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.
So if I specifically looked at you with a bunch of your brethren around and gave you (singular) the keys, common sense tells you that I also gave it to them? I'm somehow just not seeing that.We really don't know then do we?
Or does it say peter "alone"?
No, it doesn't.
So that leaves us with what? Common sense.
We have to use the only tool that you guys will reeeeally pay attention to.Interesting that those who oppose SS want to use Scripture to prove a thing
(See title of thread)
Just an observation.
Originally Posted by KephaOf course not. Jesus only used the singular you in the context of both giving the Keys and Binding on earth and Heaven and it's extremely naive to assume it was for everybody else when the other Apostles were right there with him. Wishful thinking would be to believe otherwise. Something very special was going on there without a doubt that involved Peter only.
If I had known this topic would keep coming up, I would have bumped this thread upSo if I specifically looked at you with a bunch of your brethren around and gave you (singular) the keys, common sense tells you that I also gave it to them? I'm somehow just not seeing that.
Interesting that those who oppose SS want to use Scripture to prove a thing
(See title of thread)
Just an observation.
But we don't KNOW that He was "looking at" Peter.So if I specifically looked at you with a bunch of your brethren around and gave you (singular) the keys, common sense tells you that I also gave it to them? I'm somehow just not seeing that.
umm...To lead us out of the kingdom of the death and hades and into the Kingdom of everlasting LifeBut we don't KNOW that He was "looking at" Peter.
Let's say I am wrong, and He was ONLY Giving Pete the keys,
(I have no idea tbh, could be that it was Peter and not the rest,
Don't really care much either way either... )
... what exactly were these keys of the kingdom of Heaven for?
Why are you asking this 'basic stuff' instead of showing where Jesus addresses anyone but Peter to give the keys? Go ahead, show us where that happens. You've got the Scriptures at your fingertips.
If it's so basic, show me where it happens.
So if I specifically looked at you with a bunch of your brethren around and gave you (singular) the keys, common sense tells you that I also gave it to them? I'm somehow just not seeing that.
But we don't KNOW that He was "looking at" Peter.
Let's say I am wrong, and He was ONLY Giving Pete the keys,
(I have no idea tbh, could be that it was Peter and not the rest,
Don't really care much either way either... )
... what exactly were these keys of the kingdom of Heaven for?
Except Jesus didn't give any physical, tangible keys to anyone, as you suggest. It is a Spiritual Truth He spoke of. So your pat little analogy here doesn't really hold water; not a single drop.
Except Jesus didn't give any physical, tangible keys to anyone, as you suggest. It is a Spiritual Truth He spoke of. So your pat little analogy here doesn't really hold water; not a single drop.
An interesting thread on that was started on the OBOB boardOh that's easy, just use your common sense!
"Binding and loosing" was a Rabbinical term, referring to interpreting Scripture. So clearly what Jesus did while sur-naming Simon Peter, was to establish the Magisterium, papal infallibility, ex-Cathedra, and all the associated doctrines.
How can you not see it?
In a discussion with a Catholic friend of mine (full disclosure: I am not Catholic), he mentioned the term Ex-Cathedra. I had asked him what the role of the Pope was and asked why the Pope had infallible authority over canon, the interpretation of scriptures, etc.
In reply, he said that the "infallible" part only applies to the Pope when he is sitting Ex-Cathedra, which has only happened a few times in history and only concerns a few select doctrines.
I'd be grateful for the help of any Catholics who are able and willing to shed light on this concept. THANKS!
I thought I made a thread addressing this very question but some threadsumm...To lead us out of the kingdom of the death and hades and into the Kingdom of everlasting Life
Reve 1:18 and the living One! And I became dead and behold! I am living into the ages of the ages.
And I am having the Keys of the Hades and of the Death
I have this thing about using common sense.How can you not see it?
I think sometimes we get confused and make doctrines out of eventsI also would like to see where this big "handing of the keys" event happened in scripture. There has to be something I missed, you know, heaven opening, angels flocking around Peter and magical keys floating down out of heaven to him,....?!?!?
Where is it at, I haven't read anything on it yet?!?
There'd be no need except for those who depend solely on scripture and oppose the teachings of those who don't-they won't listen to anything else.Interesting that those who oppose SS want to use Scripture to prove a thing
(See title of thread)
Just an observation.
Actually, it's that "inside" check that's missing!
People need to LISTEN to God. But they've been lulled to sleep
by organizations teaching them to obey their "leaders". So they
blindly "obey".
IMO
I still don't follow ... the comparison of Eliot and Smith, and its relationship to the ECFs.I do find it helpful to discuss Mr. Eliot with you because you are familiar with his work. Joseph Smith, like Mr. Eliot, drew upon various non-Christian sources for his writings. Unlike Mr. Eliot, he claimed that they were inspired by God and that he received them orally. The followers of Mr. Smith continue to make that assertion and disclaim anything to the contrary as being from The Great Apostasy (all of Christendom).
Okay, but Smith launched a religion that is not exactly Christian and Eliot was not defending the Christian revelation per se.The RCC claims that its leader continues to receive insight and revelation from God. In doing so, they have wandered farther from orthodoxy and not closer, as I am sure you agree. For example, in 1872 the RCC proclaimed the dogma of Papal infallibility. They base this dogma upon their understanding of Tradition. Apart from using scripture as the norma norms to ascertain the accuracy of such dogmatic claims, Christians are only left with "My church rejects what your church says - because our Tradition is better than yours. nyah, nyah, nyah."
That's okay - "never mind the bollocks".BTW, I am unfamiliar with Mr. Rotten.
How do you find out who is "in charge of you?What is known from Scripture, for example, is that we are called to obey those in charge of us.
As in "dis"obedience?So I think what is missing in this discussion is the understanding of "obedience" - that right obedience to elders etc. is commended to us, but that phenomena other than obedience occur and can be dangerous.
I am a SS and I do listen to logic as well as Scripture.There'd be no need except for those who depend solely on scripture and oppose the teachings of those who don't-they won't listen to anything else.
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?