You're the rock and on this rock I will build my church

>You're the rock and on this rock I will build my church
I just can't spin my head round this one. WHAT did he mean by this???
I mean this kephas after calling Simon kephas could mean anything. Probably means Jesus lol

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=6KV6PXSODgE
protestanterrors.com/#10
protestanterrors.com/
catholicgentleman.net/2015/01/biblical-boots-papacy/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament_apocrypha
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

rock is peter:
pros:
• seems more natural in the context
• peter's confession and subsequent confirmation of his confession
• peter became the leading disciple in the early church (acts)

cons:
• Jesus used two different words for 'peter' and 'rock'
• matthew records the aramaic distinction in greek
• if Jesus had wanted to identify peter as the rock on which he would build the church, the clearest way to do this would have been to use the same word
• peter's confession triggered Jesus' comment about building His church on a rock, it did not place peter in a privileged position among the disciples. Jesus never treated Peter as though he occupied a favored position in the church because he made this confession.
• new testament writers never connected Peter's leadership in the early church with his confession. that rested on divine election, Jesus' command to strengthen his brethren (luke 22:32) and peter's personality.

the confession is the rock (Jesus is Messiah and God):
pros:
• this position has in its favor the different words Jesus used for 'rock' and the definite 'this' before 'rock' as identifying something in the immediately preceding context
•other new testament references to the foundation of the church could refer to the truth concerning Jesus' person and work (Rom 9:33, Eph 2:20, Pet 2:5-8)

cons:
• calling the truth about Jesus' a rock when Jesus had just called peter a rock seems unnecessarily confusing
•the addition of 'this' only compounds the confusion
• the other new testament passages that refer to the foundation of the church never identify that foundation as the truth about Jesus

Jesus is the rock:
pros:
• Old testament prophets likened the Messiah to a stone (Ps 118:22; Isa 28:16) and Jesus claimed to be that stone (Matthew 21:42).
• Peter himself identified Jesus as that stone (Acts 4:10-12; 1 Pet 2:5-8)
• Paul did aswell (Rom 9:32-33; 1 Cor. 3:11; 10:4; Eph. 2:20)
• this interpretation explains the use of two different though related words for rock
• this view accounts for the use of 'this' since Jesus was present when He said these worsd
• the Old testament used the figure of a rock to describe God (Deut 32:4, 15, 18, 30, 31, 37; 2 Sam 22:2; PS 18:2, 31, 46; 28:1)
• Since peter had just confessed Jesus was God, it would have been natural for Jesus to use this figure of God to picture Himself

cons:
• This view makes makes Jesus mix His metaphors:
Jesus becomes the foundation of the church and building of the church.
• However the new testament refers explicitly to Jesus as the church's foundation elsewhere (Rom 9:33, 1 Cor. 3:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8) And Jesus referred to Himself as the church's builder.
• Paul makes a statement that God builds the church on the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20) (Though Jesus is the chief cornerstone around which they also provided the foundation (1 Cor 3:10-11)
• Peter's prominence among the apostles in the early church seems to argue against Jesus being the foundation (but peter was only the first among equals, his leadership in the church was not essentially different from the other apostles as the new testament writers present it)

>• Jesus used two different words for 'peter' and 'rock'
he didn't. In konè greek "petra" and "petros" meant the same thing. If he wanted to mark a difference between the two words he would have used "lithos". People who have english as their native language don't understand why petra was used because they don't use gendered nouns. Also in aramaic, which was the language Jesus used irl, kepha would have been used in both instances.
>• matthew records the aramaic distinction in greek
there is no distinction in aramic
>it did not place peter in a privileged position among the disciples
wrong
youtube.com/watch?v=6KV6PXSODgE
> new testament writers never connected Peter's leadership in the early church with his confession
because it's not simtply Peter's confession
>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
The authority is given to Peter directly by God.

>• Old testament prophets likened the Messiah to a stone • the >Old testament used the figure of a rock to describe God (
Jesus is also referred to as the morning star, and Lucifer is referred to as such. It is a figure of speech that conveys a meaning. Just because Jesus is the cornerstone of the Truth, the Way and the Life, doesn't mean that Peter can't be the stone of the Church.
>peter was only the first among equals
Wrong, the title of "first among equals" was invented by the Orthodox after the schism to justify their rejection of the papacy, it is not found anywhere before that
>his leadership in the church was not essentially different from the other apostles as the new testament writers present it)
wrong, see youtube.com/watch?v=6KV6PXSODgE
>• this interpretation explains the use of two different though related words for rock
again, they are not different words. They are the same word gendered differently, because if Jesus didn't use "petros" to make a distinction from "petra", Peter would have been given a female name. It would have been like saying "you are samantha". He would have feminized Peter and forced everyone to call him by a feminine name.
>• this view accounts for the use of 'this' since Jesus was present when He said these worsd
nope. You are "rock" and on THIS "rock" refers to the previous rock, which is Peter himself
> Since peter had just confessed Jesus was God, it would have been natural for Jesus to use this figure of God to picture Himself
Nope, not natural at all. Complete non-sequitur. It is very simple. Peter tells Jesus who Jesus is, in truth, that he is the Son of God. In exchange Jesus tells Peter who he really is, in truth, the stone upon which His Church will be built. Any other interpretation is misguided and dishonest.

Literally the papacy

>petra and petros mean the same thing
Πέτρος:
>a piece of rock; a stone; a single stone; movable, insecure, shifting, or rolling.
πέτρᾳ:
>a rock; a cliff; a projecting rock; mother rock; huge mass; solid formation; fixed; immovable; enduring.

would Jesus have been speaking aramiac here, or greek?

Revelation 2:9 (KJV)
"...and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan."

Revelation 3:9 (KJV)
"Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee."

>the christians are the REAL jews
filthy christkikes who worship jews so much they proclaim themselves one
you and the other jews should all be shot

Serious question Sup Forums was Paul a false Apostle?

Was he visited by Satan and corrupted to infiltrate the Apostles and spread Jesus' teaching and message to the Gentiles (Supposedly Jesus and the Apostles goal was not this, but for the Israelites/Jews.)

He taught not to follow the Mosaic law and Salvation is from Faith alone. Apparently no other Apostle or Jesus taught this.

>visited by Satan
OY VEY GOY Satan will get you!

no, that's retarded.

what's this meme from? muslims? judaizers?

I think you mean (((KJV)))

>James gave the translators instructions intended to ensure that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its belief in an ordained clergy.

The rock on which the Church is to be built is regularly taken by St. Chrysostom to be the confession of Peter, or the faith which prompted this confession. It is well known that this oblique interpretation -- "on the faith of Peter" for "on Peter because of his faith" -- was invented as a useful weapon against Arianism:

"It is upon Peter's confession of Christ as the true Son of God that the Church is immovably built." "He who built the Church upon his confession." (Hom 82[83] in Matt 3, vol VII, 741[786]; same in Hom 21[20] in Joann 1, vol VIII, 128[120])

"He received his name for the unchangeableness and immobility of his faith; and when all were asked in common, he says, leaping forth before the others: 'Thou art the Christ,' etc, when he was entrusted with the keys of the kingdom of heaven." (chap 2 of Galat 4, vol X, 640[686]; also Hom 2 in Inscr Act 6, vol II, 86[70], and Hom 19[18] in Joann, vol VIII, 121[111-112]; also Palladius "Upon this rock, that is, upon this confession" Dial de vita Chrys, vol 1, 68)

>again, they are not different words. They are the same word gendered differently
la mela: apple
il melo: apple tree

non mangio un melo

>It would have been like saying "you are samantha".
so much rides on the interpretation of this text,
i think making it clear would've been more of a priority than whether or not peter comes off looking like a nancyboy if peter really is the rock

>complete non-sequitur
all the verses of the preceding bulletpoint that show God is described as a rock in the old testament numerous times is what makes it a natural figure of speech, since peter had just identified Christ as God.

>would Jesus have been speaking aramiac here
He speak aramaic the whole times dumbass. Gospels are in Greek because it was Lingua Franca at this time.
Evrything you hate about Jews is the synagogue of Satan. If (((Jews))) were real Jews you would love them. But they are not.

>Evrything you hate about Jews is the synagogue of Satan
Christians are just as bad and they worship a Jew
>BUT christ wasn't a kike!
he was

>He speak aramaic the whole times dumbass
yeah it was a rhetorical question.
the two words there would've been kephas and kephas instead of Petros and petra.

that's what i meant by the distinction, but the italian dude i was talking to already pointed out that the reason for having the two words would've been because if he used Petra and petra, peter would've had a girl's name.
not sure where to go from there. that's a reasonable explanation but i don't find it compelling.
I believe Jesus is the rock.

>Serious question Sup Forums was Paul a false Apostle?
If he was he would end like Simon Magician.
>Was he visited by Satan and corrupted to infiltrate the Apostles
"And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it"
>and spread Jesus' teaching and message to the Gentiles (Supposedly Jesus and the Apostles goal was not this, but for the Israelites/Jews.)
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:"
>He taught not to follow the Mosaic law
>What is council of Jerusalem

>and Salvation is from Faith alone
This is Protestant meme my friend. He don't fo it. protestanterrors.com/#10
>Apparently no other Apostle or Jesus taught this.
Noone taught faith alone. Not following aspects of Mosaic law was taught by Peter for exemple.

>I know shit about Christianity: the post.

Build house on rock
Steady

Build house on sand
Collapses

>GOY Jesus definitely wasn't a jew!
>sure he was born a jew, circumcised into the Jewish faith and proclaimed himself King of the Jews
>But he wasn't a Jew!
Jew: The Post

You went through this fucking wall of pasta when you could have simply said "The rock was a metaphor for someone's strength in their faith, a pious example to lead others with"

>I've been proven wrong but I won't admit it
Protestants, I swear to God, you are somtimes worse than Ishmaelites
protestanterrors.com/
catholicgentleman.net/2015/01/biblical-boots-papacy/

>The rock was a metaphor for someone's strength in their faith, a pious example to lead others with
but that's wrong

and it was transcribed, not pasted.
i find typing things out is a good method for memorization/study.

Jesus just meant that Peter was a dense cunt, you're thinking too much

Tell me one simple thing you little fucker.
If Christianity is a Jewish trock why Jews hate it more than anything in the world?
Synagogue of Satan is went. Don't buy they lies about Christ.

>proven wrong
no, there is no smoking gun proof here.
there are 3 reasonable interpretations with varying evidence to support them, i believe that Jesus being the rock rather than peter carries more weight.

Absolutely nothing you explained takes away from my vague metaphorical statement in any way.

Is this what they teach in church now, overanalyzed tripe instead of straightforward and powerful messages about knowing oneself in the eyes of God?

peter's name was the word for rock. He was totally fucking with him and peter bought. He probably told judas 'you are the jew and on this jew I will build my church.'

>If Christianity is a Jewish trock why Jews hate it more than anything in the world?
because jesus was a naughty jew

whatever you say - jesus was a kike and you worship him like a very good goy

(OP)

We're going to own you heathens as slaves FOREVER. So quit your fantasy.

Proverbs 22:16

Whoever oppresses the poor to increase his own wealth, or gives to the rich, will only come to poverty.

Isaiah 14:2

And the peoples will take them and bring them to their place, and the house of Israel will possess them in the LORD’s land as male and female slaves. They will take captive those who were their captors, and rule over those who oppressed them.

Isaiah 49:23
Kings and queens will serve you and care for all your needs. They will bow to the earth before you and lick the dust from your feet. Then you will know that I am the LORD. Those who trust in me will never be put to shame."

Lol I trust in my father the Eternal God. My trust will not put me to shame so laugh and scoff all you want but we will own you all.

Psalm 79:9-10
Help us, O God of our salvation! Help us for the glory of your name. Save us and forgive our sins for the honor of your name. Why should pagan nations be allowed to scoff, asking, "Where is their God?" Show us your vengeance against the nations, for they have spilled the blood of your servants.

Genesis 22:17-18

That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.

Genesis 15:13-14

Then the LORD said to him, "Know for certain that for four hundred years your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own and that they will be enslaved and mistreated there. But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves, and afterward they will come out with great possessions.

Amos 9:12

So that they may POSSESS the remnant of Edom and ALL THE NATIONS that bear my name," declares the LORD, who will do these things

ALL THE NATIONS WILL BOW DOWN TO MY PEOPLE. Us who keep his laws

Immovable faith.
/thread

>worshipping the dead kike on a stick
>actually believing the Bible despite it being heavily edited and corrupted by early Church
>thinking Yoshua Ben Yussef is actually the Messiah and not some Roman plant to subdue the rebellious jews (turn the other cheek hehe, render unto caesar and behave hehe)

>being heavily edited and corrupted by early Church
what's your evidence for this?

If Peter is the rock in Matt:16:18 why Jesus calls Peter Satan couple verses later in 16:23 "But Jesus turned around and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are an offense to me, for you are not thinking God's thoughts but human thoughts!”

If even the gates of Hell wont prevail against the rock, why does Peter get scared shitless and denies Christ three times when some random dudes ask whether hi follows Him. (Matt. 26:69-75)?

That is some firm foundation you have there.

...

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament_apocrypha
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas

@84490153
can you put your trip back on?
it's annoying having to filter your shitposts in each new thread

so, in your eyes, it was edited because the writings that weren't inspired, contradicted inspired writings and known history weren't added to the canon?

that's sort of silly.
have you read the gospel of thomas?

In this context, in this passages and in this matter, Jesus makes Simon a Rock and upon this rock, he built his Church that gates of Hell shall not prevail. He gave him keys to the Heaven and authority to bound a loose things on Earth and Heaven. Jesus is aslo fundation of Church, the cornerstone as well as Apostoles and prophets; but this not change a fact that Simon is Kephas and on this Kephas Jesus bulit his Church. It wa san issue for every heretics since 33AD and they are heretics excomunicated from the Church and therafore salvation becouse it's litterally can't be worked around without commiting cardinal errors in faith.
Jezus kurwa Chryste. Tell me britbong, why you are so retarded and bluepilled by the Jews? Did your religious father beat you up for masturbaiting to Dawkins?

>why you are so retarded and bluepilled by the Jews
>worships a literal jew
>thinks he's not a retarded bluepilled goy
ok christkike

>Proverbs 22:16
Aka what Jews do
>Isaiah 14:2
>Isaiah 49:23
>Psalm 79:9-10
>Genesis 22:17-18
>Genesis 15:13-14
>Amos 9:12
You are no longer Israel or seeds of Abraham. You denied Father and broken covenant. All of the blessing is now with new children of Abraham, us. All of promises are fulfilled with the real Israel, us. Ye son of the Devil can lie about it but you are nothing more than synagogue of Satan. Repent and accept God, talmudist.

>with the real Israel, us
like is said
you're a jew and proud of it
and to top it off you think you're redpilled!
you've been jewed so hard you should change your name to yeshua bin yusuf :^)

I worship a God fucker. I am not committing idolatry. And you are still blue pilled idiot who felt perfectly for the trap of sons of devil.

>I worship a God fucker
:^)

JIDF in full damage-control

Słuchaj jebany ahmedzie bo mnie wkurwiasz. Yes we are Isreal. Yes, we are real Jews. No real Jews have nothing to do with synagogue of Satan. Yes synagogue of satan calls themselves jews. Yes, synagogue of Satan is evil af. No, they are not Jews. And jew, you are a faggot that eats shit of synagogue of Satan and buys they antichristian lies kurwa twoja mać. Read pic, read bible and for the love of God go fuck yourself mały żydku pierdolony.

that doesn't even make any sense because Christians are the real jews
so aren't JIDF really CIDF?
>Yes we are Isreal. Yes, we are real Jews
ok jew :^)

...

jesus is a jew and thus so are you

And (((Jews))) are not Jews. So where the problem is kurwiarzu?

>we're the real jews
>there is nothing wrong with being a jew
oy vey shlomo

Christianity reked again:

it was a weak assertion, in a gospel with variations, not backed up by the other gospels

rather ironic huh

>have you read the gospel of thomas?
yeah its interesting, can see why they purged it and those like it.

funny how some scrolls in a cave flipped it all around

>why does Peter get scared shitless and denies Christ three times when some random dudes ask whether hi follows Him
Because Pentecost came after crucifixion

>Taking religious figure of speech literally
Christians have the faith of Abraham while kikes do not. Now go gas yourself

>Christians have the faith of Abraham
>Abraham is a stinking semite
it's no surprise Christians are retarded when the faith they follow encourages such stupidity
>go gas yourself
ok shlomo :^)

Peter also got BTFO by Paul and that was after pentacost (Galatians 2:11-14)

There is a monumental difference between being an ethnic Jew and being a Son of God.

Wisdom and righteousness are only condemned by those who are evil, fucking faggots like yourselves.

Jakim kurwa debilem trzeba być.

>he's not a jew!
>he's the son of YHWH, the jewish God!
ok shlomo
>Wisdom and righteousness are only condemned by those who are evil, fucking faggots like yourselves.
yes shlomo
is that a gypsy curse?

Actually thanks for that. He calls him kephas there not Petrus.
Nobody claims everything Peter did was perfect. Just like Popes can sin. Just that he has the authority to bind and on loose on earth which will be loosed on heaven

>All those non-arguments

Youre the only one being jewed, goy. :^)

Christ stands forever.

That's true. Peter was a coward sometimes, like in Galatians 2:11-14. But he was steal vicar of Christ and Paul acknowledged that like in 1 Cor. 15:3-5 or Gal. 1:18
Is that what reatard sounds like?

>Christ stands forever.

...

...

Why do you boast of evil, O mighty man?
The steadfast love of God endures all the day.
Your tongue plots destruction,
like a sharp razor, you worker of deceit.
You love evil more than good,
and lying more than speaking what is right.
You love all words that devour,
O deceitful tongue.
But God will break you down forever;
he will snatch and tear you from your tent;
he will uproot you from ithe land of the living.
The righteous shall see and fear,
and shall laugh at him, saying,
“See the man who would not make
God his refuge,
but trusted in the abundance of his riches
and sought refuge in his own destruction!”

That much butthurt means that you are either slime, kike or fedora, one of the trinity of apostasy.