J
janman55
Guest
What was the point of referring to Peter as Satan?
- Status
M
mholoth
Guest
that satan was at work in Peter’s actions to try and stop the Passion or to say that it would not happen, just as he(satan) was trying to get Him to return to heaven in the desert.
T
Tim_Kirchoff
Guest
Literally, “satan” means opponent. Peter’s way of thinking contradicted God’s plan.
C
COPLAND_3
Guest
The replies that have been given are correct, there really is not much to add if anything. But here is a quote from the blessed Theophylact,
When Peter spoke rightly, Christ called him blessed, but when he was irrationally dismayed, and did not want Him to suffer, then Christ rebuked him and said, “Get thee behind Me, Satan.” “Satan” means “the adversary.” “Get thee behind Me,” that is, do not oppose Me, but follow My will. He calls Peter this because Satan, too, did not wish Christ to suffer. What He is saying, then, is this: with human reasoning you think that suffering does not befit Me, but you fail to understand that by this means God is accomplishing salvation and that this, on the contrary, greatly befits Me.
When Peter spoke rightly, Christ called him blessed, but when he was irrationally dismayed, and did not want Him to suffer, then Christ rebuked him and said, “Get thee behind Me, Satan.” “Satan” means “the adversary.” “Get thee behind Me,” that is, do not oppose Me, but follow My will. He calls Peter this because Satan, too, did not wish Christ to suffer. What He is saying, then, is this: with human reasoning you think that suffering does not befit Me, but you fail to understand that by this means God is accomplishing salvation and that this, on the contrary, greatly befits Me.
J
janman55
Guest
Thanks to all…this helped a great deal !
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
**Peter was repeating the temptation offered by satan, that Jesus should avoid the Cross, yet come into His Messianic Kingdom. The temptations are in the background of the episode. **
**1. Jesus is the Messiah Who is to rule all the kingdoms of the earth, as the Messiah was to do - see Psalms 2; 72; 110 - but not by breaking the heads of the “nations” or by any shedding of their blood. He was indeed to rule from the Mediterranean to beyond Euphrates (Psalm 72) as Messianic King - but not as a a military one. ****2. Jesus is tempted to provide bread in an extra-ordinary mannner - later, he does so. This hints at the notion of Jesus as Moses found elsewhere in the gospel. **
**3. Even the temptation to cast Himself from the pinnacle of the Temple is related to what the Messiah was thought to do. All the temptations present the extraordinary as the religiously valuable - which is a lie in itself. They degrade the signs of the Presence of God’s Kingship - which is what the “signs” done by Jesus are - into conjuring tricks. **
**The temptations are deadly dangerous because they are repetitions of God’s promises, ever so slightly perverted. ****He is tempted, not to commit a self-evident evil, but to do His Father’s Will in a manner that is at odds with the way His Father wants it to be done. And that is not to do it at all; it is to do God’s Will, but in satan’s way. And that is to make God serve satan. Which means aborting the coming of the Kingship of God that Jesus preaches & personifies; which is partly why there is a strong insistence that Jesus “must” suffer - His doing so, is essential to the Purposes of His Father. **
**Jesus is Messiah-designate before the Cross - the Baptism is His Anointing with the Spirit. It is not obvious that He is Who He is: not unless the Father reveal His identity, as He does to Simon. To become Messiah, to be exalted by His Father, He has a path to tread - & that path leads through the Cross. So He must be betrayed, ****endure many things, be crucified, & die, before He can be raised in glory by His Father: & Peter’s words oppose all this. Jesus cannot be Messiah in the manner His Father has decreed for Him, unless He suffers death on the Cross. Peter is only the first to be come up against the “stumbling-block of the Cross” described by St. Paul in **1 Corinthians 1.18-25
**It is not possible to separate His Work as Redeemer, His being the persecuted “Servant” of Isaiah 52.12-53.12, & His priestly office. They are fused together with His self-designation as “Son of Man”. In the period befor the Exile & the destruction of the Davidic monarchy, the King “personified” the nation **
**so that its sins were his sins; & Jesus has re-****interpreted the figure of the Messiah, so that he becomes a suffering & dying Messiah. The gospel joins all ****these ideas together. **
**A second reason is, that nothing at all is ever ****allowed to interfere with the fulfilment of the Father’s Will - not family ties, not ties of friendship, nothing: there are no exceptions of any kind. (This is why the Marcan Jesus rebukes his own mother; & is the other face of the universality of His mission.) This gospel is made up of several dozen episodes - & this episode follows the preceding probably because Peter is in both. **
This gospel is the only one to mention the commission of the keys to Peter - & it shows a strong emphasis on the new community of Jesus elsewhere: it is a very “churchy” gospel, especially in its second half. So it is likely to be significant that it is the only gospel to mention this severe rebuke; which does not end with Peter. It is equally valid for the first bishops & first Christians - & for us. All the gospel is like this: it is not the telling of long-dead events.
**Hope that helps
**- Status