Is there anywhere in Tanakh which gives Priests' right to forgive sin? As a Jew, I believe we should go to G-d alone, but I'm willing to see sources

[LateranBasilica]

We have plenty of evidence for stoning. It gave the Catholic Church our first saint. And what of before the Sanhedrin?

 

[Rabbi]

The Talmud says stoning hardly ever happened; I have no reason not to accept its authority. Rav Akiva said that once a court put a man to death in 70 years and THAT was a wicked court!

If you look in those laws, you’ll see how hard it was to do it. Contrary to popular opinion, stoning wasn’t something people were looking forward too in those days. For example, you’d need to witnesses who aren’t connected by family ties, and they couldn’t even tell the exact same story lest they be suspected of collusion. Lastly, the person sinning would have to be warned or it (in case s/he forgot), and still, knowing of it, keep it up. you’d have to almost be suicidal!

 

[Rabbi]

So some of that would also explain pre-Sanhedrin times, but there’s always been a court of some kind since Moses.

 

[Rabbi]

I really like what you’re saying here. Some of these Protestant people even believe in predestination, a concept entirely absent in Tanakh and the New Testament.

 

[Rabbi]

I see, we always know people like that and that’s a good sign, for we can learn from them.

 

[Rabbi]

Right, but even that’s just the awakening from sleep, as Tolstoy said. I know I’m taking your words and taking it to another place.

 

[meltzerboy2]

This sounds more like something some (certainly not all) Protestants might think about Catholic priests.

 

[LateranBasilica]

Which days? We are covering thousands of years of history here.

 

[DENNYINMI]

Looking through Isaiah 22:22 gave me some insight: “And I will give the key of the House of David on his shoulder, and he shall open and no one shall close; and he shall close and no one shall open.”

In all due respect Rabbi, if this verse was obscure to you, or you were not aware of the implication of the “keys” I question your intent, not that of the Church.

The early Church was promulgated by Jews. They understood henceforth the concept of “leaving the keys” with the person “in authority” to bind and loose and this would not have been lost on a Jew with foresight into the Jewish Scripture.

The person who held the “keys” in the Old Testament even had the power to determine who gained entrance to see the King.

I dunno what to tell you Rabbi, but I am a bit surprised. God Bless You

 

[mcq72]

Catholic priests absolve us of our sins little differently than the Levitical priests of Old did. Go to the priest as God instructs and you will be forgiven.

I think so…the priest does not say, “God forgives you”, or “Jesus forgives you”, but “I forgive (absolve) you”.

 

[Hodos]

Is there anywhere in Tanakh which gives Priests’ right to forgive sin? As a Jew, I believe we should go to G-d alone, but I’m willing to see sources. Thank you.

No, but the Tanakh does teach that the priest offers the sacrifice of atonement to God, and that God through his grace accepts this as the atonement for sin. In that light, the priest does not forgive, but announces to his people the promise that God has forgiven the sinner. The priest does not forgive sins per se, God does this, but the priest declares forgiveness of sins based on God’s covenant promise to do so. This is precisely what we see in the Book of Hebrews where Christ is both the high priest, and the sacrifice, and the one making intercession to God for the sinner.

 

[PetraG]

We can all agree here that g-d could care less, as long as we lead good lives, we’ll all attain His blessing.

I think we can agree that G-d does not get anxious about things. Having said that, of course no one could care more than G-d does. All who believe in G-d have to agree on this! (Honestly, if we believe that it matters whether the Holy Name is spelled out or voiced or not, we do believe that seemingly small things matter, correct?)

As Christians, of course you appreciate that we cannot possibly believe that the Incarnation, Passion, Death and Resurrection took place without a compelling reason! We do believe that it is necessary for those offered faith to accept it. At the same time, we also admit the possibility of “invincible ignorance” among those who have sought the truth in good faith, heard the Gospel, and yet refuse to put faith in it. While it is an offense against G-d to be able to accept the Gospel and to refuse it, yet it is also possible to hear it yet not be offered the opportunity to accept it for reasons we do not understand and therefore must not judge (except to explain the necessity of acceptance of the Gospel to those who can believe.)

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
IV. Erroneous Judgment
1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man “takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.”[Gaudium Spes, 16] In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time “from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith.”[ 1 Tim 5; cf. 8:9; → 2 Tim 3; → 1 Pet 3:21; → Acts 24:16.]

The more a correct conscience prevails, the more do persons and groups turn aside from blind choice and try to be guided by objective standards of moral conduct.[Gaudium Spes, 16]