CATHOLICS ONLY: Why did the Cornerstone tell Peter that he was the stone?

[joymercy]

If Jesus is the cornerstone as written in the book of Isaiah, then why did Jesus then turn around and tell Peter that he was the stone on which the church would be built?

A non-denominational pastor just told me that the rock was Jesus himself and not Peter.

I was left perplexed as to what to say.

Why would the rock tell someone else that they are the rock?

I want to be able to answer these tough questions when put upon me as to why I believe in the one true church.

Matthew 16:18

And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church,* and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
19l I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven.* Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Isaiah 28:16

Therefore, thus says the Lord GOD: See, I am laying a stone in Zion, a stone that has been tested, A precious cornerstone as a sure foundation; whoever puts faith in it will not waver.

 

[AlexB23]

If Jesus is the cornerstone as written in the book of Isaiah, then why did Jesus then turn around and tell Peter that he was the stone on which the church would be built?

A pastor just told me that the rock was Jesus himself and not Peter.

I was left perplexed as to what to say.

Why would the rock tell someone else that they are the rock?

I want to be able to answer these tough questions when put upon me as to why I believe in the one true church.

Hey, can you provide a verse and verse number for us on the forum, so we can all be able to analyze the context of the verse(s)? Thank you, it would mean a lot to others and myself.

 

[joymercy]

A stone and a cornerstone are two different things. A cornerstone is the first stone laid down to mark a foundation. But a building is made of many more stones.

Now, if as the pastor said, Jesus himself was the stone, why then does Christ call Peter the stone?

Thank you. I appreciate help with this. I was totally off guard, and I never did see it coming as I was carrying heavy groceries home. Here this man was trying to talk me into attending his new church.

 

[HTacianas]

Thank you. I appreciate help with this. I was totally off guard, and I never did see it coming as I was carrying heavy groceries home. Here this man was trying to talk me into attending his new church.

2Co 2:11 lest Satan should take advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices.

 

[joymercy]

If Christ is the cornerstone, the very start of the building, how should Peter then be different from the other building stones?

Why is he a rock, if we are all rocks as well who build His church?

I am fully Catholic and a firm believer, just am getting into more and more need for apologetics lately, lol.

Bear with me.

The church is really under attack and we need to be able to answer these questions.

 

[AlexB23]

If Jesus is the cornerstone as written in the book of Isaiah, then why did Jesus then turn around and tell Peter that he was the stone on which the church would be built?

A non-denominational pastor just told me that the rock was Jesus himself and not Peter.

I was left perplexed as to what to say.

Why would the rock tell someone else that they are the rock?

I want to be able to answer these tough questions when put upon me as to why I believe in the one true church.

Matthew 16:18

And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church,* and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
19l I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven.* Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Isaiah 28:16

Therefore, thus says the Lord GOD: See, I am laying a stone in Zion, a stone that has been tested, A precious cornerstone as a sure foundation; whoever puts faith in it will not waver.

God bless you for providing the verse numbers. From what I can see from Matthew 16:18, Peter is the stone. Jesus built his church upon Peter.

 

[narnia59]

If Jesus is the cornerstone as written in the book of Isaiah, then why did Jesus then turn around and tell Peter that he was the stone on which the church would be built?

A non-denominational pastor just told me that the rock was Jesus himself and not Peter.

I was left perplexed as to what to say.

Why would the rock tell someone else that they are the rock?

I want to be able to answer these tough questions when put upon me as to why I believe in the one true church.

Matthew 16:18

And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church,* and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
19l I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven.* Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Isaiah 28:16

Therefore, thus says the Lord GOD: See, I am laying a stone in Zion, a stone that has been tested, A precious cornerstone as a sure foundation; whoever puts faith in it will not waver.

For the same reason that while Christ says that he will "build his church" (Matthew 16:18) yet St. Paul refers to himself as the builder of the church (1 Corinthians 3:10-11). In that passage Paul also refers to Jesus as the ONLY founation but in Ephesians 2:20 he says the apostles and prophets are the foundation of the church.

None of these are contradictory, nor is it a contradiction when Jesus names Peter "rock". Each of these metaphors portrays a somewhat different image of the deeper reality. Jesus IS indeed the rock, the foundation and the builder. The way he manifests that to us is through Peter and the apostles. The only image that does not seem to be “shared” in some way with the apostles is that of Christ being the “cornerstone” (Ephesians 2:20) – the Church belongs to Christ alone.

 

[joymercy]

Imagine being confronted, but in a friendly way, by a Pastor, someone who has much more training in theology than you do, and suddenly, YOU have to defend the Catholic faith!

 

[AlexB23]

Imagine being confronted, but in a friendly way, by a Pastor, someone who has much more training in theology than you do, and suddenly, YOU have to defend the Catholic faith!

That would be hard to do, just on the fly, however, Jesus can give you discernment. But hey, we are all Christian in the end. I am Catholic also, and it would be hard to defend my Catholic denomination (new here to the Catholic faith since 2022) in front of a nondenominational pastor on the fly.

 

[joymercy]

For the same reason that while Christ says that he will "build his church" (Matthew 16:18) yet St. Paul refers to himself as the builder of the church (1 Corinthians 3:10-11). In that passage Paul also refers to Jesus as the ONLY founation but in Ephesians 2:20 he says the apostles and prophets are the foundation of the church.

None of these are contradictory, nor is it a contradiction when Jesus names Peter "rock". Each of these metaphors portrays a somewhat different image of the deeper reality. Jesus IS indeed the rock, the foundation and the builder. The way he manifests that to us is through Peter and the apostles. The only image that does not seem to be “shared” in some way with the apostles is that of Christ being the “cornerstone” (Ephesians 2:20) – the Church belongs to Christ alone.

Thank you for your help. It was hard to debate with this man. He proclaimed that he believed that Jesus was saying that He is the rock upon which His church would be built. It seemed to him to be that easy. Jesus is the rock and he trusts in the rock.

 

[joymercy]

That would be hard to do, just on the fly, however, Jesus can give you discernment. But hey, we are all Christian in the end. I am Catholic also, and it would be hard to defend my Catholic denomination (new here to the Catholic faith since 2022) in front of a nondenominational pastor on the fly.

It was totally on the fly! Jeepers, this really got my attention, as I'm surrounded by all of these protestant churches, and in these challenging times that we are living in, it seems that there are just more and more and more of these type churches being established and trying to help communities to survive.

 

[AlexB23]

It was totally on the fly! Jeepers, this really got my attention, as I'm surrounded by all of these protestant churches, and in these challenging times that we are living in, it seems that there are just more and more and more of these type churches being established and trying to help communities to survive.

You could have walked away from him, as he is too far stuck in his denomination. Also, it is kinda rude that a pastor stopped you when you are trying to get groceries home. A lot of churches have gone full far-left (woke) as well, or have gone full far-right also, instead of focusing on the Gospel and helping the community.

 

[narnia59]

Thank you for your help. It was hard to debate with this man. He proclaimed that he believed that Jesus was saying that He is the rock upon which His church would be built. It seemed to him to be that easy. Jesus is the rock and he trusts in the rock.

Jimmy Akin has a good explanation of the passage starting about the 10 minute mark in this video you may find helpful.

 

[chevyontheriver]

If Jesus is the cornerstone as written in the book of Isaiah, then why did Jesus then turn around and tell Peter that he was the stone on which the church would be built?

A non-denominational pastor just told me that the rock was Jesus himself and not Peter.

I was left perplexed as to what to say.

Why would the rock tell someone else that they are the rock?

I want to be able to answer these tough questions when put upon me as to why I believe in the one true church.

Matthew 16:18

And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church,* and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
19l I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven.* Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Isaiah 28:16

Therefore, thus says the Lord GOD: See, I am laying a stone in Zion, a stone that has been tested, A precious cornerstone as a sure foundation; whoever puts faith in it will not waver.

This is a well argued text from Matthew, with some Protestants making a big deal about how Peter cannot be the rock the Church is built on because Peter is masculine and the big rock at Capernaum is feminine in Greek. They will argue that Peter actually means small stone as opposed to the massif that was the background of the episode, the rock at Capernaum. Turns out the Catholic interpretation is sound enough. The trick is that the Fathers had multiple interpretations of what the rock was, either Peter, or Peter's faith, or something else.

My conclusion:
Peter is indeed the rock, not Peter's confession, although that confession was why Peter was chosen as the rock. He was 'Rocky'. But he was not a 'small stone' (Peter) as opposed to the huge rock (Petra) at Capernaum. Aramaic doesn't do genders with Greek precision but giving Simon a girl's name just wouldn't have done so the male version was used while still referring to Peter as the rock the Church would be built on.

The Fathers mined everything they could from Mt 16:18, identifying both Peter and his confession of faith as important. Because, well, Peter's confession was relevant to Peter being chosen as the head of the apostles. And he was the head in every list of apostles.

As to the Isaiah quote, it is about God laying a foundation. But not actually claiming who that foundation is here. In Psalm 18:2 it speaks of God being the rock of our salvation, which is obviously true. But the Protestant approach is that God being the rock of our salvation HAS TO EXCLUDE Peter being the rock. I don't think so. But the arguments go round and round. More heat than light trying to show us wrong.

 

[joymercy]

Jimmy Akin has a good explanation of the passage starting about the 10 minute mark in this video you may find helpful.

Thanks, I found that spot in the video and listened to it -what a great find narnia59

its a Greek language thing apparently and the two rocks, one small and one large are now only synonyms in the first century, and therefore Jesus is actually blessing Peter and not putting him down as only being a small rock or a pebble as compared to Him who is a huge rock or stone.

And Jesus is not blessing Peter for his faith and it's His faith that is the rock and faith will be what builds the church....but it's Peter himself because he gives him the keys?

 

[joymercy]

This is a well argued text from Matthew, with some Protestants making a big deal about how Peter cannot be the rock the Church is built on because Peter is masculine and the big rock at Capernaum is feminine in Greek. They will argue that Peter actually means small stone as opposed to the massif that was the background of the episode, the rock at Capernaum. Turns out the Catholic interpretation is sound enough. The trick is that the Fathers had multiple interpretations of what the rock was, either Peter, or Peter's faith, or something else.

My conclusion:
Peter is indeed the rock, not Peter's confession, although that confession was why Peter was chosen as the rock. He was 'Rocky'. But he was not a 'small stone' (Peter) as opposed to the huge rock (Petra) at Capernaum. Aramaic doesn't do genders with Greek precision but giving Simon a girl's name just wouldn't have done so the male version was used while still referring to Peter as the rock the Church would be built on.

The Fathers mined everything they could from Mt 16:18, identifying both Peter and his confession of faith as important. Because, well, Peter's confession was relevant to Peter being chosen as the head of the apostles. And he was the head in every list of apostles.

As to the Isaiah quote, it is about God laying a foundation. But not actually claiming who that foundation is here. In Psalm 18:2 it speaks of God being the rock of our salvation, which is obviously true. But the Protestant approach is that God being the rock of our salvation HAS TO EXCLUDE Peter being the rock. I don't think so. But the arguments go round and round. More heat than light trying to show us wrong.

Thank you. Really good points here. It seems that once protestants get it into their mind that it's one way, they can't hear me speaking any more and eyes gloss over.

He can't admit hes possibly wrong either because then he would have to leave his new church he just bought? He would have to find a different way to support his wife and kids too.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Thank you. Really good points here. It seems that once protestants get it into their mind that it's one way, they can't hear me speaking any more and eyes gloss over.

He can't admit hes possibly wrong either because then he would have to leave his new church he just bought? He would have to find a different way to support his wife and kids too.

Well, Catholics are always wrong. Wrong if we rely on Tradition. Wrong if they can't see the Biblical roots of our beliefs. Wrong if we have explicit Biblical texts too. Just wrong. Especially if they can convince a benighted Catholic to abandon the Church.

 

[prodromos]

Just a nitpick, but Jesus said to Simon, "you are rock". He didn't say, "you are THE rock", as a few of you have repeated.
Christ is THE rock.

 

[narnia59]

Thanks, I found that spot in the video and listened to it -what a great find narnia59

its a Greek language thing apparently and the two rocks, one small and one large are now only synonyms in the first century, and therefore Jesus is actually blessing Peter and not putting him down as only being a small rock or a pebble as compared to Him who is a huge rock or stone.

And Jesus is not blessing Peter for his faith and it's His faith that is the rock and faith will be what builds the church....but it's Peter himself because he gives him the keys?

It's not an either/or but a both/and. Sure it's about Peter's faith, as well as the person of Peter.

One other thing to note, that encounter when Jesus tells Peter he is "rock" is not when he actually changes his name. He does that the moment he first lays eyes on him -- see John 1:42. So definitely about the person of Peter. And in that encounter, he says "One of the two who heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. He first found his brother Simon, and said to him, ‘We have found the Messiah’ (which means Christ). He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him, and said, ‘So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas’ (which means Peter)." John 1:40-42

John 1:42 tells us that the Aramaic "cephas" is the equivalent to the Greek "petros". And "cephas" means "rock".

The attempt to make "petros" mean "stone" instead of "rock" doesn't line up with the rest of Scripture either. The Greek word used for "stone" in Scripture is lithos, not petros. Petros is reserved as the proper name for Peter.

The reason Jesus uses "Petros" instead of "Petra" (the word used for 'rock' throughout Scripture) for Peter is because Greek is a language that assigns gender to nouns. "Petra" is a feminine noun, 'Petros" is the masculine form of "Petra".

 

[narnia59]

Thanks, I found that spot in the video and listened to it -what a great find narnia59

its a Greek language thing apparently and the two rocks, one small and one large are now only synonyms in the first century, and therefore Jesus is actually blessing Peter and not putting him down as only being a small rock or a pebble as compared to Him who is a huge rock or stone.

And Jesus is not blessing Peter for his faith and it's His faith that is the rock and faith will be what builds the church....but it's Peter himself because he gives him the keys?

You mention the keys, yes those are extremely significant and are given to Peter alone. Two chapters later he gives all the apostles the authority to bind and loose, but the keys are given to Peter alone. The authority of the other apostles is dependent upon being in union with Peter, the guy who has the keys.