What if Jesus didn't say"on this rock, etc."?

[DallasApple]

Interesting, I'm aware of the women that are mentioned in the MAN made Bible. Are there others they did not mention? Who were they?

The minimizing..Yes..

WHAT book in the Bible was written by the "women you are aware of"?

NAME ONE!!

Crucial females are NOT part of the authoring of the Bible..FEMALES were NOT included in the meeting to include or not include what had been written..by men or what a woman may have said..(women werent allowed to read and write..)

But hey...whatever the man says..

Love

Dallas

 

[Jeremy Mason]

The minimizing..Yes..

WHAT book in the Bible was written by the "women you are aware of"?

NAME ONE!!

Crucial females are NOT part of the authoring of the Bible..FEMALES were NOT included in the meeting to include or not include what had been written..by men or what a woman may have said..(women werent allowed to read and write..)

But hey...whatever the man says..

Love

Dallas

On the contrary, it was Christianity, through the Word of God/Bible that brought about the women's right movement. My friend Shanan pointed that out to me.

Plus your projecting today's views on women to a time that was fundamentally different. But we digress... I would love to discuss the changes of women's role as it refers to then and today in another thread.

Respectfully,
Jeremy

 

[Scuba Pete]

I believe that when Jesus said that 'on THIS rock' he was referring to himself.

Frubals on your head, for man did not reveal this to you: God did! SP

 

[ChristineES]

Some of the women who followed Jesus and fed Him were Mary Magdalene, Mary, Martha, Joanna, Simone, and others. It was the women who gave Jesus food, according to the Bible NT. Maybe later I will post the verses that claim this.
I also notice that Jesus' brothers were named while His sisters were not named.

 

[Charity]

Jeremy I still don't agree with your interpretation, but we will agree to disagree if that is alright with you? I went back and checked 3 different sources on this and they said what I was saying.....But Oh well, I love you all anyway.....that's why we gather here so we can get other's opinions....See you all in another thread.

Let's all Rock on........................: hamster :

 

[Charity]

I believe that when Jesus said that 'on THIS rock' he was referring to himself.

Glad to see you posting, I have missed you.....

 

[Bennettresearch]

Jeremy what are you disagreeing with? I said that Jesus gave Peter the leadership role to the apostles and prophets to become the foundation for the church. I would never say that God or Jesus wasn't the main deity in our religion....Please go back and read the post again.....Peter had just answered the question who, Jesus really was. Jesus knew that Peter was given this as a divine revelation from God and that Peter should be the one left with the leadership role in the church....This would take place soon because the time for Jesus departure would soon be at hand....Jesus said upon this rock, I will build by church, He knew Peter would be the one to lead.....If you build a church you need the foundation and He was appointing that position to Peter.....I'm saying Jesus yes, is Head of the church but Peter was given the leadership role to the apostles and prophets by Jesus for them to be the foundation of the church once Jesus was gone.......Yes Jesus is considered our rock, but it is not the same context as what we are talking about here....

Hi Charity,

I think it comes from the fact that most Scholars consider Peter to be a poor choice for the role of leader of Christ's Church. He was a putz and that it why Paul was able able to overshadow him. There is also good reason to doubt the scriptural veracity of the Gospels on some issues. I have two issues with this subject.

1. The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are written from a perspective of Jesus expecting to be Crucified, whereas John does not. This would have a great deal to do with whether Jesus meant that He was building the Church or appointing Peter to build the Church.

2. There is no such thing as a later appointed Apostle or Apostilic succession. Jesus appointed His Apostles and after He was gone that was it.

Craig

 

[Bennettresearch]

He also gave Paul the leadership role and look at the amount of Scripture that Paul produced in the NT. Perhaps Paul should have been the Pope. He also set Peter straight on issues he was in error on. Paul being a high Priest, also had far more OT knowledge than Peter did, so to me Paul was the more qualified to be a Pope than Peter ever could. My point is Peter, Paul or any of the disciples at the time were collectively leading the Church at that time, not just one of them. Ego says we need "a" leader". Christ says you are all priests, all leaders and all equal.

What corroborating evidence do you have for this? Except for the one sided testimony of Acts, how can you say Jesus appointed Paul to do anything? We fail to see sometimes that Jesus was merely stopping Paul on his mission and not appointing Paul to be His spokesman. This is a role that Paul made for himself and if you read Revelation according to John, it describes it as a ruse. Rev 2 (2)

Craig

 

[Bennettresearch]

Men...plain old men that were on power trips wrote and decided what went in the Bible..

Its NOT complete..MUCH was left out or ommitted..And stuff was put in at the leisure of MEN who wanted it in there...

Women were the first ones in fact ..true followers of Jesus. the first witnesses...and they were told to SHUT up.....and let the men speak...

Thats how I see it..

Love

Dallas

Hi Dallas.

Please don't be bitter, just understand that they were chauvinist pigs in those days. I'm male, but I cringe when interpreting prophecy because it doesn't read so well in our modern society. Specifically, there is a passage that says they "fought like women" to paraphrase. Try describing this to modern readers.

Peace

Craig

 

[Scuba Pete]

and after He was gone that was it.

The Scriptures disagree with you here:

Matthew 28:20 And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age. NIV

 

[Bennettresearch]

There is a passage that many scholars claim wasn't said by Jesus.
Jesus purportedly established "His church" made Peter Pope, and said "what you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven and what you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven."
If Jesus had never said this, then no authority would have been established for determining what Jesus said in his time on earth and no authority would have been able to claim they have the right to interprete the Word. Each of us would interpret the Word for him/herself.
The assertion that Jesus made any of these statements is completely out of character for someone who never claimed to be God or the son of God and then, that the son of God, betrayed by his friends and crucified by his religion, would leave the development of the Word and its meaning to humans smacks of being preposterous.
antonio

Hi Antonio,

Good Thread. I disagree with one statement however. It is only recently that we have been free to interpret the Bible for ourselves. All of the resistance to translations and the dogma of the Church has left us with a certain programming that we are overcoming. I salute your thinking and not being a robotoid.

Craig

 

[Jeremy Mason]

What corroborating evidence do you have for this? Except for the one sided testimony of Acts, how can you say Jesus appointed Paul to do anything? We fail to see sometimes that Jesus was merely stopping Paul on his mission and not appointing Paul to be His spokesman. This is a role that Paul made for himself and if you read Revelation according to John, it describes it as a ruse. Rev 2 (2)

Craig

Maybe I didn't make me point clear. I was pointing out what you said. The apostles were the leaders and that as we come to maturity in Christ we become leaders. Check out my other posts.

 

[antonio]

BennetResearch said

All of the resistance to translations and the dogma of the Church has left us with a certain programming that we are overcoming.

Good point, I'm still struggling with it.
antonio

 

[antonio]

ChristineES said

I don't know anything about Peter being a pope, but I always took that passage to mean this:
Jesus is the foundation, and Peter was the first stone (or rock) of his Church-- which means he was the first person (without being told first before someone mentions Jesus' parents)to say Jesus was the Son of God.
In other words, He was the first true follower of Jesus as the Son of God. __________________

Was this said before or after Peter denied knowing Jesus?
antonio

 

[antonio]

"This whole issue of duality and non-duality is niether here nor there"
---One person or another

I was "here" and I looked over "there" then I walked over"there" and I was "here."
And then, when I looked through the lens of quantum mechanics, i saw nothing but a vast sea of vibrating energy.
antonio

 

[Scuba Pete]

Two different aspects of the Greek word "rock" are used here. Peter or Petros (rock: Nominative, Singular- MALE) and Petra (rock: Nominative, Singular- FEMALE). It's a subtle play on words and it appears that he was referring to the IDEA (which would be feminine) rather than the MALE Apostle he was speaking to a the time.

Of course, it could have been a sexist play on words indicating to Peter that he wasn't "man enough" yet. However, Jesus was very sensitive towards women, and I don't see him doing this. Interestingly, using this as attempt to establish Peter's Authority over JESUS' church goes against other scriptures which are ultra clear about WHO has authority.

 

[antonio]

[QUOTETwo different aspects of the Greek word "rock" are used here. Peter or Petros (rock: Nominative, Singular- MALE) and Petra (rock: Nominative, Singular- FEMALE). It's a subtle play on words and it appears that he was referring to the IDEA (which would be feminine) rather than the MALE Apostle he was speaking to a the time.

Of course, it could have been a sexist play on words indicating to Peter that he wasn't "man enough" yet. However, Jesus was very sensitive towards women, and I don't see him doing this. Interestingly, using this as attempt to establish Peter's Authority over JESUS' church goes against other scriptures which are ultra clear about WHO has authority.[/QUOTE]

Or..............perhaps He never said it.


antonio

 

[Scott1]

Or..............perhaps He never said it.

Or..... perhaps He did.

This is a fun game.....

 

[blackout]

[/size]
Or..... perhaps He did.

This is a fun game.....

and "perhaps" it means this...
and "perhaps" it means that.

A fun game for those who find value in varied interpretations.
(and personal revelation)

 

[Scott1]

afun game for those who find value in varied interpretations.
(and personal revelation)

Amen!