Re: [steiner] Islam Lacks a "rock of Peter"
- In a message dated 2/16/2005 1:18:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, tma4cbt@... writes:
Maybe somebody can come forward and tell us what it is about the
Petrine doctrine that made Jesus build his `church' there. We can
see distinctions unique to each gospel in the Bible. What is unique
about the gospel of Peter?
*******I think the "rock" on which the Christ was to build His "church" was not Peter himself, but the spirit-realization Simon showed a moment before, when he said, You are the living Christ. That direct knowledge of the Christ was the 'Rock' (in Greek, petrus).
And I agree that unfortunately Muhammed apparently bought into the false Gnostics' idea that Jesus didn't really die on the cross, etc.---- so that Islam leads people away from knowledge of the Christ as badly as orthodox Judaism does, making Jesus into a man or at best just one of the Prophets.
- In the early Christian movement there were those who believed
in "Jesus as God", those who believed in "Jesus as Prophet," and
those who believed in "Jesus as God and Man." There was much
argument and debate over this issue, as to what was Jesus' true
nature. Was Jesus mortal, was he God, or was Jesus God in flesh
(the "living" Christ)? Islam and most Gnostics (even to this day)
deny Jesus' divine nature, emphasizing instead his mortal role as
teacher. Thankfully, the Church father's rejected the Islamic-
Gnostic doctrines and later overcame the Monophysites, a counter-
movement that rejected the reality and completeness of Jesus' human
body, his consubstantiality with us. The chart below might help us
grasp the differences in black and white terms.
Nestorians: One person, two hypostases, two natures.
Catholics: One person, one hypostasis, two natures.
Monophysites: One person, one hypostasis, one nature.