If Matthew 16:19 is an allusion to Isaiah 22, it might
enhance the possibility that Jesus is speaking about the temple and about
priesthood in the temple. Isaiah 22:22 portrays Eliakim, prime minister to King
Hezekiah, as having “the key of the house of David on his shoulder” because he
controlled who could enter into the king’s presence and service. Priestly
connotations were associated with Eliakim’s kingly administration, since Isaiah
22:21 portrays him clothed with a “tunic” and a “sash securely about him.” The
Aramaic translation of 22:22 says that God “will place the key of the
sanctuary and the authority of the house of David in his hand.” And then
22:24 (of the Aramaic version) says that even Eliakim’s relatives will be
“priests wearing the ephod.” Like Eliakim, Christ establishes himself as having
an authoritative position in the new temple in Matthew 16:18, and then extends
his priestly authority to his disciples, who also have priestly authority.
Matthew 16:19, in the light of 18:15–18 and John 20:23, says they express what
would appear to be their priestly task by declaring who is forgiven and who is
not. Eliakim is compared to a “peg in a firm place” (Isa. 22:23) and as someone
organically related by family ties to others: “They will hang on him all the
glory of his father’s house, offspring and issue, all the least vessels, from
bowls to all the jars” (22:24). This indicates that because of Eliakim’s
favored position, his relatives will also have a favored position because of
their relation to him. This may be part of the implied background against which
to understand that the disciples and the leaders of the “church” (Matt. 16:18; 18:17)
are able to share priestly functions with Christ. They have a spiritually
organic connection to him.
Revelation 3:7 portrays Christ as having the “keys” of
Isaiah 22:22 and relates these “keys” to his followers being able eventually to
become “a pillar in the temple of My God” (Rev. 3:12; cf. 3:8–9). “Keys of the
temple” are also said to be in the possession of priests in 1 Chronicles 9:27
and 2 Baruch 10:18. In both Isaiah 22 and 2 Baruch, the keys are being taken
away from unworthy keepers in Israel and transferred elsewhere, which appears
to be the case here in Matthew 16: Could the idea be that the keys to the true
temple are being taken from old Israel and transferred to true Israel, Jesus
and his followers?
In light of the evidence above, it should not be
surprising to observe that in the context directly preceding and following
Matthew 16:18–19 Jesus identifies himself as “Son of Man” three times (16:13,
27–28), and Peter identifies him as “Son of . . . God” (16:16). These names, as
we have already seen, show that Jesus is doing what Adam and Israel should have
done. He is the “Son of Adam” who does what his human father failed to do. He
is the “Son of God,” which was a name not only for Adam but also for the
corporate Adam, Israel, who was disobedient to their divine father. And we have
seen too that Adam and the Son of Man were priestly figures and that the son of
man from Daniel 7 was understood as the son of God, so that the two names were
interchangeable. (G. K. Beale, Union with the Resurrected Christ:
Eschatological New Creation and New Testament Biblical Theology [Grand
Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2023], 208-10)
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift
card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com
Email for Logos.com Gift
Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com
