Thoughts on II Peter 3:15&16

[Kdana]

As I was reading through II Peter trying to gain a better understanding of the 'End Times', I came to a verse near the end that caused me to stop and meditate upon the significance of it.

Stepping back into time, I thought of Peter, who walked and talked with Jesus, the one whom Jesus called the Rock, upon whom He would build His church, the one whom He told to feed His sheep if he loved Him; also the one who agonized over denying his Lord three times. This is the man who wrote the first and second epistles of Peter, who wrote the verse that is the object of my thought.

II Peter 3:15 & 16 says ' consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation- as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.'

The significance this verse gives to the relationship that Peter had with Paul is very insightful to me. Peter’s epistle was written in the mid 60’s AD and Paul’s epistles are dated from the late 40’s to early 60’s AD, so it appears Peter had first hand knowledge of Paul’s epistles to the churches, giving credence to the veracity of Paul’s writings being God inspired, and totally accepted by Peter, the Rock, one of the disciples who walked with Jesus the Son of God.

It is also plain to see that people were already trying to twist and change Scripture, ending in their own destruction.

Rose,
Do you believe the following verses suggest that Jesus called Peter the Rock and is building his church upon him (Peter)? I believe Jesus said he was building his church upon the fact that He was the Christ, the Son of the living God>
Kdana


Mat 16:13 ¶ When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?


Mat 16:14 And they said, Some [say that thou art] John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.


Mat 16:15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?


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


Mat 16:17 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.


Mat 16:18 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.


Mat 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.


Mat 16:20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Rose,
Do you believe the following verses suggest that Jesus called Peter the Rock and is building his church upon him (Peter)? I believe Jesus said he was building his church upon the fact that He was the Christ, the Son of the living God>
Kdana

Hi Kdana,

Since this is my first post to you, let me say "Welcome to our forum!"



I thought I'd jump in here while we're waiting for Rose to find time to answer.

Your question makes me think of this verse:

Ephesians 2:19-22 19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; 20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: 22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Paul said that the church is built on the foundation of the "the foundation of the apostles and prophets" with "Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone."

Was Peter an Apostle? Yes.

Was Peter a Prophet? Yes. He wrote Holy Scripture.

Did Jesus say that he would build His Church upon Peter? Yes, that is the most literal and natural reading of the passage. The word play between Petros and petra is inescapable, and there is no indication in the text that Peter's confession should be taken as the antecedent of "this rock." If that were Christ's true intent, then we must ask why He made it seem otherwise.

Do all these answers cohere? Yes.

Do these interpretations of Matthew 16 and Ephesians 2 cohere? Yes.

The interpretation you offer does not flow naturally from the text. It appears to have been invented by Protestants to counter the claims of the Catholics. I don't think we should let a squabble between Christians determine how we interpret the Bible. We must look to the Bible for the truth. We must be careful not to twist it to fit our own agendas. We must never let our prejudices color what we read. I sincerely doubt that anyone ever would have invented that novel interpretation of Matt 16:18 if not for the battle with the Catholics. We must always be on guard against letting such things influence our interpretation of Scripture.

Of course, I don't think Matt 16:18 justifies the Catholic claims in any way at all. By their fruit ye shall know them. I need no contrived biblical argument to recognize the errors in the Catholic church.

Richard

[Rose]

I would also like to say.... welcome to the forum, Kdana

In response to your question about Peter being the rock upon which Christ would build His church?

That wasn't the object of my post, which was to draw attention to the fact that Peter had intimate knowledge of Paul's teaching having read and approved of his letters.
But as to your question; I read Richards post in reply to yours and he pretty much sums up the way I feel so I will just leave it at that.

Thanks for your participation

Rose

[Stephen]

Hi Kdana!

I agree with your perspective, and don't believe Jesus said he would literally build his church on Peter. However, it is true to say that Peter was a leader of the early church.

Richard takes a hyper-literalist view of the verses in question, which I think is a mistake. And here's why.

Jesus wasn't, in my view, talking literally of a man named Peter on whom he would build his church. If he was, indeed, referring to the person of Peter, that reference ought to be understood as the words Peter confessed: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God". That confession is what Jesus was most likely referring to if you want to link it to Peter, but certainly not the man himself. After all, just a few verses on and Jesus calls Peter satan! Are we then also to take this literally?!!! Certainly not. Jesus is rebuking Peter for his confession, not for his person, just as he is praising Peter for his confession a few verses earlier. Therefore the only sensible answer is that Jesus wasn't referring directly to the man Peter. You can't have your cake and eat it.

To summarise, the rock upon which Jesus said he would build his church is the confession that he is the Christ, the Son of the living God. That was Peter's confession. It is a confession every Christian shares. It is the rock of our faith. Peter is certainly not that rock!

Stephen

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi Kdana!

I agree with your perspective, and don't believe Jesus said he would literally build his church on Peter. However, it is true to say that Peter was a leader of the early church.

Richard takes a hyper-literalist view of the verses in question, which I think is a mistake. And here's why.

Ahh ... come on Stephen, let's get real. "Hyper-literalism" is not an accurate description of my position. I didn't take anything excessively "literally" - I interpreted the words in the way they were meant to be interpreted, as I will explain below.

Jesus wasn't, in my view, talking literally of a man named Peter on whom he would build his church. If he was, indeed, referring to the person of Peter, that reference ought to be understood as the words Peter confessed: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God". That confession is what Jesus was most likely referring to if you want to link it to Peter, but certainly not the man himself. After all, just a few verses on and Jesus calls Peter satan! Are we then also to take this literally?!!! Certainly not. Jesus is rebuking Peter for his confession, not for his person, just as he is praising Peter for his confession a few verses earlier. Therefore the only sensible answer is that Jesus wasn't referring directly to the man Peter. You can't have your cake and eat it.

I think you are confusing things with your strange use of the word "literal." When Jesus said "You are the Rock, and upon this Rock I will build my church" no one is taking anything "literally." The language is obviously symbolic. You seem to have forgotten that it was the Lord Jesus Himself who gave Peter the name "Rock." The fact that He then uses it in this verse can not be so glibly dismissed. We must assume that Jesus knew what He was doing when He named Peter the Rock and then said "Upon this Rock I will build my church."

If Jesus wanted us to understand that Peter's Confession was the "Rock" then He very easily could have told us so. But that's not what He did.

Furthermore, your response failed to address the fact that Paul also told us that the church was founded upon the Apostles and Prophets, with Christ as the Cornerstone. Thus Paul and Jesus confirm each other about Peter. There is no "hyper-literalism" here.

So what does the "Rock" symbolize? I agree it is not merely the "man" Peter, but his entire testimony - not merely the testimony preserved in Matt 16:16, but rather his entire testimony as preserved in his two letters and the effect he had as the Christ-appointed leader of the fledging church. It was Peter the man to whom Christ thrice repeated "Feed my sheep." You did not address this point either.

As for Christ's rebuke of Peter's fleshly opposition to the plan of God - it would be folly to take that literally, just as it would be folly to think that Peter was "literally" a piece of granite! Let's strive to use our words a little more precisely, shall we, my friend (and worthy opponent, I might add!)

To summarise, the rock upon which Jesus said he would build his church is the confession that he is the Christ, the Son of the living God. That was Peter's confession. It is a confession every Christian shares. It is the rock of our faith. Peter is certainly not that rock!

Stephen

Yes, every Christian shares that confession, but that does not make it the "Rock" of our faith. The true Rock of our Faith is Christ Himself. There is no contradiction, let alone "hyper-literalism" in taking Jesus at His Word when He established Peter as the leader of the fledgling Church in Jerusalem. This was, in fact, the common understanding of Christians until Roman arrogance rose up and attempted to use this fact to justify their wicked usurpation of authority over all other churches. But I will not allow that error of the Roman Church - no matter how grievous it be - to prejudice my interpretation of Holy Scripture.

Richard

[Stephen]

Hi Richard!

Thanks for your reply. You appear to be somewhat sensitive to certain criticisms that relate to the rcc, as you put it. Anyone who takes a stronger view - by which I mean a view more in line with the early protestant view of the rcc - seems to come within your radar as being prejudiced. Accusations of taking a prejudiced view of Scripture are quite a strong statement to make, although they don't personally bother me.

I see that we agree on certain things, that it isn't Peter the man that Jesus was referring to as the rock upon which he would build his church. However, I see nothing in your last post to dissuade me from the view I espoused earlier. Peter is not the rock upon which the church was built. That Rock can only be Jesus Christ, and the acknowledgment of his divinity.

I am fully aware of John 21 and Paul's references to the church being founded on the apostles and the prophets, with Christ as the chief corner stone. My point exactly. Christ is the Rock, and Peter is himself founded on that Rock. But do not mistake Peter as the Rock. He isn't. Christ is the Rock, the chief corner stone. This is the Rock upon which the church is built, and Peter's confession of that truth earnt him the title of Peter.

No worries about Peter being the early leader of the church. Everyone knows that. Indeed, he was a rock, with his zeal for Christ being an outstanding attribute. But so were John and Paul and the rest of the bros. Peter ain't the Rock Jesus referred to as the foundation of his church. That Rock is Christ, both in the OT and the NT (1 Corinthians 10:4 etc.). That Rock is the chief corner stone. Jesus Christ.

Therefore my assertions in my previous post stand. The naming of Peter by our Lord I believe is in reference to Peter being the first to understand and confess this truth. Truly, a chip off the old block. There is no need to introduce any notion of anti-rcc bias into the discussion. Why would anyone need to do so, unless they were particularly sensitive to this subject? Personally, I couldn't care less. The scripture speaks plainly enough as it is. It's obvious to me Christ was referring to himself as the Rock at Matthew 16:18.

Stephen

[shalag]

I find it interesting that Jesus chose the name 'Peter' for 'Simon Bar Jona'. Although it is written in the Greek I often wondered if Jesus wasn't speaking Hebrew as a play on the Greek - as confirmation of his choice:

Strong's 6363 Original Word Transliterated Word rtp peter Phonetic Spelling Translated Words peh'-ter firstling, open, first issue, first offspring

Exodus 13:2 Sanctify unto me all the firstborn [peter], whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast: it is mine.

Just as Jesus is 'firstborn' - so too was Peter according to Jesus appointment:

Colossians 1:18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.

Hebrews 12:23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect,

[Kdana]

Thank you all for the welcome's!! I'm very happy to be here

As I was reading Matthew 16:13 - 16:20 over again and all the the replies, I believe the Lord showed me another meaning. We are all aware of the different layers (?) of meaning scripture has. So now I believe the following -

"the Rock" Jesus refers to is

1. Peter - a "founder" of the early church

2. Jesus Christ - the "cornerstone"

3. The Revelation - The Lord is building His church on the "revelation" God
gives to people who seek Him!

I love when that happens!

[Stephen]

Hi shalag!

That's a really good point about the name Peter being a wordplay on the Hebrew peter. I had considered that myself some 18 years ago when I first began researching the breastplate of Aaron. At that time I was wondering if there may have been a miscopy of the name of the second breastplate stone in the Hebrew. The Hebrew is pitdah, and I was musing over that being a possible corruption of pitrah, with the Hebrew daleth and resh being so similar in appearance. The corruption of these two letters had happened elsewhere in copying. While pitdah has no etymological traces in Hebrew, a reading of pitrah would suit a Hebrew root.

Peter's name was originally Simon, and he shared many similarities to the biblical patriarch Simeon, to whom belonged the pitdah stone in the breastplate. That's another fascinating topic worth covering in the far-flung future. You know, the violent use of swords and the idea of imprisonment, that sort of thing.

Stephen

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Thank you all for the welcome's!! I'm very happy to be here

As I was reading Matthew 16:13 - 16:20 over again and all the the replies, I believe the Lord showed me another meaning. We are all aware of the different layers (?) of meaning scripture has. So now I believe the following -

"the Rock" Jesus refers to is

1. Peter - a "founder" of the early church

2. Jesus Christ - the "cornerstone"

3. The Revelation - The Lord is building His church on the "revelation" God
gives to people who seek Him!

I love when that happens!

Hey Kdana,

Me too! I love it when we get a multilayered view of the polychromatic wisdom of God!

I think its pretty difficult to deny that Peter was the leader of the church in Jerusalem. But that didn't make him the "Pope of Rome" now did it?

Glad to have you here. Talk more soon,

Richard