Who was the Rock in Matthew 16:18?

[Teneas]

Peter

Yeah I did that before to try and keep it on track as well.

 

[schaick]

Sorry, but lithos does not mean rock. It is the Greek word for stone. Petra in Greek means rock. And, the jury has settled the question

Please read Matthew 16:19 again. Jesus was talking only to Peter. The Keys to the Kingdom were given only to Peter and not to all the Apostles.

And it will be ratified by Jesus.

Every Church ( or congregation ) had a Bishop in charge. There were more than five Churches, therefore there were more than five Bishops. As for the Pope ( Papa, or father in Italian ), you are correct. The title was not used in the early Church, but the office of “chief”, or “head” Bishop did. Although Peter did not claim the title Bishop of the Church in Rome, he was considered as such as the senior, or “chief” Apostle since he lead the congregation there and was martyred there.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

Are you saying that you believe that the Gospel was first written in Aramaic? Or that it was in Greek? We know that Jesus spoke Aramaic. Do you believe that the person writting Matthew in Greek got it wrong?


http://www.graceway.com/articles/article_017.html

lithos in the sense that both-“LITHOS and PETROS…are movable stones”

A reconstructed Aramaic/Syriac of the passage would properly be:
“You are KE’PHA’ (a movable stone) and upon this SHU`A’ (a large massive rock) I will build my church.”

This is in exact correspondence to the original inspired Greek text:
“You are PETROS (a movable stone) and upon this PETRA (a large massive rock) I will build my church.”

[BThere was an Aramaic name - Petros during the time of Jesus meaning “first born”-interesting if in fact he was the first disciple.**

Yes in Matt 16 Jesus is talking to Peter but look at Matt 18 Jesus is talking to all the deciples:
1At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”
…
18"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

19"Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. 20For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them."

I understand the Bishophood of Rome was shared by both Paul and Peter and that both were martyred there.

 

[gospelofmark]

Are you saying that you believe that the Gospel was first written in Aramaic? Or that it was in Greek? We know that Jesus spoke Aramaic. Do you believe that the person writting Matthew in Greek got it wrong?


http://www.graceway.com/articles/article_017.html

lithos in the sense that both-“LITHOS and PETROS…are movable stones”

A reconstructed Aramaic/Syriac of the passage would properly be:
“You are KE’PHA’ (a movable stone) and upon this SHU`A’ (a large massive rock) I will build my church.”

This is in exact correspondence to the original inspired Greek text:
“You are PETROS (a movable stone) and upon this PETRA (a large massive rock) I will build my church.”

[BThere was an Aramaic name - Petros during the time of Jesus meaning “first born”-interesting if in fact he was the first disciple.**

Yes in Matt 16 Jesus is talking to Peter but look at Matt 18 Jesus is talking to all the deciples:
1At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”
…
18"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

19"Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. 20For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them."

I understand the Bishophood of Rome was shared by both Paul and Peter and that both were martyred there.

i have read some early fathers talking about peter and paul establishing the church at rome but our Lord never called out paul, like he did peter. so what if peter is seen as a small stone and a sinner, are’nt we all. peters being a sinner makes our Lords choice of him even more significant

 

[Javl]

Are you saying that you believe that the Gospel was first written in Aramaic? Or that it was in Greek? We know that Jesus spoke Aramaic. Do you believe that the person writting Matthew in Greek got it wrong?


http://www.graceway.com/articles/article_017.html

lithos in the sense that both-“LITHOS and PETROS…are movable stones”

A reconstructed Aramaic/Syriac of the passage would properly be:
“You are KE’PHA’ (a movable stone) and upon this SHU`A’ (a large massive rock) I will build my church.”

This is in exact correspondence to the original inspired Greek text:
“You are PETROS (a movable stone) and upon this PETRA (a large massive rock) I will build my church.”

[BThere was an Aramaic name - Petros during the time of Jesus meaning “first born”-interesting if in fact he was the first disciple.**

Yes in Matt 16 Jesus is talking to Peter but look at Matt 18 Jesus is talking to all the deciples:
1At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”
…
18"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

19"Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. 20For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them."

I understand the Bishophood of Rome was shared by both Paul and Peter and that both were martyred there.

More like as not the gospels were written in Koine Greek, and not classical Greek. I never said that they got it wrong. And many times modern or classical Greek is referenced in translations, which may and can produce errors.

And no, they were not written in Aramaic, although there are some documents that were written in Aramaic.

The Modern Ethiopian Copts have their Gospel written in Aramaic. It would be interesting for us ( you and me ) to find out what it does say, and I still stand by what I have posted.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Lib_Christian]

Finally something I can agree with as truth from you, the Catholic Church and those in communion with the Latin Rite can open your eyes wider than any!!!

Praise Jesus…we have a break through!

Alhough I don’t recall saying which ones and I wouldn’t necessarily say the Roman church allows people to open their eyes all that much. The Roman church sometimes barely allows people to open their mouths in questioning. Joan of Arc was burned at the stake and then made a saint. But if you meant your post as a sense of humor, glad to know you have one.

 

[Lib_Christian]

Yes - but you specifically mentioned the “Roman” church as having false teachers based upon their “fruits” that you would know them by. Would you care to clarify that statement?

I thought we were discussing the Roman church and whether Peter was the rock.

 

[John_Larocque]

It’s a very old tradition that Mt was written in Aramaic. Some people have suggested that “Q” - the mythical common source text behind the synoptics - was also written in Aramaic. Whether that’s true or not, Jesus undoubtedly spoke it, which would make the Gospels, in a way, a translation from the original oral language.

 

[TEPO]

I thought we were discussing the Roman church and whether Peter was the rock.

Have you commented on matthew 16:19 yet?

matthew 16:19 – “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Kind of speaks for itself. Plus, Peter was called blessed by Jesus in Matthew 16:17. – "Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah.”

Whoever is said to be blessed in the bible, (as Jesus said to Peter) always seems to be one who produces “super-fruits”. Just like Mary was called blessed among women.
To be called blessed seems MAJOR in the bible.

Mother of God / Head of the Church…

Also, I understand that usually within the Church, to be called blessed, the Saint must have been beatified… And to be beatified, one must have passed-on. But Mary, and Peter were called blessed while still walking upon the earth. Could they have had some sort of spititual as well as physical signifigance with Gods perfect plan ?

Any thoughts ?

 

[TEPO]

Or are my eyes closed ?

 

[Lib_Christian]

Or are my eyes closed ?

Hi Tepo, you can open your eyes. In Matt 18:18 Peter is speaking to all. If all can bind and loose, all have keys. As you said, kinda speaks for itself. I am certain somewhere I must have spoken as well about reformation when the successors stray. It may have gotten lost though among those persecuting me for whether I am Catholic when their own Church says I am. Lots blessed. See the Sermon on the Mount. Those are my thoughts. Hope that helps. Peace.

 

[TEPO]

Hi Tepo, you can open your eyes. In Matt 18:18 Peter is speaking to all. If all can bind and loose, all have keys. As you said, kinda speaks for itself. I am certain somewhere I must have spoken as well about reformation when the successors stray. It may have gotten lost though among those persecuting me for whether I am Catholic when their own Church says I am. Lots blessed. See the Sermon on the Mount. Those are my thoughts. Hope that helps. Peace.

THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT:

"Blessed are the poor in spirit, 4 for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are they who mourn, for they will be comforted.

Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the land.

Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness, 7 for they will be satisfied.

Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.

Blessed are the clean of heart, for they will see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.

Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness, 9 for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are you when they insult you and persecute you and utter every kind of evil against you (falsely) because of me.

Rejoice and be glad, for your reward will be great in heaven."

These teachings seem to talk about after one passes-on, as in, when they get to heaven… But to be called blessed by name, while still alive and walking upon the earth – seems different.
Seems like to be called blessed puts one on a higher level.

Could it be?

 

[TEPO]

Seems like Mary and Peter (who were called blessed -that is bless-ed not blest, are given the authority to give blessings, as opposed to one who recieves a blessing…

They are blessers not blesees, becauese God is using them both physically and spiritually to do the BIG jobs.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

Hi Tepo, you can open your eyes. In Matt 18:18 Peter is speaking to all. If all can bind and loose, all have keys. As you said, kinda speaks for itself. I am certain somewhere I must have spoken as well about reformation when the successors stray. It may have gotten lost though among those persecuting me for whether I am Catholic when their own Church says I am. Lots blessed. See the Sermon on the Mount. Those are my thoughts. Hope that helps. Peace.

In Mt 16:18, Jesus is speaking directly to Simon Peter. In Mt. 18:18, Jesus is speaking to his disciples about the authority that will be imparted to the Church. Read it in context with the two prior verses:

[15] "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.
[16] But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses.
[17] If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
[18] Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

The passage refers not just to any two persons voting down a third regarding matters of doctrine or morals, but the authority of the Church to resolve the differences among members. That authority resides not in every christian acting independently, but it resides in the entity that is the visible Body of Christ. The visible and authoritative One Holy and Catholic Church.

If you were baptized with the proper form and matter, then you are part of that church, but it does not follow that because you are a member you have an individual authority that supercedes that Church’s magesterial authority. But thanks for sharing your individual interpretation. It’s very enlightening.

Peace,
Robert

 

[luckyfredsdad]

Have you commented on matthew 16:19 yet? /

**We have indeed spoken at great length on Matt.16/19/. The question remains unanswered. What is the interpretation by the Church of Christ’s utterance in that scripture? No satisfactory reply has been received from Roman Catholics! Where is it in Scripture or Holy tradiition?.

Neither has any reply been received as to the other important question stemming from Matt.16 . how do the powers given to Peter and the other Apostles manage to end up on the shoulders of the papacy?
**
To my mind these answers would be of paramount interest to all Christians, never mind Catholics, Orthodox and Roman Catholics.
I notice you do not come up with any answers!

 

[rovimax]

i have read some early fathers talking about peter and paul establishing the church at rome but our Lord never called out paul, like he did peter. so what if peter is seen as a small stone and a sinner, are’nt we all. peters being a sinner makes our Lords choice of him even more significant

Yes Peter did sinned but it doesn’t make a difference. We believed he was used and guided by the Holy Spirit when he wrote his epistles 1Peter and 2Peter. they were the words of God right?

Paul was called by Jesus in a different way read Acts 9.

 

[Javl]

We have indeed spoken at great length on Matt.16/19/. The question remains unanswered. What is the interpretation by the Church of Christ’s utterance in that scripture? No satisfactory reply has been received from Roman Catholics! Where is it in Scripture or Holy tradiition?.

This has been answered. Read previous posts.

Neither has any reply been received as to the other important question stemming from Matt.16 . how do the powers given to Peter and the other Apostles manage to end up on the shoulders of the papacy?

Wasn’t that authority passed on to their successors by the laying on of hands? Or did the authority end with the deaths of the Apostles? If it did, then what was the reason for Jesus building His Church?

To my mind these answers would be of paramount interest to all Christians, never mind Catholics, Orthodox and Roman Catholics.
I notice you do not come up with any answers!

Answers have been given, but you have ignored them. Please see previous posts.

For 1500 years the words of Jesus in Matthew 16 have been taken literally with no objection. Then suddenly someone decides that it is an analogy, or symbolic, and the controversy starts.

The majority of Catholic and Protestant theologians and scholars of today have settled the question. The words of Jesus to Peter are to be taken as literal. Peter IS the rock on which the Church was built, with Jesus as the cornerstone. The Keys to God’s Kingdom were given to Peter alone. The authority to forgive sins and to bind and to loose was given to all the Apostles. And, this authority did not end with the death of the Apostles, but was passed on to their successors.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[luckyfredsdad]

This has been answered. Read previous posts.

“**A gift in secret blinds their eyes, they know not because they will not understand.” Matt.Henry. 17th,Cent, Commentator!

**

Wasn’t that authority passed on to their successors by the laying on of hands? Or did the authority end with the deaths of the Apostles? If it did, then what was the reason for Jesus building His Church?

**What was passed on by ,‘the laying on of hands,’ was membership of the College of Bishops. Which on the deaths of the apostles became the magisterium. By the way, Jesus is the Church, we are but members of Christ, or as it is usually put, Children of God.
**

Answers have been given, but you have ignored them. Please see previous posts.

**If they have been given, quite a few people have missed them, perhaps they have not been answered as clearly s we would have liked! Perhaps you would point out just where they are, or which numbers cover them?cf
**

For 1500 years the words of Jesus in Matthew 16 have been taken literally with no objection. Then suddenly someone decides that it is an analogy, or symbolic, and the controversy starts.

**My first response to the above is you are just about right in your time scale1500 yrs! But we are now in the second millenium! Some where or other you have missed out the first 500yrs, well you are correct in that because according to Orthodox and Anglican scholars, as well as some Roman ones,the Petrine Claims as articulated on this board were none starters. The Rock was said by the Holy Fathers, certainly of the first 300 yrs to be either Christ or Peter’s faith. It was Pope Leo, that falsifier of canons, and forger,who first made any claims at all for the papacy and he was some 350yrs, after the Rock event!
**

The majority of Catholic and Protestant theologians and scholars of today have settled the question. The words of Jesus to Peter are to be taken as literal. Peter IS the rock on which the Church was built, with Jesus as the cornerstone. The Keys to God’s Kingdom were given to Peter alone. The authority to forgive sins and to bind and to loose was given to all the Apostles. And, this authority did not end with the death of the Apostles, but was passed on to their successors.

**You are letting your enthusiasm overtake your knowledge. The bulk of the fathers either as individual utterances or collectively in Ecumenical Councils knew nothing of the Claims.

**
PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Lapey]

Alhough I don’t recall saying which ones and I wouldn’t necessarily say the Roman church allows people to open their eyes all that much. The Roman church sometimes barely allows people to open their mouths in questioning. Joan of Arc was burned at the stake and then made a saint. But if you meant your post as a sense of humor, glad to know you have one.

Shaking sand from my sandals!

Peace and love of Christ be with you, good luck!

 

[Carlan]

**We have indeed spoken at great length on Matt.16/19/. The question remains unanswered. What is the interpretation by the Church of Christ’s utterance in that scripture? No satisfactory reply has been received from Roman Catholics! Where is it in Scripture or Holy tradiition?.

Neither has any reply been received as to the other important question stemming from Matt.16 . how do the powers given to Peter and the other Apostles manage to end up on the shoulders of the papacy?
**
To my mind these answers would be of paramount interest to all Christians, never mind Catholics, Orthodox and Roman Catholics.
I notice you do not come up with any answers!

The answers are in here, you just aren’t accepting, A closed mind is not able to recognize Truth.Carlan

 

[AwGusTeen]

I thought we were discussing the Roman church and whether Peter was the rock.

We were - until you threw out the “pedophile priest” tactic. If you wish to continue on topic, then please behave accordingly in your responses.