D
David
Guest
Why do Protestants think that Jesus, changed Simon’s name to Peter?
Peace
David
Peace
David
- Status
B
bmullins
Guest
Because of Luke 6:14?
[bibledrb]Luke 6:14[/bibldrb]
In most versions it says “whom he named Peter” or “whom he also named Peter.”
[bibledrb]Luke 6:14[/bibldrb]
In most versions it says “whom he named Peter” or “whom he also named Peter.”
D
DexUK
Guest
I don’t suppose they think any different than we do - that the Church was to be built upon the Rock that was Simon-Peter.
Where they differ from us is that they disagree with the Church’s doctrines which obviously weren’t all clearly laid out from the beginning but have been the subject of the prompting of the Holy Spirit over time.
Where they differ from us is that they disagree with the Church’s doctrines which obviously weren’t all clearly laid out from the beginning but have been the subject of the prompting of the Holy Spirit over time.
E
EnglishTeacher
Guest
Because he did? (Although often in the Bible, he is referred to as “Simon Peter,” so I supposed you could say that Jesus added the name Peter, rather than changed it.)
C
CSJ
Guest
They do place an importance of Peter’s role in the early Church and some will even admit to his primacy, but that is as far as they will admit, for the most part. Even if they admit of this leadership, they see it more in a pastoral role than of the papacy.
Most Protestants can not argue agains the apostoles’ authority because it is very explicit in Scripture, but they will quickly dismiss the succession of this authority. Their argument is based on the criteria for Judas’ successor in Acts. However, in the context of the entiriety of Scripture and of the early Church Fathers, this argument holds no substance.
God Bless,
CSJ
Most Protestants can not argue agains the apostoles’ authority because it is very explicit in Scripture, but they will quickly dismiss the succession of this authority. Their argument is based on the criteria for Judas’ successor in Acts. However, in the context of the entiriety of Scripture and of the early Church Fathers, this argument holds no substance.
God Bless,
CSJ
D
David
Guest
I am trying to understand what Protestants think, is the purpose of the change.
Peace
David
Peace
David
B
bmullins
Guest
Oh, sorry. You wen’t over my head there with the question, I simply misread it. Most don’t address why. They just accept that they did. When we talked about it in the churches I grew up in most of the time it was Jesus way of showing that Peter was ‘reborn’ as a new person and had nothing to do with what the name means.
I only remember one person preaching about the name meaning ‘rock’ in nearly 25 years. That fellow was saying that it was a play on words and that Jesus said “Peter you’re a tiny rock, but I’m a huge rock, and on me I will build my church.” Explaining that Jesus was using a pun to say that nothing was as important as Jesus and that Peter was insignificant (a pebble.) A very severe twisting of scripture/word meanings was necessary to get to that conclusion though.
F
followingtheway
Guest
Catholics “think” that too. It’s in the Bible.
C
couponfit
Guest
I won’t answer this but I thought it was funny the title! It caught my eye. All I could think was—“here we go!”
D
David
Guest
oops. I see what you’re saying. I was not taking a jab at Protestant thinking.
Peace
David
D
David
Guest
No apology needed. I enjoy reading your insightful posts. Thanks for responding.
Peace
David
C
Calgar
Guest
I’ve always thought it was because he was strong/dependable. I figured it was a good thing that Christ called him that.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
as far as I can tell in my discussions with some of them about this passage they don’t think he was called Peter (Cephas or Rock) but Rocky (little pebble) and somehow calling him a little rock affirmed his profession of faith.
L
ltwin
Guest
Jesus asked the disciples “Who do you say I am?” Peter responded, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” It is this rock and faith in this rock on which the church stands. Jesus naming him “rock” was in recognition of this revelation that was revealed by the Father, not man.
S
stewstew03
Guest
On this confession by Peter (that Jesus is the Messiah), which was revealed by God, Jesus would build his Church. Thus, just as Peter revealed God’s truth in his response to Jesus, the Church will reveal God’s truth to the world. This is also why Jesus honors Peter by giving him the keys to heaven.
See also Jn 1:42, and Lk 5:3-4.
D
David
Guest
Hello Itwin,
I am not understanding how your response explains, “why Simon’s name was changed to Peter?”
Peace brother
David
D
David
Guest
Hello Itwin, Do you think that anytime someone receives a revelation from the Father, that they should have a name change? Do think there may be more involved, in Simon’s “name change”? Have you studied other “name changes” in the Bible.
Peace
David
E
EnglishTeacher
Guest
Something worth thinking about: Any time in Scripture when God gives a person a new name, there is a highly significant reason – it is usually because God is giving them a new mission and purpose in life. Think of Abram/Abraham, Sarai/Sarah, Jacob/Israel, Saul/Paul, among others. It wasn’t just because God thought Peter was a good, dependable guy.
T
thessalonian
Guest
Protestants are all over the map on Peter. Some will acknowledge that he was the early Church leader and some willl almost deny he is an apostle. The anti-catholic ones are afraid of Peter and will not acknowledge his leadership, that his name means rock, that Christ gave him the keys to the kingdom. They are much more willing to call James the leader of the twelve based on his discource in Acts 15. You can present them with 40 proofs that Peter was the leader of the 12 and they will downplay and ignore and dance around with them. That is my experience.
T
TraditonRules
Guest
Basically it is about infallibility, Catholics claim that is tradition while Protestants claim its the bible. Both have compelling arguments to back their case.
- Status