Church

[epostle1]

David's kingdom was given to Him (meaning Christ the Son)...not any others.

The earthly kingdom, was Christ (not Peter) overcoming the world...but it is not of "this" world.

Jesus doesn't give keys to Himself. Only to Peter and his direct successors. Keys do that.

 

[theQuestion]

Bottom Line- Jesus did NOT say "I will build my church on YOU!"
And Peter NEVER became a Pope- wearing a costume with a beanie, having a Palace, and being the Head of the Christian Congregation.
For example~

Acts 15:1-2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.

 

[epostle1]

Six million Polish citizens were killed in the Holocaust—three million of them were Jews, the other three million were Catholic. Poland was the only country where the Germans gave official death orders for any Pole who helped a Jew. And more Poles were killed for assisting Jews than anyone else in the world.
HOLOCAUST PARK SHUNS POLISH CATHOLICS

Catholic leaders collaborated to kill 3 million Catholics? Are you out of your mind? Where is any of that mentioned in your collage of misleading photos that have no dates?

 

[bbyrd009]

Lord spare us! ANOTHER thread turned into a Catholic v Protestant debate.
Can we never remember that we have a common Enemy...and it is NOT each other!

As Scott already said so well ....The Church is spiritual....it is all of us in the Spirit together.
We ALL are the body of Christ...His Church .

many Catholics believe this also, just not all of them i guess

 

[bbyrd009]

Jesus doesn't give keys to Himself. Only to Peter and his direct successors. Keys do that.

18and the Living One. I was dead, but look--I am alive forever and ever, and I hold the keys of death and Hades.

hmm, maybe He took them back or something...lol

 

[epostle1]

Lord spare us! ANOTHER thread turned into a Catholic v Protestant debate.
Can we never remember that we have a common Enemy...and it is NOT each other!

As Scott already said so well ....The Church is spiritual....it is all of us in the Spirit together.
We ALL are the body of Christ...His Church .

I can agree.
Please keep in mind, we do not deny that the Church is also a spiritual-invisible reality, nor do we assert that salvation is strictly predicated only of those who are formally part of the physical Church structure - although we confess such an arrangement to be normative. In emphasizing the physical-institutional aspect of the Church, we do not mean to deny the invisible. Rather, as Christ Himself was both God and man, divine and human, so the Church, too, is a kind of incarnation, divine and supernatural while also physical and institutional.
Matt. 16:17-19
As Catholics we are extremely used to citing this passage in context of discussions about the primacy of St. Peter and the prerogatives of the papal office. However, we often overlook the broader implications of the verse: the establishment of a visible hierarchy. When Jesus Christ institutes His Church, He institutes a physical authority structure that will govern that Church. This verse should be read in parallel with Luke 10:16, when Christ says to all the Apostles, "Whoever hears you hears me, and whoever hears me hears Him who sent me." The point is Jesus establishes His Church not just to preach, but to have a real authority, the very authority with which Christ is sent by the Father. This is why the Apostles, always in union with Peter, have the duty not only to preach but also the authority to bind and loose.

In short, a Church with authority to bind and loose must have a physical presence; an amorphous, spiritual communion of all believers might be able to preach, but not bind and loose. This 'spiritual Church' model does not fit very well with our Lord's description of the powers the Church is to have. This is why Protestants have traditionally struggled with these verses about binding and loosing; once we presume that the Church is purely spiritual, "binding and loosing" can only have a spiritualized meaning, which is why many Protestants interpret this verse to mean that individual believers have authority to "bind" evil spirits in the name of Jesus. This makes little sense for a few reasons:

First, it makes sense why one would "bind" and evil spirit, but when would you ever need to "loosen" one? Second, "binding and loosing" in the rabbinical jargon Jesus is using always refers to the binding and loosing of the faithful to certain disciplines, never to spiritual powers.
Third, Jesus says whatsoever you bind "on earth" shall be bound in heaven; he is not referring to the spirit world, but to the world of men.

The traditional understanding, that the power of binding and loosing refers to the authority of the Church's legitimate pastors to bind believers in matters of dogma and discipline, fits the passage much better. Because this binding and loosing is also "bound in heaven", it is authoritative - and only a physically constituted authority structure can bind and loose authoritatively. Otherwise, we are left with mere opinion and interpretation.

"He that hears you, hears me; and he that despises you, despises me; and he that despises me, despises him that sent me" (Luke 10:16).

Like the passage about binding and loosing, this passage denotes that the preaching of the Apostles is authoritative. To hear the Apostles is to hear Christ; the preaching of the Apostles is the agency through which faith in Christ is born. "And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me" (John 17:20); St. Paul says the same, "Faith then comes by hearing; and hearing by the word of God" (Rom. 10:17). The word of the Apostles is life-giving; not only this, but despising the message means despising Christ, and thus God the Father. Jesus do not say,"He who does not believe the Scriptures despises me", but "He who despises you despises me." The message comes with authority. An invisible Church - a loose spiritual communion of Christians with diverse beliefs about everything from baptism to salvation to the Rapture to the morality of contraception - cannot preach an authoritative message. There is no common witness. Only a message coming from something that has an institutional nature can possess this kind of authority.

Matthew 18:15-17

The Church must have a visible structure in order for someone to "tell it to the Church." It could be argued that this simply means to take the problem to the community, but that it says nothing about the nature or structure of that community. We could respond by noting the authority our Lord gives to that community. "If he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you as a Gentile and tax collector." Our Lord expresses a kind of disbelief that someone would refuse to listen to the Church and proscribes a kind of excommunication if they refuse their obedience. A loose spiritual communion cannot command this kind of obedience. The proscription for shunning, "let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector", would make no sense in such a spiritual communion because a person who did not like the judgment of one "church" could just go down the road to another that would give him a favorable judgment. The authority Jesus invests in the Church is meaningless unless there is one Church and unless it has some sort of physical constitution.

John 17:20-21

read more here

 

[bbyrd009]

The Church must have a visible structure in order for someone to "tell it to the Church."

saying it does not make it true, however

It could be argued that this simply means to take the problem to the community, but that it says nothing about the nature or structure of that community.

right--you have to add to Scripture to do that

and only a physically constituted authority structure can bind and loose authoritatively.

Christ refers to them as "the kingdoms that are passing away."

 

[theQuestion]

Tools of the Roman State Church used to convert.....

 

[bbyrd009]

A loose spiritual communion cannot command this kind of obedience. The proscription for shunning, "let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector", would make no sense in such a spiritual communion because a person who did not like the judgment of one "church" could just go down the road to another that would give him a favorable judgment.

here you imagine that evil behavior condemned in one community might somehow be acceptable to another, and the reality does not bear this out imo. Describe to me the community that tolerates thieves and whoremongers

your agenda is made clear at "command this kind of obedience" imo

 

[VictoryinJesus]

I can agree.
Please keep in mind, we do not deny that the Church is also a spiritual-invisible reality, nor do we assert that salvation is strictly predicated only of those who are formally part of the physical Church structure - although we confess such an arrangement to be normative. In emphasizing the physical-institutional aspect of the Church, we do not mean to deny the invisible. Rather, as Christ Himself was both God and man, divine and human, so the Church, too, is a kind of incarnation, divine and supernatural while also physical and institutional.
Matt. 16:17-19
As Catholics we are extremely used to citing this passage in context of discussions about the primacy of St. Peter and the prerogatives of the papal office. However, we often overlook the broader implications of the verse: the establishment of a visible hierarchy. When Jesus Christ institutes His Church, He institutes a physical authority structure that will govern that Church. This verse should be read in parallel with Luke 10:16, when Christ says to all the Apostles, "Whoever hears you hears me, and whoever hears me hears Him who sent me." The point is Jesus establishes His Church not just to preach, but to have a real authority, the very authority with which Christ is sent by the Father. This is why the Apostles, always in union with Peter, have the duty not only to preach but also the authority to bind and loose.

In short, a Church with authority to bind and loose must have a physical presence; an amorphous, spiritual communion of all believers might be able to preach, but not bind and loose. This 'spiritual Church' model does not fit very well with our Lord's description of the powers the Church is to have. This is why Protestants have traditionally struggled with these verses about binding and loosing; once we presume that the Church is purely spiritual, "binding and loosing" can only have a spiritualized meaning, which is why many Protestants interpret this verse to mean that individual believers have authority to "bind" evil spirits in the name of Jesus. This makes little sense for a few reasons:

First, it makes sense why one would "bind" and evil spirit, but when would you ever need to "loosen" one? Second, "binding and loosing" in the rabbinical jargon Jesus is using always refers to the binding and loosing of the faithful to certain disciplines, never to spiritual powers.
Third, Jesus says whatsoever you bind "on earth" shall be bound in heaven; he is not referring to the spirit world, but to the world of men.

The traditional understanding, that the power of binding and loosing refers to the authority of the Church's legitimate pastors to bind believers in matters of dogma and discipline, fits the passage much better. Because this binding and loosing is also "bound in heaven", it is authoritative - and only a physically constituted authority structure can bind and loose authoritatively. Otherwise, we are left with mere opinion and interpretation.

"He that hears you, hears me; and he that despises you, despises me; and he that despises me, despises him that sent me" (Luke 10:16).

Like the passage about binding and loosing, this passage denotes that the preaching of the Apostles is authoritative. To hear the Apostles is to hear Christ; the preaching of the Apostles is the agency through which faith in Christ is born. "And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me" (John 17:20); St. Paul says the same, "Faith then comes by hearing; and hearing by the word of God" (Rom. 10:17). The word of the Apostles is life-giving; not only this, but despising the message means despising Christ, and thus God the Father. Jesus do not say,"He who does not believe the Scriptures despises me", but "He who despises you despises me." The message comes with authority. An invisible Church - a loose spiritual communion of Christians with diverse beliefs about everything from baptism to salvation to the Rapture to the morality of contraception - cannot preach an authoritative message. There is no common witness. Only a message coming from something that has an institutional nature can possess this kind of authority.

Matthew 18:15-17

The Church must have a visible structure in order for someone to "tell it to the Church." It could be argued that this simply means to take the problem to the community, but that it says nothing about the nature or structure of that community. We could respond by noting the authority our Lord gives to that community. "If he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you as a Gentile and tax collector." Our Lord expresses a kind of disbelief that someone would refuse to listen to the Church and proscribes a kind of excommunication if they refuse their obedience. A loose spiritual communion cannot command this kind of obedience. The proscription for shunning, "let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector", would make no sense in such a spiritual communion because a person who did not like the judgment of one "church" could just go down the road to another that would give him a favorable judgment. The authority Jesus invests in the Church is meaningless unless there is one Church and unless it has some sort of physical constitution.

John 17:20-21

read more here

Not true. HE says to come out of the world. You are either of the World. Or of God. The Kingdom is spiritual. The Kingdom is not of this world and neither are those born of God.

James 4:2-4 KJV
[2] Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. [3] Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. [4] Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

"fondness" of the world is enmity with God. Jesus Christ overcome the world.

The church binds the works of the flesh. And looses the work of the Spirit, setting the captives free. It has nothing to do with an worldly institution or religion. Nothing to do with an adorned with white and gold Pope or a glittering church. That is all superficial and for the eye service of mankind. seems pretty clear: adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

You can't be of the world and of God. That is mankinds way of wanting to have it both ways. Broad or narrow? Crooked or straight? The world or God?

Luke 11:2 KJV
[2] And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.


Spirit.

 

[ScottA]

Jesus doesn't give keys to Himself. Only to Peter and his direct successors. Keys do that.

That is blaspheme. You speak of the keys of entering the kingdom of God: No one comes to the Father except through Christ the Son.

 

[epostle1]

Not true. HE says to come out of the world. You are either of the World. Or of God. The Kingdom is spiritual. The Kingdom is not of this world and neither are those born of God.

James 4:2-4 KJV
[2] Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. [3] Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. [4] Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

"fondness" of the world is enmity with God. Jesus Christ overcome the world.

The church binds the works of the flesh. And looses the work of the Spirit, setting the captives free. It has nothing to do with an worldly institution or religion. Nothing to do with an adorned with white and gold Pope or a glittering church. That is all superficial and for the eye service of mankind. seems pretty clear: adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

You can't be of the world and of God. That is mankinds way of wanting to have it both ways. Broad or narrow? Crooked or straight? The world or God?

Luke 11:2 KJV
[2] And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.
Spirit.

Binding and loosing has nothing to do with binding the works of the flesh. It is a rabbinical term. You can find "binding and loosing" on any Jewish resource but Jesus perfected it. Matt. 16:19 – whatever Peter binds or looses on earth is bound or loosed in heaven / when the Prime Minister to the King opens, no one shuts. This “binding and loosing” authority allows the keeper of the keys to establish “halakah,” or rules of conduct for the members of the kingdom he serves. Matt. 23:2-4 – the “binding and loosing” terminology used by Jesus was understood by the Jewish people. For example, Jesus said that the Pharisees “bind” heavy burdens but won’t move (“loose”) them with their fingers. Peter and the apostles have the new binding and loosing authority over the Church of the New Covenant. It is a physical act; it doesn't fit into a purely invisible Church.
Attacking the papacy is a straw man fallacy because you can't give a sound biblical definition of binding and loosing, or how it is applied.

 

[epostle1]

That is blaspheme. You speak of the keys of entering the kingdom of God: No one comes to the Father except through Christ the Son.

I said no such thing. Coming to the Father is a straw man fallacy to the meaning of the keys, which you are in resistance to what the Bible says, as I have carefully explained, using Isaiah, Matthew and Revelation. You offer no cohesive alternative explanation to the meaning of the keys, you just hound me with irrelevance.

Isa. 22:22 - we see that the keys of the kingdom pass from Shebna to Eliakim. Thus, the keys are used not only as a symbol of authority, but also to facilitate succession. The keys of Christ's kingdom have passed from Peter to Linus all the way to our current Pope with an unbroken lineage for almost 2,000 years.

Rev. 1:18; 3:7; 9:1; 20:1 - Jesus' "keys" undeniably represent authority. By using the word "keys," Jesus gives Peter authority on earth over the new Davidic kingdom, and this was not seriously questioned by anyone until the Protestant reformation 1,500 years later after Peter’s investiture.

Revelation 3:7 "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: `The words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David, who opens and no one shall shut, who shuts and no one opens.

Matthew 16:19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Matt. 16:19 - whatever Peter binds or looses on earth is bound or loosed in heaven / when the Prime Minister to the King opens, no one shuts. This "binding and loosing" authority allows the keeper of the keys to establish "halakah," or rules of conduct for the members of the kingdom he serves.

 

[ScottA]

I said no such thing. Coming to the Father is a straw man fallacy to the meaning of the keys, which you are in resistance to what the Bible says, as I have carefully explained, using Isaiah, Matthew and Revelation. You offer no cohesive alternative explanation to the meaning of the keys, you just hound me with irrelevance.

Isa. 22:22 - we see that the keys of the kingdom pass from Shebna to Eliakim. Thus, the keys are used not only as a symbol of authority, but also to facilitate succession. The keys of Christ's kingdom have passed from Peter to Linus all the way to our current Pope with an unbroken lineage for almost 2,000 years.

Rev. 1:18; 3:7; 9:1; 20:1 - Jesus' "keys" undeniably represent authority. By using the word "keys," Jesus gives Peter authority on earth over the new Davidic kingdom, and this was not seriously questioned by anyone until the Protestant reformation 1,500 years later after Peter’s investiture.

Revelation 3:7 "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: `The words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David, who opens and no one shall shut, who shuts and no one opens.

Matthew 16:19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Matt. 16:19 - whatever Peter binds or looses on earth is bound or loosed in heaven / when the Prime Minister to the King opens, no one shuts. This "binding and loosing" authority allows the keeper of the keys to establish "halakah," or rules of conduct for the members of the kingdom he serves.

Yes, that is true - offering you a man or the spirit of God is "no cohesive alternative explanation" to you. Nonetheless, those were and are the choices. You have no case.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Binding and loosing has nothing to do with binding the works of the flesh. It is a rabbinical term. You can find "binding and loosing" on any Jewish resource but Jesus perfected it. Matt. 16:19 – whatever Peter binds or looses on earth is bound or loosed in heaven / when the Prime Minister to the King opens, no one shuts. This “binding and loosing” authority allows the keeper of the keys to establish “halakah,” or rules of conduct for the members of the kingdom he serves. Matt. 23:2-4 – the “binding and loosing” terminology used by Jesus was understood by the Jewish people. For example, Jesus said that the Pharisees “bind” heavy burdens but won’t move (“loose”) them with their fingers. Peter and the apostles have the new binding and loosing authority over the Church of the New Covenant. It is a physical act; it doesn't fit into a purely invisible Church.
Attacking the papacy is a straw man fallacy because you can't give a sound biblical definition of binding and loosing, or how it is applied.

Matthew 23:2-7 KJV
[2] Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: [3] All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. [4] For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. [5] But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, [6] And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, [7] And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.

The heavy burdens were burdens of the flesh; when they themselves loved to feed the desires of the flesh. Binding and loosing is spiritual. The church is Spirit.

Your words sound familiar though.

Worldly.

 

[epostle1]

Yes, that is true - offering you a man or the spirit of God is "no cohesive alternative explanation" to you. Nonetheless, those were and are the choices. You have no case.

I am talking about the keys of the kingdom, you are talking about coming to the Father, WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE KEYS OF THE KINGDOM. THAT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT TOPIC. You constantly skip to different topics. You have no cohesive alternative explanation to the meaning of the keys, you left that part out, which is dishonest.
You have no case.

 

[epostle1]

Matthew 23:2-7 KJV
[2] Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: [3] All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. [4] For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. [5] But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, [6] And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, [7] And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.

The heavy burdens were burdens of the flesh; when they themselves loved to feed the desires of the flesh. Binding and loosing is spiritual. The church is Spirit.

Your words sound familiar though.

Worldly.

The scribes and Pharisees as you describe were not spirits. There is nothing "spiritual" about what they were doing. Their errors were earthly and physical. What is the biblical definition of binding and loosing??? They are physical acts that an invisible church cannot do.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

The scribes and Pharisees as you describe were not spirits. There is nothing "spiritual" about what they were doing. Their errors were earthly and physical. What is the biblical definition of binding and loosing??? They are physical acts that an invisible church cannot do.

I am sorry but you are wrong.

Luke 9:54-55 KJV
[54] And when his disciples James and John saw this , they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? [55] But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.

Jesus rebuked their flesh.

Luke 4:39-40
[39] And he stood over her, and rebuked the fever; and it left her: and immediately she arose and ministered unto them. [40] Now when the sun was setting, all they that had any sick with divers diseases brought them unto him; and he laid his hands on every one of them, and healed them.

Again Jesus(full of the Spirit) rebukes the flesh and the fever came out of her. It was Spiritual.

Romans 7:9-14 KJV
[9] For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. [10] And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. [11] For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me . [12] Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. [13] Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. [14] For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Again, It is spiritual. The scribes and Pharisees bind heavy burdens of the law(spiritual) holding others captive, preventing others entrance into the Kingdom of God. They(Pharisees and scribes) don't enter because of their love for things that feed their wants of the flesh, their desire to have and to be high...and they keep others out of the Kingdom by placing heavy burdens upon them. It is spiritual; love of the temporal(adoration of men) preventing entrance. Any thing that exalts itself above the Lord, will be brought low. I am sorry, but that includes the Pope. When Paul says the Law slew him...it was Spiritual. Saul was for the physical church(institutional).
Paul; given a revelation of Jesus Christ...was afterward a servant for the spiritual church(the spiritual body of Christ). A virgin(free from the world)/no longer an adulteress but made white/clean/spotless...by Jesus Christ. The command from Jesus to Peter to "feed my sheep" ...we all, those of Christ, are called to feed His sheep. It is not about us and getting more of the temporal...it is about others and pulling them from the fire before it is too late. It is about forgiveness and it is absolutely SPIRITUAL.

Matthew 23:13-27 KJV
[13] But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves , neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in. [14] Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation. [15] Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves. [16] Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor! [17] Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? [18] And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty. [19] Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift? [20] Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon. [21] And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein. [22] And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon. [23] Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. [24] Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. [25] Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. [26] Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also. [27] Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.

It is not by the works of men.
It is by faith in Christ.
So no man can boast.
Jesus Christ loosed the new covenant.

Revelation 1:18 KJV
[18] I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

His Blood is the key to hell and death and He laid down His life freely. Why do you think it is "what ever you do in MY name"? There is your keys. They belong to Spirit.

 

[bbyrd009]

That is blaspheme. You speak of the keys of entering the kingdom of God: No one comes to the Father except through Christ the Son.

the Peter story does provide us a template for becoming a priest; but it is occluded by the RCC, and can't really even be taught now, too bad. Perspective in the story makes all the difference

 

[bbyrd009]

Binding and loosing has nothing to do with binding the works of the flesh. It is a rabbinical term. You can find "binding and loosing" on any Jewish resource but Jesus perfected it. Matt. 16:19 – whatever Peter binds or looses on earth is bound or loosed in heaven / when the Prime Minister to the King opens, no one shuts. This “binding and loosing” authority allows the keeper of the keys to establish “halakah,” or rules of conduct for the members of the kingdom he serves. Matt. 23:2-4 – the “binding and loosing” terminology used by Jesus was understood by the Jewish people. For example, Jesus said that the Pharisees “bind” heavy burdens but won’t move (“loose”) them with their fingers. Peter and the apostles have the new binding and loosing authority over the Church of the New Covenant. It is a physical act; it doesn't fit into a purely invisible Church.
Attacking the papacy is a straw man fallacy because you can't give a sound biblical definition of binding and loosing, or how it is applied.

yet i note that you seem to be bound here quite efficiently nonetheless? Surely you even detect this on some level? It'd be nice to have a discussion without you taking it personally, so i dunno how far this will go, but there it is.


oh, i guess you will have to ignore this because it counters your point, huh, forgot about that part. well dang lol, nevermind!