If you will do a word study on petra versus petros and then reread the text you will see that Rome completely misinterprets the passage. Be a Berean and study for yourself. Eternity is too long to be wrong.
Here is a simple easy-to-read breakdown:
Is The Church Built on “Petros” or “Petra”?
http://www.trustingodamerica.com/Petra.htm
Here are a few more helpful links:
Papal Claim of Apostolic Succession
http://www.bereanbeacon.org/articles/sorted/01_On_Catholicism/Papal_Claim_of_Apostolic_Succession.pdf
Papal Claim to Have the Keys of the Apostle Peter
http://www.bereanbeacon.org/articles/sorted/01_On_Catholicism/Papal%20Claim%20to%20Have%20the%20Keys%20of%20the%20Apostle%20Peter.DOC
What Every Catholic Should Know
http://www.bereanbeacon.org/articles/sorted/02_Good_News_for_Catholics/What%20Every%20Catholic%20Should%20Know.doc
The Testimony of a Former Catholic Priest (video)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvID3lRyYIc&feature=relmfu
Concerning what every Catholic should know:
Whose word is truth?
First, that quote from Canon does not say anything about Scripture. All it says is the Pope has infallible teaching authority. If the Pope has infallible teaching authority, this is granted by God, not by men.
The actual quote from Matt 4:4 and 2Tim 3:16 do not contradict the infallibility doctrine. All the quote from Mark means is that true Tradition cannot contradict the Word of God. In reference to the Pope, this means that what he infallibly teaches cannot contradict the Word of God, not that he cannot contradict your interpretation of it.
Catholics do not worship sacred images; veneration is not worship. And Catholics do not bow down before sacred images. There is a difference between bowing down before, and bowing down in front of. The earlier one implies that it is because of the image that we bow; the latter implies that it is because of what the image represents. When a Catholic bows in front of a statue of Jesus, we are bowing because of Jesus, not the statue. Jesus does not have one nature with the statue. When interpreting commands in Torah, be careful, as there is a command in Torah that prohibits eating cheeseburgers; however, because of how it is worded and what it fully prohibits, it comes across as a moral, not ritual, commandment. If you want to claim that the Catechism of the Catholic Church incorporates Ex 20:4-5, fine, but keep in mind it is under the subheading of “Love the Lord thy God”. As we are not worshiping the sacred art, I am uncertain of how the Sacred Art is a failure to Love God.
Sacrifice: Whoever wrote that has clearly failed to read those passages in the context of what surrounds them. Also, we agree there is one sacrifice. The Eucharistic Celebration in Mass is not redoing the sacrifice. The Body and Blood in Mass is the same Body and the same Blood in the original Sacrifice. How do you intend to explain 1 Cor 11:27-32? This gives credence to the Catholic belief that one should be in a state of Grace before partaking in Communion. Paul says that Jesus said, “This chalice is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”
In addition Paul concludes 1 Cor 11 with a statement he will give more directions when he comes. What directions did he give? Since he has books in the Bible, what he said there must carry weight.
Priests:
Concerning 1 Peter 2:9, this is almost a direct quote of Ex 19:6. In this one God tells the Israelites that they will be to him a Kingdom of priests. However, not every single Israelite is/was a priest. The first requirement to be a priest was to be a Levite, and not every Israelite was a Levite. Going back to 1 Cor and examing 12:1-31, we see that Paul states we are all one body, but each of us has a different function within that body.
1 Tim 2:5 only says there is one mediator; it does not deny the possibility of subordinate mediators. When we examine Hebrews 5,6, and 7, Paul repeatedly refers to Jesus as the new High Priest. He does not explicitly mention what happened to the lower priests. While it is clear that Jesus is the High Priest in the Order of Melchizedek, it is unclear if there can be subordinate priests. However, we have a curious statement in Hebrews 7:25, Jesus “lives to make intercession for them.” Where else do we see intercessions made? In 1 Tim 2:1, Paul requests that intercessions be made (amongst other things for a list of people). Someone is supposed to imitate Christ by interceding.
Baptism/Salvation:
In Acts, we have several baptisms. In Acts 9:18, Paul is baptized. There is no statement as to how or with what. So we will backtrack to Acts 8:26-39. Phillip converts an Ethiopian Eunuch. While talking with the Eunuch, they come upon some water and the Eunuch asks if he can be baptized. Both Phillip and the Eunuch go down to the water and the Eunuch is baptized with the water. However, I suppose this is not enough, but I cannot find a passage that says the water is unnecessary. When Jesus was baptized, it was with water.
And whoever wrote this has taken Romans 11:6 out of context. The beginning of Romans 11 makes it clear that Paul is talking about the Jews. He then proceeds to say that there is a remnant chosen by Grace and the choice is no longer done because of Works. This is clearly referring to the Jewish sacrifices in the Temple. It is likely that anywhere else it denies the necessity of Works, it is a denial of Works of the Law.
If you want an example of where Paul speaks highly of Baptism as a work the attains justification, examine Romans 6:3. Here he says that we are baptized into Jesus. From this, we are baptized into his death and resurrection.
Petros v. Petra
The initial problem with this analysis is that it looks at Greek, not Hebrew or Aramaic. While the Bible was written in Greek, Jesus spoke Aramaic.
It does raise an interesting point that Peter denied Jesus and so the Gates of Hell prevailed against Peter (sort of, kind of, not really). Peter sinned by denying Jesus, but then became one of the people proclaiming Jesus.
However, Jesus says that he WILL build his Church on a rock, not that he IS building his Church on a rock. This indicates that at some future point the Church will be built, not that it is being built at the present time. Examining this passage, Ephesians 2:20, Paul says that the household of God is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets. Jesus is the cornerstone. If you look up a cornerstone, it is the first stone laid and all other stones are set in reference to it.
There is a simple explanation why Matthew used the masculine form when referring to Peter; Peter is a man not a woman, ergo, the masculine is used. However, there is another realization here. First the masculine is used and then the feminine. The masculine means movable rock; the feminine means immovable rock. This refers to Peter’s faith not being solid at the present time (movable) and that it will be solid (immovable) in the future.
Every single translation I can find of Acts 4:10-11 follows it by saying Jesus is the cornerstone. See earlier comment about cornerstones.
If you examine 1 Cor 4:15, while it is through the Gospel that they are begotten, Paul does beget them (through the Gospel). They (through the Gospel) are the children of Paul.
We have in Luke 9:46, that the disciples quarrel. Later in Luke 11, Jesus gives the Lord’s prayer. In Luke 13:18, Jesus repeats the parable of the Mustard seed. In Matthew, the Lord’s Prayer is given in 6:9. The parable of the Mustard Seed is in 13:31. Peter is appointed Chief Apostle in 15:18. The quarrel happens BEFORE the appointment.
As for there being no title of Pope in the Bible. Okay. A simple explanation is that while the office existed in some form or another, it had not yet attained the title Pope. Also the true title is Bishop of Rome. During Acts 2, Peter was not yet a Bishop, let alone Bishop of Rome, ergo, he could not hold the title Pope. That does not mean he was not the leader of the Apostles. Which is seen in Acts 2, when Peter is the one to address the crowd. In Acts 4, it is Peter, not John, that is filled with the Holy Spirit. Skipping ahead to Acts 10, the repealing of Kosher Laws is proclaimed to Peter, not one of the other Apostles. If anything this also confirms the notion of Papal Infallibility as an infallible proclamation (no need to keep Kosher) was made to Peter. Fast forward to Acts 15, after a lot of debate, Peter stands up states that it is by his mouth the gentiles should hear the Word of the Lord.
At the end of the Gospel according to John, Jesus specifically calls out Peter and gives him commands. The Church maintains that the Pope is to be the most humble of all priests. This is not to say they always act like that. In Matthew and Mark, when Jesus goes to pray in Gethsemane, he takes Peter, James and John deeper into the Garden. When he comes back, they are sleeping. He specifically calls out Peter rather than the other two; he is holding Peter to higher account.
Matthew 16:18 - http://bible.cc/matthew/16-18.htm
Jesus said that Peter was *petros*(masculine) and that on this *petra*(feminine) He would build His church.
Greek: 4074 Pétros (a masculine noun) – properly, a stone (pebble), such as a small rock found along a pathway. 4074 /Pétros (”small stone”) then stands in contrast to 4073 /pétra (”cliff, boulder,” Abbott-Smith).
“4074 (Pétros) is an isolated rock and 4073 (pétra) is a cliff” (TDNT, 3, 100). “4074 (Pétros) always means a stone . . . such as a man may throw, . . . versus 4073 (pétra), a projecting rock, cliff” (S. Zodhiates, Dict).
4073 pétra (a feminine noun) – “a mass of connected rock,” which is distinct from 4074 (Pétros) which is “a detached stone or boulder” (A-S). 4073 (pétra) is a “solid or native rock, rising up through the earth” (Souter) – a huge mass of rock (a boulder), such as a projecting cliff.
4073 (petra) is “a projecting rock, cliff (feminine noun) . . . 4074 (petros, the masculine form) however is a stone . . . such as a man might throw” (S. Zodhiates, Dict).
It’s also a strange way to word the sentence that He would call Peter a rock and say that on this I will build my church instead of *on you* as would be grammatically correct in talking to a person.
There is no support from the original Greek for the idea that Jesus meant Peter to be that which He was going to build His church on. The nouns are not the same as one is feminine and the other masculine and denote different objects.