1

Alpharic Research Institute

Centre for Research in Philosophy, Theology and
Ethics
Email: alpharicinstitute@gmail.com
+2349066927954

EXEGETICAL STUDY OF MATTHEW 16:17-19

BY
GODSWILL OME UFERE
Email: uferegodswillmatthias@gmail.com, godswillmatthias99@gmail.com; __GSM: +2347045155575
JANUARY, 2021

GENERAL AND IMMEDIATE about sixty references to the Jewish

BACKROUND OF THE TEXT, prophecies, and in it Christ’s mission to the
MATTHEW 16:17-19 Jews is emphasized (Thompson 4262); also
the writer’s assumption that its readers know
The Gospel according to Matthew is one of
about matters of Jewish ritual and his use of
the Synoptic Gospels. It was written by
Jewish terminology (like the kingdom of
Matthew who was believed to be an
heaven, Son of David) is of great importance
eyewitness of many of the events he recorded.
to the understanding of the motive of the
He was a tax collector before he was called by
writer (France 904). He also presented Jesus
Jesus and had scribal skills and knowledge of
as the Great Teacher, who has the authority to
Judaism. He was a competent witness of what
interpret the Law of God, and who teaches
he has recorded. He emphasized Jesus’ Jewish
about God’s kingdom. He stressed on Jesus’
heritage and demonstrated how Jesus fulfils
public ministry (David 1). Matthew in his
the Old Testament prophecies (Kapolyo
writing seeks to re-affirm the Messiahship of
1105). Matthew’s gospel is a teaching gospel
Jesus and contrast the religious leadership of
containing five blocks of teaching divided by
the Jews with the grace and truth that is
narratives about Jesus’ ministry activities. The
revealed through Jesus (Dickson 1067).
blocks are Sermon on the Mount, the mission
of the twelve, the parables of the kingdom, the Prior to chapter 16, Jesus spent much of his
woes of the legalistic religion and the signs of time addressing crowds, working miracles,
the end. The writer wrote to Jewish audience; and verbally jousting with scribes and
this is confirmed by the fact that there are Pharisees. With the exception of 16:1-4, Jesus

spends chapters 16-18 instructing the disciples
—preparing them for Jerusalem and his cross.
Then in 19:1 he leaves Galilee to go to Judea
—to Jerusalem—to his death.
Chapter 16:17-19 which is the text under
exegesis falls under the public ministry of
Jesus in and around Galilee (France 907). As
well, the text falls into what is described as
“Peter’s Confession.” The public ministry of
Jesus had already started in chapter 4 followed
by His first discourse in chapter 5; second
discourse on the disciples’ mission in chapter
9 and the third discourse on Jesus’ teaching in
parables in chapter 13 (McKnight 469). This
boiled down to further responses to Jesus’
public ministry found from chapters 13:53-
16:20 (France 907). In chapter 16, we reach
the climax of the first part of the gospel in
which we have seen varied reactions to the
authoritative ministry of Jesus (France 925).
Other people’s views are summarized in verse
14 of this chapter, where Jesus is placed in the
category of the prophets. Peter makes the
definitive statement for which the whole story
has been preparing: Jesus is the Messiah, the
Son of God.
EXEGESIS OF THE TEXT, MATTHEW
16:17-19
1. Jesus Commends Peter (vs.8)
2
In verse 17, Peter identified Jesus as the Son
of the living God. This is the first time anyone
in Matthew’s narrative has given Jesus the
title ‘Christ.’ (Messiah), though Matthew had
himself has used it in chapter 1:1, 16 and 17.
Now Jesus responds by acknowledging Simon
as the son of Jonah while extending to him his
blessing. Jesus calls him Simon, the name by
which Simon’s father would recognize him,
rather than the new name, Peter, that Jesus
will give him in the next verse (Bergent, n.pg).
After Peter had declared that Jesus is the
Messiah, Son of God, Jesus compliments
Peter for his bold and correct declaration.
Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are
you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has
not revealed this to you, but My Father who is
in heaven.”
Jesus’ response to Peter was positive, which
makes it clear that what Peter had said was
true, however open it might be
misunderstanding (France 925). Jesus by
saying that flesh and blood did not reveal this
to Peter, but His Father who is in heaven
means that Jesus was revealing to Peter that he
spoke by divine inspiration, even if he did not
even know it at the time. In this, Peter was
genuinely blessed – both by the insight itself
and how it came to him (Hagner 32). This
illustrates the fact that Peter did not arrive at
his insight by spiritual astuteness. God has

given him this understanding of Jesus. Peter’s
insight comes by revelation, not deduction.
His understanding is a gift from God. Here
God spoke through Peter so naturally that he
did not even realize it was the Father who is in
heaven that revealed it to him (Blomberg,
n.pg). indeed it was a revelation from God,
and that it was Peter who had received it
indicated the important role he was to play in
the development of the Messiah’s mission
(France 925). Peter’s confession assumes a
deeper level of understanding than other
confessions that had been made. Now, this is
not the first time that he and the disciples were
made aware of the Messiahship of Jesus. In
fact the disciples followed Jesus, believing
that He was the Messiah. But their
understanding of what Messiah was to do was
still weak. What made Peter’s confession so
important was the fact that it came against the
backdrop of all the confusion and false
teachings about Jesus. His confession of faith
was so strong that Jesus could begin talking
about His death on the cross (Craddock 415).
2. Jesus Builds His Church (vs. 18)
The expression of Jesus in verse 18 is highly
remarkable, where He says, “I also tell you
that you are Peter, and on this rock I will
build my church, and the gates of Hades will
3
not prevail against it.” This was not only
recognition of Peter’s more Roman name; it
was also a promise of God’s work in Peter.
The name Peter means “Rock.” Though
perhaps unlikely, Peter was a rock, and would
become a rock (Blomberg, n.pg). By
implication, God was and would transform his
naturally extreme character into something
solid and reliable. Jesus first calls Peter
(which is Petros in Greek) a rock.
Grim traced that Petros is an appellative
proper name, signifying 'a stone,' 'a rock,' 'a
ledge' or 'cliff'; used metaphorically of a soul
hard and unyielding, and so resembling a rock.
In agreement to this, Wimon tracing the
etymology of the word said that Petros
(Greek: Πέτρος) is the original Greek version
of the name Peter meaning “stone” or “rock”.
It may refer to Petrosomatoglyph (n.pg). A
petrosomatoglyph is a supposed image of
parts of a human or animal body in rock.
However, Horst refuting the stand of Grim
said that Petros is not attested as a Greek
proper name before the Christian era. It occurs
as a term for an object from Homer until the
NT period: "stone." It came to be regarded as
a name, as the tr. of the epithet given to Simon
by Jesus, ("precious stone"), which is
preserved in Greek transliteration (with the
Greek proper name ending. This epithet or
surname in its transliterated or translated form

early became the proper name
increasingly displacing the original name
Simon, presumably because the epithet
became esp. important as an "official name"
(n.pg). Worthy of note is that the Scripture
refers to God as a rock ( e.g Genesis 49:24;
Deuteronomy 32; 1 Samuel 2:2; 22; Psalm 18,
etc.). Isaiah also refers to Abraham and Sarah
as a rock: “Look to the rock you were cut
from, and to the hold of the pit you were dug
from. Look to Abraham your father, and to
Sarah who bore you” (Isaiah 51:1-2) (Hagner
32). Given these associations, Jesus does great
honor to Peter when he identifies him as Rock.
He also lays on him a heavy burden of
responsibility. It can be said here that the
name ‘Peter’ means ‘rock.’ And Jesus played
on this meaning to designate Peter as the
foundation of the new people of God.
Jesus says that “On this rock I will build My
church….” Again, Jesus uses the word “rock”,
whose Greek word is petra. This two words
used as same by Jesus have created much
controversy among interpreters of
scriptures. And the question is on, What rock?
Is it the reality that Jesus is the Son of God?
Or the faith that Peter exhibits when he makes
this confession? Or Peter himself?
A traditional Protestant interpretation is that
the rock is Peter’s confession and the reality
that stands behind it—that Jesus is the Christ,
4
itself, the Son of the living God. The point to the
distinction between the two rocks that Jesus
mentions—“you are Peter, the Peter here is
Petros, a masculine noun meaning, “a stone or
rock” and on this rock… The rock here is
petra, a feminine noun and is conveying the
idea of a rock foundation. I will build my
church, which is ekklesia—meaning the
“called out people or people of God” (Kittel,
n.pg). This means that Jesus was able to
distinguish between the rock that is Peter and
the rock upon which he will build his church.
There has been some movement toward the
center in more recent years. It is undisputable
to acknowledge Peter’s special place in the
life of the early church, but Peter was the first
Pope (Bruner, 574). It is best to see them as
referring to either Jesus Himself (perhaps
Jesus gesturing to Himself as He said this), or
as referring to Peter’s confession of who Jesus
is (Gardner 180). This also bring to light that
Peter, by His own testimony, did not see
himself as the rock on which the church was
founded. He wrote that we are living stones,
the
but Jesus is the cornerstone. We could say that
Peter was the “first believer”; that he was the
“first rock” among “many rocks” (Boring,
n.pg). the point here is that the distinction
between the two rocks is in the Greek words
for each of them: while petra, the normal
word for rock, is feminine in gender, it is not

suitable as a name for Simon. The echo of
Peter’s name remains obvious, even in Greek;
the second outlined above (France 926). All
the text would be saying is what the rest of the
New Testament affirms, that Christ
established His Church on the apostles. Their
teaching, their writing the Scriptures, their
establishing and organizing the Church, all
were the necessary ways that Christ began to
build His Church.
Walvoord said that, what is meant here is that
Peter (Petros, masc.) was strong like a rock,
but Jesus added that on this rock (petra, fern.)
this meant that Jesus Christ would build His
church. Because of this change in Greek
words, many conservative scholars believe
that Jesus is now building His church on
Himself. Others hold that the church is built
on Peter and the other apostles as the
building's foundation stones (Eph 2:20; Rev
21:14). Still other scholars say that the church
is built on Peter's testimony. It seems best to
understand that Jesus was praising Peter for
his accurate statement about Him, and was
introducing His work of building the church
on Himself (1 Cor 3:11). Building His church
was a yet-future work of Jesus Christ, for He
had not yet started the process. He said, I will
build (future tense) My church, but His
program for the nation Israel had to be
concluded before another program could be
5
set in motion. This is probably why Jesus said
not even the gates of hades would overcome
this program. Jews would understand hades'
gates to refer to physical death. Jesus was thus
telling the disciples His death would not
prevent His work of building the church. Later
(Matt 16:21). He spoke of His imminent
death. He was therefore anticipating His death
and His victory over death through the
Resurrection. His church would then begin to
be built, starting on the day of Pentecost, and
Peter and the other apostles would have
important roles in it. He declared that Peter
would be given significant authority, the keys
of the kingdom of heaven (.Walvoord, n.pg).
Clarke’s view also differs at this point. He
said that Peter, Petros, signifies a stone or
fragment of a rock; and our Lord, whose
constant custom it was to rise to heavenly
things through the medium of earthly, takes
occasion from the name, the metaphorical
meaning of which was strength and stability,
to point out the solidity of the confession, and
the stability of that cause which should be
founded on the Christ, the son of the living
God. And Christ said, “Upon this very rock,
epi tautee tee petra -this true confession of
thine-that I am the Messiah, that am come to
reveal and communicate the Living God, that
the dead, lost world may be saved-upon this
very rock, myself, thus confessed (alluding

probably to Ps 118:22, The Stone which the
builders rejected is become the headstone of
the corner: and to Isa 28:16, Behold I lay a
Stone in Zion for a foundation)-will I build
my church, mou teen ekkleesian, my
assembly, or congregation, i.e. of persons who
are made partakers of this precious faith. That
Peter is not designed in our Lord's words must
be evident to all who are not blinded by
prejudice. Peter was only one of the builders
in this sacred edifice, Eph 2:20, who himself
tells us (with the rest of the believers), was
built on this living foundation stone: 1 Peter
2:4-5; therefore Jesus Christ did not say, on
thee, Peter, will I build my church, but
changes immediately the expression, and says,
upon that very rock, epi tautee tee petra, to
show that he neither addressed Peter, nor any
other of the apostles (n.pg).
Barnes said that when Jesus made the
statement of “Upon this rock…” it has been
thought that he turned from Peter to himself,
and said, "Upon this rock, this truth that I am
the Messiah-upon myself as the Messiah, I
will build my church" (n.pg). He also pointed
that based on this interpretation, though
plausible, seem forced upon the passage to
avoid the main difficulty in it. Another
interpretation is, that the word "rock" refers to
Peter himself.
6
The use of the word “Church” here is the first
use of the word church in the New Testament
(or the Bible for that matter), using the ancient
Greek word ekklesia. Significantly, this was
well before the beginnings of what we
normally think of as the church on the Day of
Pentecost in Acts 2. This shows that Jesus was
anticipating or prophesying what would come
from these disciples/apostles and those who
would believe in their message that Jesus is
the Christ, the Son of the living God. Ekklesia
is a combination of ek (out) and kaleo(called),
so it means “called out.” Ekklesia can refer to
any assembly, but Jesus’ ekklesia is the
church (Craddock 417). As Bergent would
explain that, the ancient Greek word ekklesia
was not primarily a religious word at all; it
just meant, “group” or “called-out group.” In
describing the later group of His followers and
disciples, Jesus deliberately chose a word
without a distinctly religious meaning (n.pg).
Furthermore, this statement of Jesus was a
clear claim of ownership (My church). The
church belongs to Jesus. This was also a claim
to deity: “What is striking is…the boldness of
Jesus’ description of it as my community,
rather than God’s.” (France 926).
Jesus also proclaimed how His power will be
able to sustain the Church that “…the gates of
Hades shall not prevail against it.” Jesus also
offered this as a promise – that the forces of

death and darkness can’t prevail against or
conquer the church. This is a valuable promise
in dark or discouraging times for the church.
The Puritan commentator John Trapp
explained the gates of Hades this way: “All
the power and policy of hell combined”
(n.pg). “Neither doth hell signify here the
place of the damned…but either death, or the
graves, or the state of the dead: yet the devil is
also understood here, as he that hath the power
of death, Hebrews 2:14” (Poole 1143)
According to Clark, “The gates of hell, is the
machinations and powers of the invisible
world. In ancient times the gates of fortified
cities were used to hold councils in, and were
usually places of great strength. Our Lord’s
expression means, that neither the plots,
stratagems, nor strength of Satan and his
angels, should ever so far prevail as to destroy
the sacred truths in the above confession”
(Clarke, n.pg). The gate of Hades is a poetic
expression for death; this means that was
saying that this new community of those who
follow Him will not die (France 926). This is
thus to say that it will not die, and be shut in
by the ‘gates of death. Hades is the abode of
the dead, but it is also a metaphor for the
demonic (Senior 191). This points that Jesus’
words assure us that, while the church will
endure repeated assaults by the powers of evil,
it will prevail in the end. The gates of Hades
7
prevent those inside from getting out and
those outside from breaking in. However,
Jesus will break death’s power by his own
resurrection, which will be the first fruits of
the many faithful who will be raised from the
dead (1 Corinthians 15:23). The gates of
Hades will not withstand Christ’s resurrection
assault on them. The redeemed among the
dead will rise again and stride confidently
through the broken gates. According to
Boring, because the Church is a part of or a
form of the kingdom, nothing can prevent it
from realizing its fully promised blessings
when Christ returns. It is tied to the coming
kingdom of God. And so the gates of Hades
cannot prevail over it (n.pg).
We can now understand that the word “Gates”
is figurative for the power or the powerful
leaders of Hades. Thus, it would represent
Satan or Satanic forces, the powers of Hell,
who inflict death and destruction on the
human race. Since Jesus the Messiah was
building His assembly of believers, the powers
of death and destruction could not prevail over
it. This is especially true since Christ has
defeated sin, death and the grave through His
resurrection. Since He has done that, there is
no power in the world below that can win over
His program. The Church may seem at times
to be weak, divided, and ineffective. But that
is usually the result of human leaders and

institutions creating problems; the Church
itself, the company of the people of Jesus, will
be victorious, because Christ has overcome
the world. Even death, a weapon of Hell,
cannot destroy the true Church. It may ruin
denominations or local churches that lose
sight of the vision; but the universal body of
believers, the universal Church, will be
victorious.
3. Jesus Gives Keys of Heaven (vs.19)
Again, Jesus declared to Peter, “And I will
give you the keys of the kingdom of
heaven….” Now the metaphor changes from
rock-foundation to the keys of the kingdom.
The person with the keys has the power to
admit or exclude people (Rev. 9:1-6; 20:1-3).
The allusion is to the chief stewards of the
monarchs (Isa. 22:15, 22). The king was still
sovereign; but whoever had the keys had
authority over the house (Gardner 185).
There is no doubt that Peter had a special
place among all the disciples, and that he had
some special privileges: He is always listed
first in the listings of the disciples; he opened
doors of the kingdom to the Jews in Acts
2:38-39; he opened doors of the kingdom to
the Gentiles in Acts 10:34-44. The wording, “I
will give to you the keys of the Kingdom of
Heaven”, has its roots in Isaiah 22:22, “I will
place on (Eliakim’s) shoulder the key of the
8
house of David; he shall open, and no one
shall shut; he shall shut, and no one shall
open.” Eliakim thus became the steward of the
house, responsible for opening the house in
the morning, closing it at night, and
controlling access to the royal presence. In his
role as gatekeeper, Peter will open the gates
for three thousand people at Pentecost (Acts
2). Although he will initially resist opening
the gates to Gentiles, God will persuade him
to admit the Gentile Centurion (Acts 10), and
Peter will become the spokesperson to the
Council of Jerusalem to keep the gates open to
Gentiles (Acts 15).
And as a sign of the key Jesus gave to him,
Jesus declared to Peter, “whatever you bind on
earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever
you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
“Binding” and “loosing” were administrative
terms in daily Jewish life; whenever a Jew
came up against the Law of Moses, that
Jewish person was either “bound” or “loosed”
in regard to that law. To loose was to permit;
to bind was to prohibit. To loose was to free
from the law, to bind was to put under the law.
“Their regular sense, which any Jew would
recognize was to allow and to forbid. To bind
something was to declare it forbidden; to loose
was to declare it allowed. These were the
regular phrases for taking decisions in regard
to the law.” (Barclay, n.pg). They bound or

loosed an individual in the application of a
particular point of the law. Jesus promises that
Peter will be able to set the boundaries
authoritatively for the New Covenant
community. Here, Jesus was only speaking to
Pete, but the same authority was shared with
the other disciples in chapter 18:18 (where you
is plural; here it is singular). Peter was thus
the representative leader rather an overlord
(France 925). Peter’s leadership would be that
of a steward. The story of the early church in
Acts shows how Peter fulfilled this role. As
their rabbi, Jesus did this binding and loosing
for His own disciples. Without using the same
words, this is what Jesus did when He allowed
them to take the grains of wheat in the field
(Matthew 12:1-8). Significantly, when it came
time to understand the dietary laws of the Old
Covenant in light of the new work of Jesus,
God spoke to Peter first. He and the other
apostles, guided by the Spirit of God, would
bind and loose Christians regarding such parts
of the Old Covenant. Thus, bind and loose
have to do with rulings regarding doctrine and
ethical conduct. It has to do with actions
permitted and actions proscribed.
A literal translation of this verse would yield:
“whatever you bind on earth shall have been
bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on
earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” If this
is the translation, there is no place for earthly
9
ministers to claim the power; they simply
speak for God and enact what heaven has
enacted. Unfortunately, the history of the
Church has shown many who think they have
the power to admit to heaven or confine to
hell. For the many views ad arguments on the
verse you can consult the commentaries at
will.
The meaning of the binding and loosing in the
verse probably refers to people and not to
teachings (unlike in chapter 18:18 for
“whatever”). The keys then speak of the
permission of entering the kingdom or being
excluded from it. The meaning of this idea is
clarified by the teaching of Jesus in Luke
11:52. There Jesus denounced the teachers by
saying that they had taken away the key of
knowledge and had not only failed to enter the
kingdom themselves but had hindered others
from doing so. This meant that by their
approach to Scripture they were making it
impossible for people under their teaching to
accept the revelation about Jesus and enter the
kingdom. In strong contrast, Peter, by
confessing Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of
God, had received the revelation and so was to
be given the “keys.” The metaphor of the
“keys” refers then to the clear teaching about
Christ and the proclamation of the Gospel.
Peter, by proclaiming the good news of the
kingdom, which by revelation he was
 10

understanding more and more, would open the apostles and other Christians play supporting
kingdom to many and shut it to others roles, and those roles are important. However,
(Bergent, n.pg). Jesus has the lead role, even as He has given
to the apostles and to all disciples the privilege
This view then harmonizes with the
of proclaiming the Gospel to the world, and by
translation of “whatever you bind . . . will
that proclamation binding and loosing what
have been bound . . . “ and so forth. By
was already bound and loosed in heaven.
making the proclamation of the Gospel, the
message of the kingdom, Peter would be
binding and loosing what heaven had already
APPLICATION
bound and loosed. Peter would preach the
Gospel, and that preaching would be the When Jesus asked about Himself, the answer
means by which those bound in heaven would He got was positive. Today, how people
be bound, and those loosed in heaven would answer our question of, “Who do you say I
be loosed. As long as Peter proclaimed the am?” will reveal whether or not we have faith,
true Gospel, he would be binding or loosing and so whether or not we are part of God’s
what had been bound or loosed in heaven—he program. Our identity matters in the church,
would be using the keys to the kingdom workplaces and other places. The reply people
properly (France 927-928). give to this question about us has significance
in our lives and ministries.
THEOLOGICAL CONCLUSION
Christ declared that he was going to build His
The passage is not concerned with Peter’s
church on the apostles; they would proclaim
power or infallibility, but rather the role that
the message of Christ, record it in Scripture,
he and the disciples of Jesus will play in the
and establish the Church throughout the
building of the Church. Peter declared his
known world. Everything we do today is
faith in the Messiahship of Jesus, the Son of
should be based on the work and the teachings
God. Since his proclamation is the basis of
of the apostles, who were commissioned by
preaching about Christ, it precipitated Jesus’
Christ and inspired by the Spirit. When we
teaching about how the Church would be
follow their footsteps, then we are sure that we
built. Christ declared that he was going to
shall achieve much for God.
build His church. It is Him alone who builds
the church. The church belongs to him. The

There is a strange use of these expressions
among us today for a commanding,
authoritarian form of praying. In it we say we
bind or loose evil spirits in people when
praying for healing. There is no warrant for
that use of the words; the context clearly ties
the keys of the kingdom to salvation, who
enters and who does not, and the authority to
grant entrance and announce exclusion comes
only with the proclamation of the Gospel
already revealed. When the Gospel is
preached, it appears that it brings some into
the kingdom and repels others. But the Gospel
being preached is only the earthly
manifestation of the heavenly process.
These keys were they given only to Peter and
the apostles? If the keys refer to the
proclamation of the Gospel to the world, then
they are the possession of all believers,
because that is the task for the us as the
Church of God. We as Christ’s disciples are to
be fishers of men, lights to the world, and
witnesses who proclaim the message of the
kingdom. We are also commissioned to teach
the nations all that Christ commanded. Even
though the glorious kingdom will come
suddenly in the future, in the meantime Christ
builds His church. He established it on the
foundation of the apostles; but He builds it
through the proclamation of the Gospel, the
accurate preaching of the word of God. In
11
proclaiming the Good News the we will make
it clear how others can enter into the kingdom,
but we will also make it clear what will
exclude people from the kingdom. Our
message will include and exclude. But the
passage in no way teaches that we, or the
apostles, have a direct pipeline to heaven, or
even worse, can make the final decision of
who is bound and who is loosed. God does
that, has done that; and we by our preaching
the Gospel will see it all work out, what has
already been bound or loosed in heaven.
By proclaiming the Gospel we would see faith
or rejection in the hearers, and understand
how the kingdom of Christ was growing in a
world that often refused to enter. We all have
the keys of the kingdom because we can
proclaim entrance into the kingdom. Our task
is the faithful teaching of the truth of the
Gospel, even though some will be offended
and refuse it. The message is based on the
person of Jesus, the Messiah, the Son of the
Living God, and on His work, the work of
redemption.
 12

David, J. Introduction to the Books on Jesus’

Ministry. Western Cape: ABC Publishers,
2007. Print.

Dickson, Roger E. Dickson Teacher’s Bible.

Oklahoma: Africa International Missions,

WORKS CITED 2011. Print.

Albert, Barnes. Barnes' Notes. London: France, R. T. “Matthew.” New Bible

Blackie & Son, 1997. Electronic Database. Commentary. Carson, D.A. et al (ed.).
Nottingham: InterVarsity Press, 2011. Print.
Barclay, William. Gospel of Matthew. Vol. 2.
Edinburgh: The Saint Andrew Press, 1957. Gardner, Richard B. Believers Church Bible
Electronic Database. Commentary. Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald
Press, 1990. Print.
Bergant, Dianne. Preaching Gospel of
Matthew. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, Hagner, Donald A. Word Biblical
2001. Electronic Database. Commentary: Matthew 14-28, Vol. 33. Dallas:
Word, 1995. Print.
Blomberg, Craig L. New American
Commentary. Nashville: Broadman Press, Kapolyo, Joe. Matthew.” Africa Bible
1992. Electronic Database. Commentary. “Adeyemo, Tokunboh (ed.).
Nairobi: WordAlive Publishers, 2006. Print.
Boring, M. Eugene. The New Interpreter’s
Bible, Vol. VIII. Nashville: Abingdon, 1995. Kittel, Gerhard. ed. Theological Dictionary of
Electronic Database. the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
Clarke, Adams. Adam Clarke's Commentary.
1985. Print.
Biblesoft, Inc. 2003. Electronic Database.

Craddock, Fred B. Preaching Through the McKnight, S. Dictionary of Jesus and the

Christian Year, A. Valley Forge: Trinity Press Gospels. Oxford: Oxford University Press,

International, 1992. Print. 1992. Print.

 13

Senior, Robert H. Commentary on the Days of Horst, Balz. Exegetical Dictionary of the New
Jesus on Earth (Matthew). Dallas: Word Testament. Michigan: William B. Eerdmans
Books, 1989. Print. Publishing Company, 1990. Electronic
Database.
Thompson, J. Thompson Reference Bible.
Indiana: B.B. Kirk Bible Co. Inc., 2007. Print. Grim, Wilke. Thayer's Greek Lexicon. PC
Walvoord, John F.Bible Knowledge Study Bible. Biblesoft, Inc. 1889. Electronic
Commentary. NPP: Cook Communications Database.
Ministries. 2000. Electronic Database.
https://www.whatisthemeaningofname.com/
what-is-the-meaning-of-the-name-petros-
11762 /