Are you smarter than a fifth grader?

[NotTooSmart]

From another thread I read an interesting quote:

Add to this the inability to comprehend Bible passages that any fourth or fifth grader could explain what is actually written, such as John 6:40-66, Mt. 16:15-19, John 20:21-23 and Mt. 19:16, and it is actually mind -boggling! Our God is an Awesome God. Granting grace and understanding to whom it pleases Him!

For the sake of simplicity I want to confine this thread to Matthew 16:15-19. Too many topics lead to too much clutter. Plus this verse is a foundation verse of Catholicism.

So my question is.

How will a neutral fifth grader (remember the statement has the word “any” so this would be a fifth grader who has not had his mind warped by either Catholicism or any version of Protestantism…pardon the verb warped…that is what comes to my feeble mind) interpret Matthew 16:15-19? What skills are you assuming from this fifth grader?

Oh…I am not terribly interested in another debate on Matthew 16:15-19. I don’t have that type of attention span.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Just providing a copy of the text under discussion.

from Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition

15Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am?

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

17And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven.

18And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

and from New International Version

15"But what about you?" he asked. “Who do you say I am?”

16Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

17Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

 

[SimonArizona]

From another thread I read an interesting quote:

For the sake of simplicity I want to confine this thread to Matthew 16:15-19. Too many topics lead to too much clutter. Plus this verse is a foundation verse of Catholicism.

So my question is.

How will a neutral fifth grader (remember the statement has the word “any” so this would be a fifth grader who has not had his mind warped by either Catholicism or any version of Protestantism…pardon the verb warped…that is what comes to my feeble mind) interpret Matthew 16:15-19? What skills are you assuming from this fifth grader?

Oh…I am not terribly interested in another debate on Matthew 16:15-19. I don’t have that type of attention span.

Each 5th grader may have a different interpretation of the verse. Remember that the individual is the least qualified to interpret Scripture.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

From another thread I read an interesting quote:

For the sake of simplicity I want to confine this thread to Matthew 16:15-19. Too many topics lead to too much clutter. Plus this verse is a foundation verse of Catholicism.

So my question is.

How will a neutral fifth grader (remember the statement has the word “any” so this would be a fifth grader who has not had his mind warped by either Catholicism or any version of Protestantism…pardon the verb warped…that is what comes to my feeble mind) interpret Matthew 16:15-19? What skills are you assuming from this fifth grader?

Oh…I am not terribly interested in another debate on Matthew 16:15-19. I don’t have that type of attention span.

My fifth grader is smarter than your fifth grader!

 

[NotTooSmart]

Each 5th grader may have a different interpretation of the verse. Remember that the individual is the least qualified to interpret Scripture.

Interesting.

The quote that I was responding to indicated that the interpretation of these verses was so simple that even any fifth grader could get it right.

I assume that you disagree with the quote I was responding to (from a Catholic).

I disagree with that quote also, but for different reasons. But I was curious if Catholics would agree with this quote.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Each 5th grader may have a different interpretation of the verse. Remember that the individual is the least qualified to interpret Scripture.

Then I, too, take it that you disagree with PJM who made the original statement:

…any fourth or fifth grader could explain what is actually written [in passages] such as John 6:40-66, Mt. 16:15-19, John 20:21-23 and Mt. 19:16.

Check out the context and you see that it implies that if we protestants only had the sense of any given fourth or fifth grader that we would interpret the Bible the same as Catholics do.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Sure a 5th grader could understand. . .but you’re stacking the decks by insisting that said 5th grader be ‘unwarped’. That’s like asking your basic 5th grader who has never had a math class to understand long division. Do most 5th graders understand long division? Sure they do. Would they understand it if it was the first math concept they’d wrapped their little minds around? No, not at first. . .not until they had the idea of ‘math’ that every other 5th grader had been exposed to.

Now, some homeschooled 5th graders might have done long division in the 3rd grade and be approaching geometry by 5th grade. (Even some in public/private schools could be in advanced/enrichment classes). And some 5th graders might still be in remedial classes and struggling with addition/ subtraction, whether because they had trouble with the concept or they had just transferred from another country and were trying to learn the language of the new country and to ‘catch up’ in expressing themselves. . .whatever).

Point is, one expects the ‘average’ 5th grader to have a certain concept of math and a certain exposure to math.

So the 5th graders who were ‘unwarped’ by belief (poor children) would be in the type of situation as the 5th graders in remedial classes. . .some of them might stay for a while, having trouble with the concept; some might advance quickly, having a natural ‘bent’, some might advance more slowly with a ‘language’ difficulty but ultimately come to understanding. . .

 

[Eucharisted]

Matthew 16:15-19. Too many topics lead to too much clutter. Plus this verse is a foundation verse of Catholicism

There are no foundation verses of Catholicism.

Next you’ll tell me that Peter doesn’t mean “rock”.

On that note, here is apologetics on the verse in question: jimmyakin.org/2009/09/the-petrine-fact-part-6.html and jimmyakin.org/2009/09/the-petrine-fact-part-7.html

 

[NotTooSmart]

Sure a 5th grader could understand. . .but you’re stacking the decks by insisting that said 5th grader be ‘unwarped’. That’s like asking your basic 5th grader who has never had a math class to understand long division. Do most 5th graders understand long division? Sure they do. Would they understand it if it was the first math concept they’d wrapped their little minds around? No, not at first. . .not until they had the idea of ‘math’ that every other 5th grader had been exposed to.

Now, some homeschooled 5th graders might have done long division in the 3rd grade and be approaching geometry by 5th grade. (Even some in public/private schools could be in advanced/enrichment classes). And some 5th graders might still be in remedial classes and struggling with addition/ subtraction, whether because they had trouble with the concept or they had just transferred from another country and were trying to learn the language of the new country and to ‘catch up’ in expressing themselves. . .whatever).

Point is, one expects the ‘average’ 5th grader to have a certain concept of math and a certain exposure to math.

So the 5th graders who were ‘unwarped’ by belief (poor children) would be in the type of situation as the 5th graders in remedial classes. . .some of them might stay for a while, having trouble with the concept; some might advance quickly, having a natural ‘bent’, some might advance more slowly with a ‘language’ difficulty but ultimately come to understanding. . .

But the quote I was responding to said “any fourth or fifth grader”.

I would expect that a Catholic fifth grader would have a Catholic understanding of this passage from catechism class. But that does not say much does it.

 

[NotTooSmart]

There are no foundation verses of Catholicism.

Next you’ll tell me that Peter doesn’t mean “rock”.

On that note, here is apologetics on the verse in question: jimmyakin.org/2009/09/the-petrine-fact-part-6.html and jimmyakin.org/2009/09/the-petrine-fact-part-7.html

I would prefer to stick to the verse in question as opposed to articles on the verse. Fifth graders are not interested in apologetics (at least your generic “any fifth-grader” is not).

Oh one point, I think an understanding of “average fifth grader” for “any fifth grader” would be ok. Any implies 100% of fifth graders, and I think that is too steep of a hurdle for supporters of this proposition to defend.

Maybe there are no foundation verses in Catholicism. So I can rephrase that to a passage of Scripture frequently quoted in Scripture.

But you raise an interesting point that "Peter means rock’. Of course you probably need that tidbit of info to interpret that passage of Scripture. So to make it simple, let us assume the fifth grader is reading a Bible with the understanding that Peter means rock. Maybe the Bible has that as a note at the bottom of the page or something.

But of course the fifth grader would not be expected to know the fine points of Greek.

 

[JonNC]

Since I teach 4th grade D), I’ll quote someone smarter:
Martin Chemnitz

This is also certain, that no one should rely on his own wisdom in the interpretation of the Scripture, not even in the clear passages…

Jon

 

[NotTooSmart]

Since I teach 4th grade D), I’ll quote someone smarter:
Martin Chemnitz

Jon

So you to disagree that any (or even the average) fifth grader can read the cited passage and tell me what it means. In other words this passage is beyond fifth grade reading comprehension level.

So again, is there anybody here that agrees with the OP that this cited passage of Scripture is so simple that even a cav… umm fifth grader can get it.

Or to make this simpler, what do you think a fifth grader would understand should he be reading this passage of Scripture.

 

[PJM]

=NotTooSmart;5762315]From another thread I read an interesting quote:

For the sake of simplicity I want to confine this thread to Matthew 16:15-19. Too many topics lead to too much clutter. Plus this verse is a foundation verse of Catholicism.

So my question is.

How will a neutral fifth grader (remember the statement has the word “any” so this would be a fifth grader who has not had his mind warped by either Catholicism or any version of Protestantism…pardon the verb warped…that is what comes to my feeble mind) interpret Matthew 16:15-19? What skills are you assuming from this fifth grader?

Oh…I am not terribly interested in another debate on Matthew 16:15-19. I don’t have that type of attention span.

My dear friend “not to smart”; may i humbly and respectfully suggest you chane your name? Your musch better than it implies:thumbsup: I envy you’re computer skills [darn now I have to go to Confession ].

I do appreciate you’re gentle spirit!

As the person you quoted, I stand by my claim. I have taught both forth and fifth grade religion classes, and they are really interesting becasue they are old enoung to understand, and young enough to actually listen to what is being said.

Can they share deep theological reflections? No, proberly not. But if one read to tjem, or ahd them read it and ask questions, I truly believe the basic truth would be understood.

Jesus is speaking to Peter

Jesus is founding [starting a new church]

Jesus is putting Peter in charge of this church

Jesus gives “the keys to heaven to Peter” and this new church.

They may not understand the “binding and loosing” part?

***Mt. 16; 15 "He [JESUS] said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” ***

Might they require a bit of explaination? Sure, but, golly, we have given more than “a little explaination.”

Love and prayers my friend,

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Will they understand that this verse speaks of apostolic succession?
Will they understand that this verse means that there is only one Catholic church and that any other group that seeks to call itself a church is actually only an ecclesiastical fellowship?
Will they understand that though they may have been baptized into the body of Christ, that unless they are also in communion with the Holy See in Rome that they are not members of Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church?

I haven’t put it to the test yet with my 5th graders, but I don’t think they will say any of those things. And yet, I’m told that all of that is also in that one little passage – a passage that even a fourth or fifth grader can understand. Might it be that they will indeed prove to understand it, but won’t see these things I’ve mentioned because in reality they aren’t in that passage?

 

[BrianH]

Well how about a sixth grader who when asked said he was not familiar with the verse?

Paraphrased but as accurate as I can type here: Peter is really blessed. Hell is not going to be able to stop him. He is going to help build Christianity. Can I go back and practice my cello? I gotta do it 15 minutes or my teacher gets mad and stuff.

Oh, i guess the last two sentences are not needed

 

[NotTooSmart]

Can they share deep theological reflections? No, proberly not. But if one read to tjem, or ahd them read it and ask questions, I truly believe the basic truth would be understood.

Jesus is speaking to Peter

I can see that

Jesus is founding [starting a new church]

I can see that too.

Jesus is putting Peter in charge of this church

So you think that if a fifth grader knows Peter means rock that they would naturally interpret “this rock” to be Peter?

You know, I can see that too.

Does anyone disagree and think the fifth grader would naturally think “this rock” means Peter’s profession of faith?

Jesus gives “the keys to heaven to Peter” and this new church.

They may not understand the “binding and loosing” part?

You know I can see that. But I don’t think they will understand the keys of the kingdom part either. At least I can’t from the passage. I have to turn to the book of Acts and see what Peter actually did (like pronouncing judgement on people and having them die) and then I can work backwards.

Hmm…I was expecting a big debate. Guess not.

I do note that this is not the interpretation of this passage that I have gotten here. I like the 5th grade version better myself.

Does anybody else disagree here.

For that matter I’m not sure I do myself. At least not totally

But when I read the book of Acts and see Peter operating under the power of God such that when he pronounced judgement that people died, I am quite sure that is a fulfillment of this passage.

Actually I sort of like this little exercise. The simplest is usually the best methinks.

 

[JRKH]

From another thread I read an interesting quote:

For the sake of simplicity I want to confine this thread to Matthew 16:15-19. Too many topics lead to too much clutter. Plus this verse is a foundation verse of Catholicism.

So my question is.

How will a neutral fifth grader (remember the statement has the word “any” so this would be a fifth grader who has not had his mind warped by either Catholicism or any version of Protestantism…pardon the verb warped…that is what comes to my feeble mind) interpret Matthew 16:15-19? What skills are you assuming from this fifth grader?

Oh…I am not terribly interested in another debate on Matthew 16:15-19. I don’t have that type of attention span.

I am going to take a slightly different approach and say that I think that an “unwarped” American fifth grader will have trouble with Mt 16:15-19. The reason being that We Americans use the term “Peter” and “Rock” in the verse in what is a rather confusing way to render the translation. (I don’t know if it is just as confusing in say - French or not) In my bible (NAB) there are extensive footnotes explaining this. Peter/Petros/Kepha rendering. For this reason I would not say that it is the best verse to choose for your experiment.
The confusion would be removed if the verse were properly translated with Rock being used in both places and the footnotes written to explain Tht "Rock is where we get Peter from.
Thus, Jesus names Simon “Rock” (Kepha) and, "upon this “Rock…” With such a transalation I believe that any reasonably intelligent 5th grader would deduce that Simon “Rock” is given the keys and authority to bind and loose.

This raises a question though - In your experiment does the 5th grader get to use an a footnoted bible or are you limiting him/her strictly to the text?

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Well how about a sixth grader who when asked said he was not familiar with the verse?

Paraphrased but as accurate as I can type here: Peter is really blessed. Hell is not going to be able to stop him. He is going to help build Christianity. Can I go back and practice my cello? I gotta do it 15 minutes or my teacher gets mad and stuff.

Oh, i guess the last two sentences are not needed

The Bolded Part is so exactly how a sixth grader sounds!!!

Peace
James

 

[BrianH]

Thats my boy…well one of them

 

[Grace_Seeker]

James, I think that it must be remembered that NotTooSmart didn’t actually propose the experiment. Rather, it was PJM who asserted the hypothesis. NotTooSmart only isolated PJM’s hypothesis to its own thread for the purposes of discussion.