Just show me someone who agrees with you prior to the 16th century and you have my ear. If not, then you are asking us to accept your interpretation of Scripture over that of whole Body of Christ prior to the 1600.
That’s a mighty big assertion. To bad you were not born earlier to help avoid all the confussion and false doctrine.
You seem to be easily fooled.Hi Lily, You fooled me. I thought you were catholic.I would have become catholic until I meet one.
Hi Malachi, Thats a problem on this site,you never know who is catholic on this site. There are many that claim to be.You seem to be easily fooled.
God BlessI *was [/quote said:baptized Catholic, however my parents ended the Catholic teaching there. I attend a Protestant Church and was re-baptized in a Protestant church.
Your “re-baptism” was merely a bath!
Ozzie, the words are as clear as crystal. That is exactly what Jesus is saying and doing. Moreover, the orders of bishop, priest and deacon are clearly delineated in the New Testament. The charism of the apostles is passed on through the bishops, and by extension, to priests.
I am always amazed at this interpretation. The only reason to accept it is for the purpose of rejecting the ministry of the Body of Christ, his Church.
Ozzie, this message in no way conflicts with receiving that forgiveness in the WAY Jesus himself offers it to us through the ministry of his priests.
Presumably, after they have been “born again through water and the holy spirit.”
Jesus said it. The apostles HAVE this gift. “Whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven.”
Erroneous? I think not. The Catholic position in no way goes against the Gospel of forgiveness of sins through Christ. Jesus gave the Church this gift, who in his right mind would reject it?
Not at all. Like I said, you can’t just take that one verse and give it a life of its own. It must fit into the context of the whole of the Gospel message. In verse 21 Jesus said “as the Father has sent Me…” What did the Father send the Son to do? To be the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (Jn. 1:29). Jesus Himself said, “Truly, truly I say to you, he who hears My word and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life” (Jn. 5:24). And it is with this basic, Gospel message of belief that Jesus is now (after His sin-bearing, substitutionary, sacrificial sacrifice and subsequent bodily resurrection) sending out His disciples into the world. When their message concerning Christ and sin is believed, they have the right to say to that new believer, “your sins are forgiven.” If their message concerning Christ is refused, they have the right to say “your sins are not forgiven.”
You remind me of the Pharisees (religious leaders) who said, *"…search and see that no prophet arises out of Galilee" *(Jn. 7:52). They couldn’t have been more wrong! You’ll always have it wrong, Dennis (probably to your grave). You claim that the Word of God must be proved by the word of men, but in truth, the word of men must be proved by the Word of God. Who will you believe, Dennis? God has left that choice to you. And that choice truly does have eternal consequences.
See my post to “Curious” # 45.
Indeed. The Catholic position fully encompasses the message of preaching forgiveness of sins and provides – by the very authority of Christ himself – a concrete way of delivering that forgiveness. Your position leaves out the ordinary means.
All right Ozzie. That makes more sense. I understand now where you are coming from.
Ozzie, “my friend,” I’m not trying to ugly but you sound like a Southern-fried hacking televangelist when you say things like that.
That’s exactly what I was trying to say. The verse says what it says. “whose sins **you **retain will be retained.”
Catholics see in that statement the implication of a confession. How can the apostles forgive sins if those sins are not confessed? Moreover, confession is clearly a practice of the early Church as attested to by the Early Church Fathers. We also understand the admonition in James 5:16 as a reference to confession (the Church later limiting confession to priests for discretion’s sake: why, in the ordinary way of things, confess to someone who has no charism to pronounce absolution?)
Part of the “context” is something you undoubtedly reject: the actual practice of the Apostolic and subapostolic Church.
Jesus said “As the Father sent me, I also send you.” We see Jesus directly forgiving sin. Thus, the Apostles (which means, ‘those sent’) go and do likewise. The Greek word “forgive” is active, denoting a positive effect, not a mere declaration of forgiveness already effected by God.
Ozzie, I challenge you to show me how the forgiveness of sins via the means Jesus has given us in any way contradicts the fundamental truth of forgiveness through the Blood of his Cross.
Yes.
You seem to understand that the Body of Christ is an ‘institiution’ of unbelieving men. This is so patently at odds with the witness of the early bishops and martyrs, men trained by the apostles themselves, that it constitutes an accusation that the early church preached a fraudulent Gospel, that it deliberately distorted and perverted the work of Christ. You are saying that those men, most of whom died as martyrs for Jesus Christ and his Gospel, created and imposed upon the faithful a structure of their own invention. When Paul tells the early Christians to obey their leaders and submit to them, whom do you think he meant? Since the Catholic Church has a clear historic line back to the apostles and to Christ himself, and since she has the promise that “the gates of hell will not prevaile against her” – I’ll stick with the Church.
Well, if it was a Catholic baptism, you were not “sprinkled” unless you were in a neonatal intensive care unit or there were some other restraining factor. Catholics “infuse” (pour) as a rule, with immersion becoming more common.
Actually, Mickey, it was a sacrilege of the first order. It is a big time no-no to reject your baptism – which is what re-baptism does.Your “re-baptism” was merely a bath!
Wow, harsh words!
These are *Your *interpretations(opinions). Where did you get your biblical scholarship from? How long have you beeen studying theology? What about all the other things(binding) that possibly precede these that you mention/ What if you’re wrong?
How do you know for certain you’re correct in all that you interpret? Is the Holy Spirit telling you what everything means. Why is he telling me something different? What does it mean to you(please don’t quote scripture, just this once?)when you say you trust in the cross of Christ. How has this changed the way you live? Feel free to be explicit. As a Catholic, I actually look at Jesus crucified when I pray. It stays with me longer, forcing myself to look at Him on the Cross. It’s the only reason Catholics live(Jesus crucified, it’s in The Creed). Now if I’m wrong about all this Catholic muddle, do you think I will lose my salvation? If you’re wrong, Catholics don’t think you will be necessarily damned to hell, but what if you are wrong.? We have 2000 years of the same teaching, you have your opinion. Have you ever been to a Catholic Mass? Do you go to Church? What does binding and loosing of sins mean in the old testament and then in the new? Was there a priest invilved in the old? What about John 6? Explain to me what this whole discourse means. Why do you put constraints on our Lord’s teaching to fit your pride? Catholics take the whole Bible as Word of God (after all we put it together) not just what suits our personal belief. We even read it extensively at Mass. I bet you didn’t know that. And we sing wonderful hyms and partake in the Eucharist(just like in the Bible, every day if we want!) Do you? What if you are wrong?
Actually, the “Catholic” position circumvents the message that was “delivered” to the world by the Apostles in their day. Your position completely avoids their message and instead sets up its own sacramental system through which sins are forgiven.
Based on the Scriptures quoted above, they did not “deliver” forgiveness of sins, but declared forgiveness of sins through faith in the One who bore them; the One on whom our sins were laid; who took upon Himself our judgment in our stead - and died (“the wages of sin is death”). What was *once for all *laid on the Savior cannot be laid back on the sinner. Can you show me anywhere in Scripture where any of the Apostles were instructed to “deliver” forgiveness of sins? They were God’s messengers.
Ordinary? “…let it be known to you, brethren, that through Him forgiveness of sins is declared to you.” This IS the “ordinary” way - through faith in what Christ accomplished FOR you, in your stead. There simply is no other way. Rome’s way has no Apostolic or Biblical support.
But I’m not asking for any money (grin). And my heart is pure when I say to you that you can trust in the Apostolic message that your sins are *forever forgiven *through faith in Christ alone. No man (Pope, Prelate, Priest or Pastor) has the power or the “charism” to forgive sins. Nor is there is no power to forgive sins in a sacrament. Only through personal faith in Christ are sins ever personally forgiven. If you will turn to Christ by faith then what Paul states below will be true of you too:
Well, that what “Catholics” are told to see. But in truth, confession of sins is not even implied, and you know it.
Spoken,when you pray the act of contrition you pray it from the heartHi Isidore, And which prayer do you think God prefers? Personally I believe He wants the one from the HEART.God Bless.
And please stop attempting to read others hearts and the mind of God it is unbecoming.Come Home Spoken:crying: