PETER THE ROCK THAT AGES OR JESUS THE ROCK OF AGES
There is no
indication of Peter being the prime Bishop in Rome or Rome as the governmental
center for the whole Church. In 50 A.D. Claudius commanded all the Jews to
leave Rome. “…Since the Jews were continually making disturbances at the
instigation of Chrestus, he (Claudius) expelled them from Rome…” (Suetonius
75-160 A.D. Suet. Vita Claudii . xxv. 4 ) This would include Peter who
was an apostle to the Jews. If Peter was obedient he would have left with
the Jews that were expelled as his commission was to reach them. If not he
would have been killed with the other Jews.
When Paul
writes to the Romans in 58 A.D. He does not address the letter to Peter nor
does he even make mention of him, although he takes the time to list 27 other
names to greet. Paul does not refer to Peter in any of his 4 letters written
from a Roman prison 60-61 A.D. (Eph. Col. Phil. Philemon) Why is this?
Most Agree
that Babylon was code word for Rome (see Rev.17:1-9, 18:10,21) Peter writes
1 Pet 5:13 “She who is in Babylon, elect together with you, greets you “ If
Peter is writing from Rome then he is calling it Babylon. It would be hard to
accept him ruling over Babylon. What does this mean if it is applied today?
Jerusalem,
Judea was the center of the Jewish church of which Peter was the apostle to.
The first 15 chapters of Acts and the book of Galatians we see Peters ministry
to Jerusalem and surrounding areas until 45 A.D. We find that it was Paul who
was sent to the gentiles, the other apostles said they would stay with the Jews
(this includes Peter). Rome was a long ways from Jerusalem and was never
considered a Jewish province. It was Paul who went out (with Barnabas and Mark)
to the gentiles, the other apostles stayed in the area of their brethren. In
Acts 15 we see multiple leaders of the Jerusalem church meet. When a dispute
arose, Paul initiated a meeting. They gathered in Jerusalem church which James
the Lords half brother was in charge and Peter was just one of the many elders.
(James is called the brother of Jesus. In Gal.1:19 Jude calls himself the
brother of James. These are the same brothers mentioned as Mary's family that
came to find Jesus several times Mt.13:55 and Mk.6:2-3 <RC5.htm>). James
had the leadership role stating “Wherefore my sentence is on his declaration
the letter was sent back to Antioch. Acts 16:4 “ they delivered to them
the decrees to keep, which were determined by the apostles and elders at
Jerusalem.” Notice it was decided by all not one, not by James and not Peter,
and it was not in Rome. There was no doctrine incorporated by the Roman church
found in the Bible.
Lets not
forget who actually wrote the majority of the New Testament. In Scripture Peter
wrote 2 letters, Paul wrote 12. We find that Peters 2nd letter
was not fully accepted as inspired for a long time which certainly conflicts
with him being the Pope, the head of the Church. Writing an inspired letter
that is in scripture would not be questioned by the mother church for they
would validate it. (The Gospel of Peter was rejected as also the Apocalypse of
Peter -probably forgeries). Who decided this letter was to be included?
Certainly not the church Peter was ruling over otherwise there would have been
no delay.(canonizing
the bible <RC15.htm>)
In Acts
18:2 it writes that Emperor Claudius commanded all the Jews to leave Rome, this
would have included Peter. Unless of course he stayed, he would then be
executed for disobeying (some say he did die in Rome which means he couldn't
have been a Pope over the whole Church). In 2 Timothy written from Rome just
before Paul was martyred he writes, “Only Luke is with me” (2 Tim. 4:11). So
there is no biblical justification for a Papacy and a single church ruling from
Rome over all the church.
Church
historian Michael Walsh in the illustrated history of the Popes, ...Papal
authority as it is now exercised, with its accompanying doctrine of Papal
infallibility, cannot be found in theories about the Papal role expressed by
early Popes and other Christians the first 500 years, Philip Schaff one of the
greatest church historians writes the oldest links in the chain of Roman
bishops are veiled in impenetrable darkness.
The Pope is
considered the head of the Church (Catechism 883) the Bible teaches something
quite different. Eph. 5:23 “Christ is head of the church”;Col.1:17-18 “And He
is before all things, and in Him all things consist. And He (Christ) is the
head of the body, the church.” We can be deceived if we are “not holding fast
to the Head, from whom all the body, nourished and knit together by joints and
ligaments, grows with the increase that is from God.”( Col. 2:19) Our spiritual
growth is not dependent on the Church but Christ as the head.
The Pope is
called the only authority over the church (Catechism 816). We find Peter
considered himself a fellow elder (one among many) and is treated this way
throughout scripture( 1 Pt.5:1-2). He is not the apostle overall the other
apostles. In Peters 2nd epistle he states he is an apostle, not THE apostle.
While Roman Catholics point to his name being first all the time this is simply
not so in (although it often is). In Gal.2:9 he is named as one of the pillars,
not THE pillar, and James is mentioned first and John last. Leadership in the
New Testament is always plural, never singular. Peter makes no unique claims
for himself but calls himself an eyewitness with the other apostles 2 Pt.1:16.
So one cannot find this coming from his own mouth.
The subject
of the papacy is one of great importance, claiming to be the “Vicar of Christ,”
is the very foundation of Romanism. Without it, Roman Catholic Church cannot be
what she is today. ( there can be no apostolic succession because it is from
Peter). It is on this doctrine to keep in mind that the Romanism today stands
or falls.
The word
Petra for rock is used 16 times in the New Testament. 11 times of a massive
cliff rock, a bedrock, 5 times symbolically of Christ himself. (EX.1 Cor.10:4
The rock in the wilderness is Christ)
The name
Peter (Petros) a masculine noun means small rock or stone. In Mt. 16:18
is the first time it is used saying “I will build my church”, a future event
when the Spirit is sent and the body of Christ is formed. Jesus said “ I say
unto you ,you are Peter (Petros) and upon this Rock (Petra
feminine noun meaning a massive rock) I will build my church.” First we see who
the rock is, second we see it is Jesus building the church not Peter. it is
Jesus who states I will build my church, he protects it and gives increase to
it. When we think about a foundation for a building it needs to be reliable,
this comes through testing. There is only one who the Bible speaks as the rock
that cannot be moved, that is Christ. All one has to do is look at Peter and we
find he was moved numerous times showing he cannot be the foundation of the
Church. The church is built upon the rock, Christ.
If Jesus
were actually referring to Peter as the rock, Jesus would not have used the
MASCULINE word petros for the rock. Jesus instead used a different Greek word
for “this rock” a FEMININE word petra indicating something other than Peter. Since
the Holy Spirit guided the apostles writings into all truth we should expect
the precise words used to convey the meaning (John 14:26; 16:13). Arguments
such as they spoke in Aramaic don't hold up either. Maybe they did speak this
language but it was written in the Greek and therefore the distinction. The
ones that were there and heard what Jesus said wrote it in Greek.
The
Scripture also states the Church is also built upon the foundation of the
apostles who were connected directly to Christ (Eph 2:20). The first stones of
that building (the church) were laid next to the chief cornerstone (the rock)
by their ministry. We find their names written in the foundations of the new
Jerusalem, (Rev. 21:14). Notice they are collectively together, nowhere do we find
Peter separately. Petros means a (piece of) rock; but the Scripture is saying
very clearly Peter is related to the Rock because of his confession, not the
rock himself. And he is not the only one to have this confession. The true rock
(Petra) is massive. For the Church to spread throughout the world this rock it
is built upon must be large enough to extend throughout the world and through
time to support the Church. The word “church” literally means “those called
out,” from the world. it can be applied to the church visible- or invisible,
i.e., all those who are real Christians, a visible assembly or an “unassembled
assembly” a spiritual house that is sometimes visible.
It was not
Peter who was the rock, for the Old Testament of which both he and Paul both
agree on explains who the rock is. Ps.18:31: “For who is our God except the
Lord and who is our rock except our God. who is the church built on? Throughout
the Old Testament the rock was synonymous with God 2 Sam 22:32: “For who is
God, except the LORD? And who is a rock, except our God? Deut 32:15: “Israel
forsook God who made him, and scornfully esteemed the Rock of his salvation.”
Deut 32:18: “Of the Rock who begot you, you are unmindful, and have forgotten
the God who fathered you.” Ps. 62:2: “He only is my rock and my salvation” Ps.
95:1: “calls God, “ the Rock of our salvation.” In 1 Cor.3:10 Paul claims to as
a master builder saying there is no other foundation that can be laid, which
is Jesus Christ. Christ is the one we build on and if built on any other,
it will not endure the fire of testing for our work. “If anyone’s work which he
has built on endures, he will receive a reward”(1 Cor.3:14). Paul's statement
is No human being was ever referred to as a rock in the Old Testament Hebrew
Scriptures, neither are they found in the New Testament. The “Rock” (stone,
cornerstone) is reserved only for Jesus Christ (Matt 21:42; Isa. 28:16; Cor.
3:11; 10:4; Eph 2:20; 1 Peter 2:6-8).
Isa. 44:8:
“Is there a God besides Me? Indeed there is no other Rock; I know not
one.” This should settle any idea of anyone else being called the foundation
stone for the Church.
Moses was
told by the Lord in Exod. 17:6: “Behold, I will stand before you there on the
rock in Horeb; and you shall strike the rock, and water will come out of it,
that the people may drink.” Paul using the Old Testament example explains in 1
Cor. 10:4: “and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that
spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.” In the New
Testament it is the same rock.
The altars
built in the Old Testament were a type of the rock who was God. They were
altars of offering and sacrifice, the rock that was laid in Zion was the
foundation stone and the Church was built on this rock, a offering and
sacrifice. The Church is made of those who confess just as Peter (through
revelation) that he was the Son of the living God, God the savior. This is why
they were told not to tell others what Peter had said, but to allow others to
come to this conclusion on their own.
For one to
confess this it means that they also believe in the gospel to save them. Not a
Church , sacraments, baptism or any other thing. But the gospel itself
instantly and gloriously transfers God's mercy to the sinner by admitting his
guilt and believing on the saviors work. (1 Cor.15:1-4)
Matt 7:2:4
“Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him
to a wise man who built his house on the rock.” The saying were pointing to the
Messiah, to act on what he said was to build on the foundation of the rock. Is
this Peter? No of course not, it is Christ (Lk.20:17-19 tells us it is Jesus
who is the rock).
Who would
know better than anyone else what Jesus meant? Peter right! Lets see how Peter
interprets what the church now claims is applied to him.1 Pt.2:6 Peter quotes
this verse of Rom.9:33 which is from Isa.28:16. The Old Testament was written
in the Hebrew language and the rock refers to Christ, Paul agrees with Peter on
the rock that stumbled Israel and uses the very same Old Testament scripture.
Rom 9:31-33: “but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained
to the law of righteousness. Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as
it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone.
As it is written: “Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of
offense, and whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”
Is Peter
the first Pope? When you read Peter's statement in context, one understands
immediately what he is talking about, it is that simple. Roman Catholicism says
the rock is Peter, Peter says otherwise. Peter, the very one to whom Jesus is
speaking to states in 1 Pt.2:4 “Coming to Him (Christ) as to a living
stone, rejected indeed by men. It was Christ we come to. Peter here tells every
Christian that he is a small stone along with the rest of us vs.5,” built up
into a spiritual “temple,” and Jesus Christ is the chief cornerstone (the
rock). Peter quotes Isaiah, the prophet, who was speaking of prophetically of
the coming of The Messiah. This question must be explained by the Catholic. God
Himself and has built the Church. If Peter really was the “cornerstone “Why
didn't Isaiah say “Behold I lay in Rome a chief cornerstone?” Because it was
laid in Zion not Rome.This crucial to understand where the authority lies. And
what kind of a stone is he that wavers in his faith. So the rock couldn't
possibly be Peter who is just man. Imagine no ekkleesia (Church) without
Peter? Since when is God so dependent on one man to do his work? God has not
entrusted any human being to build the ekkleesia or have it built on
them. He built it upon HIMSELF, by Jesus Christ.
It is the
stone that the builders rejected that became the chief cornerstone, the rock
that the church is built on. As Peter says God laid in Zion a stone a chief
cornerstone which is the foundation stone to the building, which is the
Church. A cornerstone is a huge rock, this is the rock that Christ was speaking
of. And it must be something that is eternal, a living stone to last through
all the ages.
In 1
Pt.2:7, “Behold I lay in Zion a choice stone, a precious stone
(Peter is not saying I am precious) and he who believes on him will by
no means be put to shame.” Is this Peter we are to believe on? Peter goes on
saying in v.7 “Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who
are disobedient, “The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief
cornerstone, “and “A stone of stumbling and a rock of offense.” They
stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they also were
appointed.” Who was rejected? Christ. What is the church built on? Christ. Who
is one to believe on? Christ. Who do you trust and believe in? Christ. If one
trusts in Peter they will be ashamed. Certainly not Peter nor any other apostle
called themselves the foundation or had one to believe on them. we are
told to believe on the stone, speaking of Christ. 1 Pt.5:4 Peter goes on to
identify the chief shepherd as Jesus. Not himself!
Therefore
to you who believe he is precious but to those who are disobedient (disbelieve)
the stone that the builders rejected became the chief cornerstone. Who was
rejected? Christ. what is the church built on? Christ. Who is one
to believe on? Christ. who do you trust? Christ. If one trusts in
Peter they will be ashamed, he is the wrong foundation. Ps.18:31 “For who is
our God except the Lord and who is our rock except our God. who is the church
built on? In 2 Cor.3:10 Paul claims to be a master builder and says there is no
other foundation that can be laid, which is Jesus Christ. “According to the
grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I have laid the
foundation, and another builds on it. But let each one take heed how he builds
on it. For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is
Jesus Christ.”
Eph.2:20,
“Having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets Jesus Christ
himself being the chief cornerstone.” The cornerstone was a massive rock
cut as the foundation stone which is put in the corner and out of both sides
would come the apostles and prophets.
The Builder
and Maker of the church is Christ himself; as he states, “I will build it”. The
Church is a living temple which is a dwelling place for the holy Spirit and we
are temple made up of living stones which He is building together. Peter
writing to the Christians dispersed through the Roman provinces in Asia (1
Peter 1:1) in 1 Pt.2:5 You also as living stones are being built up to a
spiritual house.” Heb.3 “For every house is built by someone, but He who built
all things is God.” V.6 “But Christ as a Son over his own house whose house we
are.” Christ is the head of the house which is the body of Christ. He is the
architect (builder) of all things even the church is built by and on Christ. Christ
is the head of the body, together and as individuals we are directed by Him,
not by a priesthood or a Pope.
The Popes
say that Peter was the rock, but Peter himself said Jesus is the rock (1
Peter 2:4-8). He even preaches this to all of Israel in Acts 4:11speaking of
Christ, “This is the stone the builders rejected (Christ) which has
become the chief cornerstone”, he then proclaims there is salvation in no other
“for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be
saved.” That rock is our salvation, this is what the Church is built upon.
Salvation is found in the person of Christ not in the church or in sacraments.
It is found in the rock just as Jesus said, he would build his church on this
confession. The rock was the confession of Peter’s revelation, this is the very
reason why he is commended. This is something the Father testified all through
Christ’s ministry. Sometimes it was audible as at the baptism and the
transfiguration when the Father spoke “this is my beloved son” and accompanied
it by supernatural signs. It is this confession of Jesus being the Son of God
that the universal church is built on.
Luke
20:17-19: “Then He looked at them and said, “What then is this that is written:
'The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone?” Whoever
falls on that stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind
him to powder.” And the chief priests and the scribes that very hour sought to
lay hands on Him, but they feared the people-- for they knew that He had spoken
this parable against them.” Have you fallen on this stone who is Christ? Which
stone are you on? For if you have not fallen on the stone, it will one fall on
you and crush you.
Was (only) Peter given the keys
of the kingdom (Mt.16:19)
“I will
give you the keys of heaven,” if this means it is to Peter only, than
there can be no Roman Catholic justification for it being given to anyone
afterwards. Yet there is no scripture that entertains this idea of apostolic
succession.
“I will
give you the keys” at the time was future tense, meaning after Jesus'
resurrection; when He ascended on high, He gave those gifts (Eph. 4:8)
empowered the apostles with the Holy Spirit so they may employ their authority
under Christ. Peter had the pronouncement of the keys given to him first but
not him alone. This power of authority was actually given, not to Peter only,
but to all the apostles. This is a delegated spiritual power; it is a power
pertaining to all the things of the kingdom of heaven. The figure of the keys
is of a building with keys that are used to open from the outside. Jesus gives
to Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven, meaning that he will make him the
instrument of opening the door of faith to the world, first to preach the
gospel to the Jews and then the Gentiles. In this way what is bound on
earth is bound in heaven.
It is
Christ the Risen Lord who has “the keys of death and of Hades” (Rev. 1:18; 3:7)
He has “the keys of the kingdom of heaven” which he gives to Peter (and the
others) as a “gatekeeper.”
The master
of the house gives the keys to the steward, but it was not to only one, but
many. This promise was renewed and given to all the disciples Mt.18:18. Put in
context is about church discipline. Notice it says “whatever you bind on earth
will be bound in heaven...Again I say to you that if TWO of you agree on earth
concerning anything they ask...” The keys included doctrine, called the key of
knowledge. As the apostles were instructed by Christ they taught others, and by
the teaching of the Holy Spirit. “Since the power of binding and loosing, which
is here conferred upon Peter, is ascribed (Matt 18:18) to the apostles
generally, the power conferred upon the former is set in its proper light, and
shown to be of necessity a power of a collegiate nature, so that Peter is not
to be regarded as exclusively endowed with it, either in whole or in part, but
is simply to be looked upon as first among his equals” (Meyer on Matt 16:19;
18:18).
As Scripture teaches Peter is not exclusively gifted with the keys but only
first among his equals. For it says that two or more must agree not just one as
in speaking Ex Cathedra. Whatever this meant, it was extended to all the
apostles and to the Church to practice today. As Christ's followers through all
ages have the power to admit into the church under his command Go, disciple all
nations, baptizing them and teaching those who profess faith in Christ.
Peter had
the privilege to use the keys by presenting the gospel in Acts 2 to the Jews
first, in Acts 8 to the Samaritans and in Acts 10 to the Gentiles. But he was
called to be the apostles to the Jews which certainly would disqualify him from
being in Rome ruling over gentiles. (That was Paul's ministry. If he did visit
Rome it was not to stay or rule there.)
To “bind
and loose” in the vernacular of the Jews at that time, signified to prohibit
and permit; to teach or declare a thing to be unlawful was to bind; to be
lawful, was to loose. As the leadership was ripped from non believing Israel
and given to the apostles; some things forbidden by the law of Moses were now
to be allowed, as the eating of such and such meats; some things allowed there
were now to be forbidden. Acts 10:13-16And a voice came to him, “Rise, Peter;
kill and eat.” But Peter said, “Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything
common or unclean.” And a voice spoke to him again the second time, “What God
has cleansed you must not call common.” This was done three times. And the
object was taken up into heaven again.” By God loosening the restrictions
permitting non kosher foods to be eaten Peter understands the vision through
the gentiles. Peter used these keys in a legislative sense of ‘loosing” as
Peter saw God’s spirit moving to declare the gentiles clean. Just as it was
revealed to him in previously by a vision in Acts 10:9-48. The Lord was telling
him to eat what was on the sheet. Peter refused because it was forbidden to eat
unclean animals under the mosaic Law. After three times of the Lord saying to
eat because they are now clean, Peter then begins to contemplate what the
vision meant. This had a two-fold meaning that the foods once forbidden were
now permitted from this Peter concludes as he sees that the Lord had cleansed
all by his blood so to the gentiles can be saved.
Peter also
used the keys in judicially “binding” punishing Annanias and Sapphirra for
their lying to the Holy Spirit.
“Now there
arose a dispute among them, which of them was reputed to be the greatest. But
he said to them, 'The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them, and they who
exercise authority over them are called Benefactors. But not so with you. On
the contrary, let him who is greatest among you become as the youngest, and him
who is chief as the servant.'“ (Luke 22:24-26).
The Pope
has people bow down to him and kiss his ring (this was often a sign of
worship). When men bowed to Peter in Acts 10:25-26 he refused them telling them
to “stand up, I myself am a man” If Peter is to be the example should not the
Pope follow it?
The fact that the apostles
had an argument among themselves shows they certainly did not understand that
Peter was to be Pope. Jesus had the chance to correct them if this were so.
Also, the occasion of the argument was the night of the betrayal- the last
night of the Lord's earthly ministry- and yet the apostles still did not
understand that Christ had given Peter a position of primacy. Even after the so
called “ exaltation of Peter” in Mt.16:16 where Jesus said He would give
Peter the keys of the kingdom, less than two chapters later we see that He gave
it to them all (Mt.18). Why do this if it is exclusive? Because ALL the
apostles were to be the foundation not only one of them. The Lord settled the
argument, not by stating that He had already made Peter head, but by declaring
that the Gentiles have their head rulers, “But not so with you.” Jesus very
plainly taught that no one would occupy any such place as a ruler (or Pope)
exercising authority over the whole church. Peter said they will all abandon
you but not I. What did Jesus say? Before the night is over ( the rooster
crows) you will deny me 3 times. Not a good sign for one who would lead the
Church.
1 Peter 1:1 Peter's letters
employ his apostleship in the introduction. Because he is addressing churches
which he had no immediate connection with him, but with Paul. Paul later
states: “For I consider that I am not at all INFERIOR to the most eminent
apostles” (2 Cor. 11:5). Notice that Paul uses the plural form “APOSTLES,” not
“A or THE apostle.”
The Bible makes it clear the
foundation of the church is not on one apostle but all of them.
Eph 2:20 “ having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets,
Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone.” It is not built on Peter as
Roman Catholicism claims. In heaven as on earth god recognizes them equally.
“Now the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of
the twelve apostles of the Lamb.” There is not Peter with the eleven, he is
included with the twelve.( Rev 21:14)
Eph 4:11-12 “And He Himself
gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and
teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the
edifying of the body of Christ” There is no pope mentioned for the church's
instruction. Peter states in 2 Pet 3:2 “that you may be mindful of the words
which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of
us, the apostles of the Lord and Savior”
Without the Papacy and the succession of Peter there is no Roman
Catholicism. Their church stands or falls upon this teaching. The true Church
stands and falls by its teachings and practices of Christ from the word of God
in the Bible alone. Jesus said “if you continue in my word you
are certainly my disciples.” When Jesus gave this power to the apostles, He
meant that whatsoever they forbid or permit in the church would have authority
in conducting His teachings. This same authority is written of in the Scripture
and used for governing the church today.
pt.2
We have one Father