I know Jesus meant He is the rock and the foundation and the cornerstone etc etc...
But why do Catholics insist Jesus was speaking of Peter (É) my question mark looks like an E,sorry.
the replies so far go like this- The RCC has both scripture and tradition to back the two thousand year interpretation over the five hundred year interpretation. (RC vs. Protestant)
And they also say that Jesus teaching that a building built on a strong foundation stands firms while that built on sandy disintegrates? How much disintegration-splintering has come about since the five hundred year interpretation was proposed?
I told them that The RC church would not exist if they didn't misinterpret the verse, and they said- The first few centuries who called Peter the first Pope, Linus the 2nd Pope, Anacletus the 3rd Pope, Clement the 4th Pope, and Evaristus the 5th Pope were wrong? That when the Early Church Fathers (those who were taught by the Apostles and the Apostles' successors) wrote of Peter being the first Pope, they were wrong? So, you're going to claim that history is wrong, when those involved in that history were taught by those who knew the Apostles but that you, over 2,000 years after the fact, are right?
Thanks, but I'll go with history. They knew better how to translate verses of a Bible that wasn't even put together until the 4th century by whom? The Catholic Church.
What can I say to this- look- I know we do not want to draw this out forever- but i could not search and find any posts specifically on Peter and the RCC. I could use some very good replies please- thanks.