Here is an literal translation from Greek:
“Whatever you shall bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”
Already bound. Already loosed.
But what difference does that make? Any proclamation of the Church on earth would already have been ratified in heaven. How would that diminish the Church's Teaching Authority?
And this makes sense, since this Church is Christ's Church, "the pillar and foundation of truth." The Church is the foundation of Truth, which is Christ Himself.
The Church is the Body of Christ, with Christ as Its Head.
This conforms with Jesus' admonition, "if he won't listen to the church, treat him as a pagan or tax collector."
As to the keys...
Peter is given a significant position of authority in the *kingdom on earth* (”The kingdom is here, as elsewhere in this Gospel, the kingdom to be inaugurated when the Son of Man came upon the clouds of heaven. . . .” Constable ), not in the ekklesia of the current age.
This brief conversation has helped me understand where you are coming from and credit you with belief in what you’ve been taught, without the skills to rightly divide the Word of Truth.
Here is Constable's exegesis regarding "the keys" of Matthew 16:19, and compare it to what I have posted further below.
ConstableConstable vastly understates the authority of the office of the vice-regent in the ancient Davidic kingdom.Probably the keys stand for the judicial authority that chief stewards of monarchs exercised in the ancient world (Isaiah 22:15; Isaiah 22:22; cf. Revelation 1:18; Revelation 3:7). [Note: Vincent, 1:96.] They could permit people to enter the monarch's presence or give them access to certain areas and privileges. As the Judge of all humanity, Jesus gave this authority to Peter. Of course, some of the other Apostles exercised it too (Matthew 18:18; Acts 14:27).
To begin with, the Bible tells us that Jesus is the King of the eternal and redeemed Davidic Kingdom. (Luke 1:32)
In the ancient Davidic kingdom, the palace majordomo or chief steward served as the representative of the king (or vice-regent) in the king's absence. In the king's absence, the vice regent held full plenary authority.
Here is how this authority is described in Isaiah 22:
I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the people of Judah. I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.More of this succession in office can be seen in Isaiah 22:15-25
The authority of this office was represented by an over-sized key, the key of David, which the vice-regent wore around his neck. (Isaiah 22:22)
As the King of the eternal House of David, Jesus holds the Key of David. (Rev. 3:7)
Jesus gave the "keys of the kingdom," representing the office of the vice-regent of the eternal, redeemed House of David, to Peter. (Matthew 16:19)
In The King's earthly absence, the vice-regent of the eternal, redeemed Davidic kingdom holds plenary authority over Christ's earthly Church.
And “Whatever you shall bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”
Is that you Hillary??? :-)
"Any proclamation of the Church on earth would already have been ratified in heaven. How would that diminish the Church's Teaching Authority?”
First, please note that the Lord’s Words in Matthew 16 were addressed to Peter, but He repeated the same thing to all the Apostles in Matthew 18:18. As the representatives of their Lord, they would exercise authority according to His Word.
Now, to respond to your point above, the difference is that the passage teaches the opposite of what you claim - probably do to a poor translation of the Greek into English.
The Greek doesn’t mean God would obey what the Apostles did on earth, but that they would and should do on earth whatever God had already willed in heaven - representing that revealed will on earth.
This is vastly different than some supposed power that they would wield. That superpower isn’t in the text.
These were decisions Peter and the other Apostles were to implement *as they received instruction from heaven.*
Peter and the others carried out God’s directions as revealed (example, the lowering of the sheet of every kind of animal to eat in order to tell Peter that gentiles were not unclean). This privilege of manifesting binding and loosing on earth was demonstrated on the day of Pentecost when the Gospel was opened to Jews as well as with Cornelius when it was opened to Gentiles and other instances as well - at God’s instruction.
The Apostles could only do on earth what God already decreed in heaven. God controls the church. The church does not control God!
“And this makes sense, since this Church is Christ's Church, "the pillar and foundation of truth." The Church is the foundation of Truth, which is Christ Himself.”
Actually, it makes no sense STA. The church is meant to a the foundation, supporting the Word of God. The pillar that brings attention to God’s Truth. The church isn’t the truth. The Bible is truth, inspired directly by God the Holy Spirit.
“The Church is the Body of Christ, with Christ as Its Head.”
The local gathering of believers is the localized expression of the Body of Christ. The entirety of all believers (not church members) of all time is the full Body of Christ.
Every believer, wherever found, in any age, is the Body of Christ. Not every member of a church is part of the Body of Christ, since membership comes by faith in Him and His Gospel of Grace, and not denominational membership - whether Rome or across the river. That distinction is meaningless for salvation. Without salvation, there is not membership in the Body of Christ.
“This conforms with Jesus' admonition, "if he won't listen to the church, treat him as a pagan or tax collector.””
Now you are back to misrepresentation. This passage you quote is about the local church arbitrating between believers who have a disagreement and has no meaning beyond this. Nor does any other passage say anything more.
“Constable vastly understates the authority of the office of the vice-regent in the ancient Davidic kingdom.”
That is rich! You gave me a chuckle. I thank you for that!
Thomas Constable, a good and godly man I respect and one of my former professors in seminary doesn’t “understate the office.”
You can read his commentary on Isaiah, verse by verse. Having studied, written a commentary on the entire Bible - every single verse , taught for more than 35 years at the graduate school level in a major seminary, and then made his life work available for free on the internet, is very familiar with the entirety of Scripture, including Isaiah.
He was one of my Old Testament Bible teachers - including the Prophets. I not only had to outline Isaiah for Dr. Constable, I sat and listened to his exposition of all of Isaiah. I can assure you as an eyewitness that he is well aware of all taught in Isaiah. Perhaps it is just that what he wrote isn't what you heard from Rome?
“To begin with, the Bible tells us that Jesus is the King of the eternal and redeemed Davidic Kingdom. (Luke 1:32)”
Yes. He is the ruler of the Davidic Kingdom and will reign over it on earth after his return. He is also the Bridegroom of His Bride - the body of Christ as noted above.
"Here is how this authority is described in Isaiah 22: I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the people of Judah. I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. More of this succession in office can be seen in Isaiah 22:15-25"
Yes, except that the "succession" isn't what you portray (below).
"As the King of the eternal House of David, Jesus holds the Key of David. (Rev. 3:7)"
So clearly, He hasn't given it to Peter.
"Jesus gave the "keys of the kingdom," representing the office of the vice-regent of the eternal, redeemed House of David, to Peter. (Matthew 16:19)”"
Well, first, no he did not.
Second, if you really want to go down that road, please note that in Isaiah 22, God took the keys away from one man (Shebna) and gave them to another (Eliakim). There's your "succession." Failure!
He did this because of the pride of Shebna. So, please note, there is nothing permanent about delegated authority. Nor does Shebna nor Eliakim get to pass on the keys to whoever they wish. Only GOD did so. No one voted. No one cast lots.
Please note too that even Eliakim FAILED in his responsibility.
People who trusted in either Shebna or Eliakim were disappointed. Our trust isn’t in people - even when chosen for a brief period. Our trust is in an unfailing God. Isaiah 22:25 is a prophecy of the failure of Eliakim.
Yet when you read posts from Catholics, who undoubtedly copy and paste from Catholic sites that are echo chambers of Rome and not of God’s Word, you get a selected reading that picks and chooses. In this instance, they try to stitch together something that exalts Peter to be more than Christ said. This it the same pattern that makes Mary a co-redemptrix and all kinds of other demigoddess things.
It is worth noting for other readers this quote from Word Pictures in the New Testament, dealing with not elevating Peter, since neither he nor the other Apostles took Christ’s Words to mean Peter would be exalted.
“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 (Matt. 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.”
“In The King's earthly absence, the vice-regent of the eternal, redeemed Davidic kingdom holds plenary authority over Christ's earthly Church.”
Peter is in heaven. He is absent. There is no provision in the Hebrew Scriptures to pass on keys, as noted above. There is no instruction to the church anywhere in the NT to pass on keys.” Peter served with the other Apostles to open doors for the Gospel to advance to every group of nations. It is complete.
Peter and the others will have roles in Christ’s reign on earth when he returns. Each will sit on a throne over a tribe of Israel. Peter will likely have some earthly authority (I believe there is a case to be made there). What I’m telling you is that if you take time to delve into the Scriptures themselves and not just read the online echo from Rome, you will find it doesn’t mean what you’ve been told.
Best