"Upon this rock", which rock?

[Fool]

Yes, the body of Christ is the Church.

Jesus wants you to listen to the Church but you choose instead to follow yourself. You are your own pope!

I listen to the spirit of god. I don't listen to men. Again the kingdom comes from within. It isn't a material thing to be found elsewhere. It is a spiritual thing to be realized inwardly.

Church was made for man and not man for church.

What is amazing is that you think people who go to church elsewhere are not fallible but somehow those who don't are.

Matthew 23:15

In the last days, the love of most will grow cold.

Your love is for a church and not for God, for love itself; which is spiritually holy

 

[KW]

No... he said he was going to die.

Your personal viewpoints that aren't scripturally supported is just your personal viewpoint.

Matt "As they were gathering in Galilee, Jesus said to them, “The Son of Man is about to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day.” And they were greatly distressed."

Luke 9:22-27 ESV
Saying, “The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.”

John 20:9 ESV
For as yet they did not understand the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead.


I stand with what was written

Good post, except for the last line.

You deny that Cephas is the rock upon which Jesus built his Church.

That's what is written, and that's what happened.

CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE
“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church.’ . . . On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).


THE LETTER OF CLEMENT TO JAMES
“Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect” (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221]).



TERTULLIAN
“For though you think that heaven is still shut up, remember that the Lord left the keys of it to Peter here, and through him to the Church, which keys everyone will carry with him if he has been questioned and made a confession [of faith]” (Antidote Against the Scorpion 10 [A.D. 211]).

“[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. . . . Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church” (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).

Clement of Alexandria (200 A.D.): “[Peter is] the chosen, the preeminent, the first among the disciples, for whom alone with himself the Savior paid the tribute.”

 

[KW]

I listen to the spirit of god. I don't listen to men. Again the kingdom comes from within. It isn't a material thing to be found elsewhere. It is a spiritual thing to be realized inwardly.

So God tells you something different than he told the Church for 2000 years.

Can you find a single Christian in the first 1000 years of Christianity that believed what you believe?

 

[Fool]

So God tells you something different than he told the Church for 2000 years.

Can you find a single Christian in the first 1000 years of Christianity that believed what you believe?

Jesus wasn't christian, that is your biggest mistake. Jesus was a monist.

Your treasure is a respecter of Christian men. It isn't for God.

 

[Colt]

No... he said he was going to die.

Your personal viewpoints that aren't scripturally supported is just your personal viewpoint.

Matt "As they were gathering in Galilee, Jesus said to them, “The Son of Man is about to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day.” And they were greatly distressed."

Luke 9:22-27 ESV
Saying, “The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.”

John 20:9 ESV
For as yet they did not understand the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead.


I stand with what was written

I don't dispute that Jesus said he was going to die, at least his body anyway. The spirit Son didn't die, only the mortal flesh died. He waited three days and returned on his own as he said he could and would. Jesus used his murder to prove his authority and life after death.

What is written is that it was the devils will that Jesus die! Jesus compared himself to previous prophets that were rejected and killed.

 

[KW]

Jesus wasn't christian, that is your biggest mistake. Jesus was a monist.

So if you aren't Christian why are you posting here? This is irrelevant for you.

You might be interested to know what early Christians believed though. Why not read about them?

 

[Fool]

So if you aren't Christian why are you posting here? This is irrelevant for you.

You might be interested to know what early Christians believed though. Why not read about them?

I was raised Christian. You assume to much.

God is not exclusive to Christians. Love is not a respecter of persons. Because of people like you, I rejected tge cult of personality. It is written, I require mercy, compassion, love, sacrifice. Christianity is about self-serving personality. Most of its doctrines have nothing to do with love.

 

[KW]

I was raised Christian. You assume to much.

God is not exclusive to Christians. Love is not a respecter of persons. Because of people like you, I rejected tge cult of personality. It is written, I require mercy, compassion, love, sacrifice. Christianity is about self-serving personality. Most of its doctrines have nothing to do with love.

Christianity is about many things, but primarily about following Christ.

 

[Fool]

Christianity is about many things, but primarily about following Christ.

christs follow christ. following is a verb. it isn't an appearance, or a label. most christians aren't christ like.

again christ is all and in all but most christians ignore that. most of christianity teaches that it is only attainable through one personality and that personality isn't currently available.

some will wake to everlasting life and some to the idea that love is contemptible thing and god can't be found in all.

you've obviously never read isaiah 66 and understand the name, the name that shouldn't be taken in vain, the one that self is to be immersed into, the name that drives out demons, the name of the father in the forehead of the 144,000, the name you are to ask of the father(our Father).

 

[KW]

christs follow christ. following is a verb. it isn't an appearance, or a label. most christians aren't christ like.

again christ is all and in all but most christians ignore that. most of christianity teaches that it is only attainable through one personality and that personality isn't currently available.

some will wake to everlasting life and some to the idea that love is contemptible thing and god can't be found in all.

you've obviously never read isaiah 66 and understand the name, the name that shouldn't be taken in vain, the one that self is to be immersed into, the name that drives out demons, the name of the father in the forehead of the 144,000, the name you are to ask of the father(our Father).

Like I said, you are your own pope.

How would you know if you were in error?

 

[Kenny]

Good post, except for the last line.

You deny that Cephas is the rock upon which Jesus built his Church.

That's what is written, and that's what happened.

CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE
“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church.’ . . . On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).


THE LETTER OF CLEMENT TO JAMES
“Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect” (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221]).



TERTULLIAN
“For though you think that heaven is still shut up, remember that the Lord left the keys of it to Peter here, and through him to the Church, which keys everyone will carry with him if he has been questioned and made a confession [of faith]” (Antidote Against the Scorpion 10 [A.D. 211]).

“[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. . . . Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church” (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).

Clement of Alexandria (200 A.D.): “[Peter is] the chosen, the preeminent, the first among the disciples, for whom alone with himself the Savior paid the tribute.”

I am aware of the point and certainly cannot deny that Peter was a pillar and I certainly won't deny the impact, influence and importance of Peter. And certainly whether someone differs on this with me, it isn't a problem for me and I also respect and honor your position.

Here I tend to go to the evangelical viewpoint to wit:

We do know that Jesus and God is the rock Ps 118:2; Ps 18:2; Is 26:4; and so many more

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Here is the revelation that Jesus noted as coming from the Father.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him,Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Here he recognizes the impact of the statement.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Here is where Peter "a rock or a stone" - is mentioned. But, for me, what is "this rock". Is it the man Peter? or The Word made flesh - God our rock.

As it was said by Paul "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ."

But I won't make it an issue. The message is still Jesus either way.

Peter is not the Rock on which the Church is built

1. Augustine (354-430):
   1. “In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: ‘On him as on a rock the Church was built.’ . . . But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said: ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,’ that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying: ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,’ and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received ‘the keys of the kingdom of heaven.’ For, ‘Thou art Peter’ and not ‘Thou art the rock’ was said to him. But ‘the rock was Christ,’ in confessing whom, as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter. But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable.” (The Retractions, 1:20:1)
2. Chrysostom (349-407):
   1. “Peter, James, and John, were both first called, and held a primacy among the disciples” (Commentary on Galatians, 1, vv. 1-3). How then is Peter alone the primary apostle?
3. Cyprian (200?-258):
4. Origen

A hot button since the beginning.

 

[Kenny]

Jesus wasn't christian, that is your biggest mistake. Jesus was a monist.

Your treasure is a respecter of Christian men. It isn't for God.

He wasn't a "Christian" - he was The Christ! The son of the Living God.

 

[Kenny]

I don't dispute that Jesus said he was going to die, at least his body anyway. The spirit Son didn't die, only the mortal flesh died. He waited three days and returned on his own as he said he could and would. Jesus used his murder to prove his authority and life after death.

What is written is that it was the devils will that Jesus die! Jesus compared himself to previous prophets that were rejected and killed.

I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to stipulate since that wasn't what you first said.

 

[KW]

I am aware of the point and certainly cannot deny that Peter was a pillar and I certainly won't deny the impact, influence and importance of Peter. And certainly whether someone differs on this with me, it isn't a problem for me and I also respect and honor your position.

Here I tend to go to the evangelical viewpoint to wit:

We do know that Jesus and God is the rock Ps 118:2; Ps 18:2; Is 26:4; and so many more

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Here is the revelation that Jesus noted as coming from the Father.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him,Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Here he recognizes the impact of the statement.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Here is where Peter "a rock or a stone" - is mentioned. But, for me, what is "this rock". Is it the man Peter? or The Word made flesh - God our rock.

As it was said by Paul "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ."

But I won't make it an issue. The message is still Jesus either way.

Peter is not the Rock on which the Church is built

1. Augustine (354-430):
   1. “In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: ‘On him as on a rock the Church was built.’ . . . But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said: ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,’ that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying: ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,’ and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received ‘the keys of the kingdom of heaven.’ For, ‘Thou art Peter’ and not ‘Thou art the rock’ was said to him. But ‘the rock was Christ,’ in confessing whom, as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter. But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable.” (The Retractions, 1:20:1)
2. Chrysostom (349-407):
   1. “Peter, James, and John, were both first called, and held a primacy among the disciples” (Commentary on Galatians, 1, vv. 1-3). How then is Peter alone the primary apostle?
3. Cyprian (200?-258):
4. Origen

A hot button since the beginning.

I once believed as you do when I was an evangelical. However, I don’t think your position will hold up under further investigation.
Protestants often truncate quotes or cherry pick. Here are two among many.

Let’s start with Chrysostom:

And if one should say, 'How then did James receive the throne of Jerusalem?,' this I would answer that He appointed this man (Peter) teacher, not of that throne, but of the whole world. (Chrysostom, In Joan. Hom. 1xxxviii. n. 1, tom. viii)

Peter himself the Head or Crown of the Apostles, the First in the Church, the Friend of Christ, who received a revelation, not from man, but from the Father, as the Lord bears witness to him, saying, 'Blessed art thou, This very Peter and when I name Peter I name that unbroken Rock, that firm Foundation, the Great Apostle, First of the disciples, the First called, and the First who obeyed he was guilty ...even denying the Lord." (Chrysostom, T. ii. Hom)

 

[Colt]

I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to stipulate since that wasn't what you first said.

I said “Jesus was foretelling the rejection of his Gospel, persecution and subsequent murder. Jesus and his Father had already worked out a contingency since the Jews were rejecting their calling. Jesus was dressing down Peter for suggesting that he take a different course of action then turning the other cheek on the cross. Christians converted the rejection into the atonement doctrine, the false claim that it was Gods will for his Son to be rejected and die as a sin debt payment so God could finally forgive people.”

 

[KW]

I am aware of the point and certainly cannot deny that Peter was a pillar and I certainly won't deny the impact, influence and importance of Peter. And certainly whether someone differs on this with me, it isn't a problem for me and I also respect and honor your position.

Here I tend to go to the evangelical viewpoint to wit:

We do know that Jesus and God is the rock Ps 118:2; Ps 18:2; Is 26:4; and so many more

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Here is the revelation that Jesus noted as coming from the Father.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him,Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Here he recognizes the impact of the statement.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Here is where Peter "a rock or a stone" - is mentioned. But, for me, what is "this rock". Is it the man Peter? or The Word made flesh - God our rock.

As it was said by Paul "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ."

But I won't make it an issue. The message is still Jesus either way.

Peter is not the Rock on which the Church is built

1. Augustine (354-430):
   1. “In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: ‘On him as on a rock the Church was built.’ . . . But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said: ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,’ that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying: ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,’ and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received ‘the keys of the kingdom of heaven.’ For, ‘Thou art Peter’ and not ‘Thou art the rock’ was said to him. But ‘the rock was Christ,’ in confessing whom, as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter. But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable.” (The Retractions, 1:20:1)
2. Chrysostom (349-407):
   1. “Peter, James, and John, were both first called, and held a primacy among the disciples” (Commentary on Galatians, 1, vv. 1-3). How then is Peter alone the primary apostle?
3. Cyprian (200?-258):
4. Origen

A hot button since the beginning.

Regarding Augustine, it seems that he is saying that it is irrelevant. It does not change the authority granted to Peter and his successors:

“Number the bishops from the see of Peter itself. And in that order of Fathers see who succeeded whom, That is the rock against which the gates of hell do not prevail.”
Psalmus contra partem Donati, 18 (A.D. 393),GCC 51

“Let us not listen to those who deny that the Church of God is able to forgive all sins. They are wretched indeed, because they do not recognize in Peter the rock and they refuse to believe that the keys of heaven, lost from their own hands, have been given to the Church.”
Christian Combat, 31:33(A.D. 397), in JUR,3:51

“For if the lineal succession of bishops is to be taken into account, with how much more certainty and benefit to the Church do we reckon back till we reach Peter himself, to whom, as bearing in a figure the whole Church, the Lord said: ‘Upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it !’ The successor of Peter was Linus, and his successors in unbroken continuity were these: — Clement, Anacletus, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Iginus, Anicetus, Pius, Soter, Eleutherius, Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus, Urbanus, Pontianus, Antherus, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius, Stephanus, Xystus, Dionysius, Felix, Eutychianus, Gaius, Marcellinus, Marcellus, Eusebius, Miltiades, Sylvester, Marcus, Julius, Liberius, Damasus, and Siricius, whose successor is the present Bishop Anastasius.

 

[Colt]

Regarding Augustine, it seems that he is saying that it is irrelevant. It does not change the authority granted to Peter and his successors:

“Number the bishops from the see of Peter itself. And in that order of Fathers see who succeeded whom, That is the rock against which the gates of hell do not prevail.”
Psalmus contra partem Donati, 18 (A.D. 393),GCC 51

“Let us not listen to those who deny that the Church of God is able to forgive all sins. They are wretched indeed, because they do not recognize in Peter the rock and they refuse to believe that the keys of heaven, lost from their own hands, have been given to the Church.”
Christian Combat, 31:33(A.D. 397), in JUR,3:51

“For if the lineal succession of bishops is to be taken into account, with how much more certainty and benefit to the Church do we reckon back till we reach Peter himself, to whom, as bearing in a figure the whole Church, the Lord said: ‘Upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it !’ The successor of Peter was Linus, and his successors in unbroken continuity were these: — Clement, Anacletus, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Iginus, Anicetus, Pius, Soter, Eleutherius, Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus, Urbanus, Pontianus, Antherus, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius, Stephanus, Xystus, Dionysius, Felix, Eutychianus, Gaius, Marcellinus, Marcellus, Eusebius, Miltiades, Sylvester, Marcus, Julius, Liberius, Damasus, and Siricius, whose successor is the present Bishop Anastasius.

The evil of the church wasn’t its existence, it’s that the institutional church replaced the Kingdom of Heaven ideal embodied in the teachings of Jesus. Re-Sanhedrin! They exploited the Peter is the rock stuff.

 

[KW]

The evil of the church wasn’t its existence, it’s that the institutional church replaced the Kingdom of Heaven ideal embodied in the teachings of Jesus. Re-Sanhedrin! They exploited the Peter is the rock stuff.

The church is the pillar and foundation of truth.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

The church is the pillar and foundation of truth.

Except when it lies....

 

[KW]

Except when it lies....

The Church teaches truth as it is guided by the Holy Spirit.