“The Keys of the Kingdom”

All Scripture is subject to twisting and misinterpretation (2 Peter 3:16). Such twisting results in false teachings that then produce false churches. Some Scripture is certainly subject to more of this treatment than others. Consider one of the most popularly misunderstood passages that has likewise produced the most popular false church:

When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, “Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?” So they said, “Some say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 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. And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 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” (Matt. 16:13-19).

Most readers will likely be aware that this passage is used by the Catholic church to justify the papacy. They venerate Peter as the first pope and point to this account as Jesus coronating him, despite there being no word that could possibly be rendered as pope appearing either here or anywhere else in the Bible. They say that, in this passage, Peter is the “rock” that Jesus is referring to—the rock upon which the church was to be built, and to him and only him was given the “keys of the kingdom.” This interpretation is utterly incompatible with the rest of the Bible. We must, as with all parts of God’s Word, consider the context.

First, envision the scenario described here. Jesus poses His question in Matthew 16:13 to all twelve of the disciples present—those following Him on this occasion were the twelve apostles, but they were often referred to as “disciples” in the Gospel accounts (Matt. 10:1). The first question was for all twelve, and His next question in 16:15 was likewise addressed to them. Peter just happened to be the one that piped up in response. Jesus then continues the dialogue by addressing Peter individually since he was the one that answered His question; however, this does not mean that the eleven other disciples were excluded from Jesus’ message.

Imagine a school teacher addressing her classroom of students. She, standing in front of them all, asks to none of them in particular, “What do some people think 2 + 2 equals?” A couple students say they have heard 1, 3, 5, or some other incorrect answer. “But what do you say it equals?” she asks. A boy in the front row, coincidentally named Simon, raises his hand and says, “4.” The teacher, turning her attention to Simon, says to him, “That’s right! Good job Simon. Upon the fact that 2 + 2 = 4, the rest of mathematics is founded. With the knowledge that it can’t equal anything else, you now have the keys to learn more complicated math that builds upon that objective truth.”

Any reader endowed with common sense understands that in this hypothetical case, the teacher’s words are not just relevant to Simon but to the whole class. She rightly praises Simon specifically for giving the correct answer, but the entire class was witness to the exchange and is still involved in the discussion. In the blatant parallel being drawn here, it is equally obvious that just because Simon was the one to give the correct answer, he is not established as the class president, nor is it implied that he’s the savant upon which mathematics will forevermore be founded.

So too with Jesus’ words. He acknowledges Peter as giving the correct answer to His question, since he thereby demonstrated understanding of Jesus’ Divine nature and recognizing His authority. The “rock” upon which Jesus would build His church is the same as the answer to the teacher’s math question. “Upon the objective truth that 2 + 2 = 4, the rest of mathematics is built.” Matthew 16:16-18 in like manner says in other words, “Upon the objective truth that I am the Christ, the Son of the living God, My church will be built.” The teacher did not say, “Upon you, Simon, hangs all of mathematical theory; you are the foundation of truth.” Jesus did not say, “Upon you, Peter, rests My kingdom; you are the foundation of truth.” Jesus was prophesied as the Messiah in the Old Testament, not Peter. Jesus (and the fact that He is the Son of God) is the rock, the “chief cornerstone” (Psalm 118:22, Eph. 2:20), not Peter.

Peter, therefore, was not the sole recipient of the “keys of the kingdom of heaven” described in verse 19. All of the apostles were included in Jesus’ granting of said keys, just like all the students in the classroom were included in the teacher’s granting of the key to understanding math. Peter was not granted authority over the other apostles. Does he have more written about him than the other eleven? And does he seem to take the initiative more often in the passages involving the apostles? In the first four books of the New Testament, he does, without a doubt. When considering the entirety of the New Testament, though, Paul is certainly the most prolific of the apostles. However, it can’t be said based on any passage in the Bible that Peter or Paul had any authority comparable to what Catholics attribute to the pope. Much to the contrary, consider what Jesus said about apostles seeking greater authority in Matthew 20:20-28.

Here, the mother of Zebedee’s sons, James and John, asked that Jesus grant that they sit at His right and left hand in His kingdom. She, in other words, asked that He glorify and give them authority above all of His other disciples. According to verse 24, the other ten apostles were none too pleased at the presumptuousness of the two brothers, and no small wonder why. Jesus then addressed all of them, saying:

You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave—just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many (Mat. 20:25-28).

Certainly, this admonition precludes such a thing as the papacy, which dares to proclaim that one man be the spokesman of God and head of His church. Jesus compares the desire for such authority to the tendencies of the godless Gentiles. He says His kingdom will not be like that. The apostles (and we) are to humbly serve, just as Jesus did. It was not their place to take up a title that venerated any one of them above each other. It is likewise not our place to take up a title that would elevate oneself above all others in His church (e.g., pope, archbishop, reverend, pastor, etc.).

The apostles were, undoubtedly, granted great authority in the kingdom—the kingdom being the church. The keys of the kingdom of heaven were not granted to all the followers of Jesus—only the twelve, after all. What precisely does that mean? Popular Catholic imagery depicts Peter as being the doorman of heaven; literally having the keys to the gates of God’s dwelling place.

Having already established that the keys were given to all the apostles, what then could it mean? “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” (Mat. 16:19). What was the unique responsibility of the apostles? Establishing the church. Jesus bought it with His blood; He therefore is the sole owner of it. But when He ascended in Acts 1, He left it only partially built. It would be by the acts of the apostles, through inspiration of the Holy Spirit, that the rest of the church would be constructed. Paul refers to the household of God as, “having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone” (Eph. 2:20). Of no one else during the first century can it be said that they had a hand in laying the foundation of the church except the apostles. These men bore witness to Jesus. An important point to remember is that they were actual eyewitnesses of His miracles—not to be confused with various denomination’s colloquial misuse of the term.

They were personally chosen by Jesus Himself, or by miraculous means not overtly involving Jesus personally in the case of Matthias (Acts 1:20-26). Acts 2 records the establishment of the church and the first gospel sermon being preached by all twelve of the apostles in various tongues (Acts 2:1-14). It was uniquely to them that the keys of the kingdom were granted, demonstrated in that they were the ones through which the Holy Spirit operated in establishing the church after Jesus left.

Jesus giving the “keys of the kingdom of heaven” to the apostles was Him giving them the responsibility of beginning the church in His absence. That piece of the mystery being elucidated, let’s consider the next bit of popularly misinterpreted verbiage: “…and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” From a conversation with a Catholic friend of this writer, this apparently means that Peter was given authority to “bind” and “loose” doctrine as the pope. This, on its face, is an absurd claim. The apostles had no authority to take away from or add to the Gospel they were commanded to deliver. Paul and Peter both stated as much in Galatians 1:8-9 and 2 Peter 3:16 respectively.

The immediate conversation that follows Matthew 16:13-20 is also relevant regarding the supposed authority of Peter. In verses 21-23, Jesus tells the apostles that He must die and be resurrected. Peter, not liking what Jesus was saying, dared to rebuke Him for it. Jesus then wastes no time in reproving Peter, going so far as to call him Satan for presuming to tell Him what He should and shouldn’t do. This certainly doesn’t seem to be the behavior of one who is supposedly the head of the church, and would logically have a better understanding of the things to come than anyone else.

Paul also challenged Peter publicly for showing partiality to his Jewish brethren (Gal. 2:11-14), again indicating that Peter did not have greater authority than his counterparts. Furthermore, Peter rejected the worship of men when he came to Cornelius’ house (Acts 10:24-26). Certainly, then, he did not tell them that he alone was the vicar (or representative) of Christ—or that he was infallible. Also, in his own epistles, he did not attempt to honor himself above the other apostles, which is demonstrated clearly in 2 Peter 3:1-2; 15-16.

Knowing that neither Peter nor the rest of the apostles were going about binding and loosing as they personally saw fit, what then did Jesus mean? These terms are used in a legal sense: to bind is to put into effect, as in a law, and to loose is to nullify, or make of no effect. Jesus was making reference to a signal event in the history of God’s people—the transition from the Law of Moses to the Law of Christ. This was, again, something that would occur after He exited the physical world.

And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. For where there is a testament, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is in force after men are dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives (Heb. 9:15-17).

The author of Hebrews makes clear in this passage the separation between the old and new. Jesus gave the responsibility of establishing His church to His apostles; thus, they were the ones to bind the New Covenant and loose the Old Covenant, both on earth and in Heaven. Men on earth were no longer beholden to the Law of Moses and likewise keeping that Law was no longer required for entry into Heaven. They were, and are now, beholden to the New Testament on earth. Likewise, the criteria for salvation explained in that Testament are in effect in Heaven.

To rephrase it again, the apostles were to bind Christianity and loose Judaism, and nothing else. They didn’t come up with their own doctrine and practices (Gal. 1:11-12); on the contrary, they frequently spoke against doing just that. Jesus didn’t single out any of them as having more authority in the binding and loosing process. They only spoke that which the Holy Spirit had them speak, just as the prophets in the Old Testament (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20-21).

Interpreting Matthew 16:13-19 as Jesus appointing Peter as the head of His church is pernicious because it has set in motion a dynastic tradition of mere men wrongfully taking the mantle of “head” of His church. Taking such authority carries with it the power to twist, take away from, and/or add to the original doctrine that only the apostles were authorized to deliver. Many would protest that statement, but that is precisely what the Catholic church has been doing for all of its existence.

To presume to speak in the name of (or by the authority of) God and do things contrary to His Word is to take His name in vain. If we love Him, we will keep His commandments (John 14:15). The only way to know His commandments is to study His Word for ourselves. No one can outsource their study of Scripture to another—pope or otherwise. No man can rightfully claim to be head of the church, because Jesus is the only One who is (Eph. 1:22-23).