RevTestament Posted September 4, 2017 Posted September 4, 2017 Matthew 16:13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? 14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. The Romans had built a city at a large spring flowing out of a cave, and called it Cæsarea Philippi(above). Here they worshiped Pan, their god who guarded the gates of Hades. They called this cave the gates of Hades, so Yeshua is using this as part of an object lesson. 15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter[Petros], and upon this rock[Petra] I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. What is Yeshua saying here? Is He saying Peter is the Church? What is the big rock/Petra that Yeshua will build His church upon? I can almost see Him pointing to this huge rock the living water is flowing out of. In the scriptures stones represent revelation of God. If Petra is a big revelation, what is it? Peter just gave a revelation none of the other apostles did - that Yeshua is the Messiach/Christos/annointed, and is the Son of the living El. Thus, Peter is the stone because he is revealing that Yeshua is the Messiach of Daniel 9 prophesied to come. This is the revelation that Yeshua will build His Church upon - not some chain of authority. What do you say? Is the testimony that Yeshua is the Messiah, the Son of the Living God the foundation of the Church? Does Yeshua form the chief cornerstone of this mighty rock of revelation? Is this the firm foundation upon which His Church is built? What does the Spirit tell you?
cdowis Posted September 4, 2017 Posted September 4, 2017 He told Peter what he meant in versed 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. 2
Robert F. Smith Posted September 4, 2017 Posted September 4, 2017 14 minutes ago, cdowis said: He told Peter what he meant in versed 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. Which is why we see the keys on the papal coat of arms. The keys are a big deal both in Roman Catholicism and in the Mormon Church. 3
Robert F. Smith Posted September 4, 2017 Posted September 4, 2017 27 minutes ago, RevTestament said: Matthew 16:1.................................................. 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter[Petros], and upon this rock[Petra] I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. ........................................ What is the big rock/Petra that Yeshua will build His church upon? ................................................. The late Catholic scholar Joseph Fitzmyer suggested an Aramaic play on words, which I will alter slightly herewith: "That thou art Peter[Kefa], and upon this rock['eben] I will build ['ebne] my church" Jesus did not likely speak Greek, but instead taught in Aramaic. 1
RevTestament Posted September 5, 2017 Author Posted September 5, 2017 1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said: The late Catholic scholar Joseph Fitzmyer suggested an Aramaic play on words, which I will alter slightly herewith: "That thou art Peter[Kefa], and upon this rock['eben] I will build ['ebne] my church" Jesus did not likely speak Greek, but instead taught in Aramaic. My guess is that Yeshua did indeed speak Greek, as it is doubtful that most Hellenized Romans of the area would learn Aramaic, especially Galilean Aramaic, and Yeshua probably found work with his Father in nearby Sepphoris working for Roman citizens. Such would essentially necessitate speaking some Greek. However, I agree that Yeshua probably taught in Galilean Aramaic. So our Greek NT is obviously a translation, but appears to try to preserve the word play somewhat.
RevTestament Posted September 5, 2017 Author Posted September 5, 2017 1 hour ago, cdowis said: He told Peter what he meant in versed 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. 1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said: Which is why we see the keys on the papal coat of arms. The keys are a big deal both in Roman Catholicism and in the Mormon Church. So you appear to agree with the Catholic Church that the stone upon which He was going to build His Church was the granting of keys through authority. That seems to say that the gates of hell would not prevail against this priesthood authority, and therefore the priesthood of the Catholic Church must still be valid, and there was never an apostasy. Defend thyselves.
Robert F. Smith Posted September 5, 2017 Posted September 5, 2017 34 minutes ago, RevTestament said: So you appear to agree with the Catholic Church that the stone upon which He was going to build His Church was the granting of keys through authority. That seems to say that the gates of hell would not prevail against this priesthood authority, and therefore the priesthood of the Catholic Church must still be valid, and there was never an apostasy. Defend thyselves. You mean to say that Roman Catholics don't think that Peter was the rock upon which the church would be built? 1
Robert F. Smith Posted September 5, 2017 Posted September 5, 2017 44 minutes ago, RevTestament said: My guess is that Yeshua did indeed speak Greek, as it is doubtful that most Hellenized Romans of the area would learn Aramaic, especially Galilean Aramaic, and Yeshua probably found work with his Father in nearby Sepphoris working for Roman citizens. Such would essentially necessitate speaking some Greek. However, I agree that Yeshua probably taught in Galilean Aramaic. So our Greek NT is obviously a translation, but appears to try to preserve the word play somewhat. That is speculation. We already have plenty of instances in which Jesus and others in the NT speak Aramaic (Matt 5:22, 27:46, Mark 5:41, 7:34, 11:9, 14:36, John 20:16, 1 Cor 16:22). It would make no sense for Jesus to speak Greek to his disciples. The Greek wordplay in Matt 16:18 was invented by the author of Matthew.
Bobbieaware Posted September 5, 2017 Posted September 5, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, RevTestament said: Matthew 16:13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? 14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. The Romans had built a city at a large spring flowing out of a cave, and called it Cæsarea Philippi(above). Here they worshiped Pan, their god who guarded the gates of Hades. They called this cave the gates of Hades, so Yeshua is using this as part of an object lesson. 15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter[Petros], and upon this rock[Petra] I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. What is Yeshua saying here? Is He saying Peter is the Church? What is the big rock/Petra that Yeshua will build His church upon? I can almost see Him pointing to this huge rock the living water is flowing out of. In the scriptures stones represent revelation of God. If Petra is a big revelation, what is it? Peter just gave a revelation none of the other apostles did - that Yeshua is the Messiach/Christos/annointed, and is the Son of the living El. Thus, Peter is the stone because he is revealing that Yeshua is the Messiach of Daniel 9 prophesied to come. This is the revelation that Yeshua will build His Church upon - not some chain of authority. What do you say? Is the testimony that Yeshua is the Messiah, the Son of the Living God the foundation of the Church? Does Yeshua form the chief cornerstone of this mighty rock of revelation? Is this the firm foundation upon which His Church is built? What does the Spirit tell you? In light of the fact that Peter is the apostle who's singled out by the Lord in the verses you quote, the following insights from Peter's first general epistle setting forth his understanding of the foundation and structure of the Church of Christ are of especial interest: 1 Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings, 2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby: 3 If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious. 4 To whom coming, as unto a living STONE , disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious, 5 Ye also, as lively STONES are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. 6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner STONE, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. 7 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the STONE which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, (1st Peter 2) Edited September 5, 2017 by Bobbieaware 1
Avatar4321 Posted September 5, 2017 Posted September 5, 2017 1 hour ago, RevTestament said: So you appear to agree with the Catholic Church that the stone upon which He was going to build His Church was the granting of keys through authority. That seems to say that the gates of hell would not prevail against this priesthood authority, and therefore the priesthood of the Catholic Church must still be valid, and there was never an apostasy. Defend thyselves. Gates of hades. gates of death. Gates are designed to keep things in or out. If Jesus says the gates of death won't prevail in keeping you out of death, He is promise that the Church will die. That doesn't make much sense. If Jesus is promising the gates of seat won't prevail at keeping the Church in death then He is promising that even though the Church will die, the gates won't prevail and the Church will rise again. I think you could interpret this as a promise for the Restoration of the Church, either as an institution or as in the members of the Church will rise in the Resurrection because of the keys and death will have no power over them. Regardless how it's interpreted it doesn't support the claim that there will be no apostasy or restoration 1
strappinglad Posted September 5, 2017 Posted September 5, 2017 3 hours ago, RevTestament said: 14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. Sorry for the slight derail, but I just dawned on me that there must have been a general concept of reincarnation for this response to be acceptable. Did such exist in Christ's time in Jewish thought?
cdowis Posted September 5, 2017 Posted September 5, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, RevTestament said: So you appear to agree with the Catholic Church that the stone upon which He was going to build His Church was the granting of keys through authority. That seems to say that the gates of hell would not prevail against this priesthood authority, and therefore the priesthood of the Catholic Church must still be valid, and there was never an apostasy. Defend thyselves. Only the Catholic and the LDS church have any claim on priesthood authority. The Catholic claim is based on the supposition there was no apostasy. But Christ Himself made it clear that the keys had been lost, and the church and priesthood were restored. Edited September 5, 2017 by cdowis 2
Scott Lloyd Posted September 5, 2017 Posted September 5, 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, RevTestament said: Matthew 16:13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? 14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. The Romans had built a city at a large spring flowing out of a cave, and called it Cæsarea Philippi(above). Here they worshiped Pan, their god who guarded the gates of Hades. They called this cave the gates of Hades, so Yeshua is using this as part of an object lesson. 15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter[Petros], and upon this rock[Petra] I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. What is Yeshua saying here? Is He saying Peter is the Church? What is the big rock/Petra that Yeshua will build His church upon? I can almost see Him pointing to this huge rock the living water is flowing out of. In the scriptures stones represent revelation of God. If Petra is a big revelation, what is it? Peter just gave a revelation none of the other apostles did - that Yeshua is the Messiach/Christos/annointed, and is the Son of the living El. Thus, Peter is the stone because he is revealing that Yeshua is the Messiach of Daniel 9 prophesied to come. This is the revelation that Yeshua will build His Church upon - not some chain of authority. What do you say? Is the testimony that Yeshua is the Messiah, the Son of the Living God the foundation of the Church? Does Yeshua form the chief cornerstone of this mighty rock of revelation? Is this the firm foundation upon which His Church is built? What does the Spirit tell you? It's a triple play on words. Jehovah is the Stone of Israel. Peter (Petra), as chief apostle, would be given the keys of the Kingdom and thereby would lead the Church Christ would build, as would Peter's successors in that office. Joseph Smith taught that "rock" in this passage refers to revelation. Peter and his successors would lead the Church under revelation from Christ. There is also some symbolic significance here with a seer stone being an instrument of revelation, both anciently and in the early days of this gospel dispensation. Edited September 5, 2017 by Scott Lloyd 2
RevTestament Posted September 5, 2017 Author Posted September 5, 2017 3 hours ago, Avatar4321 said: Gates of hades. gates of death. Gates are designed to keep things in or out. If Jesus says the gates of death won't prevail in keeping you out of death, He is promise that the Church will die. That doesn't make much sense. If Jesus is promising the gates of seat won't prevail at keeping the Church in death then He is promising that even though the Church will die, the gates won't prevail and the Church will rise again. I think you could interpret this as a promise for the Restoration of the Church, either as an institution or as in the members of the Church will rise in the Resurrection because of the keys and death will have no power over them. Regardless how it's interpreted it doesn't support the claim that there will be no apostasy or restoration I agree with you that Yeshua is saying that the gates of death will not prevail against the stone. However, I don't see your implication that somehow refers to a restoration of the Church. It may be a personal reference to Peter, that death would not have power over him after he was crucified - I accept the interpretation of John that Peter was crucified. Thus, Yeshua may be personally telling Peter that the gates of death would not conquer him, and that like Yeshua, Peter would rise again. This interpretation comports with Peter's appearance to Joseph Smith to restore the priesthood, which it seems Peter would not be able to do if he was awaiting resurrection. Thus, Peter would be a special case of resurrection long after Yeshua's. I also believe that death will not prevail over the Church for those who believe Yeshua is the prophesied Messiah, so it could just be saying that.
RevTestament Posted September 5, 2017 Author Posted September 5, 2017 2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: It's a triple play on words. Jehovah is the Stone of Israel. Yep. I believe His title of Eloah refers to His being this stone on Israel's behalf. Thus the plural of Elohim is referring to the family or house of stone in the sense of being an immovable power or bond. Quote Joseph Smith taught that "rock" in this passage refers to revelation. Peter and his successors would lead the Church under revelation from Christ. Yep, you get an A here. As i said the rock is revelation. This is apparent throughout the scriptures. For instance in Revelation we read that those who overcome will be given a white stone with a name written in it. Thus, not really referring to priesthood keys. The stone that smites the image of Daniel 2 will become a great mountain of revelation that will fill the earth. Quote There is also some symbolic significance here with a seer stone being an instrument of revelation, both anciently and in the early days of this gospel dispensation. perhaps Quote Peter (Petra), as chief apostle, would be given the keys of the Kingdom and thereby would lead the Church Christ would build, as would Peter's successors in that office. Show me where in the scriptures where a stone clearly refers to priesthood - to revelation given thru priesthood, yes. As immovable, firmly planted representatives of the gospel unto death, yes. Here again you have the idea of an immovable force willing to die for the gospel. The idea that the stone represents priesthood keys of authority seems to be what the Catholics say, and if death will never prevail against it, it seems to say that the priesthood would never leave the earth, and therefore that there was no apostasy. How do you address that?
Darren10 Posted September 5, 2017 Posted September 5, 2017 Mathew L. Bowen wrote an article which touches directly on the theme of this thread. It's actually the article which got me excited when I learned he was to join the Mormon interpreter author's list. Here's his article's summary: Quote Abstract: The famous Petros/petra wordplay in Matthew 16:18 does not constitute Jesus’s identification of Peter as the “rock” upon which his church would be built. This wordplay does however identify him with that “rock” or “bedrock” inasmuch as Peter, a small “seer-stone,” had the potential to become like the Savior himself, “the Rock of ages.” One aspect of that “rock” is the revelation that comes through faith that Jesus is the Christ. Other aspects of that same rock are the other principles and ordinances of the gospel, including temple ordinances. The temple, a symbol of the Savior and his body, is a symbol of the eternal family—the “sure house” built upon a rock. As such, the temple is the perfect embodiment of Peter’s labor in the priesthood, against which hell will not prevail. Founded Upon a Rock: Doctrinal and Temple Implications of Peter’s Surnaming Great stuff. Now, if you have any specific questions from this article I'd be glad to help answer but that would require for me to read it again which I absolutely do not mind as it is a superb article but I also have major ADD when it come to reading so it would take a while for me to get through it.
Darren10 Posted September 5, 2017 Posted September 5, 2017 9 hours ago, RevTestament said: Matthew 16:13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? 14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. The Romans had built a city at a large spring flowing out of a cave, and called it Cæsarea Philippi(above). Here they worshiped Pan, their god who guarded the gates of Hades. They called this cave the gates of Hades, so Yeshua is using this as part of an object lesson. 15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter[Petros], and upon this rock[Petra] I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. What is Yeshua saying here? Is He saying Peter is the Church? What is the big rock/Petra that Yeshua will build His church upon? I can almost see Him pointing to this huge rock the living water is flowing out of. In the scriptures stones represent revelation of God. If Petra is a big revelation, what is it? Peter just gave a revelation none of the other apostles did - that Yeshua is the Messiach/Christos/annointed, and is the Son of the living El. Thus, Peter is the stone because he is revealing that Yeshua is the Messiach of Daniel 9 prophesied to come. This is the revelation that Yeshua will build His Church upon - not some chain of authority. What do you say? Is the testimony that Yeshua is the Messiah, the Son of the Living God the foundation of the Church? Does Yeshua form the chief cornerstone of this mighty rock of revelation? Is this the firm foundation upon which His Church is built? What does the Spirit tell you? I believe that the "rock" is primarily revelation. The Catholic church seems odd to me in that it does not claim living revelation given to living prophets, "vicars of Christ" as I believe they clam the Pope to be, nor do they believe in open canon of scripture so far as I understand, but they do believe in tradition. Tradition to them seems to have as much weight as biblical scripture but without believing in living revelation I do not see how that could be. If I am correct then the fact that they do not believe in living revelation then this scripture indeed does apply to a restoration of living revelation. That although it stopped, the "gate of Hell" did not prevail for its return. That is through Christ Himself dying and unlocking the gates of Hell. This also pertains to a priesthood order. Among the Christian denominations only three that I know of claim to be the "one true church". That is the Roman Catholic Church, the Greek Orthodox Church and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Strictly speaking, all three of these church's narratives cannot be correct at the same time. Although there is "communion" between the first two, the LDS Church stands out alone. It's unique claim to having been a falling away and a restoration makes all other churches "false", particularly in revelation and priesthood authority. In Acts 3 we read, "20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: 21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. 22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. 23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people. 24 Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days. 25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. 26 Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities." The LDS Church's narrative of being the "one true church" is perfectly compatible with this passage of scripture. First, it is a 'restitution of all things' with Jesus Christ being at the very center, or "heart", of it all. Second, prophets have returned to earth starting with Joseph Smith Jr. The mantel of prophets from Joseph Smith was passed down along a very specific line of authority until today with President Thomas S. Monson. It is through this line of authority that all people ordained into the priesthood can trace their line of authority. (More on that line later.) This passage clearly declares the necessity in "hearing the prophets". You cannot hear them if they are not on earth, and need to be in order to "restitute" everything in the gospel, to speak. Furthermore, each member of the LDS church is to get his or her "Patriarchal Blessing". in that it is revealed to the recipient which tribe of Israel he or she belongs to. Thus through Abraham's "seed" everyone on earth will be blessed. The restoration of the gospel as per the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is directly tied to the covenant YHWY gave to Abraham. Lastly, it is important to know that Peter, the very same Peter Jesus blessed and pronounced as a "rock" was not only present when Joseph Smith received the Melchizedek Priesthood, the priesthood needed to have authority to run Christ's church, but as an angel of the LORD, placed his hands (Peter's hands) upon Joseph Smith to give him that priesthood. Thus the proper line of authority was used to restore the gospel of Jesus Christ and all ordained into the priesthood can trace their line of authority to Joseph Smith who received it from Peter who received it from Jesus Christ.
Darren10 Posted September 5, 2017 Posted September 5, 2017 8 hours ago, RevTestament said: So you appear to agree with the Catholic Church that the stone upon which He was going to build His Church was the granting of keys through authority. That seems to say that the gates of hell would not prevail against this priesthood authority, and therefore the priesthood of the Catholic Church must still be valid, and there was never an apostasy. Defend thyselves. Isn't it "thineselves"? I think the LDS interpretation of this passage is best. Gates, as Avatar pointed out to you are not living things. They are tools to prevent things in or from getting out. There has to be an external force controlling the gates. So, if the gates of Hell not prevailing against something should mean either preventing the church of Jesus Christ from getting in Hell, in which case why would Christ's church be trying, or forced to, get in; or that the church of Jesus Christ will not be stopped getting out of Hell, in which case why was it even there in the first place? The narrative of the Apostasy and Restoration fits quite nicely to answer these questions.
Physics Guy Posted September 5, 2017 Posted September 5, 2017 (edited) 9 hours ago, strappinglad said: [T]here must have been a general concept of reincarnation for [the idea that Jesus might have been Elijah or John the recently executed Baptist or Jeremiah] to be acceptable. Did such exist in Christ's time in Jewish thought? The Elijah possibility would have been an obvious option at the time. Elijah is described in 2 Kings 2 as being taken up to heaven without dying. Malachi 4:5, at the very end of the Christian Old Testament, has God promise to send Elijah back to Israel before the Day of the Lord. So there was expectation that Elijah would return alive from heaven to herald the Day. Matthew 11 has Jesus suggest that John the Baptist fulfilled this Malachi prophecy, albeit with a qualification ("if you are willing to accept it") which seems to indicate that Jesus had in mind a filling of the Elijah role by John, not a literal identity of John and Elijah. In John 1, John the Baptist himself denies being Elijah. The question was put to him, whether he was Elijah, because pious Jews were expecting Elijah, who was available because he was not actually dead, and whose return had been promised. In later tradition Elijah was considered to come back quite often, and even today he is invited to join in the Seder meal, with the door to the house being opened in case he really appears. Some people even set a place at the table for him (though I think the place is mainly set for any unexpected guest who could be welcomed and fed, with the possibility that they could be Elijah as a remote point of principle). As to Jesus being John, perhaps the news of John's execution hadn't gotten around to some people, and when they noticed that the buzz had started up again about repentance and the Kingdom of Heaven, they just figured that John was back at it after a break. I don't know about the guesses that Jesus could have been Jeremiah or some other prophet. Jewish tradition has it that Jeremiah was stoned to death, but I don't know whether that tradition was current in Jesus's time, so maybe the general uncertainty about what had happened to former prophets made people figure that Elijah's special deal was a standard one, so that lots of other prophets were also waiting alive up in heaven. Or maybe the expectation was that prophets other than Elijah had died, but would get an early sitting of the resurrection and be sent ahead, almost like Elijah, before the great Day. Edited September 5, 2017 by Physics Guy
Alan Posted September 5, 2017 Posted September 5, 2017 The "gates of Hell" is a reference to death. Therefore, death will not prevail against the progress of the church. Peter was given the sealing keys in order to bind on earth and in heaven (eg beyond this life... after death). That is how I understand the scripture. I think Nibley promoted this view. 1
strappinglad Posted September 5, 2017 Posted September 5, 2017 The name used is Elias. I understand that name may refer to Elijah , but there is also a different individual who is a forerunner to the Messiah , and that as such John the Baptist may qualify as Elias.
LittleNipper Posted September 6, 2017 Posted September 6, 2017 (edited) The Holy Spirit through the study of the Scripture is telling me, that what Jesus is pointing out, is that HIS CHURCH is built upon the full revelation that Jesus is in FACT the Messiah, the Son of the living God. It isn't about Peter. Edited September 6, 2017 by LittleNipper
RevTestament Posted September 6, 2017 Author Posted September 6, 2017 4 hours ago, LittleNipper said: The Holy Spirit through the study of the Scripture is telling me, that what Jesus is pointing out, is that HIS CHURCH is built upon the full revelation that Jesus is in FACT the Messiah, the Son of the living God. It isn't about Peter. Don't be so sure: John 21: 18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. 19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.
LittleNipper Posted September 7, 2017 Posted September 7, 2017 18 hours ago, RevTestament said: Don't be so sure: John 21: 18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. 19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me. Matthew 16:21-28 Very sure! 21 From that point on, Jesus began making it clear to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem and endure much suffering at the hands of the elders, the chief priest and the teachers of the Law; and that He had to be put to death; but that on the 3rd day, He had to be raised to life. 22 Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, “Heaven forbid, Lord! By no means will this happen to You!” 23 But Jesus turned his back on Peter, saying, “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle in my path, because your thinking is from a human perspective, not from God’s perspective!”
RevTestament Posted September 7, 2017 Author Posted September 7, 2017 50 minutes ago, LittleNipper said: Matthew 16:21-28 Very sure! 21 From that point on, Jesus began making it clear to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem and endure much suffering at the hands of the elders, the chief priest and the teachers of the Law; and that He had to be put to death; but that on the 3rd day, He had to be raised to life. 22 Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, “Heaven forbid, Lord! By no means will this happen to You!” 23 But Jesus turned his back on Peter, saying, “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle in my path, because your thinking is from a human perspective, not from God’s perspective!” This is why He is the chief cornerstone - you are only proving my point. I am with you that the revelation is the stone, but part of that revelation is the firm, steadfast testimony unto death. It is what makes El Eloah and some elohim children of the house.
Recommended Posts