Thou art the Christ - Matt 16:13-20; Mark 8:27-30; Luke 9:18-21; John 1:42

Jesus takes his disciples to Caesarea Philippi to teach them privately. Many times, the places themselves are just as important in teaching the Master’s lesson as the words he says. The importance of this place is pointed out by the IM by quoting Elder Russell M. Nelson as teaching, “The modern-day scene in Caesarea Philippi is  unique. There is a mountain at the base of which is a mighty rock from which water seems to be flowing. These cascades comprise one of the three major headwaters of the River Jordan, literally the liquid lifeline of this country. As Jesus was preparing to conclude His mortal ministry (His Crucifixion took place six months later), here He trained future leaders of His Church. Could it be that the Savior brought His disciples to this spot to teach the lesson that this majestic mountain symbolized the rock of Christ from whom revelation would flow?- revelation to bring light and life to them, just as that flowing water of the River Jordan nourishes Israel. Just as Moses struck the rock with his staff and water flowed from it, saving the people of Israel from death in the wilderness, the Savior is the rock from which the saving doctrines and ordinances flow, empowering us to lay hold on eternal life.”

Jesus asks his disciples, “Whom do men say that I am?” Mark tells us that they answer, “John the Baptist; but some say, Elias; and others say, that one of the old prophets is risen again.” The people, in guessing who Jesus was, referred to the resurrection, meaning that the Jews at the time were fully aware that there would be a resurrection, so when Jesus is talking about himself being resurrected, this isn’t a new, unheard of doctrine that everyone is unfamiliar with, they know about it. Jesus continues by asking, “But whom say ye that I am?” Matthew tells us that Simon answers, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus responds, “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.” Simon believes that Jesus is the Christ and proclaimed it loudly and without hesitation. JTC describes the process through which Simon gained this testimony, “This was no avowal of mere belief, no expression of a result at which he had arrived by mental process, no solution of a problem laboriously worked out, no verdict based on the weighing of evidence; he spoke in the sure knowledge that knows no question and from which doubt and reservations are as far removed as is the sky from the ground.” Simon gained his testimony the same way that the rest of us do, through the Holy Ghost. He lived his life in such a way that he was able to not only learn from Jesus but to be tutored by the Spirit, and we can do the same thing.

If we look at some of the things Simon did, we can see that he’s not perfect. I think that it’s so easy for us to look at Simon’s situation and think, “sure he believed that Jesus was the Christ, he was the prophet.” But we must remember that first, Simon was not a prophet at this time, he was still growing and he was still able to have those confirmations. Similarly, we don’t have to be perfect to have our own spiritual growth experiences. Second, even after he became the prophet, he was not perfect, which again demonstrates that we are all on a personal course, we are given knowledge and understanding as we are ready for it and when we put forth effort, not when we achieve some arbitrary milestone in our spiritual growth. One of the prophets have said something to the effect that, “the Holy Ghost will bestow knowledge on you as fast as you are able to receive it.” The IM quotes President Gordon B. Hinckley as teaching, “Every latter-day Saint has the responsibility to know for himself or herself with a certainty beyond doubt that Jesus is the resurrected, living Son of the living God.”

Testimony of the magnitude of the prophets is not only obtained at prophet status, we can all have testimonies as strong and as certain and as steadfast as Simon’s and we must get that testimony the same way that he did. Just as he was physically close to the Savior, we must be spiritually close to Him. Simon’s testimony came as he worked to become more Christ-like, and that’s how our testimony will come too. The IM quotes President Dieter F. Uchtdorf as teaching, “the source of this sure knowledge and firm conviction is divine revelation… We receive this testimony when the Holy Spirit speaks to the spirit within us. We will receive a calm and unwavering certainty that will be the source of our testimony and conviction irrespective of our culture, race, language, or socioeconomic background. These promptings of the Spirit, rather than human logic alone, will be the true foundation upon which our testimony will be built. The core of this testimony will always be the faith in and the knowledge of Jesus Christ and His divine mission.”

We know from John 1:42 that Jesus calls Simon “Cephas” or Peter as it is known in much of the scriptures. Jesus tells Simon, “That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” This verse alone has been the basis of many false doctrines, and invalid church structures. Let’s look for a minute and see why it’s been interpreted so many different ways. Just reading the verses the way they are written, Jesus is saying, “You are blessed Simon, Jonah’s son, for your testimony came not from man but from the Holy Ghost. I’m telling you, you are a rock, and upon this bedrock I will build my church.” I’m getting this from the translations that we will go over in a minute. We can reference John 1:42, when Jesus first calls Simon, Cephas, or Peter the JST gives us insight saying, “Thou are Simon, the son of Jona, thou shalt be called Cephas, which is, by interpretation, a seer, or a stone.” When Jesus gives Simon the name of Peter, it is so that he can mentally connect himself with the office of Seer that he is being trained to hold. So another way that we can read Jesus’ statement would be, “You are blessed Simon, Jonah’s son, for your testimony came not from man but from the Holy Ghost. I’m telling you, you are a seer, and upon this principle I will build my church.”

I think now is a good time to point out that punctuation saves lives. For instance, “Let’s eat Grandma!” has a different meaning than “Let’s eat, Grandma!” I bring this up because I feel that this is a similar situation, one in which one set of punctuation conveys eternal truths, and another set teaches false doctrine. There are a few different ways that Jesus’s statement can and has been interpreted. First, we could interpret Jesus’ statement of “thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church,” I will build my church upon Peter, the man. Or we can look at the whole statement as saying “Blessed are thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say unto thee, Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church.” Those added commas are very important in understanding what Jesus is really trying to say because the one way, we can say that Peter is the founder of the right church and we can trace back to any interaction that he had with someone and on and on and so forth until we have some random guy who we are supposed to follow because it’s the authoritative line or whatever. That’s not the way that God operates, his gospel is very organized and consistent. We know “that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.” We can’t just listen to whoever says, “oh I got my authority to lead the church from this random guy.” We know that callings and ordinations are done publically for this very reason.

This verse can only be understood by looking at the languages that were spoken and written at the time. The IM explains, “As the Savior taught Peter about revelation, He used a wordplay on Peter’s name… The Greek word petros means an isolated small rock or stone. The Greek word petras can also mean ‘a stone,’ but in addition it can refer to stony soil, bedrock, or a large mass of rock. From these words we learn that it was not upon Peter as a man that the church would be built, but upon the bedrock of revelation… President Howard W. Hunter taught: ‘And upon this rock I will build my church.’ Upon what rock? Peter? Upon a man? No, not upon a man, upon the rock of revelation, the thing which they were talking about… This revelation that Jesus is the Christ is the foundation upon which he would build his church.’” Peter is assured by the Savior that the church He builds will be safe, “and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

It might have been a little bit overwhelming for Peter to begin to realize that he is going to play the main part of church leadership. Jesus promises to give Peter the tools that he needs saying, “and I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” The IM gave me a very interesting insight into the term and use of priesthood “keys.” It says, “In the first century A.D., keys were typically made of iron and were bulkier, more expensive, and less common than modern house keys. To hold the keys of a house was a position of great trust. Thus, keys were a fitting symbol of special authority, responsibility, and purpose. Ancient scriptures make repeated use of the symbol of keys, which represents the power to lock and unlock, open and shut, and permit or prevent entrance. Six days after Jesus told Peter, ‘I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ Peter, together with James and John, received the promised keys on the Mount of Transfiguration.” I had never considered this to be a fitting example of certain priesthood authority because I didn’t know the background. Let’s use the analogy of the Lord’s vineyard. The lord of the vineyard is always conferencing with his main steward of the vineyard. I would imagine that the steward is the one who holds all the keys to the house and property because it would be his job to go to these different places, to do work and then to make sure that they were secure again afterward. If there were many stewards of different areas of the property, then those men would only have the keys to the locks pertaining to the property that they were in charge of. Similarly, priesthood keys are for certain ordinances and they are given the priesthood holders when those men are in need of them to execute their assigned functions.

Finally, after teaching these things to Peter, the Savior “charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.” Why? The whole point is for us to know that Jesus is the Savior of the world, the Messiah that had been waited upon for centuries. Why would Jesus not want the disciples to shout it from the roof top? Believe it or not, the explanation for this came to me from the most unlikely source of all, the book “Killing Jesus,” by Bill O’Reilly. I can’t believe that I’m saying this myself, but I learned a lot from that book, it was interesting, informative and profitable for study. In his book, Bill explained that in the ancient Jewish culture at the time of Christ, declaring yourself to be the long anticipated Messiah was punishable by death. I had thought that Jesus had been declaring himself as the Christ the whole time, but looking back at it, it doesn’t seem to be the case. He might have disclosed it to a few trusted companions, but he almost always refers to himself in the third person, saying things like, “the son of man…” which, if questioned, he could just attribute it him teaching about the coming Messiah, because he doesn’t implicate himself or designate that He is this Messiah. But can’t Jesus just miraculously save himself from the murderous Jews if they came after him? Yes, he could, but like we learned in during the temptations, a grandiose display of supernatural power is to be reserved for only when dictated by Heavenly Father through the Holy Ghost. To bring on a situation where that is the only escape route is to “tempt God,” or to be disobedient, and seeking recognition that doesn’t belong to you. The IM gives other reasons that might have influenced Jesus’ decision to stay quiet about who he really was:

1. Jesus was so famous that it was physically difficult for him to do many things such as be alone with his disciples to teach them or for them to rest or eat. It was difficult for him to reach all the people or to heal all those whom he wanted to. The IM says, “Instructing people not to tell others about His miracles may have been one way the Savior carefully managed such difficulties so as not to hinder His overall mission.”

2. As Jesus’ fame grew so did those in opposition to him. Jesus had a specific mission to complete and more opposition could come when it wasn’t time. The IM says, “After Jesus entered Jerusalem in a way that clearly and publically proclaimed Him as the Messiah, less than a week passed before he was arrested and put to death.”

3. “Some of the Savior’s commandments for silence were directed at devils, who vocally acknowledged Jesus as the Son of God. Elder Bruce R. McConkie taught, “Converting testimony comes from God, not from Lucifer… (and) would have claimed greater justification for their false charge against him, ‘He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?’”

4. “The Savior knew that most Jews of His day were expecting the Messiah to put an end to Israel’s political enemies and reign as a Jewish king. It is clear that Jesus wanted to avoid presenting Himself as the Messiah of popular expectation. Therefore, one likely reason the Savior instructed his disciples not to tell people He was the Christ was that H wanted to teach people a new understanding of what kind of salvation He had come to bring. He had come not to overthrown Rome but to conquer the eternal enemies of mankind- death, sin, and suffering.”