One of the most controversial passages in the Bible is Matthew 16:18, where Jesus tells
Peter, "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church."
Catholics see this passage as evidence that Jesus made Peter the first pope.
Many Evangelicals look at it as just the opposite. Who is right?
It's an interesting question, and I've been on both sides of the question. In fact, this
passage played a pivotal role in my conversion to the Catholic Church.
You may think you've heard all the arguments about whether Peter is the rock, but I'm going
to show you the one that convinced me, and you probably haven't heard it anywhere else .
. .
The Basic Argument A common claim in Protestant apologetics is
that in Matthew 16:18, Jesus is actually contrasting St. Peter with the rock on which he will build
his Church. The argument is based on the fact that in
Greek the word for Peter is petros, while the word used for "rock" here is petra.
It is often claimed that these words meant two different things--that petros meant a
small stone or a pebble, while petra meant a large rock.
The idea is that Jesus is contrasting Peter--a tiny, insignificant stone--with the great
rock on which he will build his Church, which is often said not to be Peter but Peter's
faith. How well does this argument work?
Small Stone vs. Large Rock?
In the Expositor's Bible Commentary, the esteemed Evangelical Bible scholar D. A. Carson writes
on this passage: 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 in this case
is 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 "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. So the argument that petros and petra have
different meanings in this passage is actually quite weak.
But for the sake of argument, let's suppose that they did. Would this mean that Peter
isn't the rock?
You May Look Small . . . The argument that he isn't is based on the
fact that there is a clear parallelism between Peter and the rock in this passage, and it
assumes a particular kind of parallelism--one that contrasts Peter with the rock.
This is sometimes called antithetic parallelism. But that isn't the only kind of parallelism
there is. The Bible often uses another form, known as synthetic parallelism.
In synthetic parallelism, the second item mentioned builds on or amplifies the meaning
of the first. If that's what's happening in this passage--even
if we grant that petros means a small stone and petra means a large rock--then it does
not follow that Peter and the rock are two different things.
Instead, Jesus would be saying something like, "Although you may seem to be a small stone,
Peter, on the large rock that you really are, I will build my Church."
In this case petra or large rock would bring out the actual significance of the small stone
that Peter appears to be. But there are even more decisive arguments,
and you don't have to speak Greek or Aramaic to understand them . . .
My Own Conversion
A key moment in my own conversion occurred one day when I was reading a book, and it
had an extended quotation from Matthew 16. I suddenly realized that there was a structural
feature in the text that pointed to Peter being the rock.
Soon afterward, I noticed additional features that indicated the same thing.
I realized that these were far stronger indicators than the arguments I had previously taken
for granted regarding the alleged difference in meaning between petros and petra, and
I had to change my view. Here is what I discovered . . .
Jesus Asks a Question
If we back up a few verses, we find Jesus asking the disciples a question:
[13] Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesare'a Philip'pi, he asked his disciples,
"Who do men say that the Son of man is?" [14] And they said, "Some say John the Baptist,
others say Eli'jah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets." [15] He said to them,
"But who do you say that I am?" [16] Simon Peter replied, "You are the Christ, the Son
of the living God." That's the correct answer, and Jesus says
three things to Peter in reply: [17] And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are
you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who
is in heaven. [18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church,
and the gates of hades shall not prevail against it. [19] I will give you the keys of the
kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever
you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." What I noticed was that there are structural
features in Jesus' three statements to Peter that indicate he is the rock.
Blessed Are You
One thing I noticed is that the statements immediately before and after the "You are
Peter" passage are both blessings. First, Jesus says "Blessed are you, Simon
Bar-Jona!" That is clearly a blessing. Then he says, "You are Peter."
And finally he says, "I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven." That also
is clearly a blessing. So "You are Peter" is sandwiched between two
blessings. The passage unambiguously stresses the blessedness of St. Peter.
That argues against the idea that Jesus is belittling Peter in this passage.
It would be like Jesus saying, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! . . . You insignificant
pebble. . . . Here are the keys to the kingdom of God!"
What It Means to Be Peter
I also noticed that each of Jesus' three statements to St. Peter has a two-part explanation attached
to it. The first statement, "Blessed are you, Simon
Bar-Jona!" is explained by "For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you," which
is then further explained by "but my Father who is in heaven."
These are why Peter is blessed. He didn't learn of Jesus' identity from man. It was
revealed to him by the Father. The third statement, "I will give you the
keys of the kingdom of heaven," is explained by "and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound
in heaven," which is then further explained by "and whatever you loose on earth shall
be loosed in heaven." These are part of what it means for Peter
to have the keys of the kingdom. He is able to bind things with authority from God, and
he is able to loose things with authority from God.
So when it turns out that the second, or middle statement also has the same structure, then
we need to read it in the same way. The statement "you are Peter," is explained
by "and on this rock I will build my church," which is further explained by "and the gates
of hades shall not prevail against it." So that is what it means for him to be Peter:
Jesus will build his Church on him, and the gates of hades will not prevail against it.
What This Means for Us
When I realized these things, I realized that Peter had to be the rock Jesus was talking
about. And that was a pivotal moment in my journey with God.
Because if Peter is the rock on which Jesus builds his Church, that means that Peter is
the chief apostle, the chief shepherd of Christ's flock. And that means that, once Jesus has
ascended to heaven, Peter is the earthly head of the Church.
That's a good description of the office of the pope.
And so, when I realized these things, I concluded that I had to reconsider matters. I had to
review my beliefs with an open mind toward whether the Catholic Church was right after
all. In the end, I concluded that it is, and so
I became Catholic. In the years since, my conviction has only
strengthened as I have learned more about Catholic teaching and its basis in the Bible,
including the role
of the pope.