I was reading something yesterday and for some reason it came into my head at 2am and has had me awake ever since.
I was reading a commentary that Nicholas Ridley made shortly before he was martyred about Matthew 16:17-19 It said.
"To whom Christ answered, "I say, thou art Peter, and upon this stone I will build My Church;" that is to say, upon this stone--not meaning Peter himself, as though He would have constituted a mortal man so frail and brickle a foundation of His stable and infallible Church; but upon this rock-stone--that is this confession of thine, that I am the Son of God, I will build My Church. For this is the foundation and beginning of all Christianity, with word, heart, and mind, to confess that Christ is the Son of God."
I always understood it to mean that He would build upon Peters strength of mind and strength of Faith. Using him as more or less an example for us as the Church to follow.
But this makes more sense to me than my thoughts did. But I tend not to trust my mind completely, it tends to do what ever it wants sometimes..... especially at 2am...
I found a commentary by John Calvin at; ccel.org on the same passage but it didn't help, I think it confused me more. It says;
"And on this rock. Hence it is evident how the name Peter comes to be applied both to Simon individually, and to other believers. It is because they are founded on the faith of Christ, and joined together, by a holy consent, into a spiritual building, that God may dwell in the midst of them, (Ezekiel 43:7.) For Christ, by announcing that this would be the common foundation of the whole Church, intended to associate with Peter all the godly that would ever exist in the world. “You are now,” said he, “a very small number of men, and therefore the confession which you have now made is not at present supposed to have much weight; but ere long a time will arrive when that confession shall assume a lofty character, and shall be much more widely spread.” And this was eminently fitted to excite his disciples to perseverance, that though their faith was little known and little esteemed, yet they had been chosen by the Lord as the first-fruits, that out of this mean commencement
there might arise a new Church, which would prove victorious against all the machinations of hell."
But Robert Jamieson puts it.
"Not on the man Simon Bar-jona; but on him as the heavenly-taught confessor of a faith."
That was of no help at all.
I had never heard of Nicholas Ridley before I started this book so I don't want to just say "oh he was martyred for his Faith in Jesus Christ so he must be right" So I'm seeking second and third and fourth opinions.
What do you think? Which way do we as "Calvinists" iterpret it. Or am I way off base on the whole thing and should start over? (I guess you can tell I have an issue with self dought) Or do you know any others that do good trust worthy commentaries I could look up?
Thanks in advance.