Confession

[oneseeker]

I have a question regarding confession. I’ve read that the grammar in the Greek means that when Jesus told the apostles about binding and loosing, or remitting and retaining sins, that they were simply “announcing” what had already happened. IOW, they had the power to tell people their sins already were or weren’t forgiven based on what God had already done.

I don’t know if I’m being clear. My impression of what I’ve researched seems to be that the apostles’ power wasn’t actually to forgive sins or not, but simply say whether or not God had forgiven them. My protestant friends say that therefore you don’t need confession, b/c God forgives sins, and all the priests are really doing is telling you that, and the Bible already tells you that.

Very confused,
oneseeker

 

[dbacks5439]

Have they given you biblical references for their position?

 

[DanteAlighieri]

Have they given you biblical references for their position?

More importantly: by what authority do they teach this? Which translation(s) of Scripture are the foundation of this belief, and what authority permitted or endorsed those translations?

This question ultimately comes down to authority – that is, Christ gave His authority to Peter and the apostles, and they passed it on to their successors. How can one claim one’s own personal translation or interpretation is authoritative if one does not have the authority passed down from Christ?

In other words: if one’s faith tradition originated in a separation from the Church founded by Christ, doesn’t it seem a bit presumptuous to assert the authority of one’s personal belief system – especially given the mind-boggling number of personal interpretations this would engender?

Peace,
Dante

 

[ERose]

Another point of the requirement of a priest and that is when you sin, especially mortal sin, you are not just sinning against God but you are also sinning against the Church and society in general.

So Jesus established that absolution should come not just from Him but also from his Body which is the church.

Besides there is too much scriptural proof that the Sacrament of Penence was necessary.

Not only that if these protestant friends come from a “Saved by Faith” alone, then why should they worry about asking God to forgive them for their sins anymore they are already saved in their mind. No they do it because enately they know that it is necessary for salvation.

 

[Pax]

Give them the following on Confessing sins to a priest:

The reason we do this is because that is the way God set things up. Let me explain.

In the book of Genesis we read all about the fall of Adam and Eve and about Cain killing Able. While God knew exactly what had happened and what sins had been committed, God still asks Adam and Eve [see Gen 3:11-14] what they had done. Again, when Cain kills Able in Gen 4:10, God asks Cain “What have you done?” God wants us to confess and it is therefore necessary for us to do so.

So where does the priest fit in? In Leviticus 5:5-6 we have a solid prefiguring/foreshadowing of confession and this is carried over into the New Covenant. In Lev. 5:5-6 it says, “When a man is guilty in any of these, he shall confess the sin he has committed, and he shall bring his guilt offering to the Lord for the sin which he has committed, a female from the flock, a lamb or a goat, for a sin offering; and the priest shall make atonement for him for his sin.” Note how the penitent must confess and take his sin offering to the priest, and the priest shall make atonement for him for his sin. This requires knowledge of the sin on the part of the priest.

In the New Testament we have a number of verses that refer to the authority to forgive sins. In Matthew 9:6-8, we read “But that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins”–he then said to the paralytic --“Rise, take up your bed and go home.” And he rose and went home. When the crowds saw it, they were afraid, and they glorified God, who had given such authority to men." Notice how scripture says that such authority had been given to men. This is significant and is not merely a coincidence. This is the inspired word of God.

The question of authority and power to forgive sin is given obviously to Jesus and this is further affirmed in Matthew 28:18 where we are told, "And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.”

So just how is this authority transfered to the apostles and their successors? In John 20:21-23 "Jesus said to them, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” This is an incredible set of verses. They are rich in meaning and power. Notice that Jesus sends the apostles in the same way that the Father sent Him. The Father sent Jesus with all power and authority which included the power to forgive sins. So also Jesus sends the apostles. Jesus breathes on the apostles and says, “receive the Holy Spirit.” There is only one other time in all of scripture where God breathes on man, and that is in Genesis when God breathes life into Adam. This is a significant moment in the upper room and it is at this moment that Jesus says, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven: if you retain the sins of any they are retained.”

Later in the new testament scriptures we find additional verses that speak to confession and reconciliation. The most significant are the following:

2 Corinthians 5: 17-20
Therefore, if any one is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold, the new has come. All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. So we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.

James 5:14-15
Is any among you sick? Let him call for the presbyters [priests] of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and the Lord will raise him up; and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven. (“presbyter” is the root word from which we get the term priest)

James 5:16
Therefore confess you sins to one another….

Matthew 18:18
Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (In Jewish culture and faith the power to bind and loose carries a juridical dimension and has application to the forgiveness of sin)

 

[ryanoneil]

Matt. 9:6; Mark 2:10; Luke 5:24 - They point out that Jesus’ authority to forgive sins is as a man. Even though He is God, He does it as a man.The Gospel writers record this to convince us that God has given this authority to men. This authority has been transferred from Christ to the apostles and their successors.

1 Tim. 2:5 - For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

Christ is the only mediator, but He was free to decide how His mediation would be applied to us. The Lord chose to use priests of God to carry out His work of forgiveness. Even under the Old Covenant, God used priests to forgive and atone for the sins of others.

Now, Christ is the priest and the perfect sacrifice and He gives the ministry of reconciliation to His priests.

Peace be with you,

Ryan

 

[LindaS]

And last, but not least, Jesus spoke in Aramaic or Hebrew, not Greek. Using Greek grammar to determine what Jesus meant doesn’t make sense.

Peace,
Linda

 

[Antonius_Lupus]

I have a question regarding confession. I’ve read that the grammar in the Greek means that when Jesus told the apostles about binding and loosing, or remitting and retaining sins, that they were simply “announcing” what had already happened. IOW, they had the power to tell people their sins already were or weren’t forgiven based on what God had already done.

I don’t know if I’m being clear. My impression of what I’ve researched seems to be that the apostles’ power wasn’t actually to forgive sins or not, but simply say whether or not God had forgiven them. My protestant friends say that therefore you don’t need confession, b/c God forgives sins, and all the priests are really doing is telling you that, and the Bible already tells you that.

Very confused,
oneseeker

The key here is to understand how the Evangelical movement twists the Greek grammar. :tsktsk:

I all the Early translations of this verse, it was translated as: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (John 20:21–23).

But notice how the latter translations, like the NASB (an Evangelical translation) puts it: “If you forgive the sins of any, they have been forgiven, if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained.”

In short, we don’t know for sure how to translate the Greek verbs in that sentence, as the meaning could be either.

But let me ask you something: Who is more likely to have the correct translation? The earliest texts or the modern Evangelical texts? :bible1:

Peace be with you. :hug3:

 

[Randy_Carson]

I have a question regarding confession. I’ve read that the grammar in the Greek means that when Jesus told the apostles about binding and loosing, or remitting and retaining sins, that they were simply “announcing” what had already happened. IOW, they had the power to tell people their sins already were or weren’t forgiven based on what God had already done.

I don’t know if I’m being clear. My impression of what I’ve researched seems to be that the apostles’ power wasn’t actually to forgive sins or not, but simply say whether or not God had forgiven them. My protestant friends say that therefore you don’t need confession, b/c God forgives sins, and all the priests are really doing is telling you that, and the Bible already tells you that.

Very confused,
oneseeker

Confession to a Priest Proved from Scripture

Some people object to the Sacrament of Reconciliation (commonly called “Confession”) on the basis that they only need to confess their sins directly to God rather than to a priest. Is this perspective correct? Let’s see what the Bible has to say.

Leviticus 5:5-6
5 " 'When anyone is guilty in any of these ways, he must confess in what way he has sinned 6 and, as a penalty for the sin he has committed, he must bring to the LORD a female lamb or goat from the flock as a sin offering; and the priest shall make atonement for him for his sin.

“The priest shall make atonement.” Clearly in the Old Testament, the priesthood existed to offer sacrifices and make atonement for the sins committed by the people. Does this idea continue in the New Testament?

Hebrews 10:1
1 The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves.

The Old Testament prefigures and foreshadows New Testament truths; the Old is revealed more fully in the New. So, what does the New Testament teach us about confession of sin?

1 John 1:9
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.

We should confess our sins, and God will forgive us, but do we confess our sins to God alone?

James 5:13-16
13 Is any one of you in trouble? He should pray. Is anyone happy? Let him sing songs of praise. 14 Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. 15 And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven. 16 Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed.

Here the word of God tells us to call the elders (the Greek word is presbuteroi, or “presbyter”, from which the English word “priest” is derived. So, in this context, James is telling us to send for the priests who will pray over someone who is sick, and if he has sinned, he will be forgiven. Recalling the passage from Leviticus above, we see there is a strong parallel between the priests of the Old Testament who made atonement for sin and the presbyters or priests of the New Testament to whom we confess sins for forgiveness. But this sounds like blasphemy! Can men really forgive sins? This same question is asked in the New Testament.

Mark 2:5-7
5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” 6Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7"Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?"

Who can forgive sins but God alone? This question is often asked by those who seek to deny the sacrament of confession. However, note that this question is asked by the scribes who did not accept Jesus. Those who quote this passage find themselves on the side of those who rejected the Messiah. There’s more to the story, however; let’s consider the same incident from the book of Matthew.

Matthew 9:1-7
1 Jesus stepped into a boat, crossed over and came to his own town. 2Some men brought to him a paralytic, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven.” 3 At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, “This fellow is blaspheming!” 4 Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, “Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? 5Which is easier: to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up and walk’? 6But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins…” Then he said to the paralytic, “Get up, take your mat and go home.” 7And the man got up and went home. 8When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; and they praised God, who had given such authority to men.

The Bible teaches that God had given the authority to forgive sins “to men”. Note that this is not “to a man” but “to men” – plural. So, it is not only Jesus who has authority to forgive sins – “men” have this authority, also. This sounds like a “hard teaching”…is there confirmation of this in the Bible?

John 20:21-23
21 Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

How did God send Jesus into the world? With the authority to forgive sins as we saw in Matthew 9:6. How does Jesus send the Apostles? In the same way that the Father had sent Him…with the authority to forgive sins as we have just seen in John 20:23. How could the Apostles obey the commandment of Jesus to forgive sins unless they heard these sins confessed?

2 Corinthians 2:10
10To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ; (KJV)

And to whom you have pardoned any thing, I also. For, what I have pardoned, if I have pardoned any thing, for your sakes have I done it in the person of Christ. (Douay Rheims)

Only God can forgive sins, but He has chosen to do so through the ordained men of the priesthood and the Sacrament of Reconciliation that He Himself instituted.

 

[clmowry]

Only God can forgive sins, but He has chosen to do so through the ordained men of the priesthood and the Sacrament of Reconciliation that He Himself instituted.

So what should we say of/to the person who has committed a mortal sin and never seeks sacramental confession (Catholic or non-Catholic)?

I know that it is “possible” that God can save anyone he pleases. i.e. Baptism of Desire, Invincible Ignorance and all that…

But why do “we” seem to think the vast majority of people are going to be saved by exception?

I’m not trying to “judge” anyone here, but why do most folks seem to think that their salvation is secure without the grace of this (or any other) sacrament?

I see this very prevalent belief as Satan’s greatest success.

Chuck

 

[Odell]

In the Old testament the priest offered atonement do our priest do the same. What exactly is atonement and is there a parallel between the old atonment and the new atonement.

 

[Odell]

I have a question regarding confession. I’ve read that the grammar in the Greek means that when Jesus told the apostles about binding and loosing, or remitting and retaining sins, that they were simply “announcing” what had already happened. IOW, they had the power to tell people their sins already were or weren’t forgiven based on what God had already done.

Very confused,
oneseeker

NASB (an Evangelical translation) puts it: “**IF **you forgive the sins of any, they have been forgiven, IFyou retain the sins of any, they have been retained.”

how many protestants ministers would tell someone there sins are retained. I dont think that would go over very well. plus if a protestant tells me my sins are retained it would have nothing to do with God not forgiving me.

but scripture says IF you retain it is retained. obviously someone was given the authority.

If my confesion is not sensier a priest could tell me im not forgiven. I know some protestants who would tell me not to worry Jesus died for your sin 2000 years ago. And therefore it really would not matter if I continued in that particular sin.

 

[mercygate]

Good posts all on this thread.

The Greek IS clear in that it indicates forgiving and retaining as positive ACTS no ambiguity at all. YOU forgive. YOU retain. This is not a general message to whomever might be within earshot. It states WHOSE sins YOU forgive / WHOSE sins YOU retain.

If this meant merely: “Preach the gospel of forgiveness and those who accept it are forgiven but those who do not are not forgiven,” would Jesus have given them the specific, particular power of the Holy Spirit? Clearly, knowing that the world would spin around a few times before His return, Jesus provided his Church with a concrete means of living out the Gospel of repentance and reconciliation.

We believe that God forgives sins – but we believe that God gave the power of this mercy to the Apostles whose authority operates through their appointed successors to this day.

Heck! Confession is one of the really GREAT things about being Catholic!

 

[Odell]

Good posts all on this thread.

The Greek IS clear in that it indicates forgiving and retaining as positive ACTS no ambiguity at all. YOU forgive. YOU retain. This is not a general message to whomever might be within earshot. It states WHOSE sins YOU forgive / WHOSE sins YOU retain.
!

Thanks

thats what I was trying to say. You just said it alot better. I can use this now.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

I have a question regarding confession. I’ve read that the grammar in the Greek means that when Jesus told the apostles about binding and loosing, or remitting and retaining sins, that they were simply “announcing” what had already happened. IOW, they had the power to tell people their sins already were or weren’t forgiven based on what God had already done.

I don’t know if I’m being clear. My impression of what I’ve researched seems to be that the apostles’ power wasn’t actually to forgive sins or not, but simply say whether or not God had forgiven them. My protestant friends say that therefore you don’t need confession, b/c God forgives sins, and all the priests are really doing is telling you that, and the Bible already tells you that.

Very confused,
oneseeker

Yep, the flow is from heaven to earth, not the other way around, thus logically, the apostles at least were making infallible decisions based on old testament scriptures and based on Jesus’s teachings.

Second, the grammar of the passage suggests the very opposite of the claim made by Catholic theologians. The verbal forms “shall be bound” and “shall be loosed,” in the Greek New Testament, are perfect tense, passive voice participles. The perfect tense suggests that the binding and loosing had already occurred, and the effects of that action would remain.

The passage may thus be translated as follows: “Whatever you shall bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven” (NASB).

A full discussion of this matter is found in Boyce Blackwelder’s Light From The Greek New Testament, pp. 74-80. Underline “bound” and “loosed” in your Testament, and in the margin note: Greek tense indicates that binding/loosing had already occurred; the apostles were to concur.

christiancourier.com/articles/read/matthew_1619_binding_and_loosing

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

More importantly: by what authority do they teach this? Which translation(s) of Scripture are the foundation of this belief, and what authority permitted or endorsed those translations?

This question ultimately comes down to authority – that is, Christ gave His authority to Peter and the apostles, and they passed it on to their successors. How can one claim one’s own personal translation or interpretation is authoritative if one does not have the authority passed down from Christ?

In other words: if one’s faith tradition originated in a separation from the Church founded by Christ, doesn’t it seem a bit presumptuous to assert the authority of one’s personal belief system – especially given the mind-boggling number of personal interpretations this would engender?

Peace,
Dante

even greek catholic scholars recognize that the flow is from heaven to earth, that what is bound on earth was already bound in heaven.

 

[oneseeker]

What Daniel Marsh says about the greek grammar is exactly what I’ve heard before. The perfect passive tense of the terms binding and loosing. That’s what I was trying to convey. That’s exactly what hubby and his family (charter member Southern Baptists) believe quite strongly, to say the least.

oneseeker

 

[mercygate]

What Daniel Marsh says about the greek grammar is exactly what I’ve heard before. The perfect passive tense of the terms binding and loosing. That’s what I was trying to convey. That’s exactly what hubby and his family (charter member Southern Baptists) believe quite strongly, to say the least.

oneseeker

Do they explain why this was accompanied by Jesus’ breathing on the Apostles and ONLY the Apostles for this? Do they actually confess their sins to one another, as James counsels?

 

[oneseeker]

Do they explain why this was accompanied by Jesus’ breathing on the Apostles and ONLY the Apostles for this? Do they actually confess their sins to one another, as James counsels?

I’ve spoken to hubby about this. He believes that only God can forgive sins, and that the grammar of the passage is simply showing that the apostles have the power to bind or loose. Only they have the power to say “God said this or that is correct”, or “according to the Lord’s teaching, this is the proper doctrine for the church”, not to forgive sins, which is God’s work.

Make any sense,
oneseeker

 

[oneseeker]

bump

oneseeker