I, being an Armenian Apsotlic, believe the Orthodox interpretation. One has to realise that the Bible is not always literal and never simple.Originally Posted by Ice
I, being an Armenian Apsotlic, believe the Orthodox interpretation. One has to realise that the Bible is not always literal and never simple.Originally Posted by Ice
"Half of your brain is that of a ten year old and the other half is that of a ten year old that chainsmokes and drinks his liver dead!" --Hagop Beegan
Alright maybe an agnostic should speak his mind…
It is obvious that no single scripture should be read out of context as in this case. You should look in the verses presiding and after the quotation. Lo and behold Jesus is asking his disciples who they thought he was after hearing what the people of Caesarea Philippi thought he was. The people of the aforementioned place though Jesus was either John the Baptist, Elijah or Jeremiah. Peter answers and says: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. Jesus replies: Happy you are Simon… because flesh and blood did not reveal [it] to you, but my Father who is in the heavens did. He continues; You are Peter …
Knowing a little of the early church I will say this:
Peter was the figurehead of the Church as the leading apostle and revelator. He was the Prophet.
The Rock which is the sure foundation (rock-mass) that Jesus built his church on is the principle of Revelation.
Together with James and John, Peter joined Jesus on the mount of transfiguration (next chapter) where they had encounters with mighty prophets from the old days. They were prepared for something. It is clear from reading about the man after the death and resurrection of Jesus, that he was in the lead and had special authority to lead the church. After his death though, none of the bishops would take up the mantle. Clement, bishop of Rome was asked, but he claimed he lacked the authority and keys.
Status Emeritus
![]()
Bookmarks