The Keys

Was Peter special? Were the keys merely for one special man? What are those keys? There seems to be much misunderstanding in the area of keys, who have these keys, what they are for, and it defines some dividing line between catholics and all others for some reason. If one has accepted Christ as Lord, then we should all want the truth of Scripture, and that precious relationship with Him and each other. Let's look at the Scripture and see if it contains some context to give us what we need for sound interpretation.

Matthew 16:19 "And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." NKJV

The context should be agreeable as we have Jesus with His disciples arriving by boat to a town on the coast. They has just learned a valuable lesson by Yashua about false doctrine and the importance of testing what they believe with what is true from the Lord. Teachings from the Pharisees and Saduccees were called "leaven" by Jesus at the beginning of the Chapter. This is foundational for what happens next as the context shows that Jesus is continuing to open their hearts to receive the truth of His deity and Lordship.

Matthew 16:13 ś When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? KJV

Yashua first focuses upon one issue, public opinion, and will divide the issue so that the disciples can learn how to separate what they believe from public opinion and prepare them for the ultimate test, the Pharisaic teaching (leaven) that Messiah would conquer Rome, establish Israel, and set up His eternal kingdom. What amazes me is how people are people, and we still alolow false doctrine to leaven the whole lump. We remain somehow staunch with our leaven and have justified why it must remain in our belief system. Peter will fall into this very shortly. Therefore Jesus asks the question about who He is as seen from public opinion, the common public opinion.

vs 14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

The answers are expected because there was great speculation, and when we speculate from little or no facts we arrive at horrendous results. Jesus knew what the people said. He knew what the Pharisees taught. Jesus knew much of what the disciples thought as He spent His time with them teaching and eating. What is marvelous, Jesus shows here a very reliable teaching method, reveal to people what they believe through themselves, then show the facts from that belief, and then correct the facts so that what is believed becomes stable and sound. remember that Jesus did speak about building the house (one's faith and relationship with the Father) upon the Rock (Jesus Christ), and when the storms and tests of real life come, the house will stand (Matthew 7:24-27). The foundation may have a sound thought process, but some of the facts may be incorrect, so to replace those incorrect facts with correct ones should and will change the conclusions, at least for those who are teachable, and that is what a disciple is, a learner, one that is teachable. Now Yashua has the disciples in a place where they have answered Him, and they know what the common opinion is of Him. 15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? KJV He then goes into the personal area! We have one disciple stand up and answer His question of a very personal issue, and he gives an answer that has a very unique response from Yashua. Let's see this.

vs 16 Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." NKJV

I love this response from Peter, a response that all should and God desires to come from each of us, NOT just Peter. This is an individual response, a personal response, a truth that each of us must answer, some never do because they reject even the question much less taking time to answer, some never hear the question because we don't tell the gospel as we have been ordained to do, and some develop justification that they will hear if God ordains, and yet Peter tells his answer with such simplicity and straight forwardness, and to this we read something remarkable able God.

vs 17 Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. NKJV

The Father reveals to Peter this truth of Messiah. Yashua haMashiach, The Anointed One, the Lord Incarnate, He will come, and Peter sees Him on the coast standing before himself. Peter and the other disciples are blessed because they have been walking with Messiah, eating with Messiah, sleeping with Messiah, learning from Messiah, and He has just shown them a truth about separting opinion from fact, allowing the facts to found our house and not opinion, and Peter claims Jesus as Messiah. Is Peter special because he sees Messiah and not the opinion of the day? If that were the case then God is a respector of persons (Acts 10:34), and we know elsewhere in Scripture that the Lord is NOT prejudiced nor biased, and He wants all to know Him through repentance (2 Peter 3:9). The Holy Spirit has been given to guide us into all truth, to bring the Scriptures to light for each of us personally (John 15:26-27; John 16:13). To claim this for a Peter alone negates even the commission of the disciples "To go and preach the gospel..." which is for all members of the body of Christ, and which we see happen in a big way on the Day of Pentecost and the Holy Spirit using Peter to preach a sermon that produces 3000 disciples in need of being discipled. Peter has been blessed because he is listening to the Father! What did Peter tell the Lord?? A truth that ALL Christianity is based upon, the Rock of Christianity, the truth is simple, yet the truth is profound. "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." This precious foundation, the Cornerstone of Christianity is revealed by the Spirit of God to Peter.

vs 18 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. KJV

Here Jesus tells Peter that He is going to build His church, the "My" is in reference to Jesus and NOT to Peter, so the church must be the body of Christ which consists of all who have been born again, those who repent and commit their lives to Yashua, this is the church. The church is NOT an entity of its own, it is NOT a denomination, the church is the "called out", the ekklhsia/ecclesia. On what does Jesus build His bride? One one issue, He is Lord, He is Messiah, He is the King of Kings, and on this truth, the judgment of the devil, the king of hell, he can not destroy it nor prevail against His Messiahship. ohn 1:49 Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.
John 6:69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.
John 11:27 She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.
John 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
Acts 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Robertson's Word Pictures

{And I also say unto thee} (kagw de soi legw). "The emphasis is not on 'Thou art Peter' over against 'Thou art the Christ, 'but on kagw: 'The Father hath revealed to thee one truth, and I also tell you another" (McNeile). Jesus calls Peter here by the name that he had said he would have (#Jo 1:42). Peter (petrov) is simply the Greek word for Cephas (Aramaic). Then it was prophecy, now it is fact. In verse #17 Jesus addresses him as "Simon Bar-Jonah, " his full patronymic (Aramaic) name. But Jesus has a purpose now in using his nickname "Peter" which he had himself given him. Jesus makes a remarkable play on Peter's name, a pun in fact, that has caused volumes of controversy and endless theological strife. {On this rock} (epi tauth th petra) Jesus says, a ledge or cliff of rock like that in #7:24 on which the wise man built his house. petrov is usually a smaller detachment of the massive ledge. But too much must not be made of this point since Jesus probably spoke Aramaic to Peter which draws no such distinction (khpha). What did Jesus mean by this word-play?

{I will build my church} (oikodomhsw mou thn ekklhsian). It is the figure of a building and he uses the word ekklhsian which occurs in the New Testament usually of a local organization, but sometimes in a more general sense. What is the sense here in which Jesus uses it? The word originally meant "assembly" (#Ac 19:39), but it came to be applied to an "unassembled assembly" as in #Ac 8:3 for the Christians persecuted by Saul from house to house. "And the name for the new Israel, ekklhsia, in His mouth is not an anachronism. It is an old familiar name for the congregation of Israel found in Deut. (#De 18:26; 23:2) and Psalms (#Ps 22:36), both books well known to Jesus" (Bruce). It is interesting to observe that in #Ps 89 most of the important words employed by Jesus on this occasion occur in the LXX text. So oikodomhsw in #Ps 89:5; ekklhsia in #Ps 89:6; katiscuw in #Ps 89:22; cristov in #Ps 89:39,52; adhv in #Ps 89:49 (ek ceirov adou). If one is puzzled over the use of "building" with the word ekklhsia it will be helpful to turn to #1Pe 2:5. Peter, the very one to whom Jesus is here speaking, writing to the Christians in the five Roman provinces in Asia (#1Pe 1:1), says: "You are built a spiritual house" (oikodomeisye oikoV pneumatikoV). It is difficult to resist the impression that Peter recalls the words of Jesus to him on this memorable occasion. Further on (#1Pe 2:9) he speaks of them as an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, showing beyond controversy that Peter's use of building a spiritual house is general, not local. This is undoubtedly the picture in the mind of Christ here in #16:18. It is a great spiritual house, Christ's Israel, not the Jewish nation, which he describes. What is the rock on which Christ will build his vast temple? Not on Peter alone or mainly or primarily. Peter by his confession was furnished with the illustration for the rock on which His church will rest. It is the same kind of faith that Peter has just confessed. The perpetuity of this church general is guaranteed.

{The gates of Hades} (pulai adou) {shall not prevail against it} (ou katiscusousin authv). Each word here creates difficulty. Hades is technically the unseen world, the Hebrew Sheol, the land of the departed, that is death. Paul uses yanate in #1Co 15:55 in quoting #Ho 13:14 for adh. It is not common in the papyri, but it is common on tombstones in Asia Minor, "doubtless a survival of its use in the old Greek religion" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). The ancient pagans divided Hades (a privative and idein, to see, abode of the unseen) into Elysium and Tartarus as the Jews put both Abraham's bosom and Gehenna in Sheol or Hades (cf. #Lu 16:25). Christ was in Hades (#Ac 2:27,31), not in Gehenna. We have here the figure of two buildings, the Church of Christ on the Rock, the House of Death (Hades). "In the Old Testament the 'gates of Hades' (Sheol) never bears any other meaning (#Isa 38:10; Wisd. 16:3; 3Macc. 5:51) than death, " McNeile claims. See also #Ps 9:13; 107:18 #Job 38:17 (pulai yanatou pulwroi adou). It is not the picture of Hades _attacking_ Christ's church, but of death's possible victory over the church. "The ekklhsia is built upon the Messiahship of her master, and death, the gates of Hades, will not prevail against her by keeping Him imprisoned. It was a mysterious truth, which He will soon tell them in plain words (#21); it is echoed in #Ac 2:24,31" (McNeile). Christ's church will prevail and survive because He will burst the gates of Hades and come forth conqueror. He will ever live and be the guarantor of the perpetuity of His people or church. The verb katiscuw (literally have strength against, iscuw from iscuv and kat-) occurs also in #Lu 21:36 #Lu 23:23. It appears in the ancient Greek, the LXX, and in the papyri with the accusative and is used in the modern Greek with the sense of gaining the mastery over. The wealth of imagery in #Mt 16:18 makes it difficult to decide each detail, but the main point is clear. The ekklhsia which consists of those confessing Christ as Peter has just done will not cease. The gates of Hades or bars of Sheol will not close down on it. Christ will rise and will keep his church alive. _Sublime Porte_ used to be the title of Turkish power in Constantinople.

Now we have a context for understanding the keys that are given, and we will maintain the consistency of Scriptural hermeneutics for the verse in question about the keys. At the beginning I asked these three questions: Was Peter special, Were the keys merely for one special man, and What are those keys? Now let's take a close look at the verse.

vs 19 "And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." NKJV

Maintaining consistency in interpretation is valuable for sound hermeneutics with the exception that there are times when the context will indicate a need for change from one verse into another, but this remains true for all Scripture as we allow the context to dictate the way Scripture must be judged. It becomes a little more strenuous to accurately divide the Word of God when looking at prophecy, and in a sense this is prophetic, but we do not have the difficulty of context, we have the difficulty of man made tradition, the false doctrine of men with centuries of tradition which has many warm fuzzies, but absolutely no Scriptural soundeness when the context is exegeted. First we will look at the keys of the kingdom.

From Easton's Dictionary

Key

Frequently mentioned in Scripture.

There is a much deeper meaning of the keys than some of the commentary that I have used thus far to reveal. From the context, it is clear the usage of the keys is from a metaphorical standpoint and not a literal position as there is no door in front of the disciples and surely the Lord isn't suggesting opening the building with a key as we have today, although for many dead churches they should toss the key away [grin]. As in all metaphors, there is a literal application of the metaphorical truth, and it is this depth that I would like to show.

From Thayer's Dictionary

2807 kleiV kleis klice

from 2808; TDNT-3:744,439; n f

AV-key 6; 6

1) a key

1a) since the keeper of the keys has the power to open and to shut 1b) metaph. in the NT to denote power and authority of various kinds The keys are the access of authority and applied by the empowerment of the Holy Spirit produces power in the church that is missing and sadly needed. Luke 10:19 Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you. Here we know the disciples had returned recounting what happened while they were on the field of ministry, they were somewhat "pumped" after being used by the Holy Spirit to cast out demons, to heal the sick, to witness the truth of the kingdom of God to the lost and see the lost respond in a positive manner. This is the seventy disciples who were sent, NOT one disciple, and the Holy Spirit used them to do a great work, but for the most part it was merely preparatory to for their knowledge to be the understanding for the great commission given to us from Yashua at His ascending into the heavens.

The keys are to be used by born again and Spirit filled members of the body of Christ to open the doors of the kingdom of God for many people who are lost. This is consistent with the gospel message, and with the context of the passage. As a Pentecostal I see more in the passage because of the nature of experience in the area of the Holy Spirit using me as a vessel to bind demons in a person and casting them out. I am far from speacial, but I can not deny that the reality of the Scriptures have been seen in seen through my life for the deliverance of others. Thye Holy Spirit chooses as he wills (1 Corinthians 12) as a vessel, NOT the entity of the catholic church nor some special person as catholicism teaches in apostolic succession. Back to the verse again, we see the sound exegesis as given in Robertson's Word Pictures.

{The Keys of the kingdom} (\taV kleidaV tęV basileiaV\). Here again we have the figure of a building with keys to open from the outside. The question is raised at once if Jesus does not here mean the same thing by "kingdom" that he did by "church" in verse #18. In #Re 1:18; 3:7 Christ the Risen Lord has "the keys of death and of Hades." He has also "the keys of the kingdom of heaven" which he here hands over to Peter as "gatekeeper" or "steward" (\oikonomoV\) provided we do not understand it as a special and peculiar prerogative belonging to Peter. The same power here given to Peter belongs to every disciple of Jesus in all the ages. Advocates of papal supremacy insist on the primacy of Peter here and the power of Peter to pass on this supposed sovereignty to others. But this is all quite beside the mark. We shall soon see the disciples actually disputing again (#Mt 18:1) as to which of them is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven as they will again (#20:21) and even on the night before Christ's death. Clearly neither Peter nor the rest understood Jesus to say here that Peter was to have supreme authority. What is added shows that Peter held the keys precisely as every preacher and teacher does. To "bind" (\dęsęiV\) in rabbinical language is to forbid, to "loose" (\lusęiV\) is to permit. Peter would be like a rabbi who passes on many points. Rabbis of the school of Hillel "loosed" many things that the school of Schammai "bound." The teaching of Jesus is the standard for Peter and for all preachers of Christ. Note the future perfect indicative (\estai dedemenon, estai lelumenon\), a state of completion. All this assumes, of course, that Peter's use of the keys will be in accord with the teaching and mind of Christ. The binding and loosing is repeated by Jesus to all the disciples (#18:18). Later after the Resurrection Christ will use this same language to all the disciples (#Joh 20:23), showing that it was not a special prerogative of Peter. He is simply first among equals, _primus inter pares_, because on this occasion he was spokesman for the faith of all. It is a violent leap in logic to claim power to forgive sins, to pronounce absolution, by reason of the technical rabbinical language that Jesus employed about binding and loosing. Every preacher uses the keys of the kingdom when he proclaims the terms of salvation in Christ. The proclamation of these terms when accepted by faith in Christ has the sanction and approval of God the Father. The more personal we make these great words the nearer we come to the mind of Christ. The more ecclesiastical we make them the further we drift away from him.

Sound doctrine allows for sound daily application for when those stroms of life come, and they are not an "if" they come, but a sure "they will come". Discouragement, disillusionment, bitterness, and defeatism all come from unsound doctrine. To have sound doctrine and NOT the leaven of the Pharisees, one must first be able to be taught, as a teachable person may go through rough times, but when faced with those times and the struggle to see what is believed is incorrect, a person who desires the truth may stew for a time, they may struggle with that truth since it is different than what they believe, yet the facts remain, a teachable person will remove the brick of leaven and replace it with a brick of truth. This is a disciple, and the test now comes to Peter and the rest of the disciples. Jesus challenges one of those bricks of leaven!

Vss 20-21 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. ś From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. KJV

One such brick of leaven was the Pharisaic teaching that the Messiah would toss out Roman rule and establish His eternal kingdom, therefore the idea that the Messiah must suffer would challenge this false doctrine, one that the disciples believed and would be seen clearly from Peter's response to Yashua. Today we can see clearly that Messiah of Isaiah 53 is Jesus, yet the Jews taught this was them or specifically Jacob, that he suffered many things. Since they believed that, they concluded that the Messiah would conquer as other Scriptures detail. Peter is a bit hypocritical in that he confesses that Yashua is God in the flesh, Messiah, but then rebukes God for His "unsound" teaching that He must suffer. He calls Him God, and rightly so, then he rebukes God for NOT knowing which shows that perhaps he didn't fully believe that Jesus was God. Okay Peter, is Jesus God or is He not God?

vs 22 Then Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, "Far be it from You, Lord; this shall not happen to You!" NKJV

Peter faces the test and fails miserably as a disciple. Peter assumes his belief system to be far above the Messiah whom he just confessed as Messiah. For those who do not know, Christ is the Greek translated word from the Hebrew haMashiach which means anointed. So Peter and the rest of the disciples had confessed and agreed that Jesus was The Anointed One, and here rebukes Him for His lack of knowledge. Notice the strength of Peter's words, "this shall not happen to You!" Peter is convinced that his belief system that is based upon Pharisaic leaven is sound, so he takes it upon himself to rebuke God. We will see from Yashua's response that this is completely sound hermeneutics.

vs 23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. KJV
vs 23 But He turned and said to Peter, "Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men." NKJV
vs 23 Jesus turned to Peter and said, "Get away from me, Satan! You are a dangerous trap to me. You are seeing things merely from a human point of view, and not from God's." NLT

Peter saw the leaven of the Pharisees, man made doctrine, to be of higher value than the precious truth of the Messih from His own lips. The plan of God, Messiah to die a vicarious death for all sin, must be carried out whether Pharisaic leaven taught it or not. Peter wasn't ready to be teachable, but his arrogance and pride surfaced as they do in us at times, and when our belief system has a leaven brick that is challenged, we hold onto the leaven rather than replace it with the truth. This is why Jesus said the next few words!

vss 24-28 Then Jesus said to the disciples, "If any of you wants to be my follower, you must put aside your selfish ambition, shoulder your cross, and follow me. If you try to keep your life for yourself, you will lose it. But if you give up your life for me, you will find true life. And how do you benefit if you gain the whole world but lose your own soul in the process? Is anything worth more than your soul? For I, the Son of Man, will come in the glory of my Father with his angels and will judge all people according to their deeds. And I assure you that some of you standing here right now will not die before you see me, the Son of Man, coming in my Kingdom." NLT

Peter, James, and John would see Jesus transfigured very soon, yet they were to become His inner three, His cabinet and Board if you will. Yet Jesus is teaching that a disciple must be a learner, one who desires to follow Him, and one who keeps on following Him. Peter is rebuked for wanting man made doctrines over the inspired Word coming straight from The WORD of God, Himself. We also are disciples and must want the Word to change our belief systems so that they align with Scripture. As we meet the day, we will be faced with tests to reveal error in what we believe, a disciple allows the soundness of correctly Scripture to determine those bricks in the foundation of the house. Peter is a disciple and as a disciple he is given the keys to the kingdom as are all disciples, sadly most don't know and those that know, most of them do not believe the power still exists today. There is no mystical papal succession, but there is a great commssion, to which we do, and He confirms the preaching and teaching of the Word with signs and wonders.

Peter was special in the sense he heard the Lord's call to commitment and he committed his life, he kept following Jesus. He became a powerful leader in the church, James was the head of the church (Acts 15), but he knew that he was a blessing to the church as Paul taught the five fold minsitry would be (Ephesians 4), and still he knew he was a disciple, a learner as well until he would die (Philippians 1:6). Peter knew that Paul was correct when he discussed the weapons of warfare (2 Corinthians 10:3-5). Binding and loosing, casting our demons, healing the sick, preaching an uncompromising and righteous word from the pulpit, Peter knew the church commission is for such as this and these things. That's why Peter said what he did in Acts 2:39. A disciple in any century is the same, they are still a disciple.