Black Spirituality Religion : Who Did Jesus Build His Church Upon?

Discussion in 'Black Spirituality / Religion - General Discussion' started by UBNaturally, Dec 12, 2014.

  1. UBNaturally

    UBNaturally Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2014
    Messages:
    6,497
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    Gender:
    Male
    Ratings:
    +1,736
    Who did Jesus desire to build his church upon, and why?

    This question comes up because I am now befuddled, as I always thought Jesus said he was going to build his church upon Simon

    Mat 16:18
    And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

    [​IMG]


    There are claims that contradict this and say that Jesus is the Rock that His Church is built on.
    Even to proclaim that any church which is based or built on Peter is a false church.

    Can someone clear up Matthew 16:18 and offer up an alternative comprehension as to what is written?
     
  2. Chevron Dove

    Chevron Dove Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    6,080
    Likes Received:
    2,582
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +2,730
    yes. However, that picture kind of throws everything off.

    According to the Bible; Jesus was sent to help mankind know how to choose good over evil and right from wrong, and to NOT go after the government that is against the goodwill of mankind. At that time when the Roman Empire was setting up, the human race was headed in a downward movement and many were unknowinglingly supporting White Supremacy, and Jesus was sent to reverse this curse. Jesus spoke of Peter's future ability to be able to stand fast against trickery and deceit BASED UPON Peter's reaction to issues going on at that time. He confronted Peter on certain issues that he needed to perfect, but Peter showed strenght of character more than any other man at that time, and that is why Jesus said that he would set his church up upon a rock, being Peter.

    Peter testified of the works of Jesus, AS A WITNESS, and so after Jesus was Crucified, Peter was used to in fact, SET UP THE CHURCH in present-day TURKEY [ie. Asia Minor, Anatolia] when the Jews were driven out of their homeland due to the Roman Empire government exercising against them. It was about 50 years after the Crucifixion that the Church(es) were set up and completed A.D. 90. This was about 50 years after the Crucifixion and a lot had happened after that time period. Many emperors had come and gone, Masada occurred, Bar Khokba Movement happened, the Roman Coliseum was constructed in Italy, and the Jews were outlaws in Jerusalem. They had been scattered much like the fate of the Native Americans today. But there is another crucial piece of history that also revolves around Peter too.

    I don't know if it would be because of this issue or not that may have given Peter a greater inspiration to be more ready to receive Jesus or not, but the name of Peter, 'of which Jesus called him' has a deep meaning that seems to go along with some other bits of history. The name of 'Peter' means 'BLACK' and some faint history leads to the issue of Peter, himself, in that he was 'very dark skinned' and maybe he was more persecuted than the average ethnic people of those times. The name of 'Peter' also means 'PETROLEUM' or 'BITUMEN' and this is the deep meaning here too, because PETROLEUM' is also referred to as 'ROCK OIL' and Biblically, it is associated with 'anointing'. Petroleum is Black, Black oil.

    Peter was not able to read and write, so says the Bible. He was illiterate, and one main reason why Jesus chose him was because, it was people like Peter that would be the most suppressed. Peter learned to write and eventually wrote [authored] his own books [albeit, he may have learned to write in oppressive circumstances]. but the adversary worked hard against the original people to prevent them from being able to read and write; which is the key to knowledge. A leader/priest/preacher or etc. needs to be able to process some form of proven script! The original Jews were not the only ethnic people in tht region being exploited by the Roman system.

    The original Canaanites were also being exploited such as Simon Zealotes. It's hard for people today, to believe that Colorism was a supreme issue during that time, and it's hard for people today to believe that Jesus was sent to deal with that form of Satanism, even though today, that is THE ISSUE as well--being denied by many Black African-typed people! Many of us live in self-denial, and therefore, find it impossible to believe that 'a higher being' would come against racism and Colorism to the point he would send a higher being to earth to try and turned people around. 90% + of the Black African world support White Supremacy!--some of us do it unknowingly, but it exist because of us! We have all been born and conditioned to support it in some way! We've all been born in sin. We have to be delivered from that diseased minset. But some people believe in that picture you posted because they don't want to believe that Jesus was scripted as being a Black African-typed man. They believe what they have been conditioned to believe or what they want to believe which would go against truth according to script.

    Anyway, a lot of history about Peter has been debauched and covered up because of the issue of Colorism! But the fact that Peter was indeed an original Jew that was suppressed byway of that Greek-Jewish movement during the Helenistic Era, Jesus was sent to define 'the original Jews' who were being suppressed. Their identity was being stolen by many people who were given 'Jewish citizenship' in order to deny the original Jews and other kinds of ethnic people human rights. Today, many so-called 'White Christians' don't like Peter at all. they talk up Paul and accept Paul but hate Peter. Peter, at first, couldn't 'stand' the 'Gentiles' and refused to even sit down with them, but the Bible states that he changed his views. When Peter walked with Jesus he was taught to NOT share with the Gentiles, but afterwards, it because a new concept that he had to adapt to after he and others were driven out of their lands and had to live in other places. Paul wanted Peter to go with him to Turkey to set up the church [a refuge] for many fleeing refugees from south because, Peter knew Jesus and ws a first hand witness tht caused people to believe in a new movement and they believed what had occurred in Jerusalem.

    Today, in Europe there are huge festivals around november ushering in their Christmas season, and during their major parades, it is a mandatory tradition that goes back to the Roman empire times to have a white man dress up and put black all over his face to portray what they call BLACK PETE. Furthermore, some of the more ancient depictions of Peter in Egypt and Russia show a black figure with an afro. But the image you portray would not be correct, because the Bible also details in script the hereditary description of what Jesus look like as well. He was a descendant of Abra-Ham, he was Hamitic. All in all, ACCORDING to the script and the problems of those times, Jesus chose Peter to be 'rock' and to set up the Church because of specific reasons, some of which I have touched upon. Rome consisted of many different kinds and colors of people, but it was a White Supremacist system as most of the bust and depictions of the emps do attest for about 400+ years.
     
    • Thank You Thank You x 1
    • List
  3. UBNaturally

    UBNaturally Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2014
    Messages:
    6,497
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    Gender:
    Male
    Ratings:
    +1,736
    Thank you!

    Was going to post an image relative to Sinter Klaas in another thread that I mentioned him in, but didn't want to distract the weak minds that would latch on to it and float away.

    [​IMG]

    As for the concept or historical connection to "petr" being a translation into the term "black", I could not find this.

    Could you point to a decent source that would bring this to front?

    All I am aware of was that it always referred to an extremely solid firmament of sorts.

    Also, don't get distracted by the image(s), as it may have taken away (yet added to) the question itself.

    "He confronted Peter on certain issues that he needed to perfect, but Peter showed strength of character more than any other man at that time, and that is why Jesus said that he would set his church up upon a rock, being Peter."

    When someone claims that this is incorrect, and that Peter was not the "rock", and that any church which is based or built on Peter is a false church, how would you suggest that can be reconciled?

    Is this claim completely false, or is there merit to it within the text?

    But this is far more than I expected, and is very much appreciated... if this were a test, you would receive an A+++ for the expounding alone, as well as the clarity in writing.

    Much respect
     
  4. UBNaturally

    UBNaturally Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2014
    Messages:
    6,497
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    Gender:
    Male
    Ratings:
    +1,736
  5. cherryblossom

    cherryblossom Banned MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,252
    Likes Received:
    5,505
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +5,560
    You already know my thoughts on this question because I already answered it in the "My God Is the only Living God" thread.

    You had an agenda there.
    And you have an agenda here.

    You started this thread as bait.

    And when Sister Chevron Dove replied, you jumped on it to praise and patronize her response and to use her post to further side-ways mock the Bible.

    AND you are attempting to PIT 2 Christians against each other because you already know my answer to this question which is quite DIFFERENT from what Sister Chevron said.

    Yes, I disagree with much in her answer/explanation.
    Yes, you already know what I said about "false churches" and the catholic church.

    And you also brought this up in the thread, "Can Any Christian Answer These."

    Yes, you have exposed yourself for the "wolf in sheep's clothing" that you are.

    You want to pit me and Sister Chevron against each other, sow discord between 2 Believers.

    You've truly shown your true colors and your false face.

    MESSY and SHADY.

    Proverbs Chapter 6
    16 These six [things] doth the LORD hate: yea, seven [are] an abomination unto him:

    17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

    18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,

    19 A false witness [that] speaketh lies,
    and he that soweth discord among brethren.



    Romans Chapter 16
    17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

    18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
     
  6. cherryblossom

    cherryblossom Banned MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,252
    Likes Received:
    5,505
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +5,560
    ^^^ And you constantly ask questions about the Bible but can't answer any yourself.

    You even replied, "Not having Bible study here."

    But you continue to ask questions about it.

    And I will not allow you to play this game you're trying between me and Sister Chevron.

    YOU don't have any SINCERE interest in the Bible but only to use it in your agendas.

    So, if Sister Chevron and I wanna further discuss this BIBLE STUDY, we can do so WITHOUT YOU.
     
  7. cherryblossom

    cherryblossom Banned MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,252
    Likes Received:
    5,505
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +5,560
    Sister Chevron Dove

    This question and thread was a set-up.

    You didn't know that of course because you came in blind. You weren't here when I answered this very question from him. And I spoke about the catholic church being a false church because it teaches that Jesus built His Church on Peter instead of what Peter SAID about Jesus being "the Christ, the Son of the living God." --- that Jesus is the "chief cornerstone, rejected by the builders" not Peter.

    So, that's why UBNaturallly mentioned false churches because he knew I said that but YOU DIDN'T.

    He wants to get you and me going back-and-forth while he sits back and LAUGHS.


    1 Peter 5:
    [8] Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
     
  8. UBNaturally

    UBNaturally Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2014
    Messages:
    6,497
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    Gender:
    Male
    Ratings:
    +1,736
    Again... thank you sister Chevron Dove

    Regardless of anyone desiring to add that which has nothing to do with the question or discussion of Peter being or not being the rock the Jesus was said to build his church upon.

    Stay focused and strong sister, don't get caught up in the "extra" stuff.

    By the way sister, I am still looking for more context on the "Petr" and "Black" connection.
    Upon your reading of this, as your convenience, please direct me to an area that can reveal this in more understanding.

    I do think there is some connection, but I just can't find it.

    Thanks again
     
  9. UBNaturally

    UBNaturally Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2014
    Messages:
    6,497
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    Gender:
    Male
    Ratings:
    +1,736
    Now I wonder what about this was disagreeable, as it was a question.

    Interesting
     
  10. UBNaturally

    UBNaturally Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2014
    Messages:
    6,497
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    Gender:
    Male
    Ratings:
    +1,736
    The "not having Bible Study" was a response to a directive to read something, where as one could have easily posted it. In my apologies, the way I stated it was harsh, but I didn't feel like going to look for something that another person was offering for context.

    When someone commands me to "read the bible or read such and such", rather than posting the passages and written text, I consider that attempting to have "Bible Study", and not actually sharing one's views on the particular text.

    If one could post the passages, that's one thing... but to suggest for another to read certain passages creates the idea that one cannot post that which they desire to reference.

    Hence... "Bible Study"... why use a public forum where plenty of texts and passages are posted, if one "shoos" another mindful individual away to read something, that attempts cast a shadow upon the words of "Jesus"?


    Interesting to me is that I have essentially asked questions, some take offense to this and others offer clear and genuine explanations without personal attachments to their own point of views.

    This is called "discussion" and "collaboration"
     
Loading...