Was Peter the "Rock"?

Cornerstone Church ^

[Sir Gawain]

Was Peter the "Rock"?

Question: Was Peter the "rock" on which Jesus will build His church?

Answer: Here is the passage that you are referring to:

Matthew 16:13 Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, He began asking His disciples, saying, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?"

Matthew 16:14 And they said, "Some say John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets."

Matthew 16:15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"

Matthew 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."

Matthew 16:17 And Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.

Matthew 16:18 "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it."

The Greek word for Peter is petros, meaning "a pebble." The Greek word for rock is petra, meaning "a massive rock" such as bedrock. Jesus is the Rock, petra. Everyone who receives this revelation from the Father like Peter received it—that Jesus is the Son of God (Lord and Savior)—becomes a part of His Church.

Christ used the word petra when He told the parable of the man building a house upon a rock to illustrate its size.

Matthew 7:24-25 "Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine, and acts upon them, may be compared to a wise man, who built his house upon the rock (petra). And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and burst against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded upon the rock (petra)."

Jesus was talking about building upon bedrock, not a pebble.

The apostle Paul tells us that Jesus is the foundation upon which we build our lives:

1 Cor. 3:11 For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

The apostle Peter also informed up that every believer is a "stone" and that Jesus Christ is the "cornerstone" or foundation.

1 Peter 2:4-6 And coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected by men, but choice and precious in the sight of God, you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For this is contained in Scripture: "Behold I lay in Zion a choice stone, a precious cornerstone, and he who believes in Him shall not be disappointed."

Every believer is a stone in Christ’s Church. Peter was not the rock, but just one of many who are a part of this spiritual house of worship.

[r9etb]

I agree with you which is why I don't post the original articles; however, I do find it hones my apologetics skills to debate in a relatively friendly (usually) forum, so that when I go out in the real world, I am better prepared to defend my faith and spread the Word of God.

Well said.

Beyond that, while these debates generally do not affect the opinions of the main contenders, I contend that they can and do have an effect on those who pop in to read them. I know I, for one, have learned a great deal from some folks (logos, betty boop, to name just two).

[Campion]

The Catholic Church is into so much error (non-Scriptural beliefs and tenets), and its followers are so defensive, that you can not tell them that the Catholic Church is a mere human organization; they will not accept this, regardless of it's merit.

If the Catholic Church is not the Church Jesus Christ founded, it's crap.

And if the Church Jesus Christ founded is nothing but a "mere human organization," then Jesus Christ is nothing but a fraud and a liar.

And the apostasy you see among some branches of Protestantism today is nothing more than following those two irrefutable facts through to their obvious conclusion.

[CCWoody]

Matthew 16:18 "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it."

The more I read this verse, the more I think that the key to understanding what Jesus meant by "upon this rock" can be found in verse 17:

Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.

John 6:44-45 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, "And they shall all be taught by God."

[Mr. Bob]

Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." "This is the rock."

[Belial]

Most of the beliefs ascribed to Jesus were tacked on hundreds of years later by scribes or plotters. Worship whatever stone you want.

[Campion]

"This is the rock."

He didn't say "this is the rock". He said "you are rock" (no "the").

[CometBaby]

The ONLY reason you are making an issue of this is because .. IF Peter WAS the rock .. it would prove that he was the founder of the Catholic Church. Since Peter was the FIRST Pope of the Catholic Church. Hence, it is imperative that he be renounced.

Now I am not a religious person .. so it doesn't make any difference to me WHAT you want to believe. I merely point this out.. so that others will see it as more of the anti-Catholic religious propoganda I seem to see a lot of around here.

[Notforprophet]

"Can't we all just get along?"

Seriously, we all agree that Jesus was the Son of God, that he gave his life on the cross for the sins of all men... all of us... and that accepting his gift and believing in him grants us the key to eternal life with God in Heaven.

So what's the big argument?

[TheBattman]

It's called "intercession"

And it is a false doctrine completely put to rest by many verses, including:

1 Timothy 1:5-6

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Hebrews 7:25 refering to Jesus:

Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.

Where does the doctrine of "intercession" through Mary used by Catholics come from?

[Fiddlstix]

Ping J

[Paulus Invictus]

Matthew is thought to have written his version of the Gospel in Greek. As a tax farmer for the Romans, he would have roamed far and wide, and anyone who was anyone in those days, knew Greek (Koine), especially in Galilee. Greek was the language of business and culture during those times. The only version of the scripture, and not a very early one at that, from which we got the KJV of Matthew, was written in Greek, not Aramaic or Hebrew.

IMHO, the church was built upon the foundation of Christ, not Peter.

[RightWhale]

Funny that a man speaking Herbrew or Aramaic would suddenly throw in a Greek word

Then as now, many people in the region are multilingual. Greek was the culture of the region from Alexander until the Romans, and Greek was the common language, the language of diplomacy, the common language, the coine. Okey-dokey. The Galilee was not particularly Hebrew, and that is where Jesus did most of his teaching when he wasn't going up to Jerusalem undercover. Paul was able to travel widely and speak easily [or shyly according to himself] everywhere, and he ministered to many churches that were not Hebrew at all.

[Campion]

And it is a false doctrine completely put to rest by many verses, including:

So, uh, if it's a "false doctrine," why did Paul ask others to pray for him? Just how many "false doctrines" did Paul preach, anyway?

And you might like to re-read the context of that passage in 1 Timothy ... where it talks about "prayers offered in every place, for rulers and those in authority" (more of that awful false "intercession" junk again).

[Campion]

Matthew is thought to have written his version of the Gospel in Greek.

Papias says very clearly that Matthew wrote in "Hebrew".

However, I'm not sure it really matters. Matthew is relating a conversation. The conversation took place in Aramaic. We can prove that from the Bible. Case closed.

[la$tminutepardon]

Since Peter was the FIRST Pope of the Catholic Church. Hence, it is imperative that he be renounced.

Except there's a little problem of a few centuries in there, from Peter's time-- and then the clerical offices became a formal heirarchy, similar to the succession of posts held by the ambitious Roman aristocrat. Would Christ found a Roman church? Rome is Esau, isn't it?

Then what about the two popes who claimed each was the true one?

[B Knotts]

Well, I'll simply pipe in to say that you have there a much more reasonable argument than the one that is being made at the beginning of this thread.

[Campion]

Would Christ found a Roman church? Rome is Esau, isn't it?

Christ founded a worldwide church which happened to locate its earthly headquarters in Rome. I have no idea what you think is compelling about this. Jerusalem wasn't an option, for some rather obvious reasons. (Read Acts ...)

Then what about the two popes who claimed each was the true one?

At one point, there were three. But only one was right.

[la$tminutepardon]

Christ founded a worldwide church which happened to locate its earthly headquarters in Rome.

Don't think so. The church that Christ founded has no earthly headquarters. It has only tabernacles.

[B Knotts]

To clarify, I'm saying that while I disagree with his conclusion, it is at least arguable that papal succession was not implied.

On the other hand, to try to deny that Peter is Cephas is absurd.

Here's a good article about where a lot of the anti-Catholic stuff we see over and over and over and over and over here comes from: The Anti-Catholic Bible

[Paulus Invictus]

And Papias is, who? Perhaps a Catholic writer? Why is his opinion any better than experts I can cite saying that Matthew probably wrote his great work in Koine Greek? The case will have to remain open, as it's an argument no one can win. None of us were there at the time to ask the author himself...Matthew, what language he used. But still, the earliest text of Matthew was in Greek.