Why did Jesus change Peter's name, according to non-Catholic theology?

• Abram was changed to Abraham.

• Saul was changed to Paul.

• Simon was changed to Peter?

No. Jesus did not change Simon's name.

Simon's name is still 'Simon.'

“Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat,but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.”

Luke 22:31-32 (ESV)

The name 'Peter' was given to Simon as a title of his role/function as the one through whom the church will be built.

Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And 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. 18 And 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.

Matthew 16:16-19 (ESV)

The purpose of Simon was to be the "first" one to open the door (to preach the gospel) to the world. In this sense alone Simon is first. His Petrine role is only about the building if the church and the church is built upon faith alone in Christ alone (Ephesians 2:8-9).

2 The names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; 3 Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus;[a] 4 Simon the Zealot,[b] and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.

Matthew 10:2 (ESV)

Simon himself who is called Peter knew of his nominal title:

1 Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:

2 Peter 1:1 (ESV)

Conclusion

Simon's name is still 'Simon.' His name of 'Peter' is a title of his office. He alone has the role of being Peter (i.e. the first one to preach the good news to all). The power to preach the good news is given to all of the apostles, though (Matthew 16:19,18:18).

My question is, from a non-Catholic point of view, why did Jesus choose "Rock" as a name for Peter in the first place?

This is called begging the question. It has to be first established that Christ did name Peter the Rock. Who is the Rock all throughout Scripture?

He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he. Deut 32:4

And he said, The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; 2 Sa 22:2

For who is God save the LORD? or who is a rock save our God? Ps 18:31

He only is my rock and my salvation: he is my defence; I shall not be moved. Ps 62:6

Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek the LORD: look unto the rock whence ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye are digged. Isa 51:1

Throughout the Bible God is the Rock.

With that biblical definition in mind, we can then consider Isaiah's reference as the tie-in to Jesus and Peter. From what rock is Peter hewn and why?

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. Ma 16:18

What rock? Christ. How? Belief.

He [Jesus] saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. Ma. 16:15-16

Indeed, Peter himself tells us the same thing.

To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious, Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. 1 Pe 2:4-6

The Rock is Christ. He the believes is part of the house.

What about the keys to the kingdom given to Peter? Are they in Rome?

There is confusion that some believe those keys to the kingdom are the same as the key of David. They aren't. Christ has the key of David.

And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth; Rev 3:7

So what are the keys to the kingdom?

Keys open the doors to the kingdom and hell won't prevail. When did Peter use the keys? Peter preached first to the Jews and to the Gentiles.

But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words: Act 2:14

While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. Act 10:44

The doors were thus opened. Hell will not prevail. There are, however, some that believe they still control the keys and without them hell would prevail. They are mistaken as the bible has said.

What about Peter supposedly passing on the keys to the kingdom? Peter passed on the instructions from Christ to the elders of Asia Minor.

The elders which are among you [in Asia Minor 1:1] I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; 1 Pe 5:1-2

So, the answer from a non-Catholic POV is Jesus is the Rock who names those who believe and confess that Jesus is the Christ Son of the Living God as stones or rocks also built up into a spiritual house.

Peter was given the keys. He opened the doors. Those keys are no longer needed because hell will not prevail against believers of the Living God.

The problem is that Jesus did not just change Simons name to Peter. Jesus said he would build his church on Peter. Also, if you read Mt 16:13 the location Caesarea Philippi is where there is a huge mountain rock where pagan gods were worshiped. Jesus is saying, Peter you are the rock where I will build my church for people to worship the King of Kings not the other rock where pagan kings are worshiped. Also, Jesus gives Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven refrencing back to Is 22:22 where Eliakim gets the keys to the House of David. Eliakim was appointed to watch over the kingdom in absence of the king. This is a significant time in the early church. It's clear Peter is given a place of authority amoung the 12.

It is important to read the entire section of Scripture. There is no logical reason for Jesus to take the disciples to Cesarea Philippi. Nor is any action recorded. They apparently came, saw and left. We are specifically told Jesus asked the question of his identity as they approached the city. Therefore, the location pertained to the question. The right answer was given. In another place, it says, the one who has will be given more.

1. The Rock, is the Hermon Massif, and surroundings.
2. The city sitting on the rock's lower flank is of dual nature. Primarily, a combination of Imperial power represented by Ceasar, the first fascist emporer of Gentile Rome.
3. To a lesser degree, Phillip is second generation Herodian, the product of an intended dynasty. An enemy of the Jews, Herod used political connections to achieve power and begin marrying daughters of Priests. Herod was the natural enemy of the House of David, as evidenced by the visit of the Magi.
4. At the city's base, emerged the artesian spring, The Gates of Hell. This grotto was used in the honor of Pan. Jesus described himself as the source of the water of life. The Gates of the Underworld, dispense an entirely different kind of water.

If one stood in front of the city, the major elements of the Church are seen in action.

This is a Gentile model. What is noticeably lacking is another rock, the Mount Zion. The Temple complex is miles away in the City of David. This new Church, while initially Jewish, will rapidly become Gentile, and even hostile to Jews.

Lutherans have held that the special powers or duties given to Peter are not solely to persons who hold the office of the Bishop of Rome, just as they were not solely given to Peter, per se. They hold it to be signifying the Office of the Keys, which is a power or Office given to ordained pastors. The first scriptural citation in this LC-MS Lutheran explanation of Office of Keys is your Matthew 16 verse. The duties of the Office of the Keys include adminstering sacraments, and declaring forgiveness of sins to those who repent.

Why did Jesus change Peter's name, according to non-Catholic theology?

If Jesus was speaking Greek at the time of this passage of scripture then Petra and Petros apply, however, the feminine version of the word addresses the rock linguistically, and the masculine word addresses the name of a male person. This cannot be used to say anything else with any kind of proof.

I discovered where Peter is a rock upon which the church is built, in a biblical passage. Do you know where?

Revelation 21

14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

17 And he measured the wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of the angel.

18 And the building of the wall of it was of jasper: and the city was pure gold, like unto clear glass. (like our current city skyscrapers)

19 And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all manner of precious stones. The first foundation was jasper (this stone is thought to represent Peter); the second, sapphire; the third, a chalcedony; the fourth, an emerald;

20 The fifth, sardonyx; the sixth, sardius; the seventh, chrysolyte; the eighth, beryl; the ninth, a topaz; the tenth, a chrysoprasus; the eleventh, a jacinth; the twelfth, an amethyst.

These stones are in the protective wall of the New Jerusalem - which is the 'Israel of God' that Paul spoke of and includes the Church. They are the foundation stones, so they definitely are the stones upon which the Church/Israel of God/New Jerusalem is built.

Peter's former name was Simon, meaning reed or grass-like, which is a picture of his character, impetuous, and changeable by wind going in any direction.

Jesus' changing his name to Rock was indicative of the character change Peter would have which would make him solid on the truths of Jesus and His teaching and solid to be a leader in the NT Church.

It is interesting to note that the name Rock or Peter was not in use as a name during Jesus' time, so its' choice was highly unusual as well.

Renaming someone 'Concrete' today, is comparable to the unusual and curious name Jesus gave Simon / 'Rock'.

Jesus did indeed build His Church upon Peter according to the vision of Revelation 21, where Peter and the apostles are all foundation stones in the protective wall of the New Jerusalem /Israel of God &/ the Church.

My answer may be simplistic, but sometimes even the most profound concepts can be laid out in terms that even a child can understand. (Does my assertion remind you of someone who spoke of the necessity of becoming as a child to enter the kingdom of heaven? Could it have been--oh, I don't know . . . Jesus?)

Jesus changed Simon Bar-Jonah's name to Peter (viz., a stone) because Jesus knew what would transpire in Matthew 16, where Peter would utter those famous words:

"You are the Christ, the Son of the living God!"

According to traditional Protestant theology (to which I subscribe), Peter's confession was the rock upon which Christ would build His church. This rock was not the foundation, as Paul reminds us in 1 Corinthians 3:11, where we read

"For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Christ Jesus,"

but it was certainly a foundational truth. Peter's confession and the testimony of the early apostles were all foundational, essential truths. Christ, however, IS the foundation upon which the whole superstructure of the temple of God rests.

As Peter reminds us, each believer is a living stone, just as Peter was, and we all are being

"built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 2:5).

Peter would probably be the first to admit that he himself was but another stone among many other stones. Joined together, however, we are living stones in a spiritual house, with Jesus as THE living stone, whom Peter also described as

• choice
• precious
• the cornerstone
• of precious value to believers
• rejected by unbelievers
• a stone of stumbling
• a rock of offense

As the saying goes, "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts." There can be no superstructure, however, without a foundation, and that foundation is Jesus Christ.