Comparing Jesus With Peter
In Matthew 26:41 Jesus tells Peter that his heart his willing but his flesh his weak. This has been the story of the life of Peter portrayed by Matthew. There is no questioning his desire to follow and serve Jesus. However, readers are often left to wonder if Peter was bipolar because with his acts of greatest came the many mishaps. If we presuppose the validity of the two-source hypothesis, Matthew has drawn his materials on Peter at least partly from Mark. The latter puts greater importance on Peter, but it is clear that Matthew has lends even greater prominence to Peter, albeit negative and positive. Peter, as described by Jesus, is the stumbling block to his call installed by the devil (Matt. 16:23), yet he is the person with whom Jesus
…show more content…
Mixed with the confidence and the great desire, which Peter exudes, are the doubts, fear, lack of faith, and denial of his friend. No scholar has denied this brokenness of Peter or his role amongst the disciples. It is clear that he was a leader and favored by Jesus. If not Jesus’ favorite, he was at least in the small group with whom Jesus was close. This closeness leads to Peter receiving the special commission from Jesus. The scope and understanding of this commission have been widely debated and continues to be debated. The Roman Catholic scholars in their attempt to protect the foundation the Catholic Church, have held steadfast in their interpretation of the passage being the start of a line of successors who are leaders of the church, starting with Peter as installed by Jesus and continues into today. However, other scholars who are not particular Roman Catholic sympathizers, such as Cullmann, continue to argue that Matthew has not adequately outlined the succession model defended by the catholic scholars. Also, claims that the fact that bishops of the catholic church later claim to be the intended promise in Matthew, regardless of how early these claims appeared, cannot legitimately prove the claim. However, it does leave one to ask the question- since there are several Christian churches in the present day, based on the singularity of Jesus’ commission, shouldn’t the catholic church be arguing that any such church is not a real church as it is not standing in a succession of Peter? Understanding Peter and his commission in Matthew opens many discussion, and debates will
Mixed with the confidence and the great desire, which Peter exudes, are the doubts, fear, lack of faith, and denial of his friend. No scholar has denied this brokenness of Peter or his role amongst the disciples. It is clear that he was a leader and favored by Jesus. If not Jesus’ favorite, he was at least in the small group with whom Jesus was close. This closeness leads to Peter receiving the special commission from Jesus. The scope and understanding of this commission have been widely debated and continues to be debated. The Roman Catholic scholars in their attempt to protect the foundation the Catholic Church, have held steadfast in their interpretation of the passage being the start of a line of successors who are leaders of the church, starting with Peter as installed by Jesus and continues into today. However, other scholars who are not particular Roman Catholic sympathizers, such as Cullmann, continue to argue that Matthew has not adequately outlined the succession model defended by the catholic scholars. Also, claims that the fact that bishops of the catholic church later claim to be the intended promise in Matthew, regardless of how early these claims appeared, cannot legitimately prove the claim. However, it does leave one to ask the question- since there are several Christian churches in the present day, based on the singularity of Jesus’ commission, shouldn’t the catholic church be arguing that any such church is not a real church as it is not standing in a succession of Peter? Understanding Peter and his commission in Matthew opens many discussion, and debates will