If Christ mean in the statement “upon this rock Iwilll build my Church” he is the rock, and not Peter, the succeeding words about the keys of the kingdom of heaven doesn’t follow the train of thought.
It doesnt sound like Him. He could have said. “ I am the rock on which I will build my church” in the same manner how he said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.”
Sure. Some Church fathers agree with you & many Catholics. But the Protestant does have a Patristic argument from Augustine and also Chrysostom’s interpretation of the text too. So, a good way to approach Peter, the name change, and special status is ask where else does it occur? In John’s gospel. Jesus reverts back to the name Simon, why? What’s the significance?
You seem to think that I think they are conflict with one another and want to argue with me—that’s not the point ⬆️. As a Catholic, I say Peter is the rock.
That being said your argument is really with Augustine—he frames it as an either/or. If you’ve read my article, I’m looking at it as a both/and with a focus more on ancillary points.
The point is you can explain the significance of the name change using John’s gospel & focusing on the responsibility of the keys and the munus with the Protestant objection.
To your point, when evangelizing, the Protestant will never concede that point.
If Christ mean in the statement “upon this rock Iwilll build my Church” he is the rock, and not Peter, the succeeding words about the keys of the kingdom of heaven doesn’t follow the train of thought.
It doesnt sound like Him. He could have said. “ I am the rock on which I will build my church” in the same manner how he said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.”
Sure. Some Church fathers agree with you & many Catholics. But the Protestant does have a Patristic argument from Augustine and also Chrysostom’s interpretation of the text too. So, a good way to approach Peter, the name change, and special status is ask where else does it occur? In John’s gospel. Jesus reverts back to the name Simon, why? What’s the significance?
This is understood in two different senses.
Peter is the rock from the institutional or organizational point of view of the Church.
Christ is the rock from the foundational , inceptional or seed point of view.
These are not in comflict with each other, but in two different perspectives, consistent, which spring from the two natures of Christ.
From another point of view or analogy , if Christ is the sperm,Peter is the egg.
You seem to think that I think they are conflict with one another and want to argue with me—that’s not the point ⬆️. As a Catholic, I say Peter is the rock.
That being said your argument is really with Augustine—he frames it as an either/or. If you’ve read my article, I’m looking at it as a both/and with a focus more on ancillary points.
The point is you can explain the significance of the name change using John’s gospel & focusing on the responsibility of the keys and the munus with the Protestant objection.
To your point, when evangelizing, the Protestant will never concede that point.
Did you read the analogy?
Are you purposely being pedantic with your question?
I think that goes both ways.
That is point of contention between the Protestants and Catholics. I am cradle Catholic by the way.