MOVED: Was Peter the Rock?

[tqualey]

Hi, RocketMan,

I think one of the profound characteristics of the posters is their degree of focus - especially on items that appear strange and are in need of clarification. Additionally, from time to time, as I am sure you have observed, there are those who give every appearance of actually evading direct questions to comments previously made I know this may seem shocking … but, what can I say… it really is what it is!

The idea of Peter being, “…first amongst prodigals…” is a title I am not familiar with. As you will recall, Peter repented while Judas despaired. If you want an example of someone who was with Christ for 3 years, saw all that the Son of Man accomplished during His Ministry - and then gave up on Christ forgiving him… well… I would not be looking to Peter for this.

As Benedictus2 so clearly pointed out - this revelation came from God the Father as acknowledged by Christ, Himself. I really am not sure what it is your remark is trying to make of that fact. The way I see it, God had selcted Peter from all eternity to receive the answer and then deliver it to Christ. And, from all eternity, Christ would receive Peter’s answer (confession) and acknowledge its source - God the Father. There is a profound consistency of behavior here that God is showing to all of us.

But, you know, this dialogue with Peter does not stop there. Christ identifies PETER as the Rock that Christ will build His Church on (and, that would be the Catholic Church). Christ then gives Peter the Keys to the Kingdom - in front of the other 11 Apostles. Without engaging in wild speculaiton … what kind of a relationship do you think Christ is showing Peter in front of the others? In a previous post, someone claimed that there were 11 other sets of keys - but, this is simply not the case! Just one set - and Christ gave this Peter.

Oh, and did I mention that Christ gave Peter the power to bind and lose?

Ultimately, we are confronted with not only Matthew 16 - but the history of the first 400 hundred years when the Roman Empire was actively murdering Catholics for professing Christ as their Savior. During this time, there wre also those who wanted to develop their own religion in some form or other. Here is an excellent link: catholic.com/library/Great_Heresies.asp And, it was the Catholic Church who determined, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, which books are inspired and which were simply of men. The former were canonized, while the latter were determined to be either pious writings (Didache) or devilish mischief (Gospel of St. Thomas).

The so-called ‘Talking Points’ appear to be simple sophistry - like the Truth is something that can be evaded, ignored or stood on its head while engaging in endless debate over various items like did Christ really speak Aramaic when He spoke to His Apostles during his discourse as recorded in Matthew 16!

Personally, I would like to invite you to respond to the questions put forward. If you are sincerely concerned then I think there are an abundance of posters who can provide both factual information and genuine insight into this matter.

God bless

Yes, Peter was first among many prodigals and his revelation as Jesus being the Christ, the sin of denial, and later repentance is the heart of the church. If the sword swings from Peter’s primacy, than let it swing with the same blood that drips from the King.

 

[pablope]

pablope, it was neither one without the other but both. Do you think Peter’s tears had dried? The source of all joy radiates from the risen Christ and the empty tomb is the birthing place of the new life. The angel’s announcement was particular to Peter’s agony.

From Psalm 30:
For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favour is life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.
and…
And in my prosperity I said, I shall never be moved.
and…

Thou hast turned for me my mourning into dancing: thou hast put off my sackcloth, and girded me with gladness;

it was neither one without the other but both.

Sorry, do not know what you mean here?

Do you think Peter’s tears had dried?

You are the one who stated the angel was to end Peter’s agony. Mark’s gospel states

Mark 14: 72 …And when he thought thereon, he wept.

The source of all joy radiates from the risen Christ and the empty tomb is the birthing place of the new life.

 

[benedictus2]

The idea of Peter being, “…first amongst prodigals…” is a title I am not familiar with.

How can you be when it is something that Rocket_Man coined.

As you will recall, Peter repented while Judas despaired. If you want an example of someone who was with Christ for 3 years, saw all that the Son of Man accomplished during His Ministry - and then gave up on Christ forgiving him… well… I would not be looking to Peter for this.

Good point!

**The way I see it, God had selcted Peter from all eternity to receive the answer and then deliver it to Christ. And, from all eternity, Christ would receive Peter’s answer (confession) and acknowledge its source - God the Father. There is a profound consistency of behavior here that God is showing to all of us. **

**
**

Ultimately, we are confronted with not only Matthew 16 - but the history of the first 400 hundred years when the Roman Empire was actively murdering Catholics for professing Christ as their Savior. During this time, there wre also those who wanted to develop their own religion in some form or other. Here is an excellent link: catholic.com/library/Great_Heresies.asp

And, it was the Catholic Church who determined, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, which books are inspired and which were simply of men. The former were canonized, while the latter were determined to be either pious writings (Didache) or devilish mischief (Gospel of St. Thomas).
That makes too much sense.

The so-called ‘Talking Points’ appear to be simple sophistry

Thanks for finding the right word to describe it.

 

[Mickey]

But there was one particular Apostle that He singled out.

Roman Catholics need to be careful not to cherry pick one verse (Math 16:18) and make it seem like this is the “proof” for an ultramontanist supreme infallible papacy premised on St Peter. In reality, the Sacred Scriptures tells us that Christ is the Cornerstone. The prophets and apostles are the foundation (including St Peter). St Peter’s confession is rock (and of course St Peter is rock also because he is included with all the apostles as the foundation). If you and I confess Jesus to be the Messiah, the Son of the living God, we are rock too! Yes. The keys were given to St Peter. The keys were given to all the apostles (the foundation). The keys were given to the Church–with Christ as the Head.

And the gates of Hades will not prevail.

 

[Mickey]

And Scripture and History will say you got that wrong.

You are reading the wrong history.

 

[Mickey]

Did Jesus say the following to ANY other Apostles?

Luke 22:31-32
"Simon, Simon, behold Satan has demanded to sift all of you like wheat, but I have prayed that your own faith may not fail; and once you have turned back, you must strengthen your brothers."

No . None of the others were about to publically deny Him three times.

John 21:15-17
When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “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."
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."
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."

St Peter needed this triple affirmation after his triple denial.

The bottom line friend, is that Peter was singled out for leadership in a way that the other Apostles weren’t.

Indeed. Not only was he the spokesman of the apostles, but he was the only one to publically deny Christ three times, and Jesus used this as a wonderful way to show us the way to repentance and forgiveness.

elvisman:

Peter was given supreme authority.

Wrong.

 

[benedictus2]

Roman Catholics need to be careful not to cherry pick one verse (Math 16:18) and make it seem like this is the “proof” for an ultramontanist supreme infallible papacy premised on St Peter. In reality, the Sacred Scriptures tells us that Christ is the Cornerstone. The prophets and apostles are the foundation (including St Peter). St Peter’s confession is rock (and of course St Peter is rock also because he is included with all the apostles as the foundation). If you and I confess Jesus to be the Messiah, the Son of the living God, we are rock too! Yes. The keys were given to St Peter. The keys were given to all the apostles (the foundation). The keys were given to the Church–with Christ as the Head.

And the gates of Hades will not prevail.

As Elvis and others have shown it is not a case of cherry picking. Peter was consistently singled out by our Lord. Not just in Matthew 16:18.

But what makes Matthew 16:18 compelling is that GOD THE FATHER SINGLED HIM OUT AS WELL.

 

[benedictus2]

You are reading the wrong history.

Nope. I am reading the right history. And I even have the backing of Eastern Patriarchs .

Are you aware that Patriarch Michael flanked by soldiers stormed into a Church (which he didn’t like because it was Latin) , opened the tabernacle and threw the Hosts out on the street?

 

[benedictus2]

No . None of the others were about to publically deny Him three times.

St Peter needed this triple affirmation after his triple denial.

Indeed. Not only was he the spokesman of the apostles, but he was the only one to publically deny Christ three times, and Jesus used this as a wonderful way to show us the way to repentance and forgiveness.
Wrong.

And isn’t that what makes it interesting.

God the Father and God the Son knew Peter was going to do that and still They chose him.

Why does God’s choice grate so much with you?

 

[Mickey]

And, no - Eph 2:19-22 has nothing to do with this

It has everything to do with it.

God chose Peter to lead His Church and God chose Paul to launch the missionary work to the Gentiles.

God chose all the Apostles to the lead the Church.

Christ changing the name of Simon to Peter - but did not change the names of any of the other Apostles?

St Peter’s name was changed to show the importance of His confession of faith.

Christ selecting Peter, James and John to accompany Him on several personal experiences (Transfiguration, Agony in the Garden, etc.)?

Yes. The Sons of Thunder were there also.

John resting his head on Christ’s bosom - and John referring to himself as the Disciple whom Christ loved?

Yet this does not mean that Christ loved the others any less.

Christ paying the Temple Tax for Peter, but not for any of the other Apostles?

Now you are reaching.

my Bible does not have any reference to additonal sets of keys being given out to the Other Apostles.

St John Chrysosotom
For the Son of thunder, the beloved of Christ, the pillar of the Churches throughout the world, who holds the keys of heaven, who drank the cup of Christ, and was baptized with His baptism, who lay upon his Master’s bosom, with much confidence, this man now comes forward to us now.

To the best of my knowledge Peter was the only one to receive such a Gift.

Christ said, “I will give you the keys…” And he did….along with the others when the power to bind and loose was received by Christ’s breath.

no keys accompanied this event as it is recorded in my Bible. Tell me what yours actually says here.

Are you a solo Scripturist?

Peter is the one in charge of Christ’s Church

All the Apostles are in charge of Christ’s Church….with Christ as the Head.

St. Augustine whom you previously quoted identified the Popel’s authority in resolving disputes - “The case is closed - Rome has spoken!”

LOL! He did not say that.

Here is what he really wrote:

Iam enim de hac causa duo concilia missa sunt ad Sedem Apostolicam; inde etiam rescripta venerunt. Causa finita est; utinam finiatur error!

“For already on this matter two councils have sent to the Apostolic See, whence also rescripts have come back from there. The case is ended; would that the error may end likewise!”

 

[Mickey]

Why does God’s choice grate so much with you?

Please. There is no need to insult. St Peter is greatly venerated in the Holy Orthodox Church. There is a great feast dedicated to the Holy Apostles St Peter and St Paul preceded by a four week fast. Does the RCC have this?

We simply do not believe that St Peter was singled out to begin some sort of supreme papacy.

 

[Mickey]

St Augustine’s comments are most interesting ; however, do you not remember the claim of a previous Saint (Ignatius), who said,
Wheresoever the bishop appears, there let the people be, even as wheresoever Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.

St Ignatius of Antioch was not referring to the Roman Catholic Church (it did not exist yet). He was referring to the catholic (universal) Church.

And therefore it is said to [Peter], preferentially, after the confession: "And I give thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven: and if thou bindest upon the earth, it will be bound in the Heavens: and if thou loosenest upon the earth, it will be loosened in the Heavens (Mt 16; 19).

“Preferentially,” says this eminent and scholarly Saint.
Indeed! And notice how it is connected to Math 16:19.

 

[benedictus2]

Please. There is no need to insult. St Peter is greatly venerated in the Holy Orthodox Church. There is a great feast dedicated to the Holy Apostles St Peter and St Paul preceded by a four week fast. Does the RCC have this?

We simply do not believe that St Peter was singled out to begin some sort of supreme papacy.

We have the feast of Sts Peter and Paul but we do not have a four week fast.

I’ll see if I can find the link to a page that explains why there is Petrine supremacy.

 

[Mickey]

We have the feast of Sts Peter and Paul

I’ll see if I can find the link to a page that explains why there is Petrine supremacy.

No need my friend. This stubborn Orthodox will never accept papal supremacy.

 

[adrift]

As Elvis and others have shown it is not a case of cherry picking. Peter was consistently singled out by our Lord. Not just in Matthew 16:18.

But what makes Matthew 16:18 compelling is that GOD THE FATHER SINGLED HIM OUT AS WELL.

Cherry picking seems to me done by those who only use the scripture of upon this rock and fail to see that Jesus also says to Peter alone I will give you the Keys. Also ignored is the name change. What is not considered is all the other scriptural evidence that indicates primacy and leadership.

Micky has already explained why he ignores scripture. Although he was talking to me it really applies to him.

I understand that you must be obedient to the interpretations of your magisterium–I cannot fault you for that.

 

[Mickey]

Micky has already explained why he ignores scripture.

I have defended my stance through Sacred Scripture and Holy Tradition. Will you now be using insults to defend yours?

 

[Mickey]

Peter was consistently singled out by our Lord. Not just in Matthew 16:18.

St Peter was definitely the mouth piece for the Apostles. But he was not above them.

But what makes Matthew 16:18 compelling is that **GOD THE FATHER SINGLED HIM OUT AS WELL. **

God the Father singled out** ALL** the apostles.

 

[Mickey]

Are you aware that Patriarch Michael flanked by soldiers stormed into a Church (which he didn’t like because it was Latin) , opened the tabernacle and threw the Hosts out on the street?

Please do not turn this into a stone throwing thread.

 

[elvisman]

No . None of the others were about to publically deny Him three times.

WEAK argument.
They ALL ran and hid. Jesus singled Peter out by saying to him alone:
**Luke 22:31-32
"Simon, Simon, behold Satan has demanded to sift all of you (plural) like wheat, but I have prayed that your (singular) own faith may not fail; and once you (singular) have turned back, you (singular) must strengthen your brothers." **

---

There is simply NO getting around the fact that here, Jesus was telling Peter that HE was in charge during Jesus’ absence. To deny this is to simply bury your head in the sand.

St Peter needed this triple affirmation after his triple denial.

Indeed. Not only was he the spokesman of the apostles, but he was the only one to publically deny Christ three times, and Jesus used this as a wonderful way to show us the way to repentance and forgiveness.
Wrong.
Yes, Peter was the only one RECORDED to have denied him 3 times. They ALL denied him just as WE have all denied him - MANY more than 3 times.

The Gospel writers are showing us that even the leader (Peter) could deny him and be forgiven. The very mention of Peter’s multiple denials is more about forgiveness than about Peter’s folley.

 

[Mickey]

They ALL

ran and hid. Of course. But then St John was there with Our Lady and St Peter denied Him three times.

Luke 22:31-32

There is simply NO getting around the fact that here, Jesus was telling Peter that HE was in charge during Jesus’ absence. To deny this is to simply bury your head in the sand. Christ is in charge.

Jesus Christ knows that St Peter is about to deny Him thrice. He prays for him so that his faith may not fail–so that he does not fall into despair and hang himself like Judas. Then of course we see Jesus Christ restoring St Peter’s Apostolic standing at the end of St John’s Gospel–the triple affirmation for the triple denial–because St Peter wept and repented instead of falling into despair and suicide.

Yes, Peter was the only one RECORDED to have denied him 3 times.

Exactly. A wonderful lesson to us on repentance and forgiveness.