Since you assert your interpretation without any argument behind it, I feel safe dismissing it with the same. You're not doing yourself any service by equating Christ's words with your interpretation. Far be it from me to actually look at the context of what Christ said and use what He actually said to understand what He meant, instead of having some pope give me the Apostolic interpretation™and just dismiss all else as being against Christ. I would be happy to respond to this, had it only had anything whatsoever to do with my argument instead of just being empty rhetoric. There it is. I'll be honest, I'm surprised you touched on the relevant text at all. I was expecting you to cede the field immediately and retreat to what you consider higher ground straightaway like most of you do. I believe that there is no authority higher than God, and when God speaks He does so without reliance on any authority but Himself. Though I know of at least one father whose opinions you no doubt hold in very high regard who held this view, God's word stands alone on its own merits. Perhaps you should take it up with Him instead of asking me such inane, purposeless questions.
Then you're a fool, because nobody who actually wants to know what it means will dismiss parallel passages. Not if Peter's pope they weren't. You aren't equal if one of you is "universal ruler". He doesn't, as already proven. Wrong again, John 1:42. All Christ did in Matthew 16:18 was explain the name He already gave him.
Jayden Hughes
Yeah, just me and the entire Catholic Church.
The Holy Church's interpretation.
If Christ had said He would built the Church on Himself alone, He would have said it. He didn't, you cannot refute this.
Which Christ bestowed upon the Apostles at the Pentecost, don't play dumb.
Jace Morgan
Look man, very intelligent men have been on both sides of this argument for hundreds of years. You're "your reading is obviously wrong" is the same as Atheist's "lol, sky daddy, how can you believe that book, it's obviously wrong,"
You simply haven't taken the time to understand the opposing perspective. At least you could act like a humble Christian and admit it.
Levi Hughes
Peter himself admits that Christ is the cornerstone (the stone to build the rest of the building upon) in 1 Peter 2:6:
Go read it in context. Reading Matthew 18 in context with 1 Peter 2, who was quoting Isaiah makes it obvious Christ was referring to the truth of himself as messiah and not Peter. Otherwise, it's all contradictory.
Julian Long
And they've been wrong for hundreds of years, you have about 1,500 years worth of men, no, Saints, with the traditions of the Apostles with this understanding. It's not my fault or the Church's fault that men try to gleam any other understanding than the truth.
That's a great projection, my understanding comes from the Apostles, and the Church guided by the Holy Spirit, which you all deny.
There is no opposing perspective, you REALLY do not understand the point of authority, do you?
And the cornerstone designated Peter as Cephas, which the true Church will be built on. Why do you call Christ the corner-stone, but then deny what the corner-stone says?
Contradictory to yourself and your false understanding.
Parker Clark
or rather, Simon as Cephas
Zachary Foster
I agree with this, actually. You would be loathe to act like a human being and dare to think for yourself. You are, clearly, a sworn slave of the pope. Your disinterest in the word of God and mental bondage to a man should serve as a cautionary tale of what happens when we deny the bible its proper authority as the ground and pillar of knowledge. I won't bother wasting my time refuting a non-argument that begs the question and refuses to speak in its own defense. Actually, that's blasphemy. I know you make men equal with God, I'm just surprised you brazenly admit it.
Your understanding comes from a magisterium, men who dare to annex to themselves what belongs to God alone. Your "understanding" is automatically invalid because it springs from men who are more accurately described by no term than Antichrist.
Hudson Clark
See
and Ephesians 2:19-21
Now both Peter and Paul say that Christ is the cornerstone as prophesied by Isaiah. Why do you keep insisting Peter is the cornerstone (the stone upon which the church is built) when there are explicit verses the contrary all over the bible. Seriously dude.
