Upon This Rock I Will Build: What Rock Did Jesus Mean?
In Matthew 16, Jesus poses a profound question to His disciples: “Who do you say that I am?” After Peter’s bold confession—“You are the Christ, the Son of the living God”—Jesus responds with these words:
“Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 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.” (Matthew 16:17-18)
This statement raises a crucial question that continues to divide Christian traditions: What exactly is the “rock” upon which Christ builds His church? The answer profoundly shapes our understanding of church authority, leadership, and foundation. The Reformed tradition offers a clear and biblically grounded perspective on this pivotal text.
THE IMMEDIATE CONTEXT: PETER’S CONFESSION
To understand Jesus’ words, we must first examine their immediate context. Peter had just made an extraordinary confession—not derived from human wisdom but divinely revealed: Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of the living God. The confession represents the fundamental truth upon which the Christian faith stands.
Jesus then uses a play on words that works in both Aramaic (the language likely spoken) and Greek (the language in which Matthew wrote). He says to Simon, “You are Peter (Petros),” using a masculine noun meaning “stone” or “rock fragment,” and then states “on this rock (petra)”—using a feminine noun typically referring to a massive bedrock formation—“I will build my church.”
THE REFORMED UNDERSTANDING: THE ROCK IS THE CONFESSION
The Reformed tradition has consistently held the “rock” Jesus refers to is not Peter himself, but rather the truth Peter confessed—that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. This interpretation aligns with the broader biblical witness about the church’s foundation.
John Calvin, the influential Reformed theologian, wrote: “The statement amounts to this, that the church was to be built solely on the Son of God, and that Peter and the other prophets and apostles had no other office than to begin the building from this foundation.”
This understanding preserves several important biblical principles:
- Christ alone is the true foundation of the church (1 Corinthians 3:11: “For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ”).
- The apostles collectively (not Peter alone) form the foundation stones upon which the church is built (Ephesians 2:20: “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone”).
- The truth of who Jesus is remains central to the Christian faith and the church’s identity.
BIBLICAL SUPPORT FOR THE REFORMED POSITION
Throughout Scripture, God and Christ are consistently depicted as the Rock upon which God’s people depend:
- Deuteronomy 32:4 identifies God as “the Rock, his work is perfect”
- Psalm 18:2 declares, “The LORD is my rock and my fortress”
- Isaiah 28:16 prophesies: “Behold, I am the one who has laid as a foundation in Zion, a stone, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone, of a sure foundation”
- 1 Peter 2:6-8 applies Isaiah’s cornerstone prophecy directly to Christ
Moreover, Peter himself—the supposed “rock” in some interpretations—redirects attention away from himself and toward Christ in his own writings. In 1 Peter 2:4-8, he describes Christ as the “living stone” and “cornerstone” while believers are merely “living stones” being built into a spiritual house.
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE REFORMED VIEW
While some early church fathers understood the “rock” as referring to Peter personally, many others—including Augustine—understood it as referring to Christ or to Peter’s confession of faith. Augustine wrote: “On this rock, therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed, I will build my Church. For the Rock was Christ; and on this foundation was Peter himself built.”
The Reformed view developed in the context of recovering biblical authority during the Protestant Reformation. Reformers encountered a medieval church that had increasingly centred authority in the person of the Pope, based partly on this passage. Their return to Scripture led them to understand the “rock” as the confession of Christ rather than the person of Peter.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
This understanding has several important implications:
- Christ’s Headship: The church has one head—Christ himself—not a human successor to Peter.
- Truth as Foundational: The church stands or falls on the truth of who Jesus is. When this confession is abandoned, the true church is no longer present.
- Shared Authority: Church authority is properly dispersed among elders who hold to apostolic teaching, not concentrated in a single office.
- Gospel Centrality: The gospel message about Jesus—not institutional structures—constitutes the heart of the church’s identity and mission.
CONCLUSION: UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BUILD
When Jesus said, “on this rock I will build my church,” He was establishing the foundational truth of His identity as the cornerstone of His church. Peter’s confession—that Jesus is “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—represents the essential truth upon which the church stands. This truth is the rock-solid foundation that has sustained the church through centuries of challenges, and it alone will ensure “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
The church does not rest on human leadership, however gifted or godly, but on the unchanging truth of who Jesus is—the Christ, the Son of the living God. This understanding keeps our focus where it belongs: on Christ Himself as the church’s true foundation, head, and king.
UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BUILD: RELATED FAQs
Doesn’t the Catholic interpretation make more sense given the wordplay between “Peter” and “rock”? While the wordplay is indeed present, the distinction between “Petros” (Peter) and “petra” (rock) is significant. If Jesus meant to build the church on Peter personally, the simpler construction would have been “You are Peter, and upon you I will build my church.” Instead, Jesus shifts terms, suggesting a distinction between Peter and the “rock” foundation.
The Reformed view makes better sense of the full context—Jesus had just asked who people said He was, then who the disciples said He was. Peter’s confession becomes the central revelation moment, with Jesus declaring this truth—not Peter himself—as the foundation. This interpretation also harmonises with the broader biblical testimony that identifies Christ as the cornerstone and foundation.
- What about the “keys of the kingdom” given to Peter in the next verse? In Matthew 16:19, Jesus does tell Peter, “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,” which some interpret as establishing Peter’s supreme authority. However, these “keys” represent the authority to proclaim the gospel message that opens and closes the kingdom to people. The Reformed view understands this authority was later extended to all the apostles (John 20:23) and ultimately to the church as a whole. In Matthew 18:18, Jesus gives the same binding and loosing authority to all the disciples.
- What do archaeological discoveries at Caesarea Philippi suggest about the “rock” Jesus referenced? Caesarea Philippi, where this conversation took place, was built upon a massive rock cliff with a cave known as the “Gates of Hades.” This location featured a temple to the Greek god Pan and was associated with pagan worship. When Jesus spoke of building His church upon “this rock” with the “gates of Hades” not prevailing against it, He may have been using the dramatic physical setting as a visual aid.
How do we explain the fact that some early church fathers seemed to support Peter as the rock? It’s true some early church fathers interpreted the rock as referring to Peter. However, many others, including Augustine, Cyril of Alexandria, and Chrysostom, identified the rock as either Christ Himself or Peter’s confession of faith. The Reformed view better accounts for this diversity of interpretation in the early church and aligns with how the New Testament itself develops ecclesiology. The early church functioned with shared leadership among elders and apostles, not with Peter as a supreme head. Acts 15, for instance, shows James, not Peter, pronouncing the final decision at the Jerusalem Council.
- Why does Jesus single out Peter if He’s referring to the confession and not to Peter himself? Jesus singles out Peter because Peter was the one who made the pivotal confession. Jesus is acknowledging Peter’s role in articulating the foundational truth, while simultaneously shifting focus from Peter to the confession itself. Despite this momentary spotlight on Peter, the New Testament never depicts the early church as functioning with Peter as its supreme head. While Peter was certainly prominent, Paul could oppose him “to his face” (Galatians 2:11), and James could issue decisive judgements (Acts 15).
- Does the Eastern Orthodox interpretation offer a middle ground between Catholic and Protestant views? Eastern Orthodoxy generally understands the “rock” as referring to Peter’s confession of faith, similar to the Reformed view. However, they differ in how they understand apostolic succession and church authority. The Reformed position makes better sense of the biblical witness because it maintains focus on the truth content of Peter’s confession while avoiding the problems associated with institutionalizing authority in a succession of human leaders. The Reformed view better preserves the New Testament’s emphasis on the church as built on Christ and His truth, with leadership exercised collegially by elders rather than through a hierarchy of successors.
If Peter isn’t the rock, why does Jesus rename him from Simon to Peter (meaning “rock”)? Jesus indeed gives Simon the nickname “Peter” (rock), which suggests a special role for him. However, this doesn’t necessarily mean Peter himself is the foundation of the church. Rather, it identifies Peter as the first “living stone” (a term Peter himself uses in 1 Peter 2:5) in the church Jesus would build. The Reformed view better accounts for this distinction by recognising Peter’s prominence as the first confessor and apostolic leader without making him the church’s foundation.
UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BUILD: OUR RELATED POSTS
Editor’s Pick
The Sun’s Age: Is It Really A Showstopper for A Young Earth?
When discussing creation and the age of the earth, sceptics often point to the sun as definitive evidence against the [...]
Is the Birth Canal Poorly Designed? Creationist Perspectives
The human birth canal is a frequent example cited by evolutionists as evidence against intelligent design. They argue the narrow [...]
Foetal Consciousness: How New Insights Strengthen Pro-Life Position
Science and faith have often been portrayed as adversaries, but when it comes to understanding the miracle of life, they [...]
Son of David: How Scripture Confirms Jesus’ Royal Lineage
For centuries, Jewish prophecy pointed to a coming Messiah who would fulfil specific ancestral requirements. Chief among these was the [...]
To the Jew First: Why Must Missions Start With Israel?
When Paul declares in Romans 1:16, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of [...]
When God Manifests in Fire: What Does the Symbolism Mean?
Throughout Scripture, God frequently reveals Himself to His people through the powerful symbol of fire. From the burning bush to [...]
The Human Knee: Where Evolution’s Kneejerk Explanations Fail
Walk, run, jump, climb, kneel, squat—all these movements depend on a remarkable piece of biological engineering: the human knee. As [...]
The Big Hoax: Turns Out ‘Junk’ DNA Isn’t Junk After All
For decades, evolutionary scientists dismissed vast stretches of our DNA as useless “junk”—leftover evolutionary baggage with no purpose. This concept [...]
Can We Trust John’s Gospel? Answering Your Toughest Challenges
John’s Gospel is distinct among the four biblical accounts of Jesus’ life. With its profound theological language, extended discourses, and [...]
Resurrection Hope: Why Joseph Requested Burial in Canaan
In the closing scenes of Genesis, we find a remarkable request. Joseph—vizier of Egypt, saviour of his family, reconciler of [...]