Discussion on the Keys of Matthew 16.

Revelation 1 depicts Jesus having the "keys" of hell and death. Now, that is another symbolic reference. Being a symbol, and not a material set of keys, Jesus can still possess the "keys" after giving the "keys" to another man. (Jesus is the source of all power and authority and grace.) So, this verse does not rule out Peter possessing the "keys" (in the context meaning the "delegated authority" of the king). Besides, in Rev. 20:1 you'll find an angel also bearing the keys in question.

Interpreting the keys to be the "Gospel Message" to unlock the door to salvation to gentiles is valid on one level of interpretation. But that doesn't displace or contradict the interpretation of the keys as a symbol of Kingly authority and empowerment. Scripture usually has multiple levels of meaning and this is no exception.


The primary interpretation of the keys Jesus gave to Peter is: Kingly authority and power to lead and protect the King's people. The Davidic Kingdom was ruled by a king (duh). The king had a cabinet of ministers to take care of the day to day matters and the prime minister was the king's visier or vicar, vested with the king's power and authority by the king himself. The vicar was not a usurper, or "instead of" the king, he was doing the king's will. Isaiah 22:20ff describe the power and purpose of a Davidic King's conferral of the keys to his vicar. The vicar is described as being a "father" to the inhabitants of the kingdom (v 21). He has kingly authority to rule (v22). He is honored in that office (v23-24). (V25 refers to the end of time, the consummation, when the earthly aspect of the Church is no longer relevant.) Incidentally, you can see how God deals with unfaithful, corrupt vicars in verses 15-19. (The few evil popes in history were likewise dealt with.)

Matt 16:13ff parallel/fulfill that scene/prophecy in Isaiah. The fulfillment/transformation/perfection of the Davidic Covenant/Kingdom is the Church that Jesus built on the foundation of the Apostles. It resembles the Davidic Kingdom in certain ways, such as the King & ministers. David's Kingdom was the Kingdom of God manifested on earth. Just so, the New Covenant Church is the Kingdom of God manifested on earth and it features a visible hierarchical structure. Jesus vested in the Apostles judgeship of the Kingdom (Luke 22:29,30), the Church. This would be fatherly caretaking/disciplining, not despotic rulership.

Addendum December 14, 2012...
Besides Isaiah22, There are two other OT precedents for the concept of a king giving his authority to a guy... Joseph was empowered by Pharaoh to rule his kingdom (Gen 41:40ff); Daniel was given similar authority (Daniel 2). Notice also that the king/pharaoh first recognized that God, not man, gave them the knowledge they had. Considering these two pericopes along with Isaiah22, how can any one deny that King Jesus likewise empowered a man to be a visible leader, a "father", to His children on earth?
End Addendum.

While all Christians receive the Holy Spirit, Peter is the ONLY man to whom Jesus gave "keys". This does not usurp the Holy Spirit, it manifests the Spirit's power. In conjunction with that, John 21:15-17 (showing Jesus commanding Peter to care for His flock), leads us to conclude that Peter held a unique office as Christ's vicar on earth. And a plentitude of Scriptural evidence shows Peter performing the duties of such an office (Acts 1 - 15). The council of Jerusalem shows Peter speaking defitively. James merely supported Peter's directive. Selecting a successor to Judas demonstrates Apostolic succession. Peter is first to speak the Gospel to the world. Peter works the first healing of the apostles. Peter exercises the power Jesus delegated, in dealing with Ananias and Sapphira. His very shadow conveys God's grace to heal. Peter is first to teach salvation for Gentiles as well as Jews. ad infinitum... (And we realize these things illustrate the power of the office of Vicar, not any quality of the man himself, who was a sinner like all of us.)

Since King Jesus ascended to His throne in Heaven, His vicar (& his successor today) on earth, guided by the Spirit, shepherds/teaches/guards the earthly flock (ie John21:15-17, fulfilling Jeremiah 3:15) and leads/upholds the Apostles (& their successors today) (Luke22:31-32). 

The Holy Spirit is not the vicar on earth, He is the soul of the Church. In John 15:26 Jesus was speaking to the Apostles (they are the ministers of the King). After Jesus ascended, the Spirit would guide the Apostles to all truth and remind them of everything Jesus taught them. In this way they would be able to infallibly preach the Gospel to the world and prepare men to succeed them.

All believers have the indwelling of the Spirit but not all to the same effect, not all believers have the same role in the Kingdom (1Cor12) . The Apostles were made leaders of the infant Church and they appointed successors & expansions of that Bishopric office (ie Matthias, Titus, Timothy).

Some mention Romans 1:15 to imply that Peter did not go to Rome. However, it is widely accepted that Paul was at Rome with Peter and they were both martyred there. There is plenty of historical and archaeological evidence supporting that idea. I'm sure there was plenty of evangelizing to do in Rome without Paul usurping Peter's authority as Bishop of Rome and Vicar of Christ.

The Gospel Message is indeed the focus of Scripture. And the mechanism Jesus set up, by which that message is spread and protected, is a visible, organized society, not just a spiritual association. Salvation History demonstrates that God uses flawed, sinful men to accomplish His flawless, holy plan.

Allah... the God of Abraham?

So, the Koran says God has no children and that Allah is the God of Abraham. But this contradicts pre-existing, established, Scripture. Genesis describes God creating the universe and becoming a father to a man (and, by extension, his offspring the whole human race).

Adam was made "in our image and likeness" (Gen 1:26-27, 5:1). This means Adam was God's son and so God was Adam's Father (because Gen 5:3 describes Adam fathering a son "in his image and likeness").

Before Adam and Eve sinned they were God's children, with eternal life, and the world had no suffering or bloodshed or death. Their first sin brought those things into the world, causing it to become the violent place as we know it. This also caused an unfathomable and humanly unbridgable rift between God and mankind. (This was an infinite debt.) They lost the divine sonship for themselves and their descendants. But even back then God hinted at humankind's future redemption (Gen 3:15). That hint was fulfilled with the coming of Jesus, God's only-begotten and true son.

That's how much God loves us, His lowly creatures. First He loved us into existance and then he saved us from ourselves, through his own Son Jesus, sacrificed in order to pay the infinite debt we owed to Him. The sacrifice of this God-Man Jesus bridged the gulf that kept us away from almighty all-righteous God. Once again humans can claim the original status of sonship to God, which was lost to us by Adam. When we accept Jesus as our mediator with God and payment for our sins, we become God's child, by adoption, and He becomes our Father. Because of this, we get to spend eternity in Heaven. To die without sonship to God is to spend eternity separated from Him.

God is a true Father. Scripture, which predates the Koran, describes God fathering His family from Creation (Genesis) to Redemption (Gospels) to Final Sanctification and Consummation (Revelation).

Since Allah, as described by the Koran, does not match the God described in Genesis, I can only conclude that Allah is not, after all, the God of Abraham.