Treasures from God’s Word and Digging for Spiritual Gems – Whose Thoughts are You thinking? (Matthew 16-17)
Matthew 16:19 (will already be bound, will already be loosened) (nwtsty)
This reference is correct and the NWT (2013) edition actually makes clearer this important verse when the scripture reads “whatever you may bind on earth will already be bound in the heavens, and whatever you may loosen on earth will already be loosened in the heavens”.
However the reason for mentioning this verse is that this verse is often used verbally to support decisions of the elders and the Governing Body. However any such use is a misinterpretation and misuse of this verse.
The context is that Jesus was talking to Peter and Peter alone. It was also in relation to the giving of the keys of the Kingdom.
As the reference states “whatever decision Peter made would be made after (bold ours) the corresponding decision was made in heaven; it would not precede it.” In other words Peter would be following the directions given to him by Jesus from heaven. Indeed the accounts in Acts e.g. (Acts 11:4-16) show that Peter was given a vision before preaching to the Gentiles, and the Holy spirit being poured out on those Gentiles confirmed this decision to all onlookers. (See also Acts 8:14-17 for Samaritans being accepted and Acts 2:1-41 for Jews and Jewish proselytes). In other words, Peter followed the direction he received from heaven. Peter did not make a decision of his own origin that was then accepted by heaven.
Jesus, The Way (jy Chapter 9) – Growing up in Nazareth
Nothing for comment.
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by Smoldering Wick on 2018-02-21 11:25:08
Leaven not of Heaven
(Matthew 16:5-12)
Think twice of what ferments the mind,
And teachings of the heart,
And all that comes from those inclined
To pull the truth apart;
They do not live for love above,
But filled with fettered flaws,
Their reason cannot rhyme with love,
For all their lettered laws;
Yes love is not what Pharisees
Would savvy to remind
The disbelief of Sadducees,
Whose hearts they intertwined,
To join with them in unity,
And power they had sought,
Forsaking love for surety,
And just their common plot,
The truth they cannot bring to heart
For motive to distill,
Intentions have no counterpart
When reason seeks to kill,
So watch yourselves with Pharisees,
All you who search for truth,
And listen not to Sadducees,
Whose words are their vermouth,
To have you join in unity
Too far from heaven's birth,
For they will only live to see
Just what their leaven's worth.
Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2018-02-20 11:32:39
Matthew 16:19 is exactly the scripture that I was focusing on, Tadua. I like your reasoning regarding the Samaritans and Gentiles, which certainly is really counsel to be sure you follow the leadings of God's holy spirit, although in those cases the leading was quite obvious.
Matthew 18:18 (I realise it is next week's reading) is very similar to Matthew 16:19 (barring the keys), but is it not saying that those teaching must make sure they what they say must be solidly in line with the scriptures ?
Sadly many things which are taught are as per publications and cannot be queried, so often meeting items start with a doubtful premise, such as "when Jesus began to rule in 1914" and so many others I cannot list them. Yet they are taught as accepted fact. "Bound in heaven" ? ; not according to the way my Bible reads !
Comment by Dan Adams on 2018-02-20 19:11:02
This post seems timely given Meleti’s video on whether Jehovah has always had an organization. I find it interesting to learn that the GB will use these verses in Matthew to support their leadership while at the same time (as far as I know) denying apostolic succession. From an outsider perspective it sounds a bit like having your cake and eating it too. Or perhaps another misapplication of the type/antitype? (I hope this doesn’t sound offensive; I certainly don’t mean to post something most people here wouldn’t already agree with.)
Comment by Jerome on 2018-02-22 13:27:12
Just wondering if anyone had any thoughts on Albert Barnes comment on Matthew 16:18
" "Thou art a rock. Thou hast shown thyself firm, and suitable for the work of laying the foundation of the church. Upon thee will I build it. Thou shalt be highly honored; thou shalt be first in making known the gospel to both Jews and Gentiles." This was accomplished. See Acts 2:14-36, where he first preached to the Jews, and Acts 10, where he preached the gospel to Cornelius and his neighbors, who were Gentiles. Peter had thus the honor of laying the foundation of the church among the Jews and Gentiles; and this is the plain meaning of this passage. See also Galatians 2:9. But Christ did not mean, as the Roman Catholics say he did, to exalt Peter to supreme authority above all the other apostles, or to say that he was the only one upon whom he would rear his church. See Acts 15, where the advice of James, and not that of Peter, was followed. See also Galatians 2:11, where Paul withstood Peter to his face, because he was to be blamed - a thing which could not have happened if Christ (as the Roman Catholics say) meant that Peter was absolute and infallible. More than all, it is not said here, or anywhere else in the Bible, that Peter would have infallible successors who would be the vicegerents of Christ and the head of the church. The whole meaning of the passage is this: "I will make you the honored instrument of making known my gospel first to Jews and Gentiles, and I will make you a firm and distinguished preacher in building my church."Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2018-02-22 15:56:12
Exegesis at work. Well explained, Jerome!
Reply by Jerome on 2018-02-22 18:39:01
It didn't appear that Jesus was alluding to Isaiah 28:16. He was directly addressing Simon who he had previously named Peter, and to whom he later gave the keys to the kingdom. Also according to 1 Peter 2:5 and Revelation 21:14 the apostles were foundation stones.
Reply by Dan Adams on 2018-02-23 17:12:34
I agree, I think Isaiah 28:16 is more a reference to Christ, and now Christ gives the apostles a share in building the foundation of his church. The rock can be Jesus. It can be Peter. I don’t think it has to be only Jesus, or only Peter. Albert Barnes’s commentary shows that one can allow for Peter being the rock (as Catholics do) without having to believe everything else the Catholic Church teaches about this passage. Interestingly, Abraham is also referred to as a rock in Isaiah 51. He has the honor of being the father of the Israelites, the rock from which they were hewn. Now Peter is given the honor of being the rock, the foundation, the first of those to confess Jesus as the Christ, in the new covenant.