Binding and Loosing
by Ed Nelson
For New Testament (Brit Chadashah) readers, in Matthew 16:13-19 we encounter an ancient Hebraic concept called “binding and loosing.” The story unfolds this way:
Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi,
He was asking his disciples, “Who do people say that the
Son of Man is?”
And they said, “Some say John the Baptist; and others,
Elijah. And still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.”
He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?"
Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of
the living God.”
And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona,
because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you,
but my Father who is in heaven. I also say to you that
you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my assembly.
And the gates of Hades will not overpower it.
“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.”
This biblical Hebrew phrase, “to bind and loose,” is a commonly misunderstood concept today by New Testament readers. With the passing of time and the loss of original and proper contexts of terms and phrases in the Bible, new interpretations emerged with a different force than intended when the Bible was written.
Traditional Catholicism attaches the concept to the spiritual power of the papacy to issue edicts. This is quite close to the original meaning, though it limits its use to one person.
In many evangelical and Pentecostal churches is the common tendency to misapply the phrase to “binding evil spirits,” or even Satan. As we shall see, clearly this is not the biblical understanding and expression intended in the ancient Hebraic terms “bind and loose.”
In the “Addenda” to this article, the subject of Satan being bound is treated as a separate conversation.
Our purpose is to come to terms with the Bible regarding this phrase, “to bind and loose,” so we may understand and use it in the proper biblical intention.
Original meaning of “binding and loosing.” In ancient Jewish life, the phrase “to bind and to loose” was understood as a legal designation. It is a rabbinical term for “forbidding and permitting.”
Before and during the days of Yeshua (Jesus), these antonyms—bind and loose—were used to describe the authority of religious leaders to make decisions beyond the Torah for daily life in special circumstances, often involving controversy.
The Hebrew expression asar (to bind by a spoken bond) parar (to annul a spoken bond) was established by Moses in Numbers 30 for a vow (neder) which prohibits doing or using something. The binding remains permanent unless it is annulled by the responsible, overseeing authority.
Later, the Aramaic words asar and shera, which mean “bind” and “loose,” are often found in combination as a Jewish formula for excommunication and reinstatement, among other authoritative uses for order and discipline by Jewish leaders, usually Pharisees.
The concept of asar implies binding an object by a powerful, divinely authorized act in order to prevent its use (see Targum to Psalm 58:6). It goes beyond interpreting the Torah in a given situation, but may include it.
The corresponding Aramaic shera and Hebrew hattarah (for loosing the prohibition; permitting) have no parallel in the Tanakh. However, in the New Testament we find such an occasion at the immersion of Jesus (Yeshua) where John the Immerser was reluctant to immerse Him at his request.
Jesus (Yeshua) said to him: “Permit it at this time. For in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.”(Matthew 3:15). So John baptized Jesus (Yeshua), not for repentance but for righteousness. What prohibited John from immersing Jesus (Yeshua) was loosed for this occasion.
Again, we see an occasion when small children came to Jesus in Mark 10:14.
But when Jesus saw this [the prohibition of children],
He was indignant and said to them, “Permit the children
to come to me. Do not prohibit them. For the kingdom
of God belongs to such as these.
Pharisees functioned with this legal concept. Pharisees always claimed the power to bind and loose. Under Queen Alexandra of the Grecian Empire the Pharisees ruled, asserting their claim to divine authority “to bind and loose”:
And now the Pharisees joined themselves to her, to assist
her in the government. These are a certain sect of the Jews
that appear more religious than others, and seem to
interpret the laws more accurately… they banished and
reduced whom they pleased; they bound and loosed
[men] at their pleasure; and, to say all at once, they had
the enjoyment of the royal authority, while the expenses
and the difficulties of it belonged to Alexandra… She
governed other people, and the Pharisees governed her.
(Josephus, The War of the Jews, Book 1, Chapter 5)
As the learned men of the queen, they acted beyond the Torah on deciding what was forbidden or allowed. In most cases, what was forbidden or permitted was self-evident by virtue of the Torah’s 613 commandments. But the Pharisees went further. What they claimed to possess was the divine right of Yahweh to exercise power to tie or untie anything. This was a right granted by kingdom authority, they taught, but not to abolish the Torah.
Some matters required decision where the Torah was not clear enough under given situations. The Pharisees were ready and prepared to act in these cases by binding and loosing.
As Josephus shows, they had legal power from the queen to pronounce an anathema upon any person. In the same vested power, they could “bind and loose” people, to tie them or untie them in any matter of their choosing. Or they may ban or bind the use of an object. Carried further, they exercised the power over certain days by declaring them fast-days (Megilloth Ta’anith 22.; Ta’anith 12a; Yerushalayim Nedarim 1:36c, d).
This power and authority, vested in the rabbinical body of each age, was best exemplified in the Sanhedrin. This august body acted within the ideal that it received its sanction and mandate from the celestial court of justice (Makkoth 23b).
The Catholic Church preserved these divine rights. With this definition in mind, we can readily see why the traditional view of Christianity represented in the Catholic Church reserved the phrase to explain the right of papacy to issue edicts, to speak ex cathedra, and to excommunicate.
During the second to fourth centuries some church fathers interpreted the meaning of “binding and loosing” with slight variations, but always in the context of spiritual authorities making powerful decisions under special circumstances. Tertullian, Cyprian, and Origen viewed binding and loosing as the authority of church authorities to excommunicate persons who violated church law and the authority to reinstate them back into fellowship.
Such an understanding is based on Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 18:15-18 where church discipline by leaders is imposed on those who sin. They may be forgiven or, in the case of not being forgiven, they may be excommunicated as “a Gentile or tax collector.” This understanding reflects the meaning of “binding and loosing” in the Hebrew and Aramaic languages used by many Jewish scholars before and during the first century.
By the sixteenth century the understanding of this phrase had changed little. Martin Luther believed that binding and loosing had to do with the church’s authority to forgive or retain sins. Where he disagreed with the Roman Catholic Church was on his belief that all Christians had the authority to bind and loose. The Catholic Church maintained the view that only spiritual authorities placed in leadership in the Church may do so, a view more consistent with Bible times.
“Binding and loosing’ in the first century. The term “to bind” (asar) in ancient Israel, including the times of the New Testament, meant to forbid or prohibit. The word “to loose” meant to permit or set free. We find ample support for this ancient usage from Jewish literature such as the works of Josephus (first century A.D.), the Aramaic Targums (paraphrases of the Hebrew Bible), and, later, the collection of ancient Jewish teachings in the Talmud.
Torah teachers before and contemporary with Yeshua (Jesus) occasionally were asked to interpret and apply the 613 mitzvoth (commandments) of the Torah when uncertainty existed about how to obey them.
Often questions arose among the Israelites, including Jewish believers in Messiah in the first century, regarding how to act when the Hebrew Scriptures did not seem clear about what was right or wrong, better or best, or worse or worst. For example, the Bible forbids work on the Sabbath, but it does not specify what activities constitute work. Questions arose that no one could answer. Spiritual authorities among the Jews, particularly among the sages, sought to give explanation. Jewish rabbis “bound” the law when they determined that a commandment was applicable to an otherwise unclear situation, and they “loosed” the law when they determined that a word of Scripture (otherwise valid) was not applicable under certain specified circumstances.
During the century prior to Messiah’s first coming throughout the first century, debates over how to apply biblical law to specific situations were quite common. These debates are found in an array of scholarly arguments between the first century Pharisee schools of Hillel and Shammai. They continued to be a defining part of the discussions that would ultimately be codified as the Mishnah in A.D. 200. The general tendency was that the rabbis of the school of Hillel “loosed” many things that the school of Shammai “bound.”
In their rabbinic explanations of the laws of Scriptures, new laws and regulations began to abound as to what constituted work and what did not. Because Jewish sages were considered to be spiritual authorities, they bound certain activities, prohibiting them. At times they loosed other activities, permitting them. The great tendency of human nature, whether among Jewish or Christian leaders, in regard to unclear or non-specific spiritual matters is to bind people to legalisms rather than to set them free.
Rabbis took up the task of applying the Scriptures to daily life—answering the question “How far should I go?” and, “How far is too far?” Each rabbi offered a “yoke,” as did Jesus (Yeshua)—an oral collection of his own applications of the Bible’s teachings. To determine the application of Scripture, the rabbis used a question and answer approach. With this method, they examined the law and applied it.
The question was raised whether one might be guilty of stealing if one finds something and keeps it without searching for the rightful owner. When is such a search required, and how extensive must it be? The Talmud states, “If a fledgling bird is found within fifty cubits of a dovecote, it belongs to the owner of the dovecote. If it is found outside the limits of fifty cubits, it belongs to the person who finds it” (Bava Batra 23b).
One of the famous decisions was that the law (“Do not steal”) was bound when the bird was found in proximity to its likely owner. One who keeps the bird under such conditions has transgressed the law and is guilty of sin. But the law is loosed when the bird is found at a distance from any likely owner. The law against stealing does not forbid keeping the bird in that instance.
Jesus (Yeshua) of Nazareth engaged such legal discussions when He refered to “the tradition of the elders” (15:2) and when He discussed such questions as “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause?” (19:3). These were popular issues in the first century Jewish community that exercised many rabbis.
Important to note is that for the rabbis, and for Jesus (Yeshua), loosing the law never meant dismissing Scripture or countering its authority. The law was never wrong when it was rightly interpreted. The issue, rather, was discernment of the law's intent and of the sphere of its application. Thus, in the above example, the rabbis did not decide that in some instances it is all right to steal; rather, they sought to define stealing in a way that would determine just what behavior was prohibited.
“Binding and Loosing” in Oral Torah. “Binding and loosing” is a concept that developed among the Hebrews and their Jewish descendants who believed in the Oral Torah, a collection of memorized aphorisms and teachings passed down through the centuries. Those who believed in and accepted the Oral Torah regarded Moses to be the initiator of it. About A.D. 220 the massive amount of oral traditions handed down through the centuries were collected, systematized and edited. The result was a huge volume known as the Mishnah.
One of the classic arguments ancient Torah scholars made for the legitimacy of the Oral Torah was its flexibility under changing times and circumstances. They taught that the Written Torah was inflexible. It was a fixed book. But they saw the Oral Torah as neither immutable nor eternal. It was flexible, therefore, and could be bent to fit any situation demanding an answer that was otherwise unclear.
“Binding and loosing” originally was about how to interpret and apply the Written Torah for daily life when the Bible was unclear, or exceptional cases arose. Those interpretations of the Written Torah were gradually collected into what is known as the Oral Torah. The Oral Torah became burdensome and difficult for Jews to obey. In time it was called a yoke around their necks. The apostle Peter, in validating the Gentiles as part of the church in Acts 15:10, argued that the Oral Torah, or Oral Law, should not be imposed on Gentiles. He said at the Council in Jerusalem:
“Now therefore why do you put God to the test by
placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which
neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But
we believe that we are saved through the grace of the
Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are.”
Of course, not all Jews accepted the idea of the Oral Torah, but the fact that Peter addresses the issue regarding the burdensome laws of the Oral Torah, it is clear that the early Jewish believers in Messiah gave it much credit. In fact, we find evidence that Jesus referred to the Oral Torah favorably at times, as does the apostle Paul, but not in regard to those laws that became a burdensome yoke around the necks of the Jewish people. In fact, the authority to bind and loose is the source for the Oral Torah. For certain, Yeshua sanctions such authority to bind and loose, i.e., to interpret the Torah and the rest of the Hebrew Bible for life application in peculiar or unique circumstances.
During the Second Temple era, long before the Mishnah was written, many leading authorities rejected the Oral Torah as having any validity. For these, “binding and loosing” was not an aspect of their biblical view. The Sadducees were such a leading group. The Pharisees, however, countered the Sadducees by being the strongest advocates for oral tradition, hence, they gave the strongest support to the concept of “binding and loosing”.
As mentioned, the phrase “binding and loosing” finds its roots in the oral traditions gathered and formalized by the Pharisees and their rabbinic successors. The import of a decision to bind or loose was the making of special laws and regulations beyond the fixed writings of the Torah. These “bindings and loosings” were designed to meet a temporary need for a solution not self-evident in the Torah, interpreting the Torah for unusual situations.
Binding. A citation in the Talmud, Sanhedrin 22a, refers to a question attributed to Moses. He asks Yahweh, “Sovereign of the Universe! Cause me to know what the final decision is on each matter of law.” According to oral tradition, Yahweh replied:
The majority must be followed. When the majority
declares it forbidden, it is not allowed; so that the Torah
may be capable of interpretation with forty-nine points
pro and forty-nine points contra.
Loosing the people. Sometimes under exceptional circumstances, written ordinances of the Written Torah were temporarily suspended until such time as they could be re-enacted under more favorable times. In other words, the people, or certain people in specific situations, were loosed from certain commandments that militated against their well-being for a limited duration.
Such an occasion arose when Joshua led the conquest of Jericho. In the initial attack on the Amorite capital of Jericho, some commandments of the Torah were suspended:
• By law, the Levites were exempt from military duties, yet they were permitted to lead the military procession around Jericho
• By law, the people were to do no work on the Sabbath, yet they were permitted to march around Jericho once a day for six days, and then seven times on the seventh day
Why were some of the commandments of the Torah suspended for this week?
The reason lies in the fact that the Torah with all its commandments is greater than the sum of its laws. In fact, to ancient Israel, the Ten Commandments is a ketuvah, or prenuptial contract, for marriage. A ketuvah governed the approach to marriage and the attitude of the husband and wife towards each other, their families, their work and their worship. A ketuvah was presented for the future well-being of the marriage and home.
God gave laws to Israel as a bridegroom would present a ketuvah of marriage to his bride. It belongs to Israel and may not be changed by this bride chosen out of Egypt. Nor will the Bridegroom change it by adding to or taking away. It is eternal and immutable with one exception. When the Bride is facing unusual circumstances where observing the ketuvah would endanger her well-being, or her family, those laws or regulations may be suspended for a time, that is, she may be loosed from them for her good and her blessing. Under normal circumstances the Bride is bound to the ketuvah.
In the case of the laws that would hinder the conquest of the city of Jericho shortly after Israel crossed the Jordan River, Joshua, the leader of Israel, loosed the young nation from parts of the Torah for her well-being and safety. Levites acted like a military force, something otherwise not permitted. The people walked around the wall of the city seven times on the seventh day, something unheard of, but necessary at the moment for the victory Yahweh wanted for his people.
The power to temporarily suspend ordinances of the Torah is a gracious act of Yahweh for his loving Bride. We see this same kind of temporary suspension of ordinances in other places:
• When the Temple was destroyed, laws governing Temple practices were suspended indefinitely
• When Israel was in Babylonian captivity, agrarian laws were suspended
• King David ate of the holy bread of the Temple when he was hungry, something otherwise forbidden
A good example of temporarily loosing someone from the Torah commands is found in the following story found in rabbinic literature. According to the Oral Torah, a bridegroom is exempt from reciting the Sh’ma on the first night of his marriage. When Rabban Gamaliel married he recited the Sh’ma on the first night. His disciples said to him: “Master, didn't you teach us that a bridegroom is exempt from reciting the Sh’ma on the first night?”
“I will not listen to you,” he replied, “so as to cast off from myself the kingdom of Heaven even for a moment” (Mishnah, Berachot 2:5).
The ruling that a bridegroom is exempt from reciting the Sh’ma on the first night of his marriage is not found in the Written Torah, but it is part of the Oral Torah. One was permitted or loosed from the Written Torah to put aside the commandment temporarily. Gamaliel, however, refused to forget about the kingdom even for a few moments.
“Binding and loosing” was abused. The Oral Torah remained in a flexible state, never being fixed until the Mishnah was written about AD 200. This flexibility allowed special ordinances given by sages and rabbis to bear the same weight of authority as the Written Torah.
A woeful problem was that over the centuries in both Old and New Testament eras, Torah teachers increased the weight of the Written Torah with their own views, interpretations and commands. Their new regulations and restrictions were interpretations according to personal views of Torah, not a direct result of revelation of God with direct instructions though such may have been claimed.
New regulations based on human interpretations once given, if not retracted, were left binding on future generations.
When Yahweh suspended a Torah ordinance as at the conquest of Jericho it was temporary, not a permanent change. After the pressing issue that led to the difficulty (or controversy was concluded, then the biblical ordinances that were suspended were resumed.
But this was not the case for many ordinances that were instituted later by Torah teachers. The result was weights of instructions and regulations that became too heavy for Jewish people to bear. Such was the case by the time of Jesus [Yeshua]. Temporary changes by the virtue of binding and loosing by sages, mainly bindings, became laws and regulations that were left permanent. Several key sages of ancient Judaism fenced in the Torah with man-made decisions that became a legal yoke too heavy to bear (cf. Peter’s statement in Acts 15:10).
Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing
upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our
fathers nor we have been able to bear?
This was not the intention of Yahweh in giving the Torah, nor his Son, Jesus of Nazareth. His yoke is light and easy to bear (cf. Matthew 11:28-30). All sages, or rabbis, had their yokes of regulations and commandments to be worn by their disciples (talmidim). This was their burden as a follower of their respective Torah teacher, or rabbi. Jesus [Yeshua] had his yoke as well. But it was the yoke established by his Father in heaven, not by man. He said:
“Come to me, all who are weary and heavy-laden,
and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you
and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in
heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my
yoke is easy and my burden is light.”
The Apostle Peter with the other apostles of our Lord Jesus, were all in agreement to keep harmony with the teachings of Jesus [Yeshua] regarding the purpose of the Torah, Prophets and Writings (the Tanakh, or Old Testament).
Jesus (Yeshua) practiced “binding and loosing.” Jesus (Yeshua) believed in the legitimacy of binding and loosing, of prohibiting or permitting certain things on the basis of the Written Torah and its purpose. The Sermon on the Mount is a good example. “You have heard,” Jesus would say, referring to the Oral Tradition of interpretations. Then He would counter, with the phrase, “But I tell you . . .” Then he would add weight to the saying.
This phrase, “You have heard … but I tell you …” sets up a “binding or loosing” teaching through a hermeneutical rule known as kal v’chomer (“light and heavy”). In this way Jesus (Yeshua) was akin more to the Pharisees than the Sadducees. But, unlike the tradition of the Pharisees, He did not agree that this authority to interpret the Torah was to bring unnecessary burdens on the people. When “binding or loosing” was done, such decisions were to guard believers from entanglement with sin and its bondages and to release them to live the fullness of life in the Holy Spirit (Ruach HaKodesh).
When rules were suspended they were done for a given time for the greater benefit and welfare of the majority. Likewise, prohibitions were made to protect the lives of the majority of the people who would be endangered otherwise. Jesus said that He did not come to bring people under condemnation, but to set them free. He did not mean for Israel to be free from her relationship with Yahweh and his expectations for righteous living as God’s betrothed bride. The overarching aspect of his mission was to loose people to be fully human in God’s image and likeness. Binding was a security or assurance measure Jesus [Yeshua] sometimes acted on to preserve the lives and freedom of his followers as his holy bride.
To bind or loose people in a special situation was granted, of course, to his apostles and to spiritual authorities of his church through the centuries to follow. One of the clearest uses of “binding and loosing” is found in Acts 15 at the Jerusalem Council. You recall that the issue was whether Gentiles could become part of the Church.
At the end of the discussion, the head leader of the church in Jerusalem, James, half-brother of Jesus (Yeshua), laid out four rules for new Gentile believers to follow. All four rules were basic to a life submitted to God. All four rules helped the Gentile to renunciate paganism. These regulations were to guard the Gentiles from returning to pagan beliefs and practices. In this sense, these four laws constituted a binding of Gentile believers. These four laws also released the Gentiles from their cultural bondages to live the fullness of life in Messiah Jesus (Yeshua).
Yeshua (Jesus) authorized “binding and loosing.” Most Christians today are acquainted with the phrase “binding and loosing” from the lips of Jesus (Yeshua) when He spoke to Peter at Caesarea Philippi. He gave to Peter the keys to the kingdom whereby he was permitted to bind and loose on earth what was bound and loosed in heaven.
“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.
Whatever you bind on earth will be [or has been]
bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will
be [or has been] loosed in heaven” (Matthew 16:19).
“I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will
[or has been] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose
on earth will be [or has been] loosed in heaven”
(Matthew 18:18).
Why is heaven mentioned? Because heaven is the source of the Written Torah. To bind or loose the Written Word of God requires heaven’s favor. God acts favorably according to binding and loosing by the decisions of spiritual authorities over his people.
Keys to the kingdom of God. The keys to the kingdom of heaven may be restated as keys to the reign of God. “Keys” (Heb., maphtechoth from maphtecha, of the root patach) is plural. It refers to the action of locking and unlocking, that is, “binding and loosing.” It is reserved for those with spiritual authority like apostles (sh’lichim), the presidents (nesi’im) and rulers (ro’im) of the synagogue, and those comprising “the bench of three” forming the Bet Din (Court of Judgment) of the synagogue.
No evidence shows that the “keys” are given to anyone else but those in authoritative church leadership. “Binding and loosing” is done by authoritative figures in church roles of leadership who are called apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherd-rulers (roeh - pastors) and Torah (Bible) teachers.
Peter was given the keys, that is, the authority of the kingdom of heaven to prohibit (bind) or permit (loose) certain activities within the church when uncertainty existed.
The Book of Acts illustrates its use. We’ve already alluded to the apostle Peter’s speech at the Council in Jerusalem in Acts 15. Look at it a bit more in depth.
A long-time, simmering controversy arose over the admission of Gentiles into the fellowship of believing Jews. At question was whether Gentile men should be circumcised to fulfill the covenantal sign of the Abrahamic Covenant.
While the Torah was quite clear regarding Hebrew men, it was not clear regarding Gentiles. Some believed they must be circumcised before admission into the assembly. “Circumcision,” because it was a covenant sign, was a specific way of addressing the larger issue—should Gentile believers in Yeshua (Jesus) become Torah observant as was the practice of Jewish believers in Messiah?
After the apostles and other disciples convened in Jerusalem with James, the chief leader of the assembly, Peter showed by the Holy Spirit a way of loosing Gentiles when he announced that both Jews and Gentiles were saved by faith. His argument was that circumcision was the sign of the Abrahamic Covenant. A greater One than the sign had come, namely the Holy Spirit of Messiah upon Gentile believers as upon the Jewish believers (Acts 15:9).
Because of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon Gentiles, they concluded that the sign of the covenant (circumcision) was not a requirement to be met anymore by Gentiles coming into Judaism, in this case, the sect Nazarene Judaism. This loosed the Nazarene Jews from separating from the Gentiles so that they may now embrace them as brothers and sisters.
Then James, the head or prince (nasi) of the Jerusalem church, issued a decree to bind believing Gentiles to abstain from four practices of the pagans (Acts 15:13-20). These practices were identical to the initial requirements of the Sanhedrin for admitting Gentiles into Judaism (cf. Sanhedrin 74a).
Some modern examples. To “bind or loose” requires a spiritual authority figure. For example, a marriage vow enforced by state-approved authority binds the husband and wife together as one unit, but frees them to have normal relations as husband and wife with the blessings of society. They are free to enjoy the blessings of a home together.
Another example is the role of parents who bind their children’s freedom temporarily to loose them later to a better, safer way of life. The command to Johnny, “Don’t cross the road of traffic,” binds him to a rule until he is old enough to be loosed to enjoy the roadway in safety.
Another useful example is the role of a judge who has the power to sentence or release a person in his court.
Implications of “binding and loosing” today. In the community of faith, the highest spiritual authorities have authority to bind or loose as did the judges of ancient Israel and the heads of the church during the first century Nazarene movement. Such authority is not to be exercised as a regular activity.
The Bible is enough to guide us and is sufficient for almost all instances for life and godliness. When the Bible is not clear, then the action of binding and loosing may be used by the leading spiritual authority. With this spiritual authority comes a requirement not to bind or loose except in cases where the Torah, Prophets and Writings (the Tanakh) or the teachings of our Lord and his first apostles is not clear enough. Then the action taken should be temporary until the specific problem or issue has passed.
Implicit in the use of “binding and loosing” is the view that there is place, albeit severely limited, for an Oral Torah to help us when the Written Torah is not clear or specific enough. In these cases we should be aware of the oral teachings of ancient leaders of the Church to help us maintain consistency.
As mentioned before, James (Jacob), the half-brother of Messiah Jesus (Yeshua), was the Shepherd-ruler (roeh - pastor) and prince (nasi) of the Messianic Jewish movement in Jerusalem and oversaw its expansion to other regions. He was astute in the Written Torah (including the entire Tanakh) and the Oral Torah.
Like Jesus, he accepted a body of material from the oral traditions that were received and commonly accepted from the sages of old and passed down generation to generation. They were useful to him—like case law is to a judge—when decision-making was difficult and the Written Torah (including the Prophets and Writings) was not explicitly clear. Like Jesus, he rejected the weighty legalisms that brought the Jewish people under bondage to a yoke more than they could bear.
When James (Jacob) ruled on the terms of acceptance of Gentiles into the church, he did not ignore the Oral Torah (oral traditions). Rather, like he had always been taught from his childhood, he sought help and guidance from this useful heritage of traditions. This was not peculiar to the other Jewish apostles who convened with him in Jerusalem to settle this issue.
So it is not peculiar to understand that when James (Jacob) ruled as to what these terms should be, he used the same terms explicitly stated in the body of oral tradition in Sanhedrin 74a. He stayed consistent with established oral tradition. Should we have expected another source for his ruling? No. James (Jacob) stayed consistent with Hebraic practices common for centuries to render his binding decision as long as they did not become a burdensome yoke to heavy to bear.
This has significant implications for those who practice “binding and loosing” today. Before any spiritual authority acts in congregational life or in other spiritual matters to bind, at minimum he or she should determine through careful research what judicial bindings were used within the circle of ancient Judaism, especially within Nazarene Judaism of the first century. After all, to endorse binding and loosing is to embrace a spiritual procedure that permitted the influence of oral tradition.
Summary
The Hebraic concept of ‘binding and loosing,” a concept established perfectly in Messiah Jesus (Yeshua), is the authority of church leadership to carry out the will and decisions of God upon earth as they have been established in heaven.
The authority to bind and loose is the authority to declare what is God's mind on a matter of doctrine or practice. This is what the James and Peter did in Acts 15 and what the apostle Paul did in 1 Corinthians 7 regarding marriage. To “bind” is to obligate, to “loose” is to remove obligation. This is in perfect accord with the way Jesus instructed us to pray: “Your will be done in earth as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6:10).
ADDENDA
1. Biblical Texts on “Binding and Loosing”
Joshua 6:15-20
Loosing: “Then on the seventh day [the Sabbath] they rose early at the dawning of the day and marched around the city in the same manner seven times; only on that day they marched around the city seven times. At the seventh time, when the priests blew the trumpets, Joshua said to the people, ‘Shout! For Yahweh has given you the city …’ So the people shouted, and priests blew the trumpets; and when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, the people shouted with a great shout and the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, every man straight ahead, and they took the city.”
Matthew 16:19
Binding and loosing: “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.”
John 20:22-23
Binding and loosing: And when He had said this [to his apostles], He breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained.”
Acts 15:19
Binding: “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead, we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.”
Matthew 16:19
Binding and loosing: “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.”
Matthew 18:15-18
Binding and loosing: “If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church [i.e., the elders]; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.
“Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. For where two or three have gathered together in my name, I am there in their midst.”
Acts 15:7
Loosing: “After much discussion Peter got up and addressed them [Jewish believers in Messiah]: ‘Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified [made tahor] their hearts by faith. Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? No, we believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.’”
1 Corinthians 5:1-5
Binding: It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father's wife. You have become arrogant and have not mourned instead, so that the one who had done this deed would be removed from your midst.
“For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this, as though I were present. In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, I have decided to deliver [bind over] such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.”
1 Corinthians 7:2, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 17, 19, 25
Binding and loosing: “But since there is so much immorality . . . I say this as a concession, not as a command [not a mitzvah of Torah] . . .
“Now to the unmarried and the widows I say [not Torah] . . .
“To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord) [from Torah] . . .
“To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord) [not from Torah] . . .
“But if the unbelieving leaves, let him do so [i.e., let him be released]. A believing man or woman is not bound [to Torah] in such circumstances. God has called us to live in peace. . . This is the rule I lay down [not Torah] in all the assemblies . . . Keeping God’s commands [of Torah] is what counts . . .
“Now about virgins: I have no command [mitzvah of Torah] from Yahweh, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy [to bind and loose]. Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are. . .”
2. Plundering the House of Satan—the Spoils of Messiah’s Victory
Binding and loosing, as we’ve learned, has a definite and distinct meaning in the Bible to the unrelated but popularized view held today of binding Satan or demons. The purpose of this paper was to show the biblical view held in Bible times on this subject.
However, because of this popularized view that misconceives the purpose and role of binding and loosing, this addendum briefly addresses the subject of Satan and his demons.
Matthew 12:28-29 addresses Satan and his demons and their definitive limits of authority and power. The verses read:
“But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the
kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can anyone
enter the strong man's house and carry off his property,
unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will
plunder his house.”
Upon hearing of Jesus (Yeshua) casting out demons, the Pharisees said that “He ... cast out demons only by Beelzebul the ruler of the demons” (verse 24).
The Lord Jesus (Yeshua) first shows the illogic of their accusations by saying that if Satan was casting out demons, his kingdom would not stand. He would be self-destructive, and as important, destructive of his evil empire. He then asks about their own misguided deliverance attempts. The Jewish historian Josephus wrote about some Jewish exorcism attempts which were quite unbiblical in practice.
The Gospel writer Matthew describes Jesus’ (Yeshua’s) own explanation of the powerful deliverances He accomplished. These were done by the Spirit of God within Him—his own Spirit. Such power demonstrations showed the power of the kingdom of God in Him. In Messiah, there is an overcoming confrontation with the powers of darkness. They do not stand. Messiah is victor!
These Pharisees confronting Jesus (Yeshua) should have recognized the work of the Messiah as a manifestation of the kingdom of God that was near them and being offered to them. Because of their attribution of this work to Beelzebul, Jesus (Yeshua) warned them about blaspheming the Holy Spirit (verse 31).
Disarmament of Satan. The key verse is verse 29. In this passage, Jesus uses a metaphor to illustrate his own mission.
A strong man controls his own house until a stronger man comes, binds him (disarms him), and then plunders the house. The text of Luke 11:21-22 records the same illustration. Luke does not use the term “bind,” but says the stronger man “...attacks him and overpowers him, he takes away from him all his armor on which he had relied...” (Luke 11:22). Luke shows this binding as disarmament, the removal of Satan’s strength, weapons and defense. Matthew’s use of the word “bind,” not at all related to the biblical notion of “binding and loosing,” is simply the disarming of Satan.
The deliverances of people from the power of Satan were the plundering of Satan’s stronghold, of his fortress, of his kingdom. This Jesus (Yeshua) did with a finality that may not be abrogated. The spoiling and plundering of the kingdom of darkness goes on throughout history into the future by believers in Messiah. The victory has already been achieved over Satan by the Messiah who assailed his fortress kingdom and won. Resistance of the evil one sends him fleeing. He is like a roaring lion—a pretender of awesome power—but without the strength of teeth and arm to prevail.
“Bind,” as used here in Matthew 12, therefore, is descriptive of a strong man's house being plundered by The Stronger Man. The meaning is that Jesus (Yeshua) is stronger than Satan, and the casting out of evil spirits proves the fact. The kingdom of light assails the kingdom of darkness and wins.
Deliverance from Satan. The “goods” that are “plundered” are people previously held in bondage in darkness. This plundering, began by Messiah Jesus (Yeshua), continue since the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2 when the Holy Spirit was outpoured as the work of the Church. Jesus (Yeshua) plundered Satan’s dominion already and liberated the souls of people who were subject to his slavery. This act of overthrow remains in place.
Hebrews 2:14-15 summarizes:
Since then the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is the devil; and might deliver those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives.
|
