The Rock! Part 2

Introduction.

Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonha, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My father in haven. And I also say to you that you are [Cephas] Peter [Petros], and on this rock [petra] I will build My Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of haven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in haven and whatever you bound loose on earth will be loosed in haven. Then He commanded His disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ. Matthew 16:15-20

In pervious part of this study, we have addressed the use of words to determine the intent of the Lord in speaking those words. We have given a brief word definition and looked at evidence that support Jesus spoke in Hebrew as well as Aramaic. We have also looked at the text in context of the chapter and in relation to the testimony of the other Gospel writers. We have addressed the question of foundation of the church by looking into the prophecy of Isaiah and its application relating to Jesus or Peter.

In this part we will examine what it means to be a head over the body of Christ and its expression as a husband to a wife. In relation to this we have examined the presumed unique authority given to Peter and compared it to the authority the Lord gave to all His disciples and also to the teachings of Paul. We also submit that Jesus did send and appoint One to take His place on earth but not what the advocates of the Apostolic succession supposed.

Finally we look at what is at the base of this conflict, which in its own right has existed from the birth of the church. In relation to this we have made references to the warnings given by the apostles especially of Peter himself. We end the discourse by detailing the great work the Lord has done through the ministry of the apostle Peter and offering a plausible reason why the Lord chose to call Cephas/Kepha [rock] which neither seeks to exalt nor diminish him but gives purpose.

Topics Covered.

The Rock! Part 1	The Rock! Part 2
Basic Word Definition.	The Keys of the Kingdom.
Jesus Spoke: Hebrew and Aramaic.	Division in the Church.
The Appropriate use of Words.	Peter the Apostle of the Lord.
The Subject in Context.	Conclusion.
Foundation Rock.	References.

The Keys of the Kingdom.

And I will give you [singular] the keys of the kingdom of haven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in haven and whatever you bound loose on earth will be loosed in haven. Matthew 16:19

We will be using the above text to address the issue of Headship and Authority. It has been stated that Jesus was giving Peter the keys of the kingdom and setting him to be the head over his brethren and over the body: the church. The idea put forward by advocates of the Apostolic succession is that just as Jesus was the head of His disciples while He was on earth, now that He has gone to haven He has bestowed that honour to Peter as head. That this honour was given through the words “I will give you the keys of the kingdom”, in relation with to being the rock of the church [which we have already addressed above]. This supposed supreme authority is also given credence by linking Matthew 16:15-20 to the prophecy of Isaiah 22:19-23. Whereby, a proxy rule with the same authority is made reference to.A play on words perhaps but the same claim no the less.

In the following sections we hope to show that Christ is the only head of the Church, and has not given that position to any other man.

The Unchangeable Priesthood.

First point to be made is that the position of High Priest as in the temple dispensation is no longer applicable. In the Old Testament, the high priest was the head and represented the people before God. And this priest’s service to God were limited by death therefore a succession of high priests were required. But, Jesus holds these position permanently.

Also, there were many priests, because they were prevented by death from continuing. But He, because He continues forever, has an unchangeable priesthood. Hebrews 7:23-24

That, Jesus Himself is the High Priest, who entered into haven by the sacrifice of Himself. Now, He forever sits as King and High Priest in the order of Melchizedek, never to be replaced nor represented by any man as head over His own house: the church.

And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him, called by God as High Priest “according to the order of Melchizedek,“. Hebrews 5:9-10

The point being made here is: the argument that Jesus as King assigning a high priest to take His place does not stand. Because he fills both position both King and Priest.

He, shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule on His throne; So He shall be a priest on His throne, and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.” Zechariah 6:13

The Head of the Body: the Church.

The point being made here is that Jesus did place someone to take His place on earth, but it is not as it is supposed of flesh and blood [Peter], but the Holy Spirit. When Jesus entered into haven He poured out the Holy Spirit, with that the Age of the Spirit began and through Whom He is forever present. In the following Scriptural references we hope to show that is what Jesus did.

• “And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever…. I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.” John 14:16, 18

Many teaching has shown that when referring to [another Helper], the Greek words used to express it, is saying the same kind as in indistinguishable from Himself. So Jesus did send another to take His place that is the Holy Spirit.

• “Nevertheless I tell you it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: ” John 16:7-8

Again, here the expression is that, as Jesus leaves to go to the Father, Another coming to take His place on earth [The Holy Spirit]. 

• when the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take whats Mine and declare it to you. John 16:13-14
• Jesus began both to do and to teach, until the day in which He was taken up, after He through the Holy Spirit had given commandments to the apostles whom He had chosen.  Acts 1:1-2

Here, Luke records that, when Jesus left to go to haven, He was working through the Holy Spirit to give instruction to His apostles.

All the above Scriptural references are given to show that Jesus has not left a vacant position that He needed man to fill. That each born again believer has Jesus living in them, and their body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit. The following verses show the continual presence of Jesus as Head, over His church:

• but, speaking the truth in love may grow up in all things into Him who is the Head – Christ– from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for edifying of itself in love. Ephesians 4:15-16 

How Jesus gave the various ministry offices to edify His body, that we all may grow to resemble Him. 

• Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Saviour of the body. Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. Ephesians 5:22-24

Here Paul uses husband and wife to express the intimate relationship of the church to Christ. Any teaching that seeks to set a man as a head in place of Christ, and the submission of the body [the church], to such a rule is being unfaithful to Christ. And if we accept and submit to it, we are dethroning Christ from our hearts.

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

Though the Lord has given us shepherds and pastors that they may tend to His sheep and lambs, He remains the only Chief Shepherd. This is what Peter himself is referring to when addressing his fellow elders and shepherds: “and when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that does not fade away.” 1 Peter 5:4 That He has not delegated that to no one else, and He Himself remains the Head and Chief Shepherd over His house, whose house we are.

Jesus is not an absent landlord, He is still the head of the body; He rules and reigns through His Holy Spirit that is ever present with us. Therefore any Apostolic succession as the head of the Church is one that does not accept the rule and authority of the Holy Spirit. It does not accept Jesus is present now because it seeks to replace Jesus as head. Paul speaking to the Galatians says if any man accepts circumcision as a means of sanctification, has made Christ of no benefit to him. Because he has submitted to the law and not faith. Then what then will become of the one who has sought to place a man as his head in place of Jesus. It is the acceptance and submission to it, that is the issue, the agreement with the claim that seeks to attain for the position as head of the body of Christ.

Apostleship is not Through Succession

And they proposed two: Joseph called Barasabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed and said. “You, O Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which of these two You have chosen to  take part in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.” And they cast their lots, and the lot fell on Matthias. And he was numbered with the eleven apostles. Acts 1:23-26

There is consideration to be given of the first act of the apostles, when they sought to replace Judas by casting lot. Here, is and an example of men acting without the clear direction of the Lord. Though the last instruction the Lord gave them was to wait on the Promise of the Father, before under taking the ministry He has given them. They acted in, accordance to their own will and assigned one to the office of an apostle by casting lot, of which only God Himself was to do. However, at the right time, the Lord Himself appeared to Saul and called him to the ministry and testified of him saying: “Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before the Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel.” [Acts 9:15] The Lord who chose him, set him aside and trained him to the work He has called him that Paul may speak and say that “the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus. Galatians 1:11-12. He may claim of the same right as the eleven that, he was called and trained by the Lord?

And when Paul introduce himself says: “Paul an apostle [not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father.”] Galatians 1:1 The appointment is by God, even Paul and Barnabas were not consider apostles until the Holy Spirit called them to be sent out, before were categorised under prophets and teachers.

there were some prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyerene, Manaen who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. As the ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, “Now, separate to Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which i have called them.“… So, being sent out by the Holy Spirit, they went. Acts 13:1-2, 4

The point is, it is the Lord who sets one in place, it is not a matter for men to decide and claim these positions. That is, Jesus is present, He is the Head in the present as He was and will always be. As Luke records in Acts 1:2 saying how after the Lord was taken up, He gave commandments to His apostles through the Holy Spirit. In Ephesians 4:11, when the Lord was taken up Paul writes: And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelist, and some pastors and teachers. Though Christ uses men to build His house, it is Himself working through them. It is not the man alone that works to build the church but Christ in the man.

He Himself is the builder of His own house as it says in Hebrews:  And Moses indeed was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which would be spoken afterward, but Christ as a Son over His own house whose house we we are if we hold fast the confidence and rejoicing of the hope firm to the end. Hebrews 3:5-6

What we trying to impress upon you is that apostleship is not granted by men nor is it through votes of men [it is not a matter for succession] it is not open to wrangling or politics of men, it can not be, but according to the call of God. However, those who seek to attain to these positions by their own acts and authority, Paul in his letter to the Corinthians calls them false apostles:

• those who desire an opportunity to be regarded just as we are in the things of which they boast. For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of the light. [2 Corinthians 11:12-14]
• and John in Revelation writes what the Lord says: “And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and found them liars;” Revelation 2:2

In conclusion the first act of the apostles is an example for us, that we might not take it in our own hands to assign men into an office by our own choice or methods of which only the Lord is responsible for. To do this is a clear violation: and the Apostolic succession is one, calling it divine does not make it so, when it is votes of men that set one in place.

For consideration: The walls of the city that came down from haven has got 12 foundations on which the names of the apostles of the Lamb are written. The question is would you find Mattihas or Paul? One is the will and act of man, the other the Lord.

The Authority to Bind and to Loosen

In the following section we aim to show that the supposed distinct privilege, that Peter received does not differ from the authority Jesus gave to others. To what does the authority to bind and loosen refer to? If it is over the powers of the enemy, then how is this authority deferent from the authority the Lord gave to His disciples and what He has bestowed upon all? The following are a list of power and authority the Lord gave:

• “Assuredly, I say to you [plural], whatever you bind on earth will be bound in haven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in haven. Matthew 18:18

This verse given which is evidence that Jesus did not give any authority that He did not give to all His disciples. Here the Lord is address all of them when He gave them authority to bind and to loose. That is the same keys was given to all.   

• And when He had called His twelve disciples to Him, He gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all kinds of sickness and all kinds of disease. Matthew 10:1
• Then He called His twelve disciples and gave them power and authority over all demons and to cure diseases.  Luke 9:1 [to which He later added 70, give them the same appointment Luke 9:1]
• Behold I give you authority to trample on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall by any means hurt you. Luke 10:19
• He breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” John 20:23

One may argue to say the authority to bind and loosen also include, the power to exercise discipline over the body. The following examples show the authority to do so is not limited to Peter, but to believers as one member of the body. Paul, speaking of two disciples Hymenaeus and Alexander, says he has delivered them up to satan that they may learn not to blaspheme [1 Timothy 1:20]. He also instructed the members of the Corinthians church to do the same in regards to the one who committed sexual immorality among them [1 Corinthians 5:4-5]. Here Paul shows, that the church in Corinth had the authority to do the same, to which later he encourages them to forgive and affirm their love [2 Corinthians 2:5-11].

There is no distinct, privilege that is afforded to Peter, that The Lord did not give to others. Matthew 18:18 which makes an exact  reference to the very same authority that Lord gave to Peter He also gave to all His disciples.

The Key of the House of David.

Thus says the Lord God of hosts: “Go, proceed to this steward, to Shebna, who is over the house, and say:…So I will drive you out of your office, and from your position he(I) will pull you down. Then it shall be in that day, that I will call My Servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah; I will cloth him with your robe and strengthen him with your belt; I will commit your responsibility into his hand. He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. The key of the house of David I will lay on his shoulder; So he shall open, and no one shall shut. And he shall shut, and no one shall open. I will fasten him as a peg in a secure place, and he will become a glorious throne to his father’s house. [Isaiah 22:15, 19-23]

To address the significancy of the application of the above Scripture we have read a brief study entitled Scott Hahn on the Papacy by Dr. Scott Hahn. The following is summary of the information gathered from the site in order to help us answer the relevance of the Scripture quoted to Matthew 16:19. The implications of such an association is, it gives complete authority to an individual over a house and it finds a reason for succession of that office. In his explanation he suggests when Jesus spoke these words “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of haven.” Jesus was citing what is basically encapsulated in the Isaiah text, that is giving of office, clothing in a robe, a throne and the key of David.

The basic explanation he gives is, Hezekiah as king has ministers working for him. To which Shebna [steward] was a chief of ministers as in over the house. Then Hezekaiah expelled him and in the vacant position placed Eliakim. The fact that he is made chief minister over all other ministers is signified by the key of house of David which he is granted. Here the claim is made as there is dynastic succession for kings so is for chief ministers. And the key of the house of David symbolise, dynastic authority entrusted to chief minister and also dynastic succession. Therefore, Jesus in giving Peter the keys of the kingdom of haven was making a reference to Isaiah 22 as such He was making Peter [since the key represent authority] a chief minister, vicar, master of the house. Which means giving of the dynastic authority for the Son of David (Jesus) king of Israel, but also an office where there will be dynastic succession. To this he adds since Matthew 18:18 mentions no keys the significance is that this apostles have the right to bind and loose but final say so rest with Peter or his successor, meaning he can undo what they have done.

The first thing to address is the fact Shebna is removed and Eliakim put in his place is what signifies Elikim being made a chief minister, not the key. Since Shebna already held that position [the steward Shebna, who is over the house] [Vs. 15] which is as a chief minister. The fact that he is being striped of his authority and his responsibility given to Eliakim [Isaiah 37:2 who was over the household]. The robe, the belt and the key are all aspects of the office Shebna held. The key of the house of David I will lay on his shoulder is giving of responsibility and authority and it is spoken in line with “I will commit your responsibility into his hand.” [Vs.21-22] And the next point is the key of the house of David does not in the least bit speak of succession. Eliakim was appointed, and not by dynastic succession as suggested. The existence of the office itself determines the need for occupancy of that office not the key which is an aspect of it. A chief minister is needed just as much as a general is needed in a kingdom. David sought to replace Joab with Amasa, and Solomon replaced Joab with Benaiah, is this dynastic succession of Generals of the armies of Israel?

By creating some sort of link between Matthew 16:19 and Isaiah 22, justification is given for creating a chief apostle office, since that is the only reason this passage is referred to. By creating this supposed position and associating it, to position of master of the household gives way to claim authority and a dynastic rule at that. This endeavour does not end there, since a head of the household is a necessary aspect in Isaiah to rule a kingdom, now this brand new office of chief apostle must also attain to such elevated reach of dynastic succession regardless of need or having ever been conceived.

The simple fact is, when an authority is given in a form of key or signet ring, the next thing that follows is clarification of what that means. The keys of the kingdom of haven: to bind and to loose, the key of house of David: to open and close, He called His disciples and gave them authority to cast out demons and heal the sick. There is no reason for us to strive to extract such complicated meaning from the statement. He did not give them authority to make the sun rise nor set, just for a specific application. What is being signified is, what the keys of the kingdom are, to which He gave to all His disciples. Now consider the concept, Jesus says assuredly I say to you (All) what you bind and loose will be done like wise in haven but this is in accordance to the will of Peter. Is that what He said? To claim this is to seek to overrule Christ Himself, since the authority that is given to the disciples did not come from man but from God. And to suggest Peter or anyone else for that matter has the right to undo that, is a gross error. Jesus did not say to Peter, I lay the keys of the kingdom of haven upon your shoulder, rather I will give you access and the right to exercise authority, which He extended to all.

Consider: One can say “I give you the keys to my heart, what you ask of me that I will do.” And to another the same person may say “honestly I tell you the truth whatever you ask of me that I will do.” Now does the one referred to with a key got more access than the next? No. Both have the same right and authority, in one an expression key is used while to the next the basic nature of what that means is given.

There is no reason for us to associate Matthew 16:19 to Isaiah 22:19-23, and to claim Jesus was making or citing that passage when He spoke those words. To do so seem like putting words in His mouth. We are struggling to give meaning and justification according to our own will and expectation. Creating a system that needs a doctorate to decipher and denying the simplicity of the truth of the word God. The last part is that it is the Lord, that sought to replace Shebna with Eliakim [Go, proceed to this steward, to Shebna, who is over the house, and say.] [Vs. 15] It is not a matter of internal debate or suggestions. It is an outside force that determined that not the chief minister nor his fellow ministers.

These verse are added for the simple fact that the government and administration of the house David is in the hands of Jesus. He is the One responsible, it is upon His Shoulders “the government shall be upon His shoulder.” Isaiah 9:6 That is He has not passed it to no one:

These things says He who is holy, He who is true, “He who has the key of David, He who opens and no one shuts, and shuts no one opens. Revelation 3:7

They Disputed Among Themselves.

They argued for preeminence: If Peter was appointed by Jesus as head over all his brethren, and Jesus did that in the sight and hearing of all His disciples, then why did they argue among themselves who is going to be the greatest? Would not the fact Jesus has chosen Peter have settled the matter? John and James sought to sit on His right and on His left and Peter himself was not exempt from the squabble. Yet they were caught out arguing among themselves down to the very end, even at the last supper.

• On route to Jerusalem And He said to her, “What do you wish?” She said to Him, “Grant that these two sons of mine may sit, one on Your right hand and the other on the left, in Your kingdom.” But Jesus answered and said, “You do not know what you ask. Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink, and be baptised with the baptism that I am baptised with?” They said to Him, “We are able.” So He said to them, “You will indeed drink My cup, and be baptised with the baptism that I am baptised with; but to sit on My right hand and on My left is not Mine to give, but it is for those for whom it is prepared by My Father.” And when the ten heard it, they were greatly displeased with the two brothers. Matthew 20:21-24
• After the mount of transfiguration Then they came to Capernaum. And when He was in the house He asked them, “What was it you disputed among yourselves on the road? But the kept silent, for on the road they had disputed among themselves who would be the greatest. And He sat down, called the twelve, and said to them. “If anyone desires to be first, he shall be last of all and servant of all.” Mark 9:33-35
• After the mount of transfiguration Then a dispute arose among them as to which of them would be greatest. And Jesus, perceiving the thought of their heart, took a little child and set him by Him. Luke 9:46-47
• At the Last Supper Now there was also a dispute among them, as to which of them should be considered the greatest. Luke 22:24

Mathew 18:1 records how the disciples came to Jesus and asked him in regards to the issue, they were disputing and Jesus placing a child before them told how one, who wants to be great must humble himself like a child. Some have suggested that, Jesus, did not answer the question of who is to be head because He did not want to cause schism among them. That argument does not stand since by not answering the question according to their expectation they remained in contention even to the last supper. Further to this we also would like to point out that Jesus speaking of what is coming to an end: that is the office of the scribes and Pharisees, commands His disciples to do as they command because they sit in Moses’ seat but not to do as they do [Matthew 23:2-3].

The point is: if Jesus saw fit to command them of a system that is ending, would He fail, to do the same for the church He is building; concerning His supposed chief apostle? No. Paul, teaching in his various epistles speaks of obedience to the elders and honour to those who labour for Christ, yet no mention of the veneration due to the chief of the apostles.

No, Jesus did not intend to say those things as a matter of giving Headship/authority to Peter or His disciples would have know it and Paul would have taught it.

Paul’s Account of Authority in Jerusalem.

To the account of preeminence among the apostles we will consider Paul’s account in Galatians. Here he speaks how the ministry he has received he received it from God, and that the work that is assigned for him to do is of equal aspects with Peter’s. That the same Lord who worked through Peter is working through Him, each in the place where God has assigned for him to work.

as it says, for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.   Philippians 2:13

That what men appear to be in reason of status was of no account to him according to the work given to him and that God showed no partiality in those matters. And when referring to those who are of reputation and pillars in the church, he does not single-out one but list them, “James, Cephas and John.”

But from those who seemed to be something – whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favouritism to no man – for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), and when James, Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me. Galatians 2:6-9

Breakfast with Jesus [Peter Restored].

The final point of this part of our discourse is the discussion between Peter and Jesus on the beach. It has been suggested that Christ was bestowing responsibility to him as the head of His church, but Derek Prince [a Teacher of the Gospel] have taught saying that Jesus was restoring him to the disciple-hood, from which he fell out on that night he denied Christ 3 times. If we deny Him, He also will deny us. 2 Timothy 2:12

When the angel spoke to the women about Jesus’ resurrection he gave them instructions to give to His disciples. When the angel did that, Peter was singled out, not because he was not in same location as the disciples were, nor was it to remind him that he was not forgotten but the actual act of denial has caused Peter to fall out. That is why Christ says to remain faithful even onto death. The same concept is carried over in Luke 22:32, were the Lord tells Peter, how Satan sought to sift him, but that He had prayed for him. The result being “when you have returned to Me,” meaning there was period Peter had fallen away.  

• But go, tell His disciples – and Peter– that He is going before you to Galilee; there you will see Him, as He said to you.” Mark 16:7 
• But I have prayed for you , that your faith should not fail; and when you have returned to Me, strengthen your brethren.”Luke 22:32

The events of those last days had taken a toll on Peter, even after meeting the Lord, raised from the dead, he was not fully consoled. To this extent, he was preparing to go back to the life he left behind, and with him almost half the disciples. That morning, the Lord meets them on the beach and have discussion with Peter. Jesus takes care to ask Peter if He loved Him 3 times, the number of times Peter had denied Him. Each time reminding him the work he wants him to do and finally giving him an insight that though he acted fearfully that night when all others were scattered away, now he would indeed glorify God in manner of the death he feared.

Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me more than these?” He said to Him, “Yes Lord; You, know that I love You.” He said to him, “Feed My lambs.” He said to him again a second time, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?” He said to Him, “Yes Lord; You, know that I love You.” He said to him, “Tend My sheep.” He said to him a third time, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?” Peter was grieved because He said to him a third time, “Do you love Me?” And He said to Him. “Lord you know all things; You know that I Love You.” Jesus said to him, “Feed My sheep.“Most assuredly, I say to you, when you were younger, you girded yourself and walked where you wished; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish.” This He spoke, signifying by what death he would glorify God.  John 21:15-19

Here Peter is not being assigned authority but being restored to the call he had received from which he almost walked away from.  

Division in the Church.

Right from the birth of the church there was contention and division in the church. And the division in the church of Corinth, was due to people seeking to follow men and be identified through them. Here in his letter to the Church of Corinth, Paul confronts them:

That there is contentions among you. Now I say this that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas [Peter]” or “I am of Christ.” Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptised in the name of Paul?  1 Corinthians 11-13

Paul asserts that Christ is not divided, and seeks to redirect their gaze back to Christ. That it is not the servants of the Lord [Paul, Apollos, Cephas]  that are any account, but Jesus Christ, who was crucified for them and in whose name they were baptised. And the servants are mere instruments through whom they have come to believe. Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers through whom you believed, as the Lord gave to each one? I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. So then neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase. 1 Corinthians 3:5-7 

The point being, in seeking of power and authority, we have made man the object and have taken the focus is off Jesus. Even as far as to displace Christ Himself, from the place He has bought through His own blood; the foundation and the cornerstone of the church. And because we have made man the object – wrong teachings has come in, even to contradict the written word of God for the sayings of men. These teachings are not according to the mind of the Holy Spirit but according to the device and heart of a man.

The Roman Catholic Church History.

It would be incomplete, to close this study without first reflecting on the history of the church and how this verses played a part to shape the state we find ourselves in now. When men took it upon themselves to be the very rock that the church stood on and the head and absolute authority over the body of Jesus Christ. This corrupt and misapplication of Scripture has instigated wars, massacred the innocent, oppressed the unlearned and robbed the poor, because men sought to use it as a means to exercise power. This is not to dredge up the past for the sake of it, but to express the dangers of setting site on man and not on God. That history may in itself be evidence of the truth and that the wrong beliefs and superstition that came to be during this period of darkness still priests to this very day.

In church history there are many reformers that have arisen in protest, seeking and sharing the truth they have discovered. The Protestant body that has emerged to which almost every other branch of church stems from, owes its existence to these brave people. Who fought tooth and nail that the truth may be made known to the average believer. And their success in reaching the mass has instigated a reaction from the mainstream religious powers that has sought to oppress and rule over the people in blood. It has caused them to change. However, unlike the reformers whose  change was brought forward through the discovery of the gospel truth and it became the engine that fuelled there rebellion and willingness to give their life for that cause. The reformation that fuelled the mainstream religious powers of the time is, the quest for survival. It is not in the recognition of the truth these heretics and break aways discovered, but a damage limitation exercise to stem this exodus of believers. For this reason the skin is changed but the heart remained the same. It has become a dress up service which is unwilling to examine the truth of the word of God and has set its heart and understanding to traditional belief and man made rules, though they may stand in contradictions to the word. The enduring longevity of its traditions has in itself become its god and a point of stumbling. 

We will attempt to give a very basic insight into how the misapplication of Matthew 16:18 [Papal, church Infallibility] is used to further grant man control and the atrocious deeds that are done through it. The detrimental situation that is created through this belief system whereby hardly no one from within is willing to question the glaring errors, where blind obedience is a virtue and fear instilled into believers that any departure is deemed the forsaking of faith. If in the life time and after the death of some of the early apostles, false teaching has come into the body, Paul warned saying: “from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things…therefore watch” [Acts 20:29-31] and the Lord through John in Revelation exhorts the various churches that allowed false doctrine and teachers to remain; to resist and set their course right. That is the Lord expects us to do it, through vigilance and through His word and Spirit. It is not some automatic infallible shield that covers. If the early church had reason to contend against such, we have more reason to do so. This false belief the misapplication of Matthew 16:18, has given cause for the Roman Catholic church to fall asleep, and abdicate its responsibility to the pursuit of the truth. And allowed false doctrine and teachings of demons to flourish unchallenged.

Papal Infallibility described by [Dr. S Hahn-link ] is the Pope, the successor of Peter when speaking from the chair of Peter in defining faith and morals does so with infallible gift through the Holy Spirit, so that we can give to him the full assent of our intellect and our will. And Catholic Encyclopedia gives the same explanation that is immunity from error or failure, in theological usage, that is a supernatural prerogative granted through divine assistance to the Catholic church. The Promise of Christ in Matthew 16:18, that He will build His Church and that the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it, is the very guarantee that is used to support the infallible doctrine. If the gates of Hades can not prevail against the church then neither will it prevail against the supposed rock Peter or his successors. That Christ by His divine grace will protect against the establishment of anything that may bring error, when done in an official capacity.

“Certainly this teaching authority of the Church, not by any merely human effort but under the protection of the Spirit of Truth, and therefore absolutely without error, …. For, as the Vatican Council teaches, ‘the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter in such a way that, by his revelation, they might manifest new doctrine, but so that, by his assistance, they might guard as sacred and might faithfully propose the revelation delivered through the apostles, or the deposit of faith.'”[Va.12]

We will approach this by addressing the only two know infallible decrees that are passed by popes though the history of the Catholic church. 

“we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.”[Va. 44]

These are the Immaculate Conception of Mary and the bodily assumption of Mary into haven. We will also address the ever virgin Mary [that it is implied through reference] which we will examine briefly according to the word of God. We will further look at questionable infraction of morals and teaching of faith, though these are not deemed infallible yet are proof that the church was not kept from error under the protection of pope.

“As with the dogma of her Immaculate Conception, the dogma of the Assumption isn’t explicitly stated in Scripture. This was dogmatically defined by Pope Pius XII in 1950 in his encyclical, Munificentissimus Deus when he referred to many “holy writers who … employed statements and various images and analogies of Sacred Scripture to illustrate and to confirm the doctrine of the Assumption….” [NCR]

Immaculate Conception of Mary [GQ] [Infallible decree of the Pope Pius XI]

Immaculate Conception of Mary is a doctrine that teaches Mary was without sin, free from original sin and also free from personal sin. God by the virtue that she is to carry the Son of God has kept her form all kind of sin. And further validity is given to this teaching because of an apparition so declared it, according to [Va. 3]. The very brief search into this subject point to the fact, this implementation of this dogma of the church is done because of popular expectations, to honour Mary; as some democratic specification that was satisfied rather than on the recognition of the truth in the word of God. One aspect that seems to be repeated to the office of the Pontiff is: NO NEW revelation but interpretation of what is already given. Yet here is a new revelation in contrast to the very rule of the church.

The bible in no way teaches the perfect sinless state of Mary. On the contrary it affirms that only Jesus was without sin: For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us [2 Corinthians 5:21], and that everyone else has fallen short: There is none righteous, no, not one; There is none who does good, not one. [Romans 3:10,12],  all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. [Romans 3:23], if we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. AND If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us. [1 John 1:8, 10], all we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one, to his own way; and the Lord has laid on Him the inequity of us all. [Isaiah 53:6] to which Mary is not exempt (all means all). She was the offspring of Adam as much as every other person born of man and woman, that is what qualifies us to be born under sin. It is by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners [Romans 5:19]

The bible records how Mary found favour with God [Luke 1:30], for this purpose. Grace is unmerited favour, it is a gift of God. We receive grace because we had need of it, for one who is already righteous and perfect has no need of this gift. Mary is a recipient of grace not because she is perfect because she is imperfect. The bible speaks of Moses as one who stood before God, to whom the Lord testified saying, “I speak to Moses faces to face,” that Moses has found grace with God. [Exodus 33:12] Now consider how greatly this man was held in the sight of God, and the grace that was granted him to fulfill his role, but Moses killed a man. Yet he found grace, so did Mary, it is not necessary for her to be sinless, as she also says, “He has regarded the lowly sate of His servant”, not the sinless sate [Luke 1:48]. She found grace in the sight of God, it is not her that need to be sinless but The Child to be born (Jesus Christ). Who by His perfect sinless sate was able bare the sin of the world ALONE, be a perfect blameless sacrifice.

Jesus birth, did not necessitate a sinless mother with perfect birth that mirrors His own.

For argument sake let us assume immaculate conception is true: if God had allowed Mary to be born without sin, why has He not extended this grace to everyone else? Mary did not become sinless through carrying Christ [not that is valid] but as Catholic tradition suggest that she was born without sin and lived a perfect life by this she merited to carry Christ. To suggest she was blessed among woman is no bases for comparison, since every other person was born under the sin of Adam. The grace of God is not required for the one who is perfect. Then even if we say she carried Christ, is not the Spirit of Christ born in every believer, is not our body the temple of the Holy Spirit, who is God? Does He merit a body riddled with sin? What need Jesus have to be born of a woman only? Is it not to maintain His sinless state that the sin of Adam is not found in Him? [But Mary had an earthly father.] Romans 5 records how others have died even though their transgression was not like the one Adam. Romans 7 outlays the struggle of a man born under sin, desperate to live a life for God and failing?

By such claim we invalidated the need of a Saviour, we disregard the miracle of His birth and its significance and bring to question the work of redemption. No, immaculate conception does not honour Christ as it is the supposed intent of the Catholic Church, but takes away form Him: His uniqueness and the absolute necessity of His sacrifice on the cross.

Bodily assumption of Mary into haven [Infallible decree of Pope Pius XII]

Again we will point to the fact that this is a new teaching [Va. 12,44]; not believed in or taught by the apostles. This doctrine of Assumption is also based on driven “assumptive” theology. It is not based on the word of God, but on the imaging and expectation of men [Va. 41] and this supposition is satisfied through countless references of this saint and that pontiff and this sacred writings but the word of God is disregarded. The problem is, the base of the premise is wrong that therefore the whole structure is in peril. That is, the point we have already addressed above Mary’s sinless sate.

The bases of this teaching is, Jesus is sinless therefore His mother must also be sinless, and did not do any sin all her life. Jesus did not see corruption and was bodily raised to haven, since we have deemed Mary sinless it is not possible for her to see corruption either therefore she also must have been taken to haven as Christ was. The bible says Enoch was taken, the devil contended for the body of Moses, Elijah went to haven in a chariot of fire and Jesus was taken up into haven in a cloud, all clear indications what happened to them, yet there is no such record in reference to the body of Mary. There are attempts made to associate Mary with heavenly sighting and a slight suggestion is made but not making the declaration as a point of fact on which this supposed infallible doctrine is to stand.         

Now a great sign appeared in haven: a woman clothed with the sun, the moon under her feet and on her head a garland of twelve stars Revelation 12:1

Here we will address the issue of the sign of the woman in haven, which references are made as implication of the ascension [assumption] of Mary into haven [Va. 27]. The image of this woman, has been taken for Mary: who gave birth to a male Child, Christ. [“Revelation 12 could be seen as a poetic description of Mary having entered “into heavenly glory.” NCR]. Not an explicit references but something that can be inferred from. The concept being that since neither Immaculate Conception nor Assumption of Mary is mentioned explicitly in Scripture and infallible decree has been made by the church, some justification must be given. A ground work has to be set no matter how farfetched it maybe, so that this teachings may not be referred to as new revelation in clear contradiction of the rule.

Then he dreamed still another dream and told it to his brothers, and said, “Look, I have dreamed another dream. And this time, the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars bowed down to me.” Genesis 37:9

To this we assert that the image does not speak of Mary but of Israel. We can draw a parallel of this vision to the dream of Joseph, where the stars represented the 12 tribes of Israel, [“the 11 stars bowing to him as his brothers”]. It is through Israel the Saviour of the world has come. As Paul also speaks saying:

who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen. Romans 9:4-5

If we read through the chapter, we are able to see of whom it speak. Mary is the mother of Jesus, but the symbolism here is not speaking of her, bearing in mind Nebuchadnezzar saw himself as a great might tree reaching to the havens, not his kingdom but himself. Revelation speaks of the devil waiting to devour her Child; this speaks of how through king Herod, the devil sought to destroy Jesus by killing those who were 2 years old and under in Bethlehem. It speaks of how the Child [Jesus] was taken up to God and His throne. How the devil was cast out and  salvation coming to us. Then it speaks of how the devil went to persecute the one who gave birth to the Child, this persecution is the destruction of Jerusalem, and it’s inhabitants greatly afflicted, which the Roman empire brought to bare, as Jesus Himself prophesied:

• Now as He drew near, He saw the city and wept over it,  saying, “If you had known, even you, especially in this your day, the things that make for your peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes.  For days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment around you, surround you and close you in on every side,  and level you, and your children within you, to the ground; and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not know the time of your visitation.” [Luke 19:41-44]
• “And after the sixty-two weeks, Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; And the people of the prince who is to come, Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, And till the end of the war desolations are determined. and also [Daniel 9:26].

The persecution the devil brought forth next is against the rest of her offspring of this woman, “who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ,” [Revelations 12:17] that is the persecution that arose against the early Christians. Christianity is born from, Judaism, as the Lord says, “salvation is from the Jews,” [John 4:22] and being built on the doctrine of the apostles and prophets. Last point is this woman was given wings like eagles and was given a place to hide in the wilderness. Even if we try to apply it to Mary the end of the woman is in the wilderness, it does not say she was taken up into haven as it does of Jesus “caught up to God.” The point is the imagery is not an indication for us to build a doctrine on, and not an infallible one at that. Though other minor indications, reference to scripture are made, their application to this doctrine are farfetched and negligible.

Ever Virgin Mary:

This is another teaching that is held by the church, in regards to Mary, is the erpetual state of purity, in contradiction to the clear word of God. Though not declared as infallible, it is used as a point of reference as a sacred writing to give credit to the infallible doctrine of assumption. [Va: 21,22] which means it is in itself a fundamental aspect of the faith, through reference. This belief is held evenwhen the bible clearly records saying, “After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit.” Matthew 1:18 and “Joseph did not know her until she brought forth her firstborn Son.” Matthew 1:25 “to know” is a term used in a manner of husband and wife, “Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore cain,” Genesis 4:1 The bible also records on many occasions of the Lord’s siblings, His brothers and sisters [Matthew 12:46, 13:55-56, John 7:3,5, Acts 1:14, 1 Corinthians 9:5, Galatians 1:19] These teaching that sate the perpetual purity of Mary, are outside the word of God are fables and imaging of men. If we don’t have the word of God as a point of reference by which we are to put to test doctrine, infallible or not makes no deference, it is a futile exercise and these infraction are symptoms of a far deadly condition.               

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,  that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.  2 Timothy 3:16-17

The Spirit and the word do not contradict each other, if the word of God does not reveal this to be true no matter how astonishing the claim of the apparition must be false. Paul in Galatians, says “But even if we, or an angel from haven, preach any other gospel to you than that what we have preached to you let him be accursed.” Galatians 1:8 This he speaks of the gospel, but the same can be said for anything that seeks to affirm a teaching contrary to the word of God. As John also says “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are from God;” 1 John 4:1 The problem in addressing these subjects is precisely because it is not based on the word of God, but on fables and imaging of men. The fact now it is made a pillar of the Roman Catholic Church by the supposed infallible word of the pope makes it that much more difficult. For the sake of traditions and teachings based on false premises, the Roman Catholic Church will have to persist on this false course, pilling up reasonings of men to support its stand. The honour of the office of the pope and the doctrine of the church is held above the truth of the word of God. 

We will also address the issues that have arisen through the course of the Catholic church. Failures in morals, as shown by Reformers of the church and false doctrines that are held, believed on and are practiced that does not stand to the word of God. Though may not be classified as infallible, yet because they were or are practiced is evident in itself the Roman Catholic Church has been mislead. The basic concept that the gates of Hades shall not prevail against the church and by consequence extended to Peter and his supposed successors – is translated as kept from error according to Catholic traditions. Therefore, any breach no matter how small, in faith or morals and practice is evidence of misapplication of Matthew 16:18. The wrangling of words whether a decree is given from the seat of Peter or away is of no consequence if the church holds and teaches anything that is contrary to the word of God. We have addressed such general objection of morals and faith teaching held by the Catholic Church. [God’s Generals: Roaring Reformers]

The Sacrifice of the Mass: The Repeated Offering of Christ.

“To offer Christ up ‘again’ as a sacrificial offering for sin is an abomination in the site of God. It is to account the blood of the eternal Son to have no more value than the blood of goats and calfs. This is to hold the blood of the covenant to contempt.”

The offering of Christ in the  Sacrifice of the Mass has been greatly spoken against by the fathers of the reformation, Luther, Calvin, Knox and so on. That it is one of the greatest misconduct in the Roman Catholic Church. The Church defines the Sacrifice of Mass as: [Catholic Encyclopaedia] 

Of these the most important is that the Church intends the Mass to be regarded as a “true and proper sacrifice”, and will not tolerate the idea that the sacrifice is identical with Holy Communion. That is the sense of a clause from the Council of Trent (Sess. XXII, can. 1): “If any one saith that in the Mass a true and proper sacrifice is not offered to God; or, that to be offered is nothing else but that Christ is given us to eat; let him be anathema [cursed]”… Leo XIII in the dogmatic Bull “Apostolicae Curae” of 13 Sept., 1896 had this in mind the Eucharistic: “Sacrifice of the true Body and Blood of Christ” on the alter.” [NA]

If Christ was offered up as sacrificial offering by men, that is to account the works of the rulers of the people, High Priest, Judas, Pilot, the soldiers who scourged, nailed and pierced His side, and those who mocked derided Him in the midst of His suffering to be of a blessed work. Christ did die for the sins of the world, but the Lord was not sacrificed by His disciples but was delivered into the hands of the wicked men that the purpose of God maybe fulfilled. Therefore the priest lifting up the Eucharist to convert it to the real blood and body of Christ, so he can break it to make a fresh offering is not identifying himself with the Lord’s disciples but the hands of the wicked; he is not serving God but His enemy. 

Therefore the wisdom of God also said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they will kill and persecute,’ that the blood of all the prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world may be required of this generation, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah who perished between the altar and the temple. Yes, I say to you, it shall be required of this generation. Luke 11:49-51

This being said, Christ was never to be offered up by mankind as the high priest did with sheep and goats. That is to say Christ Himself is the Hight Priest of God and is also the Lamb of God. While the levitical priesthood depended on the blood of goats and calfs to enter into the earthly sanctuary, into the presence of God, Christ entered into haven itself not by the blood of goats and calfs but by His own blood. Christ offered Himself, to make propitiation for sins and to enter the presence of God once and for all.

• But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation. Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption…. how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? Hebrews 9:11-12, 14.
• He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And as it is appointed for man to die once, but after this is judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many.  Hebrews 9:26-28

Christ was never offered up by sinful men as a sacrificial offering, but their act was a means by which He Himself made His blood an offering.

• Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: Acts 2:23
• And now, brethren, I know that through ignorance you did it, as did also your rulers. Acts 3:17
• which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 1 Corinthians. 2:8

 So if the act done by wicked hands and the part they played they did in ignorance then it is not an offering made by men.  

• Therefore does My Father love Me, because I lay down My life, that I might take it again. No man takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. John 10:17-18
• But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God; From then on waiting till His enemies be made His footstool. For by one offering He has perfected forever them that are sanctified.  Hebrews 10:12-14

Therefore, Christ was never offered up by men and is never to be offered up but He is to be received. We are called to remember and proclaim the sacrifice of the Lord by taking part in the Bread and Wine.

Absolution, Confessionals and Penance: [GQ]

This is a process by which a believer may obtain forgiveness for sins he/she has committed by confessing the deed(s) to an appointed person [priest] by showing true sorrow for the sins and willingness to fulfil the required penance as a satisfaction of the act. It is likened to judicial process by which the sinner acts like the accuser and the priest the judge. The key point of this process is that forgiveness is not granted unless the confession is made to the appointed person with the authority to forgive that is the priest. Secret heart confession to God nor confession to a layman, a friend or any other relationship is deemed unacceptable. [NA] This authority is obtained by the priest through the following verse with association of Matthew 16:18:

“Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” John 20:22-23

The doctrine teaches since God has given the apostles the right to forgive sins and to retain it, God would be acting in contradiction to His word if He bypassed the priest and grant forgiveness to the one who comes directly to Him. “It would indeed have been strangely inconsistent if Christ in conferring this twofold power on the Apostles had intended to provide some other means of forgiveness such as confessing “to God alone”.” [NA] [no priest no forgiveness sin]. Now in order to address this issue we will look at to whom has God given this right to? by this we can determine what part the priests has to play, if any?

In the sermon of the mount Jesus is not speaking to His apostles alone but is openly teaching the crowd. To them Jesus declares how they ought to pray to their Father in haven and uses these words: “forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.” Matthew 6:12 Here Jesus is teaching everyone that they are able to come to their Father in haven directly themselves and obtain forgiveness for sins and are also to forgive those who has wronged us. The only condition to our forgiveness is that we forgive others theirs. As He says on verse 14-15: “For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, nether will your Father forgive your trespasses.” The point is that this right to forgive and to retain sin is a privilege that is granted to every believer and not only to apostles. From this two verses we are able to show that the priest plays no part in obtaining forgiveness from God. That as believers we have every right to go to God directly for what we need. Is Jesus being inconsistent in what He taught? No, only the priesthood through misunderstanding has sought to grab power where there is none. When Jesus spoke those words in John He was not speaking it in contradiction to what He taught, nor was He speaking so that His apostles would lord it over others. For there is no difference between Matthew 6:12,14-15 and John 20:22-23. [in both instances the believer can both forgive or withhold] 

Another point is, the condition for granting absolution by judging the level of contrition is flawed in itself. No one is equipped to know the heart and mind of a person. “For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man, which is in him?” 1 Corinthians 2:11 and also the Lord says: “I am He who searches the minds and hearts.” Revelation 2:23 So a priest is not equipped to determine the true state of sinner: a priest may retain a sin that he felt no due contrition for and grant one to there is no contrition. As this doctrine suggests, God will uphold what the priest decrees “if you retain the sin of any it will be retained.” then a way is made to set the guilty free and to condemn the contrite. God is not a God of injustice nor is He a minster of sin. But through misunderstanding that is what we have made God to be. Therefore, if God is the one who sees the heart and the mind as in to forgive sin, the part the priest plays has no value.

The overall summary is that we have been redeemed from sin, we are cleansed by the blood of Christ. And there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, [Romans 8:1] Sin has no power over us, and in the incident we do fall: “we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” [1 John 2:1] who intercedes for us. And through Christ we have boldness to come “to throne of grace, that we might obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need.” [Hebrews 4:16], that is we have no need of go betweens. That if we confess our sins He is faithful and just to forgive is our sins and to cleanses us from all unrighteousness. [1 John 1:9] 

As James also instructs us saying confesses your sins to one another and pray for one another that you may be healed [James 5:16]. Now when he spoke it, he spoke in relation to the previous statement of one who is healed [James 5:14-15]. The point he makes is, in the incident that there is something that is in our life that is not in keeping with the Lord and the way we ought to live, not to suffer it alone, and to confess it to your brother and sisters that they may pray for you and that you might be delivered from it. And tells us a fervent prayer of the righteous avails much. In the same concept 1 John 5:16 speaks of one who sees his brother sinning that “he might pray and God will give him life. “

So what did Jesus mean in giving us this privilege John 20:22-23? To this we have the Lord Himself as our example, when He forgave those who mocked and crucified Him saying “Father: forgive them for they do not know what they do.” Luke 23:34 And also have Stephan, who forgives those who are stoning him, with his last breath speaks out and say “Lord, do not charge them with this sin.” Acts 7:60 That is the purpose of this privilege of the authority the Lord has given us, it is not the exercise some fictitious power of granting absolutions but a life of forgiveness. 

What we can draw from these words of the Lord is, these teachings of absolution by priests, confession to priests, penance demanded by the priest are all false doctrine and not founded on the word of God. It is a system that seeks to maintain power and seek to make itself indispensable by praying upon the base aspect of the faith. To this extent the Reformers have rebelled and protested against the atrocities that were conducted through this man made privilege. Priest have been know to charge money for granting absolutions, that is to sell the blood of Jesus Christ. [GG, 32, 77] to which John Hus refers to as simony [selling something spiritual] coined after Simon who tried to buy the gift of the Holy Spirt for money. 

For further study in, the part the Roman Catholic church played to hinder the reformation of the church, and other doctrinal errors that have been promoted under the watchful eye of Pope please read: The Cost of Infallibility which will touch on The Translation of the Bible, the Sell of Indulgences, the Doctrinal Error of Indulgences, Purgatory, Idolatrous practice of Catholic Faith [worship of Mary, promotion of images and effigies], Rosary Prayers and Prayer to the Dead Saints.

Paul says to test everything [1 Thessalonians 5:21], and tells Timothy to keep careful watch on his teaching [1 Timothy 4:16]: that is so we maybe kept from error. But these system does not allow its members to question the fundamental belief errors that exists. But through ultimatums, demands blind obedience at the pain of excommunication and threats of internal damnation. Through fabricated infallible authority they have desecrated the grace of God and promoted idolatry. In their quest for power, the blind has become its leaders and the shepherds its butchers.

This solemnly proclaimed doctrine is expressly termed a “doctrine revealed by God”. Pope Pius IX adds that it must be “firmly and constantly believed by all the faithful”. Consequently, whoever does not make this doctrine his own, or maintains an opinion contrary to it, “is shipwrecked in faith” and “separates himself from Catholic unity“.] [Va. 45,47].

The fact the Catholic church and the Pope strive to promote idolatry show the lack of understanding the church has accumulated trough its over 1000 year history. Truly, the natural man can not discern the things of the Spirit is truly fulfilled in this house. Time and time again, they are captured by what is not the intent of the word. This ardent desire that refuses the word of God, and constantly look to men as a foundation of faith, is ingrained to the very fibre of the faith. Document after document piles reference after reference, each building on the other, yet the word of God is hardly to be found. And in the places it does appear the text is taken out of context, its meaning so twisted the value of the teaching is lost. Copious amount of words are used to lavish, devotion and bestow honour but if it is done to promote idolatry, and teachings that entangle men separating them from the truth of the word of God, what point is that. As Peter says “they speak great swelling of words of emptiness, they allure through the lust of the flesh, through lewdness, the ones who have actually escaped. 2 Peter 2:18  

Warnings and Examples.

For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come among you not sparing the flock. Also among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves. Acts 20:29-30

Here we point to the general warning given in the new testament to apply it to the subject at hand. Paul, had sought to quill any dissension in the early church, and correct any teachings that departed from the truth. But the main, aspect of his warning being people were seeking to follow men rather than Christ. Though these warnings seems stern and arguments can be made in saying this part does not quite apply yet therefore it is inadmissible. But the point is no one sets themselves to walk in a path that is contrary to the word of God. But it is a slow process that starts at a simple points. Peter says how they will bring destructive heresies in secret, and it is not an arrow they carry that says destruction this way but the end result is the very thing that seems out of place now. And when it comes to pass it would be just as acceptable to you as the heresies you are accustomed to now, indistinguishable for the air you breath.

• there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. and many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed.  2 Peter 2:1-2
• Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who  believe and know the truth. 1 Timothy 4:1-3 
• For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. 2 Timothy 4:3-4   

In seeking to be head over all christians the papal doctrine seeks to place itself as a chief shepherd, of which there is only One [Jesus]. From this elevated position it claims infallible authority to define faith and morals to which Christians are expected to give their will and intellectual ascent. Ephesians teaches, a man is to be the head of his wife as Jesus is the head of the church. Then any branch that seeks to place as its head any other but Jesus is one who is unfaithful to the Lord.

Peter the Apostle of the Lord.

This part is included to bring to mind the vital role Peter the apostle of the Lord played, which has been somewhat tainted by arguments and misapplication of Scripture. The harsh stand taken against him, more focused on his faults than anything else. All in an effort to counterbalance the errors, through which a God like exaltation that is given him, and his supposed successors.  

The main points we need to be aware about Peter are: he is named first in every list of the apostles of the Lord. The man the Lord called rock, NOT because He intended to build His church on him but because through whom the Lord sought to strengthen His disciples. Peter [full of the Holy Spirit] was first to preach the Gospel of the kingdom and the church growth began and 3000 souls were added to their number. Through whom the Lord healed the lame man, the dead was raised and many other miracles were performed. Peter who acted so fearfully before, now through the Holy Spirit, stood bold and confronted the religious leaders who condemned his Lord. And to whom the Lord sent His angel to rescue from prison twice. And Peter was the person to whom the Lord revelled His intent to take the gospel to the gentiles, and through whose preaching the gentiles first believed and received the Holy Spirit.
All this to show that he is faithful servant of the Lord, through whom the church first gained momentum. While the early parts of Acts details how the Lord mainly used Peter, the latter half speaks of the ministry of Paul. 

Why did Jesus call Simon Cephas/Kepha?

Through out the bible, in almost all cases when a name was given it has got a very specific meaning attached to it. Therefore, the true intent of the name the Lord gave Peter is not drawn from the translation given to it in greek [Petros], but from the initial name given by Christ Himself [Cephas/Kepha].

In this brief and limited scope of study, there was no valid evidence found to support, Jesus intended to call Peter, a pebble and not a rock. There is no reason why the word Petros that has not existed prior, a word which was coined from the word [petera] should now refer to a pebble and not a rock. No viable reason, comes to mind why the Lord, would chose to call him, [a small stone, or a pebble].

But the intent of the Lord is made clear in [Cephas] [Keph]: a rock which is hollow, or a place of rocks people flee to according to the use of the word [keph] given in the old testament.

• They were driven out from among men, They shouted at them as at a thief. They had to live in the clifts of the valleys, in caves of the earth, and in the rocks [keph]. Job 30:5-6
• The whole city shall flee form the noise of the horsemen and bowmen; they shall go into thickets, and climb up upon the rocks [keph]: every city shall be forsaken, and not a man dwell therein. Jeremiah 4:29

A word which signify a purpose to the one it is given to: [Keph] a rock that signifies a place to hide and strength. It is the belief that, this is what the Lord intended to call Peter, a person to whom the disciples would flee to when all things seem to fall apart around them. When they were fearful of those who took away their Lord. That they found a rallying point and that point was Peter. It is through whom the Lord, Himself sought to strengthen His disciples. He was a person the disciples easily gravitated to even when he sought to go back to fishing they were willing to go with him. 

To this extent Jesus called him [Cephas, keph, rock]. A word that would suite the very instance that occurred when He was taken away from them. Jesus speaking to Peter tells him, “But I prayed for you, that your faith should not fail; and when you have returned to Me, strengthen your brethren.” Luke 22:32 

But to this, the object of this study must be reiterated that Jesus did not call Peter [rock] for the purpose of building His church upon him. And to equate that name to the foundation of the church, is a gross misapplication of the word of God, giving the honour that belongs to Christ alone to a man.

Conclusion.

Throughout the history of the church there is no issue with such an enduring conflict as the topic of this study. The issue at the heart of the matter is: who is the rock on which the church is built on? Was the Lord making reference to Peter or Himself? In pursuit of this, we have briefly looked at language use to the history of the church and have concluded, the Rock Jesus was referring to was the revelation Peter received, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. And this point is best illustrated in the parable of the man who built his house on the rock.

Here, Jesus explained it as such that the man who heard His word and obeyed it, is like a man who dug deep into the ground and built his house upon the rock. To this He adds the winds and the storms beat upon this house and it did not fall because it was founded upon the rock; drawing a parallel between the rock and His word [Matthew 7:24-25]. And this is the same concept that is carried to the building of His church. That is the church is built upon a rock [a firm, a sure foundation] and the gates of Hades [the winds and the storms] will not prevail against it, because it stands on the Rock, and that Rock is Jesus, upon His words. “Haven and earth will pass away but My words will by no means pass away.” [Matthew 24:35]

Following this we will be concluding each section with a brief and clear summary of the points made. 

Jesus Spoke: Hebrew and Aramaic: That is we have more reason to suppose they spoke Hebrew/Greek as a common language than they did Aramaic. This is demonstrated from Pilot’s sign on the cross, to Paul’s speech to the crowd [Acts 21:40] all point to the wide use of the language. The various translation of Aramaic phrases are evidence to that fact. And finally have presented the words of Jesus to Paul [spoken in Hebrew: Acts 26:14] as an example of the manner the Lord addressed the children of Israel.

The Appropriate Use of Words: Through the application of the old testament texts and the history of word use. We have shown that there are more than one word to express rock in the Hebrew language [keph, cela, and tsur], while the Greek makes use of one [petra]. We have demonstrated the loss of translation that occurs from the Hebrew to Greek, through examples from Septuagint and detailed account of word definition. As such we have determined the words the Lord would have spoken are:  

• [Aramaic/Hebrew representation]: “And I also say to you that you are [Cephas/Kepha], and on this rock [cela/tsur] I will build My Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.”
• [Greek translation]: “And I also say to you that you are [Petros], and on this rock [petra] I will build My Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.”

Showing a clear distinction between the name for Peter and the rock of the church. Though the evidence is formed from a sound Scriptural arguments, it is still conjectural, due to the lack of historical Hebrew/Aramaic New Testament text.  However, we believe we have successfully put aside any other conjectural arguments that may arise in contradiction.

The Subject in Context: That Jesus is “the Christ, the Son of the living God “ is the theme that runs through the chapter. And we have shown the effectiveness of that truth in first recorded growth of the church in Peter’s first sermon in Acts 2. It is this vital  point the other gospel writers thought to include and to whom Jesus instructed to keep a secret. We also have shown that this revelation from the Father was not unique to Peter, that John and James also received it on the mount of transfiguration not more than 8 days later. As blessed as Peter was to receive this revelation, his flesh got the better of him moments later, showing the very frail nature of man and can not be possibly be the bases of the church. We also presented the thought what the Lord meant by “the gates of Hades,” that He was making this very simple statement that: “on this Rock I will build My Church and death will not prevail against it.” The Lord is not speaking of Peter nor infallibility, as in protection from error but the everlasting life to be had by those who have faith in Him.

Foundation Rock:We have used the prophecies of Isaiah [Isaiah 28:16] and Peter’s own teachings [1 Peter 2:6] to assert, Jesus is the foundation and the Cornerstone. That Jesus is the only tried and tested Stone and found without fault: “but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. “ [Hebrews 4:15] and have contrasted it to the various failures of Peter. We have also applied the words of the Lord in [John 7:37-38] calling those thirsty to come to Him, and associated with the teaching of Paul in [1 Corinthians 10:4] in which he calls the Rock the Israelites drank from Jesus. And finally, Paul’s definitive statement: “For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid which is Jesus Christ. [1 Corinthians 3:11] 

The Keys of the Kingdom: Israel will never have another king until the return of the Lord, likewise there will never be another High Priest. That Jesus is both King and High Priest in the order of Melchizedek and stands in that office permanently. He has not given any similitude of high priesthood of the temple to represent Him. However Jesus did place someone to take His place on earth, that is the Holy Spirit through whom He is ever present [Acts 1:2]. Therefore, to place another head in place of Jesus for which the body is expected to submit to is a clear violation of Scripture and an act of unfaithfulness on the part of the body. Israel seeking a king asked and got Saul, and the Lord said “they have rejected Me as King.” In like manner, the church that seeks to place a supreme ruler in place of Christ is guilty of the same, they have rejected the Lord as King and High Priest. 

We have used the example of Mathias and Paul to point out apostleship is not a matter of succession to be determined by votes. It is the Lord Himself who calls men to these offices and is not open to the will of man [Ephesians 4:11]. As Paul also explains in his letter to the Galatians that God shows no favouritism and draws a parallel between him and Peter, that the same Lord worked in both of them according to the place He had called them. That there is no unique authority given to Peter, to which the Lord has not given to all who believe in Him [Matthew 18:18]. This is evident, even in the midst of the disciples disputes, on “which of them is to be considered greatest,” [Matthew 20:21-24, Mark 9:33-35, Luke 22:24] the Lord does not give them instruction in regards to the supposed chief of the apostles. While, Jesus took time to instruct His disciples obedience to scribes and Pharisees because they sit in Moses seat. The clear point being made here is that Jesus did not set Peter as head or rock of the church, if He had, they would have had no cause for disagreement. 

We have also addressed the issue raised by Dr. Scott Hahn explanation of Isaiah 22:19-23 in associating the key of the house David to the keys of the kingdom of haven. We have pointed the flawed assumption in drawing a parallel between the keys and its implication which reaches haven itself. That all authority in haven and earth, rest in the Lord only, And that the Lord has not given this responsibility to no one else the government remains upon His shoulder and the key in His hand Revelation 3:7.

The final aspect we have addressed in the respect of authority/headship is, the disciples breakfast with Jesus [John 21:15-19]. Here we have clearly demonstrated through the teaching of Derek Prince, that Peter was not being given authority as head but being restored to the call he had fallen out of by denying Jesus.That Jesus was tenderly restoring him, and showing him the love he had for the Lord one for each time he had denied him.
Division in the Church: The point to consider is that the root of the problem, is one that has existed from the very beginnings of the church. That is, people were in contention with one other in seeking to follow men and not Jesus. That this is the point Paul brought up to the church at Corinth saying: “when you say,  “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas” or “I am of Christ.” And how he sought to correct them by pointing that the minister are mere instruments through whom you believed, the point is the Lord. 

To this we have pointed out the warnings given by Peter and Paul and how through wrong teachings many will be mislead. And the essence of their warning is that people seeking to follow men rather than Christ. We have pointed out the papal system is one that seeks to do just that. That it has sought to carve out a position between the believer and Christ. And not to reconcile the two [but to separate], by making themselves indispensable they draw disciples after themselves.

This infallible authority is sole responsible for many of the errors that exist in the Roman Catholic church today. It has affirmed and supported doctrine that stands against the truth of God. It profess to honour His name, yet works tirelessly to direct believers away from the Lord Jesus Christ. It has successfully monetised the Grace of our Lord, and the way of truth blasphemed. It is responsible for the construction of elaborate church laws which has consigned believers to pointless labours that entangle their souls. Through deceptive teaching, it has dressed up idolatry and elevated a created being to be worshiped [venerated] and statues, effigies, shrines and pagan rituals are honoured. It stands daily to sacrifice the Lord afresh in the Sacrifice of the Mass making a mockery of the finished work of the Lord. It is a system that demands blind obedience and has sought to silence anyone that dares to rise to challenge this usurped authority. The history of the Church and the Reformation being evidence of that. 

In Respect of the Apostle of the Lord: The last point we have made was to offer a reason why the Lord called Peter, [Cephas/Kepha]. The significance of his name is found from the word which it was coined from: [Keph]. This word which was used twice in the old testament each time it was to express a rock to which people flee to. That Peter would be the rallying point and through whom the Lord, Himself sought to strengthen His disciples.  

Now, the arguments are laid before you, I will end with asking you these sets of questions, why do you believe, what you believe? Is it because you have discovered the truth in the word of God or you simply found yourself in that place and never thought to ask? Paul exhorts us saying we ought to examine ourselves to see if we are still in the faith, it is our responsibility  [2corinthians 13:5]. The hardest thing we could do, once we have been shuffled into position is to take the blinkers off. Now ask yourself, who do you say Jesus is? And who do you say Peter is? In whom is your salvation and hope based on? This may seem easy, you may have answered it quickly, but Know this you can’t be married to Christ and submit yourself, your head to another, it is that simple.

Your thoughts might be to family, tradition, culture and even nation. But consider the words of the Lord Jesus, when He said anyone who loves mother or father…more than me is not worthy of Me. [Matthew 10:37-38] This text can easily be applied to mean: anyone who loves, family, nation, culture or tradition more than Me is not worthy of Me. 

The truth is the Spirit of God never contradicts the word of God. Jesus, says the Holy Spirit, does not speak of Himself, but what He hears that He shall speak and He will take what’s mine and give on to you. [John 16:12-15] That the Word and the Spirit are always in agreement. Speaking in Galatians, Paul, says if an angel came down from haven and told you a gospel contrary to the one we preach let him be a cursed. [Galatians 1:8] Consider his words, here Paul says even if an angel came down from haven, yet we accept men who teach false doctrine in stark contrast to the word of God, because they occupy a presumed office. And give heed to apparitions, who clearly speak words contrary to the truth.

There is a great effort applied to avoid the simplicity of the truth and make these verses speak what they ought not. Which rises to challenge the very Rock of the faith, and whose path way will only lead, away from the Lord. Jesus said: “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. [John 14:6]

Jeroboam who became the first king of Israel when it separated from Judah, set the nation on a path of destruction when he set idols before them [2 Chronicles 11:15]. And every king that came after, was blamed because he did not turn away from the errors Jeroboam has done. Eventually leading all Israel being carried away from their land. 

Your safety is not in men, it is in the written word of God. That anyone who seeks to relate the truth of God find their source in the word: the Bible, as the Holy Spirit gives understanding. That is, you have it in your hand and if anything that does not keep to it, is simply not of God. 

---

Reference:

• [GG] The Roaring Reformers, God’s Generals, by Roberts Liardon, 2003
• [SC] The Strong’s Expanded Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible.
• [SEPTU] The Greek Old Testament [Septuagint]: https://www.septuagint.bible/home, https://www.academic-bible.com/en/home/
• [BLB] Online translation, concordance of the bible: https://www.blueletterbible.org/
• [GTY] John McArthur’s on Matthew 16:18. [https://www.gty.org/library/bibleqnas-library/QA0098/upon-this-rock-i-will-build-my-church]
• [CEG] Key of David: [ https://www.eternalgod.org/question-and-answer-32/]
• [GQ] Got questions website:  https://www.gotquestions.org/Catholic-questions.html 
  • Topics: [ Matthew 16:18, Origen of Catholic Church, Vicar of Christ, Doctrine of the Roman Catholic church, Immaculate Conception, Assumption of Mary, Papal Infallibility, Indulgences, Purgatory, Apparition of Mary, Protestant Reformation]

Apologetic Sites for Catholic Church. Terms to search for [Assumption of Mary, Immaculate Conception, Infallibility, Indulgences, purgatory]

• [NA] Catholic Encyclopedia: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/ [a detailed archive of Catholic terms]
• [EWTN] Catholic Apologetics: https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/apologetics-870  [Apologetic explanation of various doctrines]
• [NCR] An extension of ewtn.com: https://www.ncregister.com [Articles]
• [CP] Scott Hahn on the Papacy: http://www.catholic-pages.com/pope/hahn.asp [Gives an interpretation on Matthew 16:15-19 and Isaiah 22:19, through this text gives a general address on; Peter’s primacy, succession and Infallibility]
• [Va.] The Vatican: http://w2.vatican.va/content/vatican/en.html [Documents: Immaculate Conception of Mary, Assumption of Mary, Indulgence]