Our website: www.justandsinner.org This video discusses the topic of the office of the keys and Jesus's command in John 20 for the apostles to forgive sins.
Where can I find this full video? When you do clips, would you mind adding the info on where to find where they're from, please? Thank you for your work, brother! You're my favorite Lutheran. 😁
I confused which passage show me these keys were passed on to the pastoral office from the apostle office ? Also, please keep in mind pastor leading a single church is the optimal and assumed form of church governments. In the new testament you will see how the evangelist are always appointing more than one elder(overseer), then always refers to churches then as having elders not just one elder leading a church.
I am a Cradle Calvinist living in South Africa. Growing up we always had the corporate confession of sin and the absolution after that in the usual liturgy in our church. It was anchored in the words of 1 John 1 verses 8 and 9.
For me it seems obvious that the key to the kingdom is to realise that what grudges we hold on to, are held onto in the unseen, and thus becomes chains around our necks, and what ever grudges we let go of, are let go of in the unseen, and that sets us free I enter into the Kingdom of God, where other things rule other than who did what and who deserve what, where the peace of Christ enter our hearts. This is so much the core of what having a relationship with God consists of. Jesus says it more than one place. It is the key for everyone. It's not the knowledge of it that is the key of course, but the aspiration towards a practice of it. It's the core if the gospel, the news about how God has overcome the evil system of justice by careful weighing and rewards and punishment that resulted from the fall. Actual life is free giving of overflowing love, and we can participate in it.
I converted to LCMS after hearing you and others talk about Lutherans being a continuation of the catholic church. My question: Is salvation pointicular? Does salvation come to a person at a "Point" in time. In my life, I believe I was saved at the moment I repented and gave my life to Jesus 44 years ago. It's hard for me to believe anything else. I was there. Anyway, do you have any videos, books, etc explaining whether salvation is at a moment, like when scripture says "hath passed from death unto life" John 5:24. If I had not been baptised as a believer a few months later would I have been lost? Or as my Lutheran pastor said, "Baptism is necessary, but not ABSOLUTELY necessary"
Sometimes it really helps to hear from someone this side of heaven that our sins are forgiven because of our faith and repentance. Especially repeat sins you really struggle with.
While most, if not every Lutheran pastor strongly advocates for Personal Confession, like the Romans do, most leyity prefer General Confession. This is typically done in the service with a laying on of hands before the readings. It may also be done in a separate service before the service with Communion.
I think it’s dangerous to say, I forgive you of your sins. Your sins are forgiven, adheres to the text, I forgive your sins, is not literally stated. That’s Changing the wording .
Jesus said, "If YOU forgive anyone his sins..." He told THEM to forgive, not just to quote Him. Pastors are to say, "*I* forgive you all your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." It is not the pastor's forgiveness, but Jesus'. But the pastor is the one forgiving in His stead and by His command.
@@erinblack9689 Jesus gave his disciples the authority to discern upon confession wether the confessor was genuine, the disciples merely affirmed thru discernment the confession. I forgive- is Catholic spin to it
@@Objectivetruth9122 Since it is the power of the priesthood of Christ that the priest carries, he says, "I absolve you..." as the words of Christ Himself. And that is the norm for the Roman Church, there have been other approved absolution formulas over the years for the Roman and the other Churches in Communion. Calling it spin is simply not accurate nor a rebuttal.
Hmm. I always understood this as a corporate unlocking. Through the gospel and ministry of the Holy Spirit that the disciples took to the Jewish people on Pentecost, then to the Samaritans, and finally to the Gentiles, forgiveness, new life, and freedom from sin and death was unlocked for all.
@@evangelicalcatholics Have they rejected the Lord Jesus and his atoning sacrifice? Or are they ignorant? "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." (1 John 2:2) In the end, only the Lord is the judge of men's souls.
@@stephenbailey9969 "In the end," yes, but in the meantime, Christ commands us to forgive sins and retain forgiveness. This is HIS command -- He says it. To say that it was only for the apostles...well, then we could say that about pretty much everything (Lord's Supper, making disciples, baptizing, etc.). Can't have it both ways. Even St. Paul, years later, instructs us to forgive the sins of others. Don't be scared to forgive the penitent! God loves it when you do, and don't be scared to say, "you are not forgiven" to the impenitent. These are His instructions.
A couple of thoughts: 1. Most Catholics would have no problem in subscribing to everything you said. Most Protestants wouldn’t. 2. The power of the keys doesn’t necessarily coincide only with the authority of forgiving or retaining sins. There’s nothing in Matthew 16 that restricts this power only to the forgiveness of sins. In fact, if Jesus is quite openly quoting from Isaiah 22:22, then it becomes clear that the authority he is giving Peter and his Church is much broader than that.
My concern with that reasoning is that what you see in Mt 16 as a description or content of the keys, is this action of loose on earth and heaven... But this same content is present in Mt 18:18 and apparently in the context of the whole church, not in the individual ministration of S. Peter, so probably is not possible to deduce papacy or something similar from that.
@@israeldetarso1013 sure, papacy isn’t proved by Matthew 16. Papacy can be easily derived from a cumulative evidence (biblical and historical) even ignoring Matthew 16. However, the keys are only given to Peter. The power of binding and loosing to all the apostles. This is consistent with (not the proof of) the Catholic model, with the pope (Peter’s successor) being in a place of higher authority with respect to the other bishops (apostles’s successors).
Why do you assume that the keys were already given? "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; *These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David,* he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth; 8 I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name." Revelation 3:7-8 This is Jesus speaking, and He is the One that has the keys, in Revelation, so to assume that the keys were already given must be argued for, not simply implied by the mention of the keys in Matthew 16 "And I *will give unto thee* the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Matthew 16:19
@@thealienrobotanthropologist yes he is, he is the only one who received the keys. He is the only one who was appointed by Jesus to tend his flock (John 21:15-17).
I always understood these passages as connected with the Lord's Prayer -- "as we forgive those who trespass *against us.* " So it would be instructing everyone to forgive people who sinned against them personally. But I can see how that would problematically predicate one's forgiveness on whether or not their victim forgave them.
My interpretation is that we are being instructed to forgive sins of those who have done something wrong towards us but only Jesus, not man, can forgive those sins for the person who perpetrated them. After all, we are just creatures made from dirt.
I guess how does it work with a PSA frame work? Or the cross? Many confess their sins to God directly and then to one another so does that mean we are not forgiven by God when we confess privately? Did he just never forgive me since I never told my pastor specifically those sins? Or the church you go to do not do a your sins are forgiven proclamation? I thought you know that Christ took my sins on the cross and thus forgives and cleans me. So hearing this confuses me. And what of binding sins? If you do not forgive sin will it not be forgiven as well?
Just an I quiver here looking to learn with real questions: If the keys to bind and loose forgiveness were only given to Peter, and then the successive popes from the direct chain of apostleship, how can parish priests give confession and absolution?
How is very clear that the keys are synonymous with the binding? And loosing and how is it very clear that binding and loosing is only about sins? And how is it gifted to the whole of the church and not the ministerial priesthood only?
Do Lutherans also have the understanding (like the Presbyterians) that the power of the keys is also exercised in disciplining offenders, requiring public penance for public sins?
@@ronaldfelix1000 Whether Catholic (including Episcopalian) or Presbyterian, the power of the keys and of loosing and binding is concerned with both absolution and excommunication, the exercise of discipline. Dr Cooper did not mention the discipline/excommunication aspect, ie the negative side of the power.
We understand Jesus as the King of the Kingdom of God, the Davidic Kingdom. During the reign of Kings, the King had an “over the house” position who was second in charge of the kingdom, the “vicar” if you will, when the King was absent or disposed. He was kind of like the Prime Minister of Israel: “When King Hezekiah heard it, he rent his clothes, and covered himself with sackcloth, and went into the house of the Lord. And he sent *Eliakim, who was **_over the household,_* and SHEBNA the secretary, and the senior priests,…” (2 Kings 19:1-2) Shebna eventually took the office of “over the house”, then Isaiah prophesied about him after he had done a terrible job in (Isaiah 22:15, 17-25): “Thus says the Lord God of hosts, “Come, go to this steward, to SHEBNA, *who is over the household,* and say to him: Behold, the Lord will hurl you away violently, O you strong man. He will seize firm hold on you, and whirl you round and round, and throw you like a ball into a wide land; *there you shall die,* and there shall be your splendid chariots, you shame of your master's house. *I will thrust you from your OFFICE, and you will be cast down from your STATION.”* >> We see SHEBNA is now the “over the house” or “prime minister”, and that he will eventually die (where we get the Pope till he dies) >> Also see that the “over the house” is an OFFICE, a STATION. An election of sorts, a position of power(second in command) that is passed down from one man to the next. “In that day I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your girdle on him, *and will **_commit your authority to his hand;_* and *_he shall be a FATHER_** to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah.”* >> God has given the office to Eliakim, giving all divine authority into his hand as second in command to the king of Israel. >>Also, God says that Eliakim, the new “over the house” will be FATHER TO ALL IN THE KINGDOM. This is where we call Pope, “Holy Father” of the Church, because it’s Biblical. “And I will place on his shoulder *_the key_** of the **_house of David;_* *he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.”* >> He’s given the keys, the AUTHORITY of the kingdom of David. Not a mere “entrance holder” but actually, divine given authority of the kingdom. >> “He shall open and none shall shut, and he shall shut, and none shall open” is doctrine teaching and disciplinary authority; Jesus is bestowing Peter with the KEYS TO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN, and to BIND and LOOSE what is on Earth to HEAVEN. “And I will fasten him like a peg in a sure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father's house.” >> Jesus renamed Simon to “Rock”, he’s a peg in the Church, just like the foundational stone/rock inside the temple of Jerusalem at the time, and actually still there today. “And they will hang on him the whole weight of his father's house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons. In that day, says the Lord of hosts, the peg that was fastened in a sure place will give way; and it will be cut down and fall, and the burden that was upon it will be cut off, for the Lord has spoken.”
Unless we are willing to accept that a pastor can also look at the repentant sinner and say "your sins are NOT forgiven," I don't think that we should accept this interpretation of the passage. Why would God give to corruptible, fallen man the power to decide something that God has already decided - that forgiveness of sins comes to all through repentance and faith (which means trust and faithfulness) in Christ?
Honestly, it's a very unconvincing argument presented by a really nice guy. But it reeks of desperation to get away from the Catholic understanding. No explanation for "binding" just an assertion of "forgiveness" by some loose knit, non-authoritative clique. And no reference to the holder of the Keys in the Old Testament. The Catholic position is actually the more biblical and the more clear reading of the scriptures. No weirdness or mysterious guessing games. From the Scripture Catholic website: "What Church? Scripture reveals this Church to be the one Jesus Christ built upon the rock of Saint Peter (Matt. 16:18). By giving Peter the keys of authority (Matt. 16:19), Jesus appointed Peter as the chief steward over His earthly kingdom (cf. Isaiah. 22:19-22). Jesus also charged Peter to be the source of strength for the rest of the apostles (Luke 22:32) and the earthly shepherd of Jesus’ flock (John 21:15-17). Jesus further gave Peter, and the apostles and elders in union with him, the power to bind and loose in heaven what they bound and loosed on earth. (Matt. 16:19; 18:18). This teaching authority did not die with Peter and the apostles, but was transferred to future bishops through the laying on of hands (e.g., Acts 1:20; 6:6; 13:3; 8:18; 9:17; 1 Tim. 4:14; 5:22; 2 Tim. 1:6)."
Mat. 16:19 says (ESV): "WHATEVER you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and WHATEVER you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Dr Cooper tampered the verse by replacing "Whatever" with "Whatever sin". I already pointed out in another video of his that the Greek tense of the phrase "whatever you bind/loose" is active aorist tense while that of "shall be bound/loosened in heaven" is in Greek passive perfect tense - it is NOT Greek future tense. Unlike that of English Greek perfect tense indicates the action (to be bound/loosened) was completed in the past with continuing result to the present. Thus whatever (NOT whatever sin) Peter and the apostles bind or loose on earth is in agreement with WAS ALREADY bound/loosened in heaven [by God]. This alludes to infallibility, which Dr. Cooper obviously will not accept - that is why he added the word "sin" in the verse to make it mean what he wants it to mean!
”To show you that it is the Church which has received the keys of the kingdom of heaven, listen to what the Lord says in another place to all his apostles: “Receive the Holy Spirit; and immediately afterwards, Whose sins you forgive, they will be forgiven them; whose sins you retain, they will be retained” (John 20:22-23).” St. Augustine
"This alludes to infallibility"...how? How does it necessarily allude to something that the early church knew absolutely nothing of? Let me guess, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"??? Rome has nothing if not circular logic.
@@UnicornChicken18 You only imitated what Dr. Cooper said in the video. You turn blind eye on the different words used in Mat. 16:19 (whatever you bind/loose) and John 20:22-23 (whose sins). Even the Greek tenses are not the same. "Whose sins you forgive (Greek aorist tense), they will be forgiven (Greek passive present tense) them; whose sins you retain (Greek aorist tense), they will be retained (Greek passive perfect tense).
@@voyager7 I understand why you are against infallibility, just like Dr. Cooper himself, as it goes against what you are taught. If Scripture is truly your final authority, neither evidence nor absence of evidence in the early church, then you should pay attention on the impact of Greek tenses in Mat. 16:19.
@@justfromcatholic Regardless of tense, the confession Peter makes is the basis for the entire exchange, would you not agree? So you are left with a dilemma...either the keys conferred are as Dr Cooper alleges and regard the gospel itself and the forgiveness of sin, or it is NOT about the gospel. Either way there is nothing in the rest of the early church letters and epistles comprising the scripture (nor in the immediate church fathers) that suggest or imply that Peter and his successors were promised to speak infallibly, ex cathedra. Don't you find it a bit...convenient...that the RCC defines this not merely ass adiaphoric or doctrinal, but dogmatic?
The beauty of confession by God through a priest helps one have a real examination of consciousness. Most Protestants I know never truly examine their lives, sins, and conscience.
Greetings, to you, my friend, in Jesus' name. Someone who knows you commented on the Wordprophet channel this evening, and suggested that I debate with you. :) I told him respectfully that God's word is not up for debate, and that Christians do not debate about it. That led me to this channel, to hear you speak for a moment; and I can see that you are a man who is very zealous for your religious beliefs, but have departed from the word of God and the doctrine of Christ. I do not say this to affront you, but to offer myself to you as a minister of Jesus Christ. There are no sacraments in the church of Jesus Christ, my friend. Sacraments are the pagan rites of the Babylonians and Egyptians, and were incorporated into the Catholic church 1,700 years ago when she was first created to mask the rule of the Roman Emperors. New testament baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is for the remission of sins, and it saves us. It is how we are washed from our sins by the blood of Christ. It is the washing of regeneration. The Bible testifies of these things very clearly. As it is written, If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God. (1 Peter 4:11) Therefore, Christians do not speak things like these: sacraments trinity triune God the Son God the Holy Spirit three persons co-equal co-eternal co-existent eternal Son theophany pre-existent etc... Because they are not the oracles of God. This is why John wrote by the Holy Ghost: "They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error." 1 John 4:5,6 We who are Christians have no theology, and we do not speak in theological terms. We do not go to seminaries. We are taught of God, as it is written of us. We are born of that holy seed which is the word of God, and therefore we speak according to it. If you wish to learn of the Lord Jesus Christ, and of his gospel, I would be happy to help you, for so am I equipped and called of God. No matter how much theology you have studied, or taught...Jesus Christ still stands willing to save you and make you into a vessel of honour, fit for his use. He is able, by his holy word, to wash you from all the theological confusion and nonsense that you have been indoctrinated with over the years, and to fill you rather with the truth of his word, and the power of his Holy Spirit. I know. He did it with me, a few decades ago. I beseech you not to take this message of love as an affront, or as an invitation to debate, for it is neither. It is an invitation from the Almighty God to learn of his word, and come forth from the darkness and into the light, and live. Please choose wisely therefore, my friend. Sincerely, Clinton
Such a shame that some always lump all post 1054 denominations together while still arguing which one of their true churches is the one TRUE true Church. Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Catholic, Eastern Catholic.....we still can't go "home" cause how can a lowly protestant decide this for himself? 😂
My point is that you shouldn’t overreact, just react properly. For example, I grew up Church of Christ, which won’t say the Apostle’s or Nicene Creed because it’s too Catholic.
@@thomasthellamas9886 The measuring-stick for truth is not "what is the least similar to Rome," it is "what do the Scriptures teach." Many people are so committed to Romaphobia that they reject clear Scriptural teaching just for being "too Catholic."
Seeing that the forgiveness of sins is tied to the office of the keys, it becomes all the more important to discern who possesses those keys in the present. Can a rogue German monk possess the keys? Does protestantism generally possess the keys given they largely don't perform absolution whatsoever? Apostolic christianity is the safest place to be.
Eastern Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox, one of the many Catholic denominations, etc. It's best to just focus on the gospel of Jesus Christ's death and resurrection for the believer's salvation. We all know this, so no need to argue what's "safe" to follow. The gospel is what's safe to follow
Where can I find this full video? When you do clips, would you mind adding the info on where to find where they're from, please? Thank you for your work, brother! You're my favorite Lutheran. 😁
I wonder what Ortlund has to say about absolution? 🤔
He said once, in a video i sadly cannot remember,that the keys were given to the apostles alone
I confused which passage show me these keys were passed on to the pastoral office from the apostle office ?
Also, please keep in mind pastor leading a single church is the optimal and assumed form of church governments. In the new testament you will see how the evangelist are always appointing more than one elder(overseer), then always refers to churches then as having elders not just one elder leading a church.
I am a Cradle Calvinist living in South Africa. Growing up we always had the corporate confession of sin and the absolution after that in the usual liturgy in our church. It was anchored in the words of 1 John 1 verses 8 and 9.
For me it seems obvious that the key to the kingdom is to realise that what grudges we hold on to, are held onto in the unseen, and thus becomes chains around our necks, and what ever grudges we let go of, are let go of in the unseen, and that sets us free I enter into the Kingdom of God, where other things rule other than who did what and who deserve what, where the peace of Christ enter our hearts.
This is so much the core of what having a relationship with God consists of. Jesus says it more than one place. It is the key for everyone.
It's not the knowledge of it that is the key of course, but the aspiration towards a practice of it.
It's the core if the gospel, the news about how God has overcome the evil system of justice by careful weighing and rewards and punishment that resulted from the fall. Actual life is free giving of overflowing love, and we can participate in it.
Dr, what is that huge collection of books on yours bookcase ? looks like an encyclopedia
I feel like the keys argument is one of the most common Bilically based arguments for the Papacy I hear from Catholics. Great job Jordan!
I converted to LCMS after hearing you and others talk about Lutherans being a continuation of the catholic church. My question: Is salvation pointicular? Does salvation come to a person at a "Point" in time. In my life, I believe I was saved at the moment I repented and gave my life to Jesus 44 years ago. It's hard for me to believe anything else. I was there. Anyway, do you have any videos, books, etc explaining whether salvation is at a moment, like when scripture says "hath passed from death unto life" John 5:24. If I had not been baptised as a believer a few months later would I have been lost? Or as my Lutheran pastor said, "Baptism is necessary, but not ABSOLUTELY necessary"
Is this from an interview or dialogue? I only ask because I keep hearing someone saying "un huh" in the back ground... or am I tripping 0:44
Very interesting. I didn't know the Lutherans did confession/absolution
Sometimes it really helps to hear from someone this side of heaven that our sins are forgiven because of our faith and repentance. Especially repeat sins you really struggle with.
While most, if not every Lutheran pastor strongly advocates for Personal Confession, like the Romans do, most leyity prefer General Confession. This is typically done in the service with a laying on of hands before the readings. It may also be done in a separate service before the service with Communion.
I think it’s dangerous to say, I forgive you of your sins. Your sins are forgiven, adheres to the text, I forgive your sins, is not literally stated. That’s Changing the wording .
Jesus said, "If YOU forgive anyone his sins..." He told THEM to forgive, not just to quote Him. Pastors are to say, "*I* forgive you all your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." It is not the pastor's forgiveness, but Jesus'. But the pastor is the one forgiving in His stead and by His command.
@@erinblack9689 Jesus gave his disciples the authority to discern upon confession wether the confessor was genuine, the disciples merely affirmed thru discernment the confession. I forgive- is Catholic spin to it
@@Objectivetruth9122 Since it is the power of the priesthood of Christ that the priest carries, he says, "I absolve you..." as the words of Christ Himself. And that is the norm for the Roman Church, there have been other approved absolution formulas over the years for the Roman and the other Churches in Communion. Calling it spin is simply not accurate nor a rebuttal.
@@gerry30 yes it’s the norm for the Roman church, so unless your Catholic, it is not the Norm
But then does it mean that every Christian should go through the priest/pastor to have their sins forgiven?
Hmm. I always understood this as a corporate unlocking. Through the gospel and ministry of the Holy Spirit that the disciples took to the Jewish people on Pentecost, then to the Samaritans, and finally to the Gentiles, forgiveness, new life, and freedom from sin and death was unlocked for all.
What about the Impenitent? They're forgiven too?
@@evangelicalcatholics Have they rejected the Lord Jesus and his atoning sacrifice? Or are they ignorant?
"And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." (1 John 2:2)
In the end, only the Lord is the judge of men's souls.
@@stephenbailey9969 "In the end," yes, but in the meantime, Christ commands us to forgive sins and retain forgiveness. This is HIS command -- He says it. To say that it was only for the apostles...well, then we could say that about pretty much everything (Lord's Supper, making disciples, baptizing, etc.). Can't have it both ways. Even St. Paul, years later, instructs us to forgive the sins of others. Don't be scared to forgive the penitent! God loves it when you do, and don't be scared to say, "you are not forgiven" to the impenitent. These are His instructions.
A couple of thoughts:
1. Most Catholics would have no problem in subscribing to everything you said. Most Protestants wouldn’t.
2. The power of the keys doesn’t necessarily coincide only with the authority of forgiving or retaining sins. There’s nothing in Matthew 16 that restricts this power only to the forgiveness of sins. In fact, if Jesus is quite openly quoting from Isaiah 22:22, then it becomes clear that the authority he is giving Peter and his Church is much broader than that.
My concern with that reasoning is that what you see in Mt 16 as a description or content of the keys, is this action of loose on earth and heaven... But this same content is present in Mt 18:18 and apparently in the context of the whole church, not in the individual ministration of S. Peter, so probably is not possible to deduce papacy or something similar from that.
@@israeldetarso1013 sure, papacy isn’t proved by Matthew 16. Papacy can be easily derived from a cumulative evidence (biblical and historical) even ignoring Matthew 16.
However, the keys are only given to Peter. The power of binding and loosing to all the apostles. This is consistent with (not the proof of) the Catholic model, with the pope (Peter’s successor) being in a place of higher authority with respect to the other bishops (apostles’s successors).
Why do you assume that the keys were already given?
"And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; *These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David,* he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;
8 I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name." Revelation 3:7-8
This is Jesus speaking, and He is the One that has the keys, in Revelation, so to assume that the keys were already given must be argued for, not simply implied by the mention of the keys in Matthew 16
"And I *will give unto thee* the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Matthew 16:19
@@JosefFurg1611 when do you think Peter got the keys?
@@thealienrobotanthropologist yes he is, he is the only one who received the keys. He is the only one who was appointed by Jesus to tend his flock (John 21:15-17).
I always understood these passages as connected with the Lord's Prayer -- "as we forgive those who trespass *against us.* " So it would be instructing everyone to forgive people who sinned against them personally. But I can see how that would problematically predicate one's forgiveness on whether or not their victim forgave them.
My interpretation is that we are being instructed to forgive sins of those who have done something wrong towards us but only Jesus, not man, can forgive those sins for the person who perpetrated them. After all, we are just creatures made from dirt.
@@wataboutya9310 Matthew 9:8 (ESV): When the crowds saw it, they were afraid, and they glorified God, who had given such authority to men.
I guess how does it work with a PSA frame work? Or the cross? Many confess their sins to God directly and then to one another so does that mean we are not forgiven by God when we confess privately? Did he just never forgive me since I never told my pastor specifically those sins? Or the church you go to do not do a your sins are forgiven proclamation? I thought you know that Christ took my sins on the cross and thus forgives and cleans me. So hearing this confuses me. And what of binding sins? If you do not forgive sin will it not be forgiven as well?
Just an I quiver here looking to learn with real questions:
If the keys to bind and loose forgiveness were only given to Peter, and then the successive popes from the direct chain of apostleship, how can parish priests give confession and absolution?
Through the sacrament of ordination
@@mikethemonsta15 in connection with apostolic succession.
How is very clear that the keys are synonymous with the binding? And loosing and how is it very clear that binding and loosing is only about sins? And how is it gifted to the whole of the church and not the ministerial priesthood only?
Binding and loosening is a rabbinic term. It means forbidding and permitting. Only the priesthood had this ability.
Well, actually, 2nd temple Jewish Rabbis were not typically of the priesthood, were they?
@@JW_______ The Sadducees were.
@@henrybayard6574 The Pharasees didn't have the right to forbid and permit?
@@JW_______ Yes I'm including them too.
That is why scripture needs to be read in the context of the entire Bible, not just a book, a chapter, or a verse.
In that Bible passage the sacrament of conciliation is given to Peter and the Church. No to the Church, only the apostles and their successors.
Do Lutherans also have the understanding (like the Presbyterians) that the power of the keys is also exercised in disciplining offenders, requiring public penance for public sins?
Sure but we are more Episcopalian in government, whether that is the titles used or not
@@ronaldfelix1000 Whether Catholic (including Episcopalian) or Presbyterian, the power of the keys and of loosing and binding is concerned with both absolution and excommunication, the exercise of discipline. Dr Cooper did not mention the discipline/excommunication aspect, ie the negative side of the power.
This is basically the same explanation given by the Eastern Orthodox.
We understand Jesus as the King of the Kingdom of God, the Davidic Kingdom. During the reign of Kings, the King had an “over the house” position who was second in charge of the kingdom, the “vicar” if you will, when the King was absent or disposed. He was kind of like the Prime Minister of Israel:
“When King Hezekiah heard it, he rent his clothes, and covered himself with sackcloth, and went into the house of the Lord. And he sent *Eliakim, who was **_over the household,_* and SHEBNA the secretary, and the senior priests,…” (2 Kings 19:1-2)
Shebna eventually took the office of “over the house”, then Isaiah prophesied about him after he had done a terrible job in (Isaiah 22:15, 17-25): “Thus says the Lord God of hosts, “Come, go to this steward, to SHEBNA, *who is over the household,* and say to him: Behold, the Lord will hurl you away violently, O you strong man. He will seize firm hold on you, and whirl you round and round, and throw you like a ball into a wide land; *there you shall die,* and there shall be your splendid chariots, you shame of your master's house. *I will thrust you from your OFFICE, and you will be cast down from your STATION.”*
>> We see SHEBNA is now the “over the house” or “prime minister”, and that he will eventually die (where we get the Pope till he dies)
>> Also see that the “over the house” is an OFFICE, a STATION. An election of sorts, a position of power(second in command) that is passed down from one man to the next.
“In that day I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your girdle on him, *and will **_commit your authority to his hand;_* and *_he shall be a FATHER_** to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah.”*
>> God has given the office to Eliakim, giving all divine authority into his hand as second in command to the king of Israel.
>>Also, God says that Eliakim, the new “over the house” will be FATHER TO ALL IN THE KINGDOM. This is where we call Pope, “Holy Father” of the Church, because it’s Biblical.
“And I will place on his shoulder *_the key_** of the **_house of David;_* *he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.”*
>> He’s given the keys, the AUTHORITY of the kingdom of David. Not a mere “entrance holder” but actually, divine given authority of the kingdom.
>> “He shall open and none shall shut, and he shall shut, and none shall open” is doctrine teaching and disciplinary authority; Jesus is bestowing Peter with the KEYS TO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN, and to BIND and LOOSE what is on Earth to HEAVEN.
“And I will fasten him like a peg in a sure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father's house.”
>> Jesus renamed Simon to “Rock”, he’s a peg in the Church, just like the foundational stone/rock inside the temple of Jerusalem at the time, and actually still there today.
“And they will hang on him the whole weight of his father's house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons. In that day, says the Lord of hosts, the peg that was fastened in a sure place will give way; and it will be cut down and fall, and the burden that was upon it will be cut off, for the Lord has spoken.”
Unless we are willing to accept that a pastor can also look at the repentant sinner and say "your sins are NOT forgiven," I don't think that we should accept this interpretation of the passage.
Why would God give to corruptible, fallen man the power to decide something that God has already decided - that forgiveness of sins comes to all through repentance and faith (which means trust and faithfulness) in Christ?
Got to the first comment! 🎉
Also really enjoying getting a first look at the Lutheran perspective through your Augsburg Confession series ❤
Honestly, it's a very unconvincing argument presented by a really nice guy. But it reeks of desperation to get away from the Catholic understanding. No explanation for "binding" just an assertion of "forgiveness" by some loose knit, non-authoritative clique. And no reference to the holder of the Keys in the Old Testament. The Catholic position is actually the more biblical and the more clear reading of the scriptures. No weirdness or mysterious guessing games.
From the Scripture Catholic website:
"What Church? Scripture reveals this Church to be the one Jesus Christ built upon the rock of Saint Peter (Matt. 16:18). By giving Peter the keys of authority (Matt. 16:19), Jesus appointed Peter as the chief steward over His earthly kingdom (cf. Isaiah. 22:19-22). Jesus also charged Peter to be the source of strength for the rest of the apostles (Luke 22:32) and the earthly shepherd of Jesus’ flock (John 21:15-17). Jesus further gave Peter, and the apostles and elders in union with him, the power to bind and loose in heaven what they bound and loosed on earth. (Matt. 16:19; 18:18). This teaching authority did not die with Peter and the apostles, but was transferred to future bishops through the laying on of hands (e.g., Acts 1:20; 6:6; 13:3; 8:18; 9:17; 1 Tim. 4:14; 5:22; 2 Tim. 1:6)."
Mat. 16:19 says (ESV): "WHATEVER you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and WHATEVER you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Dr Cooper tampered the verse by replacing "Whatever" with "Whatever sin". I already pointed out in another video of his that the Greek tense of the phrase "whatever you bind/loose" is active aorist tense while that of "shall be bound/loosened in heaven" is in Greek passive perfect tense - it is NOT Greek future tense. Unlike that of English Greek perfect tense indicates the action (to be bound/loosened) was completed in the past with continuing result to the present.
Thus whatever (NOT whatever sin) Peter and the apostles bind or loose on earth is in agreement with WAS ALREADY bound/loosened in heaven [by God]. This alludes to infallibility, which Dr. Cooper obviously will not accept - that is why he added the word "sin" in the verse to make it mean what he wants it to mean!
”To show you that it is the Church which has received the keys of the kingdom of heaven, listen to what the Lord says in another place to all his apostles: “Receive the Holy Spirit; and immediately afterwards, Whose sins you forgive, they will be forgiven them; whose sins you retain, they will be retained” (John 20:22-23).” St. Augustine
"This alludes to infallibility"...how? How does it necessarily allude to something that the early church knew absolutely nothing of? Let me guess, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"??? Rome has nothing if not circular logic.
@@UnicornChicken18 You only imitated what Dr. Cooper said in the video. You turn blind eye on the different words used in Mat. 16:19 (whatever you bind/loose) and John 20:22-23 (whose sins). Even the Greek tenses are not the same. "Whose sins you forgive (Greek aorist tense), they will be forgiven (Greek passive present tense) them; whose sins you retain (Greek aorist tense), they will be retained (Greek passive perfect tense).
@@voyager7 I understand why you are against infallibility, just like Dr. Cooper himself, as it goes against what you are taught. If Scripture is truly your final authority, neither evidence nor absence of evidence in the early church, then you should pay attention on the impact of Greek tenses in Mat. 16:19.
@@justfromcatholic Regardless of tense, the confession Peter makes is the basis for the entire exchange, would you not agree? So you are left with a dilemma...either the keys conferred are as Dr Cooper alleges and regard the gospel itself and the forgiveness of sin, or it is NOT about the gospel. Either way there is nothing in the rest of the early church letters and epistles comprising the scripture (nor in the immediate church fathers) that suggest or imply that Peter and his successors were promised to speak infallibly, ex cathedra. Don't you find it a bit...convenient...that the RCC defines this not merely ass adiaphoric or doctrinal, but dogmatic?
I neither seek nor trust in absolution granted by men.
The beauty of confession by God through a priest helps one have a real examination of consciousness.
Most Protestants I know never truly examine their lives, sins, and conscience.
Greetings, to you, my friend, in Jesus' name.
Someone who knows you commented on the Wordprophet channel this evening, and suggested that I debate with you.
:)
I told him respectfully that God's word is not up for debate, and that Christians do not debate about it.
That led me to this channel, to hear you speak for a moment; and I can see that you are a man who is very zealous for your religious beliefs, but have departed from the word of God and the doctrine of Christ.
I do not say this to affront you, but to offer myself to you as a minister of Jesus Christ.
There are no sacraments in the church of Jesus Christ, my friend.
Sacraments are the pagan rites of the Babylonians and Egyptians, and were incorporated into the Catholic church 1,700 years ago when she was first created to mask the rule of the Roman Emperors.
New testament baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is for the remission of sins, and it saves us. It is how we are washed from our sins by the blood of Christ. It is the washing of regeneration. The Bible testifies of these things very clearly.
As it is written, If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God. (1 Peter 4:11)
Therefore, Christians do not speak things like these:
sacraments
trinity
triune
God the Son
God the Holy Spirit
three persons
co-equal
co-eternal
co-existent
eternal Son
theophany
pre-existent
etc...
Because they are not the oracles of God.
This is why John wrote by the Holy Ghost:
"They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them.
We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us.
Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error."
1 John 4:5,6
We who are Christians have no theology, and we do not speak in theological terms. We do not go to seminaries. We are taught of God, as it is written of us. We are born of that holy seed which is the word of God, and therefore we speak according to it.
If you wish to learn of the Lord Jesus Christ, and of his gospel, I would be happy to help you, for so am I equipped and called of God. No matter how much theology you have studied, or taught...Jesus Christ still stands willing to save you and make you into a vessel of honour, fit for his use. He is able, by his holy word, to wash you from all the theological confusion and nonsense that you have been indoctrinated with over the years, and to fill you rather with the truth of his word, and the power of his Holy Spirit.
I know.
He did it with me, a few decades ago.
I beseech you not to take this message of love as an affront, or as an invitation to debate, for it is neither.
It is an invitation from the Almighty God to learn of his word, and come forth from the darkness and into the light, and live.
Please choose wisely therefore, my friend.
Sincerely,
Clinton
If you'd care to understand the keys of David I'd be happy to give you a set. Lemme know.
~ prophet
Such a shame that most Protestants overreact to and overcorrect for Rome
I don’t know man. Running far from Rome seems pretty wise to me
Such a shame that some always lump all post 1054 denominations together while still arguing which one of their true churches is the one TRUE true Church. Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Catholic, Eastern Catholic.....we still can't go "home" cause how can a lowly protestant decide this for himself? 😂
My point is that you shouldn’t overreact, just react properly. For example, I grew up Church of Christ, which won’t say the Apostle’s or Nicene Creed because it’s too Catholic.
@@calebklingerman7902 I mean, The Nicean Creed is pretty hecking Catholic
@@thomasthellamas9886 The measuring-stick for truth is not "what is the least similar to Rome," it is "what do the Scriptures teach." Many people are so committed to Romaphobia that they reject clear Scriptural teaching just for being "too Catholic."
Seeing that the forgiveness of sins is tied to the office of the keys, it becomes all the more important to discern who possesses those keys in the present.
Can a rogue German monk possess the keys? Does protestantism generally possess the keys given they largely don't perform absolution whatsoever?
Apostolic christianity is the safest place to be.
Which apostolic Christianity? Orthodoxy?
Eastern Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox, one of the many Catholic denominations, etc. It's best to just focus on the gospel of Jesus Christ's death and resurrection for the believer's salvation. We all know this, so no need to argue what's "safe" to follow. The gospel is what's safe to follow
Being baptized is what keeps us safe. I'm saved because Jesus died on the cross for our sins, not because I chose the correct denomination
@Catholic-Perennialist "Can a rogue German monk possess the..." ad-hominem slander. Repent
@@gumbyshrimp2606 Pick one