Pastor's interpretation of Matthew 16

[frangiuliano115]

I wonder why they don’t try to exegete John 1:42. All those stony excuses disappear.

And when they talk about Christ being the rock, I assume they are referring to 1 Cor 10:4, but that has got nothing to do with the building of the Church. It is just a proof text job to disprove Mat 16:18. Totally out-of-context. And Mat 16:18 precede Cor. So it is an anachronistic argument as well.

What does Mark Driscoll know about the humorous side of Christ? He couldn’t possibly know. He thinks it is a joke. And luckily for the rest of us, that is his personal opinion only. No other Christian writers thought that was a joke throughout the centuries. I am hard pressed to think of any NT Chapter or verse that is supposedly a joke. Perhaps he sees jokes littered throughout the Bible. Or perhaps that is his SOP when he couldn’t exegete his way out of it. Don’t have the answer? Laughter is the best medicine!

Get behind me Satan? That has got nothing to do with the building of the Church and there is a time gap between that and Mat 16:18. The subject of 16:23 is the ignorance of Peter and that ignorance is hindering Jesus fate with death. But we know that Peter loves Jesus and wouldn’t want any harm to fall on Jesus. Anyone reading that knows why Peter said what he said. He is not thinking of anything evil towards his Master. If anyone tries linking that to Mat 16:18 then they must also link John 21:15-17. Anyone knows how to cherry pick but not all audience is a dumb lot. A dense Peter is not an evil Peter despite Driscoll painting it as such. No one can point out one evil thing Peter said that deserves such a rebuke. Why don’t Driscoll threat that as a joke instead?

Very interesting points.

John 1:42 Cephas:
Cephas in Aramaic means rock. I also find “rock” in Young’s Literal translation from the greek. A protestant bible translates it “Peter” which is right too, but Peter does mean rock. So it’s a circle. Talk about circular reasoning!

I used to teach my catechism kids that his name was Simon Peter so they wouldn’t get mixed up with the name change. This was helpful to them - others in the bible too (Mathew).

Anyway, when Jesus met Peter, He said Peter would be called Cephas. So why don’t we know Peter as Cephas?

For the same reason we don’t call Jesus Emmanuel –
It’s a title, not a name. (it could be a name too, but not in these cases).

So you bring up a really good point!

Regarding 1 Cor 10:4. That’s kind of the same as Jesus being the rock in the sense of being the cornerstone. I wouldn’t argue with that too much. Just my opinion. Jesus IS the rock, in whatever circumstance you wish to place that idea - it does not take away from Peter, Pietro-pietra.

Yes. I agree that the “get thee behind me satan” has nothing to do with anything.
The chuch could be built on Peter - he’s still human and could make mistakes. Remember about consuming the meat sacrificed to idols? And circumcision? It was a new and fledgling church - much to be worked out.

Peter did seem to be the strongest willed of the apostles. I liked John the best. But he might have been too young and not “practical” enough. All I can say is: Jesus knew what He was doing - we have to trust that.

Thanks for the opportunity to whip out some bibles - that’s why I joined here - not to argue about the weirdest stuff!

Yeah. And I agree with what you said about Driscoll. Didn’t even watch the link for youtube. No time for nonsense.

Fran

 

[Beryllos]

… Didn’t even watch the link for youtube. No time for nonsense.

That may not have been his strongest video, in the evangelical sense, but another of his that I watched, about marriage, homosexuality, porn, and chastity, was right in line with Catholic teaching. The guy is not bad.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Anyway, when Jesus met Peter, He said Peter would be called Cephas. So why don’t we know Peter as Cephas?
Fran

Because the New Testament was originally written in Greek, and in Greek “petra” means a large rock. “Petros” is a smaller stone, but it would be strange to call Peter by a feminine name, i.e. “Petra.”

Aramaic does not translate well. Jesus’ words in Aramaic, the NT written in Greek, translated into English. No wonder things are lost.

Some people will say Jesus had blood brothers and sisters as well because in ancient languages there was no word for step-brother. The word used in the Greek Bible is “adelphos,” which is “brother.” But it could mean a full brother, half-brother, step-brother, cousin, etc. During the time I spent in the Middle East, I heard men calling many different family members “brother.”

Some Protestants, not all of course, use Acts 4:10-11 against Catholicism as well:

Be it known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by him this man is standing before you well. This is the stone which was rejected by you builders, but which has become the head of the corner.

I don’t think anyone would argue that Jesus is the head of the Church, but because the word “stone” is included, some say Jesus was speaking of himself in Matthew.

 

[frangiuliano115]

That may not have been his strongest video, in the evangelical sense, but another of his that I watched, about marriage, homosexuality, porn, and chastity, was right in line with Catholic teaching. The guy is not bad.

The above is because protestants want to say that Jesus is the rock and not Peter.

On marriage, homosexlty, porn, chastity, abortion, etc. they ARE right in line with catholicism - as would be any real christian church.

So if you listened to his sermons on those topics, you would agree with everything he says.

I did breakdown and check the youtube link. I don’t know him but he’s in line with mainline protestantism, I think - don’t know him that well.

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

Because the New Testament was originally written in Greek, and in Greek “petra” means a large rock. “Petros” is a smaller stone, but it would be strange to call Peter by a feminine name, i.e. “Petra.”

Aramaic does not translate well. Jesus’ words in Aramaic, the NT written in Greek, translated into English. No wonder things are lost.

Some people will say Jesus had blood brothers and sisters as well because in ancient languages there was no word for step-brother. The word used in the Greek Bible is “adelphos,” which is “brother.” But it could mean a full brother, half-brother, step-brother, cousin, etc. During the time I spent in the Middle East, I heard men calling many different family members “brother.”

Some Protestants, not all of course, use Acts 4:10-11 against Catholicism as well:

Be it known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by him this man is standing before you well. This is the stone which was rejected by you builders, but which has become the head of the corner.

I don’t think anyone would argue that Jesus is the head of the Church, but because the word “stone” is included, some say Jesus was speaking of himself in Matthew.

Perfect.

Listen to this, since you’re an assoc. prof. of theolgy, you might be interested.

I’m not in the U.S.

About two weeks ago, we were told to throw away any bible (italian) that was printed before 2008. Because: They were translated from the Latin vulgate and too many little words were translated incorrectly. The new Italian press bibles were translated from the Greek.

This is true, of course. Luke 1.38 came up in discussion.
Is it “let it be done unto me” or
“let it be done because of me” I can hardly translate it, but it has to do with Mary being or not being a co-redemptrix.

So, of course this is right. Much is lost in translation - I give you the word: Belief… Hear… Follow…

But a couple of my friends are very upset, nonetheless.

Fran
P.S. No problem for me - I have many bibles of all types!

 

[BartholomewB]

Did you know that the Gates of Hades is a real place in Israel?

It could be googled, I guess - can’t remember where it is.
Not that I visited there…

I never heard of a place called the Gates of Hades, but at several places in the Greek world there were well-known caves which were said to be entrances to the Underworld. The god of the Underworld was Pluto, and a cave of this kind, if any kind of worship or ritual took place there, was called a Plutonium.

The most famous Plutonium was at Eleusis, just outside Athens. There was another one at Hierapolis, near Colossae, in Phrygia, which St. Paul must certainly have known about but which he doesn’t seem to have visited.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ploutonion

 

[Indyann]

This guy should be wearing a clown suit and a big red nose. I watched the whole video and did not find him funny at all. If this is an example of protestant spirituality, thank
God, I was born into Catholicism.
A pastor should try to lead his flock, not entertain them. Just ridiculous!

 

[frangiuliano115]

I never heard of a place called the Gates of Hades, but at several places in the Greek world there were well-known caves which were said to be entrances to the Underworld. The god of the Underworld was Pluto, and a cave of this kind, if any kind of worship or ritual took place there, was called a Plutonium.

The most famous Plutonium was at Eleusis, just outside Athens. There was another one at Hierapolis, near Colossae, in Phrygia, which St. Paul must certainly have known about but which he doesn’t seem to have visited.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ploutonion

You’re right. It’s a “gate” that leads to hades (hell).

It’s at the base of Mt. Hermon in Caesarea Pilippi in the Golan Heights between Israel and Syria.

Doubt any tourists will be going there these days. Looked it up on google…
The pictures are very beautiful. Wish I could go…

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

This guy should be wearing a clown suit and a big red nose. I watched the whole video and did not find him funny at all. If this is an example of protestant spirituality, thank
God, I was born into Catholicism.
A pastor should try to lead his flock, not entertain them. Just ridiculous!

I wouldn’t say he’s an example of protestant pastors.

I like to be fair.

 

[Indyann]

I wouldn’t say he’s an example of protestant pastors.

I like to be fair.

You are absolutely correct. I was trying to find a way to delete the post, but I do not know how. It did not need to be said and was not kind. I apologize.

 

[BartholomewB]

You’re right. It’s a “gate” that leads to hades (hell).

It’s at the base of Mt. Hermon in Caesarea Pilippi in the Golan Heights between Israel and Syria.

Doubt any tourists will be going there these days. Looked it up on google…
The pictures are very beautiful. Wish I could go…

Fran

Well, well! *Dunque! *That brings us back to square one. It was somewhere on the slopes of Mount Hermon, close to Caesarea Philippi, that Jesus and Peter were having their conversation about rocks. So when Jesus said to Peter, “The gates of Hades shall not prevail against it,” he may even have been pointing at them as he spoke.

biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/16-18.htm

 

[Wesrock]

Maybe he said “Simon, you rock!”

Peter: Rabbi?

Jesus: You’ll understand in 1930 years.

 

[CompSciGuy]

That may not have been his strongest video, in the evangelical sense, but another of his that I watched, about marriage, homosexuality, porn, and chastity, was right in line with Catholic teaching. The guy is not bad.

In some ways, perhaps. But he is also pro-contraception and in favor of some forms of sexual behavior that are not in line with Catholic teaching. He has entire segments where he answers the “dirty questions” (I’m not sure if that’s exactly what he calls them) but he kind of takes an anything goes approach within the context of marriage. He was in the news a year or two ago because he was apparently ousted from his church for being a bully or something like that.

 

[ericc]

I don’t think anyone would argue that Jesus is the head of the Church, but because the word “stone” is included, some say Jesus was speaking of himself in Matthew.

I believe language experts have gone through those words many times. The sentence syntax does refer to Peter as the rock and not Christ himself. Interestingly, the time when Jesus refers to the corner stone is about the parable of the wicked tenants Mat 21:33-44 where he quotes Psalm 118:22. It wasn’t about church building.

 

[Beryllos]

In some ways, perhaps. But he is also pro-contraception and in favor of some forms of sexual behavior that are not in line with Catholic teaching. He has entire segments where he answers the “dirty questions” (I’m not sure if that’s exactly what he calls them) but he kind of takes an anything goes approach within the context of marriage. He was in the news a year or two ago because he was apparently ousted from his church for being a bully or something like that.

Yeah, okay. I have seen only two of his videos, and don’t plan to watch more, so I can say little more.

It sounds like he has some shortcomings. I hope he can save a few souls in spite of that, with God’s help.

 

[guanophore]

That may not have been his strongest video, in the evangelical sense, but another of his that I watched, about marriage, homosexuality, porn, and chastity, was right in line with Catholic teaching. The guy is not bad.

I liked the part about the plank in the eye.

People that deny Jesus meant to build the Church on Peter just have a deficient understanding of God’s plan for humanity. Jesus does not expect us to be perfect, just to be faithful. Whatever else we can say about Peter, he was passionately faithful.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I wouldn’t say he’s an example of protestant pastors.

I like to be fair.

I don’t think he is, either. Many Protestant pastors, I would say most, are kind, serious about their faith, and genuinely love Christ. I don’t agree with all they teach, but many are very nice, fine people.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I believe language experts have gone through those words many times. The sentence syntax does refer to Peter as the rock and not Christ himself. Interestingly, the time when Jesus refers to the corner stone is about the parable of the wicked tenants Mat 21:33-44 where he quotes Psalm 118:22. It wasn’t about church building.

Yes, I do know you’re right, eric. I was just pointing out that some Protestants use Acts to bolster their argument that Jesus was referring to himself.

In my advanced New Testament classes and Greek classes, I had to go through those words myself, though I would not call myself an expert. I do call my professors experts, though, and they say Christ is referring to Peter. They agree with you about the syntax.

 

[JohnR77]

Well, well! *Dunque! *That brings us back to square one. It was somewhere on the slopes of Mount Hermon, close to Caesarea Philippi, that Jesus and Peter were having their conversation about rocks. So when Jesus said to Peter, “The gates of Hades shall not prevail against it,” he may even have been pointing at them as he spoke.

I agree with you, BartholomewB, that Jesus was making a contrast with this cave, rock, and city built to honor a pagan god, with the True Rock, which is Jesus Christ, and Who now makes Simon a Rock, upon whom Christ builds the City of God to honor the One True God.

defendingthebride.com/ch/ca/rock1.html

Consider the five things that Jesus declares to Peter in Matthew 16 verses 17 through 19.
1. “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah.”

2.    	“For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.”

3.   “And so I say  	to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the  	gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.”

4.   “I will give  	you the keys to the kingdom of heaven.”  
 
5.    	“Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose  	on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” 
 
Declarations 1, 2, 4, and 5 are unquestionably favorable to  	Peter.  If declaration number 3 was unfavorable to him it would be totally  	inconsistent if not contradictory and it would make the whole dialogue  	confusing if not incomprehensible.

You can see a picture of this cave here
defendingthebride.com/ch/ca/rock5.html

.

 

[ericc]

In my advanced New Testament classes and Greek classes, I had to go through those words myself, though I would not call myself an expert. I do call my professors experts, though, and they say Christ is referring to Peter. They agree with you about the syntax.

Hi Lily, I really do envy your sources and education background. I have to make do with whatever I can grab my measly little hands on. No language skills, no Biblical study background, no proper Catechism. I have to rely on Google, internet library, snippets of information here and there, some books, a lot of websites, and lots of persistence and an inquisitive mind. Slowly but surely, I inched forward. My university days were spent on different subjects entirely without a whiff of God.