Which Church did Jesus Christ found?
A concerned Roman Catholic wrote to me, "...we cannot only look at the Bible without looking at the tradition of the Church. It says in scripture (1 Thess 2:15) "Stand firm in the teachings passed on to you by WORD and in letters." So we must also look at the teaching of the Catholic church which Jesus began. In the purity of the faith, is there any other christian church, group or otherwise that has had the same teachings since the time of Jesus? The Traditions (foundational teachings of the church) of the Catholic Church have been the same since the days of the apostles and nothing has been changed since then. The traditions (small t - or in other words the way things are done) have changed and can continue to change (married priesthood, the language the Holy Mass is celebrated in, etc.)." And later he writes: "If Peter is not the Rock than why did Jesus call him such, and then say on this rock I will build my church?"
I believe it is really important to address these issues, because the question of religious authority is fundamentally important. Who or what truly speaks for Christ? Many claim to represent Christ today, and the contradictory claims have caused a great deal of confusion in the world.
The Roman Catholic church does not claim to be merely one valid expression of the Church which Christ founded. It claims to be the church which Christ founded. It claims that it has faithfully preserved the Traditions given to us by Christ and the apostles, which, although not written in the Scriptures of the New Testament, have equally binding authority upon all who wish to enjoy God's favor.
The biblical foundation for these ideas is derived from the Roman Catholic understanding of Matthew 16:16-19.
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." 17 And Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal [this] to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it. 19 "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (NASB).
Roman Catholics understand this as follows: When Jesus said, "this rock" he meant Peter. Therefore Peter is the rock upon which the true church of Christ is built. Peter was to receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven, giving him the authority to make authoritative decrees concerning doctrinal truth, tradition, practice, and to exclude or include people from the Kingdom of Heaven. Peter was therefore the first pope and as bishop of Rome he passed these keys onto a successor, Linus (the second pope). The keys were passed in this way from pope to pope and the full authority of Christ Himself has always been invested in the pope. It follows therefore that anyone not submitting to the pope is in rebellion against God.
Roman Catholics are taught that the Catholic church headquartered at the Vatican in Rome is the only true church. Many believe that salvation is only to be found in the Catholic church. In the Roman Catholic worldview, the Bible derives its authority from the Church, not the other way around. The Bible is seen as just another Tradition of the church - one that was written down. From this viewpoint, any attempt to use the Bible to show the errors of Catholic tradition is a misuse of the Bible - because it is only really the official living teaching organ of the Church which correctly interprets the true meaning of the Bible.
Roman Catholics argue on the basis of history and Christ's words that the Catholic Church must be the church of which Jesus spoke, since he promised that "the gates of hell would not prevail against (or overpower) it". It is clear enough that the view of the Reformers was not the general view of the church during the dark and middle ages. This is seen as proof enough that Jesus was in favor of the views of the Church at this time. To deny this would be to imply that somehow the gates of hell did prevail against the church, which would be a contradiction of Jesus' own words on the subject.
I invite any Roman Catholics who feel I have misrepresented the Catholic viewpoint in the above paragraphs to e-mail me on this, because it would not be fair on my part to attack a "straw-man" - a misrepresentation of the official Roman Catholic position.
The devil knows that a big lie can sometimes be far more convincing than a small one. Its my conviction that the above doctrine is a Big Lie, and is responsible indirectly for the eternal damnation of millions of souls. This teaching has done more to undermine the authority of the Holy Scriptures than any other I know of. The practical result is that even now the majority of Roman Catholics never bother to read their Bibles. This is because they feel that all they'll ever need to know and receive from God will come through the teaching and ministry of their church, and not through personal study and consideration of the Scriptures. Let's now get down to the issues.
What is the True Identity of the Rock upon which the church is built?
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." 17 And Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal [this] to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 "And I also say to you that you are Peter [Gk: petros - a boulder or stone], and upon this rock [Gk: petra - a large mass of rock] I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it. 19 "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (NASB).
I have heard of two major alternatives to the Roman Catholic identification of the Rock upon which Jesus would build his church. One is that Peter's confession of Christ is the rock upon which the church is built. That is to say, by "this rock" Jesus meant the foundational revelation that Peter was the first man to confess, that "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God." The second alternative is that the Rock was Jesus himself, while Peter was the first stone to be built upon the rock of Christ in the church which Christ Himself is buliding. This latter interpretation makes more sense to me, because it is in perfect harmony with the tradition which the Scripture itself establishes concerning the spiritual meaning of the word "Rock".
Allow Scripture to interpret Scripture
An important principle in evangelical thinking is to allow Scripture to interpret Scripture. Since "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." it folows that every interpretation of Scripture should be in harmony with the rest of Scripture. The Scriptures have a lot to say about who the rock is. For example:
1 Corinthians 10:4 "and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ".
Romans 9:33 just as it is written, "Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense, And he who believes in Him will not be disappointed."
Habakkuk 1:12 Art Thou not from everlasting, O Lord, my God, my Holy One? We will not die. Thou, O Lord, hast appointed them to judge; And Thou, O Rock , hast established them to correct.
Isaiah 26:4 "Trust in the Lord forever, For in God the Lord, [we have] an everlasting Rock .
Psalm 144:1 (of David.) Blessed be the Lord, my rock , Who trains my hands for war, [And] my fingers for battle;
Psalm 94:22 But the Lord has been my stronghold, And my God the rock of my refuge.
Not only is the Lord God Himself consistently portrayed as the
rock throu
Get your free registration and log in to view entire article


That one returning from the dead makes all the difference
I believe the Bible is inspired by God, not because the Bible tells me so, but because of Jesus Christ and his resurrection from the dead.
The Qu'ran claims to be from God also. A book claiming that it is from God does not make it so.
Once you grant that Jesus rose from the dead, then it is HIS attitude towards Scripture which counts the most. He said "and the Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10).
To disregard the Scripture then is to disregard the authority of the One who lived, died and rose again in an utterly amazing way, as the Old testament Scriptures predicted (Ps 16:11).
For evidence on the resurrection, you can search this site. It is there. Use the search button on the top left.
Roots of Roman Catholic Authority
This quote "All Scripture is inspired by God...." is pervasive in all Judeo-Christian thinking. What I really would like to know is by what authority is the claim made that all scripture is inspired by God? When you get right down to it it is an act of faith that those who wrote the various entries in the Bible were being truthful when they said the were inspired by God. In addition it is a greater leap of faith to believe that they were incapable of misrepresenting their motivation. Then there are the various editorial decisions that sorted out certain scriptures because they were purported to be false. There again it is an act of faith that those editors were of virtuous motivations and beyond fallibility. Don't get me wrong I am not attacking the Bible in any way shape or form, all I am claiming is that it is only with belief that we hold the Bible to be divinely inspired. It is faith pure and simple for if it were not it would be called fact and so far there has only been one reported returning from the dead.
Post new comment