• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Matt 16:13-18

Arial

Admin
Staff member
Joined
May 27, 2023
Messages
8,881
Reaction score
8,298
Points
175
Faith
Christian/Reformed
Country
US
Politics
conservative
13Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” 14And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Most on the forum are Trinitarian. And many have heard and believe themselves that what is being revealed to Peter is the deity and humanity of Jesus. Understanding that the triune essence of God as Father, Son, and Spirit, is revealed knowledge. Not knowledge that is gained by human reasoning. And that this revealed knowledge is the very foundation upon which Christ builds his Church.

But can we defend that position? I will present a defense, and I welcome all comments, questions, disputes, clarifications, and expansion, and different angles of the same truths.

We can gain somewhat of Jesus' deity being expressed by his use of Son of Man as his preferred title for himself. Peter's first answer to "Who do people say that I am"? and Peter responding with human prophets. So, Peter's response to Jesus' second question "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God". hints at something being changed. But it does not solidify the claim that Peter is expressing deity regarding Christ.

A Jew would hear that as "You are the Messiah, God's appointed king." It would express a unique covenantal relationship with YHWH. Which of course is exactly what a Unitarian limits Jesus to.

But in the Gospels Jesus accepts the title and redefines it through his life, death and resurrection. The Gospels do not discard the Jewish category of "son of God: They deliberately stretch if from the inside until it can no longer be contained by Second Temple expectations.

We see the first stretch in Matt 11:27/Luke 10:22.
“No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.”

A Jew could say God knows the king and God reveals himself through prophets. But no Jew said only one man knows God exhaustively or that access to God is mediated solely through him. It now is no long royal sonship. It is unique reciprocal knowledge.

In Mark 2:5-7 Jesus exercises divine prerogatives without qualification. Jesus does not deny the premise, "Who can forgive sins but God alone?" Instead, he demonstrates authority.

Next, we have a critical move, and one directly effecting our passage in Matt 16. Jesus redefines Ps 2 sonship through Daniel 7:13-14.

The "Son of Man":
  • Comes with the clouds (divine imagery)
  • Receives everlasting dominion
  • Is worshiped (פלח, service given only to deity)

Jesus fuses:
  • Psalm 2 (Son / King)
  • Daniel 7 (Heavenly figure)

The Son is not merely installed on earth--he reigns from heaven and this is beyond any Davidic expectation.

Jesus claims a place at Gods right hand (Ps 110:1---Mark 12:35-37; 14:62). No Jewish king sat next to YHWH.

When Jesus says “You will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven”, the high priest tears his garments because Jesus claims participation in God's heavenly rule and he identifies himself as the Dan 7 figure.

Jesus receives worship without correction. I Jewish scripture angels refuse worship (Rev 19>10) and kings deflect glory.

Jesus
  • Accepts worship (Matt 14:33; 28:17)
  • Is invoked in prayer (Acts 7:59)
  • Is confessed as “Lord” in a way that echoes YHWH texts (Joel 2 → Rom 10

This stretches "Son of God" into divine identity space.

In the resurrection we have divine vindication of expanded sonship. Ps 2 already linked sonship with enthronement. Paul tells us in Romans 1:4 the resurrection does not create sonship. It confirms the stretched version. "Declared to be the Son of God in power … by his resurrection” It is not just Davidic, not merely representative, but sharing in God's rule, authority, and name.

Matt 28:18-19
18And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,"

All authority and one name: Father, Son, and Spirit.

The "Son of the living God" still fits within Jewish monotheism, but only if God's identity is now understood as complex, not solitary.






 
In the argument against his Godhood, (that he is subordinate to the Father), when they say he doesn't sit on God's throne as God (they say), but at God's right hand, I note that he is there occupying 'God's economy' where God alone can be, and no others.

Their mindset demonstrates a diminutive version of God himself, as though in Heaven we will be fully occupying God's position with him, suggesting that we are equals with him. They don't believe that, but it is what is implied by what they say about Jesus.
 
In the argument against his Godhood, (that he is subordinate to the Father), when they say he doesn't sit on God's throne as God (they say), but at God's right hand, I note that he is there occupying 'God's economy' where God alone can be, and no others.

Their mindset demonstrates a diminutive version of God himself, as though in Heaven we will be fully occupying God's position with him, suggesting that we are equals with him. They don't believe that, but it is what is implied by what they say about Jesus.
Also, when confronted with the command to worship Jesus, they either have to disobey the command or if Jesus is a human creation (creature and they don't like it when that word is used) then they are worshiping an idol. Which would of course be God telling us to not worship idols and also tell us to worship a man as God; when confronted with that they simply say they say worship has a lesser meaning when applied to Jesus and they are not worshiping him as God.
 
Also, when confronted with the command to worship Jesus, they either have to disobey the command or if Jesus is a human creation (creature and they don't like it when that word is used) then they are worshiping an idol. Which would of course be God telling us to not worship idols and also tell us to worship a man as God; when confronted with that they simply say they say worship has a lesser meaning when applied to Jesus and they are not worshiping him as God.
When faced with Jesus Himself, on that day, they won't have a word worth saying.
 
Back
Top