Whatever YOU bind..Whatever YOU Loose!

[sunlover1]

I don't see how this can be speaking exclusively to the RCC.
In context it's speaking to the same audience as the very next
sentence that we all love to use:

If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18"Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.19"Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven.…

Anyhow, who is the "YOU" and what does this MEAN?
Thank you in advance

 

[tz620q]

I don't see how this can be speaking to the RCC. In context it's speaking
to the same audience as the very next sentence that we all love to use:

If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18"Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.19"Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven.…

Anyhow, who is the "YOU" and what does this MEAN?
Thank you in advance

I wonder if your contention is then that Christ was speaking to everyone, except the RCC.

In answer to your question, we know that Christ was speaking to his disciples. He had just settled a dispute that they had about who was the greatest. Knowing that he will soon have to leave them, he sets up a method to handle disputes. First confront the person that you feel has wronged you to make sure that it is not just a misunderstanding. Second, state your cases in front of witnesses to make sure the dispute is documented properly. Third, take the dispute to the church to have it decided. The decision is binding and if someone will not abide by the church's decision, they are to be excommunicated. We can see this being played out during the Council of Jerusalem in Acts. Here the church is represented by key members. These members state the various sides and the council decides on the best course of action. This decision is bound on earth and Christ told them that it was also binding in heaven. This seems like a much more unified approach than the anywhere two or more are gathered we have a church that can then decide on all types of doctrines that disagree with other two or more type churches.

So either the "You" refers only to the disciples and establishes a binding and loosing authority that they alone have, which leads to apostolic succession of that authority. Or the "You" refers to a generic "you" that includes all Christians, with the implied assumption that these Christians will endeavor to have unity in doctrine. Otherwise this leads to a lot of differing and contradicting doctrines being bound in Heaven.

 

[sunlover1]

I wonder if your contention is then that Christ was speaking to everyone, except the RCC.

Sorry, it was poor grammar, and I've corrected that by adding the word, exclusively.

In answer to your question, we know that Christ was speaking to his disciples. He had just settled a dispute that they had about who was the greatest. Knowing that he will soon have to leave them, he sets up a method to handle disputes. First confront the person that you feel has wronged you to make sure that it is not just a misunderstanding. Second, state your cases in front of witnesses to make sure the dispute is documented properly. Third, take the dispute to the church to have it decided. The decision is binding and if someone will not abide by the church's decision, they are to be excommunicated.

This had nothing to do with who was greatest.
It's about how to resolve your bro sinning:
"If your brother sins,
go and show him his fault in private;
if he listens to you, you have won your brother.


We can see this being played out during the Council of Jerusalem in Acts. Here the church is represented by key members. These members state the various sides and the council decides on the best course of action. [/quote]
You've added your own commentary about "to make sure the dispute is documented properly"
Here's a wiki summary of the COJ:

The Council of Jerusalem was held in Jerusalem around 50 AD. It is unique among the ancient pre-ecumenical councilsin that it is considered by Catholics and Orthodox to be a prototype and forerunner of the later ecumenical councils and a key part of Christian ethics. The council decided that Gentile converts to Christianity were not obligated to keep most of theLaw of Moses, including the rules concerning circumcision of males. The Council did, however, retain the prohibitions on eating blood, meat containing blood, and meat of animals not properly slain, and on fornication and idolatry, sometimes referred to as the Apostolic Decree or Jerusalem Quadrilateral.​

This decision is bound on earth and Christ told them that it was also binding in heaven. This seems like a much more unified approach than the anywhere two or more are gathered we have a church that can then decide on all types of doctrines that disagree with other two or more type churches.
So either the "You" refers only to the disciples and establishes a binding and loosing authority that they alone have, which leads to apostolic succession of that authority. Or the "You" refers to a generic "you" that includes all Christians, with the implied assumption that these Christians will endeavor to have unity in doctrine. Otherwise this leads to a lot of differing and contradicting doctrines being bound in Heaven.

Your initial understanding (premise) is off,
causing your conclusions to be illogical,
perhaps to do the RCC POV you're working with.
IMO.
Let's see what others have to say.

 

[tz620q]

Sorry, it was poor grammar, and I've corrected that by adding the word, exclusively.

Thank you. I know your thoughts well enough to realize that you did not mean to exclude Catholics.

This had nothing to do with who was greatest.
It's about how to resolve your bro sinning:
"If your brother sins,
go and show him his fault in private;
if he listens to you, you have won your brother.

I can see your viewpoint. I read Matthew Chapter 18 as one continuous discourse by Jesus from verse 3 to verse 20. So either Jesus was conveying different thoughts about sin starting in verse 15, or he was continuing his thoughts from starting on "Who is greatest in Heaven?" going through the small child example (which to me is to show them that the humility of the child is needed, not the age)
Matthew 18:4 Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

, then admonishing the disciples about causing one of these greatest in heaven to stumble (sin),
to the parable of the lost sheep (lost because they were led to sin?),
then now that he has established the seriousness of sin (pride being the first sin),
He moves on in verse 15 to how a group of Christians should handle sin; but the model that he presents is the same as what would have been found in the Jewish courts of that time. So if sin is missing the mark, how do we establish what the true mark is? We seem to categorize sin today with the rather vague definition of "turning away from God"; but Jesus' ministry was full of stories of his chastising people who were following a very strict definition of the Mosaic Law that was meant to stop people from sinning. Jesus realized, just as the disciples disputed who would be greatest in Heaven, that there would be other disputes and that there had to be a way to resolve them. So this whole discourse to me is one continuous commentary on pride, sin, and how to overcome it.

Of course if you break Jesus' discourse into several thoughts, you can isolate the section on sin and take it to be unrelated to the rest of the speech; but that still leaves you with a need for a church as the final arbiter. To me only the most extreme of individualists take this to mean that any group of two or more constitutes an independent church capable of determining what sin is to them alone, irregardless of what other groups of Christians believe.

 

[sunlover1]

Thank you. I know your thoughts well enough to realize that you did not mean to exclude Catholics.

Oh lol..
So just being difficult eh?

I can see your viewpoint. I read Matthew Chapter 18 as one continuous discourse by Jesus from verse 3 to verse 20. So either Jesus was conveying different thoughts about sin starting in verse 15, or he was continuing his thoughts from starting on "Who is greatest in Heaven?" going through the small child example (which to me is to show them that the humility of the child is needed, not the age)

Matthew 18:4 Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

, then admonishing the disciples about causing one of these greatest in heaven to stumble (sin),
to the parable of the lost sheep (lost because they were led to sin?),
then now that he has established the seriousness of sin (pride being the first sin),
He moves on in verse 15 to how a group of Christians should handle sin; but the model that he presents is the same as what would have been found in the Jewish courts of that time. So if sin is missing the mark, how do we establish what the true mark is? We seem to categorize sin today with the rather vague definition of "turning away from God"; but Jesus' ministry was full of stories of his chastising people who were following a very strict definition of the Mosaic Law that was meant to stop people from sinning. Jesus realized, just as the disciples disputed who would be greatest in Heaven, that there would be other disputes and that there had to be a way to resolve them. So this whole discourse to me is one continuous commentary on pride, sin, and how to overcome it.

Of course if you break Jesus' discourse into several thoughts, you can isolate the section on sin and take it to be unrelated to the rest of the speech; but that still leaves you with a need for a church as the final arbiter. To me only the most extreme of individualists take this to mean that any group of two or more constitutes an independent church capable of determining what sin is to them alone, irregardless of what other groups of Christians believe.

Sure.
Well I do see it as one speech, but yes, with different sections.
I homeschooled for years and we would have prayer/bible study
and then discussion. One discussion might cover many things
but all related to one general heading.
Thank you for your thoughts!

 

[sunlover1]

Binding and loosing.
Do we know what Jesus meant in this
very famous passage?

 

[Noxot]

I think Jesus is talking about some sort of natural law of reality concerning how we are as beings who exist as both spirits and physical/animal since we stand between two different worlds. we all already dwell with various spirits depending on what we love and thus like minded spirits are together in heaven and evil ones are also together in what they make to be hell and so if you are not as the Lord is on the earth then you shall not be in a good spiritual condition in heaven either. however there are some things that only the Lord can loose or bind as many saints have noted.

I guess the 'you' would be the condition of my own spiritual world (myself) and what I allow to be part of me and what i do not allow to be part of me.

I think that this quote was also important and further explains spiritual reality and the types of conditions one can be in depending on our choices.

Spoiler: Matt 18:23-35

Matt 18:23-35 (YLT)
`Because of this was the reign of the heavens likened to a man, a king, who did will to take reckoning with his servants, and he having begun to take account, there was brought near to him one debtor of a myriad of talents, and he having nothing to pay, his lord did command him to be sold, and his wife, and the children, and all, whatever he had, and payment to be made. The servant then, having fallen down, was bowing to him, saying, Sir, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all; and the lord of that servant having been moved with compassion did release him, and the debt he forgave him. `And, that servant having come forth, found one of his fellow-servants who was owing him an hundred denaries, and having laid hold, he took him by the throat, saying, Pay me that which thou owest. His fellow-servant then, having fallen down at his feet, was calling on him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all; and he would not, but having gone away, he cast him into prison, till he might pay that which was owing. `And his fellow-servants having seen the things that were done, were grieved exceedingly, and having come, shewed fully to their lord all the things that were done; then having called him, his lord saith to him, Evil servant! all that debt I did forgive thee, seeing thou didst call upon me, did it not behove also thee to have dealt kindly with thy fellow-servant, as I also dealt kindly with thee? `And having been wroth, his lord delivered him to the inquisitors, till he might pay all that was owing to him; so also my heavenly Father will do to you, if ye may not forgive each one his brother from your hearts their trespasses.'

 

[98cwitr]

"you" = those reborn in the Spirit.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Binding and loosing.
Do we know what Jesus meant in this
very famous passage?

Binding and loosing are Jewish idioms for forbidding or permitting. This is a legal term that relates to interpretation of Jewish law.

 

[Four Angels Standing]

I don't see how this can be speaking exclusively to the RCC.
In context it's speaking to the same audience as the very next
sentence that we all love to use:

If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18"Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.19"Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven.…

Anyhow, who is the "YOU" and what does this MEAN?
Thank you in advance

Is this saying that gentiles are as loathed as tax collectors?

I'm recalling Jesus own words when he said he was sent only to minister to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

 

[Noxot]

the symbols of a gentile and tax collector are further away from the kingdom of God than the symbol of a jew is. but I must remind you that matthew was a tax collector and so I don't know how much we should loath them as we do not know what God will bring them to if they are willing... it is just that we won't have as deep a fellowship with them because we are not about the same things. I would much rather smell the rose than be stabbed by its pricks.

Rom 12:18 (YLT)
If possible--so far as in you--with all men being in peace;

the law is one thing - the Spirit, and to know it in part is to not know it for 'God is one' as he tells Israel. therefore all the scriptures speak the same thing and we can know one verse deeper by applying also other verses to it and thus the word describes itself. be in the spirit and all the words are good, be of the flesh and you shall find divisions and other such things listed in the bible. we all hear the angels songs to the degree that we have the ability to comprehend them and we have different angels set over us depending on our own conditions and of the judgments of God over us and because of the angels own communion with God and what they feel like doing.

 

[Noxot]

gentiles and tax collectors are of the kingdom of caesar. render unto caesar what is his and unto God what is his. obviously those who are of the kingdom of caesar serve caesar but those of God are concerned for the things of God. Jesus told those who hated him to give unto each what is due. but the Lord wants us to serve only him and to bare our cross of the world. God loves the world but the world did not know him. i try to let go of all dead weight but it does not mean I will hate others, it just means that i don't wanna go do things that are worthless to me and I would rather spend my time in heavenly things rather than earthly. Jesus hung around sinners not because he wanted to be like they are but rather because he loved them and wanted them to be free and sinless like he is.

Jesus came to set sinners free, we must be careful that we are not like the hypocrites are, thinking we are great and near to God whilst we condemn those that we judge to be far away... for we do not know their inner conditions and the full story of themselves. if we don't judge with righteous judgment then all our casting away of others from ourselves is, is a fault of the flesh which creates sects. but we can't willfully obey evil spirits either and someone so entrenched in evil and who does not want to repent will probably not want to hang around church anyways and if they do and you let them then they are probably just abusing the church and so in that situation it might be better to cut them off.

so i think the binding and loosing thing has to do with a means of spiritual governing at the individual level and then going outwards to groups and how they function, and it is also happening in heaven/spirit. and the wiser in the group are there to support the younger and so in such a situation it is not good that we have wolves in sheeps clothing with the sheep as that just does not work well for us.

 

[98cwitr]

Is this saying that gentiles are as loathed as tax collectors?

I'm recalling Jesus own words when he said he was sent only to minister to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

It would seem Jesus was sent to the Jews, and the 12 + Paul were sent to the Gentiles & Jews.

 

[Four Angels Standing]

It would seem Jesus was sent to the Jews, and the 12 + Paul were sent to the Gentiles & Jews.

I do know that is in the scriptures. Though there is apparently conflict in the Christian community as to Paul and his Apostleship . And part of that being how would he be continuing the ministry of Christ to the Gentiles when Jesus said his mission is finished from the cross.
Part of that is also to do with there not appearing to be any scriptures pre-Pauline wherein Jesus said he was here to save the Gentiles also.

 

[98cwitr]

I do know that is in the scriptures. Though there is apparently conflict in the Christian community as to Paul and his Apostleship . And part of that being how would he be continuing the ministry of Christ to the Gentiles when Jesus said his mission is finished from the cross.
Part of that is also to do with there not appearing to be any scriptures pre-Pauline wherein Jesus said he was here to save the Gentiles also.

It was prophesized here:

Isaiah 42:6
“I, the Lord, have called you in righteousness; I will take hold of your hand. I will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people and a light for the Gentiles,

Isaiah 49:6
he says: “It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth.”

 

[Soyeong]

The Council of Jerusalem was held in Jerusalem around 50 AD. It is unique among the ancient pre-ecumenical councilsin that it is considered by Catholics and Orthodox to be a prototype and forerunner of the later ecumenical councils and a key part of Christian ethics. The council decided that Gentile converts to Christianity were not obligated to keep most of theLaw of Moses, including the rules concerning circumcision of males. The Council did, however, retain the prohibitions on eating blood, meat containing blood, and meat of animals not properly slain, and onfornication and idolatry, sometimes referred to as the Apostolic Decree or Jerusalem Quadrilateral.

As Steve Petersen stated, binding and loosing referred to prohibiting or allowing in regard interpreting the law of Moses. In other words, they had been given the authority to tell Gentiles how to obey God's law, but they had not been given any authority to tell Gentiles not obey it. In fact, according to Deuteronomy 4:2, adding to or subtracting from God's law was prohibited, so subtracting all but four laws for Gentiles would have been a sin. Furthermore, according to Deuteronomy 13:4-6, the way to tell that someone was a false prophets was if they taught anyone against obeying God's commands, so doing so would have made them false prophets, and we must obey God rather than man. However, the Jerusalem Council didn't rule that Gentiles were not obligated to keep most of the law of Moses, but rather they ruled that Gentiles didn't need to keep the customs of Jews in order to be saved (Acts 15:1).