A thought on Matthew 16: 18-19

[ArmyMatt]

He was at Antioch and Rome both; people forget his itinerant ministry and the fact that the Lord did not create a situation where the charisma of an individual bishop somehow metaphysically transfers to the next bishop. All bishops contain all the apostolic authority. The direct bishop right after St. James was not somehow "the new James." He didn't retain that man's charisma and unique character. He received the ability to rule as a bishop, period. Obviously some Sees were venerable and respected, but there were many reasons why....

right, every bishop possesses what was given to St Peter. every bishop possesses what was given to St Paul, St John, St Matthew, etc.

 

[icxn]

'Eye of the needle' is referring to a gate in Jerusalem that heavily packed camels could not pass through. They had to be unloaded first. Same as the rich man. He cannot get into Heaven with all the trappings of his wealth!

This is off topic, but since you mentioned it... Eye of a needle is just that, an eye of a needle. A camel on the other hand is a type of thick rope that they used to tie a boat to a piling. Allegorically, it represents the Nations that found easy entrance into the Kingdom of God through faith in Jesus Christ, as opposed to the Jews who had as riches the Law and the Prophets. The needle can also be taken as symbolizing the Lord who through His teachings as if thread has woven the two people (Jews and Gentiles) into a single fabric. The rest of what you said is true, a rich man with the trappings of his wealth cannot enter into Heaven, but he who has spinned or twisted himself thin with spiritual labors.

 

[Light of the East]

He was at Antioch and Rome both; people forget his itinerant ministry and the fact that the Lord did not create a situation where the charisma of an individual bishop somehow metaphysically transfers to the next bishop. All bishops contain all the apostolic authority. The direct bishop right after St. James was not somehow "the new James." He didn't retain that man's charisma and unique character. He received the ability to rule as a bishop, period. Obviously some Sees were venerable and respected, but there were many reasons why....

Hmmmmmmmmmmm....never thought about that.

 

[Lost4words]

This is off topic, but since you mentioned it... Eye of a needle is just that, an eye of a needle. A camel on the other hand is a type of thick rope that they used to tie a boat to a piling. Allegorically, it represents the Nations that found easy entrance into the Kingdom of God through faith in Jesus Christ, as opposed to the Jews who had as riches the Law and the Prophets. The needle can also be taken as symbolizing the Lord who through His teachings as if thread has woven the two people (Jews and Gentiles) into a single fabric. The rest of what you said is true, a rich man with the trappings of his wealth cannot enter into Heaven, but he who has spinned or twisted himself thin with spiritual labors.

Eye of the needle in Jesus time was a narrow gate into Jerusalem that a camel could not get through.

 

[ArmyMatt]

This is off topic, but since you mentioned it... Eye of a needle is just that, an eye of a needle. A camel on the other hand is a type of thick rope that they used to tie a boat to a piling. Allegorically, it represents the Nations that found easy entrance into the Kingdom of God through faith in Jesus Christ, as opposed to the Jews who had as riches the Law and the Prophets. The needle can also be taken as symbolizing the Lord who through His teachings as if thread has woven the two people (Jews and Gentiles) into a single fabric. The rest of what you said is true, a rich man with the trappings of his wealth cannot enter into Heaven, but he who has spinned or twisted himself thin with spiritual labors.

Eye of the needle in Jesus time was a narrow gate into Jerusalem that a camel could not get through.

it's actually both.

 

[Lost4words]

it's actually both.

But which do you think Jesus was referring to? Or, was it something else?

 

[ArmyMatt]

But which do you think Jesus was referring to? Or, was it something else?

knowing His audience and being all knowing, both

 

[icxn]

it's actually both.

Forgive me Father but I've never came across that understanding in any of the Church Fathers I've read. Also, the Greek text doesn't support it. There's no article (the) to signify a specific 'eye of a needle.'

Wikipedia - for what is worth - has this to say:

The "Eye of the Needle" has been claimed to be a gate in Jerusalem, which opened after the main gate was closed at night. A camel could only pass through this smaller gate if it was stooped and had its baggage removed. This story has been put forth since at least the 15th century, and possibly as far back as the 9th century. However, there is no widely accepted evidence for the existence of such a gate.​

And now I'm going to shut up!

 

[ArmyMatt]

Forgive me Father but I've never came across that understanding in any of the Church Fathers I've read. Also, the Greek text doesn't support it. There's no article (the) to signify a specific 'eye of a needle.'

Wikipedia - for what is worth - has this to say:

The "Eye of the Needle" has been claimed to be a gate in Jerusalem, which opened after the main gate was closed at night. A camel could only pass through this smaller gate if it was stooped and had its baggage removed. This story has been put forth since at least the 15th century, and possibly as far back as the 9th century. However, there is no widely accepted evidence for the existence of such a gate.​

And now I'm going to shut up!

I heard both at seminary, but you are totally correct

 

[peregrinus2017]

Sometimes I think we miss what Jesus is saying to us while trying to figure out what He meant.

 

[Erik Nelson]

well, I think we would say he does have the keys, and he passed his authority to all bishops.

Jesus gave the keys to only one of 12 Apostles.

Logically only he who has the keys, having received them, Could in turn pass them on?

Jesus > Peter > Linus...

Logically. 11 of the 12 Apostles. Received no keys. And neither would the bishops they consecrated. Most of the Apostles and most of the bishops. Did not receive keys? That was a very special prerogative and privilege.

If Jesus had meant all bishops and church leaders to have the keys, he would have given the keys to all his apostles at the outset.

 

[Erik Nelson]

He was at Antioch and Rome both; people forget his itinerant ministry and the fact that the Lord did not create a situation where the charisma of an individual bishop somehow metaphysically transfers to the next bishop. All bishops contain all the apostolic authority. The direct bishop right after St. James was not somehow "the new James." He didn't retain that man's charisma and unique character. He received the ability to rule as a bishop, period. Obviously some Sees were venerable and respected, but there were many reasons why....

Logically all of the bishops contain all of the Apostolic Authority exactly as much as all of the Apostles. Contained the keys of the Kingdom. Authority from Jesus.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Jesus gave the keys to only one of 12 Apostles.

Logically only he who has the keys, having received them, Could in turn pass them on?

Jesus > Peter > Linus...

Logically. 11 of the 12 Apostles. Received no keys. And neither would the bishops they consecrated. Most of the Apostles and most of the bishops. Did not receive keys? That was a very special prerogative and privilege.

If Jesus had meant all bishops and church leaders to have the keys, he would have given the keys to all his apostles at the outset.

the keys were given to one, that is true. however, his successors are the bishops who hold his confession of faith. not simply the direct line to St Peter.

this is especially important because St Peter also founded Antioch, and Antioch has never made the claims that Rome has made, even though Antioch was founded before Rome.

 

[Erik Nelson]

the keys were given to one, that is true. however, his successors are the bishops who hold his confession of faith. not simply the direct line to St Peter.

this is especially important because St Peter also founded Antioch, and Antioch has never made the claims that Rome has made, even though Antioch was founded before Rome.

Jesus gave the keys of the Kingdom. To Peter, Peter retained possession of the keys throughout his life. He never relinquished or lost the keys. Only when he was martyred would, he have laid on hands and transferred his personal authority.

Tragically. Exactly that occured in Rome in 64 AD. Only then did Peter Transfer, the mantle of his authority to a successor. Linus.

Peter never gave the keys to the Bishop in Antioch Because. Peter was always still alive whenever he was in Antioch. He didn't "leave or forget" the keys to the Kingdom in Antioch in 48 AD When he moved on to Rome. As he was still alive, he didn't give the keys to Saint Evodius Who therefore didn't give them to Saint Ignatius and so on.

But when he was tragically martyred in Rome in 64. AD he didn't take the keys with him into the next life. Surely they were bequeathed to Saint Linus.

-----

During the days of the judges. "Everyone did what was right in their own eyes because there was no King over Israel." In the days of the judges Israel was a Confederacy.

King David created a federal government with a singular authority over all of the tribes.

Is the church of Jesus Christ the Messiah a confederacy or a federacy? Is it more like the judges? Or, more like the Davidic Kingdom?

 

[ArmyMatt]

Jesus gave the keys of the Kingdom. To Peter, Peter retained possession of the keys throughout his life. He never relinquished or lost the keys. Only when he was martyred would, he have laid on hands and transferred his personal authority.

Tragically. Exactly that occured in Rome in 64 AD. Only then did Peter Transfer, the mantle of his authority to a successor. Linus.

Peter never gave the keys to the Bishop in Antioch Because. Peter was always still alive whenever he was in Antioch. He didn't "leave or forget" the keys to the Kingdom in Antioch in 48 AD When he moved on to Rome. As he was still alive, he didn't give the keys to Saint Evodius Who therefore didn't give them to Saint Ignatius and so on.

But when he was tragically martyred in Rome in 64. AD he didn't take the keys with him into the next life. Surely they were bequeathed to Saint Linus.

-----

During the days of the judges. "Everyone did what was right in their own eyes because there was no King over Israel." In the days of the judges Israel was a Confederacy.

King David created a federal government with a singular authority over all of the tribes.

Is the church of Jesus Christ the Messiah a confederacy or a federacy? Is it more like the judges? Or, more like the Davidic Kingdom?

if you are correct, why is there no history of Antioch claiming to have the keys until St Peter went to Rome?

 

[Not David]

Jesus gave the keys of the Kingdom. To Peter, Peter retained possession of the keys throughout his life. He never relinquished or lost the keys. Only when he was martyred would, he have laid on hands and transferred his personal authority.

Tragically. Exactly that occured in Rome in 64 AD. Only then did Peter Transfer, the mantle of his authority to a successor. Linus.

Peter never gave the keys to the Bishop in Antioch Because. Peter was always still alive whenever he was in Antioch. He didn't "leave or forget" the keys to the Kingdom in Antioch in 48 AD When he moved on to Rome. As he was still alive, he didn't give the keys to Saint Evodius Who therefore didn't give them to Saint Ignatius and so on.

But when he was tragically martyred in Rome in 64. AD he didn't take the keys with him into the next life. Surely they were bequeathed to Saint Linus.

-----

During the days of the judges. "Everyone did what was right in their own eyes because there was no King over Israel." In the days of the judges Israel was a Confederacy.

King David created a federal government with a singular authority over all of the tribes.

Is the church of Jesus Christ the Messiah a confederacy or a federacy? Is it more like the judges? Or, more like the Davidic Kingdom?

Jesus is the King of the Davidic Kingdom. He is both King as God and Human.

 

[prodromos]

But when he was tragically martyred in Rome in 64. AD he didn't take the keys with him into the next life. Surely they were bequeathed to Saint Linus.

The Apostolic Constitutions state that Linus was ordained by Paul.

 

[TheLostCoin]

Jesus gave the keys of the Kingdom. To Peter, Peter retained possession of the keys throughout his life. He never relinquished or lost the keys. Only when he was martyred would, he have laid on hands and transferred his personal authority.

Tragically. Exactly that occured in Rome in 64 AD. Only then did Peter Transfer, the mantle of his authority to a successor. Linus.

Peter never gave the keys to the Bishop in Antioch Because. Peter was always still alive whenever he was in Antioch. He didn't "leave or forget" the keys to the Kingdom in Antioch in 48 AD When he moved on to Rome. As he was still alive, he didn't give the keys to Saint Evodius Who therefore didn't give them to Saint Ignatius and so on.

But when he was tragically martyred in Rome in 64. AD he didn't take the keys with him into the next life. Surely they were bequeathed to Saint Linus.

-----

During the days of the judges. "Everyone did what was right in their own eyes because there was no King over Israel." In the days of the judges Israel was a Confederacy.

King David created a federal government with a singular authority over all of the tribes.

Is the church of Jesus Christ the Messiah a confederacy or a federacy? Is it more like the judges? Or, more like the Davidic Kingdom?

The Church of Christ is actually not merely like the Davidic Kingdom - it's both. It's like the Judges of Israel, where God is the King - as remember, the Kingdom of Israel having a human king was a punishment for Israel's desires of wordliness, which God makes clear in His discussions with Samuel. (1 Samuel 8).

But more than that, the Successor to David is Christ, biologically descending from David and being it's permanent King.

This actually makes more sense with Christ fulfilling the Davidic Kingdom - considering that Christ is descended from the Root of Jesse, how does it make sense that Peter is the successor of David and not Christ, being the permanent David?


Going off the fact that you claim that the foundation of the Church is exclusive to Peter and Peter exclusively holds the keys, how do you respond to the fact that Saint John Chrysostom says that Saint John the Apostle is the pillar of the Church throughout the world and has the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven?

"For the son of thunder, the beloved of Christ, the pillar of the Churches throughout the world, who holds the keys of heaven, who drank the cup of Christ, and was baptized with His baptism, who lay upon his Master’s bosom with much confidence, this man comes forward to us now; not as an actor of a play, not hiding his head with a mask...
Seeing then it is no longer the fisherman the son of Zebedee, but He who knoweth “the deep things of God” ( 1 Cor. ii. 10 ), the Holy Spirit I mean, that striketh this lyre, let us hearken accordingly. For he will say nothing to us as a man, but what he saith, he will say from the depths of the Spirit, from those secret things which before they came to pass the very Angels knew not; since they too have learned by the voice of John with us, and by us, the things which we know."

Source: NPNF1-14. Saint Chrysostom: Homilies on the Gospel of St. John and the Epistle to the Hebrews - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

 

[Erik Nelson]

The Apostolic Constitutions state that Linus was ordained by Paul.

And the earliest reference that of Ireneus says he was ordained by the Apostles Plural. Is known from the letter of the Galatians? That Peter respected and. Acknowledged and followed. Paul's counsel and advice. Perhaps. The obvious harmonisation of all of these accounts. Is that? Peter and Paul both favor Linus.

 

[Varangian Christian]

@Erik Nelson why are you arguing that Peter alone holds the keys if you are not Roman Catholic?