Jesus and me (Part 4)

"Upon this rock"

Last time I promised to describe the “biblical justifications” for the Church’s claim to have been founded by Jesus Christ. That I will do here, but first I need to set the scene.

In late-2004 I created a web site called www.emptychurch.org. It was aimed at Roman Catholics who, despite feeling disillusioned by the state of their Church, retained their faith in God. Although emptychurch.org is now long gone, it can still be accessed online today.¹

While I wrote most of the site’s content, my son Damian made several contributions, e.g. an article entitled ‘Upon This Rock’, and a poem (‘The Intruder’). At the time Damian was a student at the School of Religions and Theology in Trinity College Dublin (TCD).² He completed his studies there in 2007.

In ‘Upon This Rock’, Damian addressed the best-known of the “biblical justifications”. This has to do with Peter the fisherman, usually portrayed in the New Testament as a close confidante of Jesus Christ.

“And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.”³

What follows is a lengthy extract from ‘Upon This Rock’.⁴

Glendalough Cathedral (Image from emptychurch.org)

It is stated elsewhere on this website that nothing Jesus said in the New Testament can be attributed to a desire to start a new religion (Belief in God).⁵ The above quotation is an obvious exception. Jesus had just asked his disciples who they thought he was. Simon Peter answered him by saying, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God”. Apparently, as a result of this confession of faith, Jesus selected Peter to head his new church. This, for many, was the founding moment of Christianity. Jesus, aware of his fate, chose Peter as his successor and entrusted to him the leadership of the new religion, promising him that it would never succumb to the “powers of death”.

The problem with this quotation, however, is that it does not sit easily with what is said about Peter elsewhere in the Gospels. For example, in the very next paragraph after the one quoted above, Peter is shown in a much more negative light.⁶ If we are to believe that this chapter is as the original author intended it, then in the space of a few short lines Peter goes from being entrusted with the leadership of the new church to being referred to as “Satan” by Jesus. Immediately after having described his new church and chosen Peter as his successor, Jesus tells his disciples that he is to be crucified and raised again.⁷ Peter rebukes Jesus, saying, “God forbid, Lord! This shall never happen to you”. Jesus replies in the harshest possible terms: “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me; for you are not on the side of God, but of men”.

Are we really to believe that this is the man to whom Jesus is entrusting the future of his church? In fact, in the Gospels as a whole no other disciple (including Judas) comes in for as much criticism [from Jesus Christ] as Peter. This exchange between Jesus and him is a perfect example. Not only is Peter referred to as Satan but Jesus also calls him a hindrance, or in the Greek a ‘stumbling block’.

Another example is the scene at the Mount of Olives where Jesus singles Peter out for criticism when he finds him sleeping.⁸ And it is Peter who swears on his life that he will never deny Jesus but who shortly afterward does so three times in quick succession.⁹ And again, it is Peter who repeatedly needs to be kept in check by Jesus, when he attacked the soldier at the Mount of Olives¹⁰ and when he refused to have his feet washed by Jesus just before the Last Supper.¹¹

If we return to our original quotation [“the founding moment of Christianity”] we can see that it does not correspond with the other Gospel writers’ portrayal of the same event. In Mark… Peter makes a shorter confession, saying “You are the Christ”.¹² And that is that. There is no mention of a new church or any commissioning of Peter. The incident is portrayed almost identically to Matthew’s account - except for this notable absence. And also, just like in Matthew, the text immediately goes on to describe Jesus’s rebuke of Peter and his reference to him as ‘Satan’.¹³

Likewise in Luke…there is no commissioning of Peter (although there is no reference to him as Satan either).¹⁴ In John there is no exact equivalent but [there is…] a confession of Peter where he says, “we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God”.¹⁵ This confession is far weaker than any of the others. It makes no reference to Jesus being the son of God or that he is the Christ. Furthermore, this appellation, “the Holy One of God” only appears in two other places in the gospels … both times spoken by a demon or unclean spirit.¹⁶

I have, thus far, tried to show that Matt 16:8 stands out from the rest of the gospels. In fact, were it not for this one chapter, none of the accounts of Jesus’ life in the Bible would refer to a ‘church’ and its formation with Peter at its head.

Now, many incidents are referred to in only one of the Gospels. For example, Jesus washes the disciples’ feet only in John. But this is a minor event compared to the formation of Christianity. Surely, this pivotal moment would have been important enough to merit the interest of all four Gospel writers. Why does it stand alone in Matthew? Can it really be maintained that this is a description of the beginning of Christianity?

The passage examined here is not the only “biblical justification” put forward by the Roman Catholic Church (before and after Vatican II) in support of its case that it was founded by Jesus Christ himself. There are others, such as Jesus’ blessing of bread at the Last Supper¹⁷ and his injunction to Peter that he “feed my sheep”.¹⁸ But none is as clear cut as the extract analysed in ‘Upon This Rock’. It places Peter front and centre in leading the new religion following Christ’s death on the cross.

In the meantime it is worthwhile dwelling for a moment on the close association that developed after the crucifixion between Peter and Saul/Paul of Tarsus. (Indeed they share a feast day within the Christian calendar on 29 June each year.) That association is underlined in this extract from a short biographical piece about Peter.

St. Clement of Rome conjoins Peter and Paul as the outstanding heroes of the Faith and probably implies that Peter suffered martyrdom. St. Ignatius uses words which suggest that Peter and Paul were the Apostles of special authority for the Roman Church and St. Irenaeus states definitely that they founded that Church and instituted its episcopal succession.¹⁹

So was either, or both, of these men the true founders of the religion we know today as Christianity? l will take a closer look at Saul/Paul in a future instalment. But first I would like to continue this examination of the enigmatic Peter.

More in Part 5

1. Internet Archive Wayback Machine [https://web.archive.org/web/ 20050214014354/http://emptychurch.org/ index.htm], accessed 8 Jun. 2026.

2. TCD has since rebranded this department as the School of Religion, Theology, and Peace Studies.

3. Matthew, 16:18

4. Although the article is reproduced here as it appeared in emptychurch.org, I have taken the liberty of changing the inline citations to footnotes. This corresponds with the conventions used elsewhere in the ‘J.P. Bruce says Hello!’ publication. I have made a few other additions to aid reader comprehension. These appear either in the text as italics within square brackets, or as extra footnotes at the bottom of the page.

5. Damian refers here to another of his emptychurch.org articles, ‘Belief in God’, specifically this excerpt: “Nothing Jesus said can be interpreted as a desire to start a new church. At the most he can be credited only with the ambition of purifying Judaism.”

6. Matthew, 16:21-3.

7. Although these two very different conversations between Jesus and Peter are juxtaposed in Matthew’s Gospel, they probably happened at different times.

8. Matthew, 26:40. Mark, 14:37.

9. Matthew, 26:69-75. Mark, 14:66-72. Luke, 22:54-62. John, 18:15-27.

10. John, 18:10-11

11. John, 13:8.

12. Mark, 8:29.

13. Mark, 8:32-33.

14. Luke, 9:20.

15. John, 6:68-69.

16. Mark, 1:24. Luke, 4:34.

17. Catechism of Catholic Doctrine (Dublin 1951), p. 81. Catechism of the Catholic Church (Vatican City, 1994), p. 334.

18. Catechism of Catholic Doctrine (Dublin 1951), p. 42. Catechism of the Catholic Church (Vatican City, 1994), p. 142.

19. ‘Peter, St.’, in F. L. Cross & E. L. Livingstone (eds.), The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (2nd ed., Oxford, 1974), p. 1068 (emphasis added).