Posted on 01/25/2007 10:49:26 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
Israel is God's portion and as such, God alone is ever the king of Israel. David being a man after God's own heart, was allowed to rule temporily. God has taken it back and Jesus occupies the throne. No one rules Israel other than Jesus, since Jesus. Peter was given no earthly throne, nor was any other apostle or disciple. Moreover, Peter was never an apostle sent to gentiles, so he would have no work in Rome. Paul was that emissary.
= = =
Sound reasoning. Sound historical facts.
Peter did not have this power over the other apostles and neither do those deemed his successors have such authority over the whole church.
= = =
Historically sound.
Logically sound.
Biblically sound.
Thanks.
Not only that but the lesson from the bible of what happens when the people clamor for a king or a prince or whatever over them, should be enough to give people pause.
The Bible indicates David will be raised up by the LORD God to also rule over Israel. That could be symbolic of Christ Himself, being from the line of David; or, it could be that David himself will literally have a role to play in the kingdom.
Jeremiah 30:9 But they shall serve the LORD their God and David their king, whom I will raise up for them.
Ezekiel 37:24
The Davidic Kingdom
24"My servant David will be king over them, and they will all have one shepherd; and they will walk in My ordinances and keep My statutes and observe them
Ezekiel 34:24
24"And I, the LORD, will be their God, and My servant David will be prince among them; I the LORD have spoken.
Hosea 3:5
5Afterward the sons of Israel will return and seek the LORD their God and David their king; and they will come trembling to the LORD and to His goodness in the last days.
Since Jesus and YHWH are synonymous, I don't think we can say that the literal David will not have a role to play. Ultimately, Israel will serve the LORD her God. But, David may have a governing role.
Psalm 110:1
The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool
Psalm 110:1
The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool
Amen. I don't think we can err when we fall on the side of believing all goodness and virtue, whether in the OT or NT, is from Christ by Christ for Christ.
The power to bind and loose was given to Peter in Matt 16 in a way that it was not given to the other Apostles in Matt 18. The evidence of that is:
1) the turning over of the keys, which only occurs with Peter
2) the name change, which only occurs with Peter
and 3) the fact that Peter is given the power to bind and loose singly while the others are given it corporately. In Matt 16..it's the singular, referring only to Peter. In Matt 18, it's in the plural. "whatever you all bind on earth will be bound in heaven". The power that all the Apostles have seems to be somehow "crystallized" in Peter in a way that it is not with Andrew, say, or John or James.
Also, I don't think devolving Peter's power to the Apostles helps you any, if you don't think that there is any authority in the Church save Christ alone. Matt 18 practically screams ecclesiastical authority...not only in the Apostolic college having the power to legislate, but also the power to excommunicate in Matt 18:17.
Binding and loosing...whether through Peter singly or the Apostles corporately..implies legislative authority over the Church. This is something that not every believer can have.
PRE-cisely!!!! A better metaphor you could not have presented.
The Church is Christ's portion and, as such, Christ alone is ever the king of the Church. BUT, Peter being a man after Christ's own heart, is allowed to rule temporarily.
Saul took the name Paul, and in Acts we see another name change,
Acts 4:36
Thus Joseph, also named by the apostles Barnabas (which is translated "son of encouragement"), a Levite, a Cypriot by birth, sold a piece of property that he owned, then brought the money and put it at the feet of the apostles.
Levi was renamed Matthew, Jesus renamed James and John, Boanerges, Nathaneal is renamed Bartholomew.
Jesus renames all of us
Re 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.
Binding and loosing and the priesthood of all believers . . . as Paul makes plenty clear . . . is given to all believers.
Sorry but the bible speaks of the messiah as the Son of David. Peter was probably a Levite, and as such, just another priest, as are we all. If you think he is sitting on JGod's throne, then you have made him divine and a god.
is allowed to rule temporarily.
= = =
That, to me, is entirely contrary to the whole sweep of Biblical history and New Testament teachings.
God is thoroughly against hierarchical 'lording it over' religiosity, bureaucratic loftiness in any and all forms.
All examples of it in Scripture are fiercely denounced by the most Godly person involved--in the New Testament--Jesus Himself.
He was not so stupid as to set up again a worse edifice of the sort He spent so much of His earthly ministry railing against.
He was not and is not schizophrenic!
Well I never! ;)
But what makes it any worse than yours?
The distinction you're missing is that once Christ comes, there is no need for any other ruler than Christ.
In the OT, all were but shadows of the truth to come -- Jesus Christ, the only mediator between man and God.
With your elevation of Peter and the pope, you return to wretched legalism, if not outright idolatry.
Lording it over yes. As we've said countless times on this thread, he who must lead must be the servant of the rest. But as for there being no religious authority...well, I think Numbers 16 has something to say about that:
Now Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, and Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab, and On, the son of Peleth, sons of Reuben, took men: And they rose up before Moses, with certain of the children of Israel, two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly, famous in the congregation, men of renown: And they gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said unto them, Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the LORD is among them: wherefore then lift ye up yourselves above the congregation of the LORD?What happened to Korah, Quix? For advancing the priesthood of all believers apart from the divinely instituted priesthood of Aaron?
Now this is correct. The Roman Republic began to consider their rulers as gods, and you see where that led. Just no good ever comes of it. Moreover, it's absurd to think that after Jesus' work He would allow such a thing.
You're absolutely right. My fingers went faster than my brain. Forgive the misstatement, and thanks for the correction.
lol, anytime
Actually Peter himself wrote something which argues against the need for Popes and magisterium. Want to read it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.