BetteTheRed
Resident Heretic
- Pronouns
- She/Her/Her
always thought Jesus chose James (a very righteous man)
Wasn't James Jesus' brother? Wasn't that what the ossuary issue was all about?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
always thought Jesus chose James (a very righteous man)
YesWasn't James Jesus' brother? Wasn't that what the ossuary issue was all about?
Interestingly, there he is speaking to the disciples in general, not specifically to Peter. And he actually says almost the exact same thing. So is what he says to Peter in 16 something he later extends to the larger group?Binding and loosing show up again in Matthew 18:18.
No--- Just to Clarify ----- this is not right here ---Peter is not the rock on which Jesus will build His ChurchIn this unique to Matthew narrative, Jesus tells Peter he is the rock upon which He will build His church.
We can believe Jesus is the rock with all our hearts if we want to.No--- Just to Clarify ----- this is not right here ---Peter is not the rock on which Jesus will build His Church
Jesus is the rock on which the Church is built ---
Yes, according to this passage, Peter was the first to understand Jesus correctly. The spread of the early church is a fascinating story.The Keys open the door of Faith and the truth of the Gospel to be preached not just to the Jews but to the Gentiles as well and Peter got to be the first to do so ------the other Apostles were brought in as well once the door was open -----
Matthew misheard. Jesus was Peter's manager and he said Peter would be the "rock star" on whom he would build his agency.![]()
Seems to me that Matthew must have had a reason for including it. Darned if I can guess the reason thoughOkay, probably not. But interesting that only Matthew included that. So is this a Matthew insertion to buff Peter's image or did the others disregard the source of the information for some reason?
Nah, I don't think so. Matthew has the other disciples present to relay what they have been hearing.Or did Peter really keep that part under his hat per Jesus' request so that only Matthew found out?
Which really brings us back to either a Matthew insertion based on some oral tradition in the community OR a non-apostolic source of unknown provenance. Because if it came from an apostolic source, then the question shifts to why the others didn't include it as much as why Matthew did. And, well, barring discovery of some previously unknown, pre-Gospel documentation that contains the saying, we just can't ever know for certain where he got it from. It's not in Mark, one of his known sources, and if it was in Q, the other, you would think Luke would have it.Matthew has the other disciples present to relay what they have been hearing.
The Church is not built on Peter Himself ---that makes no sense ---Jesus is the head of the Church not Peter ----Peter was given a Revelation by God the Father as to who Jesus was ----Either Peter himself is the rock or it is Peter's expression of faith that Jesus will build on
There's historical as well as Biblical problems with that whole idea. Really, the bishopric of Rome doesn't really become institutionalized until much later. I doubt there even was such a thing at the time he died, said by many early Christian sources to have been in Nero's persecution of 64CE.Catholics believe St Peter was the first Pope.
But they are apparently inserting the "already" and even acknowledge that with the square brackets. So that's apparently their interpretation and does not seem to match more literal, scholarly translations of the Greek. Even older translations like the KJV and Wycliffe don't have "already" or similar wording there (yes, I checked on Biblegateway).Or, as the Amplified Bible puts it, “Whatever you bind [forbid, declare to be improper and unlawful] on earth will have [already] been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose [permit, declare lawful] on earth will have [already] been loosed in heaven.”
But they are apparently inserting the "already" and even acknowledge that with the square brackets. So that's apparently their interpretation and does not seem to match more literal, scholarly translations of the Greek. Even older translations like the KJV and Wycliffe don't have "already" or similar wording there (yes, I checked on Biblegateway).