ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Who Is The Rock

In Matthew 16:13-20, what is the ROCK Jesus is referring to?

Peter being the ROCK, or Peter's confession of who CHRIST IS?

Join Our Free Dating and Take The Who Is Jesus Bible Quiz
 ---Rob on 9/10/16
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Post a New Blog



//when someone is trying to murder you.---Samuelbb7

Really? Those Swiss Guards are the worst attackers in the history of mankind.

Even though people claim the RCC tried to kill them, somehow they ALL manage to live.

Next people claim the RCC tried to stop people from leaving the Catholic Church, but over 60,000 different denomination manage to operate harmful free.

//Saying the Pope is the Holy Father and Head of the Church, instead of Christ is PROOF from its beginning the Catholics are not and never has been the CHURCH//

If that is TRUE you would give a direct quote from the CCC as PROOF instead of your OWN WORDS.
---Nicole_Lacey on 10/4/16


John and Samuel, STOP calling them Reformers!

They didn't reform anything!

You all claim all kinds of falsehoods to support Luther and Calvin LEAVING the Catholic Church and starting their own denomination.

OKAY! Just stop calling them Reformers. That is my complain!

You don't understand what the word 'reform' means!

Orthodox and Catholics doesn't even use that word!

the Great Schism:

1.a split or division between strongly opposed sections or parties, caused by differences in opinion or belief.

synonyms: division split rift breach rupture break separation

Note the word 'Reform or Reformers are not used.

Luther and Calvin fooled you all by calling themselves Reformers
---Nicole_Lacey on 10/4/16


Rob, according to your own criterion, you have given PROOF that Orthodoxy IS the original Church, because we never believed that.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 10/4/16


Saying the Pope is the Holy Father and Head of the Church, instead of Christ, is PROOF from its beginning the Catholics are not and never has been the CHURCH.

Catholics are part of the ANTI-CHRIST.
---Rob on 10/4/16


Good points and questions John.

Nicole when someone is trying to murder you. Because you are trying to reform and bring the Church back to the Bible. It is not the fault of the reformers. But the fault of those trying to murder them.

A number of Reformers were murdered. Also hundreds of thousands of Protestants were also murdered.

True latter Protestants did also murder Roman Catholics.

But neither of these people who murdered people can claim to be following Jesus. So if a Pope murders people he is no longer an Apostle of Christ but a servant of Satan.
---Samuelbb7 on 10/4/16




Nicole said, "YOU LEFT THE FAMILY!
Go start your own wealth if you can."

Nicole what you must Historically establish is the following:

1. Did these Early Believers believe what the eastern orthodox and rcc believes today?

2. What the terms "Orthodox." and "Catholics." mean in the original usage??

3. What did the Early Believers mean by using the word, "Tradition."
---john9346 on 10/3/16


Jesus Christ is the ROCK. 1Cor 10:4

If Peter were made head of the church at the time of Jesus' word play, then we should all be following Peter's example of cutting off someone's ear and denying Christ three times. It is amazing how far some will go to make a religious dogma out of a misinterpretation.


---Jerry6593 on 10/4/16


Nicole,

First, you state a claim then you provide support for that claim when that claim is challenged. I have not made any claims, but responded to your assertions.

Here is what you said to me, ""John, stop and think about it. The only Christian churches before the 16th century was the Orthodox and Catholic."

So, for the Second time can you establish forus the following:


1. Did these Early Believers believe what the eastern orthodox and rcc believes today?

2. What the terms "Orthodox." and "Catholics." mean in the original usage??

3. What did the Early Believers mean by using the word, "Tradition."
---john9346 on 10/3/16


John, you are dodging. Name a Protestant Church after the 16 century that was around before the 14 century?

Admit you can't because those Churches Founders were not born yet.

Orthodox is a schism, not so with you.

They still held on to Jesus' VALID PRIESTHOOD. Thus has all 7 Sacraments not only 2 as you all.

//reformers themselves looked and learned from the church fathers in starting the reformation. ---john9346

You can't reform what you left!
Leaving made them lose the Priesthood causing 5 Sacraments unavailable to you.

You can't tell your father 'I don't what anything to do with you', and STILL expect money as your inheritance.

YOU LEFT THE FAMILY!
Go start your own wealth if you can
---Nicole_Lacey on 10/3/16


Nicole states, "John, stop and think about it. The only Christian churches before the 16th century was the Orthodox and Catholic."

Nicole what you must Historically establish is the following:

1. Did these Early Believers believe what the eastern orthodox and rcc believes today?

2. What the terms "Orthodox." and "Catholics." mean in the original usage??

3. What did the Early Believers mean by using the word, "Tradition."

Lastly we must not forget the reformers themselves looked and learned from the church fathers in starting the reformation.
---john9346 on 10/3/16




John, stop and think about it. The only Christian churches before the 16th century was the Orthodox and Catholic.

If you were a Christian you were ONLY a Orthodox or Catholic.

After the 16 century the Reformer came along. The names meaning there is something prior needing to be reform.

When they came on the scene in the 16th century there was an explosion of Protestant denominations.

Remember Protestant in itself alludes to something prior so that they can protest against. Lutheran, Anglican, Baptist and many came along. All of these religions happened at the start of 16th century.

Prove to me that you can find any Protestant Denomination before the 14th century?
---Nicole_Lacey on 10/2/16


Nicole states, "And that's thanks to the RCC who compiled the Bible in the 5th Century."

This is a Historical Error, the rcc didn't compile the bible until April of 1546 at the 4th session of the Council of Trent.

I am sure we all know the bible was known, quoted, and defended for thousands of years before 1546.

For example, the Council of Laodicea in Canon 60 in the fourth century listed the books of "Scripture."
---john9346 on 10/2/16


//What should I google?---David

Yes, just type Catholic Bible 101 The Early Church Fathers

The website is 'Catholic Bible 101.

The Early Church Fathers is the topic.

You can also goggle each person with their titles to find the same information.

Even Wikipedia has the same information.

The RCC never hides it's pass.

The RCC corrects any false statements accredited to them.

We have enough bad history as it is without any one adding to them.

The RCC learns from Her mistakes. Because She doesn't want any of Her children to repeat the errors.

Can anyone say the same for Protestant Denominations?

Just NAME ONE who displays it's error. ONE please.
---Nicole_Lacey on 10/2/16


Nicole
Thanks for the help. The Bible you mention, Is there one online? What should I google?
---David on 10/2/16


1 Clement, a letter written by Clement of Rome, a disciple of Peter.

The Didache. The full Greek title translates to "The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles".
The Apology of Quadratus of Athens.
The Apology of Aristides.
The Epistle of Barnabas, attributed to Barnabas who traveled with Paul. Most scholars believe this was actually written by someone else.

The Disputation of Jason and Papiscus attributed to Aristo of Pella.

The Epistle to Diognetus. The letter is attributed to "Mathetes", meaning "Disciple". The author calls himself "a Disciple of Apostles",---'How many writings of those who were disciples of the first 12 apostles (plus Paul) are available today?'- Christianity
---Nicole_Lacey on 10/1/16


David, St. POLYCARP, Bishop of Smyrna was one of the immediate disciples of St. JOHN the Evangelist (The Beloved Disciple)


St. IRANAEUS or IRENAEUS, Bishop of Lyons, had seen and heard the holy Bishop Polycarp (d. 155) at Smyrna.


St. IGNATIUS of Antioch was an Apostolic Father of the Church, a disciple, with Saint POLYCARP, of Saint John the Evangelist, and the third bishop of Antioch, the former See of Peter before he went to Rome..

During his months of captivity he wrote seven letters to Christian congregations in the Mediterranean, who he referred to generally as the Catholic (universal) Church thus coining the term for the first time.

--Catholic Bible 101 The Early Church Fathers
---Nicole_Lacey on 10/1/16


Read These Insightful Articles About VoIP Service


Nicole
The Catholic Church was the first Church to organize, and this is why they have a history. And as we know, other churches, like the Protestants, have a relatively short history, which are readily available. Only their history is confined to those who founded them.

But to read a history, a history which dates all the way back to the 12 Apostles and Paul? You have to admit, that would be a fascinating book to read. I just want to read about the first 100 years of the Catholic Church. Is that readily available, in book form?

I'd give 100 dollars to read that book, to hear in their own words what happened to the Apostles, for I believe they are the only ones who have this information.
---David on 10/1/16


//The RCC does make it's history known.//

Open your eyes and go to Vatican.VA

//and some false statements. Put out by the RCC.//

You made that up! Even Secular Scholars agrees with the RCC's History

//The RCC ignores that it was one with the Orthodox until the Bishop of Rome tried to usurp the power//

All of it is in Vatican.VA.

No usurping, because Jesus made Peter Vicar. No sharing of headship. The other Apostles didn't know Jesus' Question. Peter Did!

//That culminated in the Great Schism of 1055//

If you went to Vatican.Va you would know that the year was 1054 not 1055.

//This places the claim they established the Bible false---Samuelbb7

No it doesn't.
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/30/16


The RCC does make it's history known.

But there are two histories of the RCC. There is the somewhat sanitized version with assumptions and some false statements. Put out by the RCC.

Then there is Encyclopedia Britannica and other History only reports.

The RCC ignores that it was one with the Orthodox until the Bishop of Rome tried to usurp the power and become the head of all Christians by proclaiming himself the Vicar of Christ alone.

That culminated in the Great Schism of 1055.

This places the claim they established the Bible false since they were not the same group then. Nor that all the so called Popes were alone the leaders when the Orthodox Bishop was equal leader.
---Samuelbb7 on 9/30/16


//The Bible is also a historical record of the church, but it's been made available for everyone to see.//

And that's thanks to the RCC who compiled the Bible in the 5th Century.

Plus She reads chapters (OT, NT and Gospel) from the Bible every Sunday to make sure the Faithful who can't read has the right to hear the Bible.

//Why doesn't the Catholic Church make their history readily available, for all to see?---David

What part of the Vatican.VA isn't available for public?

It's in several Languages including Latin.

Tell me of any other Christian or Protestant websites that is displayed in multiple languages for it's faithful?

What more do you want the RCC do to display it's history pass 60 AD?
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/30/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Settlements


Vatican.VA is the best way to access TRUE historical records.The RCC believes the GOOD, BAD and UGLY should ALWAYS be known.
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/29/16


Nicole
The Bible is also a historical record of the church, but it's been made available for everyone to see. Why doesn't the Catholic Church make their history readily available, for all to see?

Don't you think this information, if true, is vital for every believer to read, in the absence of proof, their authority comes from God?
---David on 9/30/16


//repeating what the 11 Apostles did when electing Matthias.//

Only with the election of a Pope.

Note not everyone were allowed to vote for Matthias, but only a few.

The college of Bishops today are the replacements of Apostles.

The Pope appoints Cardinals and Bishops as Jesus appointed the Apostles. (New Cardinals and Bishops after each death) Which in turn the Cardinals appoints the new Pope after his death.

New Bishop positions are made according to growth of new Catholics.
Thus more Catholic means more Bishops.

Pope is the Vicar of Christ. Matt 16:13-19

Vatican.VA is the best way to access TRUE historical records.

The RCC believes the GOOD, BAD and UGLY should ALWAYS be known.
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/29/16


Nicole
It would be cool if the Catholic Church had some history on Matthias. Do you know from the Catholic records, if Matthias had the same power to heal as the other 12?

I've always been curious of this.
---David on 9/29/16


Nicole
So basically the Catholic Church, over these many years, has just been repeating what the 11 Apostles did when electing Matthias. As each Apostle died, they were replaced by this same election process.

The Pope is Peters replacement, and the 115 Cardinals represent the 11. And the Catholic Church believes their mandate, to create more than the original 12 Apostles, comes from (Matthew 28:18-20). The believer must therefore trust in the historic records the church has kept over these many years, due to the absence of Gods power the original 12 had.

Being a history nut, can I gain access to these records? That would be fascinating!!!
---David on 9/29/16


Shop For Christian Homeschool Curriculum


//By faith we take God at his word, but if a man says he is ordained by God, for him, we need proof. Because our faith should be in God, not in man.---David

Yes, just saying you are ordained isn't enough.

RCC/Orthodox Ordained Priests had hands on and prayed over them at their ordination by Bishops who had hands on them at their ordination.

All the way back to the 11 Apostles in Acts 1:26 who were appointed by Jesus. (Paul also because he was appointed by Jesus so he could lay his hands on Timothy and Titus making them Priest/Bishops)
No BREAKAGE in that line of ordination.

The 115 Cardinals are connected to the original 11
Apostles and Paul appointed by Jesus

Authority passed by Jesus Matthew 28:19
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/28/16


Just as there were 12 men in the beginning and it grow to millions, so it would be logical to understand that the 12 Apostle would grow to teach all Nations--Nicole_Lacey

Nicole
Your point is logical, but as you said earlier, and which I agree, disciples are students, but Apostles are Appointed by Jesus Christ.

The 115 Cardinals who elected the Pope are not Apostles. If they are, what proof does the Catholic Church have, which causes them to believe they are appointed by God?

By faith we take God at his word, but if a man says he is ordained by God, for him, we need proof. Because our faith should be in God, not in man.
When you take man at his word, without any proof, then you have put your faith in man.
---David on 9/28/16


//115 Cardinals. Why were there so many involved in this process when there were only 12 disciples chosen by God? And what proof, tells you they were given authority from a God?---David

Everyone agrees that Jesus had 12 Apostles to represent the 12 tribes of Israel.

Just as there were 12 men in the beginning and it grow to millions, so it would be logical to understand that the 12 Apostle would grow to teach all Nations.

Matt 28:18-20 Then Jesus came to them and said, All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. Therefore go and make DISCIPLES of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey all that I have commanded you.
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/27/16


Acts 1:26, when choosing the Pope. Is this correct?---David YES
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/26/16


Nicole
Now here's the conundrum, Matthias was chosen by eleven Apostles, eleven who received their authority and power from God. They were shown to have this authority, with power, because they could heal the sick and bring the dead back to life.

So for this reason, I would dare not question they had a God given authority to choose Matthias.

But when the Catholic Church appointed the last Pope, he was not elected by just eleven, he was elected by 115 Cardinals. Why were there so many involved in this process when there were only 12 disciples chosen by God? And what proof, tells you they were given authority from a God?
---David on 9/27/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Services


//Luke 22:31..I think it was to weaken Peter, which in turn would weaken the foundation of the church.---David

EXCELLENT POINT!
Never thought of that. Thanks

Even satan knows Peter is the Rock

//Acts 1:26, when choosing the Pope. Is this correct?---David YES

//All the Bible I know even the Roman Catholic ones are from Greek. Since all the Gospels were written in Greek.---Samuelbb7

No, all the earliest Bible that still exist today are written in Greek.

That's like people living the year of 4945 thinking since a Japanese's translation of the American Constitution is the only copy that the founding Fathers of America spoke Japanese not English.

NO, it means the English Original copy wasn't found.
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/26/16


Samuel
I can understand the Lord using the word "Rock" to mean foundation, but I can't see how the word "Pebble" fits.

If the Lord was saying "upon this pebble I will build my Church", what did the Lord mean by using the word Pebble?

Though I don't subscribe to the Catholic doctrine, I believe they are partially correct in their interpretation of this passage.

In (Luke 22:31) we read where Satan wanted to sift Peter. Why would Satan want to sift Peter above all the others? I think it was to weaken Peter, which in turn would weaken the foundation of the church.
---David on 9/26/16


But Nicole which Bible translation is from Aramaic? All the Bible I know even the Roman Catholic ones are from Greek. Since all the Gospels were written in Greek.

Thank you.
---Samuelbb7 on 9/25/16


Samuel, you claim Matthew wrote the Gospel in Greek, but when I prove it was written in Aramaic not Greek you claim it doesn't matter??

Okay, so stop changing the Greek word.

The Greek translation of Matthew uses Perta NOT Petros.

The Greek chose the large description NOT the smaller one.

//the word for rock in Aramaic (kepha) and Greek (petra)---Ruben 9/20/16

//how do Reconcile calling Peter and Paul liars and false teachers when you say they are lying about who is the Foundation of the church?.---Samuelbb7

That's like asking 'when did you STOP beating your wife' trick question.

It isn't nice!

We agree with the Bible.
So if you think we are lying you are ALSO calling the Bible a LIAR.
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/25/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Stores


So let me ask both of you how do Reconcile calling Peter and Paul liars and false teachers when you say they are lying about who is the Foundation of the church?

GOD love you.
---Samuelbb7 on 9/24/16

Nobody is lying, the Question that was ask is ,

Peter being the ROCK, or Peter's confession of who CHRIST IS?

The answers is Peter is the Rock.

In the Gospel of John, Jesus said this ,

" Jesus looked at him, and said, So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas

Cephas means ROCK, Yes or No!

Are you saying Jesus is lying??
---Ruben on 9/24/16


But a better term for Apostleship is office since his replacement wasn't directly sent by Jesus.--Nicole_Lacey on 9/23/16

Nicole
Very informative, and I think you have biblically, given me a better understanding of how the Catholic Church chooses the Pope.

The Catholic Church votes/casts Lots like they did in (Acts 1:26), when choosing the Pope. Is this correct?
---David on 9/25/16


Nicole since no one seems to have the books all that matters is the Greek.

Ruben Stongs and Thayers
Ptros, pet'-ros, apparently a primary word, a (piece of) rock (larger than G3037), as a name, Petrus, an apostle:Peter, rock. Small stone.

Hitchcock's Bible Names Dictionary
Peter:
a rock or stone

So let me ask both of you how do Reconcile calling Peter and Paul liars and false teachers when you say they are lying about who is the Foundation of the church?

GOD love you.
---Samuelbb7 on 9/24/16


Greek petros small stone. Then Petra large ..

---Samuelbb7 on 9/20/16

Samuel,

The Greek word for 'small stone' is lithos, not petros, used numerous times in the Bible (Mt. 4:6, 7:9, 21:42, count, 32 times in the New Testament). Protestant Greek scholars like D.A. Carson and Joseph Thayer admit there is no distinction in meaning between petros and petra in the Koine Greek of the New Testament. [Joseph H. Thayer, Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996), 507, D.A. Carson, "Matthew," in Frank E. Gaebelein, ed., The Expositor's Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984), vol. 8, 368.] Petra does mean 'rock', usually a 'large rock.' That is exactly what petros means.
---Ruben on 9/24/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Business Training


Samuel, HISTORY states Matthew wrote the Gospel in Aramaic:

*Around 180 Irenaeus of Lyons wrote that: Matthew also issued a written Gospel..in their own dialect,..(Against Heresies 3:1:1)

*Fifty years earlier Papias, bishop of Hieropolis in Asia Minor, wrote, "Matthew compiled the sayings [of the Lord] in the Aramaic language,..[cited by Eusebius in History of the Church 3:39])

*Eusebius himself declared that "Matthew..he committed his own Gospel to writing in his native tongue [Aramaic],..(History of the Church 3:24 [inter 300-325}--Catholic Answers

Jesus spoke to Peter in Aramaic not Greek.

You don't have any proof Jesus spoke to Peter in Greek which has nothing to do with multiple written language
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/23/16


No Jesus was not speaking Greek. But Matthew wrote it in Greek. So we should believe that he knew which words to pick.

Also when you make the Bible contradict itself. But saying follow Peter but don't believe what Peter wrote because Peter was wrong. Then you create a dilemma.

How can you follow Peter but say don't follow Peter. Then you have written to not follow Paul either. Again why are you saying to not follow Peter and Paul?

Why didn't they understand the truth and put lies in the Bible?

Why not believe they told the truth?
---Samuelbb7 on 9/23/16


//Matthias, the replacement, was also given the Apostleship of Judas//

Yes as per requirements in Acts 1:21-22

//what separates us, mere disciples, from being called Apostles?

Disciple is a student and an Apostle is Disciple but sent personally by Jesus. Apostle means messenger, he who is sent.

Jesus SENT 72 Disciples Luke 10:1 Matthias was one of the 72 sent by Jesus

This is why St. Paul states He is an Apostle Acts 9

//As a replacement, wasn't the Pope given Peter's Apostleship, as was Matthias when he became the replacement for Judas?--David

YES! But a better term for Apostleship is office since his replacement wasn't directly sent by Jesus.

The keys (Authority) goes with Peter's Office.
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/23/16


Logically if they replaced Judas who was the WORST of the Apostles, why not Peter who was given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven?
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/22/16


Nicole
True, and and I admit your answer is quite logical.
But Matthias, the replacement, was also given the Apostleship of Judas in (Acts1:25-26).

The question is what separates us, mere disciples, from being called Apostles?

If it is the Power and Authority of God, which showed Paul and the twelve to be Apostles, the Pope is a replacement for Peter. As a replacement, wasn't the Pope given Peter's Apostleship, as was Matthias when he became the replacement for Judas?

Does the Catholic Church believe the Pope has the same Power as Peter had?
---David on 9/23/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Software


//What proof does the Catholic Church have which shows this authority was passed on to the Pope?---David

Peter is the 1st Pope Matthew 16:13-19
V19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.

Acts 1:12-26
20 For, said Peter, it is written in the Book of Psalms:
May his place be deserted, let there be no one to dwell in it, and, May another take his place of leadership'"..23 So they nominated two men:..25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs. 26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias, so he was added to the eleven apostles.

Logically if they replaced Judas who was the WORST of the Apostles, why not Peter who was given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven?
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/22/16


//As I pointed out it is in Greek petros small stone.//

That is ridiculous.

Jesus wasn't speaking Greek to His Disciples.

So your theory isn't working.

//Then Petra large or huge stone. Like a Corner Stone would be.//

No, like a foundation for a large Church would be.

Jesus already said He was the Cornerstone.

Lets not change Jesus' Words.

//Since the idea peter is the corner stone does not agree with two of the passages.---Samuelbb7

This we agree that if someone is the corner stone then someone else has to be the Rock.

Jesus called Himself the CORNERSTONE and He called Peter the Rock.
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/21/16


Not really. Since are we saved because Jesus is the Christ the son of the Living GOD.

Or because Peter is the route through him salvation comes.

As I pointed out it is in Greek petros small stone. Then Petra large or huge stone. Like a Corner Stone would be.

The problem is that all three verse must agree. Since the idea peter is the corner stone does not agree with two of the passages. The understanding that does must be true.

Unless GOD contradicts himself.

Agape
---Samuelbb7 on 9/20/16


..So are you saved by Peter or Jesus?

Only Jesus Christ is our Savior.
---Samuelbb7 on 9/19/16

This came out of left field!

The question is did Jesus call Peter Rock? Yes

John 1:42 From the word for rock in Aramaic (kepha) and Greek (petra), respectivel

2786. Kephas kay-fas' of Chaldee origin (compare 3710), the Rock, Cephas (i.e. Kepha), a surname of Peter:--Cephas.

We know during Jesus time they spoke Aramaic,

And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? MK 15:34
---Ruben on 9/20/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Advertising


Petros or Peter rock or Stone G4703. Small little stone.


Rock Petra G4704. a rock, cliff or ledge a large stone.

1Peter 2:4-8 To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, ..., acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, ...So are you saved by Peter or Jesus?

Only Jesus Christ is our Savior.
---Samuelbb7 on 9/19/16


Mat 16:18
And I say also unto thee, That thouart Peter,G4074 and uponthisrockG4073 I will build mychurch,

Strong's concordance.

Also Peter says you are incorrect. He says the Church is built on Jesus. I Peter 2.
---Samuelbb7 on 9/11/16

Samuel,

He brought Simon to Jesus, who looked at him and said, You are Simon son of John. You are to be called Cephas (which is translated Peter[b]).
Footnotes:

John 1:42 Gk him
John 1:42 From the word for rock in Aramaic (kepha) and Greek (petra), respectivel

2786. Kephas kay-fas' of Chaldee origin (compare 3710), the Rock, Cephas (i.e. Kepha), a surname of Peter:--Cephas.

Case Closed!
---Ruben on 9/19/16


Isa 28:16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner [stone], a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
Psa 118:22 The stone [which] the builders refused is become the head [stone] of the corner.
The foundation Stone
The tried Stone
The rejected Stone
The corner Stone
The sure Foundation
Jesus Christ.
1Co 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
/How can a foundation stone be REJECTED?...So the Stone spoken about in 1 Peter 2:6 isn't the FOUNDATION ROCK!-Nicole_Lacey on 9/12/16
-The Bible is still right, and Nicole is still wrong.
---micha9344 on 9/18/16


//Correct Nicole that is what the RCC teaches. But they don't follow what Peter and Paul taught//

They do. Please give an example.

//They teach they were wrong.//

Please give the teaching from the RCC that supports what you claim.

//So as they were both Bishops should we not follow what they taught?//

The RCC does

//Why do you deny that Jesus is the foundation.//

Because Jesus said He is the Cornerstone and called Peter the Rock which He would build His Church.

I take Jesus at His Words.

So does Paul

//1Corithians 9:5---Samuelbb7

??

Back up to V4 and go to V6.

Mothers teach their children, but fathers are still head of the houses.
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/18/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Eating Disorders


Nicole
It's funny how much more we learn when given a challenging question. Keeps the Bible interesting, as it should be when seeking the truth.

For instance, I never really gave much thought to why the Lords Disciples were called Apostles. Now I know it's because of the Power God gave them.
---David on 9/18/16


Correct Nicole that is what the RCC teaches. But they don't follow what Peter and Paul taught. They teach they were wrong. So as they were both Bishops should we not follow what they taught?

Why do you deny that Jesus is the foundation.

1Corithians 9:5
Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
---Samuelbb7 on 9/18/16


I learned that the Gospel of Luke was combined with Acts as one Gospel. ---Nicole_Lacey on 9/16/16

Never really thought about it, but reading it this way does make make perfect sense. I'll give it a try.

I admit, Peter does appear to be to be the leader of the church, for everyone appears to be following him in the book of Acts.

Peter & Paul were both given the power from God to do miracles. But Satan also has a power to do miracles. But we know the authority given to Peter & Paul came from God, because Satan can not bring the dead back to life, a miracle performed by both Peter and Paul.

What proof does the Catholic Church have which shows this authority was passed on to the Pope?
---David on 9/17/16


//why wasn't Paul excommunicated?---David

Because Paul didn't do anything WRONG.

1 Cor 6:1-2 Excommunication are for GRAVE sins and REFUSAL of repentance.

//Ephesians 2:20-22 Paul does not say Peter alone is the foundation.//

No Jesus did.

But because of the Bible, the RCC DOES has the Pope and the College of Bishops as the fullest of Priesthood

//Why should we not follow the Teachings of Paul and Peter?---Samuelbb7 on 9/16/16

In the Catholic Church, a bishop is an ordained minister who holds the fullness of the sacrament of holy orders and is responsible for teaching doctrine, governing Catholics in his jurisdiction,and sanctifying the world and representing the Church-Wikipedia
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/17/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Travel Packages


Both Paul and Peter affirm the words of Isiah.

Ephesians 2:20-22 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone, In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Paul does not say Peter alone is the foundation. Why should we not follow the Teachings of Paul and Peter?
---Samuelbb7 on 9/16/16


//Peter is the foundation, got it.//

I will when you QUOTE JESUS saying He Himself is the ROCK FOUNDATION.


***/Cornerstone means it will be PLACED in the CORNER-ME\
//-Jesus is the cornerstone, placed on the foundation, got it.//

I guess you don't???

Cornerstones are not placed as a foundation on the bottom, but on the sides.
They are 2 DIFFERENT stones.

Got it?


//Isa 28:16...Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner [stone], a sure foundation:
-Nicole, as usual, is wrong.---micha9344

Wrong about Isaiah 28:16 being the OT Scriptures Jesus, Peter and Paul are quoting????

Don't forget about Palms 118:22-23. Because Jesus didn't
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/16/16


/He chose Peter to be the foundation.\
-Peter is the foundation, got it.
/Cornerstone means it will be PLACED in the CORNER.\
-Jesus is the cornerstone, placed on the foundation, got it.
-Yet we read this:
Isa 28:16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner [stone], a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
-Nicole, as usual, is wrong.
---micha9344 on 9/16/16


David, somehow, we Catholics read Acts differently.

I learned that the Gospel of Luke was combined with Acts as one Gospel. But later someone(?) separated them and named the later portion of the Gospel Acts.

Read the Gospel of Luke and immediately read Acts.

Jesus went to the Jews first. Peter does the same, but He is the FIRST one to see a Cornelius. Peter had dream to eat unclean food not Paul.

Peter's proclaims Gentiles are equal to Jews.
Lastly, Paul goes to the Jews first then Gentiles.

Jesus/Peter/Paul. The miracles correlate with each other. Compare Jesus' miracles, go to Peter's and finally Paul's miracles. Awesome!

I will address the excommunication next.

I am enjoying this as well.
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/16/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Repair


Cont. The foundation of apostles and prophets is the first disclosed principles of the revealed truth of the salvation of God through the atoning sacrifice of His Son. Peter, as a rock, represents the first of that foundation. Referencing "Thayer's Greek Lexicon", it is basically the laying down of a foundation, that is of, or belonging to the foundation. In other words, that which is written concerning the apostles and prophets as 'a foundation' would be a course of instructions, which like a foundation, is laid down in the soul of the believer, upon which is built up the fuller knowledge of the saving truth, begun by their teacher, Jesus, the Christ, who is the foundation of His church.
---josef on 9/16/16


Nicole
I love a good, friendly, mature conversation, about God. I am enjoying ours. Can you imagine how wonderful the church would be, if Christians, with differences in their beliefs about God, could sit down and have this type of dialogue?

With that said, Jesus made Paul the Apostle to the Gentiles, making him a rock too, in my opinion.
Paul rebuked Peter. If Jesus made Peter the head of the church, why wasn't Paul excommunicated?
---David on 9/16/16


//Peter says it is Jesus---Samuelbb7

No he doesn't. Lets break up 1 Peter 2:6

Agree Jesus and everyone are quoting Isaiah 28:16 and Palms 118:22-23?

I (God) lay in a Zion a stone, a chosen and precious cornerstone (Jesus), and the one who believes in Him (Jesus) will never be put to shame. To you who believe, then, this stone (Jesus because the word precious is used again) is precious. But to those who do not believe, The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone (No new stone, but the same precious stone Jesus.

Building stones has names of location. Cornerstone means it will be PLACED in the CORNER.

Jesus had opportunities to call Himself the Rock but He doesn't. Matt 21:42 Mark 12:10 Luke 20:17
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/16/16


But Nicole Peter says it is Jesus. So it Peter is the leader you should follow his words. But then you end up saying Peter is wrong.

The problem is not Peter is wrong. It is that you missed the point. Peter agreed that Jesus is the Christ the son of the Living GOD. On this declaration is the church to stand.

You have not shown where Peter is wrong. You say you are to listen to him but then you refuse to listen to Peter. Why?
---Samuelbb7 on 9/15/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Products


//Paul: I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ." 1 Cor 3:10,11//

I see that as Paul saying he laid down the foundation, but Jesus is the 1st One to who laid the foundation which is Peter.


//By Why not both head and foundation?---Chria9396 on 9/15/16

He can but He choose NOT to be both.

He chose Peter to be the foundation.

Why can't Jesus have whatever He wishes?
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/15/16


/1st you say Jesus is the Head of the Church!
Then you all claim Jesus is the Foundation\-Nicole_Lacey on 9/14/16
Is Jesus not the sacrifice Lamb and the High Priest?
Is not Jesus the Root of Jesse and the Lion of Judah?
How can one be a lion, lamb, priest and root at the same time?
Answer: The same way He can be the Foundation and the Head, the Beginning and the End, The Alpha and the Omega.
Quite simple, not confusing, unless one makes it such.
1Co 14:33 For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
churches-plural, saints-living on Earth. Maybe this rules out RCC.
---micha9344 on 9/15/16


//Do you believe Jesus was referring to Peter In (Matthew 7:24)?
---David on 9/15/16

Matthew 7:24 "Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock.

That's a good question.

I believe Jesus means to have a firm ground with your whole life (since usually our homes are our lives)

I know the RCC states our homes are known as domestic churches.

So since Jesus said I will build His Church on the Rock.

So it can also mean we should be within and part of the RCC, His Church, His Family
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/15/16


Nicole,

"BTW, you all CAN'T MAKE UP YOUR MINDS!

1st you say Jesus is the Head of the Church!'

Then you all claim Jesus is the Foundation"


Paul: "According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ." 1 Cor 3:10,11

Head: "And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things he might have the preeminence." Col 1:18

Why not both head and foundation? After all, Christ IS all: Col 3:11
---Chria9396 on 9/15/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Divorce


The LORD, He is the Rock, His work is perfect: for all His ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is He. The LORD is my Rock, For who is God, save the LORD? and who is a Rock, save our God. Let us make a joyful noise to the Rock of our salvation. The LORD Jesus is our Rock, and the rock upon which we, as His Church are built, is our revealed knowledge and empowered confession that He is the Christ, our cornerstone, the Lord of our salvation. As the household of God we ourselves, all of us including the apostles and prophets, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house acceptable to the Father by Jesus, The Christ, through the Spirit. Refs. Deu 32:3,4>1Sa 2:2>2Sa 22:32>Psa 95:1>Isa 28:16>1Pe 2:6> Eph 4:11-13
---josef on 9/15/16


John 1:42 not only does he write what Jesus calls Peter: Cephas, but he translates the meaning of Cephas for everyone.---Nicole_Lacey on 9/14/16

Nicole
Hmm...very good point. Peter was the rock. Both John and Paul confirm this. I have argued this point in the past, but because of your evidence, I can not argue this fact in the future.

Now that I have conceded to your point, I have another question for you. Do you believe Jesus was referring to Peter In (Matthew 7:24)?
---David on 9/15/16


//Peter uses the word stone.//

Thank you.

//But he still puts Jesus as the foundation//

NO HE DOESN'T.

BTW, you all CAN'T MAKE UP YOUR MINDS!

1st you say Jesus is the Head of the Church!'

Then you all claim Jesus is the Foundation

//who does the Bible say is the Rock.---Samuelbb7

John 1:42

//If Peter, himself, was the rock, why doesn't Paul, John, James,..show reverence toward him in their writings? ---David

They did:
Galatians 2:7-14, I Cor. 1:11-13, I Cor. 3:21, I Cor. 9:5 and I Cor. 15:5

John 1:42 not only does he write what Jesus calls Peter: Cephas, but he translates the meaning of Cephas for everyone.

V42..You will be called Cephas (which means Peter).
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/14/16


1 Corinthains 10:4 - And did drink the same spiritual drink, for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that was Christ,

Ephesians 2:20 - And are build upon a foundation of the apostles and the prophets Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone,

Isaiah 48::21 And they thirsted not when he led them through the desert: He caused the water to flow out of the rock for them: he clave the rock also, and water gushed out,

Ephesians 5,26 - That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word ,

John 1:14 --------- > Word becomes flesh
---RichardC on 9/14/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Marriage


True Peter uses the word stone. But he still puts Jesus as the foundation not himself. The Foundation which depends on the Cornerstone is the foundation of the Church.

Which if you take the words of Peter that Jesus is the Christ the son of the living GOD. Then the statements mesh. If not they contradict.

Also who does the Bible say is the Rock.

Psalms 18:31
For who is God save the LORD? or who is a rock save our God?

Why would you replace GOD with a mere human being?
---Samuelbb7 on 9/13/16


If Peter, himself, was the rock, why doesn't Paul, John, James, or Jude show reverence toward him in their writings?

I remind you, Paul does write about Peter, but it was not about his reverence for him. (Galatians 1 & 2)
---David on 9/13/16


//Also Peter says you are incorrect. He says the Church is built on Jesus. I Peter 2. ---Samuelbb7 on 9/11/16

Peter NEVER uses the word 'Rock', but the word 'Stone'.

Peter calls Jesus the Cornerstone in 1 Peter 2:6

How can a foundation stone be REJECTED?

It is put down FIRST!

So the Stone spoken about in 1 Peter 2:6 isn't the FOUNDATION ROCK!

1 Peter 2:6 For it stands in Scripture: See, I lay in Zion a STONE, a chosen and PRECIOUS CORNERSTONE, and the one who believes in Him will never be put to shame. To you who believe, then, this STONE is precious. But to those who do not believe, The STONE the builders rejected has become the CORNERSTONE,
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/12/16


Psalms 118:22 You have become my salvation. The STONE which the builders rejected Has become the CHIEF CORNER STONE.

Matt 21:42 Jesus said to them, Have you never read in the Scriptures:
The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone,

Ephesians 2:20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus Himself as the CORNERSTONE.

1 Peter 2:6 For it stands in Scripture: See, I lay in Zion a STONE, a chosen and PRECIOUS CORNERSTONE, and the one who believes in Him will never be put to shame. To you who believe, then, this STONE is precious. But to those who do not believe, The STONE the builders rejected has become the CORNERSTONE,

OT (David?), NT: Jesus, Peter and Paul. All agree!
---Nicole_Lacey on 9/11/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Consolidation


Ruben I don't know where you get your words. But when I checked it is Petros translated as peter. Petra translated as rock.

Mat 16:18
And I say also unto thee, That thouart Peter,G4074 and uponthisrockG4073 I will build mychurch,

Strong's concordance.

Also Peter says you are incorrect. He says the Church is built on Jesus. I Peter 2.
---Samuelbb7 on 9/11/16


Who or what is "rock" in these passages?
Mat 16:18 ...and upon this rock I will build my church...
Mat 7:24 ...which built his house upon a rock:
Rom 9:33 ...I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence...
1Co 10:4 ...for they drank of that spiritual Rock...
1Pe 2:7-8 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
-If you did not answer Christ and/or the gospel to all of these, why not?
1Co 3:11, Eph 2:20, 1Pe 2:5
---micha9344 on 9/11/16


Peter of course!

17" 18 And I tell (you) , (you) are Peter(Kepha), and on this rock(Kepha) I will build my church,
1. Jesus is specifically talking to who in this verses? Peter. 'This rock' relates back to Peter.

2. The petros and petra arguments some of you will use, falls flat, and here is why,

Protestant Greek scholars like D.A. Carson and Joseph Thayer admit there is no distinction in meaning between petros and petra in the Koine Greek of the New Testament.

3. Jesus had already call Peter a rock,

"Jesus looked at him and said, You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas(Rock) Jhn 1:42

4. And finally, Jesus did not built his Church on confessions but on people. See Eph 2:20
---Ruben on 9/11/16


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.