' wounds could be a parable
- The story of Jesus walking along with two men shortly after He rose could be a parable
- Jesus allowing the demons to enter the swine who then ran off the cliff could be a parable
- Jesus healing the ear of the servant that Peter had cut off could be a parable
- The resurrection of Lazarus could be a parable
- The feeding of the 5000 could be a parable
- Jesus' conversation with the man on the cross who He said would be with him in paradise could be a parable
etc.
etc.
etc.

Either all these events are true or they are not.
There is NOTHING that Biblical Scholars have found that indicates that the 'walking on water' event was simpy a parable.

Simply walking on water or anything as such can or has nothing to do with anything really....

-- Again, that grammatical trainwreck aside, one of the things chroncicled in the NT are the flaws of the Disciples, especially Peter.
So why would you then need a parable to further accentuate the flaws of the Disciples, again especially Peter?
This specific event - if it were a parable - teaches us much.
But the event as it was - a real event - is also teaches much and can be applied to our own lives.


Again, there is NOTHING that shows that this one specific event was a parable. It was presented as fact.
The standards necessary to have this considered a parable could be applied to almost every other singular event in the NT, including those I listed above.

Peter walked on water. Period.

 

[lawrance]

Maybe foreigner it is more to do with the Spirit at work in the Bible. so if one has an ear ?
She works in mysterious ways the gifts of the Holy Spirit.
And one can discern this when one has more understanding in the Bible.
More of an understanding than just parables.
I find the way some denominations teach is only just like in a typical school but the fact is they will never learn much at all especially because they have not the experience in depth. so they come out of school thinking they know it all and then bag others who have many more years of experience on them.

And i find this the same as in my job that some kid that just has left school starts telling me how to do my trade and i have been doing it from 1974 and the fact is they know bugger all. ^_^

 

[prism]

Notwithstanding the lessons behind the miracles (the lessons are opened to interpretations), the miracles themselves happened in real time in real space with real flesh and blood subjects. I too have been at this since 1974 and it doesn't take a genius to know the subtlety of Liberal Theology in their denial of the supernatural miracles of Jesus.