Which is the Rock: Peter, or the truth of Jesus being the Christ, the Son of God?

[Joseph_L_Varga]

Consider the following teachings that contradict each other, all coming from Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox Bishops and Pastors who confess that Jesus is the Messiah, and according to the flawed theory they would all be “Rocks” with the authority to bind and loosen:

1. EUCHARIST All Catholic and Orthodox Churches teach that Jesus is fully present, body, blood, soul and divinity in the Eucharist. The Calvinists and many other Protestants disagree with this. Who is right and who is wrong, if both sides are Rocks and Infallible Foundations to the Church?
2. ARTIFICIAL BIRTH CONTROL The Catholic Churches, Russian Orthodox, and certain Evangelical Christians reject it and the Catholic Church teaches it’s a mortal sin to engage in ABC. However the Anglican/Episcopal and many other Protestant denominations, as well as certain Orthodox Churches including the Greek and OCA, accept ABC and do not believe it to be a sin. Is then ABC a mortal sin which can send someone to the Hell and eternal damnation, or not? Surely both sides cannot be right on this, even though they both confess that Jesus is the Messiah?
3. GAY MARRIAGE AND HOMOSEXUALITY The Episcopal Church in America has just split over this. There are Episcopal Bishops in UK and USA who believe that homosexual practice is not a sin, while other Episcopal Bishops in the USA and Africa (as well as the Catholic and Orthodox Churches) teach that this can send someone to the Hell, it’s a mortal sin, and it’s unacceptable in God’s eyes. Both sides confess that Jesus is the Messiah - but one side wants to “bind” and impose restriction on homosexual practice, while the other side wants to “loosen” and permit it.

And the stakes are very high, according to those who would prohibit ABC and gay marriage, because they insist that these are mortal sins and gravely evil behaviors. Thus in real life, the theory that anybody who confesses Jesus as the Messiah is the Rock and infallible foundation, and can validly bind and loosen on Earth and the same things will be bound and loosened in Heaven, this theory just doesn’t work out in the real life.

 

[po18guy]

I’ve heard the Catholic arugument for Peter being the Rock,but here (the link below) is a non-Catholic or Protstant rebuttal. What are your comments/thoughts?
christiancourier.com/articles/552-was-peter-the-rock

It does not follow from the ancient Greek, Aramaic or Syriac language that “rock” was either the hill they were on/near, or was Christ Himself. He would have used the personal pronoun “I” if that’s what he meant. He used “I” frequently, and to found a body of believers upon Himself is redundant and makes no sense.

Why would Jesus found His Church on a physical location, since He then sent the Apostles away to the ends of the earth? Only in modern times has church come to mean a building. No such thing back then. The Church is human souls, not a place or thing.

Christ spoke directly to Simon in a simple, declarative sentence when he called him the rock upon which he would found His Church. Simple.

Maybe too simple for some, but the devil is always in the details.

 

[mpernot]

Why would Jesus found His Church on a physical location, since He then sent the Apostles away to the ends of the earth? Only in modern times has church come to mean a building. No such thing back then. The Church is human souls, not a place or thing.

It is true that there was no visible Christian church at the time of Jesus - the church needed Him to start it, so it didn’t exist (visibly or invisibly) until He came. When Jesus spoke to Peter in Matthew 16, He did more than just name an Earthy successor - He created an office and transferred authority, just as authority was transferred in Isaiah 22.

A quick aside to this - folks back then were well aware of Scripture, as I’ve heard that there was close to a 100% literacy rate among the Jews because everyone could read Scripture. It was very common for people to have it committed it to memory as well. Peter (and anyone else who heard) would have been very well aware that Jesus chose His words very deliberately to bring Isaiah 22 to the minds of those present.

The visible Christian church on Earth started with this command and grew as more offices (bishops, priests, etc.) were created. This expansion and apostolic succession is documented in the New Testament in Acts, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, and other books.

Christ spoke directly to Simon in a simple, declarative sentence when he called him the rock upon which he would found His Church. Simple.

Exactly.

 

[mercygate]

Thank you for your comments. I wanted to explain though, to you that said the keys can’t be given to a belief/truth, etc.

I think the Protestant belief in this would be that the keys are given to anyone who believes this truth. So all believers have the authority or keys to the kingdom. Why do Catholics not believe that?

Because the Greek does not support that; “to you” is dative singular in Mt. 16:19. Moreover, some Dominical promises are general (for everybody) and some are specific (to an individual or to the Apostles).

 

[mercygate]

Yey! I’m not alone! How long have you been on the journey? It’s really hard for me. I was SO convinced it was God’s will, and now am not sure, am confused, am still trying to make sure the Catholic Church isn’t some anti-christ plan. I figure it’s either right, or it’s of the Devil, no middle ground because of the kind of claims they make. That’s what’s holding me back. The gospel is so different than the gospel I was raised with. One of us (religions) is wrong…or we both are, but we can’t both be right. I kinda feel like if Catholicism is wrong, than I can’t really trust Christianity/the BIble in general. Ahh! This is getting so frustrating!

By the way, what’s all this “Tiber swim team” stuff? I’m starting to think it’s not really about swimming the Tiber?! I thought it was kinda odd that there were so many of you out there!

mes14, the river isn’t very wide, but it can take DECADES to swim it. (Took me 40 – kinda like crossing the Jordan.)

You are right. Only with the Catholic Church are you forced into the position of recognizing that if it is NOT the Church Christ Himself promised to build, then it is ‘of the Devil.’ (You’ll find a lot of company believing that one.) I don’t understand how the Gospel is “so different” from what you grew up with. Take out the anti-Catholicism in some churches and you get pretty much the same message. It’s ALL about Jesus. :hug3:

 

[Della]

mes14…

You are right. Only with the Catholic Church are you forced into the position of recognizing that if it is NOT the Church Christ Himself promised to build, then it is ‘of the Devil.’ (You’ll find a lot of company believing that one.)

Just to back you up on this, C. S. Lewis proposed that Jesus was either a liar, or mad, or who he said he was. And since the Church is his Body, the same can be said for it, too.

I don’t understand how the Gospel is “so different” from what you grew up with. Take out the anti-Catholicism in some churches and you get pretty much the same message. It’s ALL about Jesus. :hug3:

When I was a Pentecostalist (not presuming to speak for all non-Catholics here) we heard a lot about how the Catholic Church was wrong about a lot of things from the primacy of Peter to what one must do to be saved. It’s a whole other world outside of liturgical Christianity with it’s own way of viewing God, man, theology, everything. Coming into the Church from such a background is similar to giving up one’s citizenship in a democracy and giving one’s allegiance to a monarchy. It can be very hard for people to make the mental and emotional shift.

 

[mesl4]

But let’s consider the theory that anyone who confesses Christ, not just Simon the Son of Jonah, automatically becomes “The Rock”, possesses the Keys to Heaven, and has the authority to bind and loosen. Now go to John 1, 35-51, where the apostle describes the story how Jesus initially met and invited the apostles John, Andrew, Peter, Philip, and Nathanael. When Jesus first meets Simon (Peter), he tells him: “You are Simon, the son of Jonah. Your name will be Rock (Kephas in Aramaic, Peter in Latin language)” (John 1, 42). On their very first encounter, Jesus greets Peter with this prophecy, he gives this prophecy to one individual person called Simon the Son of Jonah, and he doesn’t tell to all the disciples, that “all of you guys who confess me, will be called Rock”. This in spite the fact that in the same passage (John 1, 35-51), several apostles other than Peter as well as John the Baptist already confess him as being the Messiah: “He is the Son of God” and “Behold the Lamb of God” - St John the Baptist verses 34, 37; “We found the Messiah” - Andrew, verse 41; “We found the one foretold by Moses and the prophets” - Philip, verse 45; “Rabbi, you are the Son of God!” - Natanael, verse 49. In summary, in this passage Jesus is confessed by St John the Baptist, as well as apostles Andrew, Philip, and Natanael; he is not confessed vocally here by John and Simon (Peter) (although their actions are certainly consistent with believing that Jesus is the Messiah). Yet, nobody except for Simon is being told that he will be called Rock.

This is a strong argument against the Protestant interpretation that The Rock means anybody who confesses Jesus, and they failed to deal with it.

Interestingly, a little after the famous Matthew 16, 15-18, where Simon is being called Rock, made the foundation of the Church, given the Keys, and the authority to bind and loosen, PART OF these authorities are extended to the “Church” and to the “Community” as well. Namely in Matthew 18, 16-18, Jesus gives the authority to bind and loosen to the community of the Church. However the rest of the Church is not being called Rock, not being made foundation, and not given the Keys.
.

OK, I can see why not all believers then can be the binders and loosers and hold the keys, but why would we not think that it was just given to Peter and not to be passed on to his successors? For example, he tells Peter he can bind and loose so he can open the path to the Gentiles, set up the Church, etc, but after him, it’s not necessary because it’s already been opened.

Also, why did Jesus not open the door to the Gentiles before he ascended? I guess noone really knows the answer, they’d just take guesses. What are your guesses? I guess my answer would be because he had to ascend first and send the HOly Spirit before he opened heaven. But I always thought of Jesus as the key. He actually says he’s the door/gate though right? So he’s there but only works with Peter’s key. Ahh, That’s why people talk about Peter being at the Pearly Gates letting people into Heaven. He’s standing there deciding if he’ll open the door (Jesus) for us. Without the door we can’t come it, and without the key we can’t come in. Sorry, I’m thinking out loud here. I guess he still could’ve told the disciples and the Gentiles that they would be given the green light soon though.

Now, if Peter was given the keys, and it’s passed on to future popes, doesn’t that create a problem in heaven once they’re all there at the “door” and might not agree on who gets in or not. Will they all have keys at that point? Or none? Are the keys only in effect while the person lives on Earth? Gets complicated.

 

[mesl4]

. Thus in real life, the theory that anybody who confesses Jesus as the Messiah is the Rock and infallible foundation, and can validly bind and loosen on Earth and the same things will be bound and loosened in Heaven, this theory just doesn’t work out in the real life.

JUst to clarify, Protestants don’t say they are infallible. Only the BIble/God’s word is infallible. Our interpretations can be fallible.

 

[mesl4]

It does not follow from the ancient Greek, Aramaic or Syriac language that “rock” was either the hill they were on/near, or was Christ Himself. He would have used the personal pronoun “I” if that’s what he meant. He used “I” frequently, and to found a body of believers upon Himself is redundant and makes no sense.

Why would Jesus found His Church on a physical location, since He then sent the Apostles away to the ends of the earth? Only in modern times has church come to mean a building. No such thing back then. The Church is human souls, not a place or thing.

Christ spoke directly to Simon in a simple, declarative sentence when he called him the rock upon which he would found His Church. Simple.

Maybe too simple for some, but the devil is always in the details.

I don’t think there was anything in there or anyone’s response about it being a physical location/hill or actual rock.

 

[MarcoPolo]

It is both of course. In fact, we as Catholics all must agree with the profession of faith of Peter and his successors, because it is not flesh and blood that reveals it to him, but God (this is the foundation of the Catholic dogma of papal infallibility). In Luke, Christ prays for Peter’s faith that it not fail so that he can strengthen the brethren. It is Peter and his faith that are the unshakeable foundation upon which Christ builds and its Christ who makes it unshakeable.

This is correct.
The Church teaches Peter is the rock (CCC#552), and it can also be said “the rock of this faith” (CCC#424).

 

[mesl4]

When I was a Pentecostalist (not presuming to speak for all non-Catholics here) we heard a lot about how the Catholic Church was wrong about a lot of things from the primacy of Peter to what one must do to be saved. It’s a whole other world outside of liturgical Christianity with it’s own way of viewing God, man, theology, everything. Coming into the Church from such a background is similar to giving up one’s citizenship in a democracy and giving one’s allegiance to a monarchy. It can be very hard for people to make the mental and emotional shift.

AMEN! Yes, the entire approach to God, salvation, prayer, church,etc. is different. The more I get to know, the more different it is. I have to regut my belief system except for the trinity concept. God seems scarier , less merciful, and the gospel doesn’t feel like good news from my Catholic perspective. I feel like I’ll be constantly living in the fear of hell instead of living in joy with the gift of salvation God’s given me. Instead of going to church and doing good for others out of love for God and enjoyment of praising him w/the body of believers, I’ll go to church out of fear of damnation since to miss Sunday/days of obligation is a mortal sin. It takes the joy out of Christianity.

 

[po18guy]

I don’t think there was anything in there or anyone’s response about it being a physical location/hill or actual rock.

Believe it or not, this theory has actually been argued!

But, consider this: without a human leader throughout the ages, the church, which has fought many heresies on many occasions, would have dissolved into in-fighting, disagreement and disintegration. It would have shattered into numerous small groups of believers, none of which agreed with each other on all things. Does this sound familiar? Denominations.

As to Peter being placed in charge, I offer the following: If you work for a company or some other organization, no matter the size, there is likely a “mission statement”. Do the employees each read the mission statement and then go and do whatever they think will carry out that mission? Rather, there is a supervisor in charge to ensure that the overall direction of the company is kept true to its mission. Thus it is with Peter and his successors. They resolve disputes and keep the Church on its mission.

This is how human organizations function and endure. Jesus is perfect and knew this beforehand. It is exactly how He organized His Church. It is a perfect plan, as His Church remains 1,975 years later, just as He said. It remains the oldest organization on earth. Talk about a rock foundation, with Jesus as its cornerstone!

Christ’s peace be with you.

 

[po18guy]

AMEN! Yes, the entire approach to God, salvation, prayer, church,etc. is different. The more I get to know, the more different it is. I have to regut my belief system except for the trinity concept. God seems scarier , less merciful, and the gospel doesn’t feel like good news from my Catholic perspective. I feel like I’ll be constantly living in the fear of hell instead of living in joy with the gift of salvation God’s given me. Instead of going to church and doing good for others out of love for God and enjoyment of praising him w/the body of believers, I’ll go to church out of fear of damnation since to miss Sunday/days of obligation is a mortal sin. It takes the joy out of Christianity.

Ah, but faith requires obedience. We willingly submit to the Church, as we are absolutely convinced that it is the one that Christ founded. We joyfully submit to her ordinances, for it is the true path to the Kingdom.

Saint Paul admonished believers to “work out your salvation through fear and trembling”. Thus, salvation is not guaranteed by a one-time event or statement of belief. It is a process that continues for life. Fear of the Lord is one of the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit. Without a healthy fear, one can become arrogant or apathetic, being self-assured of salvation. Why do any good work, or love your neighbor if your salvation is guaranteed? Why be concerned about sin, if your salvation is certain?

Seek the joy that comes from knowledge of the merciful God, who sent his only Son for your salvation. However, we must also walk the narrow path and reach the narrow gate. This is not done by mere acceptance of Christ, followed by a life of leisure. It is faith and it is work, the left and right hands of salvation.

Christ’s peace.

 

[mesl4]

Unless of course God just wanted people to have faith in him like Abraham did…believe God will do what he says he will, and to seek him and have a relationship w/him, and the other stuff/details/etc - even believing the trinity, doesn’t really matter. Than it wouldn’t matter what religion you call yourself. He’d simply judge you on your heart’s love for him and others and how you acted out that love to the best of your ability. That sounds like a good news gospel to me, but I don’t find many Christians that would see things this way. They all at least say you have to believe the Trinity. I even wonder about that. Than our salvation is based on our intellectual ability, rather than our faith in an act Jesus / God did. He wanted us to believe he was the son of God, the chosen/annointed one that would save us, and in his works - and in love. I wonder if he really cared if we figured out and defined his exact relationship to the Father - chemical breakdown, natures vs. persons, etc. That’s all really complex and to become like children, we don’t need to figure all that out. Simple faith. Love, follow seek, run to him for all things. The Catholic church doesn’ seem to stress Jesus’ main message as primary to faith. Neither do the denominations for that matter.
In the RC faith it’s more about perfect obedience and religious system, definition, etc. The only reason I’m eaven considering this Church is because of the possiblity of what if Jesus really did want a heirarchy governmental church type system here, an the RC church really is it. Than, I will make the best of it and try to obey and fall in love with it for Christ’s sake…and my own.

 

[mesl4]

. Why do any good work, or love your neighbor if your salvation is guaranteed? Why be concerned about sin, if your salvation is certain?

Salvation wouldn’t be guaranteed if you had that attitude. That is not faith. Fatih w/out obedience is dead. I understand that. So, I understand that if you truly believe all the teachings of the church are God’s than we should obey. But, don’t you think the church has gotten a little carried away? What is God’s mercy? Who get’s his mercy? Catholics don’t seem to want thinks to be internal/vague. They want evidence and think God will judge mainly on the external evidence. I think he judges mainly on the internal evidence, with the external being the sign of what’s inside. So, as Paul explains in Rom 7 I believe, that when we sin, it is not we that sin, but the sinful nature. I am not my nature any longer. I have been given a spirit. That spirit seeks to follow God, but at times falls to the flesh. Because we have that spirit, we recognize it and change…daily. Unless we renounce that spirit, we are living in grace and are forgiven. If we get the attitude of “I don’t care” or "go ahead and sin since we’ll be forgiven, than we seem to have lost the spirit and the faith and will perish if we die in that state. I don’t know of any faithful Christians that have done this though. In my church/experience, we say that if someone turns away, they never really had the faith that saves to begin with. That’s uncomforatble for those that really want to judge by the exterior because we don’t have a litmus test for our faith. We never really know. But we can get a pretty good idea if we are honest w/our selves about our thoughts, actions, will, etc. Ultimately, only God know.

Anway, let me know how the RCs differ from this. I’m sorting out all the gospel/teachings I have been taught as Truth to figure out what the new Truth will be if i convert. Gotta regut ya’know.

 

[Della]

Unless of course God just wanted people to have faith in him like Abraham did…believe God will do what he says he will, and to seek him and have a relationship w/him, and the other stuff/details/etc - even believing the trinity, doesn’t really matter. Than it wouldn’t matter what religion you call yourself. He’d simply judge you on your heart’s love for him and others and how you acted out that love to the best of your ability. That sounds like a good news gospel to me, but I don’t find many Christians that would see things this way. They all at least say you have to believe the Trinity. I even wonder about that. Than our salvation is based on our intellectual ability, rather than our faith in an act Jesus / God did. He wanted us to believe he was the son of God, the chosen/annointed one that would save us, and in his works - and in love. I wonder if he really cared if we figured out and defined his exact relationship to the Father - chemical breakdown, natures vs. persons, etc. That’s all really complex and to become like children, we don’t need to figure all that out. Simple faith. Love, follow seek, run to him for all things. The Catholic church doesn’ seem to stress Jesus’ main message as primary to faith. Neither do the denominations for that matter.

Faith engages the whole human person. Heart, mind, soul and spirit. Some people are drawn to the Faith through beauty. Others through truth. And still others through love. All of these ways of approaching faith in God are just fine. Having said that, truth is very important. Without truth love becomes: “whatever I feel” and without love truth becomes: “believe it or else!” Neither is complete without the other, which is why the Church pursues and teaches both.

In the RC faith it’s more about perfect obedience and religious system, definition, etc. The only reason I’m eaven considering this Church is because of the possiblity of what if Jesus really did want a heirarchy governmental church type system here, an the RC church really is it. Than, I will make the best of it and try to obey and fall in love with it for Christ’s sake…and my own.

When people first look into the Catholic Church it does seem overwhelming. But maybe it wouldn’t be if you looked at the richness of the Faith as a banquet instead of a list of rules and regs.

At a banquet you eat what pleases you. If you wish to have dessert first, you do. If you wish to start with the usual courses, you can do that too. It’s the variety of ways one can come to God within the Church that is truly amazing and wonderful.

Obedience within the Church is really very simple. Just love God above all else, others as Christ loved us, and you will find obedience easy. For humility is the first virtue we need before all the others because it teaches us how to do all the other ones. Without humility we cannot obey, we cannot love with agape love, we cannot understand why God allows us to go through trials, etc.

We learn what we need to do as we go along in the Church. RCIA is the first step in that process. And it is a process–a life long process of growth and becoming perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect just as Jesus commanded us to do.

 

[po18guy]

In the RC faith it’s more about perfect obedience and religious system, definition, etc. The only reason I’m eaven considering this Church is because of the possiblity of what if Jesus really did want a heirarchy governmental church type system here, an the RC church really is it. Than, I will make the best of it and try to obey and fall in love with it for Christ’s sake…and my own.

The Lord requires each of us to make our personal “leap of faith”. It is both easy and difficult - that is the mystery of God.

However, like many who have joined the Church, I have made the decision to love her. Once you realize that, for the first time in your life, you are actually eating His Body and drinking His Blood, it is joyous beyond words. The inner peace is indescribable. In the same manner at adoration, once you realize that you are in His presence, that He is there with you physically, a joy will overcome you and the Holy Spirit will take your breath away.

The Lord extends His hand to you and invites you to believe. Your current joy in Christ will be repaid for your faith in making the leap of faith. It is supplanted by a profound joy that will go far beyond what you have experienced so far. It takes faith to make the leap, but the Lord rewards those who trust Him.

 

[Fidelis]

OK, I can see why not all believers then can be the binders and loosers and hold the keys, but why would we not think that it was just given to Peter and not to be passed on to his successors? For example, he tells Peter he can bind and loose so he can open the path to the Gentiles, set up the Church, etc, but after him, it’s not necessary because it’s already been opened.

Thought I answered this one up in Post #12:

…does that mean Jesus’ words apply ONLY to Peter? Imagine this:

Jesus: *“Peter, I’ve got some good news and some bad news. First, I say to you that YOU possess the keys to the kingdom and whatever YOU bound on earth was bound in heaven. The bad news is that power and authority is going to die with you. So we made this long trip up to Caesarea Phillipi to stand in front of this big rock as a backdrop just so I can predict something that’s going to last maybe 40 years or so.” *

No, it is obvious again that this was something that was going to be passed on from Peter to those who succeeded him, personally in his office, in some manner. Those successors are the Popes.

As for this being Jesus’ way of telling Peter that he will be the one that opens the Church to the Gentiles — well, it isn’t mentioned at all here, or even implied in the context.

 

[mercygate]

I don’t think there was anything in there or anyone’s response about it being a physical location/hill or actual rock.

Didn’t somebody link to the location of the “you are Peter” passage? It was at Caesarea Philippi, where there is an immense rock outcropping.

BTW, something only one in 100 people notice is that Jesus promises the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to Peter but, in Revelation, reserves to Himself the Keys of death and the nether world. Cool, huh?

 

[mercygate]

Unless of course God just wanted people to have faith in him like Abraham did…believe God will do what he says he will, and to seek him and have a relationship w/him, and the other stuff/details/etc - even believing the trinity, doesn’t really matter. Than it wouldn’t matter what religion you call yourself. He’d simply judge you on your heart’s love for him and others and how you acted out that love to the best of your ability. That sounds like a good news gospel to me, but I don’t find many Christians that would see things this way. They all at least say you have to believe the Trinity. I even wonder about that. Than our salvation is based on our intellectual ability, rather than our faith in an act Jesus / God did. He wanted us to believe he was the son of God, the chosen/annointed one that would save us, and in his works - and in love. I wonder if he really cared if we figured out and defined his exact relationship to the Father - chemical breakdown, natures vs. persons, etc. That’s all really complex and to become like children, we don’t need to figure all that out. Simple faith. Love, follow seek, run to him for all things. The Catholic church doesn’ seem to stress Jesus’ main message as primary to faith. Neither do the denominations for that matter.
In the RC faith it’s more about perfect obedience and religious system, definition, etc. The only reason I’m eaven considering this Church is because of the possiblity of what if Jesus really did want a heirarchy governmental church type system here, an the RC church really is it. Than, I will make the best of it and try to obey and fall in love with it for Christ’s sake…and my own.

I think I understand what you are feeling. But when you have great love for Our Lord, and you want to be with Him on His terms, then all of that scary judgment/legalistic/obedience-or-else stuff melts away because you recognize that all of that is simply roadmaps and guideposts. I don’t need the Church to tell me I HAVE to go to Mass on Sunday. Not only do I SEE that by the grace of God, but I WANT to go and to rejoice in His Presence in the Eucharist.