Peter's "confession"

[Jason_W]

Indeed. My debate cohort is trying very hard to deny any mention of a singular office of authority above all the bishops in the early Church. However, it is awfully hard to deny.

I would say it is impossible to deny given the fact that in traditional jewish custom the term KEYS refer to authority. a city surrouned by a wall would have a great gate with a lock, and the one who was given the key had control of the city as well as authority in it. this is still practiced somewhat to this day where people are given the key to a city. And we see Jesus gave the KEYS to the kingdom of Heaven to Peter. this to me sounds like the greatest single office of authority one could have.

all our early Church writings uphold the claim that Peter was the Prince of the Apostles and the first Pope. there simply is no early writings that say otherwise.

 

[JRKH]

It may be more information than you need for your other debate, but check out the “If Peter is Rock” Thread.
There is an especially good discussion of the meanings of the words used in the “Rock” Passage by Claudius and Ronydish. I believe it starts about page 6 or 7.
It is well worth the read!!

Peace
James

 

[rpp]

lets be logical here. BC stands for before Christ correct? and AD after his death right? so how could he be born 3 years before himself? is 1 AD the first year after his death and ressurection or am i just confused? lol

“AD” is short for “Anno Domini”, Latin for “after the coming of the Lord”, his birth, not his death.

Originally, the birth of Christ was year 1 AD.

However, later historical research determined his birth to be a few year earlier, long after the implementation of the modern calendar system and year numbering.

Now, back to the topic…

 

[Jason_W]

Yes after some research i seen that. i had never really thought about it before. so i should correct my statement from more than 2000 years , to more than 1970 years.

 

[Ignatius]

Is there a Church document that indicates that the “Rock” is both Peter himself and his confession? It’s easy to find references to Peter being the Rock himself. But I do not believe the Church excludes his confession as a meaning within that verse, no?

A number of the Early Christian Patristic writers allude to this. I think Cyprian of Carthage and St. Maximos are two.

 

[Ignatius]

lets be logical here. BC stands for before Christ correct? and AD after his death right? so how could he be born 3 years before himself? is 1 AD the first year after his death and ressurection or am i just confused? lol

No. AD stands for Anno Domini (In English we say Year of Our Lord as you see in so many writings). BC does indeed mean Before Christ, but the year originally calculated to His birth is about 3-4 years late.

 

[Jason_W]

Here is something that might help to place Peter above the others.

Eusebius book 2 chapter 14,6

the all-good and gracious Providence, which watches over all things, led Peter, that strongest and greatest of the apostles, and the one who on account of his virtue was the speaker for all the others,

and also chapter 15,2

And they say that Peter — when he had learned, through a revelation of the Spirit, of that which had been done — was pleased with the zeal of the men, and that the work obtained the sanction of his authority for the purpose of being used in the churches. Clement in the eighth book of his Hypotyposes gives this account, and with him agrees the bishop of Hierapolis named Papias.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Indeed. My debate cohort is trying very hard to deny any mention of a singular office of authority above all the bishops in the early Church. However, it is awfully hard to deny.

It is because there wasnt one Marco…

 

[MarcoPolo]

By the way, if anyone wants a link to my debate in the other forum, feel free to PM me.

 

[MarcoPolo]

By the way, if anyone wants a link to my debate in the other forum, feel free to PM me.

I think someone tried to PM me for the link to my debate. My mailbox was full. I emptied it now.

 

[po18guy]

Is there a Church document that indicates that the “Rock” is both Peter himself and his confession? It’s easy to find references to Peter being the Rock himself. But I do not believe the Church excludes his confession as a meaning within that verse, no?

“Peter’s confession” is simply a chapter sub-title that has been added in some bibles for easy reference. The church document that establishes this is the Book of Matthew, as reflected in the CCC.

Remember that “Peter’s denial” is also scriptural. Although Christ graciously restored Kepha to grace.

 

[Jason_W]

I dont see why one would need to go beyond scripture to prove Peter held some type of authority above the rest.

We can start with the name. Kepha.that alone is significant, since in the old testament only God was called rock.

John 1:42 Jesus looked at him, and said, “So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas” (which means Peter *).

when someones name changed that usually meant their status changed. Gen 17:25 No longer shall your name be Abram, * but your name shall be Abraham; * for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations.

Gen 32:28 Then he said, “Your name shall no more be called Jacob, but Israel, * for you have striven with God and with men, and have prevailed.”

2 Kings 23:34 And Pharaoh Neco made Eliakim the son of Josiah king in the place of Josiah his father, and changed his name to Jehoiakim.

Dan 1:6-8 Among these were Daniel, Hananiah, Misha-el, and Azariah of the tribe of Judah. 7 And the chief of the eunuchs gave them names: Daniel he called Belteshazzar, Hananiah he called Shadrach, Misha-el he called Meshach, and Azariah he called Abednego.

we see John and James called the sons of thunder, but they were still called by their names, James and John. only Simon would be called by his new name , Peter.

also significant is when Jesus came to Cesarea Phillipi.
Matt 16:13 Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do men say that the Son of man is?” this was near the southern foothills of Mt. Hernon were there is a giant wall of rock some 200’ high and 500’ long. Matthew gives us the name of this place because it relates to Peter , whose new name means rock, and also what takes place.
Matt 16:17 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.
There are some people who try to twist this by giving some elabrate explanation of the greek petros and petra. but the fact is Jesus and the others spoke aramaic, Hebrew was considerd a Holy language and reserved. so the phrase would read " you are kepha and on this kepha i will build my church.” and if thats not enough , then the next verse SHOULD suffice.

Matt. 16:19 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."

to Peter alone he gave the Keys. the term keys to a jewish person would mean AUTHORITY.

Is 22:22 And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.

Rev. 1:18 and the living one; I died, and behold I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.

the Apostles later were given authority to bind and loose, but to Peter alone were given the keys to the Kingdom.

Satan knows to kill the body you must destroy the head. Jesus is the ultimate head of the Church. but Peter is the head of the Church on earth. that is why satan demanded to have him.
Luke 22:31 Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, * that he might sift you like wheat,

and we see in the next verse Jesus commands Peter to strengthen the brethren. Luke 22:32 but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren."

and he commands Peter to lead his flock and feed his sheep.
John 21:15-17

He usually was always named first among the disciples.
Matt 10:1-4, Mark 3:16-19 , Luke 6:14-16 , Acts 1:13

He generally spoke for the others.
Matt 18:21, Mark 8:29, Luke 12:41, John 6:68

He was present at some of the most extraordinary moments
Matt 14:28-32, 17:24, Mark 10:28

at pentecost he was the first to speak
Acts 2:14-40

and the first to heal
Acts 3:6-7

it was to Peter that came the revelation to baptize gentiles
Acts 10:46-48

to this Church Jesus entrusted the Holy Spirit that it would faithfully and without error , concerning faith and morals, hand on the teachings of Christ and truth. the same Church that Jesus said the gates of hell will not prevail agianst, and that he would send the Spirit of Truth to guide it, has always declared Peter the first Pope, or the first head of the Church. or should we believe as some do , that the Holy Spirit took a 1500 year vacation?

 

[Mickey]

when someones name changed that usually meant their status changed.

In John 21: 15-17 Jesus Christ calls Peter by the name Simon.

Had his status changed again?

 

[mercygate]

Is there a Church document that indicates that the “Rock” is both Peter himself and his confession? It’s easy to find references to Peter being the Rock himself. But I do not believe the Church excludes his confession as a meaning within that verse, no?

I’m not sure that it requires documentation. We do not separate Peter from his Confession. However paragraph 424 of the Catechism says:

**424 **Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church.

 

[toaslan]

In John 21: 15-17 Jesus Christ calls Peter by the name Simon.

Had his status changed again?

No. For the use of Simon dwindles and the use of Peter predominates from that point in the NT onwards. That the name Simon does not disappear, but is used by Our Lord and others even after the “name change” does not show that Simon Peter’s status has reverted to pre-Peter level. It just shows that he is the same person, and he has two names now, the newer name pointing to his role as the earthly foundation, counterpart of Christ who is the Eternal Rock upon which the Church is eternally built.

As you can see in the verses you cite, both names are used for the First Apostle. Simon is his “given name”, and Peter his “title name,” if you will. For “Rock” was not a usual given name–but as a title name it labels the man with his new function, and seems to be more used with the spread of the Church and with its members’ need to be unified to each other through union with their earthly head.

Notice that throughout Acts the name most used for the man is Peter, but Simon still persists, for example, Chapter 10:5 “now send men to Joppa, and bring one Simon who is called Peter…”

Mickey, does this meet or is it beside your point?

 

[Mickey]

No. For the use of Simon dwindles and the use of Peter predominates from that point in the NT onwards. That the name Simon does not disappear, but is used by Our Lord and others even after the “name change” does not show that Simon Peter’s status has reverted to pre-Peter level. It just shows that he is the same person, and he has two names now, the newer name pointing to his role as the earthly foundation, counterpart of Christ who is the Eternal Rock upon which the Church is eternally built.

Wrong. St Peter had denied Him three times. “Simon” was asked to affirm Jesus Christ three times as a type of penance for the triple denial. It was a restoration of his Apostleship and it shows the beauty of repentance.

 

[Jason_W]

In John 21: 15-17 Jesus Christ calls Peter by the name Simon.

Had his status changed again?

did he say you shall be called simon agian? no

at the beginning of the sentence we see the name Simon Peter,
then Jesus calls him Simon, son of John. three times. i dont see how you would imply his status has changed agian. when Jacob’s name was changed to Isreal that does not mean he will never be called Jacob agian. also after John records these statements he still calls him Peter, referring to the status given him by Jesus as rock. so no his status did not change agian.

 

[Jason_W]

Wrong. St Peter had denied Him three times. “Simon” was asked to affirm Jesus Christ three times as a type of penance for the triple denial. It was a restoration of his Apostleship and it shows the beauty of repentance.

you need to be carefull with your assumptions here.

first you state Simon was asked to affirm Jesus, what exactly do you mean by affirm. because the Bible only states that Jesus asked “do you love me”

secondly you state it was a restoration of his Apostleship.even though the Bible nowhere states such a thing. Did Jesus say agian I give you the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. Peter never lost his Apostleship, therefore it could not be restored.

when Peter broke down and wept, was that not repentance?

but i can understand Jesus asking 3 times " do you love me" as a type of penance.

 

[Mickey]

you need to be carefull with your assumptions here.

I suppose many Church Fathers were assuming this interpretation also?

what exactly do you mean by affirm.

Affriming his love for Jesus Christ after denying Him three times.

Peter never lost his Apostleship, therefore it could not be restored.

It is no coincidence that Jesus asked him three times in conjucntion to the triple denial.

when Peter broke down and wept, was that not repentance?

Yes.

 

[Mickey]

then Jesus calls him Simon, son of John. three times.

Why do you think He does this?