Want to dig deeper into what the Bible really says about authority, leadership, and the church? Keep reading. We’ll walk through more passages and history to give you the clarity you need.
Matthew 16:18 is often cited as a key verse supporting apostolic succession, especially the idea that Peter was the first pope and that his authority was passed down through generations of church leaders. But when you examine the verse closely—along with the surrounding context and the rest of the New Testament—it doesn’t actually support that claim. The verse highlights Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Messiah, not a promise of a continuing office. Nowhere does Jesus mention successors or a future papal lineage.
The Reformers and many Bible scholars argue that the church is built on the truth of who Jesus is, not on any human leader. Authority in the early church was shared among elders and rooted in Scripture, not in institutional hierarchy. If you’re looking for a biblical view of leadership and authority, it’s centered on faithfulness to Christ and His Word—not a chain of command. Keep reading for a deeper dive into how this shapes our understanding of church leadership today.
If you’ve ever heard arguments about church authority, you’ve probably come across the idea of apostolic succession. It’s the belief that church leaders today trace their authority directly back to the apostles—especially Peter. The key verse often used to support this claim is Matthew 16:18, where Jesus says to Peter:
“And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.”
This verse has become central in the debate over apostolic succession. But does it really support the idea that authority was handed down from Peter to future church leaders like the popes? Or is something else going on in this passage?
Let’s walk through it together. We’ll look at what apostolic succession means, how Matthew 16:18 has been interpreted, and what the Bible and church history actually show.
What Is Apostolic Succession?
At its core, apostolic succession is the belief that:
- Jesus gave authority to the apostles, especially Peter.
- That authority was passed down through generations of bishops.
- Today’s church leaders (especially in the Catholic, Orthodox, and some Anglican traditions) hold legitimate authority because of this unbroken chain.
In this view, Peter is seen as the first bishop of Rome—the first pope—and every pope since is considered his successor.
But not all Christians agree with this. Many Protestants reject the idea that authority comes through a human chain of succession. Instead, they believe the authority of the church comes from Scripture and the Holy Spirit, not an institutional lineage.
So the real question is this: Does Matthew 16:18 actually teach apostolic succession?
What Does Matthew 16:18 Really Say?
Let’s look at the full context. In Matthew 16:16, Peter makes a bold confession:
“You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”
Then Jesus replies in verses 17–18:
“Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.”
The debate centers on the phrase: “on this rock I will build my church.”
There Are Three Main Views on What “This Rock” Means:
- Peter Himself
- This is the Catholic view. They argue Jesus is making a wordplay between Petros (Peter) and petra (rock), making Peter the foundational rock of the church.
- This interpretation supports the idea that Peter held unique authority, passed on to his successors (the popes).
- Peter’s Confession
- This is the most common Protestant view. Jesus isn’t pointing to Peter as a person, but to the truth he just confessed: “You are the Messiah.”
- In this view, the church is built on the identity of Jesus, not on a man.
- Christ as the Rock
- Another historic Protestant view is that Jesus is referring to Himself, as elsewhere in Scripture He’s called the cornerstone (Ephesians 2:20, 1 Corinthians 10:4).
- This interpretation sees Jesus as the foundation, with Peter simply playing a supporting role.
So the big question is—which of these is most faithful to the text and the broader message of Scripture?
Problems with Using Matthew 16:18 to Prove Apostolic Succession
Even if we accept that Peter plays a foundational role, there are several issues with using this verse to justify the modern concept of apostolic succession:
1. There’s No Mention of Succession in the Passage
- Jesus says He will build His church.
- He doesn’t say Peter’s successors will have his authority.
- There’s nothing in the immediate context about an office being passed down.
2. The New Testament Doesn’t Emphasize Peter’s Ongoing Authority
- Yes, Peter is a key figure in Acts. But so is Paul. So is James.
- In fact, in Acts 15 (the Jerusalem Council), James, not Peter, gives the final word (Acts 15:19).
- Galatians 2:11–14 even shows Paul publicly correcting Peter. That would be odd if Peter were the supreme authority.
3. Authority in the Early Church Was Shared
- The New Testament shows multiple elders or overseers in each church (Titus 1:5, Acts 14:23).
- Leadership was local and plural, not centralized in a single person.
4. Scripture Emphasizes Faithfulness, Not Lineage
- 2 Timothy 2:2 talks about passing on truth, not authority.
- The emphasis is always on teaching, sound doctrine, and character—not a physical line of succession.
What About the Keys to the Kingdom?
Some might point to Matthew 16:19, where Jesus says:
“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven…”
Yes, Jesus gives Peter the keys. But here’s the thing: those same keys are later given to the other disciples.
In Matthew 18:18, Jesus says to all the apostles:
“Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven…”
And in John 20:23, Jesus gives the authority to forgive sins to all the disciples.
So the “keys” weren’t exclusive to Peter. The whole church shared in that authority.
What Did the Early Church Believe?
It’s worth noting that early church history doesn’t show a clear or immediate belief in papal succession like we see later in Catholic doctrine.
- Irenaeus (2nd century) talks about apostolic teaching, but the focus is on preserving the message—not a power structure.
- Tertullian and Cyprian mention church order, but still recognize authority as rooted in Scripture and faithful teaching.
The strong claims about Peter and the papacy come later, especially as the Roman bishop gained political influence.
So, Does Matthew 16:18 Support Apostolic Succession?
In short: No, it doesn’t—at least not the way it’s often claimed.
Here’s why:
- The verse affirms Peter’s role, but not a line of successors.
- The focus is on the truth Peter spoke—that Jesus is the Christ.
- The rest of the New Testament doesn’t treat Peter as a pope.
- Authority in the church is consistently tied to faith, teaching, and Scripture—not to an unbroken line of bishops.
Final Thoughts
If you’re wondering where church authority really comes from, the Bible points to Jesus as the head of the church (Ephesians 5:23), and the foundation being the apostles and prophets, with Christ Himself as the cornerstone (Ephesians 2:20).
The early church wasn’t about titles and offices—it was about faithfulness to the gospel, the authority of God’s Word, and the leading of the Holy Spirit.
So don’t get caught up in lineage. Focus on truth.
You said:
Write 10 FAQs for the post and the SEO meta description at the end.
ChatGPT said:
10 FAQs About the Apostolic Succession Debate and Matthew 16:18
- What is apostolic succession?
Apostolic succession is the belief that church authority has been passed down in an unbroken line from the apostles—especially Peter—to modern-day church leaders, like bishops or popes. - Does Matthew 16:18 support apostolic succession?
No, Matthew 16:18 doesn’t mention succession. It affirms Peter’s role in confessing Jesus as the Christ but doesn’t establish a continuing line of authority through successors. - What did Jesus mean by “on this rock I will build my church”?
There are three main interpretations: the rock is Peter, the rock is Peter’s confession of faith, or the rock is Christ Himself. The Reformation favored the second and third views. - Did Jesus give unique authority to Peter?
Jesus gave Peter a significant role, but the same authority (like the “keys”) was later extended to all the apostles (Matthew 18:18, John 20:23). - Is there biblical evidence for a papal office?
No, the New Testament never mentions a pope or a centralized office of authority passed down from Peter. Leadership was plural and shared among elders. - Who was the leader of the early church—Peter or someone else?
Peter played a key role, but James appears to lead the Jerusalem church (Acts 15). Paul also had authority and even corrected Peter publicly (Galatians 2:11–14). - How did early Christians view church authority?
Early Christians focused on the apostles’ teaching, Scripture, and faithful doctrine—not a formal office passed down through a line of bishops. - What does “the keys of the kingdom” mean?
It refers to the authority to bind and loose—interpreted as teaching and discipline. This authority was shared by all the apostles, not limited to Peter. - What role does Scripture play in church authority?
According to the Reformers and many modern Protestants, Scripture alone (sola scriptura) is the final authority for the church—not tradition or succession. - Why does this debate matter today?
It shapes how we understand who has authority in the church. If apostolic succession isn’t biblical, then authority comes from Scripture and faithfulness to Christ—not church hierarchy.
