Come on, be objective, honest, and admit that Matthew 16:18 is about saint Peter.

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,262
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Here's the passage, and a comment from a commentary.

Matthew 16:13-20 Revised Version of 1885 Now when Jesus came into the parts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Who do men say that the Son of man is? (14) And they said, Some say John the Baptist; some, Elijah: and others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. (15) He saith unto them, But who say ye that I am? (16) And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. (17) And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jonah: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. (18) And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. (19) I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (20) Then charged he the disciples that they should tell no man that he was the Christ.​
Comment on Mat 16:18 by Albert Barnes, once a Presbyterian minister, now deceased.
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter - The word “Peter,” in Greek, means “a rock.” It was given to Simon by Christ when he called him to be a disciple, Joh 1:42
Cephas is a Syriac word, meaning the same as Peter - a rock, or stone. The meaning of this phrase may be thus expressed: “Thou, in saying that I am the Son of God, hast called me by a name expressive of my true character. I, also, have given to thee a name expressive of your character. I have called you Peter, a rock, denoting firmness, solidity, stability, and your confession has shown that the name is appropriate. I see that you are worthy of the name, and will be a distinguished support of my religion.”

And upon this rock ... - This passage has given rise to many different interpretations. Some have supposed that the word “rock” refers to Peter’s confession, and that Jesus meant to say, upon this rock, this truth that thou hast confessed, that I am the Messiah and upon confessions of this from all believers, I will build my church. Confessions like this shall be the test of piety, and in such confessions shall my church stand amid the flames of persecution, the fury of the gates of hell. Others have thought that Jesus referred to himself. Christ is called a rock, Isa 28:16; 1Pe 2:8. And it has been thought that he turned from Peter to himself, and said, “Upon this rock, this truth that I am the Messiah - upon myself as the Messiah, I will build my church.” Both these interpretations, though plausible, seem forced upon the passage to avoid the main difficulty in it. Another interpretation is, that the word “rock” refers to Peter himself.

This is the obvious meaning of the passage; and had it not been that the Church of Rome has abused it, and applied it to what was never intended, no other interpretation would have been sought for.
“Thou art a rock. Thou hast shown thyself firm, and suitable for the work of laying the foundation of the church. Upon thee will I build it. Thou shalt be highly honored; thou shalt be first in making known the gospel to both Jews and Gentiles.”​
This was accomplished. See Acts 2:14-36, where he first preached to the Jews, and Acts 10, where he preached the gospel to Cornelius and his neighbors, who were Gentiles. Peter had thus the honor of laying the foundation of the church among the Jews and Gentiles; and this is the plain meaning of this passage. See also Gal 2:9.

But Christ did not mean, as the Roman Catholics say he did, to exalt Peter to supreme authority above all the other apostles, or to say that he was the only one upon whom he would rear his church. See Acts 15, where the advice of James, and not that of Peter, was followed. See also Gal 2:11, where Paul withstood Peter to his face, because he was to be blamed - a thing which could not have happened if Christ (as the Roman Catholics say [here the commentator is wrong, the Catholic Church does not say this and never has. Saint Peter and his successors are men, sinners like others, fallible, capable of error, liable to correction. It is a common error among Protestants to suppose things about Catholic teaching that are simply wrong.]) meant that Peter was absolute and infallible [Christ did not mean that and Catholics do not think that he did. Giving saint Peter the keys of the kingdom did not make Peter infallible in every word and every deed he did.]. More than all, it is not said here, or anywhere else in the Bible, that Peter would have infallible successors who would be the vicegerents of Christ and the head of the church. The whole meaning of the passage is this: “I will make you the honored instrument of making known my gospel first to Jews and Gentiles, and I will make you a firm and distinguished preacher in building my church.”

Will build my church - This refers to the custom of building in Judea upon a rock or other very firm foundation. See the notes at Mat 7:24. The word “church” literally means “those called out,” and often means an assembly or congregation. See Act 19:32, Greek; Act 7:38. It is applied to Christians as being “called out” from the world. It means sometimes the whole body of believers, Eph 1:22; 1Co 10:32. This is its meaning in this place. It means, also, a particular society of believers worshipping in one place, Act 8:1; Act 9:31; 1Co 1:2, etc.; sometimes, also, a society in a single house, as Rom 16:5. In common language it means the church visible - i. e., all who profess religion; or invisible, i. e., all who are real Christians, professors or not.

And the gates of hell ... - Ancient cities were surrounded by walls. In the gates by which they were entered were the principal places for holding courts, transacting business, and deliberating on public matters. See the notes at Mat 7:13. Compare the notes at Job 29:7. See also Deu 22:4; 1Sa 4:18; Jer 36:10; Gen 19:1; Psa 69:12; Psa 9:14; Pro 1:21. The word “gates,” therefore, is used for counsels, designs, machinations, evil purposes.
“Hell” means, here, the place of departed spirits, particularly evil spirits; and the meaning of the passage is, that all the plots, stratagems, and machinations of the enemies of the church would not be able to overcome it a promise that has been remarkably fulfilled.
 

BruceLeiter

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2024
Messages
280
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Widow/Widower
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
And Revelation 21 says: Rev 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
The city it refers to is the new Jerusalem, a symbolic presentation of the church. How do I know? Well, it comes down from heaven with Jesus, the Lamb, to the new earth (21:1) at Jesus' second coming; and all the Apostles are the foundations, because of their eyewitness' testimonies.
 

JustTheFacts

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2024
Messages
184
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Actually, Jesus never stated those words so it’s a moot point trying to figure them out.
 

Lanman87

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
769
Age
55
Location
Bible Belt
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Actually, Jesus never stated those words so it’s a moot point trying to figure them out.
Great, another person who thinks that the New Testament, in its current form, that was/is affirmed by a consensus of Christians throughout history, is wrong.
 

Lanman87

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
769
Age
55
Location
Bible Belt
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I agree with this statement

The whole meaning of the passage is this: “I will make you the honored instrument of making known my gospel first to Jews and Gentiles, and I will make you a firm and distinguished preacher in building my church.”

I don't think anyone disputes that Peter was set aside to be a leader and holds the distinction of being the apostle to first preach the Gospel and was therefore, foundational to the building and growing of the early converts to Christianity.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,262
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I agree with this statement

The whole meaning of the passage is this: “I will make you the honored instrument of making known my gospel first to Jews and Gentiles, and I will make you a firm and distinguished preacher in building my church.”

I don't think anyone disputes that Peter was set aside to be a leader and holds the distinction of being the apostle to first preach the Gospel and was therefore, foundational to the building and growing of the early converts to Christianity.
Saint Peter was called to feed Christ's sheep. His successors are also called to feed the sheep of God.

Matthew 16-18.jpgJohn21.jpg
 
Last edited:

JustTheFacts

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2024
Messages
184
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
if you want to connect John’s account of Jesus’ exchange with Peter telling him to feed Jesus’ lambs and sheep to Matthew 16:18, you should take a closer look at the details. I would agree with you if Jesus referred to Peter as “Peter” or the ”rock.” However, Jesus went out of his way to call Peter the son of Peter’s father— three times. Through that Jesus told the world not to believe what the Catholic Church will tell you about Peter, he is just a man chosen to be a disciple. Yes, Revelation will tell you twice that Peter was executed, just as Jesus prophesied, but it also warns against using Peter to rule over the Church. The details of Jesus‘ prophetic warnings are incredible as they have all come true.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,262
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
if you want to connect John’s account of Jesus’ exchange with Peter telling him to feed Jesus’ lambs and sheep to Matthew 16:18, you should take a closer look at the details. I would agree with you if Jesus referred to Peter as “Peter” or the ”rock.” However, Jesus went out of his way to call Peter the son of Peter’s father— three times. Through that Jesus told the world not to believe what the Catholic Church will tell you about Peter, he is just a man chosen to be a disciple. Yes, Revelation will tell you twice that Peter was executed, just as Jesus prophesied, but it also warns against using Peter to rule over the Church. The details of Jesus‘ prophetic warnings are incredible as they have all come true.
You are mistaken if you believe that Catholics are taught to believe that saint Peter is anything but a man and a sinner at that.

Through that Jesus told the world not to believe what the Catholic Church will tell you about Peter, he is just a man chosen to be a disciple.
Catholics are well aware that every priest and every bishop including the pope is a man and a sinner and consequently every one of them confesses his sins both to God and to his brother in the priesthood. And every Catholic knows that his priest and his bishop say many things that are mistaken because they are men like other men with all the faults of men; they are not infallible, they do not know everything, they make poor decisions sometimes, they lie at times even if they are not fully conscious of the lies that they tell. This is the common lot of humanity and priests, bishops, and the pope all share in it.

Yes, Revelation will tell you twice that Peter was executed, just as Jesus prophesied, but it also warns against using Peter to rule over the Church.
Saint Peter's role is to feed the sheep, tend to them, and guide them as a shepherd would. His role is not to dominate them as an emperor or king might. It is a role of service, as Jesus predicted, where the leader is the servant of all. Thus, the pope is referred to as the servant of the servants of God. His duty is to guide, to work tirelessly to keep the sheep safe, to fend off the wolves that threaten God's flock, and to lead them to pastures where they can graze safely, free from corrupting heresies and deceit.
 

JustTheFacts

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2024
Messages
184
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I don't have any dog in a fight with you over Catholic theology. I'm an observation and document expert analyst who ignores theology to determine what God is telling us. If you want to debate the word, then tell me what sections I’m misinterpreting and why.

John told us that everyone they chose as leaders of the Church were false teachers (1 John 2:18-19). Jesus warned the disciples about being misled (Mark 13:5). What happened to these false teachers? Did they just get up and leave the church after the disciples died? The answer is in prophecy- they took over the Church.

The evidence in the Gospels prove that Matthew 16:17-19 was never stated by Jesus. Peter walking on water also never happened. If you closely analyze those sections of Gospel and compare the versions in Matthew, Mark, and John, its obvious that Matthew's author copied those events from Mark’s author because he wasn’t present then those sections elevating the role of Peter were added later.
 

JustTheFacts

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2024
Messages
184
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Great, another person who thinks that the New Testament, in its current form, that was/is affirmed by a consensus of Christians throughout history, is wrong.
Actually completely opposite. My research shows that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John are eyewitness statements written by disciples of Jesus. This means that Deuteronomy requirements for proving Jesus to all nations and people has been validated and verified as every Christian should expect.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,262
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I don't have any dog in a fight with you over Catholic theology. I'm an observation and document expert analyst who ignores theology to determine what God is telling us. If you want to debate the word, then tell me what sections I’m misinterpreting and why.

Your post inaccurately represented Catholic Church doctrine, which is grounded in biblical teachings. It portrayed a falsehood as a Catholic belief, akin to how Satan presented a lie to Eve as though it were God's words. The rebuttal of Satan's deception lies in the truth of God's words, and avoiding error requires rejecting Satan's falsehoods. In the same vein, the truth counters your misrepresentation, which is why I shared two photos of Bible pages that contradicted the claim your post attributed to Catholic doctrine.

John told us that everyone they chose as leaders of the Church were false teachers (1 John 2:18-19). Jesus warned the disciples about being misled (Mark 13:5). What happened to these false teachers? Did they just get up and leave the church after the disciples died? The answer is in prophecy- they took over the Church.

1 John 2:18-19 NAB Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that the antichrist was coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. Thus we know this is the last hour. (19) They went out from us, but they were not really of our number; if they had been, they would have remained with us. Their desertion shows that none of them was of our number.
Those who departed from the Church, claiming to be its missionaries, were in fact individuals who masqueraded as authentic interpreters of holy scripture and trustworthy guides whom devout Christians should heed. This was the falsehood they propagated. They posed as envoys of God and His divine will. The rebuttal to their deception lies in the reality that the true bearers of God's word are the apostles appointed by Jesus and their rightful successors, who offer sincere and accurate exegesis of the holy scriptures.

From your writing, it appears you subscribe to a theory of a "great apostasy" occurring shortly after the apostles' deaths. I disagree with this perspective as it lacks scriptural, historical, and truthful basis. It is one of the deceptions that Satan's agents propagate to attract followers. These are the individuals Saint Peter cautioned against, those who would exploit their followers' souls for profit (2 Peter 2:3). The counter to these falsehoods is to embrace Christ as the eternal Truth, whose reliability and availability never waver (John 8:31-32).​

The evidence in the Gospels prove that Matthew 16:17-19 was never stated by Jesus. Peter walking on water also never happened. If you closely analyze those sections of Gospel and compare the versions in Matthew, Mark, and John, its obvious that Matthew's author copied those events from Mark’s author because he wasn’t present then those sections elevating the role of Peter were added later.

You have disclosed the motivation behind your posts: the assertion that the holy scriptures are untrustworthy. You reject what Christ stated, as well as the testimonies of the apostles about their experiences and observations. Such grave inaccuracies in your statements make it evident that they do not originate from God. Instead, they stem from another source, one known for deception, the father of lies (John 8:44).
 

JustTheFacts

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2024
Messages
184
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Your post inaccurately represented Catholic Church doctrine, which is grounded in biblical teachings. It portrayed a falsehood as a Catholic belief, akin to how Satan presented a lie to Eve as though it were God's words. The rebuttal of Satan's deception lies in the truth of God's words, and avoiding error requires rejecting Satan's falsehoods. In the same vein, the truth counters your misrepresentation, which is why I shared two photos of Bible pages that contradicted the claim your post attributed to Catholic doctrine.


1 John 2:18-19 NAB Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that the antichrist was coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. Thus we know this is the last hour. (19) They went out from us, but they were not really of our number; if they had been, they would have remained with us. Their desertion shows that none of them was of our number.
Those who departed from the Church, claiming to be its missionaries, were in fact individuals who masqueraded as authentic interpreters of holy scripture and trustworthy guides whom devout Christians should heed. This was the falsehood they propagated. They posed as envoys of God and His divine will. The rebuttal to their deception lies in the reality that the true bearers of God's word are the apostles appointed by Jesus and their rightful successors, who offer sincere and accurate exegesis of the holy scriptures.​
From your writing, it appears you subscribe to a theory of a "great apostasy" occurring shortly after the apostles' deaths. I disagree with this perspective as it lacks scriptural, historical, and truthful basis. It is one of the deceptions that Satan's agents propagate to attract followers. These are the individuals Saint Peter cautioned against, those who would exploit their followers' souls for profit (2 Peter 2:3). The counter to these falsehoods is to embrace Christ as the eternal Truth, whose reliability and availability never waver (John 8:31-32).​



You have disclosed the motivation behind your posts: the assertion that the holy scriptures are untrustworthy. You reject what Christ stated, as well as the testimonies of the apostles about their experiences and observations. Such grave inaccuracies in your statements make it evident that they do not originate from God. Instead, they stem from another source, one known for deception, the father of lies (John 8:44).

Where is your proof that Catholic Doctrine is the word of God? I’ll tell you in case you don’t know; it is in your Catechism #80, #81, and #82 leading to #552 and #553. It is all theology based on Matthew 16:17-19 Jesus assigning Peter, Matthew 14:28-31 Peter walking on water, and John 21:15-17 with Jesus telling Peter to
feed and lead. But then I already discussed evidence that the sections in Matthew were copied by the author but edited later. This is my career training and expertise. Are you disputing my findings? I also found evidence Jesus specifically warned about elevating Peter in the words he used in that e in John.

In contrast to your baseless allegation that I believe the Holy Scriptures are untrustworthy, Jesus stated that heaven and earth will pass away, but his words never will. I fully believe that. I also believe Jesus’ warnings and the the warnings through prophecy that God provided the world about the corruption of false teachers.

Rather than attack me and my credibility, pick out one conclusion- even one of those three sections referenced above and let’s look in-depth at them. try to it wrong through the word of God.
 

BruceLeiter

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2024
Messages
280
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Widow/Widower
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Actually, Jesus never stated those words so it’s a moot point trying to figure them out.
So, do you only accept Jesus' words and not the words of the rest of the Bible, which declares it is God's Word?
 

Lanman87

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
769
Age
55
Location
Bible Belt
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Actually completely opposite. My research shows that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John are eyewitness statements written by disciples of Jesus. This means that Deuteronomy requirements for proving Jesus to all nations and people has been validated and verified as every Christian should expect.

Then why would you say this

"Actually, Jesus never stated those words so it’s a moot point trying to figure them out."

Is the New Testament wrong or not? Is it accurate or Not?
 

JustTheFacts

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2024
Messages
184
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
So, do you only accept Jesus' words and not the words of the rest of the Bible, which declares it is God's Word?
i follow the Law of God. Deuteronomy 18:21-22 gives me the guidelines for a prophet to be from God. Deuteronomy 17:6 and 19:15 for proving that Jesus is the Messiah. No where did God allow the words of “inspired men” to be the word of God. That is a creation of false teachers who, through it, were validated to speak for God.
 
Last edited:

JustTheFacts

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2024
Messages
184
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Then why would you say this

"Actually, Jesus never stated those words so it’s a moot point trying to figure them out."

Is the New Testament wrong or not? Is it accurate or Not?
Thank you for that very good question. Every word of Jesus is the truth unless proven to be part of the false teacher corruption. John told us the Holy Spirit reminded the disciples of everything. The Holy Spirit made sure they got every detail just right in their documents so that fraud could be identified. Peter walking on water, the edits to the tax collector story in Matthew, and Matthew 16:17:19 are the confirmed edits I’ve found in Matthew, Mark, and John thus far. I believe there have been other edits to build up Peter, such as Peter always mentioned first and comments like, “Peter and the disciples”. But that corruption has no effect of the words of Jesus or the message so they don’t really matter.
 

Uncle_Sol

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2024
Messages
59
Age
69
Location
England (U.K.)
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I agree with this statement

The whole meaning of the passage is this: “I will make you the honored instrument of making known my gospel first to Jews and Gentiles, and I will make you a firm and distinguished preacher in building my church.”

I don't think anyone disputes that Peter was set aside to be a leader and holds the distinction of being the apostle to first preach the Gospel and was therefore, foundational to the building and growing of the early converts to Christianity.
I think the part of Jesus' thrust here, that's most relevant to us, is slightly less ad hominem than the quoted sentence above seems to imply. The conclusion beneath it is nearer the mark in that specific respect.

I think Jesus is addressing especially "whoever like you".

Please see my comment to the schism thread.
 

Lanman87

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
769
Age
55
Location
Bible Belt
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Thank you for that very good question. Every word of Jesus is the truth unless proven to be part of the false teacher corruption. John told us the Holy Spirit reminded the disciples of everything. The Holy Spirit made sure they got every detail just right in their documents so that fraud could be identified. Peter walking on water, the edits to the tax collector story in Matthew, and Matthew 16:17:19 are the confirmed edits I’ve found in Matthew, Mark, and John thus far. I believe there have been other edits to build up Peter, such as Peter always mentioned first and comments like, “Peter and the disciples”. But that corruption has no effect of the words of Jesus or the message so they don’t really matter.
So you don't believe in the inerrancy of Scripture and rely on your own understanding to decide which parts have error and which parts are not.

That is what I gather you are saying.
 

JustTheFacts

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2024
Messages
184
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Following the Word of God through prophecy tells me that the Bible is not inerrant. The Bible was assembled by men and men have said it is inerrant. I have found no word of God proving them to be right.
 
Top Bottom