JESUS ALONE IS THE ROCK

What is a rock?

This is the solid mineral material forming part of the surface of the earth and other similar planets, exposed on the surface or underlying the soil or oceans.

 Characteristics of rocks

• Hardness (is a measure of the mineral's resistance to being scratched)

• Luster (some minerals are shiny and some are dull, luster means metallic  or non metallic)

• Streak (Streak refers to the color powder that the mineral leaves after it scratches it)

• Cleavage and fracture (Cleavage is a way the mineral breaks and fracture is a breakage is rough and has jagged edges)

Jesus used the example of a rock because of its characteristics (Matthew 16:14-19). He (Jesus) was being metaphoric. For the rock is symbolic of something that can last for ages and ages if to say. 

Prior to this encounter, Peter was called Simon. But after this encounter, Jesus gave him (Simon) the name Peter. This name Peter means a small rock. Yet the person of Simon, or Peter for that matter, is not the rock being spoken of here.

The Church whose head is Jesus the Christ can't be founded on a vulnerable human being whose preferences and priorities keep changing every micro second. Mere men are always easily manipulated into the wrong way. It is unique only to God not to change and not to be manipulated (Malachi 3:6), (Hebrews 13:8). The Church therefore is built upon God alone. Only the nature of God has the required and fitting components to uphold it (the Church) firmly and for eternity (ages).

But then, what did Jesus mean when He said; "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it"? (Matthew 16:18). Was it to mean the person of Peter or the content of the confession?

When Peter gave the perfect answer, Jesus made this reply: 'Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven" (Matthew 16:17). Meaning it was not a personal confession. Rather the confession was not of the person of Peter.

For if to ask, does a speaker speak by itself? Rather, is it of itself to say whatever? What tool is a speaker? Is it a transit tool or what is it? Was Peter the master of it or a tool?

He (Peter), (by expression) did not understand what he had confessed until when he was filled with the Holy Spirit at the day of Pentecost. At that moment, Peter could have never been in position to understand this. And at whatever point it could be or was, he could have understood nothing if it were not for the Spirit of God.

So, when Jesus said: "you are the rock and upon this rock...", it was not with the intent to glorify the person of Peter. But Jesus made an expression that Peter had confessed the absolute truth. And that truth was not of Peter but of the Spirit of God. It is the Spirit of God which makes us understand and do the things of God (Philippians 2:13).

We all know how God made the donkey talk the language of humans (Numbers 22:28). The donkey did not speak by itself, though, but by the command of God. Peter spoke by the revelation and command of the Father. Thus Jesus (the Son) glorified the Father.

To expound more on this, let us consider why Jesus rebuked Peter for trying to deny the fore narration of His (Jesus') Crucifixion to the disciples (Matthew 16:23). Jesus called Peter Satan. Is it that Peter (the rock upon which the Church would be built) had turned into Peter the Satan? Would the Church be built on Peter the Satan as the foundation? Was it to mean Peter was Satan? The answer to all these questions is "No not". 

Yet this is a good example of how the same Peter could go either way (just like any human would). If he had made the prior statement of Jesus being the Son of God with intent, he wouldn't then have gone on to make the mistake of ignorantly denying Jesus' fore narration of His (Jesus') Crucifixion. All this is clear manifestation of how Peter was very ordinary in everything. He (Peter) only came to understand things better when the Spirit of God descended on him.

For Peter had perceived everything literally, yet Jesus was establishing a Kingdom which is not of this world. The Kingdom of God is not here or there, but it is in our hearts (Luke 17:20-21), (John 18:36). For if you believe in your heart and confess with your mouth that Jesus is the Son of the living God, that is the foundation upon which God's Kingdom is built. Thus to say, the foundation of the Church is not a person, but faith in the (Son of God) is the foundation of the Church.

To further demonstrate Peter's vulnerabilities as a human person, he, despite having been with and shared with Jesus so much, he went on to deny Him three times (Luke 22:54-62). Peter had gone back fishing after the Crucifixion of Jesus (John 21:3).

What then did Jesus mean by referring to Peter as the rock upon which He would build the Church that would never be shaken by the gates of hell? Just like we have seen above, this could have never been to mean the person of Peter. But the question is; what else could it have been? What odes it mean that Peter gave this answer; "...Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God"? (Matthew 16:16).

Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God. He was, He is, and He will always be. For before anything else ever was, Jesus was (John 1:1-4, 8:58). For scripture tells us nothing would have ever been if it were not for Jesus. And it is upon this fact that everything He did made absolute meaning. 

Jesus is the truth (John 14:6). Everybody else failed, yet Jesus alone overcame all. Thus then, Jesus is the rock being spoken of here, and Him being the rock of our faith, it makes it directly true that when we believe on and in Him, then we become the little rocks carrying on propagating the Kingdom of God. 

And upon this, together with the big rock who is Jesus the Christ and the Son of the living God, we build the Kingdom of heaven. That is that if one is a rock, so he is because he is an off-cut of the big rock who only is Jesus.

Yet again, one of the characteristics of rocks is that they are hard, and they can last for ages and ages. Does this character literally apply to Peter? Yet Peter's faith in Christ lives on in us. Thus then, it is not about Peter literally, but it is about his faith in Christ. 

And so then, if there is to be a heir of Christ (as is claimed by the Roman Catholic Church), it is not Peter the person. Everyone who believes Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God is the heir of Christ. And upon this, if to be, we who do believe Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God are all popes.

The doctrine that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of the living God is the foundation of the Church and that is the absolute truth. Peter was commended for having had this revelation. But to claim it is upon the person of Peter the Church is built is to credit him for more than he can afford or handle. 

 

The Roman Catholic Church desperately looked for scripture which seems to them to support their ideology of the papacy. For the papacy and many of the Catholic teachings are not founded in the basic Biblical scripture.

Is this to weigh down the person of Peter? No not. But neither should we weigh him more than he is. Neither does he claim what is said of him by the Roman Catholic Church. 

We all realize that Peter's character and teachings do not at all rhyme with the practices and teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. Yet Peter was a great man of God who made immeasurable contributions to the body of Christ. It is about what we say, believe and practice; not what people say of us.