Replies

Thank you so much for sharing your beautiful insights!

I believe God telling Israel that he did not want Kings is a foreshadowing of this as well.

Indeed, that rings true in my Spirit as well!

I believe the keys to the Kingdom of heaven is the Holy Spirit and those that are bound are those that believe in Jesus, just as Peter had just done, and those that don't are loosed in heaven.

This also rings true in my Spirit. Peter was first to receive the direct revelation from the Father and along with it he had responsibilities/authorities concerning Christ's sheep, most especially to proclaim that Jesus Christ is Lord, the receiving being a binding, the rejecting being a loosing.

We all have this responsibility/authority once we have received the same direct revelation that Jesus Christ is Lord. (compare Matt 16 and Matt 18 on binding and loosing)

But as you say, people often seem to want a "king" or at least to put someone or some thing between themselves and God. I believe the following is a type for that phenomenon as well, i.e. that people, out of fear, want their pastor, minister, preacher, prophet, saint, evangelist, apostle or pope to be an intermediary - because they cannot bear the glory of God personally.

And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two tables of testimony in Moses' hand, when he came down from the mount, that Moses wist not that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him. And when Aaron and all the children of Israel saw Moses, behold, the skin of his face shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him.

And Moses called unto them; and Aaron and all the rulers of the congregation returned unto him: and Moses talked with them. And afterward all the children of Israel came nigh: and he gave them in commandment all that the LORD had spoken with him in mount Sinai.

And [till] Moses had done speaking with them, he put a vail on his face. But when Moses went in before the LORD to speak with him, he took the vail off, until he came out. And he came out, and spake unto the children of Israel [that] which he was commanded.

And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses' face shone: and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him. - Exo 34:29-35

It reminds of that line from the movie, "Truth? You can't handle the truth!" And so many willfully do not behold the glory of God and appoint intermediaries, trusting them instead and burdening them with their own spiritual well being - and worse, putting the intermediary in peril should at any time he act of self-will (fail in utter humility) - and like Moses, for a single failing be denied entry to the "promised land." (Also a "type" wrt this phenomenon.)

It reminds of that line from the movie, "Truth? You can't handle the truth!" And so many willfully do not behold the glory of God and appoint intermediaries, trusting them instead and burdening them with their own spiritual well being...

I agree. It's stunning how the OT is so great in illustrating for us the pitfalls of human behavior and how it separates us from God.

I believe God telling Israel that he did not want Kings is a foreshadowing of this as well.

Indeed, that rings true in my Spirit as well!
= = = =

FOR SURE! AND I THINK IT'S A VERY KEY POINT.

Why did God not want Kings?

He considered it an affront--somewhat as He considered it an affront that the Children of Israel were too much fraidy cats to meet person to person with God at the tent of meeting in the wilderness.

God wants INTIMATE ONE ON ONE DIALOGUE WITHOUT INTERMEDIARIES.

Having a King was another form of foisting some man--flawed man--between the troops and God.

It neutered God's OPEN-DOOR-WALK-AGAIN-IN-THE-GARDEN policy, heart's desire--what Christ died for.

And, I think, that's one of the most demonic of the perversions of the Roman edifice that God hates the most. However, lots of other Protesty congregations functionally end up doing the same thing--glorifying man and deferring to man as the professional "God-go-between." The Roman brothers and sisters have no monopoly on the perversion. I'd rather they did--then at least a major portion of Christendom would be relatively free of it. Sadly, they are not.