And what do you say happened in Genesis 3 that inserted little variances in the teaching of the Bible ? Are you saying the text is invalid because it quotes the serpent ?
Or that all the re-formed denominations and sects are of the adversary ?
Or there is only one teaching of the Bible that is valid, and if so, who holds the keys ?
Do you believe what Jesus said, not believe, or fall in the camp of ye of little faith ?
When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He 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. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 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. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
If you will recall in Genesis 3, Satan twisted the words God spoke to Adam and Eve. He did the same thing when he was tempting Christ.
I believe what Jesus said...word for word. I also believe we were given the Bible so that we can search all of the Scripture for the proper interpretation of the Bible. We let the Bible interpret the Bible.
This way we don't build denominations on one verse theology interpretations as some have done with Matthew regarding Peter.
An interesting Bible study on Peter is very revealing in conjunction with the word rock as used in Scripture.
It is interesting to read the accounts in Mark and Luke regarding the same event recorded in Matthew. In these two other accounts, the exchange between Christ and Peter regarding the keys, rock, etc are not mentioned.
However what is recorded in all three accounts is Peter's confession that Christ is the Son of God.
This is not to diminish the account in Matthew, but the main point in all three accounts is Peter's confession that Christ is the Son of God.
When you combine this with the use of the word rock you will come to the conclusion that the rock upon which Christ is building His church is Peter's confession....not Peter himself. That is what the Bible is emphasizing.
Peter does assume a leadership role in the early church and no one denies that. The keys Christ gave him was the opportunity to be a leader in the early church....and this Peter did very successfully as we see at Pentecost and later.
There were other leaders in the church as well so Peter was not the only leader. As you read Acts you will see James, Phillip and others in a leadership role.
But we also see Peter stumble in the New Testament.
Later in the NT Paul had to chastise Peter as he had stopped eating with the Gentiles.
In Peter's own writings he referred to himself as a bond-servant of God. In Acts, anytime someone was healed, Peter was very clear to give the credit to Christ and not take any of the credit.
There is a lot more on this, but you can do the research yourself. I believe if you do an honest Biblical search on Peter and the rock, you will come to the conclusion that the church was built upon Peter's confession and that the rock is Christ.