Resurrection Shaped Stories

Pastor Matt Swigart, has served for 8 years as the youth Pastor of in New Life Church of Woodbury in Woodbury, MN. He is a loving father of two with his wife Christina. Both are a great example of a Godly marriage involved in ministry.

Not only do I consider him a geniune "Warrior for Christ" but also have the blessing of calling him a friend. This sermon is taken off the New Life Church of Woodbury website, and I pray that the Spirit uses this to open our spiritual eyes and see what exactly God values as a life of significance.

"When the men were returning home after David had killed the Philistine, the women came out from all the towns of Israel to meet King Saul with singing and dancing, with joyful songs and with tambourines and lutes. As they danced, they sang: "Saul has slain his thousands, and David his tens of thousands."

Saul was very angry; this refrain galled him. "They have credited David with tens of thousands," he thought, "but me with only thousands. What more can he get but the kingdom?" And from that time on Saul kept a jealous eye on David. " -1 Sam 18:6-9

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD SERMON

I invite you to such a reading of this verse, that hand in hand through the Spirit’s guide and an objective assessment of the language and 1^st century Jewish thought, help us figure out exactly what in the “heaven’s” Jesus meant by such statements towards a known, frail figure, of that as Simon son of Jonah.

Let me begin by acknowledging that hundreds of sermons might be hidden under this passage but I will limit myself to examine the “promises” and “blessings” Jesus issued on Peter upon his confession, and to perhaps evaluate their influence and application for us today.

And by doing so, I will break them down into the following:

YOU ARE PETER AND ON THIS ROCK I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH AND I TELL YOU THE GATES OF HADES WILL NOT OVERCOME IT.

Much could be said about how the traditional (Catholic) Church, distorted this verse to acknowledge or confer “infallibility” to the figure of the Pope, and somehow support the claim that Peter was given, exceptional authority over all the apostles, and how in its defense the modern evangelical readings of this passage fail to it justice, trembling in fear that they might acknowledge that Jesus was in fact addressing Peter as “the rock” in this passage.

So by means of boiling it all down, I bring you the 3 main modern interpretations of this statement, of which I will briefly list below:

The rock is: Peter’s confession, so in essence Jesus is saying: You are Peter, and on what you just said about me, I will build up my Church

The rock is: Jesus, so basically scholars argue Jesus used a play on words in Greek pointing to himself figuratively, like Jesus saying: you are Peter (petros: small rock) and on this rock (petra: bedrock) myself, will build up my Church

The rock is: Peter, lastly we come to the traditional interpretation where Jesus was directing himself to Peter and for all intense and purposes called the man “a rock” and promised to build a Church (that is congregation in Greek) on him. (I will come to this one later on*)

So take your pick, for time and space constraints, I will go ahead and dismiss A and B on the grounds that (a) is not evidenced in the narrative and (b) Jesus most likely spoke Aramaic and the Greek play on words does not necessarily diminish the statement. For He kind of nicknamed Peter “a rock” in Aramaic (Cephas) as well. And note, nowhere in the text do we find a command for succession or authoritarian leadership for Peter.

So it is after such findings that I humbly put my chips on (c) which I will elaborate on, right at the end*.

I WILL GIVE YOU THE KEYS OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN

Pop-culture has really taken hold of this one, and visions of the transparent remains of a cartoon character floating and arriving at a pearly white gate in the clouds, where there is an old man (guess who) holding a book, much like a “glorified bouncer” in a V.I.P club, weighing good deeds vs. bad ones, is the image we all have gotten out of this verse. Cartoon watchers or not, pop-culture has made its way in the last 100 years to advert such imagery.

But it comes as a rebuking surprise to many Christians to find out that when Jesus is talking about the Kingdom of Heaven, or the Kingdom of God, he is not referring to “heaven”, nor did his followers make such a mistake, they all knew (eventually or gradually) that Jesus was talking about God’s sovereign rule of all the earth, that is mysteriously at work now (Mark 1:15), (Matthew 28:18-20), but still yet to come (Rev 21:3-5).

A kingdom inaugurated by the announcement that Israel’s King was raised from the dead, and overcame the deadliest of enemies; Death itself! An announcement Peter was blessed to preach, and in some way “open” to both Jews (Acts2:14-38) and Gentiles (Acts 10) the “gate” through which salvation was attainable.

WHATEVER YOU BIND ON EARTH WILL BE BOUND IN HEAVEN, WHATEVER YOU LOOSE ON EARTH, WILL BE LOOSED IN HEAVEN

Probably one of the most dazzling and mesmerizing “promises” made to Peter, and well 2 chapters afterwards, to ALL the disciples (Matt 18:18). So singling out Peter to hold this one above all, would be you know, kind of impossible. But the question remains, what exactly did Jesus mean by such a phrase?

The words "bind" and "loose" were commonly used among the Jews in the sense of forbid and allow, and more so among Rabbis who thought It was not a matter of treating Scripture lightly, "loosing" it by tossing overboard, but rather the process treated Scripture with gravity, carefully attempting to discern how it applied to actual daily living. For example, Rabbis went beyond the Commandments and analyzed them, by means of determining when one was “bound” to the Law, or “loosed” from it.

Two schools of Rabbis examined the law and applied it. Someone might ask, "If I find a fledgling dove and keep it have I stolen?" The rabbi’s teaching then established the application of the commandment "Do not steal" to the real situation of a person’s finding a baby bird that had obviously escaped from someone’s cage. In this case the teaching was that if you found the bird within fifty cubits of the cage you had to return it, otherwise "finders keepers" prevailed.

In some ways the entire Sermon on the Mount is an example of Jesus’ “binding and loosing” ("You have heard it said…I say unto you"). He binds murder to include anger. He binds adultery to include divorce/remarriage. He binds/extends the commandment on loving neighbor to loving enemies. But he “looses” Sabbath-keeping so that one might harvest grain by hand and even heal people. He also looses the restrictions against idolatry by allowing tax payments to Caesar who considered himself a god. Rabbi Jesus did what rabbis did—they took the law and applied it to daily practical issues of morality—loosening the grip of some rules and tightening and extending others. He never disposed of the law, but applied it to real-life through the process of binding and loosing.

So considering how “binding and loosing” clearly sparked an imagery of lawful or unlawful determination by the “agent” in this case the Apostle’s we can easily do a contextual reading of Matthew 18:15-22, and find that Peter’s question at the end makes sense, and also find that what he did NOT ask, might give clarity to this particular statement. He did NOT ask: how many demons am I allowed to bind, or how many angelical legions can I set loose? I say this only, to give notice to the fact that NOWHERE in these verses is authority over demonic forces or “Spiritual warfare” being addressed, as some claim.

But rather Peter’s question goes hand in hand with the context of the phrase, “to bind and loose”: HOW MANY TIMES SHALL I FORGIVE MY BROTHER? As in asking Jesus, how He would redefine (bind or loose if you will) this commandment, and in an exponential manner, so he did (Matthew 18:22).

So in essence, we find that Jesus uses a cryptic and mysterious language when addressing how exactly the Church will function. Thankfully none of the believers actually claimed to have the power to forgive sins after Jesus promised this to them (John 20:22-23), rather they understood the language and implication that through them the power of God’s Spirit would allow them to do so, and similarly in this case, the Apostle’s understood that the Church would as well need to evaluate and determine lawful and unlawful acts within itself, ranging from matters such as: food offered to idols, gentile circumcision(Acts 15:28-29), to more delicate issues such as exposing sin within the church(1 Cor 5). And confident that the Spirit would guide them, and confirm their judgment (their binding and loosing if you will) in the heavens.

IN CONCLUSION

*On why (c) remains a sound choice above the other 2, I argue, it is that this interpretation that follows the narrative, I see NO heretic inclinations of Jesus calling Peter a rock.

Further down the New Testament we find Peter being the first to preach the Gospel to Jews and Gentiles, and in this sense getting a sense of leadership and respect among the Apostle’s, we also find him being the first to speak and to lead the first Church council (Acts 15:7). And this in NO way places Peter above or beyond the other Apostle’s, as we see Paul rebuking him at some points (Galatians 2:11-17…so much for infallibility) and Peter himself acknowledging divine authorship in Paul’s Letters (2 Peter 3:15…so much for exclusiveness of authority). I suggest evangelical readers chill out for a second. Nothing transcends sound doctrine here, Jesus is still at the center of the faith, put your pitchforks and torches away.

I think perhaps Peter got it, more than we ever will, even after denying Jesus, being hailed as a demonic agent by The Man himself, he found redemption in being asked the same thing 3 times. Far from a heretic view, I claim, and so does the New Testament for that matter, the Church is built on Christ as “THE” Rock if you will, and we as a Church being built upon the foundation laid by the Apostle’s and Prophets (Ephesians 2:19-22), come together as a great mystery, God himself picks sinners and by all means frail men and women to uphold and build his church, and also build them up within it. I argue that the person that really got it was Peter himself; Quietly let his words sink in as you meditate upon this passage: 1 Peter 2:3-9 ...Peter, calling YOU and I a rock? hmm!

1.We like Peter, have been placed as building stone in the church, which is where we fit in. Are you involved and committed to this notion? Does partaking in the life of a local Church your priority? It is only when we do, that God builds us up from within as well, to give service and support to other believers, and vice versa to spread a testimony of his love to the world.

2.We like Peter have been selected to announce God’s kingdom, through the resurrection of Jesus; Are we doing it? When was the last time you did? How can thinking about this verse change your attitude toward sharing the Gospel, knowing that the Gates of hell can’t prevail against you doing so?

3.We must examine ourselves and see whether or not we are following God’s commandments and testing our obedience toward them and discerning when we are "bound or loosed" by them, and by doing so remaining a healthy member, to recognize sin within us and within our church and to acknowledge and deal with it, supporting Church leadership, in a Godly and restoring manner.

*a very special mention to Mike Munoz for giving me so much insight on this passage, his love for Scripture and passionate diligence of seeking its meaning and application, is not only worthy of mention but of emulation. Gracias Mike!

The Roman Triumphus was a civil ceremony and religious rite of ancient Rome. In which the victorious Roman troops led the conquered enemy down a processional route in the city of Rome to the temple of Jupiter. The route was lined with spectators who applauded as the victors passed by.

The triumph publicly celebrated and sanctified the military achievements of an army commander who had won great military successes, or originally and traditionally, one who had successfully completed a foreign war. The triumphing general was ritually elevated to near-divine or near-kingly status for the day of the triumph, and thereafter retained the right to be described as vir triumphalis (roughly, "man honored with triumph") for the rest of his life. Even the etymology of the word Triumph, comes from this ceremony.

One of the most interesting facts about this “march/procession” is that there were carriers burning spices, and spreading a fragrance of victory among the people in Rome, just picture it, the sweet smell reminding you, you are on the winning team, the enemy has been conquered, yet right behind them though, the defeated army, which will forever associate this smell with defeat and despair as their future is certain slavery.

2 Corinthians 2:12-17

Perhaps among my favorite passages in all of scripture, because of Paul’s use of imagery to describe how God uses us to spread his message, with the “fragrance” of his Gospel and even as one reads further in the New Testament and sees this image come up again to describe God's victory in the spiritual realm (Col 2:15), we can fully understand what 1st century readers would get behind the usage of such a metaphor, and we can perhaps glimpse from it the message of assurance and comfort that Scripture, is still to this day trying to transmit.