An explanation of Matthew 16:13-18 with regard to "the Anointed One" and "the Rock" and "the key of David"

[Gabriel_of_12]

Before Jesus died he said;

Matthew 16:18
And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, 13 and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
19
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Then after Jesus Christ resurrected from the dead he said;

John 21:14
7 This was now the third time Jesus was revealed to his disciples after being raised from the dead.
15
8 9 10 When they had finished breakfast,** Jesus said to Simon Peter/SIZE], “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, **"]“Feed my lambs.” ****
16
He then said to him a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, **"]“Tend my sheep.” **17
He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed that he had said to him a third time, “Do you love me?” and he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” **(Jesus) said to him, "Feed my sheep. **

What part of scripture here denies Peter as Shepherd of Jesus flock, possessor of the keys of the kingdom of God, with the power to bind and loose?

 

[ParkerD]

Hello my little love muffin. Do ya miss me

Okay now hold on, I have a problem with what you just said. Now while I agree that the Apostles were all given the power of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, I do not see where they were all given the keys to the kingdom. Unless our scripture is different.

Let me show you mine. IT says Jesus said to HIM, now him would not be all of the apostles to begin with would you not agree, Now next Jesus said I give to YOU Peter. Now you Peter is means one person do you not agree. Now if Jesus wanted all of the Apostles to have the keys to the kingdom why did he just mention Peter by himself?

Hi, Rinnie,
Nice to hear from you–you are always sweet and kind-hearted. (Thanks!)

I realize I will not find any Catholic agreeing with me about the other apostles receiving keys to bind and loose, even though the Savior mentioned the authority to do that within the same sentence when He spoke to Peter about keys of the kingdom, and did so in the very next phrase of the sentence–

–but at least I might entertain the hope that some few Catholics would think more about Jesus being the Rock of salvation and thus rely on Him directly for His guidance in their lives.

I think Jesus spoke to Peter knowing that the other apostles were listening and learning also, and that when the keys were actually conferred that it happened soon thereafter when all the apostles received the authority to bind and loose on earth and in heaven.

(But I realize there is not the slightest chance that any Catholic is going to consider that such a thing is possible.)

Have a great weekend, Rinnie.

 

[ParkerD]

So which is Christ’s Church? The Catholic Church or the 18000 or is it more, protestant churcheS?

WWolverine,
I had already commented that the words “my church” would mean “my congregation of believers”, and thus I think it’s fair to say that Christ’s “church” exists wherever there is a believer in Him who follows Him (especially as regards Him being able to influence them to do good as they follow Him, and grow in doing even better along the way).

Peace and good day to you.

 

[CatholicGuyNY]

Hi, Rinnie,
Nice to hear from you–you are always sweet and kind-hearted. (Thanks!)

I realize I will not find any Catholic agreeing with me about the other apostles receiving keys to bind and loose, even though the Savior mentioned the authority to do that within the same sentence when He spoke to Peter about keys of the kingdom, and did so in the very next phrase of the sentence–

What Catholics believe is that Peter was given the keys, and all of the apostles received the power to bind and to loose. We do not equate the keys with binding and loosing, since the keys are only specifically mentioned when Jesus was talking to Peter.

–but at least I might entertain the hope that some few Catholics would think more about Jesus being the Rock of salvation and thus rely on Him directly for His guidance in their lives.

Catholics already believe that Jesus is the rock of salvation and we already rely on Him directly for guidance in our lives. To imply otherwise is to not understand what Catholics actually believe. We enter into a personal relationship with Him not only through prayer and reading His words, but through the His presence in the Eucharist, which is a communion not only with the Lord, but with our fellow Catholics.

I think Jesus spoke to Peter knowing that the other apostles were listening and learning also, and that when the keys were actually conferred that it happened soon thereafter when all the apostles received the authority to bind and loose on earth and in heaven.

(But I realize there is not the slightest chance that any Catholic is going to consider that such a thing is possible.)

Have a great weekend, Rinnie.

You “think” this, which means that you are speculating. What we do know from the Bible is what Catholics believe: the keys were only mentioned when Jesus was specifically talking to Peter, and all of the apostles, including Peter, received the power of binding and loosing.

 

[CatholicGuyNY]

WWolverine,
I had already commented that the words “my church” would mean “my congregation of believers”, and thus I think it’s fair to say that Christ’s “church” exists wherever there is a believer in Him who follows Him (especially as regards Him being able to influence them to do good as they follow Him, and grow in doing even better along the way).

Peace and good day to you.

So Christ’s Church is not The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but some vague “congregation of believers…wherever there is a believer in Him who follows him”? This does not follow with what the LDS church actually teaches, beginning with its belief in a restoration and reestablishment of Christ’s Church with His authority (which it alone has, i.e. the priesthood). What you say above is what Protestants believe.

 

[ParkerD]

Parker - Let’s elaborate on this.

We have Jesus, who is now dead, and He is going to lead His Church through His own involvement?
What would that look like? Explain how people would react to Him. Is He leading it by coming to earth as a resurrected person or say, as the wind?

Hi, Lax16,

Jesus is resurrected, not dead. He can certainly lead by direct involvement, even if He is not seen. He can be “heard” in the heart and the soul. (He could be seen if the people were righteous enough and if He had a reason to show His resurrected body to them.)

Why then did He die if He still had to lead His church?

He was going to lead His church from heaven, as He had taught He was going to do.

Wasn’t it time to pass it on to the people He prepared (as imperfect as they were and still are?)

It was certainly time to prepare the apostles to lead the people when He was not going to be there directly, but He did not say He would not still be with them.

Don’t you think that Jesus, being God, could live forever as man if it was God’s will and could still be here in person to lead His church?

Yes, absolutely.

God did not come Himself and gather up the Israelites - He chose Moses to lead them.
The Mormons don’t wander around aimlessly - they have a president/prophet and leaders.

Yes, and the president/prophet says that Jesus is in charge of the church on the earth, leading and guiding by revelation or occasionally by a personal appearance to one of them when necessary.

Let’s face it, by admitting that Jesus chose Peter is admitting that the Catholic Church was the One Jesus Christ established from the very beginning.

No–it would not admit that point at all. That would certainly be what certain leaders would say was the resulting standard of belief, and they would very likely insist upon it, but that doesn’t make it so.

Peace and good day to you.

 

[ParkerD]

So Christ’s Church is not The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but some vague “congregation of believers…wherever there is a believer in Him who follows him”? This does not follow with what the LDS church actually teaches, beginning with its belief in a restoration and reestablishment of Christ’s Church with His authority (which it alone has, i.e. the priesthood). What you say above is what Protestants believe.

Hi, CatholicGuyNY,
There are a general set of teachings, and then there are specific “higher level” teachings, and I was saying that a “congregation of believers” follows Him using His general set of teachings and are blessed by living those teachings, and He can guide their lives as they follow Him.

 

[CatholicGuyNY]

CatholicGuyNY,
Sorry to have taken a while to get back to you on this set of comments.

The reason I don’t consider that the use of the word “primacy” is the correct word in relation to Peter, is that I see in the Savior’s teaching that although He singled out Peter several times, and also sometimes had Peter, James and John apart from the other apostles, He taught them that they each should be a “servant” and that they shouldn’t be seeking “rank”, and I don’t find that the apostles’ writings show a sense of “rank”, and instead show a sense of counseling together and seeking unity.

Since the word primacy has a connotation of “preeminence” (as you noted and I had in mind when I considered what that word would mean), I think it is the wrong word to describe Peter’s role. (So I disagree with the Encyclopedia of Mormonism on that particular point.)

My point with the last paragraph, which you asked that I explain, is that an effective leader always plans for their replacement unless the replacement is going to be elected or appointed and there is no transitional period. The Savior would of course know about effective leadership principles, including the transition after a leader has died such that the leader who is the successor continues to bring “success” to the organization.

The responsibilities, ministry, and learning that would take place among the Twelve Apostles would be a perfect place for the successor to Peter to be prepared for a leadership role of being Peter’s successor as the “head apostle” in counsel. The Savior prepared Peter in an earthly way to have a leadership role after the ascension, but He also was preparing each of the other apostles as well, and showed this several times and in several ways during His recorded ministry.

Peace to you and all.

You seem to be confused as to what exactly you believe as far as the place of Peter. You have already stated that Peter was the first among the apostles. This quite clearly indicates that he had a primacy (no one is saying that he sought a “rank”), which is clear from the dictionary definition of “primacy” (which indicates being “first”, as you already stated Peter was), and we see that the Encyclopedia of Mormonism also states that Peter had “primacy”. All of the apostles had roles to play, and all were authorities in the Church. However, Peter quite clearly was first among the apostles, as you said, as the Encyclopedia of Mormonism states, and as anyone reading the Bible knows. This is by definition “primacy”. We are all, including Peter, servants, but that does not mean that we don’t have different roles, which is clear in a church as hierarchical as the LDS church. Therefore, there is no issue with Peter holding primacy/being “first” and being a servant at the same time. This is even more clear when we see how Mormons view the President of the LDS church, who is seen as a “Peter” (with the First Presidency analogous to Peter, James, and John). Reading the Encyclopedia of Mormonism entries on the First Presidency and the President makes it clear that the President/Prophet has primacy over all of the other General Authorities, including within the First Presidency (including the issue of “keys”).

 

[ParkerD]

Where does scripture teach everything must be said explicitly? Again,you are fishing at a lake with no fish.And who says everything that was ever said and done by Jesus and the Apostles had to be written down in scripture in order make it legit? What does John 21:25 say:

There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written.

Assumptions? Assumptions cannot be proven and facts are proven. The history of the early church and church fathers would raise their eyebrows at you. Sorry,but you adding your own biased views as to what scripture clearly says: Peter ALONE received the keys.

Provide me one church father who believed and taught all the other 11 also received the KEYS to the KINGDOM of HEAVEN?

How absurd! I see,it is okay for all other types of institutions (religious or secular) to have one person succeed another due to whatever reasons arive,but it is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE for Peter to have done the same? How dare Jesus do something so unthinkable for His Church.

U-huh and Peter also never wrote he was NOT going to give the Keys to someone else.Your argument is circular with no beginning or end.

Nicea,
This post is to acknowledge your post, and to point out that if what I have written was “circular reasoning”, then what you wrote about not everything having been written down that happened during the Savior’s ministry, provides the same basis for “circular reasoning” by saying that the one verse where the word “keys” are used is the only time Jesus used the word “keys” with regard to the apostles.

 

[CatholicGuyNY]

Hi, CatholicGuyNY,
There are a general set of teachings, and then there are specific “higher level” teachings, and I was saying that a “congregation of believers” follows Him using His general set of teachings and are blessed by living those teachings, and He can guide their lives as they follow Him.

The question that you were responding to was “So which is Christ’s Church?” Mormons clearly believe that “Christ’s Church” is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and that baptism by the proper authority (i.e. the LDS priesthood only) is necessary to become a member of Christ’s Church on earth, as the Encyclopedia of Mormonism teaches.

 

[ParkerD]

You seem to be confused as to what exactly you believe as far as the place of Peter. You have already stated that Peter was the first among the apostles. This quite clearly indicates that he had a primacy (no one is saying that he sought a “rank”), which is clear from the dictionary definition of “primacy” (which indicates being “first”, as you already stated Peter was), and we see that the Encyclopedia of Mormonism also states that Peter had “primacy”. All of the apostles had roles to play, and all were authorities in the Church. However, Peter quite clearly was first among the apostles, as you said, as the Encyclopedia of Mormonism states, and as anyone reading the Bible knows. This is by definition “primacy”. We are all, including Peter, servants, but that does not mean that we don’t have different roles, which is clear in a church as hierarchical as the LDS church. Therefore, there is no issue with Peter holding primacy/being “first” and being a servant at the same time. This is even more clear when we see how Mormons view the President of the LDS church, who is seen as a “Peter” (with the First Presidency analogous to Peter, James, and John). Reading the Encyclopedia of Mormonism entries on the First Presidency and the President makes it clear that the President/Prophet has primacy over all of the other General Authorities, including within the First Presidency (including the issue of “keys”).

CatholicGuyNY,
I agree with all of the above, so long as the word “primacy” does not bring the connotation of “preeminence”. You show a great diligence in research, which I appreciate–thanks!

 

[ParkerD]

The question that you were responding to was “So which is Christ’s Church?” Mormons clearly believe that “Christ’s Church” is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and that baptism by the proper authority (i.e. the LDS priesthood only) is necessary to become a member of Christ’s Church on earth, as the Encyclopedia of Mormonism teaches.

CatholicGuyNY,
This particular discussion centers around Matthew 16:18, which uses the word “church” in the KJV translation and I view that word meaning “congregation of believers” which is a larger meaning than one particular body of believers such as the LDS church.

I am saying others can be influenced, taught, guided, and grow through their belief in Christ within the context of their beliefs and the context of the teachings of Jesus from the New Testament and the teachings of the Bible in general.

 

[lax16]

CatholicGuyNY,
This particular discussion centers around Matthew 16:18, which uses the word “church” in the KJV translation and I view that word meaning “congregation of believers” which is a larger meaning than one particular body of believers such as the LDS church.

I am saying others can be influenced, taught, guided, and grow through their belief in Christ within the context of their beliefs and the context of the teachings of Jesus from the New Testament and the teachings of the Bible in general.

Parker - Matthew 16:18 (Douay-Rheims)

And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Clearly, Jesus is establishing one Chuch.

 

[ParkerD]

Parker - Matthew 16:18 (Douay-Rheims)

And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Clearly, Jesus is establishing one Chuch.

Lax16,
Jesus is establishing a congregation of believers. Please use the following excellent resource for figuring that out from the Greek-English meaning:

blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Mat&c=16&v=18&t=KJV#conc/18

That is an excellent resource for really searching out the meaning of the New Testament original meanings.

Have a good day.

 

[Nicea325]

Nicea,
This post is to acknowledge your post, and to point out that if what I have written was “circular reasoning”, then what you wrote about not everything having been written down that happened during the Savior’s ministry, provides the same basis for “circular reasoning” by saying that the one verse where the word “keys” are used is the only time Jesus used the word “keys” with regard to the apostles.

Sorry,but that is not how it works. Do you honestly believe everyone prior to the Reformation or the LDS merely isolated one passage? Apparently you do not know history very well. Arius and his buddies were doing the very samething with scripture,merely quoting the verses which conveyed Jesus as being inferior to God the Father. How has Christ Church respond to such poor biblical exegesis? It uses the ENTIRE Bible to defend its positions,not isolate one passge and say: See…see…this passage clearly says it all by itself.

Therefore,there is absolutley nothing circular my postiion and why? Because this matter has been dealt by the church against people as yourselflong before any non-Catholic church appeared on earth. Do your homework and quit revising history and scripture!

 

[onenow1]

Indeed! However, my remark to ParkerD is that Peter never states he was **NOT **going to pass on his authority.

:banghead: Sorry !

Peace

 

[eddy714]

Sorry,but that is not how it works. Do you honestly believe everyone prior to the Reformation or the LDS merely isolated one passage? Apparently you do not know history very well. Arius and his buddies were doing the very samething with scripture,merely quoting the verses which conveyed Jesus as being inferior to God the Father. How has Christ Church respond to such poor biblical exegesis? It uses the ENTIRE Bible to defend its positions,not isolate one passge and say: See…see…this passage clearly says it all by itself.

Therefore,there is absolutley nothing circular my postiion and why? Because this matter has been dealt by the church against people as yourselflong before any non-Catholic church appeared on earth. Do your homework and quit revising history and scripture!

Like they say there is nothing new under the sun, this has been the problem and since the Church was established a lot of heresies like this have accrued. But with the reformation all these heresies are now beliefs and carry a lot of people that are poor in there faith and that don’t seek truth.

But lets pray for them to realize what there doing and for them to come home.

God Bless

 

[rinnie]

Hi, Rinnie,
Nice to hear from you–you are always sweet and kind-hearted. (Thanks!)

I realize I will not find any Catholic agreeing with me about the other apostles receiving keys to bind and loose, even though the Savior mentioned the authority to do that within the same sentence when He spoke to Peter about keys of the kingdom, and did so in the very next phrase of the sentence–

–but at least I might entertain the hope that some few Catholics would think more about Jesus being the Rock of salvation and thus rely on Him directly for His guidance in their lives.

I think Jesus spoke to Peter knowing that the other apostles were listening and learning also, and that when the keys were actually conferred that it happened soon thereafter when all the apostles received the authority to bind and loose on earth and in heaven.

(But I realize there is not the slightest chance that any Catholic is going to consider that such a thing is possible.)

Have a great weekend, Rinnie.

Yes my love you are correct. Not because we don’t want to Parker you must remember we have to go by what the Apostles taught.

But you have to remember Jesus knew that although all of the Apostles had authority, they were not given the same authority as for being the leader of the Church. He had his reasons for this.

You know the story too many Chiefs not enough indians. Another piece of scripture I think may help you to understand Catholic teaching and authority is not only the keys but this one. Many people miss it.

Peter makes it quite clear who the Lord has chosen to lead them. Read acts 15. Now there is a decision to be made.

Peter stands up and states Gord made his choice among YOU that through MY MOUTH the gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe.

Now think about this Peter said God made his choice, that meant among all of the Apostles and presbyters that his mouth was where the word would come through.

Now if he was not the chosen one by God (leader) the aposltes would have stood up and said hey listen we are trying to come to a decision here, and would have said God never gave you anymore authority. But they did not did they, Peter stood up, made the decision and closed the case as they say.

So they never questioned his authority. So we cannot either. I understand that you cannot accept our teaching at this time, and I understand, But just wanted to show you why we believe what we do.

This week-end is about over unfortunately but it was wonderful. Hope yours was also. And also as usual my love and prayers to you family.

 

[rinnie]

Lax16,
Jesus is establishing a congregation of believers. Please use the following excellent resource for figuring that out from the Greek-English meaning:

blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Mat&c=16&v=18&t=KJV#conc/18

That is an excellent resource for really searching out the meaning of the New Testament original meanings.

Have a good day.

Now here is the thing Parker, I appreciate your source but we have to remember, even the bible teaches us this.

If we want to understand and search for the true meaning what God wanted us to know we cannot go to places like this. The bible said go to the Church. The Church is the pillar of all truth. We have to stick with the early teachings of the Church and thats ST AND SS. This source could not possible have the fullnes of the truth without SS and ST. That is like having the O.T without the N.T. You must have the complete truth to have it revealed to you.

Remember what the bible said, if it were to reveal all of the truth the world would not be big enough to hold the books.

That is why we must do as Jesus intended and go to the Church.

 

[ParkerD]

Yes my love you are correct. Not because we don’t want to Parker you must remember we have to go by what the Apostles taught.

But you have to remember Jesus knew that although all of the Apostles had authority, they were not given the same authority as for being the leader of the Church. He had his reasons for this.

You know the story too many Chiefs not enough indians. Another piece of scripture I think may help you to understand Catholic teaching and authority is not only the keys but this one. Many people miss it.

Peter makes it quite clear who the Lord has chosen to lead them. Read acts 15. Now there is a decision to be made.

Peter stands up and states Gord made his choice among YOU that through MY MOUTH the gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe.

Now think about this Peter said God made his choice, that meant among all of the Apostles and presbyters that his mouth was where the word would come through.

Now if he was not the chosen one by God (leader) the aposltes would have stood up and said hey listen we are trying to come to a decision here, and would have said God never gave you anymore authority. But they did not did they, Peter stood up, made the decision and closed the case as they say.

So they never questioned his authority. So we cannot either. I understand that you cannot accept our teaching at this time, and I understand, But just wanted to show you why we believe what we do.

This week-end is about over unfortunately but it was wonderful. Hope yours was also. And also as usual my love and prayers to you family.

Hi, Rinnie,
What a kind post–thank you! (Everyone on this forum ought to follow your example in how they treat people as they show their point of view and explain things.)

I do agree that Peter showed his leadership in Acts 15, and that he had had a revelation (a vision) that led him to know what should be done among the Gentiles and that the gospel was to be taken to them. Paul became an important missionary to the Gentiles.

Thank you for sharing your sweet and kind perspective on Peter’s leadership.

Have a wonderful day, Rinnie.