Does Lds Doctrine Contradict The Bible?

[danielwoods]

Actually, Daniel is right, as your link plainly shows. Dedemenon is the perfect passive participle form of deo.

Add-on: That said, I don't necessarily agree with Daniel's interpretation of the passage, although it finds support among some commentators (see, e.g., R.T. France, The Gospel of Matthew [NICNT, Eerdmans, 2007], 626-27.)

Thanks!

[Nevo]

Thanks!

For the benefit of others on the thread, here is the relevant section of R.T. France's commentary on Matthew 16:19:

The heavenly "endorsement" of Peter's decisions is expressed (both here and in 18:18, twice in each verse) in the unusual syntax of future perfect passive verbs, "will have been tied up," "will have been untied." The construction is sufficiently unusual and indeed awkward in Greek to draw attention. If Matthew had wished to say "it will be tied up," "will be untied" (as many translations have it), he could have used the much more natural syntax of a simple future passive to say it. It seems likely, therefore, that these repeated future perfects are there for a reason. They change the sequence of actions. With simple futures, Peter would take the initiative and heaven would follow. But with future perfects the impression is that when Peter makes his decision it will be found to have been already made in heaven, making him not the initiator of new directions for the church, but the faithful steward of God's prior decisions. In this syntactical form the saying becomes a promise not of divine endorsement, but of divine guidance to enable Peter to decide in accordance with God's already determined purpose (France, The Gospel of St. Matthew, 626-27; emphasis in original).

Edited July 7, 2013 by Nevo

[Calm]

What does "being righteous" on the outside have to do with a direct relationship with the lord? Even an Atheist can appear righteous on the outside.

She did not described them as only pretending to be or appearing righteous, but as someone who she sees as eligible for translation....which surely means they are righteous in their hearts.

Now she might have been being sarcastic, if necessary she can clarify. That you interpret such as LDS being righteous in appearance only is rather indicative.

And that you see an atheist as incapable of true righteousness (if that is your actual belief and not just a poorly phrased comment) I find very sad.

Edited July 7, 2013 by calmoriah

[Vance]

I haven't ignored anything. Thanks.

As I have said repeatedly, there is a future tense, followed by perfect past tense (Completed).

Which is clearly allows for the understanding that at some point in the future it will be complete.

[Vance]

Right, or, "already has been bound..." doesn't mean that Peter was given the power to bind things in Heaven. Only that he was given the power to know what already has been bound in Heaven.

The other point, related to sealings and marriage, is that these passages don't mention them. They have nothing to do with eternal marriage. In essence, there isn't anything in the Bible that mentioned an eternal marriage between a man and a woman.

And that passage doesn't mention "to know" either. So, by your approach it can't have anything to do with knowledge.

[Flyonthewall]

I think the minimal evidence in the biblical text to support the concept of the eternal marriage is mitigated by the revelation from Jesus and the Apostles. I think that the LDS read the biblical text that way because of the influence of Joseph Smith. Hence the difference in interpretation on many things.

The evidence in the Bible for eternal marriage is not minimal. Without using the exact words "eternal marriage" it is as explicit as it can be. There is no revelation by Jesus or the Apostles that "mitigate" eternal marriage, but all endorses it.

And yes we understand the difference in interpretation is due to the influence of Joseph Smith...same way the interpretation of the scriptures were influenced by all the prophets of old. Your interpretation is based on ... ?

I do not believe you will get much of an argument from LDS that prophets of God understand the will of God and would not go against God's will, and anything they bind or loose would be in line with the will of God.

Prophets do not bind God, but God has entrusted prophets to make judgments in accordance to His will.

Scriptures demonstrate that even a prophet of God can make a pronouncement that is not backed up by God.

Are we going to be resurrected anatomically correct? I have no idea. Jesus stated that there is no marriage, and no one is given in marriage, in Heaven. So, it's likely that there's no need for it. But I have no idea. It's pure speculation.

Jesus stated that IN THE RESURRECTION weddings will not be performed, which is in agreement with LDS doctrine. All marriages will already have been performed BEFORE the resurrection.

Jesus also stated that from the beginning Adam and Eve, Man and Woman, were joined together by God to become ONE, and they were intended to stay together(no divorce).

So here we have scriptures that explicitly state that God joins together men and women in marriage, and they are intended to stay together. No where is it mitigated that marriage is limited to our earthly life...that is something that has been artificially inserted by men.

Now you have latched on to this man made interpretation so it must have some sort of appeal to you.

Scriptures have addressed this situation too: "Who hath ears to hear, let him hear."

[Vance]

For the benefit of others on the thread, here is the relevant section of R.T. France's commentary on Matthew 16:19:

Very interesting.

Also interesting, at least to me, is the fact that Jesus didn't speak these (Greek) words at all, so it is Matthew that is responsible for the choice. Matthew was not a native Greek speaker, so it is easily understandable why this "The construction is sufficiently unusual and indeed awkward in Greek to draw attention." is said. So, is Matthews "sufficiently unusual and indeed awkward" usage of Greek intentional or not?

"In this syntactical form the saying becomes a promise not of divine endorsement, but of divine guidance to enable Peter to decide in accordance with God's already determined purpose." So, clearly Peter's teachings should take preeminence over that of (the misunderstood) Paul. Even this understanding doesn't bode well for the Evangelical approach. So, when Peter and Paul are at odds, it is Peter that has the blessing of heaven.

[teddyaware]

See my next post below.

Edited July 8, 2013 by teddyaware

[danielwoods]

She did not described them as only pretending to be or appearing righteous, but as someone who she sees as eligible for translation....which surely means they are righteous in their hearts.

Now she might have been being sarcastic, if necessary she can clarify. That you interpret such as LDS being righteous in appearance only is rather indicative.

And that you see an atheist as incapable of true righteousness (if that is your actual belief and not just a poorly phrased comment) I find very sad.

Ok, my point is that we can only look on people, on the outside. We cannot see their heart. When someone says they are "righteous" they can only be observing what they do. One can infer that they are doing things "out of their heart" but we can't know that.

Atheists by their own proclamation do not have a relationship with God. Hence, I figured they would be an good example of one who can act righteous, but not have a relationship, and by extension, not be apart of the kingdom.

[danielwoods]

Which is clearly allows for the understanding that at some point in the future it will be complete.

False. It clearly states that it has been completed in the past.

And that passage doesn't mention "to know" either. So, by your approach it can't have anything to do with knowledge.

Binding and loosing are legal terms. Knowing what is legal and what isn't legal comes before actions that are or aren't.

[danielwoods]

The evidence in the Bible for eternal marriage is not minimal. Without using the exact words "eternal marriage" it is as explicit as it can be. There is no revelation by Jesus or the Apostles that "mitigate" eternal marriage, but all endorses it.

And yes we understand the difference in interpretation is due to the influence of Joseph Smith...same way the interpretation of the scriptures were influenced by all the prophets of old. Your interpretation is based on ... ?

As we have discussed, there is only one marriage discussed in heaven (or from Heaven) according to John.

My interpretation is based on basic principles of interpretation.

I do not believe you will get much of an argument from LDS that prophets of God understand the will of God and would not go against God's will, and anything they bind or loose would be in line with the will of God.

Prophets do not bind God, but God has entrusted prophets to make judgments in accordance to His will.

Scriptures demonstrate that even a prophet of God can make a pronouncement that is not backed up by God.

Jesus stated that IN THE RESURRECTION weddings will not be performed, which is in agreement with LDS doctrine. All marriages will already have been performed BEFORE the resurrection.

Jesus also stated that from the beginning Adam and Eve, Man and Woman, were joined together by God to become ONE, and they were intended to stay together(no divorce).

So here we have scriptures that explicitly state that God joins together men and women in marriage, and they are intended to stay together. No where is it mitigated that marriage is limited to our earthly life...that is something that has been artificially inserted by men.

Now you have latched on to this man made interpretation so it must have some sort of appeal to you.

Scriptures have addressed this situation too: "Who hath ears to hear, let him hear."

Again, Romans 7 states that marriage laws end on earth at our deaths. So, it's not man putting them asunder, but God's will.

And the statement also includes that no one will be "given" in marriage, in other words, be in the state of marriage.

The only appeal this "interpretation" has to me, is that it is true. As I have stated in the past, I don't have an axe to grind. If JS was right, I'd defend it as truth as well.

[Flyonthewall]

As we have discussed, there is only one marriage discussed in heaven (or from Heaven) according to John.

This is not accurate as the scriptures state very clearly that Adam and Eve were man and wife. Who married them? Was it someone that was not from heaven? The only person that could have possibly married them was God.

My interpretation is based on basic principles of interpretation.

So based on academia? Scholarship? learning of men?

Again, Romans 7 states that marriage laws end on earth at our deaths. So, it's not man putting them asunder, but God's will.

And again, Romans 7 does not state that marriage laws end on earth. Romans 7 is talking about dominion, and we are only under dominion to one law at a time. While the Mosaic law was in place they were subject to that law. That law was fulfilled which allowed us to be subject to the law of Christ. The example of a wife being subject to one husband at a time in NO WAY indicates marriage ends at death. That is something YOU read into it.

I pointed out before that the Mosaic law is the 1st husband, and the law of Christ is the second husband. If anything, if likening marriage to the Mosaic law and the Law of Christ, you should take away that marriages would last as long as the law. Now if you are stating the Law of Christ will end with our deaths...you would still be wrong.

And the statement also includes that no one will be "given" in marriage, in other words, be in the state of marriage.

That's right, no one will be "given" in marriage...no weddings will be performed, not that no one will have a marriage relationship with their spouse. "Marry" and "given in marriage" are verbs, not nouns. In the resurrection the verbs will all have been done before. What will still remain is the nouns.

The only appeal this "interpretation" has to me, is that it is true. As I have stated in the past, I don't have an axe to grind. If JS was right, I'd defend it as truth as well.

As you can see, there are plenty around here that believe JS was and is right. We believe he received his authority directly from God. Academia and scholarship alone will only get one "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."

[Tacenda]

I have a calling in primary and today in sharing time they spoke of temple marriage and if you aren't married there you won't be with family. This never bothered me until now. Because now I see that no one ever questions if you can still be with your loved ones any way. So if Daniel is right and we are married to Jesus instead but one big happy family, what's wrong with that? We're still together. But in our church we won't be together if we're not sealed? This sounds like a bigger problem to me. It sounds more doom and gloom. If our whole thing is families are together forever but isn't really that way unless we go to the temple, it sounds like a lot of people are not going to be in the same kingdoms. More a division, I don't see how this is all that enticing.

[Vance]

False. It clearly states that it has been completed in the past.

No! what it clearly states because it uses the future tense, that IN THE FUTURE it will be in the past.

Binding and loosing are legal terms. Knowing what is legal and what isn't legal comes before actions that are or aren't.

NOPE!!! The actions have NOTHING TO DO WITH KNOWLEDGE!!!! You do not have to have the knowledge to do the action. By your own standard, because it doesn't say knowledge(or any of its forms) it can NOT be referring to knowledge. So either live with your own standard or reject it. You can't have it both ways.

[Vance]

Again, Romans 7 states that marriage laws end on earth at our deaths. So, it's not man putting them asunder, but God's will.

Still missing the real topic of Rom 7.

[teddyaware]

I think the minimal evidence in the biblical text to support the concept of the eternal marriage is mitigated by the revelation from Jesus and the Apostles. I think that the LDS read the biblical text that way because of the influence of Joseph Smith. Hence the difference in interpretation on many things.

Are we going to be resurrected anatomically correct? I have no idea. Jesus stated that there is no marriage, and no one is given in marriage, in Heaven. So, it's likely that there's no need for it. But I have no idea. It's pure speculation.

The point is that when Adam was immortal, possessed of a glorious body, without sin, and living in the immediate presence of God, the Lord said it was not good that Adam should be alone. So while in the Edenic paradise, God created the woman, Eve, who became Adam's wife. And she would have remained Adam's wife forever and ever, except for the fall. So in light of the Bible, it is not at all out of line for the Latter-day Saints to embrace the doctrine that men and women were meant to be together forever, as husband and wife. After all, it was God's idea, wasn't it? God was the one who said it wasn't good for man to be alone; and His chosen solution to the problem was eternal marriage.

Edited July 8, 2013 by teddyaware

[Glenn101]

I have a calling in primary and today in sharing time they spoke of temple marriage and if you aren't married there you won't be with family. This never bothered me until now. Because now I see that no one ever questions if you can still be with your loved ones any way. So if Daniel is right and we are married to Jesus instead but one big happy family, what's wrong with that? We're still together. But in our church we won't be together if we're not sealed? This sounds like a bigger problem to me. It sounds more doom and gloom. If our whole thing is families are together forever but isn't really that way unless we go to the temple, it sounds like a lot of people are not going to be in the same kingdoms. More a division, I don't see how this is all that enticing.

The song goes "Families can be together forever" not will be. The whole Gospel plan is based upon "obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel." And "There is a alaw, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated - And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated."

The enticing part is that we can be together forever as husband and wife, as families, etc. There are indeed conditions, as the quotes point out, but the promise is open to all.

Glenn

[cdowis]

No! what it clearly states because it uses the future tense, that IN THE FUTURE it will be in the past.

This is known as the prophetic future tense.

Jeremiah 23:2 "Therefore thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, against the shepherds that feed My people: Ye have scattered My flock, and driven them away, and have not taken care of them; behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the Lord."

This is a prophecy projecting itself into the time of Christ. It speaks of future events as if it already had been fulfilled in the past. But, of course, the theologians and scholars will dither over this interpretation, and, once again, this discussion goes nowhere as one bases his salvation upon the lexicon and the grammar textbook.

[Jude2]

The other point, related to sealings and marriage, is that these passages don't mention them. They have nothing to do with eternal marriage. In essence, there isn't anything in the Bible that mentioned an eternal marriage between a man and a woman.

I’m going to give you the following because I want you to understand how short sighted you are being.

The sealing is more than just marriage,

From Eph 3 “For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named”

We are God the Father’s family and he loves us but because of the fall we have become lost to him.

But he had a plan;

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places (the temple) in Christ:

According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation (pre-ordination) of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

Having predestinated us unto the adoption (sealing) of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, (see John 17:6)

….In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

…..That in the dispensation of the fulness of times (today) he might gather (seal) together in one all in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth(see Gen 2:1); even in him……in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,…..” Eph 1

Peter held the Keys or authority to start all of this sealing of this heavenly family in his dispensation. They were given to him on the Mount of Transfiguration when Moses and Elijah appeared.

Mal 4

“Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.”

Moses held Keys especially for the gathering of Israel.

“ Specially the day that thou (Moses) stoodest before the Lord thy God in Horeb, when the Lord said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may teach their children……When thou shalt beget children, and children’s children, …and shall corrupt yourselves,….And the Lord shall scatter you among the nations, and ye shall be left few in number among the heathen, ….But if from thence thou shalt seek the Lord thy God, thou shalt find him, … even in the latter days (today), if thou turn to the Lord thy God, and shalt be obedient unto his voice; …he will not forsake thee….nor forget the covenant of thy fathers which he sware unto them.”

Along with sealing couples and families Peter was the one who was organizing the baptism of the dead which Paul mentioned in 1Cor 15:29. They were then combing through their long genealogies sealing one generation to the other back as far as Moses or maybe further.

When he died in 64 ad the power and authority was taken from the earth, so much so that people like you deign the even the need for it.

Now we are in the ‘dispensation of the fullness of times’ or ‘the latter days’ and this power and authority has been brought back to the earth.

On April 3,1836 Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdry received a revelation of Christ and then a number of other visions which open up to them;

“….the heavens were again opened unto us; and Moses appeared before us, and committed unto us the keys of the gathering of Israel from the four parts of the earth…. After this vision had closed, another great and glorious vision burst upon us; for Elijah the prophet, who was taken to heaven without tasting death, stood before us, and said:

Behold, the time has fully come, which was spoken of by the mouth of Malachi—testifying that he [Elijah] should be sent, before the great and dreadful day of the Lord come—

To turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the children to the fathers, lest the whole earth be smitten with a curse—

Therefore, the keys of this dispensation are committed into your hands; and by this ye may know that the great and dreadful day of the Lord is near, even at the doors….”

I hope all of this explains why your arguments seem rather shallow to us, you are missing the bigger picture.

[Jude2]

So if Daniel is right and we are married to Jesus instead but one big happy family, what's wrong with that?

We are not married to Jesus we are adopted by him, see Eph 1:5

We have been lost to the Father (and our Mother, remember Daniel doesn’t believe in her nor that we are their literal family) because of the fall so we are adopted by Christ as his.

“I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word….And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them….” John 17

See first we belonged to the Father and now we belong to our Elder Brother and He will return us to our Heavenly Parents.

I'd like to point out too that Daniel also believes that those who don't believe in his Jesus are doomed to burn in hell for ever and ever, do you really want to worship that god?

Daniel is all full of why we’re wrong but he doesn’t explain what these Keys were all about. Why was Jesus giving this power to Peter?

Edited July 8, 2013 by Jude2

[danielwoods]

This is not accurate as the scriptures state very clearly that Adam and Eve were man and wife. Who married them? Was it someone that was not from heaven? The only person that could have possibly married them was God.

No one disputes that God joined them. The question is what John revealed in Revelation.

So based on academia? Scholarship? learning of men?

And again, Romans 7 does not state that marriage laws end on earth. Romans 7 is talking about dominion, and we are only under dominion to one law at a time. While the Mosaic law was in place they were subject to that law. That law was fulfilled which allowed us to be subject to the law of Christ. The example of a wife being subject to one husband at a time in NO WAY indicates marriage ends at death. That is something YOU read into it.

I pointed out before that the Mosaic law is the 1st husband, and the law of Christ is the second husband. If anything, if likening marriage to the Mosaic law and the Law of Christ, you should take away that marriages would last as long as the law. Now if you are stating the Law of Christ will end with our deaths...you would still be wrong.

Your contention is that Christ established an eternal law of marriage, that replaced the mosaic law of marriage. Please show me where he did this?

That's right, no one will be "given" in marriage...no weddings will be performed, not that no one will have a marriage relationship with their spouse. "Marry" and "given in marriage" are verbs, not nouns. In the resurrection the verbs will all have been done before. What will still remain is the nouns.

Near as I can tell, "given in marriage" isn't a verb, but a phrase, which describes the state of being of those "given in marriage."

As you can see, there are plenty around here that believe JS was and is right. We believe he received his authority directly from God. Academia and scholarship alone will only get one "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."

Right. If I was only relying on Academia and scholarship alone, you'd have a point.

[danielwoods]

The point is that when Adam was immortal, possessed of a glorious body, without sin, and living in the immediate presence of God, the Lord said it was not good that Adam should be alone. So while in the Edenic paradise, God created the woman, Eve, who became Adam's wife. And she would have remained Adam's wife forever and ever, except for the fall. So in light of the Bible, it is not at all out of line for the Latter-day Saints to embrace the doctrine that men and women were meant to be together forever, as husband and wife. After all, it was God's idea, wasn't it? God was the one who said it wasn't good for man to be alone; and His chosen solution to the problem was eternal marriage.

Yeah, if that was the end of the story.

[teddyaware]

Yeah, if that was the end of the story.

What I've written about is God's revealed will for his creation prior to the fall. When men and women are fully redeemed from the fall, God will reestablish his ideal: Man will live in the presence of God; they will live without sin, they will have glorious bodies of flesh and bone, the will live as husband and wife, they will live under the commandment to multiply. This is the redemption from the fall, when all that was lost will be restored as at first.

[danielwoods]

I’m going to give you the following because I want you to understand how short sighted you are being.

The sealing is more than just marriage,

From Eph 3 “For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named”

We are God the Father’s family and he loves us but because of the fall we have become lost to him.

But he had a plan;

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places (the temple) in Christ:

According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation (pre-ordination) of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

Having predestinated us unto the adoption (sealing) of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, (see John 17:6)

….In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

…..That in the dispensation of the fulness of times (today) he might gather (seal) together in one all in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth(see Gen 2:1); even in him……in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,…..” Eph 1

Peter held the Keys or authority to start all of this sealing of this heavenly family in his dispensation. They were given to him on the Mount of Transfiguration when Moses and Elijah appeared.

Mal 4

“Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.”

Moses held Keys especially for the gathering of Israel.

“ Specially the day that thou (Moses) stoodest before the Lord thy God in Horeb, when the Lord said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may teach their children……When thou shalt beget children, and children’s children, …and shall corrupt yourselves,….And the Lord shall scatter you among the nations, and ye shall be left few in number among the heathen, ….But if from thence thou shalt seek the Lord thy God, thou shalt find him, … even in the latter days (today), if thou turn to the Lord thy God, and shalt be obedient unto his voice; …he will not forsake thee….nor forget the covenant of thy fathers which he sware unto them.”

Along with sealing couples and families Peter was the one who was organizing the baptism of the dead which Paul mentioned in 1Cor 15:29. They were then combing through their long genealogies sealing one generation to the other back as far as Moses or maybe further.

When he died in 64 ad the power and authority was taken from the earth, so much so that people like you deign the even the need for it.

Now we are in the ‘dispensation of the fullness of times’ or ‘the latter days’ and this power and authority has been brought back to the earth.

On April 3,1836 Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdry received a revelation of Christ and then a number of other visions which open up to them;

“….the heavens were again opened unto us; and Moses appeared before us, and committed unto us the keys of the gathering of Israel from the four parts of the earth…. After this vision had closed, another great and glorious vision burst upon us; for Elijah the prophet, who was taken to heaven without tasting death, stood before us, and said:

Behold, the time has fully come, which was spoken of by the mouth of Malachi—testifying that he [Elijah] should be sent, before the great and dreadful day of the Lord come—

To turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the children to the fathers, lest the whole earth be smitten with a curse—

Therefore, the keys of this dispensation are committed into your hands; and by this ye may know that the great and dreadful day of the Lord is near, even at the doors….”

I hope all of this explains why your arguments seem rather shallow to us, you are missing the bigger picture.

Right. I am missing the bigger picture, because it's of utmost importance to me, to rightly divide the word of truth. To understand it as it was intended. And Matt. 16 and 18 don't say that Peter has the power to bind things in Heaven or seal for that matter.

Fact remains, that eternal marriage isn't mentioned, nor is sealing for that matter.

What this whole thread has demonstrated, is that the principles of interpretation between LDS and non-LDS are different because the LDS rely on Joseph Smith.

[danielwoods]

We are not married to Jesus we are adopted by him, see Eph 1:5

We have been lost to the Father (and our Mother, remember Daniel doesn’t believe in her nor that we are their literal family) because of the fall so we are adopted by Christ as his.

“I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word….And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them….” John 17

See first we belonged to the Father and now we belong to our Elder Brother and He will return us to our Heavenly Parents.

I'd like to point out too that Daniel also believes that those who don't believe in his Jesus are doomed to burn in hell for ever and ever, do you really want to worship that god?

Daniel is all full of why we’re wrong but he doesn’t explain what these Keys were all about. Why was Jesus giving this power to Peter?

The "marriage of the lamb" is the only marriage mentioned in heaven.

Rev. 19:^{7 "}Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.

⁸ And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints."

By the way, the "Keys" were to allow Peter to know what was bound and loosed in Heaven already (a reference to what is legal or illegal). It has nothing to do with binding things in Heaven. It is a mistranslation.