Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
My last was a silly question, as you are not questioning this. You are suggesting that what was meant was meant for all of the apostles. Aside from the fact that, in the gospels, Jesus never says what is written in Isaiah 22:22 to the other apostles, let’s consider the possibility. This is a consideration of 12 simultaneous prime ministers of the Kingdom. What is prime about a minister who has 11 equals?
What are you talking about? Isaiah 22:22 does not refer to Peter. And, as I previously wrote, the same authority is given to the other apostles in Matthew 18:18, which knocks down the house-of-straw RC claims.
Did Jesus say this to Peter:So when Jesus spoke to Simon He had no idea that what He was saying had already been said to Eliakim?
There is a parallel but nothing more. What you are trying to accomplish with this flailing is beyond me.So you are going to ignore the parellel in favor of...your belief?
Matthew 16:19 was not an accident. Nor was Matthew 18:18, where the same authority is extended to all of the apostles. What is miraculous, though, is that you think you have a point.Isaiah 22:22 (New International Version)
I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.
Matthew 16:19 (New International Version)
I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
What a miraculous accident Matthew 16:19 was.
Matthew 16:19 was not an accident. Nor was Matthew 18:18, where the same authority is extended to all of the apostles. What is miraculous, though, is that you think you have a point.
The parallel is nothing special. But since you are trying to extend it beyond what it can reasonably bear, allow me to develop it further. Isaiah 22:22 speaks of a steward who exceeded his authority, so he was stripped of his authority and it was given to another. This is clearly a prophecy concerning the power-mongering papacy, and it shows God's displeasure with the institution and his revocation of its authority!First of all let me apologize for the tone of my previous posts. As I read them I am aware of a rather sarcastic tone. I will blame that on the hour.
I have addressed the redundant parts of your last post already. As for your admission that Matthew 16:19 was not an accident, we can then admit the converse: Mathew 16:19 was intentional. Why then would Jesus intent the parallel of Isaiah 22:22 without intending the meaning?
The parallel is nothing special. But since you are trying to extend it beyond what it can reasonably bear, allow me to develop it further. Isaiah 22:22 speaks of a steward who exceeded his authority, so he was stripped of his authority and it was given to another. This is clearly a prophecy concerning the power-mongering papacy, and it shows God's displeasure with the institution and his revocation of its authority!
Have you read the previous posts in this thread? Yes the steward was stripped of his position. The whole point is that it was a dynastic position. After it was stripped, it needed to be filled, and it was filled. It was filled by the new steward Eliakim via the passing of the key.
Heres something of an illustration of the parallel:
Isaiah 22:22
Hezekiah (Davidic King of Israel)
Eliakim (Steward) given key to house of David
Matthew 16:19
Jesus (Davidic King of Israel/Heaven)
Simon (Steward) given keys to kingdom of heaven
Matthew 18:18 says nothing of keys
Your parallel is missing the person the keys were taken from in the first place.
And Matthew 18:18 does not need to mention "keys" because it mentions "binding and loosing," which is what the "keys" are all about.
Your parallel is missing the person the keys were taken from in the first place.
And Matthew 18:18 does not need to mention "keys" because it mentions "binding and loosing," which is what the "keys" are all about.
The Keys are but a representation of the one that is cosidered supreme of the ministers or prime. All ministers have the power to bind and loose. But only the one with the Key on his shoulder has the power to change what another minister bound or loosed. It is because this person with the Key has a higher authority then the other that he has this symbol of office.
No, that is your argument. The language is reminiscent of Isaiah 22:22 but that is all.
That is a fantasy of Roman Catholic invention.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?