The Foundation and Origin of the Church

Although there are similarities (e.g. Lev 20:7; 1 Pet 1:16), a fundamental doctrine of Scripture is that the specific plan and purpose of God for the church is to be distinguished from regenerate national Israel. The church is exclusive and unique to this age (dispensation). The origin of the church was still future during Christ’s earthly ministry, and did not come into existence until His resurrection (cf. Matt 16:18; Acts 1:4-5; 2:32-33; 11:15-17; 1 Cor 12:13). The holy calling of the church as distinct from that of Israel is evident from an understanding of both the foundation and origin of the church.

FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH
The first use of the word church (Gk. ekklesia) in the New Testament is found in Matthew 16:16-19. In response to Peter’s statement that He is “the Christ, the Son of the living God,” Jesus said to him, “flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.” Speaking to Peter (Gk. petros, “stone”), Jesus promised, “upon this rock [Gk. petra, “rock”] I will build my church.” In regard to the foundation of the church, one needs to understand the “rock” upon which Jesus promised to build His church. Roman Catholicism identifies the “rock” as Peter, who is believed to have been the foundation for and ultimate authority of the church. Based on the doctrine of apostolic succession, Roman Catholicism teaches that final authority and infallibility reside in the pope.
 
Suggested Foundations
There are many interpretive views regarding the meaning of Matthew 16:16-19, but all focus upon two persons: Christ and Peter. Some Protestants believe Peter is the “rock” upon which the church is built. The prevailing evangelical view is that Christ is the one, essential foundation upon which the church is built. The Roman Catholic teaching regarding Peter is that he was the “rock” upon which the church is built, and therefore both the exclusive and ultimate authority for the church; consequently, Roman Catholicism affirms apostolic succession and the authority of the pope.

Some Protestants believe Peter is the “rock,” but only in the sense that he was given the apostolic privilege to extend the universality of the church to Gentiles (Acts 15:17), which is evident by the extension of the church as recorded in Acts 2, 8, & 10. Most evangelicals are uncomfortable with this view, not for lack of biblical support but due to apprehension that it may lend support to the conservative Roman Catholic understanding. However, if it were not for the extremes of Roman Catholic interpretation, it would be difficult to understand the “rock” as anyone or anything other than Peter. To regard Peter as the foundation of the church does not necessitate one to affirm the Roman Catholic teaching of papal succession and infallibility, nor the priority of Peter. The church has been built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20), of which Peter may be regarded as the first among equals.

Another prominent evangelical view is that the “rock” upon which the church was built is Peter’s confession of Christ (Matt 16:16), which is a mediating position between Peter himself as an apostle and Christ as the essential and unique foundation stone. The majority of evangelicals believe that the “rock” is Christ Himself, upon which the church is built; however, this creates disjunction between the two rocks, contrary to the biblical context.

The Origin of the Church
Matthew 18:17 is within the context of church discipline. Following a specific order for discipline, Jesus said the final procedure is to bring the matter “to the church.” Matthew’s reference to the church invoked the natural Jewish mindset of an “assembly”; it is even possible (although not likely) that Matthew was referring to a Jewish “assembly,” i.e. the synagogue in 18:17. Yet in both Matthew 16:18 and 18:17, the designation of “church” is in reference to a new entity, of which Christ Jesus is the Founder.

Although Peter may be identified as the rock who used the keys of the kingdom “in proclaiming the truth about Christ to Jews and Gentiles,” Ephesians 2:11—3:11 is plain in communicating that Christ is indeed the Founder of His church. Scripture declares: “Therefore, remember … you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise … that in Himself He might make the two into one new man … fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God’s household, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets … that by revelation there was made known to me the mystery … which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit; to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel … and to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God … This was in accordance with the eternal purpose which He carried out in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Christ Is the Founder of His Church
Much discussion has occurred regarding the distinction between petros (stone) and petra (rock). Many evangelicals believe that the rock upon which the church is built is not Peter, who is a mere stone, but Jesus Himself, the rock of foundation (cf. 1 Pet 2:5-8). To affirm that Peter is the rock (Matt 16:16-19) does not deny that Jesus is the Builder of the church and that other passages, such as 1 Corinthians 3:11, teach Christ as the cornerstone. Peter was the first among equal apostles who also contributed to the church’s one foundation. For instance, all the apostles had the same authority of binding and loosing (John 20:23), as does the church universally (Matt 18:18).

Peter never claimed a position of infallibility or ultimate authority for himself (Acts 10:25-26; 1 Pet 1:1; 5:1-3). Indeed, Peter denied being the source or authority upon which the church is founded (Acts 2:21; 10:43). The teaching of Peter’s final authority and infallibility is contrary to his ministry. Immediately following his confession of faith and subsequent declaration by Christ, Peter was censored severely by the Lord (Matt 16:22-23). Furthermore, it was essential for Paul to confront Peter for hypocrisy and confusing the truth of the Gospel (Gal 2:11-14). Peter never exerted a controlling authority in the early church. He was not the exclusive authority involved in choosing a replacement for Judas (Acts 1:15-26), the selecting of deacons (6:1-7), or leading the council at Jerusalem (15:1-33).

Moreover, the specific teaching of Scripture in other passages declares Christ as the foundation of the church (1 Cor 3:11; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-7). Ephesians 2:20 refers to the church as a building, and all the New Testament apostles and prophets are identified as components of the foundation. The authority given to Peter by Jesus (Matt 16:18-19) was given to all the Apostles (Matt 18:18; John 20:23). Peter did extend the gospel message through his proclamation of Christ, and thereby incorporated Gentiles into the church at Pentecost (Acts 2), in addition to the Samaritans (Acts 8) and other Gentiles (Acts 10). Peter’s binding and loosing were related to his proclamation of the gospel message. When he proclaimed that truth, the people were loosed from their sins. If they did not hear and believe, they remained bound in their sin.

CONCLUSION
The nature of the church as a new entity that originated at Pentecost—founded upon the New Testament apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone (Eph 2:20)—is a fundamental doctrine of Scripture. Christ’s headship over the church distinguishes the relationship of the church as unique (Eph 1:22-23). Therefore, the church should not be confused with Israel, the kingdom of God, or another phase in salvation history. The church is a distinct entity in this age, which is evident from consideration of the foundation and origin of the church. Both the church and Israel have special relationships with God, but they must be distinguished. Since the church came into existence on the Day of Pentecost, the church is distinct from Israel, and cannot inherit the unconditional promises that God made with Israel. Such a fundamental understanding drastically affects how one understands the fulfillment of the biblical covenants, the blessings and curses upon Israel (cf. Deut 28—30), and the Lord’s future earthly purposes.

Scripture teaches that the Old Testament promises made with national Israel will be fulfilled with a future, regenerate, national Israel. Since Israel and the church are distinct entities, there is no sense in which the latter can fulfill promises to the former (unless, of course, one wrongly assumes priority of the New Testament, resulting in the meaning of the promises in their original context being changed or reinterpreted, so that they were not unconditional or eternal). God has a specific purpose for the church that is to be distinguished from His plans and purposes for regenerate national Israel. Those purposes affect the relationship of Israel to the biblical covenants, and the relationship of the church to the tribulation (seventieth week of Daniel), second coming, and millennium.

The church is never designated as Israel. Although it has been common for some Christians to reference the church as the “new Israel,” a concordance study in the New Testament will demonstrate contrariwise. In each of the 66 occurrences of the word “Israel” in the New Testament, the term always refers to the Jewish people. Both the church and Israel have special relationships with God, but they must be distinguished. The distinction between Israel and the church is the natural result of interpreting the Bible historically and grammatically (i.e. literal, plain interpretation).

Midnight Call - 03/2025