Upon THIS Rock I will build my Church

[APAK]

There is nothing negative about pointing you to the truth. Indeed you should have been thankful.

Christ is the only Rock and Foundation upon which the Church is built. And Peter's confession (obtained by divine revelation) -- that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God -- confirmed that. Therefore the Church is the Body, the Bride, and the Building of Christ.

Enoch: I do accept and agree with your explanation because...new believers are those that believe and trust that salvation is through Christ. They become in Christ as Christ is in the Father.

God announced and revealed to Peter the identity of the human instrument or direct object for salvation, Jesus, his son. He would now be the instrument by which salvation was possible. Previous to his son's birth, death, resurrection and ascension, God himself was the direct object of salvation as per over 24 verses in the OT, under the Law.

God announced the transfer and new way to salvation from himself directly to his son, under grace.

Since Christ is in the Father, the Father is the ultimate savior of men and they are the ekklesia (living stones) of Christ (living rock), for the Father (enormous living rock).

Bless you,

APAK

 

[Philip James]

Christ is the only Rock and Foundation upon which the Church is

built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the capstone

Simon, youre name is Rock and on this rock Ill build my church...


You set up a false dichotemy of the Rock being either Jesus or Peter.
In doing this Jesus forever unites Peter with Himself..

And it is Peter whom Jesus says, his faith will never fail...

And it is Peter to whom Jesus commends the care of His sheep...

Pax!

 

[Small Fish]

Many say they built the church on Christ, yet how can this be if Christ is not revealed to them?

No wonder their is so many denominations. They haven't even gotton to first base yet.

This is the fundamental problem in the church world today.

 

[brakelite]

Enoch: I do accept and agree with your explanation because...new believers are those that believe and trust that salvation is through Christ. They become in Christ as Christ is in the Father.

God announced and revealed to Peter the identity of the human instrument or direct object for salvation, Jesus, his son. He would now be the instrument by which salvation was possible. Previous to his son's birth, death, resurrection and ascension, God himself was the direct object of salvation as per over 24 verses in the OT, under the Law.

God announced the transfer and new way to salvation from himself directly to his son, under grace.

Since Christ is in the Father, the Father is the ultimate savior of men and they are the ekklesia (living stones) of Christ (living rock), for the Father (enormous living rock).

Bless you,

APAK

My bro, the was never a time since Adam and Eve when salvation came through anyone other than through the son of God. In anticipation in the OT, in realisation in the NT. The Son was as much in action throughout the history of Israel, the judges, and the patriarchs and before, as He was in the time of today's church. For example, it was the spirit of Christ that preached through Noah. It was the spirit of Christ that preached through the prophets. It was Christ that created all things.

 

[marksman]

The importance of revelation by the Spirit to a true believer can never be over emphasized. Revelation means more to you than perhaps you realize. Now I am not talking about this Book of Revelation and you. I am talking about ALL revelation. It is tremendously important to the church. Do you remember in Matthew 16 where Jesus asked the disciples this question, "Whom do men say that I the Son of Man am? And they said, Some say that Thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father Which is in heaven. And I say 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 Roman Catholics say that the church is built upon Peter. Now that is really carnal. How could God build the church upon a man so unstable that he denied the Lord Jesus and cursed while doing it? God can't build His church upon any man born in sin. And it wasn't some rock lying there as though God had hallowed the ground at that spot. And it isn't as the Protestants say, that the church is built upon Jesus. It was the REVELATION. Read it the way it is written: "Flesh and blood hath not REVEALED it, BUT MY FATHER HATH REVEALED IT, and UPON THIS ROCK (REVELATION) I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH:" The church is built on Revelation, on the "Thus Saith the Lord".

- The Seven Church Ages WMB

The grammar makes it so that he is not referring to Peter. He said "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church..."

If he was referring to Peter he would have said "You are Peter and upon you I will build my church..."

 

[amadeus]

Adam and Eve had relationship but lost it by seeking more and it was the very thing that cost them
Covetousness and disregard for God...still costs.

Their problem was in seeking to elevate themselves. We are certainly to seek, but we need have priorities right:

"But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you." Matt 6:33
Let God do any elevating of us!

 

[faithfulness]

Their problem was in seeking to elevate themselves. We are certainly to seek, but we need have priorities right:

"But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you." Matt 6:33
Let God do any elevating of us!

Amen! Learning and seeing glimpses of true humility as I'm walking.
Loved what a brother said: "Wait before the Lord at all times and let Him dispense what He is".

 

[amadeus]

Of course the Rock is the proper Foundation. Remember Jesus spoke of it here:

"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:
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.
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:
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" Matt 7:25-27

The Foundation or Rock is most certainly Jesus:

"And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice: and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also." Num 20:11

What did Moses do that was so wrong? Why was it by striking the Rock instead of speaking to it was it that he was denied entrance into the Promised Land?

"Then did they spit in his face, and buffeted him; and others smote him with the palms of their hands,
Saying, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, Who is he that smote thee?" Matt 26:67-68

Then again see the Foundation:

"For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.
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.
For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ." I Cor 3:9-11

 

[Helen]

Amen! Learning and seeing glimpses of true humility as I'm walking.
Loved what a brother said: "Wait before the Lord at all times and let Him dispense what He is".

Amen!! I like that quote very much...excellent line.

 

[faithfulness]

Amen!! I like that quote very much...excellent line.

Amen! I like that quote very much, too...there are 'certain' brothers that when they speak, it is engraved in your heart!

Whoever claims to abide in Him must walk as Jesus walked.

 

[BreadOfLife]

The importance of revelation by the Spirit to a true believer can never be over emphasized. Revelation means more to you than perhaps you realize. Now I am not talking about this Book of Revelation and you. I am talking about ALL revelation. It is tremendously important to the church. Do you remember in Matthew 16 where Jesus asked the disciples this question, "Whom do men say that I the Son of Man am? And they said, Some say that Thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father Which is in heaven. And I say 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 Roman Catholics say that the church is built upon Peter. Now that is really carnal. How could God build the church upon a man so unstable that he denied the Lord Jesus and cursed while doing it? God can't build His church upon any man born in sin. And it wasn't some rock lying there as though God had hallowed the ground at that spot. And it isn't as the Protestants say, that the church is built upon Jesus. It was the REVELATION. Read it the way it is written: "Flesh and blood hath not REVEALED it, BUT MY FATHER HATH REVEALED IT, and UPON THIS ROCK (REVELATION) I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH:" The church is built on Revelation, on the "Thus Saith the Lord".

The way to read this as as follows: "Flesh and blood hath not REVEALED it, BUT MY FATHER HATH REVEALED IT, and UPON THIS ROCK (CHRIST) I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH".

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. (Mt 16:18)

κἀγὼ δέ σοι λέγω, ὅτι σὺ εἶ Πέτρος, (Petros = Peter = stone or boulder) καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ (Petra = Christ = cliff or massive rock) οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, καὶ πύλαι ᾅδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς.

Strong's Concordance
Petros: "a stone" or "a boulder," Peter, one of the twelve apostles
Original Word: Πέτρος, ου, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: Petros
Phonetic Spelling: (pet'-ros)
Short Definition: Peter
Definition: Peter, a Greek name meaning rock.

Strong's Concordance
petra: a (large mass of) rock
Original Word: πέτρα, ας, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: petra
Phonetic Spelling: (pet'-ra)
Short Definition: rock
Definition: a rock, ledge, cliff, cave, stony ground.

Christians are not *built" into the Church by revelation but by Christ Himself through the New Birth. And the apostle Peter was certainly not the Rock of Ages.

Good grief - how many times must this passage be argued - and how many time do you guys need to be proven wrong?

FIRST of all - Jesus and the Apostles spoke ARAMAIC to one another - not Greek - so your entire linguistic argument goes right out the window.
What Jesus actually said to Simon was: "You are KEPHA and on this KEPHA I will build my Church."

The Aramaic word, "Kepha" means "ROCK" - period. Not "small rock" or "pebble" - just ROCK.
This is why Paul refers to Peter - NOT as "Petros" in his letters - but as "CEPHAS", which is a Greek transliteration of the Aramaic Kepha. The vast majority of your own Protestant scholarship agrees with the CATHOLIC position that the "Rock" is Peter - and NOT his confession of faith NOR the revelation of who Jesus was . . .

W.F. Albright (Protestant) and C.S. Mann
“[Peter] is not a name, but an appellation and a play on words. There is no evidence of Peter or Kephas as a name before Christian times….Peter as Rock will be the foundation of the future community. Jesus, not quoting the Old Testament, here uses Aramaic, not Hebrew, and so uses the only Aramaic word that would serve his purpose. In view of the background of v. 19…one must dismiss as confessional interpretation any attempt to see this rock as meaning the faith, or the messianic confession, of Peter. To deny the pre-eminent position of Peter among the disciples or in the early Christian community is a denial of the evidence…The interest in Peter’s failures and vacillations does not detract from this pre-eminence; rather, it emphasizes it. Had Peter been a lesser figure his behavior would have been of far less consequence.”
(The Anchor Bible; Matthew [Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1971], 195)

Albert Barnes (Nineteenth-Century Presbyterian)
"The meaning of this phrase may be thus expressed: ‘Thou, in saying that I am the Son of God, hast called me by a name expressive of my true character. I, also, have given to thee a name expressive of your character. I have called you Peter, a rock. . . . I see that you are worthy of the name and will be a distinguished support of my religion"
[Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, 170].

John Broadus (Nineteenth-Century Calvinistic Baptist)
"As Peter means rock, the natural interpretation is that ‘upon this rock’ means upon thee. . . . It is an even more far-fetched and harsh play upon words if we understand the rock to be Christ and a very feeble and almost unmeaning play upon words if the rock is Peter’s confession" [Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, 356].

Craig L. Blomberg (Baptist)
"The expression ‘this rock’ almost certainly refers to Peter, following immediately after his name, just as the words following ‘the Christ’ in verse 16 applied to Jesus. The play on words in the Greek between Peter’s name (Petros) and the word ‘rock’ (petra) makes sense only if Peter is the Rock and if Jesus is about to explain the significance of this identification" [New American Commentary: Matthew, 22:252].

J. Knox Chamblin (Contemporary Presbyterian)
"By the words ‘this rock’ Jesus means not himself, nor his teaching, nor God the Father, nor Peter’s confession, but Peter himself. The phrase is immediately preceded by a direct and emphatic reference to Peter. As Jesus identifies himself as the builder, the rock on which he builds is most naturally understood as someone (or something) other than Jesus himself"
["Matthew" in Evangelical Commentary on the Bible, 742].

R.T. France (Anglican)
“Jesus now sums up Peter's significance in a name, Peter . . . It describes not so much Peter's character (he did not prove to be 'rock-like' in terms of stability or reliability), but his function, as the foundation-stone of Jesus' church. The feminine word for 'rock', 'petra', is necessarily changed to the masculine 'petros' (stone) to give a man's name, but the word-play is unmistakable (and in Aramaic would be even more so, as the same form 'kepha' would occur in both places). It is only Protestant overreaction to the Catholic claim . . . that what is here said of Peter applies also to the later bishops of Rome, that has led some to claim that the 'rock' here is not Peter at all but the faith which he has just confessed. "The word-play, and the whole structure of the passage, demands that this verse is every bit as much Jesus’ declaration about Peter as verse 16 was Peter’s declaration about Jesus. Of course it is on the basis of Peter’s confession that Jesus declares his role as the Church’s foundation, but it is to Peter, not his confession, that the rock metaphor is applied. . . Peter is to be the foundation-stone of Jesus' new community . . . which will last forever.”
(Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, [Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1985], vol. 1: Matthew, 254, 256)

William Hendriksen (Reformed Christian Church, Professor of New Testament Literature at Calvin Seminary)
“The meaning is, “You are Peter, that is Rock, and upon this rock, that is, on you, Peter I will build my church.” Our Lord, speaking Aramaic, probably said, “And I say to you, you are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church.” Jesus, then, is promising Peter that he is going to build his church on him! I accept this view.”
(New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1973], page 647JPK page 14]

Donald Hagner (Contemporary Evangelical)
"The frequent attempts that have been made, largely in the past, to deny [that Peter is the rock] in favor of the view that the confession itself is the rock . . . seem to be largely motivated by Protestant prejudice against a passage that is used by the Catholics to justify the papacy"
(Word Biblical Commentary 33b:470).

 

[BreadOfLife]

Protestant scholars on Peter, the ROCK (cont'd) . . .

David Hill (Presbyterian)
“It is on Peter himself, the confessor of his Messiahship, that Jesus will build the Church…Attempts to interpret the ‘rock’ as something other than Peter in person (e.g., his faith, the truth revealed to him) are due to Protestant bias, and introduce to the statement a degree of subtlety which is highly unlikely.” (The Gospel of Matthew, New Century Bible Commentary [Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1972], 261)

Herman Ridderbos (Contemporary Dutch Reformed)
"It is well known that the Greek word petra translated ‘rock’ here is different from the proper name Peter. The slight difference between them has no special importance, however. The most likely explanation for the change from petros (‘Peter’) to petra is that petra was the normal word for ‘rock.’ . . . There is no good reason to think that Jesus switched from petros to petra to show that he was not speaking of the man Peter but of his confession as the foundation of the Church. The words ‘on this rock [petra]’ indeed refer to Peter"
[Bible Student’s Commentary: Matthew, 303].

Donald A. Carson (Baptist)
“On the basis of the distinction between 'petros' . . . and 'petra' . . . , many have attempted to avoid identifying Peter as the rock on which Jesus builds his church. Peter is a mere 'stone,' it is alleged; but Jesus himself is the 'rock' . . . Others adopt some other distinction . . . Yet if it were not for Protestant reactions against extremes of Catholic interpretation, it is doubtful whether many would have taken 'rock' to be anything or anyone other than Peter . . . The Greek makes the distinction between 'petros' and 'petra' simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine 'petra' could not very well serve as a masculine name . . . Had Matthew wanted to say no more than that Peter was a stone in contrast with Jesus the Rock, the more common word would have been 'lithos' ('stone' of almost any size). Then there would have been no pun - and that is just the point! . . . In this passage Jesus is the builder of the church and it would be a strange mixture of metaphors that also sees him within the same clauses as its foundation . . .”
(Expositor's Bible Commentary, [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984], vol. 8: Matthew, Mark, Luke (Matthew: D.A. Carson), 368)

 

[Enoch111]

Protestant scholars on Peter, the ROCK

That should have said "DELUDED Protestant scholars on Peter, the ROCK". There are a lot of deluded Protestant scholars. Many if them are sucking up to Rome. But that is not an excuse for Catholic delusions.

 

[BreadOfLife]

That should have said "DELUDED Protestant scholars on Peter, the ROCK". There are a lot of deluded Protestant scholars. Many if them are sucking up to Rome. But that is not an excuse for Catholic delusions.

I could accept that as a lucid and well-thought-out argument - if you had done your homework.
Apparently, you haven't - or you would have posted a solid refutation of their scholarly quotes.

If you disagree with them - PROVE them wrong.
That's the way a debate works . . .

 

[GodsGrace]

That should have said "DELUDED Protestant scholars on Peter, the ROCK". There are a lot of deluded Protestant scholars. Many if them are sucking up to Rome. But that is not an excuse for Catholic delusions.

There's one thing I'd like to understand, as a Protestant.
What DIFFERENCE does it make if Jesus meant the rock to be Peter?
I've never understood this and I've been protestant for about 35 years or so.

We know that Peter could not have been the first pope because there was no such thing back in the time of Acts. If Catholics want to say that every bishop of Rome going back to Peter was the "pope"...what difference?

I can say that knowing Italian I can understand how this is a play on words.
"Tu sei Pietro" The name Peter coming from rock
e su questa pietra costruiro' la mia chiesa". On this rock.

 

[GodsGrace]

To me it is very clear that the Rock Jesus speaks of here refers to the revelation of Who Jesus is.
Therefore it must be the foundation that He builds His Church on and in turn, the reference point for the unity of the Church of God.

Any thoughts on this?

I think we're fishing!
Why would Jesus have said first "you are Peter"??

 

[Stranger]

I think we're fishing!
Why would Jesus have said first "you are Peter"??

Why would Jesus build His Church upon Peter?

Stranger

 

[BreadOfLife]

I think we're fishing!
Why would Jesus have said first "you are Peter"??

He said, "You are ROCK" (Kepha)."

"Peter" is simply an English translation of the Greek Petros. Greek has several words for "Rock" (lithos, petros, petra), whereas Aramaic only has ONE. Paul chose to use a Greek transliteration (not translation) and called him "Cephas".

 

[BreadOfLife]

Why would Jesus build His Church upon Peter?

Stranger

Eph. 2:20 tells us that the Church is built on the Apostles and Prophets.
Rev. 21 describes the foundations of the New Jerusalem being the 12 Apostles.

Why is that??

 

[Stranger]

Eph. 2:20 tells us that the Church is built on the Apostles and Prophets.
Rev. 21 describes the foundations of the New Jerusalem being the 12 Apostles.

Why is that??

That doesn't answer my question.

Stranger