Catholicism stands or falls on whether Peter was or was not the first Pope.  If he was, that must have been God’s plan for the church, and saying that all the Popes that followed him were his predecessors is a legitimate claim.  However, if it can be proved that Peter was not the first Pope, Catholicism crumbles.

Why do Catholics believe that Peter was the first Pope?  They believe that Matthew 16:18  teaches it is the case.  The problem for them is that the passage does not say that Peter was the first Pope.  What does it say?  Here it is—

Matthew 16:18 (ESV)
¹⁸ And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Not only does this verse not say that Peter was the first Pope, but Catholics cannot even prove that he was the “rock” upon which Jesus said He would build His church, something that is essential in proving that Peter was the first Pope.  There is nothing in the verse that tells us that Jesus was referring to Peter by the term “rock,” but there is an indication that he was not.  The name Peter comes from the Greek word Petros which is masculine in gender and means, “a piece of rock.”  The word that Jesus used for “rock” was Petra which is feminine in gender and means, “ a mass of rock”.  It appears that Jesus was not referring to Peter by the term “rock” when you consider the word that He used.  To what, then, was He referring? It has been suggested, and I would concur, that the “rock” was the confession that Peter made when Jesus asked him, “Who do you say that I am?”  Peter said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”  Without making that confession, one cannot be added to the church (Romans 10:9-10).  The church would be built upon Jesus and the truth that He is God’s only begotten Son.

Just from a practical standpoint, if Jesus was setting Peter up as the foundation of the church in Matthew 16:18, would He not have been more direct and straightforward about it?  He could have simply said, “You are Peter, and on you, I will build my church.”  That would have left the situation settled for all generations of Christians to come, but He did not say that.  Maybe because Peter is not the rock under consideration.

Catholicism teaches that Peter was made supreme head of the church on earth.  Where is the scripture for that?  Matthew 16:18 does not say that.  Was Peter ever called the head of the church on earth?  The answer is no!  The only mention of anyone being head over the church are passages referring to Christ (Ephesians 1:22-23; 5:23; Colossians 1:18).  He is the only head the church has ever had.  The church belongs to Him because He purchased it with His own blood (Acts 20:28).  He is the only one who can set forth legislation regarding the church, and all the legislation He has set forth is in the Word of God.  No man, the Pope or otherwise, has the authority to make new laws or override the laws that are found in the New Testament.  

The final thing that Catholics teach and believe concerning Peter being the first Pope is that he had authority over the other apostles.  Is this conclusion borne out by the scriptures?  No!  All the apostles were equal in authority.  If Peter was the head of the rest of them, and he had the final word on all matters, why did the other apostles contend with him after he converted the household of Cornelius (Acts 11:1-4)?  If Peter was the chief apostle, why did Paul and Barnabas meet with the apostles in Jerusalem to settle the question of Gentiles being circumcised?  Why didn’t Peter, as the Pope, just set forth the law?  If Peter was the head apostle, why did Paul say that he was not behind any of the apostles in 2 Corinthians 11:5?  The truth is Jesus delegated equal authority to all the apostles.  All their teachings were binding (Matthew 18:18).  If one rejected the words of any of the apostles, they stood condemned (Luke 10:16).  All the apostles were ambassadors of Christ, not just Peter.

The apostles had no successors for no one today fits the qualifications of an apostle.  To be an apostle one must be an eyewitness to the resurrection of Christ, and not one of the Popes fills that qualification.  Based on these facts, we know that Peter was not the first Pope.  Catholics should consider these truths carefully and leave their traditions behind.  They can quote Mattew 16:18 all they want, but it does not say what they need it to say.

As you wind down for the night, think about these things.