Was Peter thr Rock that the Church was built upon?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Status
Not open for further replies.

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
shnarkle, on 16 Feb 2017 - 01:52 AM, said:

Now we've heard it all. What Christ says about himself isn't about him at all, but Peter? Yeah, that's it. That's really what this logic leads to ultimately. Peter is Christ. Peter's confession that Jesus is the Christ isn't exclusive to Christ at all, it includes Peter as well. Makes perfect sense to everything you've presented so far. At least you're being consistent in your logic.

I never said anything about Jesus making reference only to Peter. You made that up. I said, "What Jesus says about Himself is not exclusive to what He says about Peter." To re-phrase so you understand, what Jesus said about himself is not excluding Peter, which, it seems, you wish Peter would be entirely excluded. Then you might have a case.

BTW, "Kepha" is a new name, not a metaphor.
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
mjrhealth said:
You should be able to answer that, this is a "christian" community you have divided it by "demonination". Is Christ divided, No He is not but men have divided teh body of Christ by there "doctrines", You elevated Peter to a higher status when your religion made Him into something he is not, This whole topic will not end untill our Lords return and all the "false Churches" the Harlot and her children finally have there eyes opened when they see the truth that is Christ Jesus,

You think you are rich and have it all but you are blind and naked and have nothing.
You have declared your own doctrine, which makes little sense since you have no community.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
mjrhealth said:
No His Church is not but mankind and all His denominations have rejected Christ for there own teaching, No denomination own God not even yours.And all the text highlighting in the world will not change that fact. Spelling correction made to not upset people.
You're right - ALL of your denominations have rejected His teachings in one way or the other in favor of the doctrines and precepts of mere men.
Jesus built ONE Church - not tens of thousands of perpetually-splintering Protestant sects . . .

PS - you missed a spelling correction (in RED).
 

mjrhealth

Well-Known Member
Mar 15, 2009
11,810
4,090
113
Australia
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
You're right - ALL of your denominations have rejected His teachings in one way or the other in favor of the doctrines and precepts of mere men.
Jesus built ONE Church - not tens of thousands of perpetually-splintering Protestant sects . . .

PS - you missed a spelling correction (in RED).
But funny how christianity rejects catholism because thy all know it is a lie, and it is history itself hat has declaared it an abomination. It is simply the way you divide the communtiy that makes it all so easy to see. When one talks about deception its amzing how deep it goes, The other day Tom was talking about apostatsy, well you should look at the australian news about the fortune your church has had to spend on compensating Gods children the innocent because of all the child molestation, but it is the anglicans and all the other demoninations too, for teh bible does declare

Rev_17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

Mother must be so proud of what she has done, oh capalisation was copy paste so dont blame me.

And it also declares

Luk_12:2 For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known.

And the ugliness of teh great whore has being shown for all the world to see.

It also says

1Co_6:16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

and

1Co_6:15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.

after all teh abominatios she has done upon this earth yet you mock God by calling it our Lords church. You really have serious issues with who God is. And if you bellittiling me because of my typing well Jees teh devil himself has done worse.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
mjrhealth said:
But funny how christianity rejects catholism because thy all know it is a lie, and it is history itself hat has declaared it an abomination. It is simply the way you divide the communtiy that makes it all so easy to see. When ione talks about deception its amzing how deep it goes, The other day Tom was talking about apostatsy, well you should look at the australian news about teh fortune your church has had to spens on compensation Gods children the innocnect because of aoo the child molestation, but it is teh anglicans and all teh othere demoninatios too, for teh bible does declare

Rev_17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

Mother must be so proud of what she has done, oh capalisation was copy paste so dont blame me.

And it also declares
Luk_12:2 For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known.

And the ugliness of teh great whore has being shown for all the world to see.

It also says
1Co_6:16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

and
1Co_6:15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.

after all teh abominatios she has done upon this earth yet you mock God by calling it our Lords church. You really have serious issues with who Gid is. And if you bellittiling me becasue of my typing well Jees teh devil himself has done worse.
And, as long as YOU keep reading those Jack Chick tracts - you're never know the truth.
You'll just be stuck in the sick and scary world of Jack Chick.

Most reputable Protestant scholars have long-abandoned these wacky notions about the Catholic Church being the "Whore of Babylon" except for the deeply disturbed people like Chick, and the delusional Dave Hunt. Have fun wallowing in their abject ignorance . . .
 

mjrhealth

Well-Known Member
Mar 15, 2009
11,810
4,090
113
Australia
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
You have declared your own doctrine, which makes little sense since you have no community.
none of it made up srtaight out of teh bible, unlike your doctrines straight from man.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
mjrhealth said:
none of it made up srtaight out of teh bible, unlike your doctrines straight from man.
Straight out of "teh" Bible, eh??
The Bible condemns your perverted brand of "Lone Ranger" Christianity (1 Cor. 12, Heb. 10:25, Col. 1:18).

So much for your twisted opinions about Scripture . . .
 

FHII

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2011
4,833
2,494
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Somebody please put this thread out of its misery.
 

tom55

Love your neighbor as yourself
Sep 9, 2013
1,199
18
0
FHII said:
Somebody please put this thread out of its misery.
Is someone forcing you to read it? I suspect since there is heavy Catholic input it will be shut down.

Back to the subject at hand: Was Peter the rock that the Church was built upon? Scripture says......drum roll please........

....you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church,..... (NKJV)

That was easy to answer....... :popcorn:
 

mjrhealth

Well-Known Member
Mar 15, 2009
11,810
4,090
113
Australia
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
The Bible condemns your perverted brand of "Lone Ranger" Christianity (1 Cor. 12, Heb. 10:25, Col. 1:18).
Isa_49:2 And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of his hand hath he hid me, and made me a polished shaft; in his quiver hath he hid me;

Missed the mark again
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
mjrhealth said:
Isa_49:2 And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of his hand hath he hid me, and made me a polished shaft; in his quiver hath he hid me;

Missed the mark again
Another irrelevant response.
As I stated earlier - the Bible condemns your perverted brand of "Lone Ranger" Christianity (1 Cor. 12, Heb. 10:25, Col. 1:18).
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
mjrhealth said:
I gues Jeremiah and all te hprohpets would disagree with you
REALLY??
Jeremiah and the prophets were Christians??

The NEW Testament verses I presented speak of the Church - not Israel.
 

Jun2u

Well-Known Member
Mar 6, 2014
1,083
362
83
75
Southern CA.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
kepha31 said:
Quote me where I elevated Peter's status above Jesus, or stop making things up.

The moment you claimed Peter is the Rock!!!!
"Catholic" comes from the Greek word "Katholicos" which is right out of the Bible, and "Catholic" and "Christian" has been used interchangeably since the 1st century, you just don't know any history.
I must have missed it somehow. Can you refer me to the scriptures where the word “Katholicos” is found?

The topic of the OP is, “Was Peter the Rock that the Church was built upon?”

I believe, I have answered the question of the OP by supplying with ample scriptures to prove that Jesus is the Rock of the Bible and none other, particularly Ps 18:30-31 which reads:

30 As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him.
31 For who is God save the LORD? or who is a rock save our God?

On the other hand, Catholics try to prove Peter is the rock via his primacy. It’s imperative for Catholics to prove Peter is their first pope/leader or the primacy cannot be handed down the line or inherited by the next pope BTW, this is not a bashing of Catholics rather it is to disprove the doctrines of the church you belong to.

It is irrelevant how Jesus addressed Peter in John 1:41-42 (which I first addressed in post192) whether in Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek, Peter has not changed he is still the same Peter (a Rose by any other name is still a Rose”). Yourself have said that Jesus spoke in Aramaic therefore when He saw Peter He called him by his Aramaic name “Cephas” which means by interpretation A Stone. I believe Jesus said this of Peter so that there should be no misunderstanding of any kind about Peter’s personality. When a word or verse is doubled up in scriptures (in this case the word “interpretation”) the doubling up ot the word means it is bringing home a point.


For instance, the word “interpret” was used in Mt 1:23 to signify the deity of Jesus, we read: “Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being “interpreted” is, God with us. The name “Emmanuel” did not change Jesus’ personality He is always from everlasting to everlasting...God! This is how we compare scripture with scripture! No assumptions of truths just facts. Mt 1:23 was prophesied by the prophet Isaiah in Isa 7:14.

You have not proven your case with scripture references that Peter is the Rock except by inferences! In fact, no where in the Bible will you find Peter is the Rock, other than his name being interpreted “A Stone.”

You are in the market place peddling your false doctrines. The Bible warns, “if anyone preach another Jesus than that of the Bible, let him be accursed.” It is a scary thing to fall under the wrath of God.

To God Be The Glory

P.S.

The “binding” and “loosing” that Jesus supposedly gave to Peter as the keys to heaven was actually taken from Jo 20:21-23. No man can forgive sins except God even the Pharisees who were evil knew this.


Secondly, the church Jesus gave His life for is NOT an earthly church as you might want to believe rather a “Spiritual Church” where all true believers identify with sometimes called the “Bride” “the New City Jerusalem” “Israel of God” “My people” and “the elect.”
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Jun2u said:
The moment you claimed Peter is the Rock!!!!

I must have missed it somehow. Can you refer me to the scriptures where the word “Katholicos” is found?

The topic of the OP is, “Was Peter the Rock that the Church was built upon?”

I believe, I have answered the question of the OP by supplying with ample scriptures to prove that Jesus is the Rock of the Bible and none other, particularly Ps 18:30-31 which reads:

30 As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him.
31 For who is God save the LORD? or who is a rock save our God?

On the other hand, Catholics try to prove Peter is the rock via his primacy. It’s imperative for Catholics to prove Peter is their first pope/leader or the primacy cannot be handed down the line or inherited by the next pope BTW, this is not a bashing of Catholics rather it is to disprove the doctrines of the church you belong to.

It is irrelevant how Jesus addressed Peter in John 1:41-42 (which I first addressed in post192) whether in Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek, Peter has not changed he is still the same Peter (a Rose by any other name is still a Rose”). Yourself have said that Jesus spoke in Aramaic therefore when He saw Peter He called him by his Aramaic name “Cephas” which means by interpretation A Stone. I believe Jesus said this of Peter so that there should be no misunderstanding of any kind about Peter’s personality. When a word or verse is doubled up in scriptures (in this case the word “interpretation”) the doubling up ot the word means it is bringing home a point.


For instance, the word “interpret” was used in Mt 1:23 to signify the deity of Jesus, we read: “Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being “interpreted” is, God with us. The name “Emmanuel” did not change Jesus’ personality He is always from everlasting to everlasting...God! This is how we compare scripture with scripture! No assumptions of truths just facts. Mt 1:23 was prophesied by the prophet Isaiah in Isa 7:14.

You have not proven your case with scripture references that Peter is the Rock except by inferences! In fact, no where in the Bible will you find Peter is the Rock, other than his name being interpreted “A Stone.”

You are in the market place peddling your false doctrines. The Bible warns, “if anyone preach another Jesus than that of the Bible, let him be accursed.” It is a scary thing to fall under the wrath of God.

To God Be The Glory

P.S.

The “binding” and “loosing” that Jesus supposedly gave to Peter as the keys to heaven was actually taken from Jo 20:21-23. No man can forgive sins except God even the Pharisees who were evil knew this.


Secondly, the church Jesus gave His life for is NOT an earthly church as you might want to believe rather a “Spiritual Church” where all true believers identify with sometimes called the “Bride” “the New City Jerusalem” “Israel of God” “My people” and “the elect.”
WRONG on all counts.

First of all - Jesus is NOT the only one in the Bible who is referred to as the "Rock":

Isa. 51:1 calls Abraham the "Rock."
Matt. 21:42 calls Jesus the "Rock."
Matt. 16:18 calls Peter the "Rock."

All three of them are the Rock, depending on how you are using the word:
Abraham is the Rock from which the Jews were hewn.
Jesus is the Stone that was rejected by the builders (Jews) that became the chief cornerstone.
Peter is the rock on which Jesus built His Church.

In Matt 16-18, we see where Jesus calls Peter "Kepha", which is the Aramaic word for ROCK. This is why Paul reefers to Peter as "Cephas" in his letters, which is the Greek transliteration of Aramaic Kepha. Paul never refers to Jesus as Cephas or Peter's confession of faith as Cephas.


Rev 21:14 talks about the 12 foundations of Heaven - and they have the names of the APOSTLES written on them.

Finally - as to your question about the Greek roots for the term "Catholic Church" - Acts 9:31 talks about how the Early Church grew throughout the region. The language used here describes the Catholic Church:
“Then the church throughout Judea, Galilee, and Samaria experienced peace and thus was strengthened. Living in the fear of the Lord and in the encouragement of the Holy Spirit, the church increased in numbers.”

According to Strong’s Greek Concordance – the verse is translated as:
“The true Church throughout all Judea . . .”

Here is the phrase in Greek:

η μεν ουν εκκλησια καθ ολης της ιουδαιας

The Catholic Church gets its name from the GREEK for “according to the whole” and “universal” - εκκλησια καθ ολης, which is pronounced “ekklesia katah-holos”.

Εκκλησια (ekklesia) - A gathering of citizens called out from their homes into some public place, an assembly; CHURCH
Καθ (katah) - Through out, according to
Ολης (holos) - All, whole, completely
"Ekklesia Kata-holos" = CATHOLIC CHURCH.
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Jun2u said:
The moment you claimed Peter is the Rock!!!!
Jesus said Peter is the Rock, I've listed dozens of PROTESTANT scholars that agree. Your grammatical understanding is outdated.


The topic of the OP is, “Was Peter the Rock that the Church was built upon?”
Jesus does the building, we are not saying otherwise.. He doesn't build junk that needs rebuilding by human opinion 15 centuries later.

I believe, I have answered the question of the OP by supplying with ample scriptures to prove that Jesus is the Rock of the Bible and none other, particularly Ps 18:30-31 which reads:

30 As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him.
31 For who is God save the LORD? or who is a rock save our God?
Several words in scripture can have more than one meaning, and you don't explain why Jesus changed Simon bar Jonah's name to ROCK, which isn't even a name at the time.
On the other hand, Catholics try to prove Peter is the rock via his primacy. It’s imperative for Catholics to prove Peter is their first pope/leader or the primacy cannot be handed down the line or inherited by the next pope BTW, this is not a bashing of Catholics rather it is to disprove the doctrines of the church you belong to.
We don't have to prove anything. We KNOW. Succession of popes is not just a belief, it is a HISTORICAL FACT.

It is irrelevant how Jesus addressed Peter in John 1:41-42 (which I first addressed in post192) whether in Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek, Peter has not changed he is still the same Peter (a Rose by any other name is still a Rose”). Yourself have said that Jesus spoke in Aramaic therefore when He saw Peter He called him by his Aramaic name “Cephas” which means by interpretation A Stone. I believe Jesus said this of Peter so that there should be no misunderstanding of any kind about Peter’s personality. When a word or verse is doubled up in scriptures (in this case the word “interpretation”) the doubling up ot the word means it is bringing home a point.
Aramaic is not irrelevant, it is the language Jesus spoke. The original language clarifies a secondary translation and that is why you don't like it. Greek is a secondary translation, it is not a divine language. You have based your doctrine on constructive pronouns that don't exist in the language Jesus spoke. Again, I have posted lists of Protestant scholars that don't agree with you. Your approach is outdated.

You have not proven your case with scripture references that Peter is the Rock except by inferences! In fact, no where in the Bible will you find Peter is the Rock, other than his name being interpreted “A Stone.”
What does the name "Peter" mean?
You are in the market place peddling your false doctrines. The Bible warns, “if anyone preach another Jesus than that of the Bible, let him be accursed.” It is a scary thing to fall under the wrath of God.
"Bible" is not in the Bible.

The “binding” and “loosing” that Jesus supposedly gave to Peter as the keys to heaven was actually taken from Jo 20:21-23. No man can forgive sins except God even the Pharisees who were evil knew this.
John 20:21-23 says the opposite:.

21 Jesus said to them again, ‘Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.’ 22 When he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.’

Jesus never quoted from John's gospel, the keys have nothing to do with forgiving sins, and Jesus refers the keys from Isa. 22. Binding and loosing is a rabbinal term and everyone at the time understood what it meant. "Jesus supposedly gave to Peter" ??? Can you be that biblically illiterate?

Matt. 16:19 - Jesus gives Peter the "keys of the kingdom of heaven." While most Protestants argue that the kingdom of heaven Jesus was talking about is the eternal state of glory (as if Peter is up in heaven letting people in), the kingdom of heaven Jesus is speaking of actually refers to the Church on earth. In using the term "keys," Jesus was referencing Isaiah 22 (which is the only place in the Bible where keys are used in the context of a kingdom).

Isaiah 22:22 - in the old Davidic kingdom, there were royal ministers who conducted the liturgical worship and bound the people in teaching and doctrine. But there was also a Prime Minister or chief steward of the kingdom who held the keys. Jesus gives Peter these keys to His earthly kingdom, the Church. This representative has decision-making authority over the people - when he shuts, no one opens. See also Job 12:14.

Rev. 1:18; 3:7; 9:1; 20:1 - Jesus' "keys" undeniably represent authority. By using the word "keys," Jesus gives Peter authority on earth over the new Davidic kingdom, and this was not seriously questioned by anyone until the Protestant reformation 1,500 years later after Peter’s investiture.

Matt. 16:19 - whatever Peter binds or looses on earth is bound or loosed in heaven / when the Prime Minister to the King opens, no one shuts. This "binding and loosing" authority allows the keeper of the keys to establish "halakah," or rules of conduct for the members of the kingdom he serves.

Secondly, the church Jesus gave His life for is NOT an earthly church as you might want to believe rather a “Spiritual Church” where all true believers identify with sometimes called the “Bride” “the New City Jerusalem” “Israel of God” “My people” and “the elect.”
A purely spiritual church is a Protestant invention, it's not in the Bible. The Body of Christ is both those in heaven and on earth. It would be impossible to feed, cloth, house, educate and provide medal care for more people than the world's largest charity if the Church was just spiritual. It would be impossible for "invisible" Early Church Fathers to discern the canon of Scripture in 397 unless they compiled an invisible Bible. They made infallible rulings on the Trinity at the councils of Nicae, Ephesus, and Chalcedon (that is even accepted by most Protestants) that would have been impossible without a Pope. It would be impossible to have a Bible in the first place if it were not for Tradition and papal authority, which makes sola scriptura so illogical and contradictory.




1340313.png
 

mjrhealth

Well-Known Member
Mar 15, 2009
11,810
4,090
113
Australia
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
A purely spiritual church is a Protestant invention, it's not in the Bible
Joh_4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
Joh_4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
Joh_14:17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
Joh_15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
Joh_16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Joh_1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
Act_2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
Rom_8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
Rom_8:19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

we teh people of this world who have accepted Chirst as Lord and saviour are His church or as he put it

Mar 10:42 But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them.
Mar 10:43 But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister:
Mar 10:44 And whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all.
Mar 10:45 For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many

or as God put it

1Sa 8:6 But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD.
1Sa 8:7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.

mankind still rejecting Jesus and quiet happily at that
 
Status
Not open for further replies.