Calvin Synod Herald, 2013 (114. évfolyam, 3-12. szám)

2013-07-01 / 7-8. szám

10

CALVIN SYNOD HERALD

from Isaiah 22: 22, but from a different approach. It links them to the building metaphor from the previous verse (i.e. Mat. 16: 18). According to this interpretation the metaphor implies a house or a temple. Then Christ would be the master of the house and just as the Lord lays the keys of the house of David on the shoulders of Eliakim in Isaiah 22:22, “so Jesus commits to Peter the keys of his house, the Kingdom of Heaven, and thereby installs him as administrator of the house.” Jesus takes the keys from the scribes and Pharisees, who purportedly had it, but who did not use it, and gives it to Peter by given him the task of leading the people of God into the “resurrection kingdom.” In Matthew 23: 13 Jesus blames the scholars and Pharisees who “lock people out” of the kingdom of heaven. Jesus here refers to the “teaching” of the scholars and Pharisees. This observation resonates with the parallel passage in Luke 11:52, where the author of the gospel uses the phrase “the key of knowledge.” Grundy therefore indicates that “[a]s a Christian scholar, Peter is to use the keys of Jesus’ words to prohibit the kind of behavior that falsifies discipleship and blocks entrance to the kingdom, and to promote the kind of behavior that verifies discipleship and gains entrance into the kingdom.” He furthermore points out that the strange verb tense “will have been bound in heaven” and “will have been loosened in heaven” indicates that Peter’s binding and loosing will have already been determined in heaven. Peter has received (and will receive) Jesus’ words, which are already spoken and derived from heaven. This authority (of keys) is not just for Peter but for all of Jesus’ disciples as it is indicated in Matthew 18: 18. Gundry says, “Peter represents every disciple ... in having been commissioned by Jesus as a scholar who teaches the discipled nations ‘to keep all the things, as many as they are, that [Jesus] has commanded [them]’ (28: 19-20a).”

R. T. France sharpens our understanding about what kind of authority is in view here. According to him it is not so much the authority of the porter, who controls admission to the house, but a steward’s, who regulates its administration, just as it is suggested by the text in Isaiah 22 (especially in verses 15 and 22). That authority, transferred by the keys, is exercised in binding and loosing, which were technical terms for the pronouncements of rabbis on what was or what was not permitted (to “bind” was to forbid, to “loose” was to permit). The authority here probably refers to some kind of “legislative authority.” It is even clearer if we take a look of the parallel accounts in Matthew 18: 18 and John 20: 23. An early instance of Peter’s exercise of this authority was when he was chosen to pioneer and authorize the church’s acceptance of Gentile converts (Acts 10 - 11; cf. Acts 15: 7-11) It is obvious from these examples that the case it is not that heaven will ratify Peter’s independent decision, but that Peter will pass on decisions that have already been made in heaven.

Now it is time to turn to the rabbinic literature to see its interpretation on “binding and loosing.” There is an interesting discussion in Berakhoth 28a from the 2nd century C.E. between Joshua ben Hananiah and Rabban Gamaliel (Gamliel II) about a certain Ammonite proselyte, named Judah, who asks the question: “Am I permitted to enter the assembly?” Gamaliel says no, citing Deuteronomy 23: 4, but R. Hanninah answers favorably, saying that “Sennacherib king of Assyria long ago went up and mixed up all the nations, as it says, I have removed the

bounds of the peoples and have robbed their treasures and have brought down as one mighty their inhabitants [Isaiah 10: 13]; and whatever strays [from a group] is assumed to belong to the larger section of the group.” Hananiah here basically says that we must presume that this man came from another nation. Gamaliel yielded to this interpretation and thus it became the presiding interpretation of the passage. Here we see how two leading rabbis establish a ruling principle from the Law about who can and who cannot enter into the assembly of God.

However, this is not the only example of such authority of the rabbis in 1st and 2nd century C.E. According to Colin Brown “[t]he authority of the rabbis as teachers was shown by their being able to forbid or allow certain things. They were able to excommunicate, i.e. exclude a person from the synagogue, though this is relatively seldom mentioned in rabbinic writings. Their decisions claimed to have validity in heaven, i.e. with God.” Lachs says that to “bind and loose” in Matthew 16: 19 “are undoubtedly translations of either the Aram, asar and share or the Heb. asar and hitir. They mean to forbid and/or to permit some act which determined by the application of the halakhah.” We can find such example in Terumoth 5: 4 (about ritual cleanness or uncleanness), Jebamoth 3b and 13b (about permitted or forbidden marriage relations), Nedarim 66a (about which oaths can be “loosed” and which ones cannot), and Jebamoth 38a (about the “doubtful son” in the case of an inheritance). There are other examples but even from the ones above we can see that these scholars possessed authority on the most serious issues of life. This sheds light on Peter’s “final appearance” in the Book of Acts in chapter 15. From the viewpoint of a first century religious Jew (follower of Jesus of Nazareth or not in those early days made little difference) the gathering (to which later Christian literature refers as the Council of Jerusalem) is a classic example of how to use the “rabbinic authority” of “binding and loosing.” Those who belonged to the “sect of the Pharisees” brought an issue before the Beth ha-Midrash (The House of Learning) and those who had the authority “from heaven” decided which Scripture was authoritative in the matter and how to interpret it.

The evidence all leads to the same direction. From the standpoint of a first century devout Jew, Jesus’ words in Matthew 16: 19 represents transition of religious authority. Peter and the other disciples were about to be sent out as scholars who possessed authority to make decisions about serious life-issues, such as who can be welcomed into the assembly of God, and who are not. They received authority to make decisions about what kind of rules the members of the assembly must keep and in what manner. In the Book of Acts we can see indeed that Peter had a leading role in the early church’s governance.

Rev. Viktor J. Toth