John 20:23 (Again and again)

[Randy_Carson]

He said it to tell them that they had the authority. Jesus didn’t mislead anyone. He told the Apostles that they had the authority and they did. He didn’t say anything about successors.

I addressed the issue of Apostolic Succession in posts 12-16.

Would you like to interact with any of that?

 

[NotWorthy]

Why would Jesus give that authority to his disciples if He did not intend for it to be passed down?

Evidently the need for forgiveness passed with the Apostles?

Oh, that’s right. It didn’t!!!

 

[SyCarl]

I addressed the issue of Apostolic Succession in posts 12-16.

Would you like to interact with any of that?

I did interact with them in post 20.
First the subject of this thread is John 20:23. I agree with the literal interpretaion of the passage. Yes, the Apostles did have the power to forgive sins. Jesus quite clearly gave it to them. However none of the Scriptures you quote say anything about the power of the Apostles being passed on. The instructions are to pass on the teaching to others. Again there is no dispute that prior to enscriptualization of the message it was passed on orally. But it was later passed on by Scripture. While the early church fathers are not infallible, Irenaeus did write:

1. We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith. (Against Heresies 3, 1, 1)

(emphasis added)

You quote from Irenaeus. Do you accept what he says here as well?

Doctrine was passed on but the Scripture makes no mention of the Apostles passing on their power. The only offices that Paul directs to be appointed are those in 1 Timothy and Titus. Presbyters, whether you call them bishops, elder or overseers, and deacons are the only offices he deals with. There is no distinction made between priest and bishop; they are the same office, as the Epistle to Titus makes clear. The distinction in the offices were created afterwards by men.

You cite passages from the Old Testament. But they do not deal with the passing on of power. The Jewish priesthood did not have the same powers as Moses and Aaron.

As mentioned above, the early church fathers are not infallible and while they may say things that support the Catholic position on some matters, they also say things contrary to it, and can in fact contradict themselves. How are bishops to be appointed? Cyprian says in at least one place by universal suffrage.

a bishop is appointed into the place of one deceased, when he is chosen in time of peace by the suffrage of an entire people, when he is protected by the help of God in persecution, faithfully linked with all his colleagues, approved to his people by now four years’ experience in his episcopate (Letter 54:6)

On confession itself Clement of Rome says the following:

The Lord of all things, brethren, is in need of naught; neither requireth he anything of any one, except to confess unto him. For the elect David saith, I will confess unto the Lord, and that shall please him more than a young calf that putteth forth horns and hoofs. Let the poor behold and rejoice thereat. And again he saith, Offer unto the Lord the sacrifice of praise: pay thy vows unto the Most High. And call upon me in the day of thy affliction, and I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me. For the sacrifice unto God is a broken spirit. (First Epistle to the Corinthians)

Having said all this, I do not say there is anything wrong with confessing to a priest, but it is God who actually forgives, and the priest is not necessary. The priest can not tell whether a penitent is truly contrite. Only God can tell that, so the forgiveness comes from God.

The Church at least implicitly recognizes this to be true by its teaching on perfect contrition. If a person can be forgiven by perfect contrition with the intention to confess when possible, what does the priest add when the penitent actually does confess? Does perfect contrition only give a conditional forgiveness? Would God take away forgiveness a person already had just because the person did not go to a priest?

 

[Randy_Carson]

I did interact with them in post 20.

Post 20 was mine.

 

[anthony022071]

JOHN 20:23
If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.

This verse drives me insane. I tried to look some things up, trying to find a decent Protestant explanation of this verse. It probably deserves much more serious research than the brief looking around that I did, but I did what I could for right now.

*From the little commentary in my Bible: *The disciples are to preach both the way of salvation and the way of damnation explaining how sinners can be forgiven and the danger of rejecting the gospel. Whether or not the hearers’ sins are forgiven depends on their acceptance or rejection of Christ.

Oh my. Isn’t that stretching it a bit?

The second and third will be a copy/paste from a website.

Source:
protestant-truth.org/protestantism/absolution.html

I was at another website that looked okay for a minute, but I was so put off by the term “Romish” that I just quit there. I’m not in a great mood right now anyway.

And from the quote I quoted above, those interpretations are stretches too.

No, they may not be paraphrased that way because that’s not even paraphrasing. That’s utterly, unabashedly adding stuff. Isn’t it? I mean, isn’t that just a stretch? Is it something that’s been interpreted “in light of other scriptures?”

I have asked around, just a few fellow Bible thumpers. Most of them give me a variation of the stuff I’ve quoted above.

Either there is no satisfactory Protestant explanation for this verse or I am not looking hard enough.

:banghead:

What exactly is so hard to understand about John 20:23 ?
Jesus gave the apostles,as his messengers,his authority to forgive or retain sins,but that does not mean salvation or damnation.
Salvation and damnation is for Jesus Christ to decide,based not only on faith but on works.

As Paul says in his letter to the Romans (2,12 - 16) “When the Gentiles,who do not possess the law,do instinctively what the law requires,these,though not having the law,are a law to themselves.They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts,to which their own conscience also bears witness;and their conflicting thoughts will accuse them or perhaps excuse them on the day when,according to my gospel,God,through Jesus Christ,will judge the secret thoughts of all.”

 

[teachccd]

Why would Jesus give that authority to his disciples if He did not intend for it to be passed down?

You’re probably right. I wish I could just post everything here, as I know there are some knowledgable and eloquent Protestant posters here, but I guess I ought to go see what the full scope of Protestantism has to say. I’m to a point where I’d love to confer with some other Protestants about several things. From what I’ve heard from posters here, a lot of protestant forums will ban anyone that remotely sounds catholic, but I guess I’ll just see for myself.

heh…maybe this isn’t a good place to ask, but are there any prot forums anyone would recommend for such a discussion?

:banghead:

This bangy head smiley is becoming one of my favorites.
I honestly don’t know. **** and moan and whine? Bang my head against the wall in real life?

Randy Carson really spells it out for you, Curious. All these posts and not one adequate Protestant answer to that verse. I’ve been asking Protestants for years. No intelligent answers found as of yet.

Conclusion? Well Catholics have a very sensible answer. You can really put that bangy head thing away. Pray for me tomorrow…teachccd

 

[teachccd]

Oh and one other thing, Curious. You have quite an interesting signature for a “Protestant”.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Oh and one other thing, Curious. You have quite an interesting signature for a “Protestant”.

Why is his signature interesting for a protestant? Just asking

I try to remind myself of this alomst daily. You know with beingso totally caught up in my own little world and all.

 

[teachccd]

Why is his signature interesting for a protestant? Just asking

I try to remind myself of this alomst daily. You know with beingso totally caught up in my own little world and all.

The body of Christ…CATHOLIC EUCHARIST
Bless me, father, for I have sinned…CATHOLIC CONFESSION
I baptize you… CATHOLIC (and some protestant) BAPTISM
Now and at the hour of our death… END OF THE HAIL MARY PRAYER (CATHOLIC)
Lord, hear our prayer… SAYING AFTER THE GENERAL INTERCESSIONS AT A CATHOLIC MASS

These are ALL used in Catholicism. I have yet to hear, " Bless me Father for I have sinned" at a Calvary Chapel. I would hope that Protestants would use all of these but somehow I don’t see that yet…God Bless…teachccd

 

[Curious]

Randy Carson really spells it out for you, Curious

I know it. Randy is the BOMB!!! I’ve just discovered his bombness recently.

And you’re okay too, I guess, teach.

KIDDING!

Oh and one other thing, Curious. You have quite an interesting signature for a “Protestant”.

Yes. I made it when I was feeling particularly dramatic and whiny. I’m rather fond of it now, actually.

ALLFORHIM, I’m a her.

 

[Mannyfit75]

I know it. Randy is the BOMB!!! I’ve just discovered his bombness recently.

And you’re okay too, I guess, teach.

KIDDING!

Yes. I made it when I was feeling particularly dramatic and whiny. I’m rather fond of it now, actually.

ALLFORHIM, I’m a her.

Aren’t you ALLFORHIM’s archrival as one of the most respected Protestants here?

Anyways, before this goes off the topic, do you have any other reason how you would interpret this passage, curious?

 

[Curious]

Aren’t you ALLFORHIM’s archrival as one of the most respected Protestants here?

nawww…not REALLY. Just in fun.

[Anyways, before this goes off the topic, do you have any other reason how you would interpret this passage, curious?/QUOTE]

I found something more satisfactory then the stuff I posted previously. But that explanation still sounds pretty Catholic.

 

[teachccd]

I found something more satisfactory then the stuff I posted previously. But that explanation still sounds pretty Catholic.

Oh Oh…You see how I just continue to pop up when you say things like this??? …LOL teachccd

 

[Mannyfit75]

nawww…not REALLY. Just in fun.

[Anyways, before this goes off the topic, do you have any other reason how you would interpret this passage, curious?/QUOTE]

I found something more satisfactory then the stuff I posted previously. But that explanation still sounds pretty Catholic.

 

[Curious]

Oh Oh…You see how I just continue to pop up when you say things like this??? …LOL teachccd

Other than John 20:23 what other passages in the Gospel of John do you have trouble with?

Well.

John 6 certainly isn’t much fun right now. Were you anticipating I would say that? I’m here all the time - enough to know what a hot topic that is. Enough to know that I don’t know anymore how symbolic communion is. Transub is quite a leap for me.

this is my body…
this is a hard saying…
this is my blood…

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Just for you, teach.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Well.

John 6 certainly isn’t much fun right now. Were you anticipating I would say that? I’m here all the time - enough to know what a hot topic that is. Enough to know that I don’t know anymore how symbolic communion is. Transub is quite a leap for me.

this is my body…
this is a hard saying…
this is my blood…

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Just for you, teach.

I think Matthew 16:18 sounds too Catholic,

The first Chapter of Luke concerning Mary very much sounds too Catholic… even the Marian prayers of the rosary are there.

 

[teachccd]

Well.

John 6 certainly isn’t much fun right now. Were you anticipating I would say that? I’m here all the time - enough to know what a hot topic that is. Enough to know that I don’t know anymore how symbolic communion is. Transub is quite a leap for me.

this is my body…
this is a hard saying…
this is my blood…

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Just for you, teach.

Well deserved!!

 

[teachccd]

Well.

John 6 certainly isn’t much fun right now. Were you anticipating I would say that? I’m here all the time - enough to know what a hot topic that is. Enough to know that I don’t know anymore how symbolic communion is. Transub is quite a leap for me.

this is my body…
this is a hard saying…
this is my blood…

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Just for you, teach.

Do you have a week?? We can go over John Chapter Six. WARNING!!! You’ll never be the same again. teachccd

 

[Techno2000]

In what instance did the disciples “retain” sin? What does that even mean?

.

It would mean if someone went to confession for fornication, and that person was living with someone at the time,the Priest could decide to not give that person Absolution.

 

[Curious]

It would mean if someone went to confession for fornication, and that person was living with someone at the time,the Priest could decide to not give that person Absolution.

ahhh…okay.