I'm probably going to sound every which way of stupid here but I'm REALLY trying to understand! A person can analyze (linguistics, history and culture) of a certain time period but at the end of the day they are still guessing what the author means because they weren't there.
From the Catholic Encyclopedia:
With regard to the authorship of the Sacred Books, too, the exegete follows the authoritative teaching of the Church and the prevalent opinions of her theologians on the question of Biblical inspiration.
If I understand that sentence, an exegete in regards to Matt. 16:18 is going to say that Peter is the rock because that is what the Church teaches.
And regarding posts #1303:
First, you don't have the authority to determine the meaning of Scripture.
Who has the authority to determine the meaning of Scripture? Why is an exegete correct and someone like Billy Graham is wrong? Both are Bible scholars and yet they interpret Matt 16:18 so differently.
I may be way off base in my understanding of your post and other items I'm reading (I wouldn't be surprised - lol) so if I am I look forward to your reply!
Guessing? No. If we were just guessing, then anybody's guess would be as good as anybody else's.
I'll give you an example. In #1281, BriarBey said,
"Jesus said, many will come saying I am the Christ (exactly what you are doing...saying he is the Christ) but in their ways they will deny me."
Notice what she put in parenthesis. She took the referent of "I" to be Jesus. In doing so, she made Jesus to be saying that many people will come and [falsely] say that Jesus is the Christ. But if you know the Greek, for example, you see clearly from the words 'hoti ego eimi' (in Mark 13:6), that the referent of the 'I' is the person who is coming, not Jesus. The 'hoti' shows us that this phrase is to be read as a quotation, which is why good English translations put this phrase in single quotes, i.e. 'I am he'. Notice, that in order to exegete the verse, I didn't have to appeal to what the Church Fathers taught, or what the Church has taught. I just looked at the Greek, and directly showed that the referent of 'I' could not be Jesus. I could have been an atheist and done the same thing.
Now if intrinsic analysis leaves the question ambiguous, then I would have to look at the Fathers, the commentaries, and the Church teaching, and see which reading best fits with the regula fide (rule of faith).
Regarding Matt 16:18, Protestant scholar Oscar Cullmann, writes in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, "But what does Jesus mean when He says: 'On this rock I will build my church'? The idea of the Reformers that He is referring to the faith of Peter is quite inconceivable in view of the probably different setting of the story. For there is no reference here to the faith of Peter. Rather, the parallelism of 'thou art Rock' and 'on this rock I will build' shows that the second rock can only be the same as the first. It is thus evident that Jesus is referring to Peter, to whom he has given the name Rock. He appoints Peter, the impulsive, enthusiastic, but not persevering man in the circle, to be the foundation of His ecclesia [church]. To this extent Roman Catholic exegesis is right and all Protestant attempts to evade this interpretation are to be rejected."
Cullmann is exactly right. The natural reading of the passage in the Greek, without bringing in any theology, is that Peter is the rock upon which Christ will build His Church. Matthew has to switch from 'Petros' to 'petra' to show that in the first case the sense of the term is a name [i.e. Peter], and in the second case the sense of the term is rock. Jesus isn't switching referents, i.e. talking about two differing things: Peter and his faith, or Peter and Peter's statement of faith. Jesus is talking about one thing, i.e Peter, saying two things about him: first, that he is to be called Peter (a masculine name meaning 'rock'), and second, that upon him [Peter], Christ will build His Church. In the very next verse, Jesus says "doso soi tas kleidas tes basileias": I will give to you [singular] the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Jesus has just said that His [Jesus's] Father in heaven revealed Christ's identity to Peter. Now, Jesus says to Peter, that He [Jesus] will give to Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Giving Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven, such that whatever Peter binds on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever Peter looses on earth will be loosed in heaven, only makes sense if Peter is the rock upon which the Church is built. The notion that in verse 18 Jesus is talking about Peter's faith requires two changes in subject. Jesus has to start, by talking about Peter, then switch to talking about Peter's faith, and then in the very next sentence return to talking about Peter. The natural reading is that the subject stays the same [i.e. about Peter] throughout verses 18-19.
-A8