quote=Technocrat2010; There is no legit papacy unless Jesus is our permanent king - which He is.
& who did you replace Him with as High Priest in your insecurity over His physical absence?
Mt 28:20 - Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and,
lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. Quote:
Heb 3:1 - Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and
High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;
The point of citing this passage is...?
Illustrating the redundancy of the papacy, regardless of the fact that Christ's sacrifice retired the model it follows.
Quote:
Techno: He gave Peter the Keys, which was analogous to the position of the Prime Minister in the OT Davidic Kingdom.
The analogy isn't false, but your application of it is.
David=1 authority, 1 key. 12 Apostles=multiple keys.
David was succeeded, Jesus was not.
David's authority
was human, Jesus'
is divine.
You have "high priest" and "Prime Minister" mixed up.
I don't think so. They are combined in both David & Jesus.
We are indeed a priesthood of believer
Then each believer has consecrating authority if he holds the truth in righteousness.
However, Hebrews is not speaking of the end of the Levitical priesthood but rather the fulfillment of the Levite priests through the NT antitypes of Church priests/presbyters, bishops, etc.
Semantics as rhetoric.
The butterfly is both the end & fulfillment of the caterpillar. You can't make a silk purse (divine infallability) out of a sow's ear (human flesh).
Your argument is similar to Korah's argument in the NT when he rebelled against Moses for the same reasons - that the divine priesthood of all believers, he erroneously concluded, meant that there was to be no separate order of hierarchy.
He was ahead of God's time.
Hebrews is not demolishing the OT priesthood
I agree. It illustrates how the fulfillment of it completely changed the definition of the priesthood.
- it is highlighting the importance placed upon a person with the role of a priest (in this case, Melchizedek).
...and every believer.
Incidentally, Melchizedek is used here as a typological reference to the NT High priest, which is Jesus. The "change in law" is referring to the fact that in the OT time, only descendants of the house of Levi became priests. Jesus was a descendant of the house of Judah. In order for Him to become a Priest, let alone a "High" Priest, and in order for anyone else to take on such a mantle, there must have been a fulfillment of the OT Levite law. This does not mean we are all priests in the same typological manner as Korah suggested. This means that just as the Levite priests, a specific group of people, upheld the Mosaic Law, so now we have our current Church priests, who uphold the New Testament Law.
...every believer.
Have a look at numbers 16.
It's 2am & there's 36 chapters...
And again, nothing here that remotely touches the keys to the kingdom. There were many OT priests, specifically of the tribe of Levi, but there was only
one bearer of the Keys - the King. The King,
in his absence, charged the keys to the
Prime Minister.[/quote]
Key, not keys. You have confused the two kingdoms, as well as the differing natures of their kings.
