Peter is the ONLY man in the NT to receive a new name by God. In the OT whenever God gave someone a new name He is giving them a very significant mission. Per Strong's Concordance Cephas/Kephas/Peter means "rock" and a name that was given to Simon by Jesus. Paul was already his Roman name from his father's side. It is not a new name given by God. Jesus is the Cornerstone Rock of the church, but He was grafting Peter into Himself to be the leader of the church after His death and Resurrection. Jesus said to Peter, Feed my Lambs Tend to my Sheep Feed my Sheep Who takes care of the Sheep and Lambs? ANSWER: A SHEPHERD Jesus is giving Peter his new mission as prefigured by his new name. . Jesus is naming Peter as the Shepherd of the Church on which He will build. Blessed are “YOU” Simon, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to “YOU,” and I tell “YOU,” “YOU” are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church. I will give “YOU” the keys to the kingdom, and whatever “YOU” bind and loose on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven. Jesus’ whole discourse relates to the person of Peter, not merely his confession of faith. -Peter is mentioned 195 times in the New Testament. -John is 2nd most with only 29 times; and then James 19 times. -Peter’s name appears at least 54 times in the Book of Acts. -James is second most, but only appears 4 times. Also, when all 12 of the Apostles are listed by name as a group Peter is always listed First. (i.e. Matthew 10, Mark 3, Luke 6 & Acts 1) Judas is always mentioned Last. Which also represents Judas’ place within the 12. Matt 10:2 - Matthew calls Peter the First. Peter is even called the chosen one in the Bible.
Ric, Paul was already his Roman name from his father's side. However, it is a name change that demonstrated that he was going to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles as he did with Peter who was GOD's choice to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles.
Anna Pennrose You don't build a whole new religion because of a name change. And especially if this new religion points to dead church leaders and newfangled rules in order to attain salvation. Salvation is in our belief and complete trust in the completed work of Christ. The Gospel is simple and was intended to be understandable by all, rather than through some religious organization that complicates everything and makes it confusing and adds all sorts of new players and rules.
Matt Z, A new religion was not built on a name change, but rather the The NT is revealed by the OT. In the OT whenever a person received a new name from God they also received a new and significant mission by God. Peter is the ONLY man in the NT to receive a new name and that name was rock. Peter was clearly the leader of the Apostles . Kepha = Rock = Cephas = Petros = Peter. -Peter is mentioned 195 times in the New Testament. -John is 2nd most with only 29 times; and then James 19 times. -Peter’s name appears at least 54 times in the Book of Acts. -James is second most, but only appears 4 times. YOU are kepha (rock) and upon this kepha (rock) I will build my church" I will give YOU (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever YOU bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever YOU loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Jesus said to Peter... Feed my Lambs Tend to my Sheep Feed my Sheep WHO feeds and tends to sheep? ANSWER: A SHEPHERD. Peter was commissioned by Jesus to be the leader of the church after the Resurrection.
I am learning so much from you.. I have a strong Catholic background and all my family members are Catholic. Thank you for giving us the information we need to evangelize to our Catholic friends and families.
Hi Dr Tarsitano, what is your position on pork or other types of foods when it comes to clean and unclean foods from a christian point of view. I see a lot Christian eat whatever they like of because of their understanding of what Jesus's said.. Mark 7:19
Hello Dr.Fred I am doing a research paper on Christianity and one of my topics is the Catholic Church I was wondering if you would be able to share your notes with me, I will not copy anything I would just love to share this info with my class mates please let me know, thank you and may God continue to bless you
Note carefully that we find in Matthew 16:18 that there are two Greek words used for “rock.” The first Greek word “petros” is in the male gender and obviously refers to Peter. However, the second Greek word use for rock is “Petra” and it is in the FEMALE gender, and thus cannot refer to Peter. However, note that the concept of "a Revelation" in biblical Greek is always in the FEMALE GENDER. Hence, the Rock upon which Jesus would build His Church is THE REVELATION that Jesus is the Christ. “… Simon, son of Jonah, flesh and blood did not REVEAL this to you … “(Matthew 16:17). Therefore, the rock upon which Jesus would build His Church is the UNCHANGING REVELATION that He (Jesus) is the Christ. The Church of Christ could never be built upon an unstable and fluctuating man like Peter (cf. Matthew 14:31; Matthew 16:21-23; Matthew 26:69-75; Acts 10:13--15; Galatians 2:11-14). Rather the Church is built upon the UNCHANGING REVELATION, THE ETERNAL TRUTH that Jesus is the Christ.
@@EpiGenosko Some more points to consider when looking at the Greek text / Grammar of Matthew 16:18. if we look carefully at the grammar of Matthew 16:18, we find that it presents another insurmountable problem concerning the Catholic doctrines of 1,) Peter being the rock, and 2.) Papal succession. For when we look at the two words that precede “petra,” in Matthew 16:18, we find the two Greek Words “this” and “the.” A literal translation of Matthew 16:18 would be: “And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this the rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.” Matt. 16:18. What does “this the rock” mean? Well however we want to define “petra” here, we must recognize that “this” (singular demonstrative pronoun), and “the” (singular definite article), both emphasize the singularity of the Rock upon which Jesus will build His Church. In other words, “THIS THE Rock,” simple informs us that there will be ONE AND ONLY ONE ROCK, … upon which the Church of Christ will be built. This phrase “this the Rock” points to only one person (or thing). Both the singular demonstrative pronoun (“this”), along with the definite article (“the”), make it emphatically clear that only one person, or one thing, can be the Rock upon which the Church of Christ will be built. The singularity of the Rock (only one person or one thing) clearly negates the ideas of papal succession, that someone else will also be the rock at some later time in Church history. Jesus does not say to Peter, “and you are Peter, and upon you and your successors, I will build my Church.” Think about it. In fact, Jesus says the exact opposite. Jesus uses both the singular demonstrative pronoun (“this”), along with the singular definite article (“the”) before the Greek word “Petra’” making it unequivocally clear that Jesus is only referring to one person, (or one thing). Now if Jesus is declaring Peter to be “this the rock,” (as Catholic theologians would have us to believe), then once Peter died, then there would no longer be a Rock upon which to build the Church of Christ. The grammar in Matthew 16:18 leaves no room for papal succession: “This The Rock.” The singular demonstrative pronoun and the singular definite article lock in the meaning of “Petra” to one person, or one thing. Thus, the grammar of Matthew 16:18 emphatically negates the idea of papal succession in any form. However, if we allow that “Petra” in Matthew 16:18 is a reference to the Revelation that Jesus is the Christ (a Revelation which never “dies” or ceases to exist) then we wisely keep the focus on Christ, and secondly there will be no need to create a doctrine which cannot be supported by the Scriptures (That is, that a man, and his successors {papa succession} is / are the rock(s) upon which the Church is built). The fact that Roman Catholicism has degenerated into the adulation of dead men (dead Popes / dead saints / and the relics of dead saints) and not Christ, should speak volumes to the humble student of the Bible. Likewise, if we go to the inspired words of St. Peter, we can correctly interpret Matthew 16:18, for St. Peter clearly tells us that “there is salvation in no other man (Jesus), for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved,” (Acts 4:12). The context in Acts 4:12, makes it clear that St. Peter is talking about Christ and no one else. In sum, the grammar of Matthew 16:18 tells us that there can only be ONE ROCK-“THIS THE ROCK”-upon which the church of Christ is built. Likewise, “THIS THE ROCK” is the eternal and everlasting revelation that Jesus is the Christ. Thus, the Roman Catholic doctrines of 1.) Peter is the rock and 2.) “Papal Succession” are both negated by the grammar of Matthew 16:18, which clearly points to ONE, AND ONLY ONE, ROCK for the Church-and that ROCK is The unchanging and eternal Revelation that Jesus is the Messiah.
If the pope can forgive sins - then could peter forgive sins too. If i found out that peter could forgive sins then why would i need Jesus? Perhaps the idea of a pope being the leader of the church is in the bible, but the powers and priveleges given to the pope are man made?
Paul himself said that Peter, John & James were the leaders/pillars of the early Church (Galatians 2:9) so I won't even entertain an argument that Peter was not a leader in the early Church. The only question is whether Christ gave Peter a primacy that He did not give to John and James, which he clearly did: "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter (kephas/rock) and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of the hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Mathew 16:17-19). While Jesus gave all the Apostles power to bind and loose (Mathew 18:18), only Simon had his name changed to rock/Kephas (John 1:42) and was given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven (Mathew 16:19). Your brother in Christ! Fr. David
Note carefully that we find in Matthew 16:18 that there are two Greek words used for “rock.” The first Greek word “petros” is in the male gender and obviously refers to Peter. However, the second Greek word use for rock is “Petra” and it is in the FEMALE gender, and thus cannot refer to Peter. However, note that the concept of "a Revelation" in biblical Greek is always in the FEMALE GENDER. Hence, the Rock upon which Jesus would build His Church is THE REVELATION that Jesus is the Christ. “… Simon, son of Jonah, flesh and blood did not REVEAL this to you … “(Matthew 16:17). Therefore, the rock upon which Jesus would build His Church is the UNCHANGING REVELATION that He (Jesus) is the Christ. The Church of Christ could never be built upon an unstable and fluctuating man like Peter (cf. Matthew 14:31; Matthew 16:21-23; Matthew 26:69-75; Acts 10:13--15; Galatians 2:11-14). Rather the Church is built upon the UNCHANGING REVELATION, THE ETERNAL TRUTH that Jesus is the Christ. In the Love of Christ and for His Glory.
With deepest respect, my brother, your Greek needs an adjustment: First, Jesus did not name Peter in Greek but in the Aramaic, "Cephas" which just means "rock" or "stone." (John 1:42, Galatians 2:9, 1 Corinthians 1:12, 3:22, 9:5) KJV Second, the Greek version of Mathew 16:18 uses two different words for Peter because Greek grammar requires it. In Greek, objects have different word-endings than persons. When you give a person (Simon) the name of an object (rock), you use the word ending for a person (petros), not the word ending of an object (petra). Greek words also have a gender that is identified by the word ending. In Mathew 16:18, petros (the man) indicates a male while petras (the stone) is female. However, in Greek, they mean neither male, female, big or little rock -- but just "rock" because that's how there grammar works. The Aramaic that Jesus used when giving Peter his name is not like that: "You are kephas (rock) and upon this kephas (rock) I will build my Church." As St. John said, "And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone." John 1:42 (KJV). May Christ love you and bless you! Fr. David
Hi my friend, nothing much needs to be said other than the gospel of Matthew was written in Greek. Therefore, the divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit was written in Greek and must be interpreted therefrom. Furthermore, there are 20 other Scripturally based factual understandings of why Peter is not the representative of Christ on earth. Additionally, this could go many other directions as well but no need. Finally, you didn’t address any other reputation in this presentation. You cannot seriously, seriously believe, and certainly could not be persuaded that Christ would leave his church to be built on a fallible sinful man. There is no way you believe that their earthly representative of Christ would sanction the murder of tens of millions of people, which Roman Catholic “popes” have done. There is no way that you can get scripturally any of what the Roman Catholic Church teaches on any of the icon generation, praying to marry, Sacramento paganism that is required for your version of salvation It is all rooted and paganism power to move forward rewrite and disseminate down through the Roman Empire a.k.a. the Roman Catholic Church
I know it’s hard to change your perspective, largely because you probably grew up with it. But I would ask that you actually read the Bible and pray and let the Holy Spirit help instill in you. The faith that’s needed to believe his word. The Bible true and beyond reputation and sharper than any two edges sword. “See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame” Isaiah 8:14 For we are co-workers in God’s service; you are God’s field, God’s building. By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as a wise builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should build with care. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. 1 Cor 3:9-11 In fact, the whole chapter of 1 Corinthians 3 is worth a read, because Paul specifically refers to Peter (or Cephas) and describes him as not one that Christians should say they follow as they are just “mere human beings” (1 Cor 3:4, 21-22). The most compelling argument to me though is from the words of Peter himself. His first epistle is full of this language of foundational rocks and cornerstones, and he is always talking about Jesus and not himself. I will leave you with Peter’s words. I want you to consider, in Peter’s mind, when Jesus said, “On this rock I will build my church”, did Peter end up thinking Jesus was talking about Peter or Jesus? As you come to him, the living Stone - rejected by humans but chosen by God and precious to him - you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For in Scripture it says: “See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.†Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, “The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone,†and, “A stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall.†1 Peter 2:4-8
Unam Sanctum in 1302 states: Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff
Since we know that Peter was the Apostle to the Jews and all the main events of the NT centered around Jerusalem why would Peter feel led to go to Rome. ? Jerusalem was not conquered until 70 AD long after his death therefore it seems logical that Jerusalem is where the Church was started and would grow. IMO Peter there doing his part. There is some evidence/discussion that the Emperor brought Peter to Rome to make an example of him and had him killed. There is also some discussion that the pagan Constantine appointed himself the head of the church as one of his titles. Finally most Catholics have no comprehension of the evil acts of the RCC throughout history including Inquisitions even as late as the 2nd half for the 19th century.
Fred, You need to look into your view of "offering the sacrifice" aka the mass. What is (or is not) supposed to be "offered up" in the liturgy? Where's your scriptures to support your position? I think there is some tradition you still hang onto there that is not biblical. Just look it over and put two and two together just as you've done with so many other issues where Rome's doctrines conflicts with scripture.
@@EpiGenosko RC mass is called a "sacrifice"; actually a re-sacrifice of Christ. You, at one point in this series, referred to protestant group worship using that same term, "sacrifice offered". Just so you're clear that Jesus Christ died ONCE for ALL and doesn't need to be offered up to the Father over and over again. … BTW, Just curious: what sacrifice were you referring to?
@@cathys465 You are correct about Christ dying once and does not need to be re offered over and over again. Unfortunately, that is not what the Catholic Church believes and teaches. I refer you to the following official RC statement - Catechism of the Catholic Church - Sec. 1367 p. 344 - "The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one same sacrifice. The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of the priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of the offering is different. And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered Himself once in a bloody manner on the alter of the cross is contained and offered in an unbloody manner . . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."
@@EpiGenosko , I fully agree with you as to what the RC catechism says. I only question what You meant in the previous video when you mentioned "OUR SACRIFICE" in regards to holy communion. I understand that we, who are being led by the Holy Spirit, who follow biblical direction ONLY sacrifice our desires, our worldliness even our very lives and existence to God on a daily basis. But is that what you had in mind when you said "our communion sacrifice"? If so then the sacrifice takes place even on days when we don't celebrate holy communion. If you were referring to some other communion sacrifice we fundamentalist Protestants offer, then I'm still puzzled regarding that one point. Thanks for getting back with me. It shows you actually are a "minister" and not just a blogger. :-)
@@cathys465 I am not sure what you are referring to. If you can tell me which video and roughly where you are referring to, I will watch and get back to you - Fred
You’re amazing! Thank you for doing all this footwork! Long time Catholic ready to pull the trigger
Facts presented precisely...!! Good one, Dr. Tarsitano
Peter is the ONLY man in the NT to receive a new name by God. In the OT whenever God gave someone a new name He is giving them a very significant mission.
Per Strong's Concordance Cephas/Kephas/Peter means "rock" and a name that was given to Simon by Jesus.
Paul was already his Roman name from his father's side. It is not a new name given by God.
Jesus is the Cornerstone Rock of the church, but He was grafting Peter into Himself to be the leader of the church after His death and Resurrection.
Jesus said to Peter,
Feed my Lambs
Tend to my Sheep
Feed my Sheep
Who takes care of the Sheep and Lambs? ANSWER: A SHEPHERD
Jesus is giving Peter his new mission as prefigured by his new name. .
Jesus is naming Peter as the Shepherd of the Church on which He will build.
Blessed are “YOU” Simon, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to “YOU,” and I tell “YOU,” “YOU” are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church. I will give “YOU” the keys to the kingdom, and whatever “YOU” bind and loose on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven.
Jesus’ whole discourse relates to the person of Peter, not merely his confession of faith.
-Peter is mentioned 195 times in the New Testament.
-John is 2nd most with only 29 times; and then James 19 times.
-Peter’s name appears at least 54 times in the Book of Acts.
-James is second most, but only appears 4 times.
Also, when all 12 of the Apostles are listed by name as a group Peter is always listed First.
(i.e. Matthew 10, Mark 3, Luke 6 & Acts 1)
Judas is always mentioned Last. Which also represents Judas’ place within the 12.
Matt 10:2 - Matthew calls Peter the First.
Peter is even called the chosen one in the Bible.
Anna, Peter wasn't the only one to get a new name.. Saul -> Paul!
Ric, Paul was already his Roman name from his father's side. However, it is a name change that demonstrated that he was going to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles as he did with Peter who was GOD's choice to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles.
Anna Pennrose You don't build a whole new religion because of a name change. And especially if this new religion points to dead church leaders and newfangled rules in order to attain salvation. Salvation is in our belief and complete trust in the completed work of Christ. The Gospel is simple and was intended to be understandable by all, rather than through some religious organization that complicates everything and makes it confusing and adds all sorts of new players and rules.
Matt Z, A new religion was not built on a name change, but rather the The NT is revealed by the OT.
In the OT whenever a person received a new name from God they also received a new and significant mission by God.
Peter is the ONLY man in the NT to receive a new name and that name was rock. Peter was clearly the leader of the Apostles .
Kepha = Rock = Cephas = Petros = Peter.
-Peter is mentioned 195 times in the New Testament.
-John is 2nd most with only 29 times; and then James 19 times.
-Peter’s name appears at least 54 times in the Book of Acts.
-James is second most, but only appears 4 times.
YOU are kepha (rock) and upon this kepha (rock) I will build my church"
I will give YOU (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever YOU bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever YOU loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Jesus said to Peter...
Feed my Lambs
Tend to my Sheep
Feed my Sheep
WHO feeds and tends to sheep?
ANSWER: A SHEPHERD.
Peter was commissioned by Jesus to be the leader of the church after the Resurrection.
I really hope that honest Roman Catholic truth seekers will watch and see the biblical truth of this presentation.
You wouldn’t believe how satan plays with their mind. My family mainly catholics, even priest in the family, most don’t even want to know!
Me too and be saved.
I am learning so much from you.. I have a strong Catholic background and all my family members are Catholic. Thank you for giving us the information we need to evangelize to our Catholic friends and families.
I praise the Lord that He is blessing you!!!
eye opener! God bless you fred
Dr. Tarsitano and brother in Christ, thanks for presenting this clearly.
Peter get married
While the pope must not get married
sooo informative! Thank you
Thank you!!
Hi Dr Tarsitano, what is your position on pork or other types of foods when it comes to clean and unclean foods from a christian point of view. I see a lot Christian eat whatever they like of because of their understanding of what Jesus's said.. Mark 7:19
Hello Dr.Fred I am doing a research paper on Christianity and one of my topics is the Catholic Church I was wondering if you would be able to share your notes with me, I will not copy anything I would just love to share this info with my class mates please let me know, thank you and may God continue to bless you
My Man!
Note carefully that we find in Matthew 16:18 that there are two Greek words used for “rock.” The first Greek word “petros” is in the male gender and obviously refers to Peter. However, the second Greek word use for rock is “Petra” and it is in the FEMALE gender, and thus cannot refer to Peter. However, note that the concept of "a Revelation" in biblical Greek is always in the FEMALE GENDER. Hence, the Rock upon which Jesus would build His Church is THE REVELATION that Jesus is the Christ. “… Simon, son of Jonah, flesh and blood did not REVEAL this to you … “(Matthew 16:17). Therefore, the rock upon which Jesus would build His Church is the UNCHANGING REVELATION that He (Jesus) is the Christ. The Church of Christ could never be built upon an unstable and fluctuating man like Peter (cf. Matthew 14:31; Matthew 16:21-23; Matthew 26:69-75; Acts 10:13--15; Galatians 2:11-14). Rather the Church is built upon the UNCHANGING REVELATION, THE ETERNAL TRUTH that Jesus is the Christ.
Beautiful!!
@@EpiGenosko Some more points to consider when looking at the Greek text / Grammar of Matthew 16:18.
if we look carefully at the grammar of Matthew 16:18, we find that it presents another insurmountable problem concerning the Catholic doctrines of 1,) Peter being the rock, and 2.) Papal succession. For when we look at the two words that precede “petra,” in Matthew 16:18, we find the two Greek Words “this” and “the.” A literal translation of Matthew 16:18 would be:
“And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this the rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.” Matt. 16:18.
What does “this the rock” mean? Well however we want to define “petra” here, we must recognize that “this” (singular demonstrative pronoun), and “the” (singular definite article), both emphasize the singularity of the Rock upon which Jesus will build His Church. In other words, “THIS THE Rock,” simple informs us that there will be ONE AND ONLY ONE ROCK, … upon which the Church of Christ will be built. This phrase “this the Rock” points to only one person (or thing). Both the singular demonstrative pronoun (“this”), along with the definite article (“the”), make it emphatically clear that only one person, or one thing, can be the Rock upon which the Church of Christ will be built.
The singularity of the Rock (only one person or one thing) clearly negates the ideas of papal succession, that someone else will also be the rock at some later time in Church history. Jesus does not say to Peter, “and you are Peter, and upon you and your successors, I will build my Church.” Think about it. In fact, Jesus says the exact opposite. Jesus uses both the singular demonstrative pronoun (“this”), along with the singular definite article (“the”) before the Greek word “Petra’” making it unequivocally clear that Jesus is only referring to one person, (or one thing).
Now if Jesus is declaring Peter to be “this the rock,” (as Catholic theologians would have us to believe), then once Peter died, then there would no longer be a Rock upon which to build the Church of Christ. The grammar in Matthew 16:18 leaves no room for papal succession: “This The Rock.” The singular demonstrative pronoun and the singular definite article lock in the meaning of “Petra” to one person, or one thing. Thus, the grammar of Matthew 16:18 emphatically negates the idea of papal succession in any form. However, if we allow that “Petra” in Matthew 16:18 is a reference to the Revelation that Jesus is the Christ (a Revelation which never “dies” or ceases to exist) then we wisely keep the focus on Christ, and secondly there will be no need to create a doctrine which cannot be supported by the Scriptures (That is, that a man, and his successors {papa succession} is / are the rock(s) upon which the Church is built).
The fact that Roman Catholicism has degenerated into the adulation of dead men (dead Popes / dead saints / and the relics of dead saints) and not Christ, should speak volumes to the humble student of the Bible. Likewise, if we go to the inspired words of St. Peter, we can correctly interpret Matthew 16:18, for St. Peter clearly tells us that “there is salvation in no other man (Jesus), for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved,” (Acts 4:12). The context in Acts 4:12, makes it clear that St. Peter is talking about Christ and no one else.
In sum, the grammar of Matthew 16:18 tells us that there can only be ONE ROCK-“THIS THE ROCK”-upon which the church of Christ is built. Likewise, “THIS THE ROCK” is the eternal and everlasting revelation that Jesus is the Christ. Thus, the Roman Catholic doctrines of 1.) Peter is the rock and 2.) “Papal Succession” are both negated by the grammar of Matthew 16:18, which clearly points to ONE, AND ONLY ONE, ROCK for the Church-and that ROCK is The unchanging and eternal Revelation that Jesus is the Messiah.
If the pope can forgive sins - then could peter forgive sins too. If i found out that peter could forgive sins then why would i need Jesus? Perhaps the idea of a pope being the leader of the church is in the bible, but the powers and priveleges given to the pope are man made?
Good point!
Question: If Peter wasn't there in Rome for Paul, could he had already been dead or was it that they had a falling away?
There is great debate about whether or not Peter ever went to Rome. But I don't believe either of these two possibilities you listed is the case
the next question is how in the world is he or was he the first pope? Answer......BIG LIE in order for Constantine to keep control.
@@edwindantes539 Maybe!
@NorthStars the Steagle God doesn't compromise the Truth.
Paul himself said that Peter, John & James were the leaders/pillars of the early Church (Galatians 2:9) so I won't even entertain an argument that Peter was not a leader in the early Church. The only question is whether Christ gave Peter a primacy that He did not give to John and James, which he clearly did: "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter (kephas/rock) and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of the hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Mathew 16:17-19). While Jesus gave all the Apostles power to bind and loose (Mathew 18:18), only Simon had his name changed to rock/Kephas (John 1:42) and was given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven (Mathew 16:19).
Your brother in Christ!
Fr. David
Note carefully that we find in Matthew 16:18 that there are two Greek words used for “rock.” The first Greek word “petros” is in the male gender and obviously refers to Peter. However, the second Greek word use for rock is “Petra” and it is in the FEMALE gender, and thus cannot refer to Peter. However, note that the concept of "a Revelation" in biblical Greek is always in the FEMALE GENDER. Hence, the Rock upon which Jesus would build His Church is THE REVELATION that Jesus is the Christ. “… Simon, son of Jonah, flesh and blood did not REVEAL this to you … “(Matthew 16:17). Therefore, the rock upon which Jesus would build His Church is the UNCHANGING REVELATION that He (Jesus) is the Christ. The Church of Christ could never be built upon an unstable and fluctuating man like Peter (cf. Matthew 14:31; Matthew 16:21-23; Matthew 26:69-75; Acts 10:13--15; Galatians 2:11-14). Rather the Church is built upon the UNCHANGING REVELATION, THE ETERNAL TRUTH that Jesus is the Christ.
In the Love of Christ and for His Glory.
With deepest respect, my brother, your Greek needs an adjustment:
First, Jesus did not name Peter in Greek but in the Aramaic, "Cephas" which just means "rock" or "stone." (John 1:42, Galatians 2:9, 1 Corinthians 1:12, 3:22, 9:5) KJV
Second, the Greek version of Mathew 16:18 uses two different words for Peter because Greek grammar requires it. In Greek, objects have different word-endings than persons. When you give a person (Simon) the name of an object (rock), you use the word ending for a person (petros), not the word ending of an object (petra).
Greek words also have a gender that is identified by the word ending. In Mathew 16:18, petros (the man) indicates a male while petras (the stone) is female. However, in Greek, they mean neither male, female, big or little rock -- but just "rock" because that's how there grammar works.
The Aramaic that Jesus used when giving Peter his name is not like that: "You are kephas (rock) and upon this kephas (rock) I will build my Church." As St. John said, "And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone." John 1:42 (KJV).
May Christ love you and bless you!
Fr. David
Hi my friend, nothing much needs to be said other than the gospel of Matthew was written in Greek. Therefore, the divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit was written in Greek and must be interpreted therefrom.
Furthermore, there are 20 other Scripturally based factual understandings of why Peter is not the representative of Christ on earth.
Additionally, this could go many other directions as well but no need.
Finally, you didn’t address any other reputation in this presentation.
You cannot seriously, seriously believe, and certainly could not be persuaded that Christ would leave his church to be built on a fallible sinful man.
There is no way you believe that their earthly representative of Christ would sanction the murder of tens of millions of people, which Roman Catholic “popes” have done.
There is no way that you can get scripturally any of what the Roman Catholic Church teaches on any of the icon generation, praying to marry, Sacramento paganism that is required for your version of salvation
It is all rooted and paganism power to move forward rewrite and disseminate down through the Roman Empire a.k.a. the Roman Catholic Church
I know it’s hard to change your perspective, largely because you probably grew up with it. But I would ask that you actually read the Bible and pray and let the Holy Spirit help instill in you. The faith that’s needed to believe his word.
The Bible true and beyond reputation and sharper than any two edges sword.
“See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame”
Isaiah 8:14
For we are co-workers in God’s service; you are God’s field, God’s building. By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as a wise builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should build with care. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.
1 Cor 3:9-11
In fact, the whole chapter of 1 Corinthians 3 is worth a read, because Paul specifically refers to Peter (or Cephas) and describes him as not one that Christians should say they follow as they are just “mere human beings” (1 Cor 3:4, 21-22).
The most compelling argument to me though is from the words of Peter himself. His first epistle is full of this language of foundational rocks and cornerstones, and he is always talking about Jesus and not himself. I will leave you with Peter’s words.
I want you to consider, in Peter’s mind, when Jesus said, “On this rock I will build my church”, did Peter end up thinking Jesus was talking about Peter or Jesus?
As you come to him, the living Stone - rejected by humans but chosen by God and precious to him - you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
For in Scripture it says: “See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.â€
Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, “The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone,†and, “A stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall.â€
1 Peter 2:4-8
Fred Fred Fred please answer me. Appreciate it.
Unam Sanctum in 1302 states:
Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff
💯
Since we know that Peter was the Apostle to the Jews and all the main events of the NT centered around Jerusalem why would Peter feel led to go to Rome. ? Jerusalem was not conquered until 70 AD long after his death therefore it seems logical that Jerusalem is where the Church was started and would grow. IMO Peter there doing his part. There is some evidence/discussion that the Emperor brought Peter to Rome to make an example of him and had him killed. There is also some discussion that the pagan Constantine appointed himself the head of the church as one of his titles. Finally most Catholics have no comprehension of the evil acts of the RCC throughout history including Inquisitions even as late as the 2nd half for the 19th century.
Fred, You need to look into your view of "offering the sacrifice" aka the mass. What is (or is not) supposed to be "offered up" in the liturgy? Where's your scriptures to support your position? I think there is some tradition you still hang onto there that is not biblical. Just look it over and put two and two together just as you've done with so many other issues where Rome's doctrines conflicts with scripture.
Not sure what you are referring to.
@@EpiGenosko RC mass is called a "sacrifice"; actually a re-sacrifice of Christ. You, at one point in this series, referred to protestant group worship using that same term, "sacrifice offered". Just so you're clear that Jesus Christ died ONCE for ALL and doesn't need to be offered up to the Father over and over again. … BTW, Just curious: what sacrifice were you referring to?
@@cathys465 You are correct about Christ dying once and does not need to be re offered over and over again. Unfortunately, that is not what the Catholic Church believes and teaches. I refer you to the following official RC statement -
Catechism of the Catholic Church - Sec. 1367 p. 344 - "The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one same sacrifice. The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of the priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of the offering is different.
And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered Himself once in a bloody manner on the alter of the cross is contained and offered in an unbloody manner . . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."
@@EpiGenosko , I fully agree with you as to what the RC catechism says. I only question what You meant in the previous video when you mentioned "OUR SACRIFICE" in regards to holy communion. I understand that we, who are being led by the Holy Spirit, who follow biblical direction ONLY sacrifice our desires, our worldliness even our very lives and existence to God on a daily basis. But is that what you had in mind when you said "our communion sacrifice"? If so then the sacrifice takes place even on days when we don't celebrate holy communion. If you were referring to some other communion sacrifice we fundamentalist Protestants offer, then I'm still puzzled regarding that one point.
Thanks for getting back with me. It shows you actually are a "minister" and not just a blogger. :-)
@@cathys465 I am not sure what you are referring to. If you can tell me which video and roughly where you are referring to, I will watch and get back to you - Fred
This is the definition of anti christ, in place of= vicar