Binding and loosening. Is it a legality or spirituality?

[unobtrusive]

Binding and loosening. Is it a legality or is it just spiritual or maybe both?

Matthew 18:16-20
16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.
20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

These words of Jesus appear to be taken from the Mosaic law in respect to making righteous legal judgements.

“One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.” (Deuteronomy 19:15b)

This binding and loosening also appears to be invoked by the disciples concerning the the absence of circumcision of the Gentiles, in Acts chapter 15, when the disciples all agreed that Gentiles would be allowed to mingle with Jews in their synagogues because the law of Moses was read to them all every Sabbath day. The ordinances then given (in chapter 15) had everything to do with pagan worship practices that believing Gentiles had repented of. These first four regulations were a starting point for the Gentiles to grow in Christ Jesus, giving them the assets to increase in the knowledge of scriptures that had been preserved by the Jewish believers of that day.

Acts 15:20-29
20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
22 Then pleased it the apostles and elders with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas and Silas, chief men among the brethren:
23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia.
24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:
25 It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul,
26 Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
27 We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth.
28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Binding and loosening. Is it a legality or is it just spiritual or maybe both?

Both. Legality requires at least two or three witnesses to corroborate the truth. Spirituality is applicable because the issue being discussed is spiritual. The authority for binding and loosing was given to the apostles to make judgmental decisions about issues affecting the churches, including rulings about sinning Christians. There are several examples in the Acts of the Apostles.

 

[Willie-T]

Sadly, you, like so many people, have fallen for a mistranslation of that passage.

 

[unobtrusive]

Sadly, you, like so many people, have fallen for a mistranslation of that passage.

So what's the correct translation of that passage? Is the passage that you are addressing in Deuteronomy, Matthew, Acts, or all three, or just one of those?

 

[Willie-T]

So what's the correct translation of that passage? Is the passage that you are addressing in Deuteronomy, Matthew, Acts, or all three, or just one of those?

I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that if you spend a few minutes thinking about it, you will soon figure it out for yourself. I have confidence you can do it.

Think of all the dumb things the Apostles did over their lifetimes. Do you really believe those mistakes and blunders became Heavenly Law because of the frailty of their mortal thinking?

 

[unobtrusive]

I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that if you spend a few minutes thinking about it, you will soon figure it out for yourself. I have confidence you can do it.

Think of all the dumb things the Apostles did over their lifetimes. Do you really believe those mistakes and blunders became Heavenly Law because of the frailty of their mortal thinking?

There are other people that read these threads. Please detail your explanation for their sake, so we can grow together in the truth rather than leave rhetorical questions as to who is talking about what or whatever. Please be definitive. Thanks.

 

[Willie-T]

There are other people that read these threads. Please detail your explanation for their sake, so we can grow together in the truth rather than leave rhetorical questions as to who is talking about what or whatever. Please be definitive. Thanks.

Even a Neophyte knows God expects us to think a little when reading the word.

Do you recall, for just one example, about 40 years after Jesus died, that Peter discriminated against his Gentile flock, by leaving them to eat with the Fat Cats who came from Jerusalem? Paul openly rebuked him for that arrogant, man-fearing mistake.

Do you think that because Peter stamped his approval on discrimination there in Antioch, that it became approved of in Heaven?

 

[Marcelo]

The authority for binding and loosing was given to the apostles to make judgmental decisions about issues affecting the churches, including rulings about sinning Christians. There are several examples in the Acts of the Apostles.

Correct! BIND and LOOSE are rabbinical idioms meaning FORBID and PERMIT.

 

[unobtrusive]

Even a Neophyte knows God expects us to think a little when reading the word.

Do you recall, for just one example, about 40 years after Jesus died, that Peter discriminated against his Gentile flock, by leaving them to eat with the Fat Cats who came from Jerusalem? Paul openly rebuked him for that arrogant, man-fearing mistake.

Do you think that because Peter stamped his approval on discrimination there in Antioch, that it became approved of in Heaven?

Peter made that decision on his own and others that followed suit did likewise on their own, right? The key is two or three witnesses, and any decision must be in "His name." Peter was not together with others in his personal decision as is the will of God. Paul was correct in his judgement as far as I am concerned. Peter was binding himself like the rest that did the same with him, but not together in the name of Christ. There was not an agreement in the presence of 2 or 3 witnesses gathered in the name of Christ. That is the difference from what I presented in the OP.

Galatians 2:11-17
[SUP]11 [/SUP]But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
[SUP]12 [/SUP]For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
[SUP]13 [/SUP]And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
[SUP]14 [/SUP]But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
[SUP]15 [/SUP]We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
[SUP]16 [/SUP]Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
[SUP]17 [/SUP]But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.

 

[Willie-T]

We can play various "what if" games about technical meanings, but what is the REAL question here?

I think we all know this is directed at the Catholic idea that whatever the Pope decides is to be the Law of The Church, will automatically become Law in Heaven. And the same goes for the various Protestant Preachers who want to declare their ideas of proper church behavior as being approved by God, simply because they have elevated themselves to the status of being the ones who dictate to the rest of us peons.

All those verses ever meant was that if the Apostles stayed in the will of God, they would not have to worry that they might be going against Heavenly principles..... and that on those occasions when they DID goof, God would see that it got worked out for right.

 

[Willie-T]

Peter made that decision on his own and others that followed suit did likewise on their own, right? The key is two or three witnesses, and any decision must be in "His name." Peter was not together with others in his personal decision as is the will of God. Paul was correct in his judgement as far as I am concerned. Peter was binding himself like the rest that did the same with him, but not together in the name of Christ. There was not an agreement in the presence of 2 or 3 witnesses gathered in the name of Christ. That is the difference from what I presented in the OP.

Galatians 2:11-17
[SUP]11 [/SUP]But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
[SUP]12 [/SUP]For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
[SUP]13 [/SUP]And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
[SUP]14 [/SUP]But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
[SUP]15 [/SUP]We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
[SUP]16 [/SUP]Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
[SUP]17 [/SUP]But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.

Don't you think just about all the crazy and restrictive rules that come from behind closed doors at many churches all over this nation, are made by the consensus of at least three or four men who all end their prayers with, "in Jesus' name, Amen," and swear that since there was "agreement" by them (witnesses), that their word is God's will?

I don't doubt that is exactly what the Westboro Baptist Church does all the time.

 

[unobtrusive]

We can play various "what if" games about technical meanings, but what is the REAL question here?

I think we all know this is directed at the Catholic idea that whatever the Pope decides is to be the Law of The Church, will automatically become Law in Heaven. And the same goes for the various Protestant Preachers who want to declare their ideas of proper church behavior as being approved by God, simply because they have elevated themselves to the status of being the ones who dictate to the rest of us peons.

All those verses ever meant was that if the Apostles stayed in the will of God, they would not have to worry that they might be going against Heavenly principles..... and that on those occasions when they DID goof, God would see that it got worked out for right.

Agreed

Don't you think just about all the crazy and restrictive rules that come from behind closed doors at many churches all over this nation, are made by the consensus of at least three or four men who all end their prayers with, "in Jesus' name, Amen," and swear that since there was "agreement" by them (witnesses), that their word is God's will?

I don't doubt that is exactly what the Westboro Baptist Church does all the time.

To me this is not a “what if.” This authority was given to the disciples by Jesus Christ. What ever decision was made it had to be in agreement with the truth in scripture by the very character of Jesus Christ.

Secondly, I believe that the pope is not a disciple of Jesus Christ. We, too often make up our own rules as to what the scriptures are really telling us. The Pharisees did that and so do most, if not all denominations, including Catholics, like if it feels good, do it. Wrong!!

And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us: And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him. (1 John 5:14-15)

The key to the OP is the quotation of scripture that says… “For where two or three are gathered together in my name,there am I in the midst of them.” (Matthew 18:20)

I’m sure you and others didn’t miss that. Now, what do you think that being in His name means? I think it means His desire of righteous judgment. “Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.” (Leviticus 19:15)

 

[unobtrusive]

This pertains to the OP
John 7:19-24
[SUP]19 [/SUP]Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?
[SUP]20 [/SUP]The people answered and said, Thou hast a devil: who goeth about to kill thee?
[SUP]21 [/SUP]Jesus answered and said unto them, I have done one work, and ye all marvel.
[SUP]22 [/SUP]Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers) and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man.
[SUP]23 [/SUP]If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?
24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

 

[Dino246]

Binding and loosening. Is it a legality or is it just spiritual or maybe both?

...
This binding and loosening also appears to be invoked by the disciples concerning the the absence of circumcision of the Gentiles, in Acts chapter 15, when the disciples all agreed that Gentiles would be allowed to mingle with Jews in their synagogues because the law of Moses was read to them all every Sabbath day. The ordinances then given (in chapter 15) had everything to do with pagan worship practices that believing Gentiles had repented of. These first four regulations were a starting point for the Gentiles to grow in Christ Jesus, giving them the assets to increase in the knowledge of scriptures that had been preserved by the Jewish believers of that day.

Regarding the part I bolded above: this is an interesting viewpoint. I have always thought this verse implied, "Moses' Law has been read every Sabbath, and you haven't followed it. Why do you exclude the Gentiles for not following it?"

 

[MarcR]

Looking back to verse 1, we see that Jesus is speaking to his disciples (which includes us) not just the apostles.

Mt 18:15-22
15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.
20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
21 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.
KJV

The passage focuses on dealing with grievances within the body instead of going to law in public courts.

We are to first try to come to agreement privately. (v 15)

Then we bring 1 or two brothers to arbitrate. (v. 16)

Last recourse is to the church fellowship at large. (v 17)

in (v 19) the discourse moves to group prayer, and in (vv 21-22) comes back to forgiveness.

This gives a good clue to understanding verse 18.

There are two possibilities and I believe both apply:

1) Mt 6:14-15
14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
KJV

in this reading the sense is that which is bound is unforgiven and that which is loosed is forgiven


2) in this sense verse 18 deals with authority to teach.

that which is bound restrained or prohibited will be what God restrains or prohibits. The true sense is not that God adopts our pronouncements but by the Holy Spirit God's desire is revealed to us.

Likewise what we permit (loose) will be God's revealed will.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Think of all the dumb things the Apostles did over their lifetimes. Do you really believe those mistakes and blunders became Heavenly Law because of the frailty of their mortal thinking?

This is definitely not about what the apostles did "over their lifetimes". It is about the power that was promised to them with the coming of the Holy Spirit, and the wisdom that God would give them while they served the churches. Therefore it was not about their "frailty" but the power of God working in them and through them since they were given apostolic authority. They would all have had multiple spiritual gifts including miracle-working power, wisdom, knowledge, etc. If they wrote by Divine inspiration then they judged with Divine wisdom granted to them. So study the Acts of the Apostles and don't go by your humanistic reasoning.

 

[unobtrusive]

Regarding the part I bolded above: this is an interesting viewpoint. I have always thought this verse implied, "Moses' Law has been read every Sabbath, and you haven't followed it. Why do you exclude the Gentiles for not following it?"

Is the "you," in your quote, arbitrary in relation to Israel turning to pagan practices, the Pharisees not following the law as God intended, the Gentiles repenting from paganism, or is that question for me?

Other than that, I believe that the law was read to the Gentiles as well as the Jews every Sabbath day in whatever Gentile province those many synagogues were located. According to Acts, that was a common practice the way I read it.

 

[NayborBear]

Don't you think just about all the crazy and restrictive rules that come from behind closed doors at many churches all over this nation, are made by the consensus of at least three or four men who all end their prayers with, "in Jesus' name, Amen," and swear that since there was "agreement" by them (witnesses), that their word is God's will?

I don't doubt that is exactly what the Westboro Baptist Church does all the time.

Oh WiilieT? I'm so glad you posted this up. Can't tell you how many times I've been in "prayer circles", with church leadership, where they were (supposedly) gathered in Jesus' name; and then, commenced to tellin' God, not askin'. Tellin' God what they were gonna do! It's like "We agree Jesus is here, and Jesus agrees with us, because, we are all here in Jesus' name!
Which got me questioning? If this is "Jesus in their midst?" Just what Jesus, or who's Jesus, is in their midst, doin' all this agreeing, anyway?
Which lead me to the conclusion that because Jesus may be in the midst of 'em, doesn't mean He's agreeing with 'em!

 

[Johnny_B]

Even a Neophyte knows God expects us to think a little when reading the word.

Do you recall, for just one example, about 40 years after Jesus died, that Peter discriminated against his Gentile flock, by leaving them to eat with the Fat Cats who came from Jerusalem? Paul openly rebuked him for that arrogant, man-fearing mistake.

Do you think that because Peter stamped his approval on discrimination there in Antioch, that it became approved of in Heaven?

Brother Jesus is teach the disciples this so that one member could not pass judgement on another for something that was not done to one member by the other, like the Paul and Peter situation, Peter did not sin against Paul, nor Paul against Peter, but if they had there's a process to go through for a judgement to be made, not just a hot headed decision made in the heat of the moment. It is about corperate decisions being made, because that is what Jesus was teaching His disciples that no one was above the other and there is a plurality of elders that run the Church, not some superstar pastor that is the shot caller, no, but a group of elders to lead the Church. No alpha leader that has the final say in what the Church is going to do or where the Church is going, so no one pastor to kiss up to, to get ahead in the leadership role of the Church and if one of the elders get cocky, he can be sat down so he can get a better understanding of what a leader in the Church of God is like. I know of pastors that were the head pastor of a Church and had a drug problem, he brought it before the Church in what appeared to be repentance. He went to a rehab program, after that he came back to the Church and was to sit down under the other pastor's that he was over and after a year he wanted his position back to full restoration.

The reason being he did not treat those that were under him before very well, he had stipulation as to how one is a servant to the body of Christ and he did not like cleaning toilets. So those that were over him, so to speak. Told him he was not ready yet and that did not sit right with him, he did not like anyone telling him he was not ready yet and after years of teaching how if he had to submit to others he would do it, because we are all servenats of the Lord and how the greatest among you would be the servenat of all, he found out it is easier to teach than to do. And the flesh over took him and threatened to take it to court, he forgot how he used to teach that it was a shame when members of the Church had to go to a secular court to have a matter setlled, I Corinthians 6:1-8

“When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints?2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases?3 Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life!4 So if you have such cases, why do you lay them before those who have no standing in the church?5 I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers,6 but brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers?7 To have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded?8 But you yourselves wrong and defraud—even your own brothers!”

There were plenty of member in that body that could made a Godly decision over the matter, but they would not have sided with the alpha pastor because just his action to take it back, showed that he was still running in the flesh not in the Spirit.

I have it told to me all the time, when I tell them about the plurality of eldership that leads the Church, the first thing they say is who is in charge of the Church and I say Jesus. He is the head pastor or head elder and men are the under Shepards of the flock of God, I Peter 5:1-5

“So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed:2 shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly;3 not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock.4 And when the chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.5 Likewise, you who are younger, be subject to the elders. Clothe yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another, for “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.”

Matthew 18:15-20 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses.17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed[f]in heaven.19 Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven.20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”

This is about a Church member that has sinned against you, it instruces us to go to them and bring the sin that was against you and if they listen you have gained a fellow member, if they do not listen, then you go with one or two other members of the Church in hopes that they will listen. If they do not, then you bring it before the Church and if they refuse to listen to the body, then you treat that person like a sinner that does not know the Gospel. You would speak to them about the Lord in an attempt to bring them to an understanding of repentance. This is what would be bound or loosed in heaven, because it is a decision made by the body, it's not like Paul rebuking Peter for hypocrisy, that is one man making a decision on another man.

Here, it is the body coming to a corprate decision on a fellow member, not one member on another. It is the same principle as in Deuteronomy 19:15-21

“One witness shall not rise against a man concerning any iniquity or any sin that he commits; by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established.16 If a false witness rises against any man to testify against him of wrongdoing,17 then both men in the controversy shall stand before the Lord, before the priests and the judges who serve in those days18 And the judges shall make careful inquiry, and indeed, if the witness is a false witness, who has testified falsely against his brother,19 then you shall do to him as he thought to have done to his brother; so you shall put away the evil from among you.20 And those who remain shall hear and fear, and hereafter they shall not again commit such evil among you.21 Your eye shall not pity: life shall be for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.”

In Moses' day the judgement would be carried out by those that were appointed as judges and priests, if there are false witnesses they would be placed under the same judgement as the wrongdoer. The binding and loosing would be if it is forgiven by the body or there is a judgement on the members.

 

[garee]

Sadly, you, like so many people, have fallen for a mistranslation of that passage.

Mistranslated and if translated properly would destroy the foundation of Catholicism.

Yes most translations turn the understanding of that upside down, taking away the understanding of God, and in the end make the faith of God without effect. They perform that by accrediting the unseen as the “things of God”, to that seen, as the “things of men”.

Looking at the end of the context of the loosening and binding authority of the gospel in question. It, “whatsoever you shall bind on earth” is used twice. Once in Mathew 16 and again in Mathew 18. The first time in Mathew 16 it is shown as to how we can hear what the Spirit says to the believer personally one on one and in chapter 18 how we respond to the leadership of the church as a body in respect to Him not seen

And having taken him aside, Peter began to rebuke him, saying, `Be kind to thyself, sir; this shall not be to thee;' and he having turned, said to Peter, `Get thee behind me, adversary! thou art a stumbling-block to me, for thou dost not mind the things of God, but the things of men.'Mathew16 :22

Again the things of God not seen the eternal, compared to the things of men seen, the temporal.

Those who required a sign before they would believe (walking by sight) as a law of the fathers, a false zeal of men of both Jews and the Roman Catholics as the kind of fathers that Christ called a brood of vipers apposed walking by faith the unseen .
The Young’s literal as well as the new American Standard are of a few translations that turned things right side up as the unseen things of God.


Isaiah 29:16 Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?

The key that binds the lies of the father of lies like a chain and loosens the truth is the gospel .

and I will give to thee the keys of the reign of the heavens, and whatever thou mayest bind upon the earth shall be having been bound in the heavens, and whatever thou mayest loose upon the earth shall be having been loosed in the heavens.' Mat 16:19 Youngs Literal

I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” Then He warned the disciples that they should tell no one that He was the Christ. New American standard Bible Mat 16:19

The difference seems clear we walk by faith giving the understanding to the Potter who forms the clay.

The King James translators turned it upside down as if the loosening and binding were of the things of men, seen.

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Mat 16:19 King James

There is nothing loosed from the hand of man or the church as a whole on earth that could be bound in heaven .

If it was then we could make peter the key rather than the gospel and the Pope the one who makes saints through his declaration on earth binding it in heaven. Its simply the father of lies, Satan trying to establish is upside down idea of walking by sight as if God not seen has no understanding to offer..