Thursday of Week 18 in Ordinary Time - Matt 16: 13-23 - Daily Gospel Exegesis

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:10):
Hey everyone. Welcome back to another episode
of The Daily gospel exegesis podcast, where we do our best to
really pull apart. The scriptures verse by verse
and do a proper exegesis on the text to help.
You understand what the author was intending to teach.
So that's called doing an exegesis of the literal sense.
In this podcast every single day, that's what we do.

(00:32):
We look at the Gospel reading from today's mass and we go
through it, verse by verse to see if we can work out.
What's happening in the text. Today, we have a really, very
well-known text and it's one that has Catholics.
You probably heard many times and you probably heard lots of
really important interpretationsof it.
And as we go through, I think you'll see that doing an

(00:52):
exegesis as we do in this podcast, is actually really
useful for a text like this because there's so many layers
and every word that Jesus uses here is actually layered with
meaning and I think you'll find this to be a really rewarding
study as we go through. So Matthew chapter 16 verses 13
to 19 when Jesus came to the region of caesarea.

(01:13):
Philippi he put this question tohis disciples.
Who do people say the son of manis and they said some say he is
John the Baptist some Elijah andothers, Jeremiah or one of the
prophets. But you he said, who do you say
that? I am then Simon.
Peter spoke up. You are the Christ.

(01:35):
He said the son of the Living, God, Jesus replied, Simon, son
of Jonah. You are a happy man because it
was not flesh and blood that revealed this to you.
But my Father in heaven. So I now say to you, you are
Peter and on this rock, I will build my church and the gates of

(01:57):
the underworld can never hold out against it.
I will give you the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, whatever you
bind on Earth. Shall be considered Bound in
heaven and whatever you loose. So on Earth shall be considered
loosed in heaven, then he gave the disciples strict orders not
to tell anyone that he was the Christ.

(02:21):
From that time. Jesus began to make it clear to
his disciples that he was destined to go to Jerusalem and
suffer grievously at the hands of the elders and chief priests
and scribes to be put to death and to be raised up on the third
day. Then taking him aside, Peter
started to remonstrate with him.Heaven, preserve you.

(02:44):
Lord, he said this must not happen to you, but he turned and
said to Peter get behind me. Satan you are an obstacle in my
path because the way you think is not God's way but man's So
that's the text we want to look at today and as you know, this
is the text where as Catholics. We believe Jesus makes Peter the

(03:07):
first pope and as we go through I think you will see that.
The case for that is even stronger than you might suspect.
Now this is a text that you'll hear read a lot during the
lectionary. So it's red on the Feast of st.
Peter's chair. It's also read on the celebrity
solemnity of Saints, Peter and Paul.
It's also read on Thursday of week 18 in ordinary time and

(03:29):
also its Two on one of the Sundays in year a as well.
So you'll probably hear this various times during the year
Let's start with verse 13 and this helps us set the context
when Jesus came to the region ofcaesarea Philippi.
So Jesus is actually starting Ministry in a new area here.
So it's the region of caesarea Philippi.

(03:50):
Now that was 25 miles Northeast of Galilee, which is where he
has been doing most of his work up until now.
So caesarea Philippi is in a region of Israel called Galore
notice. It's basically a gentile area
and in particular caesarea Philippi was particularly well.
Our own because it had a cultic shrine where the Pagan God pan
was worshipped and that's going to come in, really interesting

(04:12):
in this particular section that will look at Jesus put this
question to his disciples. Now this is a private discussion
with his disciples on the road so it's not to the crowds in
general, it's a question. He puts to his own disciples
that have been with him for quite a while.
Now up till this point Jesus hasbeen concealing his identity,
basically, and what he's going to do here is he's going to see

(04:35):
if his Apples have perceived what his identity is.
So he asks, them, who demands say that the son of man is now
firstly, we need to say something about the term son of
man. Son of man, basically means
Messiah and Jesus often uses it in reference to himself.
So, it's sort of his preferred way of referring to himself as

(04:58):
Messiah. So when he says, who do men say
that, I, the son of man is he basically means who do men say
that. I am now Jesus.
Is the answer to the question? Jesus knows what men think of
him, so he's not asking this in this question because he doesn't
know the answer. He's actually just wanting to
establish some common ground forthe rest of the conversation.

(05:18):
So he sort of using it as a starting point to get the
conversation going. Now, as we're going through
here, keep in mind, the region that they're just entering
caesarea Philippi, was that area?
Well, known for worshipping false gods verse 14.
Some say he is John the Baptist some Elijah ER and others
Jeremiah or one of the prophets.So that's what the disciples

(05:41):
say. In reply, the disciples here are
listing some different identities.
That various different people, thought Jesus was apparently,
some people thought he is John the Baptist, some people thought
his Elijah and some people thinkhe's a Prophet.
This is what different people are thinking about.
Jesus at this time, period by this point, in Matthew's gospel,

(06:02):
Jesus has already performed manysigns, and miracles and is
already known as One who teacheswith authority that was
mentioned in chapter 7, so many had come to believe that Jesus
is definitely pivotal in Salvation history, and many
people believed he was a true prophet of God and some also
saying him might be John the Baptist or Elijah.

(06:22):
Now they didn't the Jews didn't really believe in reincarnation.
So it seems that what this groupof Jews who think he is, John
the Baptist or Elijah. Is they basically think that he
is, carrying on the spirit or the particular mandate, or
Omission of John the Baptist or Elijah and Jews did believe this
could happen. For example, we know from

(06:43):
elsewhere in the gospels that John the Baptist is literally
carrying on the mission of Elijah in a very much real
tangible way. Now, these same three
possibilities are the same ones that we encountered earlier in
the gospel with the incident, with King Herod.
So the same sort of group of possibilities is listed there.
What's what they've got in, common is John the Baptist

(07:04):
Elijah Jeremiah Or one of the prophets.
So that's the group that's listed here.
These are all Preparatory roles for the Messiah.
So, it seems that lots of peoplein this time period, at this
point in Jesus, life are willingto say, maybe Jesus is
continuing the, in the spirit ofElijah, or the spirit of
Jeremiah, or maybe his one of the other prophets.

(07:25):
Maybe he's a new Prophet, but itseems like not many people are
willing to say that he's the Messiah.
That is not a very well-established fact, yet
amongst the people not many people.
Willing to come right out and say he's the Messiah because so
far, he hasn't really done the political things that they would
expect the Messiah to do verse 15, Jesus says to them.

(07:47):
But you who do you say that I am.
So this is the key question. This is what he wants them to
get into talking about verse 16,Simon Peter spoke up, so notice
who speaks up Peter, that's significant.
It shows that he is speaking on behalf of the Apostles.
He's the leader who speaks on behalf of the Apostles.
Very clear in the New Testament.That Peter is the leader

(08:09):
possible and here's what he saysto Jesus.
You are the Christ. Now, this is quite profound
Christ means Messiah. So here Jesus says, you are the
Messiah, so, whereas the other people in the crowds, in
general, haven't been willing tosay that he's the Messiah.
Jesus hasn't even fully revealedthat yet, Peter recognizes you

(08:30):
are the Messiah. This is the one, the Jews have
been waiting for. So for Peter to say, this is
really quite significant. Now, this confession of Peter
appears in some form in all fourgospels are all four gospel.
Authors, know that what Peter says here about Jesus is quite
important. You are the Messiah.
This is a turning point in the gospels.
And then he adds in this really interesting phrase, you are the

(08:53):
son of the Living. God now, this is an additional
claim. Apparently, very few Jews
believe that the Messiah would literally be God's son.
They would to say that God had ason is Blasphemy in the minds of
the Jews. But having said that, there was
a bit of a close association between this idea of God's son
in a metaphorical sense and the Messiah, because the anointed

(09:15):
line of davidic kings in the OldTestament, they were considered
to be God's Sons. So, if you look at the davidic,
Covenant, in particular, it saysthat David's Kingdom and his
descendants will be considered to be God's sons and the Jews
believe that the Messiah would be a new David.
So it's logical to think that. In some sense, they would be
okay. Okay, with believing that the

(09:36):
Messiah was in some sense. God's son, but there seems to be
something more going on here. It seems to be Peter is saying
you are the actual Sun, the literal Son of God.
Peter has been listening to Jesus preached for some time
now. And now, Peter is enlightened by
God, the Holy Spirit guides Peter here and Peter declares
that Jesus is indeed God's son. So, now, Jesus says to him in

(09:58):
verse 17, Simon, son of Jonah. Now, that's Peter's proper name,
basically Simon and he's the sonof someone called Jonah.
You are a happy man or you can also translate this blessed are
you? So the word can be translated
blessed or happy and basically it means favored.

(10:19):
You have God's favor and we see this in the Beatitudes as well.
When Jesus says, blessed are those who mourn.
Etc. So basically means fortunate you
are fortunate. You have God's favor.
So here he says to Peter, you are a blessed, man.
You have God's favor. It was not flesh and blood that
revealed this to you. Now, the phrase flesh and blood

(10:40):
is a Jewish word, meaning, humanbeings.
Basically, it's a Semitic word. So, when Jesus says, here, it
was not flesh and blood that revealed this to you, he's
saying to Peter, you did not getthis knowledge from yourself off
from human beings. It's not the result of your own
human thinking instead. He says my Father in Heaven

(11:00):
revealed this to you. So Jesus here tells Peter That
God has revealed this information to him.
He says, to Peter, God has givenyou this information.
He's given you a revelation now that makes sense.
Because Jesus, at this point, hasn't explicitly said that he's
the Messiah and he definitely hasn't said anything directly
about being the son of the Living God.
So the fact that Peter calls him, these three things, it must

(11:24):
be because he's inspired by God.God has given him a revelation
to see this So Jesus has just started to give Peter some
blessings and he's going to continue in this string of
blessings. He's going to give to Peter.
So follow with us Verse 18. So now I say to you so that
indicates Jesus is about to declare something important.

(11:45):
Now interestingly Jesus is aboutto reverse what Peter just said,
Peter just called him, the Christ, the son of the Living.
God, that's what Peter just saidabout.
Jesus now, Jesus says to Peter, You are the son of Jonah so that
concept of sonship is used both ways.
Jesus goes on, you are Peter. Now before this, you just called

(12:07):
him Simon. That's what he called him a
couple of phrases ago. And now he says you are Peter.
So he's going to make a point here about this word Peter.
Now, first thing to say about this is, Peter is actually given
this title, Simon is given the title Peter earlier in the
gospels. If you look at John chapter 1,
The First Time, Peter meets Jesus, Jesus calls him.

(12:27):
Peter, or at least Jesus says tohim, you will be called Peter.
Now, it seems to be the moment when Jesus says, this is now a
proper title for you. And he's going to explain why
Peter is an appropriate title for Simon.
The Greek word here is Petrus, which roughly means Rock.
And we're going to talk more about this word Petrus because

(12:49):
you probably heard the some other interpretations from
non-catholic Christians who argue about the meaning of this
word, pet your ass. But in Greek, you what it
definitely says is you Petrus, which is translated in English
as Peter. The symbolism of rock is
important. So firstly, the fact that Jesus
calls him a rock rather than some other idiom.
Like you are a piece of wood or something.

(13:11):
Rock is important. The foundation of the temple in
Jerusalem, at this time, period was built on a rock and it was
widely believed by the Jews. This is interesting.
It was believed that this rock that the temple was founded on
prevented the forces of Hell from escaping onto the Earth.
Earth. So, it's interesting that Jesus
now says, you are Peter, so you could interpret this to mean,

(13:33):
you are the true Rock. And that would entail that Peter
is being founded as the new Temple, or at least the
foundation of the new Temple andalso that his Temple.
This new Temple is also going tohave the power to stop the
forces of Hell from being Unleashed on Earth.
And that seems to be confirmed by what Jesus says, at the end
of this passage here. So already, the concept of rock

(13:54):
would be rich in the mind of theJewish hearers.
And the readers of Matthew's gospel.
So he says, you are Peter, or you are rock and on this rock.
Now, let's stop you. The first time Jesus says Rock.
So when he says you are Peter, he says Petros, that's what it
says in Matthew's gospel in Greek.
Now he says Petra. So in the Greek, you what it

(14:16):
says is you are Petrus. And on this Petra, I will build
my church. A lot of Scholars have tried to
make something of this. So Petra is actually a feminine
word. Word, whereas Petrus is not.
So from that some Scholars have tried to say that.
Well, clearly the meanings are different.
Clearly, Jesus is not referring to Peter here when he says,

(14:37):
Petrus is referring to Peter. But now, when he says Petra, he
must be referring to a differentRock.
And from that, the scholars willsay the foundation that Jesus is
going to talk about here is not Peter.
It's actually a different Rock, which could be the confession of
faith that that Peter gives, or perhaps Jesus himself is The
Rock. The first thing to say in

(14:59):
response to this is that although it is true that two
different Greek words are used here Petros and Petra.
In the time period of Jesus, they actually have the same
meaning, although earlier in history, Petros and Petra, one
meant a large Rock, and one meant a small rock, by the time
of Jesus, the historical evidence indicates that Petros

(15:21):
and Petra had the same basic meaning, which is Rock.
There was no significant difference too.
To the two words and they meeting and we'll talk more
about why Matthew chooses to usetwo different words then.
So what's going on with these two words?
Well in Aramaic. And that's what Jesus probably
would have spoken. In fact, almost certainly he
would have spoken Aramaic hear what Jesus would have said in

(15:43):
Aramaic is not petrol some Petrabecause they're Greek words in
our make what he would have saidis Kiefer.
That is the Petros and Petra areboth translations of the word
Kieffer. So what he would have actually
said is Kiefer twice, Ice. So what would have come out of
Jesus mouth? Here is you are kefir.
And on this key far I will buildmy church.

(16:04):
It's the same word. He would have used the same word
twice because there is no different Aramaic word for large
Rock and small rock. He would have just said, kefir
and kefir means, large Rock. We can confirm this.
We can confirm that what Jesus would have called Peter here is
in fact Kieffer, because if you look at elsewhere in the New
Testament, Peter is actually called cephas.

(16:26):
That's what Paul and some othersin.
New Testament, call Peter later on he's called cephas.
That's what he was known as by his Aramaic name, he was not
known by the Greek version of this which was Petrus.
Although Matthew tells us Petrosbecause he's writing in Greek,
what he was, commonly known as was Kieffer so that tells us
what Jesus would have called Peter here was the Aramaic word

(16:47):
Kieffer. So then how do we respond to
this objection? Well, why does Matthew used two
different words? Why does it matter?
You just use the same word both times.
If it really He is true, that Jesus was intending to refer to
Peter both times. He talks about rock the basic
answer. It seems to be is Matthew, is
choosing to do this for literaryreasons, he's trying to avoid
repetition. Basically, in Greek, it would

(17:10):
sound awkward to say you are Petrus and on this petrol.
So, I'll build my church. It would actually not sound very
good for the reader. So, Matthew, as a stylistic
thing translates, one word, Petrus, and one word Petra in
order to avoid repetition. Basically, and that might seem a
bit strange but That is something that the gospel
authors often. Do they try to make their

(17:32):
sentences as readable as possible?
And sometimes, the repetition can prevent that from happening?
Another example of this happens in John chapter 21 when Jesus is
talking to Peter. After the resurrection, there's
a famous conversation where Jesus says to Peter feed my
sheep, feed my lambs and then also do you love me?

(17:54):
Do you love me? And you've probably heard some
interpretations, which would saySay that the fact that different
Greek words for love and for sheep.
And for lambs, a user, indicatesa significant difference in
meaning, but actually most Scholars would say, no, there
really isn't. It's just that John, as the
gospel author is trying to avoid.
Repetition by using different, Greek words, the same thing is
happening here. It's not that, not that Jesus

(18:16):
used different words in the Aramaic, you would have just
used the same words, it's just that the gospel author in order
to avoid repetition has used twodifferent variants of the word
kefir, which would be Petros andPetra.
So hopefully that makes sense. Now, remember a lot of
non-catholics would say that it's not Peter that's being
identified as The Rock when he says, on this rock.

(18:37):
I will build my church. They would say no.
It's actually Jesus himself. That's the rock.
That's going to have the church built on it, something like
that. If you think about the whole
context, though, this section ofreally doesn't make sense.
What Jesus says here, when he says on this rock, I will build
my church. It's in between two other
promises that are clearly given to Peter.

(18:57):
So Jesus first says to Peter blessed, are you?
So it's a black, a blessing, he gives to Peter.
And then after this phrase, about on this rock, I will build
my church. Jesus then says to Peter, I will
give you the keys of the kingdomand that's clearly to Peter.
So it doesn't really make sense to say that he's switching away
from Peter. Clearly, the whole section is
blessings about Peter, Peter is The Rock.

(19:20):
And on top of that, if some, whoinsist on this, the fact that
petrol some petrol. Two different Greek words are
used. Basically, that would mean that
Jesus here is saying to Peter, Peter you are blessed, you are
an insignificant, small Little Rock.
I will give you the keys of the kingdom.
It really doesn't make sense to read it that way with the

(19:42):
petrol, some petrol difference. So if you look at the whole
context and you look at if you understand why things have been
translated from the Aramaic intothe Greek, the way they have by
Matthew. It's very clear that all the way
through here Jesus is giving Peter strong promises.
He's saying you are the the larger Look upon you.
I will build my church. It's all about Peter all the way
through. So then he says, I will build my

(20:04):
church. So let's spend a bit of time.
Talking about this phrase, this word church church.
Actually already had a meaning in the time of Jesus.
So it was the Greek word Ecclesia.
So, we shouldn't imagine that Jesus is inventing a new word
here, in the time of Jesus, Ecclesia was used to refer to
the community of God's chosen people.

(20:25):
In the Old Testament, it's used to refer to the congregation
Education or the assembly in theOld Testament and there's a
scene where in the book of Exodus, where God's people are
at the foot of Mount Sinai, they're actually referred there
as the clearly the Ecclesia. So that's like the Old Testament
Church God's people Israel when they gather together in a formal
way. So, when Jesus, he says, I will

(20:46):
build my church. The emphasis is on, my I will
build my church. So his readers would have
understood him to mean, that he's planning to build a new
community of God's people. It's the Community foretold by
the prophets. That's how his readers would
have understood it. He's building the new community
of God's people that they'd beenlooking forward to and then he

(21:06):
says the powers of death will not be able to Prevail against
it and in fact in our lectionarysays the gates of the underworld
can never hold out against it. So there's some interesting sort
of translational things going onhere.
In Israel's theology. There were they did actually
believe that there was sort of gates to the underworld.

(21:29):
These were would be the entranceto sheol or Hades.
That's where the souls of dead people go.
So when Jesus says the powers ofdeath, he's really saying the
powers of Hades, the powers of the realm of the Dead, will not
be able to Prevail against it. Some Jews, actually, believed
that evil Powers resided in the Underworld is in.
There was literally evil spiritsof some kind in there.

(21:52):
On top of that, we Build anotherelement to what Jesus is saying
here. Some lady Jewish thinking
believe that the foundation stone of the temple actually
blocked off the literal shaft tip leading to the underworld.
So that might be being alluded to here as well.
They believed the foundation stone of the temple blocked.
The evil powers from Hades getting into the world and here

(22:14):
Peters being made, the New Foundation Stone of the new
Temple, the powers of death can never hold out against it.
Now, there's two different ways that we can understand this idea
of the powers of death or the powers of Hades.
It could mean the powers of eviland Satan as in Satan will not
be able to ultimately overcome the church.

(22:35):
It could also mean the power of death will not be able to
overcome the church. And that would mean the church
will never go out of existence. You could go with either
interpretation and in church history.
Both interpretations have been used.
Maybe Jesus has both in mind. He says the powers of death or
the gates of the underworld. Never hold out against it.
Now, that's defensive if we wantto try and get the mental

(22:57):
picture here he says the gates of the underworld won't be able
to stop you if you come up against them.
So if the church tries to attackSatan or if it tries to attack
death or overcome death Satan ordeath, won't be able to defend
itself. Hopefully, that makes sense
here. Now, Jesus is about to give

(23:18):
Peter some even more, impressiveblessings here.
So, here's what he says, I will give you the Keys of the Kingdom
of Heaven. Whatever you bind on Earth.
Shall be considered Bound in heaven and whatever you loose on
Earth. Shall be considered loosed in
heaven. So these are blessings and
Promises on Peter which carry profound significance for our
understanding of the kingdom of God.

(23:39):
And as Catholics, we believe these promises which are given
to Peter here, continue to be ineffect in the church today now
to understand Meaning of these phrases.
We need to look at the Old Testament.
Passage to the Jesus is quoting from.
A lot of people don't realize that Jesus here is actually
quoting from a passage from the Old Testament, so, it's in

(23:59):
Isaiah 22:22. So, here's what that reads in
Isaiah God speaking, I will place on his shoulder.
The key of the House of David, he shall open a None Shall shut
and he shall shut. And None Shall open.
Now, in the time of the book of Isaiah, Hi this is referring to
the kind of like the prime minister of the davidic Kingdom.

(24:21):
So this is in the time period when Israel was United under a
king. So the davidic kingdom was
effectively the kingdom of God in the Old Testament.
This passage here is talking about the anointing of the Prime
Minister or the second in command in the Kingdom.
So the King was the top in the kingdom and then he had a second
in command or a prime minister. This second in command When the

(24:45):
King was away from the kingdom, the second-in-command would
administer the Affairs of the Kingdom in his absence.
So it's that's what it means here in the, in Isaiah, when it
says, I will give him the keys to the kingdom.
I will place upon him the key tothe house of David.
He shall open a nun, she'll shut.
So it's like this. Prime minister will be able to

(25:05):
make binding decisions in the absence of the king.
So it's like, the Prime Ministerwill speak on behalf of the
king, that's what's meant here. By the Keys of the Kingdom in
the, in the Isaiah passage. It's also what Jesus means here
as we'll see in the davidic Kingdom, the second-in-command,
the Prime Minister, his decisions were binding, so

(25:27):
that's what it means here in Isaiah when, it says, When God
says, he shall open, a None Shall shut and he shall shut and
None Shall open. It's a Jewish way of saying.
The Prime Minister will have theauthority to make binding
decisions. His decisions are binding on the
people. So he acted in place.
S of the king, you can probably already start to hear.
Hear hear some really interesting Echoes of the papal

(25:52):
of the Catholic teaching about papal, Authority.
So he says, I will give you his speaking to Jesus speaking of
Peter, here, I will give you theKeys of the Kingdom of Heaven.
So think about the background the parallel here, that's being
set up between the eyes. I passage and Jesus statement in
Matthew 16. There's very clear parallel
here. The disciples were probably

(26:14):
We're of the parallel here, and certainly Matthews readers would
have been aware of the parallel.Jesus is setting up.
So, in the New Kingdom of God, the true kingdom of God, the New
Covenant, who is the king, it's Jesus.
Jesus is the king of the kingdomof God.
And here, by saying to Peter, I will give you the Keys of the
Kingdom of Heaven. His appointing Peter as his

(26:34):
second-in-command, as his prime minister of the kingdom of God.
So, Peter is given the keys to administer the kingdom in the
absence of the king. Once Jesus leaves Earth, He goes
back to Heaven. Peter now has authority to make
binding decisions, on behalf of the king.
That is what Jesus is saying to Peter here.
Once you look at the context of eyes, I 2222 the verbal Echo is

(26:56):
a very clear and it makes sense,given what the Jews were waiting
for, though, they knew that the Messiah would set up a new
kingdom that was in some ways similar to the davidic kingdom
and continuous with it. But ultimately greater than and
bringing to fulfillment the aspects of the A kingdom that
will left unfulfilled. This is really cool, isn't it?

(27:18):
When you start to see all these connections here and you
understand how the original readers would have interpreted
Jesus words here, and then Jesussays this to Peter, whatever you
bind on Earth, shall be considered Bound in heaven and
whatever you loose on Earth. Shall be considered loosed in
heaven. So, firstly, this is clearly
amplifying, the Isaiah passage when it says he shall open an

(27:40):
unsure. Shut he, she'll shut and None
Shall open. That's Neil made even clearer.
In the New Covenant, the Prime Minister, whatever you bind on
Earth. Shall be considered Bound in
heaven and whatever you loose onEarth.
Shall be considered loosed in heaven.
So firstly, let's talk about theextent of this.
He says, whatever you Peter. The Prime Minister bind on

(28:00):
Earth. It should be considered Bound in
heaven. So the idea is your decisions
will be ratified. Your decisions will actually be
true. They will be backed up by the
power of heaven. So the idea he seems to be
conveying here is that Peter when you make Visions.
They are absolutely binding and you will have the backing of God
behind it. That's pretty strong Authority,

(28:22):
but that's, that's the authority.
That's given to Jesus year. You have absolute authority to
make binding decisions in the kingdom of God.
Now we need to get a bit more specific though.
What kind of decisions is Jesus thinking of, he uses the
language who are binding and loosing, whatever you bind shall
be, truly considered Bound in heaven and whatever you loose

(28:42):
shall be considered loosed by. Earning and loosing actually,
had established usage in established.
Meaning, in Jesus time, it referred to three things,
basically, binding and loosing referred to the ability to make
binding decisions in matters of teaching and discipline.
So that's the first thing. We know this from the Jewish
writings at the time. It also included matters of

(29:04):
excommunication so you could bind and loose in the sense of
excommunicating someone from God's community and bringing
them back in. It also referred to the ability
to forgive sins. Now, it looks like in the time
of Jesus, the Pharisees were considered to have these binding
and loosing Authority. There are some references in
this time. Period to the Pharisees being
given binding and loosing Authority, which is interesting

(29:26):
in and of itself. But they would have only had
Earthly authority to bind and loose.
Whereas here in the New Covenant, the new prime minister
of the kingdom of God is given absolute Authority.
Whatever you considered bind on Earth, shall be considered Bound
in heaven. That's the extent of it.
The readers of Matthew's gospel,would have clearly understood

(29:47):
that here. Jesus gives Peter absolute and
divine Authority in the kingdom of God.
So this whole passage is pivotaland understanding Jesus, own
idea of the kingdom of God, you'll hear some Progressive and
critical Scholars. They say that Jesus didn't
really intend to establish an Institutional church WIll
clearly this passage teaches. Otherwise, it this is a window

(30:09):
into how Jesus wants his church to continue to run in his
absence. He's teaching his how he intends
the kingdom of God to be run. Just as the officer of prime
minister continued through the generations in the Old Testament
which it does if you study the Old Testament that there was
always someone in this office ofprime minister here, the office

(30:30):
of the Prime Minister of the kingdom of God was also intended
to continue to be passed throughthe generations.
And we know from church history that that's exactly what
happened. It was the bishop of Rome that
offers continue to be passed down and that was always To be
the leader of the universal church.
Now in time that offers became known as Pope that the word Pope

(30:51):
obviously doesn't appear in the Bible, but this concept of the
Prime Minister who speaks on behalf of Jesus, the king in his
absence and has the ability to make binding decisions in the
New Covenant, that is clearly here and eventually that comes
to be known as Pope which is really a version of the word
Papa or father. So it's like the ultimate
Spiritual Authority in the kingdom of God.

(31:14):
Now, Matthew is writing to Jews,keep it keep that in mind.
So his audience would expect theMessiah to set up the kingdom of
God with some sort of visible governance, just as the kingdom
of David had in the Old Testament.
So Matthew is trying to convey to his Jewish readers that here
is where Jesus has appointed an Earthly leader of his kingdom
just as any good king would. So in fact, if you look at two

(31:38):
chapters later, Matthew's gospelprovides further information
about how this institutional, Rocky cool church should
operate. That's in Matthew chapter, 18.
And here, Matthew is deliberately including this
passage the other gospel authors, don't give us the full
version of this conversation. Matthew does because he's
writing to Jews. He's assuring his Jewish readers

(31:59):
that the Messiah has arrived andthe Messiah is going to set up
his kingdom. And here's how it's going to
look. He's inaugurated the kingdom of
God and Jesus. The Messiah intends his kingdom
to be authoritative invisible Matthews Jewish.
Readers would want to know this.They would know that there's
going to be parallels between the Old davidic Kingdom, and the

(32:20):
way the New Covenant kingdom is rather.
And so, that's why Matthew really has these focus on
telling us exactly what Jesus has said, and really bringing
out the parallels between the Isaiah passage.
And what is said here. Now, last verse verse 20, then
he gave the disciples strict orders not to tell anyone that

(32:40):
he was the Christ. So the Could he's the cross has
now been revealed, because that's what Peter announced
Jesus, confirmed. Yes, I am.
The Messiah, the Christ, the sonof man.
But Jesus, he says, don't tell anyone that that's my identity.
So this is often called by Scholars.
The Messianic secret typically, when people realize Jesus is the

(33:02):
Messiah, he doesn't want them totell anyone.
And it seems the main reason forthat is, he doesn't want word to
spread that he's the Messiah to quickly.
Because if the word spreads things, Could get out of hand.
People could think that he's going to be a military Messiah
and they might try and take him as the king and things will get
out of here and you see an example of that in John chapter
6 where that's exactly what theytry to do.

(33:24):
They try to take him as king andthat's not the way Jesus wants
to go. So for most of his ministry he
needs to keep his true identity fairly quiet.
So that ends kind of the first half of this passage already.
It's been quite a long episode because there's so much to
unpack there in the first half, you might like to pause the
podcast now. Before we get into the second

(33:45):
half of today's passage verse 21, Jesus began to make it
clear. So what it literally says, there
is from that time. Jesus began to show his
disciples. Now, that phrase from that time,
it's actually a key Market in Matthew's gospel, Matthew uses
that when he's about to start a new section or a new major phase

(34:05):
in his story. So he actually used it earlier
just before Jesus began his Galilean Ministry in chapter 4.
So here, the signal Matthew is giving us, is that Jesus is now
finished in Galilee, and he's going to move to Jerusalem.
So, Begins the next, big section.
And the language here from that time.
Jesus began to show his disciples in implies, that Jesus

(34:27):
doesn't just give him this teaching once he's giving it to
them constantly. And it appears that the reason
Jesus begins to teach them. This now is because they will
Peter, in particular has just recognize that he's the Messiah.
So, Just realizes that they're now ready to hear about his
Destiny. Now that they understand that
he's the Messiah at least partially and he teaches them

(34:50):
that he was destined to go to Jerusalem.
So that phrase is interesting destined.
Jesus is teaching them what he'sabout to say to them from the
perspective of Prophecy. It's not really, I'm going to
suffer, it's more according to God's Plan of Salvation as made
clear in the Old Testament. All of these things must happen

(35:11):
to the son of Men. So if he's thinking of Old
Testament prophecy here, and in fact, the word here for Destin
can also be translated must. So, Jesus wants his disciples to
understand that these things that he's about to describe have
to happen as part of his ministry and they're not, just
going to be accidents or tragedies though.
There might appear to be. So he's encouraging them when

(35:33):
these events happen to realize that his prophesied them, and
they shouldn't be discouraged, they're actually necessary.
So, he's predicts a whole lot ofthings that he Suffered
grievously at the hands of the elders and chief priests and
scribes. So, these are the people who
should have recognized that he'sthe Messiah.
But here Jesus says, those leaders are the ones who are
going to reject him. He even says here, he will be

(35:56):
put to death, so his predicting his crucifixion and then he
says, and be raised up on the third day.
This is a very specific prophecy.
Actually why is it significant that Jesus is in the Tomb for
three days? It's never fully unpacked in the
New Testament, actually the three days, significance.
One of the reasons is it probably Taps into Hosea,

(36:17):
chapter 6, verses 1, to 2. So there it says God will revive
us after two days on the third day, he will raise us up to live
in his presence. So in the context of our of
Hosea that refers to God, Up Israel, after suffering.
So, Jesus is Calling a kind of going to recapitulate this in

(36:40):
himself. He's going to make the whole
Destiny of Israel summed up in his own Resurrection on the
third day. So notice Jesus predicts all
these things, he says, he'll be rejected who be crucified, he'll
be resurrected on the third day.So Jesus knows exactly how the
timeline is going to go. Unfortunately, the disciples did

(37:00):
not recall a lot of these prophecies at the time that they
were occurring that It was only later after his Ascension that
they remembered all this stuff verse 22.
Then taking him aside, Peter started to remonstrate with him
or more. Literally rebuke him.
So picture this Peter is rebuking Jesus, he says Heaven
preserve. You Lord.

(37:20):
What? God forbid, you Lord.
This must not happen to you. So, Peter thinks Jesus is being
crazy. Jesus just said I'm going to be
crucified and abused and all sorts of stuff and Peter thinks
what? So he's kind of In.
What's gotten into you? Jesus, you're the Messiah are,
you're not going to die. So Peter is being pretty
presumptuous here, isn't it? He's, the disciple whose thinks

(37:42):
he needs to correct his master pretty dangerous, but also keep
in mind. What the Jews believed about the
Messiah at the time. The Jews did not really
understand this suffering servant aspect of the Messiah.
Although, that, is there in the Old Testament in Jesus time,
they focus more on this idea. The Messiah will be victorious,
ruler sent from God. To restore Israel.

(38:06):
So, that's the Assumption Peter is operating under, he thinks
Jesus is the Messiah and he thinks Jesus is going to be a
Victorious, military leader. Rather Jesus says, I'm going to
suffer and be killed and that's not the way that they picture
the Messiah at all. So Jesus in verse 23 turned
aside and said to Peter, now mercs marks version actually,
makes it clear that Jesus first sees the other disciples.

(38:29):
So it looks like Jesus doesn't want the other disciples to be
LED astray by Peters false Outburst.
He wants to keep them on the right track.
So he has to correct Peter for the sake of the other disciples
and he says strong language Getsbehind me Satan.
Now there's two interpretations here of what's going on.

(38:50):
It could be the Jesus perceives,the Satan is literally
influencing Peter. So in that case, when Satan saw
that Peter had confessed Jesus as Messiah, Satan wasn't happy
with that. So Satan intervened to Fuse.
Peter. And of course, we now get this
contrast between Jesus cook blessing.
So you have been between Jesus, blessing, Peter and giving him

(39:12):
the keys. And now Jesus saying, put Satan
has possessed you. There's a big contrast.
We know this. This is the kind of thing.
Satan would do actually because earlier, in chapter 4, verse 8
to 10 Satan had actually tried to exploit the human instinct to
avoid suffering. That's how he tempted.
Jesus. Remember he said you don't have
to go to the Cross. You can just have the glory.

(39:34):
Now that was The things he said to Jesus and now maybe he's
tapping into Peters own natural,inclination to avoid suffering
and maybe that's why Jesus says Get Behind Me Satan because he
recognizes that same tempter. Another, interpretation of this
when Jesus says, Get Behind Me, Satan the Greek word for Satan
just means adversary, so maybe he's not accusing Peter of being

(39:58):
possessed, literally by Satan orinfluence by Satan, but maybe
he's just saying get behind me adversary and that would fit as
Well, what about the Gets behindme?
Bit what it basically means is fall in line.
So, what Jesus is saying here toPeter, or maybe to Satan is II,
outrank you. Now follow me rather than trying

(40:20):
to lead me, it's a command to get in line for fall behind me.
And then he says to Peter, you are an obstacle in my path more
literally what it says, there isstumbling Stone.
Interesting, isn't it? There's a contrast between the
rock that Jesus has just made him.
And now he's a stumbling-stone. The difference is one of Grace

(40:41):
versus nature, really? When Peter speaks what the
father has revealed to him, likehe did earlier, he's the sturdy
foundation stone. That keeps the forces of
Darkness at Bay, which is what he's supposed to do as leader of
the church. But when that same Peter speaks
from the standpoint of human weakness, apart from Divine
assistance, he is a stone That causes others to stumble

(41:04):
interesting, isn't it? The two sides of Peter?
When he's acting with the Holy Spirit and when he's acting just
by Nature big contrast, So Jesussays to him, get behind me, here
are an obstacle in my path. So the kind of idea that Peter
has just expressed, which is that you're the Messiah, you
can't suffer Jesus. He declares that's actually
going to make things difficult for Jesus mission.

(41:25):
That kind of thinking needs to stop.
He says, to PD the way you thinkis not God's way but man's what
it actually says. They're more literally is you
are not on the side of God. But of men, So the fact that
Peter doesn't believe that Jesuswill die is because he's the
Messiah that's just worldly thinking.

(41:46):
So he's following common Jewish opinion not in accordance with
God's truth and the catechism actually picks up on this.
I'll include that in the show notes, it talks about worldly
views of the Messiah versus the view of the Messiah that Jesus
knows is the correct one. So, that's what Jesus says, to
Peter. And Jesus, is now going to make
the point that not only must he as the Messiah suffer, but also,

(42:10):
all of his followers, must be willing to be willing to
experience suffering as well. It's actually a necessary part
of being a follower of the Messiah, and you can hear that
next section in tomorrow's episode.
Hopefully that exegesis has beenuseful for you.
When you've learned some new things, it's worth pointing out
that a lot of protestant Scholars still don't like this

(42:32):
interpretation, but in recent years, many Protestant Scholars,
have come around. And in fact, there's some, that
would say that the traditional Catholic interpretation is
undeniably the correct one. There are some Protestant
scholars in recent years. Have gone on record to say that
we need to stop trying to find alternative interpretations.
But basics of the traditional Catholic interpretation of this,

(42:53):
Passage is absolutely. What's being taught some
Protestant Scholars are saying this?
They may not go so far as to saythat Peter's offers continues
through the generations and eventually becomes known as
Pope. But the Protestant Scholars say
that clearly this is a promise. Given to Peter, the keys are
being given to Peter. Peter is the rock on which the
church is being built, and you can do some further research to

(43:15):
see that a lot of protestant Scholars, when they're being
honest, and candid. Now agree, that that makes the
best sense of the texture. How awesome is that?
I think that that's an amazing passage.
And hopefully you can see that when we unpack it, there's such
richness in here. Now this is a very significant
passage theologically both the first half about the keys to the

(43:36):
kingdom. And even the second half when
Jesus rebukes Peter, both of them are very significant and
both of them get commented a loton in the catechism.
So in fact for both halves of this reading, there's about 10
different, really significant. Catechism, passages paragraphs
that refer to this passage and we don't have time to go through
all of those today because this is already been quite a long

(43:59):
episode. But what I want to do is point
you to Two other times in the podcast where we do, look at
each of the two halves of this text in more detail, and when we
do, go through the relevant, catechism paragraphs.
So, if you want to hear the relevant paragraphs, for that
really important, first half about the keys to the kingdom.
There's a few times in the lectionary win.
We do break down the catechin, the paragraphs there.

(44:21):
So the feast of Saint Peter's cheer every single year and also
the solemnity of Saints. Peter, and Paul, every single
year, we look at this reading and we look at the Paragraphs
also on the twenty first Sunday in ordinary time in year.
A we look at that same reading and if you want to hear a bit
more about the second half and the relevant paragraphs from the

(44:43):
second half with the get behind me, Satan then the rebuking of
Peter you can hear that on the second on the twenty-second
Sunday in ordinary time in year.A and we'll look at the
catechism paragraphs then. So I hope you've learned
something new today from this longer episode, but I hope
you'll agree. It's well worth.
It. If you've enjoyed today's

(45:03):
episode, please share it around.Continue to keep this ministry
in your prayers and hopefully we'll see you again tomorrow.

All Episodes

Thursday of Week 18 in Ordinary Time - Matt 16: 13-23

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Crime Junkie

The Breakfast Club

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Thursday of Week 18 in Ordinary Time - Matt 16: 13-23