But are those two events "Peter-promoting" at all? His profession, Jesus' approval, and the "Peter-demoting" event that follows are also in Matthew:
I haven't been through all of Peter's mentions in Matthew and I don't expect all of them to be "Peter-promoting," but I went through several events and found a pattern. Nicodemus copied from the Gospel of Mark. All events will either have proof of copying or not. Those that do if they have additional information, regardless of whether they are "Peter-promoting" or not, need the additional information carefully scrutinized to find out why.
The comparison starts at the beginning of the event with Nicodemus copying the event from James [Mark] because he wasn't present:
Matthew 16:13 Now when Jesus came into the parts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, “Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?”
Mark 8:27 Jesus went out, with his disciples, into the villages of Caesarea Philippi. On the way he asked his disciples, “Who do men say that I am?”
Matthew 16:14 They said, “Some say John the Baptizer, some, Elijah, and others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”
Mark 8:28 They told him, “John the Baptizer, and others say Elijah, but others, one of the prophets.”
Matthew 16:15-16 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
Mark 8:29 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Peter answered, “You are the Christ.”
Then there is the add-on by the false teachers:
Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
Mat 16:18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Mat 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.”
Nicodemus did not copy these sections so where did they come from because he wasn't present? The are edits from the false teachers to build the Catholic Church. Then the accounts details match again:
Mat 16:20 Then he strictly charged the disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ.
Mark 8:30 commanded them that they should tell no one about him.
Mat 16:21 From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.
Mark 8:31 He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.
Mat 16:22 And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying, “Far be it from you, Lord! This shall never happen to you.”
Mark 8:32 He spoke to them openly. Peter took him, and began to rebuke him.
Mat 16:23 But he turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man.”
Mark 8:33 But he, turning around, and seeing his disciples, rebuked Peter, and said, “Get behind me, Satan! For you have in mind not the things of God, but the things of men.”
"This rock" could just as well be his profession, not him as an individual, especially since Jesus balled him out just afterwards as an agent of Satan for rebuking him.
It doesn't matter what the Rock means because it wasn't said by Jesus. It was the only section that Nicodemus didn't copied from Mark's author. It was added later. Note that there is another instance of Peter claiming that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the Living God. I think it's recorded by John. There is a much different reaction by Jesus and it is in a section that address false teachers. Ya think Jesus was giving us a message. Also, the words used in Matthew for Peter, "Simon Peter," are not typical for Nicodemus as he never knew Peter as Simon. More proof of the fraud!
In the storm, he walked on the water only briefly until his lack (or weak) faith made him sink. Now, if he had started dancing on the water, maybe the Catholics have a point. But Peter only appears to be the disciples' spokesman.
Doesn't matter what people think of it because if you so a similar analysis you will find that it didn't happen. It is fraud.
Document the false teachers' actions that you claim they made to the manuscripts.
You just reviewed one. Feel free to perform the same analysis on Jesus walking on water and you will also find it to be fraud.
