>>509027849The Greek text does matter, and no, it’s not a “20-year-old Protestant lie.” It’s been discussed since the early Church.
In Matthew 16:18, Jesus says: “You are Peter [Petros], and on this rock [petra] I will build My church.”
The words Petros (masculine) and petra (feminine) are different in form and in meaning. Petros was typically used for a stone or small rock, while petra meant bedrock, massive rock, or foundation. That’s not Protestant spin, it’s classical Greek.
Some argue that Jesus probably spoke Aramaic, where the word kepha would have been used for both. Maybe. But Matthew chose to write it in Greek under guidance of the Holy Spirit, and he deliberately used two different words.
Also, look at the context. Just a few verses later, Peter is rebuked as “Satan” for opposing the cross. Not exactly the foundation you want for the eternal Church. Peter himself never claims to be the foundation. He points to Jesus as the “chief cornerstone” (1Peter 2:6). Paul agrees: “No other foundation can be laid except Jesus Christ” (1Corinthians 3:11).
Even if you take “rock” as Peter, the early church didn’t treat him like a pope. In Acts 15, it’s James who gives the final decision, not Peter. Authority was shared, not centralized. So it’s not a “Protestant lie". It’s called reading Scripture carefully, in context, and not building a world empire on one verse. The true Rock of the Church is Christ Himself, immovable, eternal, and still standing.
Then what about Mark 8 and Luke 9?
The whole “You are Peter, and on this rock” line is missing.
Same event, same confession, but no mention of Peter receiving authority, keys, or a special position.
If Peter’s authority was truly the foundation of Christ’s Church, it’s strange that two of the three Synoptic Gospels leave it out completely. The only constant in all three accounts is Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ.” That’s the real rock.