Jesus Christ is our only 'mediator' as stated by St. Paul

[placido]

John 20:22-23 Is just a proclamation of what Christ has already done. No need to confess your sins to a priest.

You want us to believe that John 20:23 says “if you forgive the sins of any, IT IS BECAUSE I have already forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, IT IS BECAUSE I have already retainied them,” but that is not what the text says, that is what you wanted it to say.
And where does the Bible say “no need to confess your sins to a priest”?

placido

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Also, if your interpretation of the passage were correct, the Apostle would be saying that we should not pray for a person who is in mortal sin, which does not seem to make sense.

Don’t take my word for it read it yourself.
1Jn5:16If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.

I can see your point, but what I cannot see is why we would not want to pray for such a person.

I believe what John is saying is that we should not pray for mercy for sins that are not repented of. I do not believe he is saying that we should not pray that the sinner comes to repentance.

Because you are saying that the quality of the sins is the same. What you are purporting is that one is forgiven, and the other is not. The Apostles taught that some sins are more serious than others…

I agree that the apostles did say that some sins are more serious than others. Ok, let’s look at Mark 12 and see if I can explain it.
Mark 12
42And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?
43Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
44Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath.
45But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;
46The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
47And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
48But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

You will notice that there are four different servants here. The first is the righteous servant
Who is giving meat to the lord’s household. What does that mean? Well, it’s kind of like what I’m trying to do on this thread and that is explain the word of God. The next three recieve diminishing degrees of punisment according to their awarness of God’s word and willingness to expound on it. You must note that the first one recieves no punishment. this is the righteous servant who has been washed in the blood of the Lamb. The other three recieve punishment which means they are all damned. It’s just that some will be punished longer than others before they are destroyed.

Pretty much not. You see, we have held to the Apostolic command to keep the Traditions. One of those is that, if anyone comes along with “a different gospel” than the one committed to us by the Apostles, we will be accursed if we embrace it. We take our salvation vere seriously, and we don’t want to be accursed by embracing what you are bringing.

Gal1:1Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead
8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Ok, please explain to me how I am saying any thing to you that Paul or any of the apostles did not teach?

You did, however, your explanation does not fit all the facts:

How so?

Our Lord said to Pilate (John 19:11): ‘He that hath delivered me to thee, hath the greater sin,’ and yet it is evident that Pilate was guilty of some sin. Therefore one sin is greater than another.

Again, I don’t believe I said they weren’t

Neither of these sins had been forgiven.

You absolutely cannot know this.

This is true. But it is also true that some sins are more serious than others. This is why some receive a “light beating” and others a “severe”

True, but none of those that are punished recieve eternal life.

continued

 

[Richard_Kastner]

continued

Let’s take a look at 1Jn 5:16-17 again. 16If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. 17All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death. You will notice in v. 16 John is talking about intercessory prayer. He mentions it twice in that v. The first time he mentions it, he says there is a sin that is not unto death and we should pray to God for that person and God will give him life. Ok, we got that one. Now he says there is a sin that is unto death and we are not even to pray for the brother that commits this sin. Right? Ok, let me ask you. Does the CC teach that you should not pray for brothers that commit mortal sin? I certainly hope not. So, this sin probably is not the sin that the CC would call mortal. Ok, what is it then. It is my contention that this sin is the unpardonable sin. The unpardonable sin is any sin for which no pardon is asked and if no pardon is asked none will be given. John is here talking of a truely lost soul.

You put your finger on the problem, Richard. The only way your interpretation can make sense is if we are not to pray for those in mortal sin.

I think you misunderstand me here. In v. 16 John says there is a sin unto death and that we should NOT PRAY for it. Now let’s get this straight. It’s not me saying this. It’s John.
I also say that I don’t believe that this is what the CC says is Mortal sin, unless that mortal sin is not repented of. The only sin this could possibly be talking about is unrepentant sin.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

All Catholics have Clout

I understand you are SDA … who desires to join with those who have Clout

Just another misunderstanding. I am SDA but, I’ll stay in my weakness. for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 2Cor 12:9

 

[1beleevr]

shw:“But if we confess our sins unto Him, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all wickedness.” Kinda interesting how man creates or manipulates to make things “mandatory”, when we don’t know for sure that this is His plan or His order Uh, oh, here comes John 20:22-23, again, or maybe James 5:14-16 Isn’t the word “if” in both verses, somewhere!

 

[1beleevr]

Richard Kastner: Sounds like ther is a witch hunt on, concerning your choice of faithWhen I read your posts, I don’t see SDA, or anything else, I see a man who is passionate about his Saviour:thumbsup: Keep up the good fight, my brother in Christ!

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Richard Kastner: Sounds like ther is a witch hunt on, concerning your choice of faithWhen I read your posts, I don’t see SDA, or anything else, I see a man who is passionate about his Saviour:thumbsup: Keep up the good fight, my brother in Christ!

Thanks I needed that!!!

 

[1beleevr]

It should read,:“All Christians have clout!.” No sense in keeping it in one religion or another

 

[SHW]

I think you misunderstand me here. In v. 16 John says there is a sin unto death and that we should NOT PRAY for it. Now let’s get this straight. It’s not me saying this. It’s John.
I also say that I don’t believe that this is what the CC says is Mortal sin, unless that mortal sin is not repented of. The only sin this could possibly be talking about is unrepentant sin.

In context, John is encouraging all believers to pray for others and telling them that their prayers for others will be heard by God and also answered by God according to His will:

1 John 5
Now this is the confidence that we have in Him, that** if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. 15 And if we know that He hears us, whatever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we have asked of Him.**

First, John states that God answers all of our prayers. However, then he makes an exception to what he just wrote since he then makes the point that there is one particular “mortal sin” of apostasy/impenitence which causes the “death of eternal life of the soul” and this extremely serious sin usually is not repented before death and this is why he states that “I do not say that one is to pray for that.” He is emphasizing his point that their prayers for these persons probably will not be answered because most persons who apostatize rarely repent.

16 If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin which does not lead to death, he will ask, and He will give him life for those who commit sin not leading to death. There is sin leading to death. I do not say that he should pray about that. 17 All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death.

But, all things are possible for God.

Mark 10:27
But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.

 

[SHW]

shw:“But if we confess our sins unto Him, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all wickedness.” Kinda interesting how man creates or manipulates to make things “mandatory”, when we don’t know for sure that this is His plan or His order Uh, oh, here comes John 20:22-23, again, or maybe James 5:14-16 Isn’t the word “if” in both verses, somewhere!

We confess our sins “unto Him” by confessing to His priests to whom He gave His power to forgive sins. And you would know this if you knew the Oral Traditions of the Church besides just the Written Tradition/Scripture. You would not now be choosing verses and misinterpreting them to support your own personal beliefs.

John 20:20-23
When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord.
21 So Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.

This command and power to forgive sins and retain sins was given to the Apostles only, who then commissioned others by the “laying on of hands” of the priesthood. (1 Timothy 4:14, 2 Timothy 2:2)

The only purpose of confessing sins to other Christians is to help keep us accountable to our Christian walk. This confessing to others does not remit our sins. Jesus chooses to remit sins through His chosen priests.

The word “IF” means that they have the power to do either one or the other; either Forgive the sins of the person who is confessing them or Retain the sins of the person who is confessing them. **This does not mean that they can shirk their duty and do neither. They must choose one or the other. ** However, Jesus accepts their decisions as final!!!

In James 5:14-16, the elders/presbyters are actually priests so, yes, they do forgive sins when the sick person confesses.

 

[guanophore]

It doesn’t matter which came first. The Gospels are just that. The good news of Jesus Christ and Him crucified. The epistles merely expanded on this theme.

No, Richard. The primary purpose of the Epistles are not evangelistic, but pastoral. It is true that nothing in them contradicts what is contained in the gospels, but their thrust is to give direction to the believers - those that have already become members of the Body of Christ. If you look at the salutations of the Epistles, it is clear they are addressed not to unbelievers, but believers.

 

[1beleevr]

shw: Funny, I read 1John1:9 again, and there is no mention of priests It is clearly the interpretation(speaking of such) of the catholic church, that believers should be compelled to confess sins to a priest! No catholic on any thread has been able to show me where my Saviour commands ME to confess my sins to a priest, therefore I shall continue confessing to the one and only Holy Father(sorry pope!)

 

[guanophore]

Don’t take my word for it read it yourself.
1Jn5:16If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.

I believe what John is saying is that we should not pray for mercy for sins that are not repented of. I do not believe he is saying that we should not pray that the sinner comes to repentance.

I can appreciate that this is what you want to believe “what John is saying”. However, your choice of interpretation is not consistent with what the Apostles believed and taught. They taught that God wants all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the Truth, and that God has called all men every where to repent, believe in the Gospel, and become obedient to the faith. Toward that end, we are to pray fervently for the conversion of lost sinners who are in danger of dying in their sins. You have inserted your personal (or perhaps the classic SDA) theology into the passage. It says nothing about praying for mercy with regard to unrepentant sins.

There are sins that are mortal (unto death) and intercessory prayer is not sufficient for them. One must go to confession, so that the sin can be remitted.

 I agree that the apostles did say that some sins are more serious than others. Ok, let's look at Mark 12 and see if I can explain it.

You will notice that there are four different servants here. The first is the righteous servant
Who is giving meat to the lord’s household. What does that mean? Well, it’s kind of like what I’m trying to do on this thread and that is explain the word of God.

I am sure that you wish to see yourself as a righteous servant. That is kinda hard to put across when you are breaking the forum rules.

The next three recieve diminishing degrees of punisment according to their awarness of God's word and willingness to expound on it. You must note that the first one recieves no punishment. this is the righteous servant who has been washed in the blood of the Lamb. The other three recieve punishment which means they are all damned. It's just that some will be punished longer than others before they are destroyed.

It seems clear from your previous posts that you have significantly departed from the Apostolic teaching on Heaven and Hell. However, that is an issue for another thread also.

Suffice to say that we are in agreement that there are different degrees of seriousness of sin. In the Latin Rite, these are referred to as “mortal” and “venial”. Mortal sins are deadly, and do not respond to intercessory prayer.

All sins are covered by the blood of the Lamb.

Ok, please explain to me how I am saying any thing to you that Paul or any of the apostles did not teach?

Just the number of departures you have made from Apostolic Teaching on this thread is too much for one post! You have departed from the unity of the Apostles. You have taken up a “different gospel” that was created some 1800 and some years after the Apostles committed the faith (whole and entire) to the Church.

How so?

Your explanation of the passage does not fit all the facts. See my first paragraph above.

Again, I don't believe I said they weren't

Actually, I think you did say that all sin is equivalent. However, specifically with regard to the passage in Jn, you are saying that it it not talking about the seriousness of the sin, but to whether or not the sin is forgiven.

You absolutely cannot know this.

I can know what has been revealed by the word of God, and that is that Pilate sinned in handing Jesus over to be crucified, and so did Herod. However, I don’t agree with y’all that Herod is the one reference in this passage, but the High Priest and the elders. They are the ones that are responsible for handing Jesus over. Jesus testified of them that they would die in their sins, unless they came to Him. You are right, I cannot know if any of them were forgiven, but I do know that the passage in Jn. is not distinguishing sins according to the categories of forgiven/unforgiven.

True, but none of those that are punished recieve eternal life.

This, again, is your personal belief, also not consistent with what the Apostles believed and taught.

I think you misunderstand me here. In v. 16 John says there is a sin unto death and that we should NOT PRAY for it. Now let's get this straight. It's not me saying this. It's John.

We are in agreement on this point. What we don’t agree upon is how you interpret what John says.

I also say that I don’t believe that this is what the CC says is Mortal sin, unless that mortal sin is not repented of. The only sin this could possibly be talking about is unrepentant sin.

I know you believe this, however, this is not consistent with what the Apostles believed and taught. It is true, death in a state of unrepentant sin is mortal, but the passage in John is talking about greater and lesser severeties of sin. Mortal sin must be remitted according to the method Jesus gave to the Church.

 

[AwGusTeen]

shw: Funny, I read 1John1:9 again, and there is no mention of priests It is clearly the interpretation(speaking of such) of the catholic church, that believers should be compelled to confess sins to a priest! No catholic on any thread has been able to show me where my Saviour commands ME to confess my sins to a priest, therefore I shall continue confessing to the one and only Holy Father(sorry pope!)

You will not accept the idea of confessing your sins to a priest, yet you have no problem holding to the made-made idea of Sola Scriptura. Where does the Savior command you to hold to scripture as the sole authority? Show me.

 

[guanophore]

Richard Kastner: Sounds like ther is a witch hunt on, concerning your choice of faith When I read your posts, I don’t see SDA, or anything else, I see a man who is passionate about his Saviour:thumbsup: Keep up the good fight, my brother in Christ!

No, no witch hunt. We were making the point that the doctrine he has espoused is a departure from what the Apostles believed and taught.

The question about his denominational affiliation came up out of the curiosity over the origin of his “different gospel”.

I agree with you that Richard is clearly passionate about his faith. I think he is even more passionate about the doctrines he embraces than he is passionate about bashing the Catholic faith, and that is a lot!

This is not really the right place, though, for him to “fight”, in the sense that he is not really here to use the forum for it’s intended purpose. I think he needs another website where he can encourage Catholics to leave their faith, since it is against he rules here.

 

[BRB1]

I’ll stay in my weakness. for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 2Cor 12:9

Paul had Clout … I think you would agree.

Christ wants RK to have Clout. Christ works thru his Church to build up the body.

 

[SHW]

Funny, I read 1 Jn 1:9 again, and there is no mention of priests: It is clearly the interpretation(speaking of such) of the catholic church, that believers should be compelled to confess sins to a priest! No catholic on any thread has been able to show me where my Savior commands ME to confess my sins to a priest, therefore I shall continue confessing to the one and only Holy Father(sorry pope!)

Since you are untaught by Christ’s Catholic Church, you are therefore unstable in your understanding of the Scriptures, so you then unknowingly twist Them to fit your own personal dogmas. (2 Pet 3:16, 2 Pet 1:20)

How about using reasoning in this discussion?

Since John was writing to Church members only, don’t you think that they already were confessing their serious sins to priests/elders? Since they were already taught orally by the apostles and their successors in person before this letter was written, they would already know the rules of the Church, don’t you think?

This epistle (1 Jn 1:9) and all others are reminders of previous oral teaching and do not have to have every aspect of their oral preaching written in them. Epistles were supplements to oral preaching/teaching only in order to further instruct in the faith and/or for admonishment and/or encouragement of the faithful; they were not substitutes for oral preaching/teaching.

Jesus commanded the apostles to go out and make disciples for Him through Baptism and to teach these new disciples the gospel (all that He had commanded them) (Matt 28:18-20); He never told them to go out and teach orally only until they could get some letters written and then 300+ years later make them into a book and call it the Bible, so that people could then just disregard all previous oral teaching/preaching. He never commanded everyone to pick up a Bible, read it, and then decide for themselves what these Scriptures meant. Jesus founded a Church and gave It His authority to take His place administering His New Covenant on earth much like Moses and his successors, the scribes and Pharisees, were in possession of God’s authority on earth under the Old Covenant. (Matt 23:1-3)

And, for argument’s sake, even if confessing to a priest back then was not done exactly as it is today, this does not negate the fact that the Catholic Church has God’s authority to make rules to help people to lead good Christian lives and this is one (confessing mortal sins to a priest) of the rules in force today which must be obeyed because it is bound/upheld in heaven.

Matt 16:18-19
And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 And** I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven**.

Matt 18:18
Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

**
Scripture does admonish us to stand fast and hold/obey all the traditions of the Church, both oral or written.**

2 Thess 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.

1 Cor 11:2
Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you.

The Catholic Church has Jesus’ authority to speak for Him and to make rules for the faithful to follow:

Luke 10:16
He who hears you (Church hierarchy) hears Me, he who rejects you (Church hierarchy) rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me.

Heb 13:7
** Remember those who rule over you**, who have spoken the word of God to you, whose faith follow, considering the outcome of their conduct.

Heb 13:17
Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you.

2 Cor 10:8
For even if I should boast somewhat more about our authority, which the Lord gave us for edification and not for your destruction, I shall not be ashamed—

How do we know which Church is the church of Christ? The one with the successor of Peter as chief steward. He alone on earth has the keys to the kingdom of heaven.

Matt 16:18-19
And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

“Around the year A.D. 107, a bishop, St. Ignatius of Antioch in the Near East, was arrested, brought to Rome by armed guards and eventually martyred there in the arena. In a farewell letter which this early bishop and martyr wrote to his fellow Christians in Smyrna (today Izmir in modern Turkey), he made the first written mention in history of “the Catholic Church.” He wrote, “Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church” (To the Smyrnaeans 8:2). Thus, the second century of Christianity had scarcely begun when the name of the Catholic Church was already in use.” from: ewtn.com/faith/teachings/churb3.htm

I obey Scripture. You have decided to make yourself your own authority. This is not Biblical.

 

[elvisman]

John 20:22-23 Is just a proclamation of what Christ has already done. No need to confess your sins to a priest.

Ummm . . . can you please show me where it says that in the text, because in the text I’m reading, Jesus is commissioning them:

John 20:21-23
**(Jesus) said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you." *****And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the holy Spirit. ***Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained."
Notice Jesus didn’t say, whose sins I forgave or whose sins I retained.

 

[elvisman]

shw:“But if we confess our sins unto Him, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all wickedness.” Kinda interesting how man creates or manipulates to make things “mandatory”, when we don’t know for sure that this is His plan or His order Uh, oh, here comes John 20:22-23, again, or maybe James 5:14-16 Isn’t the word “if” in both verses, somewhere!

Then what, exactly do you make of John 20:21-23? Do you think Jesus was just kidding or pulling the wool over the Apostles’ eyes?

**While we’re at it - what do you make of 1 Tim. 2:5? **
All I want is a clear, succinct answer to both questions.

 

[freedomwriter]

Ummm . . . can you please show me where it says that in the text, because in the text I’m reading, Jesus is commissioning them:

John 20:21-23
(Jesus) said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you." ***And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the holy Spirit. ***Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.”
Notice Jesus didn’t say, whose sins I forgave or whose sins I retained.

ummm…Only God can forgive sins Mk 2:7, i have already responded to Jn 20:23 but I will do it for you. All this scripture is saying is when people respond to the gospel in a positive way and accept it, we have the right to delcare to them “your sins are forgiven” based on the promise of Jesus. Same goes for "your sins are not forgiven. We are proclaiming heaven’s verdict regarding what will happen if people respond one way or the other in regard to Christ.
Technically all believers is a priest before God 1 Peter 2:5,9. So if this is true then this has implications regarding whether it is necessary for believers to go to a priest for confession. After all Priests confess directly to God Heb 4:16. If we are priests as scripture indicates then we confess directly to God not to another priest.
Scripturally there is not a single verse in the NT including Jn 20:23 that instructs us to confess our sins to some priest.
Since the Word of God indicates that all of us are priests and since all priests confess directly to God what does this tell you about the privilege of every single believer. Ummmm.lol (we can confess directly to God instead of having to go through anothe priest)Ummmm. God Bless you Elvis