"And he cometh to Bethsaida; and they bring a blind man unto him, and besought him to touch him. And he took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the town; and when he had spit on his eyes, and put his hands upon him, he asked him if he saw ought. And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, walking. After that he put his hands again upon his eyes, and made him look up: and he was restored, and saw every man clearly. And he sent him away to his house, saying, Neither go into the town, nor tell it to any in the town. And Jesus went out, and his disciples, into the towns of Caesarea Philippi: and by the way he asked his disciples, saying unto them, Whom do men say that I am? And they answered, John the Baptist: but some say, Elias; and others, One of the prophets. And he saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ. And he charged them that they should tell no man of him."
In the first part of today's quote, Jesus miraculously gave sight to a blind man ant told him to tell no one about the miracle.
In the latter part, Jesus asked his disciples what the people were saying about Him, to which some responded that He was John the Baptist, Elias; or others of the prophets come back to life. Jesus then asked who the apostles themselves believed Him to be. Peter said, "Thou art the Christ."(An absolute truth) to which Jesus, acknowledging that Peter was correct, responded that they were to tell no one.
It behooves every bible student to note that during the Matthew account of this conversation between Jesus and Peter, Jesus supposedly (according to some) chose Peter as the cornerstone of the church by saying, "That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church" (Matthew 16:18 in part). Roman Catholicism contends that Jesus also, by making that statement, designated Peter as the "father" of the church, and it's first "pope". The exchange between Jesus and Peter, upon which Catholicism bases its false contention, does not appear in any of the other gospel accounts, neither Mark, Luke nor John. The absence of that conversation in the other gospels, in my view, diminishes the probability of that particular interchange between Jesus and Peter as it is written in the Matthew account.
As I rationalize the overall message that is to be gleaned from the entirety of the New Testament, the omission of that part of the conversation between Jesus and His apostles causes me to wonder if the Catholic "church", who had control of almost all of the documented material concerning the ministry of Jesus, including Matthew, Mark, Luke and John's accounts, did not insert the supposed appointment of Peter as the head of the church themselves so as to give scriptural credence to their distorted version of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
This is only my opinion developed after much prayer and study, and I recommend that every bible student, through that same prayerful study, arrive at their own conclusion as to what the truth of this lesson really is comparing all four of the gospel accounts.~
No comments:
Post a Comment