Protestant Scholars agree - Peter is the Rock in Matthew 16:18

[IgnatiusOfAntioch]

matt 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter[ little rock] and upon this [bedrock=Christ] Rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

This is a common error. You have forgotten about the gender of nouns in Greek. Peter was a male, and therefore required the masculine noun Petros. Jesus was actually speaking Aramaic, no Greek, and theere is no such issue in Aramaic. It is Kepha-Thou art Kepha(Rock) and upon this Kepha(rock) I will build my church and I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Look up the Aramaic.

Yours in Christ.

 

[daveleau]

Rome is the "only" Church of the Ancient Churches who define Peter as the Rock in Matthew 16:18.

"All" of the others agree that the faith that Peter showed is the Rock spoken of.

Forgive me...

Until the overrunning of the East by Muslims, the 5 patriarchates (Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople) were equal. Each had separate traditions for their founding, but one central theme: Jesus is the Christ, which is Peter's statement. So, the early church supports mainstream Protestant theology that the phrase was the rock, not Peter. What does Scripture say? Peter is not mentioned as a central figure in the rest of Scripture as being set apart from the rest. Peter did not establish the church in Rome, with which CC tradition agrees, as Rome's church was established before the Apostles left Jersualem. The CC tradition teaches that the Apostles stayed in Jerusalem for 12 years. Romans was written before this or shortly thereafter, and was already an established church. Peter went east (see 1 Peter), and Paul went west. Alexandria was traditionally set up by Mark, Peter's protoge, which fits with Peter's admission that he went East. Some say Peter speaks metaphorically about Rome as being Babylon in 1 Peter, yet he mentions all other cities by name rather than by metaphor, so this is highly unlikely. Tradition teaches PEter was arrested and moved to Rome for execution, which was his first visit there. Early Christian writings tell us that Peter spoke there once, then was executed in Rome (Papias). Mark was written to give the people of Rome a record of his teachings, since they only heard him once. Eusebius, a biased writer, ridicules Papias, but because of his "strange" millenial views, which were supported by John in Revelation, which was a disputed book by Eusebius, hence his disagreement with Papias.

 

[FreeinChrist]

Actually, it refutes the erroneous interpretations of those verses. Jesus is speaking 1st person singular to a man named Simon bar Jonah, He changes the mans name to Kepha, Peter, Rock when He says to him "You are Kepha (rock) and upon this kepha (rock) I will build My Church."

The quotations support the plain meaning of the verse by honest scholars who have nothing to gain by the misinterpretation of the verses. These people present very powerful but honest arguments against the primacy without resorting to distorted misinterpretation of the Holy Scriptures. This shows that you do not have to resort to contorting the plain meaning of the Scriptures to maintain your honestly held position.

Sorry, but it doesn't support the view of the Catholic church on the primacy of Rome. IF those Protestant theologians beleived it supported primacy, then they wouldn't be Protestant, would they?

And I could find a few ECF...like:
Victorinus, writing about 300 AD on the Apocalypse of St. John :

"Even though the floods of the nations and the vain superstitions of heretics should revolt against their true faith, they are overcome, and shall be dissolved as the foam, because Christ is the Rock74 by which, and on which, the Church is founded.75

 

[mark75]

This is a common error. You have forgotten about the gender of nouns in Greek. Peter was a male, and therefore required the masculine noun Petros. Jesus was actually speaking Aramaic, no Greek, and theere is no such issue in Aramaic. It is Kepha-Thou art Kepha(Rock) and upon this Kepha(rock) I will build my church and I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Look up the Aramaic.

Whether Jesus was originally speaking in Aramaic or Hebrew or Greek, the author was originally inspired to quote Jesus in Greek, so the gender issue does come into play. Apparently Matthew felt the need to place a gender distinction between the two uses of the word "petros/petra" for a reason.

 

[freespiritchurch]

If Peter isn't the rock, why does everyone call him "the rock?" It seems to me that there is something to be said for the traditional Catholic interpretation. But there's a big gap between "Peter is the rock" and "Peter has absolute authority over all Christians" (something he didn't claim for himself, as far as we can tell). And there's an even bigger gap between "Peter is the rock" and "Linus has absolute authority over all Christians."

 

[johnd]

Matthew 1:23 “The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”—which means, “God with us.”

No one able to read Hebrew needs to be told what Immanuel means.

Whoever said for whatever purpose that Matthew or any of the NT books was originally written in Hebrew is wrong!

Most Jews in Jesus' day didn't even speak Hebrew. They spoke Aramaic and the universal language of commerce secular Koine Greek.

And in Matthew 16:18 when Jesus said, "And 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."

everyone present knew it meant:

"I tell you that you are Small Rock, and on this Rock Ledge I will build my church,"

 

[mark75]

If Peter isn't the rock, why does everyone call him "the rock?" It seems to me that there is something to be said for the traditional Catholic interpretation. But there's a big gap between "Peter is the rock" and "Peter has absolute authority over all Christians" (something he didn't claim for himself, as far as we can tell). And there's an even bigger gap between "Peter is the rock" and "Linus has absolute authority over all Christians."

Everyone has to make up their own mind as to who is going to be their ultimate authority. If Peter, then Peter; if Christ, then Christ. You're right: Peter never claimed this type of authority for himself, nor was it ever given to him by Jesus. In fact each church has its own bishop/pastor/elder (whichever word you wish to use) who was spiritually responsible for that church, and that person originally anwered to Christ - sometimes through the apostles in the early years, but afterwards through the Word of God.

 

[racer]

Twelve Quotations from Ten Protestant Biblical Scholars

William Hendriksen
member of the Reformed Christian Church
Professor of New Testament Literature at Calvin Seminary ​

The meaning is, “You are Peter, that is Rock, and upon this rock, that is, on you, Peter I will build my church.” Our Lord, speaking Aramaic, probably said, “And I say to you, you are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church.” Jesus, then, is promising Peter that he is going to build his church on him! I accept this view.

New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1973), page 647
JPK page 14​

Gerhard Maier
leading conservative evangelical Lutheran theologian​

Nowadays a broad consensus has emerged which — in accordance with the words of the text — applies the promise to Peter as a person. On this point liberal (H. J. Holtzmann, E. Schweiger) and conservative (Cullmann, Flew) theologians agree, as well as representatives of Roman Catholic exegesis.

“The Church in the Gospel of Matthew: Hermeneutical Analysis of the Current Debate”
Biblical Interpretation and Church Text and Context
(Flemington Markets, NSW: Paternoster Press, 1984), page 58
JPK pages 16-17​

Donald A. Carson III
Baptist and Professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Seminary
(two quotations from different works)​

Although it is true that petros and petra can mean “stone” and “rock” respectively in earlier Greek, the distinction is largely confined to poetry. Moreover the underlying Aramaic is in this case unquestionable; and most probably kepha was used in both clauses (“you are kepha” and “on this kepha”), since the word was used both for a name and for a “rock”. The Peshitta (written in Syriac, a language cognate with Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses. The Greek makes the distinction between petros and petra simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine petra could not very well serve as a masculine name.

The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 8 (Matthew, Mark, Luke)
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), page 368
JPK pages 17-18​

The word Peter petros, meaning “rock” (Gk 4377), is masculine, and in Jesus’ follow-up statement he uses the feminine word petra (Gk 4376). On the basis of this change, many have attempted to avoid identifying Peter as the rock on which Jesus builds his church. Yet if it were not for Protestant reactions against extremes of Roman Catholic interpretations, it is doubtful whether many would have taken “rock” to be anything or anyone other than Peter.

Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary — New Testament, vol. 2
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), page 78​

JPK page 18
John Peter Lange
German Protestant scholar​

The Saviour, no doubt, used in both clauses the Aramaic word kepha (hence the Greek Kephas applied to Simon, John i.42; comp. 1 Cor. i.12; iii.22; ix.5; Gal. ii.9), which means rock and is used both as a proper and a common noun.... The proper translation then would be: “Thou art Rock, and upon this rock”, etc.

Lange’s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: The Gospel According to Matthew, vol. 8
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1976), page 293
JPK page 19​

John A. Broadus
Baptist author
(two quotations from the same work)​

Many insist on the distinction between the two Greek words, thou art Petros and on this petra, holding that if the rock had meant Peter, either petros or petra would have been used both times, and that petros signifies a separate stone or fragment broken off, while petra is the massive rock. But this distinction is almost entirely confined to poetry, the common prose word instead of petros being lithos; nor is the distinction uniformly observed.
But the main answer here is that our Lord undoubtedly spoke Aramaic, which has no known means of making such a distinction [between feminine petra and masculine petros in Greek]. The Peshitta (Western Aramaic) renders, “Thou are kipho, and on this kipho”. The Eastern Aramaic, spoken in Palestine in the time of Christ, must necessarily have said in like manner, “Thou are kepha, and on this kepha”.... Beza called attention to the fact that it is so likewise in French: “Thou art Pierre, and on this pierre”; and Nicholson suggests that we could say, “Thou art Piers (old English for Peter), and on this pier.”

Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew
(Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1886), pages 355-356
JPK page 20​

J. Knox Chamblin
Presbyterian and New Testament Professor
Reformed Theological Seminary​

By the words “this rock” Jesus means not himself, nor his teaching, nor God the Father, nor Peter’s confession, but Peter himself. The phrase is immediately preceded by a direct and emphatic reference to Peter. As Jesus identifies himself as the Builder, the rock on which he builds is most naturally understood as someone (or something) other than Jesus himself. The demonstrative this, whether denoting what is physically close to Jesus or what is literally close in Matthew, more naturally refers to Peter (v. 18) than to the more remote confession (v. 16). The link between the clauses of verse 18 is made yet stronger by the play on words, “You are Peter (Gk. Petros), and on this rock (Gk. petra) I will build my church”. As an apostle, Peter utters the confession of verse 16; as a confessor he receives the designation this rock from Jesus.

“Matthew”
Evangelical Commentary on the Bible
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1989), page 742
JPK page 30​

Craig L. Blomberg
Baptist and Professor of New Testament
Denver Seminary​

Acknowledging Jesus as The Christ illustrates the appropriateness of Simon's nickname “Peter” (Petros = rock). This is not the first time Simon has been called Peter (cf. John 1:42), but it is certainly the most famous. Jesus’ declaration, “You are Peter”, parallels Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ”, as if to say, “Since you can tell me who I am, I will tell you who you are.” The expression “this rock” almost certainly refers to Peter, following immediately after his name, just as the words following “the Christ” in v. 16 applied to Jesus. The play on words in the Greek between Peter’s name (Petros) and the word “rock” (petra) makes sense only if Peter is the rock and if Jesus is about to explain the significance of this identification.

The New American Commentary: Matthew, vol. 22
(Nashville: Broadman, 1992), pages 251-252
JPK pages 31-32​

David Hill
Presbyterian minister and Senior Lecturer in the Department of Biblical Studies
University of Sheffield, England​

On this rock I will build my church: the word-play goes back to Aramaic tradition. It is on Peter himself, the confessor of his Messiahship, that Jesus will build the Church. The disciple becomes, as it were, the foundation stone of the community. Attempts to interpret the “rock” as something other than Peter in person (e.g., his faith, the truth revealed to him) are due to Protestant bias, and introduce to the statement a degree of subtlety which is highly unlikely.

“The Gospel of Matthew”
The New Century Bible Commentary
(London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1972), page 261
JPK page 34​

Suzanne de Dietrich
Presbyterian theologian​

The play on words in verse 18 indicates the Aramaic origin of the passage. The new name contains a promise. “Simon”, the fluctuating, impulsive disciple, will, by the grace of God, be the “rock” on which God will build the new community.

The Layman’s Bible Commentary: Matthew, vol. 16
(Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1961), page 93
JPK page 34​

Donald A. Hagner
Fuller Theological Seminary​

The natural reading of the passage, despite the necessary shift from Petros to petra required by the word play in the Greek (but not the Aramaic, where the same word kepha occurs in both places), is that it is Peter who is the rock upon which the church is to be built.... The frequent attempts that have been made, largely in the past, to deny this in favor of the view that the confession itself is the rock... seem to be largely motivated by Protestant prejudice against a passage that is used by the Roman Catholics to justify the papacy.

Matthew 14-28
Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 33b
(Dallas: Word Books, 1995), page 470

JPK pages 36-37​

This is a blatantly false statement. If Protestant "scholars" agreed with the Catholic Church regarding Peter, they would NOT be protestant. They would be Catholic.

 

[SumTinWong]

A better title would be SOME protestant scholars agree. For every one that you name that says this I can name you fifty that say otherwise.

Probably doesn't mean anything, but I have never heard of any of these people that support the RC stance either.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Until the overrunning of the East by Muslims, the 5 patriarchates (Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople) were equal. Each had separate traditions for their founding, but one central theme: Jesus is the Christ, which is Peter's statement. So, the early church supports mainstream Protestant theology that the phrase was the rock, not Peter. What does Scripture say? Peter is not mentioned as a central figure in the rest of Scripture as being set apart from the rest. Peter did not establish the church in Rome, with which CC tradition agrees, as Rome's church was established before the Apostles left Jersualem. The CC tradition teaches that the Apostles stayed in Jerusalem for 12 years. Romans was written before this or shortly thereafter, and was already an established church. Peter went east (see 1 Peter), and Paul went west. Alexandria was traditionally set up by Mark, Peter's protoge, which fits with Peter's admission that he went East. Some say Peter speaks metaphorically about Rome as being Babylon in 1 Peter, yet he mentions all other cities by name rather than by metaphor, so this is highly unlikely. Tradition teaches PEter was arrested and moved to Rome for execution, which was his first visit there. Early Christian writings tell us that Peter spoke there once, then was executed in Rome (Papias). Mark was written to give the people of Rome a record of his teachings, since they only heard him once.

(The embolden and underlining is mine and not from the original poster)





My best friend's father, who is VERY Catholic, very active in their Catholic parish, attending Catholic schools K-grad school, whose undergraduate work was in history, and whose brother is a priest, explained this all to me EXACTLY as explained in the post above. According to him, after the fall of much of the Christian lands with Islam, the Bishop of Rome began to be increasingly powerful. Eventually, a power struggle among the bishops became very intense - and it was in that mileau that we began to get this "Peter/Rock" interpretation to support the Roman bishops claims of supremecy.


Pax.


- Josiah

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

SERMON XXVI.

[LXXVI. BEN.]

AGAIN ON MATT. XIV. 25: OF THE LORD WALKING ON THE WAVES OF THE SEA, AND OF PETER TOTTERING.

1. THE Gospel which has just been read touching the Lord Christ, who walked on the waters of the sea;(1) and the Apostle Peter, who as he was walking, tottered through fear, and sinking in distrust, rose again by confession, gives us to understand that the sea is the present world, and the Apostle Peter the type of the One Church. For Peter in the order of Apostles first, and in the love of Christ most forward, answers oftentimes alone for all the rest. Again, when the Lord Jesus Christ asked, whom men said that He was, and when the disciples gave the various opinions of men, and the Lord asked again and said, "But whom say ye that I am?" Peter answered, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." One for many gave the answer, Unity in many. Then said the Lord to Him, "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjonas: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in heaven."(2) Then He added, "and I say unto thee." As if He had said, "Because thou hast said unto Me, 'Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God;' I also say unto thee, 'Thou art Peter.' " For before he was called Simon. Now this name of Peter was given him by the Lord, and that in a figure, that he should signify the Church. For seeing that Christ is the rock (Petra), Peter is the Christian people. For the rock (Petra) is the original name. Therefore Peter is so called(3) from the rock; not the rock from Peter; as Christ is not called Christ from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. "Therefore," he saith, "Thou art Peter; and upon this Rock" which thou hast confessed, upon this Rock which thou hast acknowledged, saying, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, will I build My Church;" that is upon Myself, the Son of the living God, "will I build My Church." I will build thee upon Myself, not Myself upon thee.
2. For men who wished to be built upon men, said "I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas,"(4) who is Peter. But others who did not wish to be built upon Peter, but upon the Rock, said, "But I am of Christ." And when the Apostle Paul ascertained that he was chosen, and Christ despised, he said, "Is Christ divided ? was Paul crucified for you ? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?"(5) And, as not in the name of Paul, so neither in the name of Peter; but in the name of Christ: that Peter might be built upon the Rock, not the Rock upon Peter.
3. This same Peter therefore who had been by the Rock pronounced "blessed," bearing the figure of the Church, holding the chief place in the Apostleship,(6) a very little while after that he had heard that he was "blessed," a very little while after that he had heard that he was "Peter," a very little while after that he had heard that he was to be "built upon the Rock," displeased the Lord when He had heard of His future Passion, for He had foretold His disciples that it was soon to be. He feared test he should by death, lose Him whom he had confessed as the fountain of life. He was troubled, and said, "Be it far from Thee, Lord: this shall not be to Thee."(7) Spare Thyself, O God, I am not willing that Thou shouldest die. Peter said to Christ, I am not willing that Thou shouldest die; but Christ far better said, I am willing to die for thee. And then He forthwith rebuked him, whom He had a little before commended; and calleth him Satan, whom he had pronounced "blessed." "Get thee behind Me, Satan," he saith, "thou art an offence unto Me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men."(8) What would He have us do in our present state, who thus findeth fault because we are men ? Would you know what He would have us do? Give ear to the Psalm; "I have said, Ye are gods, and ye are all the children of the Most High." But by savouring the things of men; "ye shall die like men."(9) The very same Peter a little while before blessed, afterwards Satan, in one moment, within a few words! Thou wonderest at the difference of the names, mark the difference of the reasons of them. Why wonderest thou that he who was a little before blessed, is afterwards Satan? Mark the reason wherefore he is blessed. "Because flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in heaven."(10) Therefore blessed, because flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee. For if flesh and blood revealed this to thee, it were of thine own; but because flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in heaven, it is of Mine, not of thine own. Why of Mine? "Because all things that the Father hath are Mine."(11) So then thou hast heard the cause, why he is "blessed," and why he is "Peter." But why was he that which we shudder at, and are loth to repeat, why, but because it was of thine own ? "For thou savourest not the things which be of God, but those that be of men."
4. Let us, looking at ourselves in this member of the Church, distinguish what is of God, and what of ourselves. For then we shall not totter, then shall we be founded on the Rock, shall be fixed and firm against the winds, and storms, and streams, the temptations, I mean, of this present world. Yet see this Peter, who was then our figure; now he trusts, and now he totters; now he confesses the Undying, and now he fears test He should die. Wherefore? because the Church of Christ hath both strong and weak ones; and cannot be without either strong or weak; whence the Apostle Paul says, "Now we that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak."(1) In that Peter said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God," he represents the strong: but in that he totters, and would not that Christ should suffer, in fearing death for Him, and not acknowledging the Life, he represents the weak ones of the Church. In that one Apostle then, that is, Peter, in the order of Apostles first and chiefest, in whom the Church was figured, both sorts were to be represented, that is, both the strong and weak; because the Church doth not exist without them both.
5. And hence also is that which was just now read, "Lord, if it be Thou, bid me come unto Thee on the water."(2) For I cannot do this in myself, but in Thee. He acknowledged what he had of himself, and what of Him, by whose will he believed that he could do that, which no human weakness could do. Therefore, "if it be Thou, bid me;" because when thou biddest, it will be done. What I cannot do by taking it upon myself,(3) Thou canst do by bidding me. And the Lord said "Come."(4) And without any doubting, at the word of Him who bade him, at the presence of Him who sustained, at the presence of Him who guided him, without any delay, Peter leaped down into the water, and began to walk. He was able to do what the Lord was doing, not in himself, but in the Lord. "For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord."(5) What no one can do in Paul, no one in Peter, no one in any other of the Apostles, this can he do in the Lord. Therefore well said Paul by a wholesome despising of himself, and commending of Him; "Was Paul crucified for you, or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?"(6) So then, ye are not in me, but together with me; not under me, but under Him.
6. Therefore Peter walked on the water by the bidding of the Lord, knowing that he could not have this power of himself. By faith he had strength to do what human weakness could not do. These are the strong ones of the Church. Mark this, hear, understand, and act accordingly. For we must not deal with the strong on any other principle(7) than this, that so they should become weak; but thus we must deal with the weak, that they may become strong. But the presuming on their own strength keeps many back from strength. No one will have strength from God, but he who feels himself weak of himself. "God setteth apart a spontaneous rain for His inheritance."(8) Why do you, who know what I was about to say, anticipate me? Let your quickness be moderated, that the slowness of the rest may follow. This I said, and I say it again; hear it, receive it, and act on this principle. No one is made strong by God, but he who feels himself weak of his own self. And therefore a "spontaneous rain," as the Psalm says, "spontaneous;" not of our deserts, but "spontaneous." "A spontaneous rain" therefore "God setteth apart for his inheritance;" for "it was weak; but Thou hast perfected it." Because Thou "hast set apart for it a spontaneous rain," not looking to men's deserts, but to Thine own grace and mercy. This inheritance then was weakened, and acknowledged its own weakness in itself, that it might be strong in Thee. It would not be strengthened, if it were not weak, that by Thee it might be "perfected" in Thee.
7. See Paul a small portion of this inheritance, see him in weakness, who said, "I am not meet to be called an Apostle, because I persecuted the Church of God." Why then art thou an Apostle? "By the grace of God I am what I am. I am not meet, but by the grace of God I am what I am." Paul was "weak," but Thou hast "perfected" him. But now because by "the grace of God he is what he is," look what follows; "And His grace in me was not in vain, but I laboured more abundantly than they all."(9) Take heed lest thou lose by presumption what thou hast attained(10) through weakness. This is well, very well; that "I am not meet to be called an Apostle. By His grace I am what I am, and His grace in me was not in vain:" all most excellent. But, "I laboured more abundantly than they all;" thou hast begun, it would seem, to ascribe to thyself what a little before thou hadst given to God. Attend and follow on; "Yet not I, but the grace of God with me." Well! thou weak one; thou shalt be exalted in exceeding strength, seeing thou art not unthankful. Thou art the very same Paul, little in thyself; and great in the Lord. Thou art he who didst thrice beseech the Lord, that "the thorn of the flesh, the messenger of Satan, by whom thou wast buffeted, might be taken away from thee."(11) And what was said to thee? what didst thou hear when thou madest this petition? "My grace is sufficient for thee: for My strength is made perfect in weakness."(1) For he was "weak," but Thou didst "perfect" him.
8. So Peter also said, "Bid me come unto Thee on the water." I who dare this am but a man, but it is no man whom I beseech. Let the God-man bid, that man may be able to do what man cannot do. "Come," said He. And He went down, and began to walk on the water; and Peter was able, because the Rock had bidden him. Lo, what Peter was in the Lord; what was he in himself? "When he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried out, Lord, I perish, save me." When he(2) looked for strength from the Lord, he had strength from the Lord; as a man he tottered, but he returned to the Lord. "If I said, my foot hath slipped"(3) (they are the words of a Psalm, the notes of a holy song; and if we acknowledge them they are our words too; yea, if we will, they are ours also). "If I said my foot hath slipped." How slipped, except because it was mine own. And what follows? "Thy mercy, Lord, helped me." Not mine own strength, but Thy mercy. For will God forsake him as he totters, whom He heard when calling upon Him? Where then is that, "Who hath called upon God, and hath been forsaken by Him?"(4) where again is that, "Whosoever shall call on the Name of the Lord, shall be delivered."(5) Immediately reaching forth the help of His right hand, He lifted him up as he was sinking, and rebuked his distrust; "O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?" Once thou didst trust in Me, hast thou now doubted of Me?
9. Well, brethren, my sermon must be ended. Consider the world to be the sea; the wind is boisterous, and there is a mighty tempest. Each man's peculiar lust is his tempest. Thou dost love God; thou walkest upon the sea, and under thy feet is the swelling of the world. Thou dost love the world, it will swallow thee up. It skilleth only how to devour its lovers, not to carry them. But when thy heart is tossed about by lust, in order that thou mayest get the better of thy lust, call upon the Divinity of Christ. Think ye that the wind is then contrary, when there is this life's adversity? For so when there are wars, when there is tumult, when there is famine, when there is pestilence, when even to every individual man his private calamity arriveth, then the wind is thought to be contrary, then it is thought that God must be called upon. But when the world wears her smile of temporal happiness, it is as if there were no contrary wind. But do not ask upon this matter the tranquil state of the times: ask only your own lust. See if there be tranquillity within thee: see if there be no inner wind which overturns thee; see to this. There needs great virtue to struggle with happiness, lest this very happiness allure, corrupt, and overthrow thee. There needs, I say, great virtue to struggle with happiness, and great happiness not to be overcome by happiness. Learn then to tread upon the world; remember to trust in Christ. And "if thy foot have slipped;" if thou totter, if some things there are which thou canst not overcome, if thou begin to sink, say, "Lord, I perish, save me." Say, "I perish," that thou perish not. For He only can deliver thee from the death of the body, who died in the body for thee. Let us turn to the Lord, etc.

Forgive me.....

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

From Homilies LIII & LVI (Matt. 15 & 16)

3. What then saith Christ? "Thou art Simon, the son of Jonas; thou shalt be called Cephas."(9) "Thus since thou hast proclaimed my Father, I too name him that begat thee;" all but saying, "As thou art son of Jonas, even so am I of my Father." Else it were superfluous to say, "Thou art Son of Jonas;" but since he had said, "Son of God," to point out that He is so Son of God, as the other son of Jonas, of the same substance with Him that begat Him, therefore He added this, "And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church;"(10) that is, on the faith of his confession. Hereby He signifies that many were now on the point of believing, and raises his spirit, and makes him a shepherd. "And the gates of hell" shall not prevail against it." "And if not against it, much more not against me. So be not troubled because thou art shortly to hear that I shall be betrayed and crucified."


Forgive me......

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

From Homilies IX to X


And Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God."(7) And this he heard from the Lord: "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." See what praises follow this faith. "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church." What meaneth, "Upon this rock I will build my Church"? Upon this faith; upon this that has been said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

Forgive me.....

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

CHAPTER XIV.

How the confession of the blessed Peter is the faith of the whole Church.

BUT what are the other words which follow that saying of the Lord's, with which He commends Peter? "And I," said He, "say unto thee, that thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build My Church." Do you see how the saying of Peter is the faith of the Church? He then must of course be outside the Church, who does not hold the faith of the Church. "And to thee," saith the Lord, "I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven." This faith deserved heaven: this faith received the keys of the heavenly kingdom. See what awaits you. You cannot enter the gate to which this key belongs, if you have denied the faith of this key. "And the gate," He adds, "of hell shall not prevail against thee." The gates of hell are the belief or rather the misbelief of heretics. For widely as hell is separated from heaven, so widely is he who denies from him who confessed that Christ is God. "Whatsoever," He proceeds, "thou shalt bind on earth, shalt be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shalt be loosed also in heaven." The perfect faith of the Apostle somehow is given the power of Deity, that what it should bind or loose on earth, might be bound or loosed in heaven. For you then, who come against the Apostle's faith, as you see that already you are bound on earth, it only remains that you should know that you are bound also in heaven. But it would take too long to go into details which are so numerous as to make a long and wearisome story, even if they are related with brevity and conciseness.

Forgive me.....

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Treatise I. On the Unity of The Church


4. If any one consider and examine these things, there is no need for lengthened discussion and arguments. There is easy proof for faith in a short summary of the truth. The Lord speaks to Peter,(3) saying, "I say 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 also in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."(4) And again to the same He says, after His resurrection, "Feed my sheep."(5) And although to all the apostles, after His resurrection, He gives an equal power, and says, "As the Father hath sent me, even so send I you: Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they shall be remitted unto him; and whose soever sins ye retain, they shall be retained;"(6) yet, that He might set forth unity, He arranged by His authority the origin of that unity, as beginning from one. Assuredly the rest of the apostles were also the same as was Peter, endowed with a like partnership both of honour and power; but the beginning proceeds from unity.(7) Which one Church, also, the Holy Spirit in the Song of Songs designated in the person of our Lord, and says, "My dove, my spotless one, is but one. She is the only one of her mother, elect of her that bare her."(8) Does he who does not hold this unity of the Church think that he holds the faith? Does he who strives against and resists the Church(9) trust that he is in the Church, when moreover the blessed Apostle Paul teaches the same thing, and sets forth the sacrament of unity, saying, "There is one body and one spirit, one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God?"(10)°
5. And this unity we ought firmly to hold and assert, especially those of us that are bishops who preside in the Church, that we may also prove the episcopate itself to be one and undivided.(1) Let no one deceive the brotherhood by a falsehood: let no one corrupt the truth of the faith by perfidious prevarication. The episcopate is one, each part of which is held by each one for the whole.(2) The Church also is one, which is spread abroad far and wide into a multitude by an increase of fruitfulness. As there are many rays of the sun, but one light; and many branches of a tree, but one strength based in its tenacious root; and since from one spring flow many streams, although the multiplicity seems diffused in the liberality of an overflowing abundance, yet the unity is still preserved in the source. Separate a ray of the sun from its body of light, its unity does not allow a division of light; break a branch from a tree,--when broken, it will not be able to bud; cut off the stream from its fountain, and that which is cut off dries up. Thus also the Church, shone over with the light of the Lord, sheds forth her rays over the whole world, yet it is one light which is everywhere diffused, nor is the unity of the body separated. Her fruitful abundance spreads her branches over the whole world. She broadly expands her rivers, liberally flowing, yet her head is one, her source one; and she is one mother, plentiful in the results of fruitfulness: from her womb we are born, by her milk we are nourished, by her spirit we are animated.

Forgive me.....

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Book XII


But if you suppose that upon that one Peter only the whole church is built by God, what would you say about John the son of thunder or each one of the Apostles? Shall we otherwise dare to say, that against Peter in particular the gates of Hades shall not prevail, but that they shall prevail against the other Apostles and the perfect? Does not the saying previously made, "The gates of Hades shall not prevail against it,"(7) hold in regard to all and in the case of each of them? And also the saying, "Upon this rock I will build My church"?(8) Are the keys of the kingdom of heaven given by the Lord to Peter only, and will no other of the blessed receive them? But if this promise, "I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven,"(9) be common to the others, how shall not all the things previously spoken of, and the things which are subjoined as having been addressed to Peter, be common to them? For in this place these words seem to be addressed as to Peter only, "Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven,"(1) etc; but in the Gospel of John the Saviour having given the Holy Spirit unto the disciples by breathing upon them said, "Receive ye the Holy Spirit,"(2) etc. Many then will say to the Saviour, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God;" but not all who say this will say it to Him, as not at all having learned it by the revelation of flesh and blood but by the Father in heaven Himself taking away the veil that lay upon their heart, in order that after this "with unveiled face reflecting as a mirror the glory of the Lord"(3) they may speak through the Spirit of God saying concerning Him, "Lord Jesus," and to Him, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."(4) And if any one says this to Him, not by flesh and blood revealing it unto Him but through the Father in heaven, he will obtain the things that were spoken according to the letter of the Gospel to that Peter, but, as the spirit of the Gospel teaches, to every one who becomes such as that Peter was. For all bear the surname of "rock" who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved,(5) that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of the rock just as Christ does. But also as members of Christ deriving their surname from Him they are called Christians, and from the rock, Peters. And taking occasion from these things you will say that the righteous bear the surname of Christ who is Righteousness, and the wise of Christ who is Wisdom.(6) And so in regard to all His other names, you will apply them by way of surname to the saints; and to all such the saying of the Saviour might be spoken, "Thou art Peter," etc., down to the words, "prevail against it." But what is the "it"? Is it the rock upon which Christ builds the church, or is it the church? For the phrase is ambiguous. Or is it as if the rock and the church were one and the same? This I think to be true; for neither against the rock on which Christ builds the church, nor against the church will the gates of Hades prevail; just as the way of a serpent upon a rock, according to what is written in the Proverbs,(7) cannot be found. Now, if the gates of Hades prevail against any one, such an one cannot be a rock upon which Christ builds the church, nor the church built by Jesus upon the rock; for the rock is inaccessible to the serpent, and it is stronger than the gates of Hades which are opposing it, so that because of its strength the gates of Hades do not prevail against it; but the church, as a building of Christ who built His own house wisely upon the rock,(1) is incapable of admitting the gates of Hades which prevail against every man who is outside the rock and the church, but have no power against it.


Forgive me.....

 

[Augustine_Was_Calvinist]

Upon This Rock​

Matthew 16:18​

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. (KJV)​

Beginning with the writings of the so-called Church Fathers in the second century various interpretations of the phrase "upon this rock" have been given. Some have said the rock on which the church was founded was Peter. Others have argued that the rock was Peter's confession - the faith that Peter confessed was the foundation of the church. Still others have seen this reference to the rock as a reference to Christ Himself as the foundation of the church. [Larry Richards, The Teacher's Commentary, p. 567]​

It is the purpose of this article to present a short explanation of each of these viewpoints and try, if possible, to draw the scriptural conclusion. Among the brotherhood I have found no commentators that believe that Peter is the rock. Indeed most brethren tend toward Peter's confession as the rock. If you have not read McGarvey's eloquent explanation of this position please take time to do so. [McGarvey, Commentary on Matthew pp. 144-146.] My study of this verse has drawn me towards the third position - the "rock" is Christ.​

Is the Rock Peter?
This is the Roman Catholic position. They believe that the church through the pope is the "Vicar of Christ on earth" and the power of making binding decisions has been given to Peter and his successors. This notion did not gain prominence in church history until after the Bishop of Rome gained preeminence over other bishops. They base their doctrine on the wordplay between Peter (petros) and Rock (petra). They believe that in this passage Christ is installing Peter as the head of the Apostles. The problem with this theory is that Christ forgot to tell the other Apostles that Peter was their head (Mt. 18:1; 20:21).​

However, Petros and Petra refer to the difference between a stone (Peter) and bedrock. By using the word "this" instead of "you" Christ points toward a different antecedent than Peter. In his commentary on Matthew, Kenneth Chumbley cites a survey of eighty-five ancient commentators. Sixty-eight out of eighty-five of these pre-Roman Catholic believed that Peter was not the Rock. [Chumbley's Commentary on Matthew, pp. 296-300]​

Churches of the Protestant Reformation chose to either reject the Catholic view or accept Peter as the Rock in the more general sense that the church was built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets with Jesus as the chief cornerstone (Eph. 2:20). Some believe that Peter is shown to be the foundation of the church by his possession of the "Keys of the Kingdom" and the fact that he was the first to bring the gospel message on the day of Pentecost (to the Jews) and later to Cornelius (the Gentiles). Some Greek lexicographers such as Vincent argue that the sentence structure will not allow any other interpretation than Peter as the Rock. (Word Studies, Vol. 1, pp. 91,92.) Barnes states that "the whole meaning of the passage is this: I will make you the honored instrument of making known my gospel first to Jews and Gentiles and will make you a firm and distinguished preacher in building my church." [Barnes' Notes on Matthew, p. 170.]​

Is the Rock Peter's Confession?
Those that hold this position argue that the most fundamental truth on which the whole superstructure of the Christian system is based - is the truth that Jesus Christ is the Savior, the Son of God. Jesus is the architect, Peter holds the keys to the gate, and the truth that Jesus is the Christ is the foundation.​

The imagery is of one city (built on a rock) pitted against another (represented here by Hades - referring to "death"). Jesus the architect would build his city on Peter's great confession and allow Peter and the other apostles to control who might enter that city via the "keys to the kingdom." The cities are at war. But the gates of death will not prevail against the city built on the rock of Peter's confession. [McGarvey, Commentary on Matthew pp. 144-146.] The strength of this city is that not even death can destroy it because it is everlasting.​

Henry interprets the passage: After Peter's great confession, " Now, saith Christ, this is that great truth upon which I will build my church." [Matthew Henry's Commentary, Vol. 5, pp. 187,188.] Henry then goes on to point out that without this truth the church falls to the ground. If Jesus is not the Christ then His church does not exist and without this confession anyone calling himself a Christian does not hold on to the foundation and falls away into infidelity. Of the eighty-five ancient commentators mentioned earlier, 44 held this view.​

Is the Rock Christ?
The distinction between the word petros and the word petra has led some Bible scholars to believe that the rock is Christ. They base their thinking on the following four points:​

The symbolic use of the word "rock" in the Hebrew scripture always refers to God and never to man. Twice in Deuteronomy it is used of false gods in comparison to the "rock of Israel." Otherwise the term is applied directly to God or the Messiah. (See Duet. 32:4; Ps. 18:2; 18:31; Isa. 28:16)​

Peter never identified himself as the rock or the foundation of the church, yet he obviously identifies Christ as the "chief cornerstone" of Psalms 118:22 in 1 Pet. 2:4-8 and Acts 4:10,11.​

The teachings of Paul also point to Jesus as the "rock." (1 Cor. 3:11: "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.") In Eph. 2:20 Paul uses the apostles and prophets as a figure of the foundation - teaching that it is their inspired teaching concerning Christ (not their person or office) on which the church rests. [Chumbley's Commentary on Matthew, pp. 296-300]​

Jesus identifies Himself as the Rock of Ps. 118 (Mt. 21:42).​

Conclusion
Peter indeed receives the distinction of being the first preacher of record to take the gospel to both the Jews and the Gentiles (day of Pentecost, household of Cornelius). But, Peter was not infallible nor was he the superior apostle. He made doctrinal blunders before and after being filled with the Holy Spirit. God could not found the church on an imperfect man. He and the other apostles laid the foundation of the church, with Christ as the chief-cornerstone and every believer (including the apostles) as "living stones" of the building itself (the church). "Believers are added to the church. as they are saved." Peter is not the pope and he is not the bedrock on which the church is founded.​

Peter's confession is the "contract" to build. His confession is not the bedrock on which the church is built; it is the bedrock on which his own salvation is based. In a similar vein, our individual confessions of Christ as Lord, set in motion an agreement between ourselves and God that we want to become part of His building - we want to be "living stones" in His service. If the church was built on Peter's confession then in that same sense the church continues to grow every time a new soul is added to the building. Every new believer renews the contract first established between Peter and the Lord.​

Lyricist S.J. Stone used scripture and poetic beauty to craft these words:​

The Church's one foundation is Jesus Christ her Lord,

She is His new creation by water and the word;

From heaven He came and sought her to be His Holy Bride;
With His own blood He bought her,
And for her life He died.​

The bedrock of the church is Jesus Christ her Lord. Jesus Christ is the Word of God Incarnate (Jn. 1:1). For all practical purposes for the world today it is God's word (the Bible) that stands as the foundation of Peter's faith, our faith, and the faith of believers to come. Each true believer must dedicate themselves to "standing on the promises of Christ the King" our "rock and hope of eternal salvation!" We can if we obey His word.

​

By Carey Dillinger
From Expository Files 8.10; October 2001​

​

http://www.bible.ca/ef/expository-matthew-16-18.htm​

​

​

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

LETTER XXXIII.

TO THE SYNOD OF EPHESUS 4.

Leo, bishop, to the holy Synod which is assembled at Ephesus.

I. He comments the Emperor's appeal to the chair of Peter.

The devout faith of our most clement prince, knowing that it especially concerns his glory to prevent any seed of error from springing up within the catholic Church, has paid such deference to the Divine institutions as to apply to the authority of the Apostolic See for a proper settlement: as if he wished it to be declared by the most blessed Peter himself what was praised in his confession, when the LORD said, "whom do men say that I, the Son of man, am 5?" and the disciples mentioned various people's opinion: but, when He asked what they themselves believed, the chief of the apostles, embracing the fulness of the Faith in one short sentence, said, "Thou art the Christ, the son of the living God(5) :" that is, Thou who truly art Son of man art also truly Son of the living God: Thou, I say, true in Godhead, true in flesh and one altogether(6), the properties of the two natures being kept intact. And if Eutyches had believed this intelligently and thoroughly, he would never have retreated from the path of this Faith. For Peter received this answer from the Lord for his confession. "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 unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church: and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it(7)." But he who both rejects the blessed Peter's confession, and gainsays Christ's Gospel, is far removed from union with this building; for he shows himself. never to have had any zeal for understanding the Truth, and to have only the empty appearance of high esteem, who did not adorn the hoary hairs of old age with any ripe judgment of the heart.

Forgive me.....

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

It is CLEAR through the ECF's... The faith of Peters confession is that which Christ God speaks of the Church being built upon.

Not Peter, the person.

Forgive me...

 

[A. believer]

It is CLEAR through the ECF's... The faith of Peters confession is that which Christ God speaks of the Church being built upon.

Not Peter, the person.

Forgive me...

For a comprehensive look at the Patristic exegesis of this verse, go here.