What if Jesus comes tomorrow and it turns out these scriptures mean exactly as they read?

[Ligurian]

Pretty straight-forward... that "authority" belongs to all of Jesus' Disciples.

Matthew 18:15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. 16 But if he will not hear [thee, then] take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. 17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell [it] unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. 18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

That passage speaks of the Church's authority. Thanks for answering my question.

Those who don't keep Jesus Commandments aren't His Disciples.

mathetes = from manthano; a learner, pupil, disciple.
manthano = prolongation from a primary verb; to learn, understand.

John 8:31 Then said Jesus to those Judeans which believed on Him,
If ye continue in My word, [then] are ye My disciples indeed;

Matthew 23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi, for one is your Master: Christ; and all ye are brethren. 9 And call no [man] your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in Heaven. 10 Neither be ye called teachers, for one is your Teacher: Christ.

Matthew 7:24 Therefore whosoever heareth these words of Mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon the rock: 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon the rock.

Matthew 13:9 Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

 

[BobRyan]

What about divine flesh, Bob? Matt 16 talks about the Pharisees and Saducees...

Jesus is the one saying his own discussion about eating flesh is not at all about literal flesh because He says it is "His WORD" that has spirit and life in John 6 - not biting him. Then in Matt 16 we see Him hammer his own disciples for taking the symbol of bread too literally.

 

[BobRyan]

Respectfully, you are a broken record Bob.

IT always comes back to actual scripture with me -- I like it and affirm it. I guess some tire of that position - but I never do.

I prefer the Bible to beer. Have I said that enough times yet

 

[Ceallaigh]

Why did Jesus tell Peter first? Also, Peter is almost always named first among the apostles, or they are grouped with him. There are several reasons we call Peter the prime apostle. Jesus didn't rename the other apostles, either. We believe that the bishop is in charge of his diocese, but must remain in communion with the Bishop of Rome. But the power to bind and loose comes from Isaiah 22, a power given to the Prime Minister.

There seems to be a lot of conjecture and variables involved with this. You've portrayed the position as both just another bishop to "Prime Minister" you must remain in communion with. Meaning the pope is really supposed to be equal to God. But I suppose you didn't want to come right out and say that, so you tried to downplay it some at first.

 

[klutedavid]

Another poster once asked: What if Jesus comes tomorrow and it turns out these scriptures mean exactly as they read?

I agree. What if John 6 means exactly what it says? What if Matthew 16:18-20 means exactly what it says, and makes Peter the head of the apostles, and thus the entire Church, and his successors the same?

I don't think anyone will be held to account for a erroneous eschatology. Given that there are so many interpretations within eschatology.

We need to concentrate on the foundational doctrines and not be distracted.

Believe in Jesus, confess Jesus, bear the fruit of the Holy Spirit.

Love is the goal of our Christian instruction.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I don't think anyone will be held to account for a erroneous eschatology. Given that there are so many interpretations within eschatology.

We need to concentrate on the foundational doctrines and not be distracted.

Believe in Jesus, confess Jesus, bear the fruit of the Holy Spirit.

Love is the goal of our Christian instruction.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

IT always comes back to actual scripture with me -- I like it and affirm it. I guess some tire of that position - but I never do.

I prefer the Bible to beer. Have I said that enough times yet

 

[bbbbbbb]

That is monergism at its best. Thank you.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

That is monergism at its best. Thank you.

It was Luther's sarcasm at its best.

 

[Root of Jesse]

IT always comes back to actual scripture with me -- I like it and affirm it. I guess some tire of that position - but I never do.

I prefer the Bible to beer. Have I said that enough times yet

Your interpretation, by your own authority. Yes. But when you submit to the proper authority, all that mud gets washed away.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Your interpretation, by your own authority. Yes. But when you submit to the proper authority, all that mud gets washed away.

Which would that "proper" authority happen to be - the EOC or the RCC?

 

[Root of Jesse]

Which would that "proper" authority happen to be - the EOC or the RCC?

Both, since both hold to very much the same teaching.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Both, since both hold to very much the same teaching.

I was unaware that the EOC conforms to the RCC understanding of the role of the Pope in Rome.

 

[Valletta]

There seems to be a lot of conjecture and variables involved with this. You've portrayed the position as both just another bishop to "Prime Minister" you must remain in communion with. Meaning the pope is really supposed to be equal to God. But I suppose you didn't want to come right out and say that, so you tried to downplay it some at first.

Jesus used words paralleling Isaiah 22, your beef is with Jesus. Jesus gave the power to bind and loose to all of the Apostles, the keys to the kingdom were given to Rock (Peter) and not to the other Apostles. Back in the days of Isaiah there were ministers as well, but the king gave the keys to the kingdom to his prime minister. That meant that the word of the prime minister in matters of authority was just as good as the king's word when the king was absent. It did NOT mean that the prime minister was made a king or any kind of royalty for that matter. That Catholics believe that the pope is God is an old anti-Catholic hoax.

 

[BobRyan]

Your interpretation, by your own authority. .

only when someone finds it to oppose their own preferences. But that is fine with me - everyone has free will.

 

[Root of Jesse]

There seems to be a lot of conjecture and variables involved with this. You've portrayed the position as both just another bishop to "Prime Minister" you must remain in communion with. Meaning the pope is really supposed to be equal to God. But I suppose you didn't want to come right out and say that, so you tried to downplay it some at first.

It is not conjecture, not at all. Even many Protestants agree that Peter was given the Prime Minster spot by Jesus. What you seldom see, though, even among some Catholics is that the apostles were a collegial group. They were pretty much chosen together. So there is no seniority. Paul tells us that none is greater than another. Jesus tells us that, if you wish to be first, you must be the lowliest of servants, and this, in response to James and John arguing over their greatness.
You also have to realize that being the leader of the Christian world is not something people aspire to. Many simply don't want it, but when elected, they take that cross upon themselves because they, and we believe the Holy Spirit calls them to it. Oh, I know, in the Renaissance, popes acted differently, in a worldly way, and so on. There were some not-so-good popes, granted.
No, the pope is not equal to God. He is God's vicar. He holds the keys to the kingdom, to be sure, but if he's a bad shepherd, you can bet he will pay dearly for it.

 

[Root of Jesse]

I was unaware that the EOC conforms to the RCC understanding of the role of the Pope in Rome.

Where did I say anything, in my reply to you, about the Pope in Rome?

 

[lismore]

Oh, I know, in the Renaissance, popes acted differently, in a worldly way, and so on. There were some not-so-good popes, granted.

Hello! The fact that years and decades went by and nothing was done about these 'worldly' or 'not-so-good popes' perhaps in part explains the Reformation. And it raises other questions. There's a lot in the bible about the character of leaders in the church and how to recognise wolves in sheep's clothing. God Bless

 

[Root of Jesse]

Hello! The fact that years and decades went by and nothing was done about these 'worldly' or 'not-so-good popes' perhaps in part explains the Reformation. And it raises other questions. There's a lot in the bible about the character of leaders in the church and how to recognise wolves in sheep's clothing. God Bless

What would you do that you don't believe God has done?. Jesus did say woe to them.
David, a man after God's own heart, was not a person of great character, neither was Paul, James and John, and Thomas. Solomon the Great, either. Jesus didn't have any non human followers.

 

[lismore]

What would you do that you don't believe God has done?. Jesus did say woe to them.
David, a man after God's own heart, was not a person of great character, neither was Paul, James and John, and Thomas. Solomon the Great, either. Jesus didn't have any non human followers.

Hi Jesse. I hope you're well! False teachers are to be marked and avoided. So people in a church with 'worldly' or 'not-so-good popes', I wonder how they could mark and avoid these popes