Get thee behind me, satan

[faith_ful1953us]

I apologize if there is already an answer to my question on these forums but I tried a search = get thee behind me, satan / satan / Peter…and nothing comes up.
Why did Jesus call Peter satan? In one bible verse (I don’t know where), Jesus tells Peter, “get thee behind me, satan”.

 

[RSiscoe]

faith_ful1953us:

I apologize if there is already an answer to my question on these forums but I tried a search = get thee behind me, satan / satan / Peter…and nothing comes up.
Why did Jesus call Peter satan? In one bible verse (I don’t know where), Jesus tells Peter, “get thee behind me, satan”.

Matthew 16:23. But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

Mark 8:33. But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men.

Luke 4:8. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

From these verses we can see that St. Peter (the first Pope) was in error for sinning against the first commandment by paying more attention to the things of man, than the things of God.
St. Augustine:

And then He forthwith rebuked him, whom He had a little before commended; and calleth him Satan

, whom he had pronounced “blessed.” “Get thee behind Me, Satan,” he saith, “thou art an offence unto Me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.” What would He have us do in our present state, who thus findeth fault because we are men ? Would you know what He would have us do? Give ear to the Psalm; “I have said, Ye are gods, and ye are all the children of the Most High.” But by savouring the things of men; “ye shall die like men.” The very same Peter a little while before blessed, afterwards Satan, in one moment, within a few words! Thou wonderest at the difference of the names, mark the difference of the reasons of them. Why wonderest thou that he who was a little before blessed, is afterwards Satan? Mark the reason wherefore he is blessed. “Because flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in heaven.” Therefore blessed, because flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee. For if flesh and blood revealed this to thee, it were of thine own; but because flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in heaven, it is of Mine, not of thine own. Why of Mine? “Because all things that the Father hath are Mine.” So then thou hast heard the cause, why he is “blessed,” and why he is “Peter.” But why was he that which we shudder at, and are loth to repeat, why, but because it was of thine own ? “For thou savourest not the things which be of God, but those that be of men.”
"Let us, looking at ourselves in this member of the Church, distinguish what is of God, and what of ourselves.

 

[faith_ful1953us]

But why did he call Peter “satan”? I understand that Peter was paying more attention to the things of man, than the things of God, but why call him satan. Is it like calling someone “scrooge” when they don’t want to spend money.
That quote is very hard to read. It is not the english I am used to and there are typing errors that repeat. I read that and I understand the meaning and what it is saying but my mind can not grasp why Jesus calls Peter “satan”.
Does anyone know of a thread that I can read to better understand?
Or maybe take another stab at explaining it to me?

 

[Fidelis]

As was seen when he tried to tempt Jesus in the wilderness, Satan was all about getting Jesus diverted from God’s plan of salvation. Right before the passage in question, Jesus has predicted that he will suffer and be killed as part of God’s plan. Peter then vows that he will not let this happen to his Lord. Jesus calls Peter Satan, not in the sense he is literally Satan, but he is acting like Satan in that he would try to keep Jesus from fulfilling God’s plan of salvation for the world.

 

[slinky1882]

Fidelis:

As was seen when he tried to tempt Jesus in the wilderness, Satan was all about getting Jesus diverted from God’s plan of salvation. Right before the passage in question, Jesus has predicted that he will suffer and be killed as part of God’s plan. Peter then vows that he will not let this happen to his Lord. Jesus calls Peter Satan, not in the sense he is literally Satan, but he is acting like Satan in that he would try to keep Jesus from fulfilling God’s plan of salvation for the world.

I agree with the literal part not meaning Peter was Satan, bur how do we know that Jesus didn’t see Satan whispering in Peter’s ear??? Curious . I agree that Jesus chided Peter for opposition to God’s Will. I guess I am asking, how do we know that the statement wasn’t directed at Peter and Satan??? Thanks and God Bless.

 

[Steve_Andersen]

faith_ful1953us:

But why did he call Peter “satan”? I understand that Peter was paying more attention to the things of man, than the things of God, but why call him satan. Is it like calling someone “scrooge” when they don’t want to spend money…

Yes, IMHO it is a fairly straight forward metaphor.

a slightly more stinging rebuke than “scrooge” though

 

[Ghosty]

Satan also simply means “adversary”, so it could have been meant in a much kinder way than is implied by our modern use of the word.

 

[matthew1624]

slinky1882:

I guess I am asking, how do we know that the statement wasn’t directed at Peter and Satan??? Thanks and God Bless.

Because that would mean that we have books in our bible written by Satan (1 Peter, 2nd Peter) and also Jesus building his church and handing over the keys to the kingdom of heaven to him as well.

Hope this helps…

 

[Church_Militant]

Has it occured to anyone that the statement may have been directed to the devil who was tempting St. Peter and not really to Peter himself? I have never felt like Jesus was calling Peter Satan because it makes the passage seem like nonsense to me. Certainly Jesus was rebuking the idea that He might not sacrifice Himself for the sins of the world and in view of His agony in the garden where He prayed that the cup would be passed from him if it was possible… We know from many passages that Jesus was indeed tempted…does this add a different perspective to this thread or not? Maybe this is my personal heresy…
Pax vobiscum,

 

[slinky1882]

matthew1624:

Because that would mean that we have books in our bible written by Satan (1 Peter, 2nd Peter) and also Jesus building his church and handing over the keys to the kingdom of heaven to him as well.

Hope this helps…

No that doesn’t necessarily follow. Jesus could easily have seen Satan or a demon tempting Peter. Jesus could have literally been telling Satan to get away from Peter and telling Peter that those thoughts were from the Devil that focused on man and not God. None of the Apostles were immune to demonic tempting. Jesus handing the Keys to Peter does not eliminate temptations. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks and God Bless.

 

[matthew1624]

slinky1882:

No that doesn’t necessarily follow. Jesus could easily have seen Satan or a demon tempting Peter. Jesus could have literally been telling Satan to get away from Peter and telling Peter that those thoughts were from the Devil that focused on man and not God. None of the Apostles were immune to demonic tempting. Jesus handing the Keys to Peter does not eliminate temptations. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks and God Bless.

I think I misunderstood you and now see what you’re saying. My response relates to the misconception that Peter was Satan. Your illustration makes sense, the temptations were present in Peter and even within us today.

God Bless…

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Here is how I have always taken that passage:

16 Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” 20 Then he strictly charged the disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ. 21 From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised. 22 And Peter took him and began to rebuke him, saying, “God forbid, Lord! This shall never happen to you.” 23 But he turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me; for you are not on the side of God, but of men.”

Peter wanted to be the best Apostle he could be, when Jesus started talking about suffering and dying and stuff Peter wasnt going to have that happen to his Master, Peter was going to stop the sob who dared come at his Master. So on the surface Peter is displaying courage and will die rather than let his Master be taken. The problem is Satan…just like many other things that sound virtuous and a good idea can and are used by Satan to actually be going against the will of God, pure evil that looks like it is good from a human standpoint.
That is what I see at the heart of this passage. Jesus was never damning Peter to hell, but was getting at the root of the problem. We need to trust Jesus and let Him guide us, even if it seems odd to us at the time. Peter saw that situation as odd, but as we know he soon realized what the purpose of the cross was all about.

There are many things today that the average joe sees as harmless or even good act, but it can (and does) actually lead to problems. We could easily make a list of things.

I hope this helped.
Any one else?

 

[slinky1882]

matthew1624:

I think I misunderstood you and now see what you’re saying. My response relates to the misconception that Peter was Satan. Your illustration makes sense, the temptations were present in Peter and even within us today.

God Bless…

Yes, thank you for defending Peter and ultimately Chirst as your handle ultimately says. I threw the possibility of Satan tempting to give an example illustrate the point we were both making that Peter was not Satan through an alternative. I think some people may understand better if the roles were explained if Satan was actually there around Peter. Thanks again and God Bless.