What are the keys of the kingdom?

The kingdom, then, in its prophetic and national shape was no longer the object of testimony to the people, or the immediate purpose in the thoughts of God. Though not, of course, abandoned, it was postponed, and in the meanwhile, it was to be set up in quite a different form. In this form it was placed under man's administration, the keys being given to Peter, who also received authority to bind and loose. These were not the keys of the Church, much less of heaven, but "the keys of the kingdom of heaven." A key is that which gives admission. On Peter, then, was laid the trust of admitting, not into the Church, but into the kingdom. How he used it we see in the Acts. He it was who authoritatively proclaimed Jesus as "both Lord and Christ," calling on the Jews to own His rights and to be baptized in His name. Thus the Jewish door was opened, and through it, in one day, three thousand souls entered the kingdom. But the Church was never entrusted to man's hands, and the account adds that "the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved" (Acts 2:47). Afterwards another door to the kingdom was opened. Cornelius's prayers were heard. One might have supposed that the apostle of the Gentiles would be used to bring him in. But no; Christ had given the keys to Peter, and the locked door of the Gentiles could only be lawfully opened by him. Taught of God that in the new form of the kingdom, the earthly distinctions of clean and unclean were abolished, he went at the first summons, and seeing "that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost, he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord" (Acts 10:44 48).

Further, there are no keys to the Church. It and its building have nothing to do with the keys. Christ builds and does not build with keys. The keys are the insignia of the administration of the kingdom. These were in a special manner entrusted to Peter individually; but the passage gives him nothing to do with building the Church at all, nor does he pretend to it when he refers to this passage in his epistle. He partakes in a remarkable manner of that on which the Church is founded. He is a stone, has part in the nature of the living stone, the Son of the living God, the truth on which the Church rests; but that is all. Of the kingdom of heaven he had the administration specially entrusted to him. The kingdom is not the Church, and never will be. In a general way, we may say, those who compose it have a part in the kingdom, and will hereafter reign in it as they now suffer for it. It is the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ now; hereafter the kingdom and glory. Christ, as John the baptist, had preached the kingdom of heaven as at hand, as did the twelve (Matt. 10:7). When at length it was set up, though in no outward power, Peter had in an especial manner the administration of it, as we see in the Acts. The Lord added to the Church daily (then openly) such as should be saved. This was His own work; but we see Peter, whether in testimony to Jews or Gentiles, or ordering the choice of deacons, or dealing with Ananias and Sapphira, having the administrative lead in the work. And what he preaches is the Lordship of the ascended Man as a present thing (in chap. 2), and His return in power to accomplish the prophecies (in chap. 3). The assembly was there, and the Lord added to it; but the testimony was to the Lordship of Christ, made Lord, and returning in power. In the case of Cornelius the Church does not come in question. Peter never preaches once that Jesus is the Son of God. He is exalted, made Lord and Christ. In this administration of the kingdom, Heaven put its seal on his acts. Whatever he bound or loosed was bound or loosed with an authority which Heaven sanctioned. I will speak of forgiveness in a moment; but in general what was established by Peter's apostolic authority in the administration of the kingdom had Heaven's seal put upon it. But in Matthew 16 the keys have no connection with the Church, and Peter has nothing to do with building that Church against which the gates of hell shall not prevail. Scripture never confounds the kingdom and the Church.

105 Further, binding and loosing is not confined to forgiveness, even if, in a collateral way, it may include it, and it is only in such a way that it does. Whatever Peter establishes by the authority committed to him was sanctioned in heaven, as was also whatever two or three did as really met in Christ's name. That too was sanctioned in heaven as much as Peter's administrative acts; but only what was within the competency or left to the service of the place he was put in, or of the two or three gathered in Christ's name. Heaven's sanction on what they did does not mean that they could determine all that heaven could. The sanction of all that an inferior authority does is not saying that that inferior authority can do all that its superior is entitled to do or has to do. Many things may not be left to it. It is a question of what is rightly left. Thus, "What you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" does not include binding anything in heaven. Whatever in Christianity belonged to heaven itself, whatever was done there, Peter and the Church had no power whatever. He bound things on earth and only there; his commission did not go farther; what he did in these, that Heaven sanctioned; but he had nothing to say to what was bound or loosed in heaven itself. And this is of all importance when we come to certain points. He, Simon Barjonas, had the administration of the kingdom confined to him, backed by Heaven's authority: a most important and solemn charge, but that was all.

The Lord adds immediately after the declaration that He will give to him the keys of the Kingdom of the heavens -- "and whatsoever thou mayest bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, etc." Now, if we turn to the eighteenth chapter of this Gospel (verse 18) we find that the Lord repeats this very commission and He addresses it no longer to Peter but to the whole company of disciples. Peter must be looked upon in the whole passage as the representative of the disciples and as such of all true believers. If the Lord calls him "a stone," He certainly did not mean him alone, but every one who believes is a living stone, and so when He speaks of the keys and the binding and loosing He commits this authority not upon Peter exclusively, but upon every disciple, and as true believers form His assembly, upon the assembly as such.

It is generally taught that Peter used the keys on the day of Pentecost, and when he preached to Cornelius and his household (Acts 10). It is assumed that the Lord gave this commission to him exclusively and that the words of the Lord were fulfilled at these occasions. However, this cannot be proven from the Scriptures, nor does Peter refer to any special authority in preaching on the day of Pentecost or in the house of Cornelius. (After all that Rome and ritualism and even more evangelical systems have found in these keys it may be hard to credit such a view as this; and with many it has been customary to point to Peter's eminent place on the day of Pentecost in opening the kingdom to the Jews, as afterwards in the person of Cornelius to the Gentiles. But an eminent place may be fully allowed him in this way, while yet we deny him an exclusive place; and, in fact, we cannot exclude others on the day of Pentecost; nor even at Caesarea allow that this was the sole use of the key in relation to the Gentiles, any more than the use of another key than that which before had opened the kingdom to the Jews. One act did surely not exhaust the service of the key, nor to open the door twice require two keys. Can it be thought that the door once, opened simply remained open, and needed no more opening? On the contrary, I believe it can be conclusively shown that the administration of the kingdom, which these keys stand for, is not yet over, is not at all come to an end in one initial authoritative act. Men still receive and are received in; and if the power of the keys speaks of admission into the kingdom, and the kingdom be the sphere of discipleship, then the key is in fact but authority to disciple. -- Numerical Bible.)

But what are the keys? The answer is, Knowledge (teaching and preaching) and Baptizing. "Go ye therefore and teach (disciple) all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" (Matt. 28:19). These are the doors of entering into the professing sphere of Christendom, that is the Kingdom of the heavens. These keys are still used. The binding and loosing refers only to discipline on the earth. It has nothing whatever to do with remission of sins or eternal salvation. We pass this over at present, but shall enter into it more fully when we reach the eighteenth chapter, where we find these words in connection with the statement, "where two or three are gathered together unto My Name, there am I in the midst of them."

In the vital, inward sense, the kingdom is entirely in the hand of God, in the outward sense it has been committed into the hands of men as regards responsibility for public administration, but with no earthly headquarters. This is explicit in our Lord’s words to Peter in Matthew 16:19: “And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Heaven reserves final and full authority. But the keys here are certainly not of the Church, the body of Christ, and certainly not of heaven itself; but involve clearly the public admittance of souls into the sphere of professed Christianity, or the public refusal of them. It has been well observed that Peter used these keys freely on the day of Pentecost, - “the key of knowledge” in faithfully declaring the testimony of God concerning His Son, and the key of baptism, which is the means by which in a public sense souls are admitted into the kingdom of heaven.

The Father had given a wonderful revelation to Peter, so that the Lord could say to him, "Blessed art thou Simon Barjona;" and the Lord Himself had spoken great things to him. He had called him Peter, indicating that he was a stone for the building to be built, and declaring the imperishable nature of the structure. Now He commits to Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven, a particular administration connected with His affairs on earth. The kingdom is now in mystery, for on earth we have a great kingdom with many subjects, but without a visible king. Peter, having the keys of the kingdom, admitted the Jews in Acts 2, and the Gentiles in Acts 10. All who submit to the authority of Christ, whether in reality or in profession, are viewed as responsible subjects of this kingdom. It is one thing however to be a responsible subject in the kingdom, and quite another to be a stone in the building that Christ calls "My assembly." Peter was given the keys of the kingdom, not the keys of the assembly, nor the keys of heaven. It was into an earthly administration that acknowledged the rule of heaven that Peter admitted men. He has nothing to do with admitting into the church which the gates of hell can not prevail against, or into the presence of God in heaven.

That it is administered by men; as representatives of the absent King, the Lord's words to Peter here are clearly in proof, for the keys of the Kingdom are committed to him: not, I believe, distinctively, but as connected with that place which the Lord had just assigned him. As his confession of Him was just that of the others ― of all true disciples, so the place of a stone in Christ's spiritual building was not Peter's alone, but that of all disciples; and the keys of the Kingdom go with this: the Church (that is) administers the Kingdom. In the eighteenth chapter, the power of binding and loosing, given here to Peter, is given to the assembly as a whole (ver. 18): and when we consider what the power of the keys implies, we shall find that in fact it is not peculiar to Peter at all. The two statements here go perfectly together, and as Peter is but a living stone founded upon the Rock, Christ Jesus, so every living stone is thus a Peter, and addressed as such through him.

After all that Rome and ritualism and even more evangelical systems have found in these keys, it may be hard to credit such a view as this; and with many it has been customary to point to Peter's eminent place on the day of Pentecost in opening the Kingdom to the Jews, as afterwards in the person of Cornelius to the Gentiles. But an eminent place may be fully allowed him in this way, while yet we deny him any exclusive place; and in fact we cannot exclude others on the day of Pentecost; nor even at Caesarea allow that this was the sole use of the key in relation to the Gentiles, any more than the use of another key than that which before had opened the Kingdom to the Jews. One act did not surely exhaust the service of the key, nor to open the door twice require two keys. Can it be thought that the door once opened simply remained open,and needed no more opening? On the contrary, I believe it can be conclusively shown that the administration of the Kingdom, which these keys stand for, is not yet over, is not all come to an end in one initial authoritative act. Men still receive and are received in; and if the power of the keys speaks of admission into the Kingdom, and the Kingdom be the sphere of discipleship, then the key is in fact but authority to disciple.

Now there are keys, not simply a key; and so, if we are right, a double way of doing this is implied. The first is what the Lord Himself speaks of as "the key of knowledge," and which He reproaches the lawyers for taking from the people (Luke 11:52). Similarly in this Gospel He denounces the Pharisees for shutting up the Kingdom of heaven against men. "Ye neither go in yourselves," He tells them, "neither suffer ye those that are entering to go in" (Matt. 23:13).

Verse18 is therefore totally the words of the Son of God in building and maintaining His church. Verse 19 adds a matter that is committed to Peter. The Lord would give to him the keys of the kingdom of heaven. These are certainly not the keys of heaven itself, nor the keys of the assembly. The kingdom of heaven is the sphere of Christian profession on earth, a kingdom on earth but with its headquarters in heaven. The keys of course are used to allow entry Luke 12:52 shows one of these keys to be that of knowledge, that is, the teaching of the truth of God. In Matthew 28:19, 20 baptism is connected with teaching, and it appears clear that these two are the keys to which the Lord refers, specially since Peter and the other apostles were sent to baptize, though Paul was not (1Cor.1:17), and in fact Jesus Himself did not baptize (Jn.4:2). In Acts 3:14-41 Peter used both of these keys in declaring the truth to the Jews, and insisting on baptism, with three thousand baptized on the day of Pentecost. He used the same keys with Gentiles in Acts 10:34-48. However, though Peter was prominent in these cases, there is no doubt that others also were entrusted with the same keys (See Acts 8:12; 9:17-18).

As to binding and losing; losing is seen in baptizing, for this involves the public governmental forgiveness of sins (Act 2:38), but binding is seen in Acts 8:18-23, when the forgiveness of Simon the sorcerer was rescinded by Peter when Simon exposed his actual unrepentant condition. Peter told him then that he had neither part nor lot in this matter, for he had manifested his own hypocrisy. Such righteous action by Peter and other apostles was ratified in heaven.

— “He that has the key of David.” In these words and in those that follow the reference is to Isaiah 22:22. Shebna is deposed and degraded. The treasurer of the royal house of David used his high office to immortalise himself (v. 16). Then the prophet announced the investiture of Eliakim to the administration of the royal authority. The terms of the prophecy in depth and fulness are characteristically Messianic, going far beyond the historical circumstances in the days of Hezekiah. The prophetic announcement of Isaiah (Isa. 22:22) and the words of the Seer (v. 7 in our chapter), almost verbally the same, imply administrative authority; the former in connection with royalty in Judah, the latter in connection with grace to the Church. The “key” as a symbol denotes undisputed right to enter and exercise all needful authority.

Some, strangely enough, connect “the key of the house of David” with “the keys of death and of hades.” They are not identical. The former intimates Christ’s sovereignty in time, the latter His sway in the unseen world in all that concerns the bodies and souls of men. “The keys of the kingdom of Heaven” (Matt. 16:19) were alone committed to Peter to signify delegated authority, which necessarily ceased when his work was done. Peter by his preaching opened the door of the kingdom for Jews in Acts 2, and for the admission of Gentiles in Acts 10. The keys having been used, and the doors opened, a successional and vested right in “St. Peter’s keys” is absurd. Peter left the door open; hence they are of no further use.

Before I pass on to Ephesians, I add here another system in which Peter is given a place of authority on earth - not the Church at all, but the Kingdom of heaven. The keys not of heaven, not of the Church - there are no keys of the Church, there is a Builder, Christ. Nor are there any persons bound here at all. Anything formally enacted by Peter was warranted and sanctioned by heaven. He had the administration of the Kingdom confided to him. "The key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder," is said of Hilkiah. A housekeeper, or intendant has the keys, and administers, as a trust, the household affairs. Peter did so in the kingdom and with full authority. Though in fact he did let in the Jews, he did let in the Gentiles, a most immensely important act, for it was changing the whole divinely constituted order - an uncircumcised man was received into the Kingdom. Chapter 13 shows us prophetically this would be spoiled, but that was prophecy, this administration. Simon Magus did not escape Peter though he did Philip. Philip admitted him, but he was soon detected when Peter and John came. This was not solely Peter, but the admission of Jews and Gentiles was the full power of the keys. It was not the Body, nor the revelation of the Body. The giving of the Holy Ghost was no way Peter's act. He was anticipated by a witness of God. I do not mean that admission was the power of the keys, but Peter was administering the Kingdom - I should apprehend when Ananias and Sapphira fell dead also - thus, in one sense, binding and loosing would refer to sins, but in judicial administration as on earth. Binding in heaven is the divine sanction.

It is of this, and of this only, the keys were entrusted to Peter. The prime use of keys is to open doors (Rev. 3:7). Accordingly, in Acts 2 we have Peter divinely selected to preach the first discourse after the Holy Ghost came down from heaven, and three thousand persons were brought to repentance, being baptised forthwith in the Saviour's name. But these were Jews only. In Acts 10 we have the same apostle proclaiming Christ for the first time to a Gentile congregation, with the happy result that all who were assembled in Cornelius' house believed, and were granted the privilege of Christian baptism forthwith. Speaking of this event afterwards, Peter said: "Brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the Word of the Gospel and believe." (Acts 15:7).

Peter has thus used the keys entrusted to him by the Lord, and the door of the kingdom has been thrown open to both Jews and Gentiles. The Church belongs to heaven; the kingdom belongs to earth; of the latter only have the keys been committed to human hands. But what of the binding and loosing? This has reference to discipline here below, eternal issues being in Christ's keeping alone. Peter's stern dealing with Ananias and Sapphira, and with Simon Magus, are incidents illustrative of binding. Is there anything successional in this authority committed to the apostle? There is no hint of such a thing in Matt. 16:19. Nothing beyond a personal commission can possibly be deduced from the Saviour's words. But when we pass to Matt. 18:18 we find the very same words in an altogether different connection. Peter is not there in view, but the assembly of God's saints, gathered together in any given locality upon earth, and at any time. Even supposing the number be but "two or three," the authority to "bind" and "loose" is with them, the Lord's own presence in the midst supplying them with the necessary power and grace. To receive into communion from the world outside is to "loose"; to put away a transgressor, such as he of 1 Cor. 5, is to "bind"; to welcome once more the repentant one, as in 2 Cor. 2:6-8, is to "loose" again. But in all this heaven is not in question. To import such an idea to the Saviour's words is to produce inextricable confusion, to say nothing of the spiritual terrors thus injected into the minds of the unthinking. The apostle is gone but the Church remains; though as far as its external unity and order is concerned it has degenerated into a shapeless wreck. But wherever two or three are gathered together to the name of the absent Christ, His presence is assured, conveying with it all that is needed in grace and competency to act for Him until He come.