Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Apologetics > Sacred Scripture
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #1  
Old Mar 23, '05, 12:24 pm
mercygate mercygate is offline
Forum Elder
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: June 21, 2004
Posts: 15,423
Religion: Catholic via Canterbury
Default Petros/petra?

Who (and when) first interpreted Mt. 16:18 based on the gender distinction between Petros and petra to indicate that it is not Peter but Peter's confession upon which Jesus would build his Church?
__________________
There are countless millions of Christians who will not accept anything, even Christ, from the Catholic Church. (Frank Sheed)
Tiber Swim Team - Class of 01
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old Mar 23, '05, 1:34 pm
BlackKnight BlackKnight is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: March 19, 2005
Posts: 141
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Petros/petra?

Wouldn't this be better answered in the AAA forum?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Mar 23, '05, 1:37 pm
Christy Beth Christy Beth is offline
Regular Member
Prayer Warrior
 
Join Date: July 13, 2004
Posts: 2,444
Religion: catholic
Default Re: Petros/petra?

Before the protestant reformation, I don't know if there was any discussion on that point. Of course, the difference refers to the Greek translation of that Gospel. Jesus spoke aramaic, and the word He used for both "Peter" and "Rock" were exactly the same. Jesus' statement referred to Peter and not Peter's statement. I read somewhere that for Jesus to refer to the statement when he said, "on this rock I will build my church," would have broken every rule of grammer.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old Mar 23, '05, 1:42 pm
GoodSamaritan GoodSamaritan is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 20, 2004
Posts: 106
Religion: Roman Catholic, baby!
Default Re: Petros/petra?

Even John Calvin admitted that petra and petros were the same word in Koine Greek, the language of the Bible. It's easy to spot the lowest of the low church anti-Catholics because they still use this antiquated and unintelligible argument.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old Mar 23, '05, 1:49 pm
Della Della is offline
Forum Elder
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Posts: 19,074
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Petros/petra?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mercygate
Who (and when) first interpreted Mt. 16:18 based on the gender distinction between Petros and petra to indicate that it is not Peter but Peter's confession upon which Jesus would build his Church?
One source seems to indicate that it was a teaching of Wycliffe's. I do not know if it originated with him, though. I had a hard time finding out this much about it online. It may be that no one really knows who first put forth this misinterpretation.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old Mar 23, '05, 2:38 pm
mercygate mercygate is offline
Forum Elder
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: June 21, 2004
Posts: 15,423
Religion: Catholic via Canterbury
Default Re: Petros/petra?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Della
One source seems to indicate that it was a teaching of Wycliffe's. I do not know if it originated with him, though. I had a hard time finding out this much about it online. It may be that no one really knows who first put forth this misinterpretation.
Thanks, Della. I had the same luck you did. Somehow, the argument has a late Nineteenth Century flavor to me -- but that's just a hunch.

My motives for wanting to know are base: I want THE definitive response the next time somebody gives me that condescending "you-ignorant-Catholic" look and tries to foist this one on me.
__________________
There are countless millions of Christians who will not accept anything, even Christ, from the Catholic Church. (Frank Sheed)
Tiber Swim Team - Class of 01
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old Mar 23, '05, 2:56 pm
Della Della is offline
Forum Elder
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Posts: 19,074
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Petros/petra?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mercygate
Thanks, Della. I had the same luck you did. Somehow, the argument has a late Nineteenth Century flavor to me -- but that's just a hunch.

My motives for wanting to know are base: I want THE definitive response the next time somebody gives me that condescending "you-ignorant-Catholic" look and tries to foist this one on me.
I know what you mean , but since there are a multitude of misinterpretations of nearly every verse of the Bible regarding Catholic teaching it seems an impossible task to me.

I just tell them that the Bible is not theirs or anyone else's to interpret however we please. It is the book of the Catholic Church (and go into a very brief outline of the history of the Bible in the Church) which alone was given the authority by Christ to pass on to humankind his words and to make decisions regarding matters of faith and morals. In a word, I cut to the chase instead of endlessly arguing over the translations of this word or that.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old Mar 23, '05, 3:06 pm
mercygate mercygate is offline
Forum Elder
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: June 21, 2004
Posts: 15,423
Religion: Catholic via Canterbury
Default Re: Petros/petra?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Della
I know what you mean , but since there are a multitude of misinterpretations of nearly every verse of the Bible regarding Catholic teaching it seems an impossible task to me.

I just tell them that the Bible is not theirs or anyone else's to interpret however we please. It is the book of the Catholic Church (and go into a very brief outline of the history of the Bible in the Church) which alone was given the authority by Christ to pass on to humankind his words and to make decisions regarding matters of faith and morals. In a word, I cut to the chase instead of endlessly arguing over the translations of this word or that.
Me too. Go straight to the heart of the matter:

Me: Would I be correct in understanding that you believe that Scripture is inerrant?
They: Of course! The Bible is the inerrant Word of God!
Me: Catholics believe that too. (Disbelieving look) Why do you believe it?

Then I give 'em the history of the Catholic view and close the conversation without getting into a debate. I don't want these discussions to become contentious -- and they will if not carefully managed. The last thing I want is to make people feel trapped, cornered, or "whupped."
__________________
There are countless millions of Christians who will not accept anything, even Christ, from the Catholic Church. (Frank Sheed)
Tiber Swim Team - Class of 01
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old Mar 23, '05, 3:08 pm
Della Della is offline
Forum Elder
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Posts: 19,074
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Petros/petra?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mercygate
Me too. Go straight to the heart of the matter:

Me: Would I be correct in understanding that you believe that Scripture is inerrant?
They: Of course! The Bible is the inerrant Word of God!
Me: Catholics believe that too. (Disbelieving look) Why do you believe it?

Then I give 'em the history of the Catholic view and close the conversation without getting into a debate. I don't want these discussions to become contentious -- and they will if not carefully managed. The last thing I want is to make people feel trapped, cornered, or "whupped."
Yup. Give 'em the truth in love. Best thing to do every time, isn't it?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old Mar 23, '05, 3:29 pm
jimmy jimmy is offline
Account Under Review
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: June 22, 2004
Posts: 9,742
Default Re: Petros/petra?

John Chrysostom mentions that it is the faith of Peter in this homily on Matt. 16.

Quote:
Then, since they said, "Some John the Baptist, some Elias, some Jeremias, or one of the prophets,"7 and set forth their mistaken opinion, He next added, "But whom say ye that I am?"8 calling them on by His second inquiry to entertain some higher imagination concerning Him, and indicating that their former judgment falls exceedingly short of His dignity. Wherefore He seeks for another judgment from themselves, and puts a second question, that they might not fall in with the multitude, who, because they saw His miracles greater than human, accounted Him a man indeed, but one that had appeared after a resurrection, as Herod also said.9 But He, to lead them away from this notion, saith, "But whom say ye that I am?" that is, "ye that are with me always, and see me working miracles, and have yourselves done many mighty works by me."

5. What then saith the mouth of the apostles, Peter, the ever fervent, the leader of the apostolic choir?10 When all are asked, he answers. And whereas when He asked the opinion of the people, all replied to the question; when He asked their own, Peter springs forward, and anticipates them, and saith, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."11

What then saith Christ? "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona, for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee."12
Quote:
Yet surely unless he had rightly confessed Him, as begotten of the very Father Himself, this were no work of revelation; had he accounted our Lord to be one of the many, his saying was not worthy of a blessing. Since before this also they said, "Truly He is Son of God,"13 those, I mean, who were in the vessel after the tempest, which they saw, and were not blessed, although of course they spake truly. For they confessed not such a Sonship as Peter, but accounted Him to be truly Son as one of the many, and though peculiarly so beyond the many, yet not of the same substance.

And Nathanael too said, "Rabbi, Thou art the Son of God, Thou art the King of Israel;" s and so far from being blessed, he is even reproved by Him, as having said what was far short of the truth. He replied at least, "Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig-tree, believest thou? thou shalt see greater things than these."14

Why then is this man blessed? Because he acknowledged Him very Son. Wherefore you see, that while in those former instances He had said no such thing, in this case He also signifies who had revealed it. That is, lest his words might seem to the many (because he was an earnest lover of Christ) to be words of friendship and flattery, and of a disposition to show favor to Him, he brings forward the person who had made them ring15 in his soul; to inform thee that Peter indeed spake, but the Father suggested, and that thou mightest believe the saying to be no longer a human opinion, but a divine doctrine.

And wherefore doth He not Himself declare it, nor say, "I am the Christ," but by His question establish this, bringing them in to confess it? Because so to do was both more suitable to Him, yea necessary at that time, and it drew them on the more to the belief of the things that were said.


Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old Mar 23, '05, 3:30 pm
jimmy jimmy is offline
Account Under Review
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: June 22, 2004
Posts: 9,742
Default Re: Petros/petra?

Quote:
Seest thou how the Father reveals the Son, how the Son the Father? For "neither knoweth any man the Father," saith He, "save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him."16 It cannot therefore be that one should learn the Son of any other than of the Father; neither that one should learn the Father of any other than of the Son. So that even hereby, their sameness of honor and of substance is manifest.

3. What then saith Christ? "Thou art Simon, the son of Jonas; thou shalt be called Cephas."17 "Thus since thou hast proclaimed my Father, I too name him that begat thee;" all but saying, "As thou art son of Jonas, even so am I of my Father." Else it were superfluous to say, "Thou art Son of Jonas;" but since he had said, "Son of God," to point out that He is so Son of God, as the other son of Jonas, of the same substance with Him that begat Him, therefore He added this, "And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church;"18 that is, on the faith of his confession. Hereby He signifies that many were now on the point of believing, and raises his spirit, and makes him a shepherd. "And the gates of hell" shall not prevail against it." "And if not against it, much more not against me. So be not troubled because thou art shortly to hear that I shall be betrayed and crucified."

Then He mentions also another honor. "And I also19 will give thee the keys of the heavens."20 But what is this, "And I also will give thee?" "As the Father hath given thee to know me, so will I also give thee."

And He said not, "I will entreat the Father" (although the manifestation of His authority was great, and the largeness of the gift unspeakable), but, "I will give thee." What dost Thou give? tell me. "The keys of the heavens, that whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in Heaven,21 and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in Heaven." How then is it not "His to give to sit on His right hand, and on His left,"22 when He saith, "I will give thee"?

Seest thou how He, His own self, leads Peter on to high thoughts of Him, and reveals Himself, and implies that He is Son of God by these two promises? For those things which are peculiar to God alone, (both to absolve sins, and to make the church incapable of overthrow in such assailing waves, and to exhibit a man that is a fisher more solid than any rock, while all the world is at war with him), these He promises Himself to give; as the Father, speaking to Jeremiah, said, He would make him as "a brazen pillar, and as a wall;"23 but him to one nation only, this man in every part of the world.

I would fain inquire then of those who desire to lessen the dignity of the Son, which manner of gifts were greater, those which the Father gave to Peter, or those which the Son gave him? For the Father gave to Peter the revelation of the Son; but the Son gave him to sow that of the Father and that of Himself in every part of the world; and to a mortal man He entrusted the authority over all things in Heaven, giving him the keys; who extended the church to every part of the world, and declared it to be stronger than heaven. "For heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away."24 How then is He less, who hath given such gifts, hath effected such things?

And these things I say, not dividing the works of Father and Son ("for all things are made by Him, and without Him was nothing made which was made"):25 but bridling the shameless tongue of them that dare so to speak.

But see, throughout all, His authority: "I say unto thee, Thou art Peter; I will build the Church; I will give thee the keys of Heaven."

4. And then, when He had so said, "He charged them that they should tell no man that He was the Christ."26
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old Mar 23, '05, 3:46 pm
VociMike VociMike is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2004
Posts: 8,730
Religion: Catholic (revert)
Default Re: Petros/petra?

What I want to know is, if it were Peter's confession, why just Peter? Plenty of others made confessions of faith.

Also, what exactly does it mean to build a chuch on a confession of faith?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old Mar 23, '05, 3:53 pm
jimmy jimmy is offline
Account Under Review
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: June 22, 2004
Posts: 9,742
Default Re: Petros/petra?

http://ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF1-10/np...#P5263_1628465

Here is an article on John Chrysostom with Peter.

http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/num52.htm
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old Mar 23, '05, 3:54 pm
jimmy jimmy is offline
Account Under Review
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: June 22, 2004
Posts: 9,742
Default Re: Petros/petra?

Quote:
Originally Posted by VociMike
What I want to know is, if it were Peter's confession, why just Peter? Plenty of others made confessions of faith.

Also, what exactly does it mean to build a chuch on a confession of faith?
John Chysostom recognizes the authority of Peter in several of his homilies.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old Mar 23, '05, 3:57 pm
jimmy jimmy is offline
Account Under Review
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: June 22, 2004
Posts: 9,742
Default Re: Petros/petra?

It was because of Peter's faith that he gave him the keys to heaven. That is why Christ gave Peter authority over the rest of the apostles.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Apologetics > Sacred Scripture

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump




Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
6607CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: tawny
6151Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: hazcompat
5167Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: grateful_child
4629Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: DesertSister62
4291Poems and Reflections
Last by: Purgatory Pete
4055OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: Fischli
3290For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: GLam8833
3261Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: Herculees
2824Let's Empty Purgatory 2
Last by: TheCrabNebula
2448SOLITUDE
Last by: beth40n2



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:21 pm.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.