I hope to publish several articles this week. I hope to publish today the answer to this question - "was Peter the 'rock' upon which the church was built?" I believe he was! Stay tuned!
I also hope to publish my review of the "exegesis" of James White relative to I John 5: 1 and his view that John teaches that one is "born again before faith." I have already addressed this text in "Hardshell Proof Texts III" recently published. But, my treatment of White's writing on the text will be an enlargement.
I also have reviews in the works on both Wayne Grudem's and Ligon Duncan's "regeneration before faith" apologetic. For an interesting ongoing discussion of this point, visit my friend Steve Camp at
http://stevenjcamp.blogspot.com/2008/10/regeneration-precedes-faith-esvsb-gets.html
I also, as promised, hope to complete my review of Pierce's writing against means in regeneration (as published in 1872 in the Baptist Quarterly and mentioned by A. H. Strong in his Systematic Theology). I also hope to have a writing defending historic Calvinism on "faith" being a sovereign absolute gift of God, promised to all the elect.
I also hope I can have a couple other chapters in the series "Hardshell Proof Texts" ready to publish this month.
I also continue to work on other writing projects, hoping to publish another chapter or two in my book "The Weak and Strong Brothers."
I want to thank those of you who visit, read, and comment here. I hope I make all welcome and show proper love, grace, and humility, in our discussions of the sacred word of God.
5 comments:
Stephen:
Your understanding that Jesus was speaking of Peter in Matthew 16 is correct. You are taking up a worthwhile task in view of divergent opinions on interpretation.
Dear Ian:
Thanks for your agreement. We give nothing to the Papists in this admission. To say Peter is the rock does not, sine qua non, mean he is therefore papa of all the other apostles and that the church is subject to him alone.
Blessings
Stephen
Stephen:
Peter does play an important role within the unfolding of salvation-history, but Catholicism has extrapolated far too much out of Jesus' words. Peter fulfilled an important role within the church, being the one who preached to Jerusalem (Act 2), made his way along with John to authenticate that the Samaritans were accepted by God in salvation (Act 8) and was instrumental in Gentile inclusion (Acts 10.1-11.18) and hence showed himself to be "rock" on which church is built. Nonetheless, Peter's role does not necessitate papacy, nor does this text suggest it. Great care is required in the interpretation and application of Matthew 16.
Dear Ian:
I agree. I will also be elaborating on the points you raise in upcoming chapters.
Yes, Peter used the "keys" to "unlock" the door of salvation to sinners, but so did the other apostles, and so do we when we lead a soul to Christ.
I do not think that Peter was the only one who preached on the day of Pentecost. I rather think that lots of preaching was being done by all the apostles, elders, and evangelists.
Blessings
Stephen
Stephen:
I concur that the binding and loosing was not restricted to Peter (see Matthew 18.18-19). Nonetheless, in Matthew 16 Jesus was addressing Peter directly and played on the words petra and Petros. Jesus is highlighting him at this juncture.
While you are correct that more than Peter preached on the day of Pentecost -- the 120 began speaking in tongues (4), telling forth the God's mighty deeds (11) -- yet Peter is given the prominent place in Luke's account with his utterance (2.14-41).
None of this, though, gives creedence to the papal system.
This is a good discussion. I hope it encourages others to examine the text and work through it carefully.
Post a Comment