Sola Scriptura is True

[Bill_Pick]

The Bible mostly…things it states must be in complete harmony with the overall theme of the Bible.

DjDave is this in harmory with overall ttheme of the Bible///
When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. 23 Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained Jhon 20:: 23-24

 

[ccolley2]

The Bible mostly…things it states must be in complete harmony with the overall theme of the Bible.

I am curious what you think the overall theme of the Bible is?? And who determines what the overall theme is?? How do you - according to the bible - discern the Spirit of Truth from the Spirit of Error?

According to 1John4:6* “We[the Church] are of God. Whoever knows God listens to us, and he who is not of God does not listen to us. By this, we know the spirit of truth from the spirit of error.”
*
CC

 

[Bill_Pick]

DjDave is this in harmory with overall ttheme of the Bible///
When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. 23 Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained Jhon 20:: 23-24

Dave I see you miss by question can you please tell me why,was it they receive the HP or that Our Lord was breating on the Apostles ,why

 

[dj_dave]

DjDave is this in harmory with overall ttheme of the Bible///
When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. 23 Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained Jhon 20:: 23-24

How did the apostles understand and apply this? There is no record in the Bible of a single instance in which an apostle listened to a private confession and then pronounced absolution. However, the requirements for being forgiven by God are set out in the Bible. The apostles, under the direction of holy spirit, could discern whether individuals were meeting such requirements and could on this basis declare that God had either forgiven them or not forgiven them. For examples, see Acts 5:1-11, also 1 Corinthians 5:1-5 and 2 Corinthians 2:6-8.

The Catholic Encyclopedia, by R.*C.*Broderick, states: “Since the fourth century auricular confession has been the accepted method.”—P. 58.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia says: “Many contemporary historians, both Catholic and Protestant, trace the origins of private penance as a normal discipline to the churches of Ireland, Wales, and Britain, where the Sacraments, including Penance, were administered usually by the abbot of a monastery and his priest-monks. With the monastic practice of confession and public and private spiritual direction as the model, repeated confession and confession of devotion seem to have been introduced for the laity. . However, it was not until the 11th century that secret sins were absolved at the time of confession and before the fulfillment of penance.”—(1967), Vol. XI, p. 75. (IS THIS TRUE?–I AM ONLY GOING BY THE QUOTE)

ALSO…

Historian A. H.Sayce reports: “The ritual texts show that both public and private confession was practised in Babylonia. Indeed, private confession seems to have been the older and more usual method.”—The Religions of Ancient Egypt and Babylonia (Edinburgh, 1902), p. 497.

What are the beliefs of Jehovah’s Witnesses as to forgiveness and confession?

Ps. 32:5: “My sin I finally confessed to you [God], and my error I did not cover. I said: ‘I shall make confession over my transgressions to Jehovah.’ And you yourself pardoned the error of my sins.”
1 John 2:1: “If anyone does commit a sin, we have a helper with the Father, Jesus Christ, a righteous one.”

*Matt. 18:15: “If your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone.”
Luke 17:3: “If your brother commits a sin give him a rebuke, and if he repents forgive him.”

Eph. 4:32: “Become kind to one another, tenderly compassionate, freely forgiving one another just as God also by Christ freely forgave you.”*

Jas. 5:14-16: “Is there anyone [spiritually] sick among you? Let him call the older men of the congregation to him, and let them pray over him, greasing him with oil in the name of Jehovah. And the prayer of faith will make the indisposed one well, and Jehovah will raise him up. Also, if he has committed sins, it will be forgiven him . Therefore openly confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may get healed.”

Prov. 28:13: “He that is covering over his transgressions will not succeed, but he that is confessing and leaving them will be shown mercy.”

What if persons who commit sins do not seek help?

Gal. 6:1: “*Brothers, even though a man takes some false step before he is aware of it, you who have spiritual qualifications try to readjust such a man in a spirit of mildness, as you each keep an eye on yourself, for fear you also may be tempted.”

1 Tim. 5:20: “Reprove before all onlookers [that is, those who personally know about the matter] persons who practice sin, that the rest also may have fear.”

1 Cor. 5:11-13: “Quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man. . . . ‘Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.*’”

SUMMARY…If the sinner refused to repent of his serious sin, he was to be expelled from the congregation. Was it a matter of some men deciding to forgive or retain his sins? No, they would simply be acting in accord with what they could conclude would already have been done in heaven. How would they know this? By what God has revealed in his Word on such matters.—2 Tim. 3:16, 17.

This is evident from Jesus’ next words: “Truly I say to you, whatever you shall bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” (Matt. 18:18, New American Standard Bible; see also NW, Ro, The New Testament by C. B. Williams) Though some Bible versions render this verse in a way that suggests that the heavenly action occurs after the earthly decision, noted Bible translator Robert Young said that it literally should be: “shall be that which has been bound (already).”

[SIGN]Matthew 18:18 (New International Version)
18*"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be[a]bound * in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be** loosed in heaven**.
Footnotes:
Matthew 18:18 Or have been [/SIGN]

 

[dj_dave]

I** am curious what you think the overall theme of the Bible is?? And who determines what the overall theme is?? **

How do you - according to the bible - discern the Spirit of Truth from the Spirit of Error?
CC

Though written before the four other inspired books by John, Revelation is correctly placed last in the collection of 66 inspired books making up our Bible, for it is the Revelation that takes its readers far into the future, by providing an all-embracing vision of what God purposes for mankind, and that brings the grand theme of the Bible, the sanctification of Jehovah’s name and the vindication of his sovereignty by means of the Kingdom under Christ, the Promised Seed, to a glorious climax.

AGAIN–the Bible is one Book, with one powerful theme—the vindication of Jehovah’s sovereignty and the ultimate fulfillment of his purpose for the earth by means of his Kingdom under Christ, the Promised Seed.

From the Bible’s opening pages, this one theme is developed and explained through the writings that follow, until, in its closing chapters, the glorious reality of God’s grand purpose by means of his Kingdom is made clear. What a remarkable book the Bible is! Starting from the creation of the material heavens and of the earth with its creature life, the Bible gives us the one inspired and authentic account of God’s dealings with humankind until our time and carries us through to the complete realization of Jehovah’s glorious creation of “a new heaven and a new earth.” (Rev. 21:1)

With his grand purpose fully accomplished by means of the Kingdom of the Seed, Jehovah God is seen in the relationship of a kind Father to a happy united human family, which joins in with all the heavenly hosts in praising him and sanctifying his holy name. How wonderfully this theme involving the Seed is developed throughout the Scriptures!

Expressing the first inspired prophecy, God gives the promise that ‘the seed of the woman’ will bruise the serpent in the head. (Gen. 3:15) More than 2,000 years pass, and God tells faithful Abraham: “By means of your seed all nations of the earth will certainly bless themselves.” Over 800 years later, Jehovah gives a like promise to one of Abraham’s descendants, loyal King David, showing that the Seed will be a kingly one. As time passes, Jehovah’s prophets thrillingly join in to foretell the glories of Kingdom rule. (Gen. 22:18; 2 Sam. 7:12, 16; Isa. 9:6, 7; Dan. 2:44; 7:13, 14) Then the Seed himself appears, more than 4,000 years after the first promise in Eden. This One, who is also ‘the seed of Abraham,’ is Jesus Christ, “Son of the Most High,” and to him Jehovah gives “the throne of David his father.”—Gal. 3:16; Luke 1:31-33.

Though this Seed, God’s anointed King, is bruised in death by the Serpent’s earthly seed, God raises him from the dead and exalts him to His own right hand, where he awaits God’s due time to ‘crush Satan’s head.’ (Gen. 3:15; Heb. 10:13; Rom. 16:20)

Then the Revelation brings the entire vision to its glorious climax. Christ enters into Kingdom power and hurls “the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan,” from heaven down to earth. For a short time, the Devil brings woe to the earth and wages war with ‘the remaining ones of the seed of God’s woman.’ But Christ, as “King of kings,” smites the nations. The original Serpent, Satan, is abyssed and then is to be finally destroyed forever. Meanwhile, by means of **New Jerusalem, (the Lamb’s bride), **the benefits of Christ’s sacrifice are applied to mankind for the blessing of all the families of the earth. Thus, the magnificent theme of the inspired Scriptures unfolds before us in all its thrilling grandeur!—Rev. 11:15; 12:1-12, 17; 19:11-16; 20:1-3, 7-10; 21:1-5, 9; 22:3-5.

Many think that the Theme is their salvation by Christ…Actually it’s Not… See Ps 79:9; Ps 91:14

Why do you think Jesus put first in his direction of how to pray “Hollowed ByThy Name”
THEN “let thy Kingdom come” and only THEN we pray for our needs…
Matthew 6:9,10

 

[dj_dave]

Many think that the Theme is their salvation by Christ…Actually it’s Not… See Ps 79:9; Ps 91:14

Why do you think Jesus put first in his direction of how to pray “Hollowed ByThy Name”
THEN “let thy Kingdom come” and only THEN we pray for our needs…
Matthew 6:9,10

PS one other thought about John 20:23

if a Christian was lying, for example, and when the older men of the congregation met with him about it he refused to repent of his dishonest course, God’s view, as revealed in his Word, would already be known. If a sinner would repent, God would forgive him. (Isa. 55:7) And Jehovah would forgive one who sinned unintentionally. But he would not forgive an intentional, unrepentant sinner. (Num. 15:22-31) Knowing this, the representatives of the congregation could decide from the facts and the sinner’s attitude how to deal with him. And since they know from the Bible what God’s view is, their decision about whether to expel from the congregation one who had sinned should be what God had already decided in heaven.

That the above is how Matthew 18:18 and John 20:23 were understood by first-century Christians is plain from 1*Corinthians, chapter five. There was a willful, unrepentant sinner in the Corinthian congregation. Could the older men of that congregation or even the apostle Paul personally ‘forgive the sins of that person’ or ‘retain the sins of that person’? No, but because they knew God’s estimation of such an unrepentant sinner, they were obliged to expel him from the congregation, demonstrating to all that evidently his sins were being “retained” on him by God and not forgiven.

While Matthew 18:18 and John 20:23 may have been spoken directly to the apostles, it is clear from what Paul wrote the Corinthians that the spiritually older men in each congregation were to apply Jesus’ words. This can also be seen in the messages to the congregations in Pergamum and Thyatira. (Rev. 2:12-16, 20-24) Christ held it against those congregations that they did not expel wrongdoers, thus binding on earth what was already bound in heaven.

But when a sinner does repent, those acting for the congregation can allow him to continue in the congregation, or accept him back in if he had been disfellowshiped. Apparently this is what later happened in Corinth. Knowing that God would forgive such a one, Paul urged the Christians to accept him back into the congregation. (2 Cor. 2:6-8) They would not themselves be forgiving his sins; Jehovah alone could do that. But by acting in accord with the principles in God’s Word they could conclude that his sins were forgiven by God in heaven. Thus, John 20:23 would be true: “If you forgive the sins of any persons, they stand forgiven to them.”

Summary: I cannot accept that God and Jesus would put the “looseing and binding” i (Matt 18:18) in the hands of imperfect men to dictate things on earth BEFORE they are already decided in heaven…consider thus;

Jesus went through a great deal of trouble and anguish on earth because he new the reward was great! He would be installed as a king! Do you really think after all that, he was going to let humans ‘dictate things’ to HIM?

Why would God say through Jeremiah "(Jeremiah 10:23) I well know, O Jehovah, that to earthling man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step.

Jesus is directing things now.

For example,if a Christian was lying, and when the older men of the congregation met with him about it he refused to repent of his dishonest course, God’s view, as revealed in his Word, would already be known. If a sinner would repent, God would forgive him. (Isa. 55:7) And Jehovah would forgive one who sinned unintentionally. But he would not forgive an intentional, unrepentant sinner. (Num. 15:22-31) Knowing this, the representatives of the congregation could decide from the facts and the sinner’s attitude how to deal with him. And since they know from the Bible what God’s view is, their decision about whether to expel from the congregation one who had sinned should be what God had already decided in heaven.

That the above is how Matthew 18:18 and John 20:23 were understood by first-century Christians is plain from 1 Corinthians, chapter five.

There was a willful, unrepentant sinner in the Corinthian congregation. Could the older men of that congregation or even the apostle Paul personally ‘forgive the sins of that person’ or ‘retain the sins of that person’? No, but because they knew God’s estimation of such an unrepentant sinner, they were obliged to expel him from the congregation, demonstrating to all that evidently his sins were being “retained” on him by God and not forgiven.

While Matthew 18:18 and John 20:23 may have been spoken directly to the apostles, it is clear from what Paul wrote the Corinthians that the spiritually older men in each congregation were to apply Jesus’ words. This can also be seen in the messages to the congregations in Pergamum and Thyatira.PLEASE READ- **(Rev. 2:12-16, 20-24) **Christ held it against those congregations that they did not expel wrongdoers, thus binding on earth what was already bound in heaven.

But when a sinner does repent, those acting for the congregation can allow him to continue in the congregation, or accept him back in if he had been disfellowshiped.

Apparently this is what later happened in Corinth. Knowing that God would forgive such a one, Paul urged the Christians to accept him back into the congregation. (2 Cor. 2:6-8) They would not themselves be forgiving his sins; Jehovah alone through his son’s legal sin atonning sacrifice could do that. But by acting in accord with the principles in God’s Word they could conclude that his sins were forgiven by God in heaven. Thus, John 20:23 would be true: “If you forgive the sins of any persons, they stand forgiven to them.”

 

[beautiful304]

Well, then who’s interpretation and translation of the Scripture is correct? This is why we have so many denominations. What came first: Scripture or the Church?

 

[Bill_Pick]

dj_dave:
PS one other thought about John 20:23

if a Christian was lying, for example, and when the older men of the congregation met with him about it he refused to repent of his dishonest course, God’s view, as revealed in his Word, would already be known. If a sinner would repent, God would forgive him. (Isa. 55:7) And Jehovah would forgive one who sinned unintentionally. But he would not forgive an intentional, unrepentant sinner. (Num. 15:22-31) Knowing this, the representatives of the congregation could decide from the facts and the sinner’s attitude how to deal with him. And since they know from the Bible what God’s view is, their decision about whether to expel from the congregation one who had sinned should be what God had already decided in heaven.

That the above is how Matthew 18:18 and John 20:23 were understood by first-century Christians is plain from 1*Corinthians, chapter five. There was a willful, unrepentant sinner in the Corinthian congregation. Could the older men of that congregation or even the apostle Paul personally ‘forgive the sins of that person’ or ‘retain the sins of that person’? No, but because they knew God’s estimation of such an unrepentant sinner, they were obliged to expel him from the congregation, demonstrating to all that evidently his sins were being “retained” on him by God and not forgiven.

While Matthew 18:18 and John 20:23 may have been spoken directly to the apostles, it is clear from what Paul wrote the Corinthians that the spiritually older men in each congregation were to apply Jesus’ words. This can also be seen in the messages to the congregations in Pergamum and Thyatira. (Rev. 2:12-16, 20-24) Christ held it against those congregations that they did not expel wrongdoers, thus binding on earth what was already bound in heaven.

But when a sinner does repent, those acting for the congregation can allow him to continue in the congregation, or accept him back in if he had been disfellowshiped. Apparently this is what later happened in Corinth. Knowing that God would forgive such a one, Paul urged the Christians to accept him back into the congregation. (2 Cor. 2:6-8) They would not themselves be forgiving his sins; Jehovah alone could do that. But by acting in accord with the principles in God’s Word they could conclude that his sins were forgiven by God in heaven. Thus, John 20:23 would be true: “If you forgive the sins of any persons, they stand forgiven to them.”

Summary: I cannot accept that God and Jesus would put the “looseing and binding” i (Matt 18:18) in the hands of imperfect men to dictate things on earth BEFORE they are already decided in heaven…consider thus;

Jesus went through a great deal of trouble and anguish on earth because he new the reward was great! He would be installed as a king! Do you really think after all that, he was going to let humans ‘dictate things’ to HIM?

Why would God say through Jeremiah "(Jeremiah 10:23) I well know, O Jehovah, that to earthling man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step.

Jesus is directing things now.

For example,if a Christian was lying, and when the older men of the congregation met with him about it he refused to repent of his dishonest course, God’s view, as revealed in his Word, would already be known. If a sinner would repent, God would forgive him. (Isa. 55:7) And Jehovah would forgive one who sinned unintentionally. But he would not forgive an intentional, unrepentant sinner. (Num. 15:22-31) Knowing this, the representatives of the congregation could decide from the facts and the sinner’s attitude how to deal with him. And since they know from the Bible what God’s view is, their decision about whether to expel from the congregation one who had sinned should be what God had already decided in heaven.

That the above is how Matthew 18:18 and John 20:23 were understood by first-century Christians is plain from 1 Corinthians, chapter five.

There was a willful, unrepentant sinner in the Corinthian congregation. Could the older men of that congregation or even the apostle Paul personally ‘forgive the sins of that person’ or ‘retain the sins of that person’? No, but because they knew God’s estimation of such an unrepentant sinner, they were obliged to expel him from the congregation, demonstrating to all that evidently his sins were being “retained” on him by God and not forgiven.

While Matthew 18:18 and John 20:23 may have been spoken directly to the apostles, it is clear from what Paul wrote the Corinthians that the spiritually older men in each congregation were to apply Jesus’ words. This can also be seen in the messages to the congregations in Pergamum and Thyatira.PLEASE READ- **(Rev. 2:12-16, 20-24) **Christ held it against those congregations that they did not expel wrongdoers, thus binding on earth what was already bound in heaven.

But when a sinner does repent, those acting for the congregation can allow him to continue in the congregation, or accept him back in if he had been disfellowshiped.

Apparently this is what later happened in Corinth. Knowing that God would forgive such a one, Paul urged the Christians to accept him back into the congregation. (2 Cor. 2:6-8) They would not themselves be forgiving his sins; Jehovah alone through his son’s legal sin atonning sacrifice could do that. But by acting in accord with the principles in God’s Word they could conclude that his sins were forgiven by God in heaven. Thus, John 20:23 would be true: “If you forgive the sins of any persons, they stand forgiven to them.”

Dave Not at my Bible just now but Dont the Psalms say some thing like.
A time to live
A time to die
A time to laugh
A time to cry A time for peace
A time for WAR Will your cult go to war or do you just keep going against the bible, you know if I had the time I could right 4 or 5 books tell you how wrong your cult

 

[Filioque]

The New Catholic Encyclopedia says: “Many contemporary historians, both Catholic and Protestant, trace the origins of private penance as a normal discipline to the churches of Ireland, Wales, and Britain, where the Sacraments, including Penance, were administered usually by the abbot of a monastery and his priest-monks. With the monastic practice of confession and public and private spiritual direction as the model, repeated confession and confession of devotion seem to have been introduced for the laity. . However, it was not until the 11th century that secret sins were absolved at the time of confession and before the fulfillment of penance.”—(1967), Vol. XI, p. 75.

To the extent that one can compact 10 Centuries of the History of the Sacrament, yes it is correct. However the article cannot cover the entire scope, let alone a snippet from the entire article on the Encyclopedia.

That the Sacrament remains the same sacrament if the penance is given to be completed at a later date, or that it is done prior to absolution is a minor consideration that does not effect the validity of the Sacrament. If we look at the essentials of the Sacrament dispensed in the usual manner, for the usual cases, we see what is nessesary is that the Penitent approach the sacrament truly sorry for his or her sins, they confess mortal sins to the best of their recollection, without holding back mortal sins that they are aware of, they are truly penitent, (sorry for their sins) have an amendment, or desire to not sin again, and by being there they are willing to preform the prenances imposed. Secondly the priest must be a priest with faculties, who can pronounce the absolution.

In Moral and Sacramental theology we are taught that if someone is not truly repentant of his or her sins, the sacrament is invalid. Even if the repentance is because they fear punishment for their sins, it suffices. If someone is not contrite, and has no intention of doing penance for his or her sins, the confessional is not a pagan place of magic, and the person has by the lack of disposition not been absolved, even if he went though the proper form of the Sacrament.

A priest does not have to absolve someone at the time of the original confession, even today. As an example, a man comes to confession, the priest hearing the confession and after inquiring of the man is not convinced that he is sorry for his sins as evidenced by the man having fallen into the same pattern of sinful behavior in the past, (lets say the sin was adultery) the priest can refuse absolution and tell the manu that until there is some evidence that he is attempting to overcome a lifestyle of sinfulness, and overcome his adulterous life, he will not give him absolution. So while a penitent is normally given absolution today with the expectation that they will do the imposed penance, it is not something that is automatic, or universal.

While the external forum of the Sacrament can change, and the rite itself may differ between the various Eastern Catholic and Western Catholic practices, the basic truths remain, a priest with jurisdiction can absolve, a sinner who wishes to reconcile his or her life back to God after sinning against him, comes to seek forgiveness in the manner Jesus gave us, that is asking for God to forgive us, and submitting to someone who Jesus gave that authority to.

While none of this negates the teachings on Perfect Contrition nor is it a complete exposition of the Sacrament, it does I hope touch on the silly WT allegations that because the external form of the Sacrament has undergone changes over the centuries, the Sacrament remains as it was delivered to the Church when the Apostles were first given the authority to forgive sins.

 

[PJM]

=Filioque-Not enough spin to be convincing. I’ve collected and read Old Watchtower material for some time now. Including a very hard to find Birthday Reminder Book, so you can remember to celebrate family and other Society member’s birthdays, published back in the days of Russell. You won’t find the Watchtower admitting to having published that too often.

***Application of the gifts from God of Mind, intellect [LOGIC] and freewill, there is no room for serious debate.

“Sola Scriptura” can it be true?

No! And here why.

This doctrine is not taught anywhere in the Bible, but holding to sacred Tradition is. 1 Cor. 11:2, 2 Thess. 2:14-15

The Bible “calls the Church” the Pillar of truth not the Bible. 1 Tim. 3:15

Mt. 18: 15-18 specifically tells us to follow the authority of the Church

2 Peter 3:16 tells us that the Bible contains things very hard to understand

The First Christians did not have “a complete Bible”. The NT was not finished until about the year 100AD, so what did Christians do? They followed Oral Tradition as the Jews did in the OT

The “Canon” [list of books in the Bible] was not finalized until about the year 400AD.

The CC Produced the Bible, the bible did not produce the Church

The Bible manuscripts contain thousands of variations

There are hundreds of versions of the Bible [which one is true?] The source, the CC.

The Doctrine of Sola Scriptura did not exist until the Fourteenth Century, and did not become widespread until the 16th. Century

The Doctrine of ‘Sola Scriptura” does not allow for any Final and Definitive Interpretation to any single passage which would make the Bible useless as a guide to Christ

---

Love and prayers,

 

[dj_dave]

while none of this negates the teachings on perfect contrition nor is it a complete exposition of the sacrament, it does i hope *touch on the silly wt allegations *that because the external form of the sacrament has undergone changes over the centuries, the sacrament remains as it was delivered to the church when the apostles were first given the authority to forgive sins.

Interesting, but lets expand this thought to what we are really talking about–“Justification”

THE need for reconciliation with God is recognized by all the churches that claim to be Christian. However, the understanding of the way in which it is attained and of the Christian’s standing before God differs in Catholic and Protestant doctrine.

The Bible says of Jehovah: “The Rock, perfect is his activity, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness, with whom there is no injustice; righteous and upright is he.” (Deuteronomy 32:4) He is the embodiment of righteousness. As the Creator and Life-Giver, he has the right to set the standard, or norm, for determining what is right and what is wrong. That which is in conformity with God’s standard IS righteous.

Thus, God sets the mark that his intelligent creatures must reach if they wish to live in harmony with their Creator. Missing that mark, or standard, is what the original languages of the Bible call sin. Sin is, therefore, unrighteousness. It is a failure to conform to God’s definition of right and wrong. Consequently, sin is also a form of disorder, a form of lawlessness.—1 John 5:17; 3:4.

Jehovah “is a God, not of disorder, but of peace.” (1 Corinthians 14:33) Originally, all his creatures in heaven and on earth were perfect. They were endowed with free will. (2Corinthians 3:17) They enjoyed “the glorious freedom of the children of God.” (Romans 8:21) As long as his righteous standards were respected, peace and order prevailed throughout the universe. Disorder intruded into the universe when, first in heaven, later on earth, some creatures became lawless before God, *rejecting his right to rule over them. *They deviated from God’s standard of right and wrong. They missed the mark and thus made sinners of themselves.

This was the case with our first parents, Adam and Eve. (Genesis 3:1-6) “That is why … sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned.” (Romans 5:12) Ever since their rebellion, sin has “ruled as king with death,” because all Adam’s descendants “have sinned and fall short” of God’s righteous standard. (Romans 5:21; 3:23) Hence our need to be put right with God.

Now that being said let’s talk about the need for absolution from a priest…

As to Catholic dogma, The Catholic Encyclopedia states: “Justification denotes that change or transformation in the soul by which man is transferred from the state of original sin, in which as a child of Adam he was born, to that of grace and Divine sonship through Jesus Christ, the second Adam.” A Catholic Dictionary further explains: “We confine ourselves here to the process by which adults are elevated from a state of death and sin to the favour and friendship of God; for with regard to infants the Church teaches that they are justified in baptism without any act of their own.”

Briefly put, the Catholic Church teaches that “justification” is an act of God whereby a person who is baptized in the Catholic faith is really made righteous and sanctified by the gift of divine “grace.” It also claims that such justification can be (1)*increased by personal merit, or good works; (2)*lost by mortal sin and by unbelief; (3)*regained by the sacrament of penance. Within this arrangement, the justified Catholic must confess his sins to a priest and receive absolution. Any “temporal punishment” still due after absolution can be atoned for by good works or remitted by means of an “indulgence.”

Now correct me if I am wrong…

According to Catholic dogma, sin involves guilt and two kinds of punishment—eternal and temporal. Guilt and eternal punishment are remitted by means of the sacrament of penance. Temporal punishment must be atoned for in this life by good works and penitential practices, or in the next life in the fire of purgatory. An indulgence is a partial or a full (plenary) remission of temporal punishment by the application of the merits of Christ, Mary, and the “saints,” that are stored up in the “Treasury of the Church.” The “good works” required to obtain an indulgence can include a pilgrimage or the contributing of money to some “good” cause. In the past, money was thus raised for the Crusades and for the building of cathedrals, churches, and hospitals.

I believe that this dogma goes beyond what the Bible teaches when it claims that “a man is really made just,” or righteous, by the gift of divine grace bestowed at baptism. It is not baptism that washes away original sin, but it is Christ’s shed blood. (Romans 5:8, 9) There is a big difference between *really *being made righteous by God and being counted, or considered, as being righteous. (Romans 4:7, 8) Any honest Catholic, struggling in his fight against sin, knows that he has not really been made righteous. (Romans 7:14-19) If he were really righteous, he would have no sins to confess to a priest.

Furthermore, if Catholic dogma followed the Bible, the sin-conscious Catholic would confess his sins to God, asking forgiveness through Jesus Christ. (1 John 1:9–2:2) The intercession of a human priest at any stage of “justification” has no foundation in the Bible, no more than the accumulation of merits upon which the doctrine of indulgences is based.—Hebrews 7:26-28.

What Does the Bible Teach?

…Continued soon

 

[dj_dave]

Dave Not at my Bible just now but Dont the Psalms say some thing like.
A time to live
A time to die
A time to laugh
A time to cry A time for peace
A time for WAR Will your cult go to war or do you just keep going against the bible, you know if I had the time I could right 4 or 5 books tell you how wrong your cult

Let me ask you, Is there any reason to believe that men can bring an end to war? Historically, there have been only a few scattered years when this earth was totally free from war. In this 20th century alone, about 100 million people have been killed in war!
(**That is six single file lines of people across the U.S.)…**Neither yesterday’s League of Nations nor today’s United Nations has been able to stop this slaughter.

But will the fear of destruction from nuclear weapons change this? What about in 1945 when atom bombs annihilated two Japanese cities? Since then stockpiles of more powerful nuclear weapons have grown a thousandfold. And just since 1945 an estimated 35,000,000 people have been killed in wars and rebellions involving more than 100 countries. In one recent year 45 nations were involved in conflicts!7 No, fear of nuclear weapons has not stopped war.

Granted, nations will continue to sign disarmament pacts or peace treaties. Over the centuries literally thousands of these have been signed. Yet, whenever war sentiment became strong enough, those treaties became worthless scraps of paper. The United Nations also has failed to stop war, because although nearly all countries today are part of the UN, they ignore it at will. So is it realistic to hope that future world leaders will keep their word any more than those of the past?

On the other hand Bill, the Bible’s position is in harmony with the lessons of history. It does not recommend putting our hope in human efforts to bring peace. (Ps 146:3-5)… On the contrary, it foretold long ago that human efforts would never bring lasting peace. It forewarned that just before the end of this system of things, wars and disorders would escalate worldwide, with ‘nation rising against nation and kingdom against kingdom.’ (Luke 21:9, 10,*31; Revelation 6:1-4)

World events since 1914 have fulfilled those prophecies. So rather than arousing false hopes, the Bible truthfully declares: “To earthling man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step.”—Jeremiah 10:23.

What scriptures have always had a bearing on the attitude of true Christians toward participation in carnal warfare?

Matt. 26:52: “Jesus said to him: ‘Return your sword to its place, for all those who take the sword will perish by the sword.’” (Could there have been any higher cause for which to fight than to safeguard the Son of God? Yet, Jesus here indicated that those disciples were not to resort to weapons of physical warfare.)

Isa. 2:2-4: “It must occur in the final part of the days that the mountain of the house of Jehovah will become firmly established above the top of the mountains ... And he will certainly render judgment among the nations and set matters straight respecting many peoples. And they will have to beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning shears. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, neither will they learn war anymore.” (Individuals out of all nations must personally decide what course they will pursue. Those who have heeded Jehovah’s judgment give evidence that he is their God.)

2 Cor. 10:3, 4: “Though we walk in the flesh, we do not wage warfare according to what we are in the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly, but powerful by God for overturning strongly entrenched things.” (Paul here states that he never resorted to fleshly weapons, such as trickery, high-sounding language, or carnal weapons, to protect the congregation against false teachings.)

Luke 6:27, 28: “I [Jesus Christ] say to you who are listening, Continue to love your enemies, to do good to those hating you, to bless those cursing you, to pray for those who are insulting you.”…BILL!!!

Also,

“A careful review of all the information available goes to show that, until the time of Marcus Aurelius [Roman emperor from 161 to 180 C.E.], no Christian became a soldier; and no soldier, after becoming a Christian, remained in military service.”—The Rise of Christianity (London, 1947), E. W. Barnes, p. 333.

“We who were filled with war, and mutual slaughter, and every wickedness, have each through the whole earth changed our warlike weapons,—our swords into ploughshares, and our spears into implements of tillage,—and we cultivate piety, righteousness, philanthropy, faith, and hope, which we have from the Father Himself through Him who was crucified.”—Justin Martyr in “Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew” (2nd century*C.E.), The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, Mich.; reprint of 1885 Edinburgh edition), edited by A. Roberts and J. Donaldson, Vol. I, p. 254.

“They refused to take any active part in the civil administration or the military defence of the empire. . it was impossible that the Christians, without renouncing a more sacred duty, could assume the character of soldiers, of magistrates, or of princes.”—History of Christianity (New York, 1891), Edward Gibbon, pp. 162,*163.

Has the neutrality of Christians meant that they are not interested in the welfare of their neighbors?

Certainly not. They know well and conscientiously endeavor to apply the command repeated by Jesus: “You must love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matt. 22:39) Also the counsel recorded by the apostle Paul: “Let us work what is good toward all, but especially toward those related to us in the faith.” (Gal. 6:10) They have been convinced that the greatest good that they can do for their neighbors is to share with them **the good news of God’s Kingdom, which will lastingly solve the problems facing mankind **and which opens up to those who embrace it the marvelous prospect of eternal life.

 

[Filioque]

dj_dave:
Now correct me if I am wrong…

According to Catholic dogma, sin involves guilt and two kinds of punishment—eternal and temporal. Guilt and eternal punishment are remitted by means of the sacrament of penance. Temporal punishment must be atoned for in this life by good works and penitential practices, or in the next life in the fire of purgatory. An indulgence is a partial or a full (plenary) remission of temporal punishment by the application of the merits of Christ, Mary, and the “saints,” that are stored up in the “Treasury of the Church.” The “good works” required to obtain an indulgence can include a pilgrimage or the contributing of money to some “good” cause. In the past, money was thus raised for the Crusades and for the building of cathedrals, churches, and hospitals.

I believe that this dogma goes beyond what the Bible teaches when it claims that “a man is really made just,” or righteous, by the gift of divine grace bestowed at baptism. It is not baptism that washes away original sin, but it is Christ’s shed blood. (Romans 5:8, 9) There is a big difference between *really *being made righteous by God and being counted, or considered, as being righteous. (Romans 4:7, 8) Any honest Catholic, struggling in his fight against sin, knows that he has not really been made righteous. (Romans 7:14-19) If he were really righteous, he would have no sins to confess to a priest.

Furthermore, if Catholic dogma followed the Bible, the sin-conscious Catholic would confess his sins to God, asking forgiveness through Jesus Christ. (1 John 1:9–2:2) The intercession of a human priest at any stage of “justification” has no foundation in the Bible, no more than the accumulation of merits upon which the doctrine of indulgences is based.—Hebrews 7:26-28.

What Does the Bible Teach?

I think once you have looked not at snippets from an Encylopedia, taken out of context by the WT, or other sources, you will find the Catholic position to be 100% in line with Biblical principles.

As to your misunderstanding. Sin causes two kinds of injury to the person, one spirtual, and the other temporal. If we apply what is written in the Bible, “the wages of sin are death.” That a willful action against God, (sin) has an effect on both body and soul. The punishments are both spiritual and temporal. Therefore the restitution is both spiritual and temporal.

The temporal punishment due for sin, the idea that our works, united with the Blood of Christ, or the Treasury of merits of our Blessed Lady or the Saints, or indulgences are substitutes for contrition, or a magic formula that excuses our sins is a Protestant idea which is far from Catholic. What the truth is from the Catholic teachings going back 2000 years, is that since we have the debt for our sins, after we are forgiven them, by the means Jesus gave us, (which he could since He is God.) only after we have approched the Sacrament can we restore our communion with God. God’s justice requires that we repent, which includes not simply having sorrow for our sins, but making restitution, as best we can both to Him and to our fellow man, if they have been harmed by our sin. If we steal $100.00, it is not simply sufficent to be sorry that we stole the money, we must make restitution to the person we stole from, and restitution to God for breaking His law. The Church requires this as a condition of the absolution, or at the very least the desire, or intent to make restitution. (an example of only having the intent, would include; The same man confesses that he stole $100.00 from his neighbor, he is sorry for his sin, confesses it, has the intention to make restitution, on his way to the neighbors house, he is hit by a bus, and dies. Since his intention was to make restitution, but he did not have the opportunity to do so prior to his death, the absolution was valid.)

As it is God who forgives sin, through the means He gave us, when He gave the Apostles the authority to forgive sins, we depend on His Mercy, and His actions to work both through the Sacraments, (all seven) and outside of them when someone cannot receive them. So if someone has habitually tried to live a life of Grace, and has the intention of seeking God’s grace, dies without having a priest availible, God will not refuse him His grace, and forgiveness because a priest is not at hand. While God gave us the Sacraments as an ordinary or usual means of Grace, that does not bar Him from extraordinary means to bring us closer to Him.

The crux of the differences between most Protestants, and Catholics with regard to Justification can be distilled down to the idea held by many Protestants that Jesus, by His Incarnation and Death, erased our sins, past present and future. He no longer has any knowledge of them. From the Catholic point of view, Jesus is fully aware of our sinfulness, and offers forgiveness of them. The Incarnation does not magically remove our past, but rather promises us a Future, that is far different from the one we have without Him.

 

[PJM]

=Filioque;5673128]Now correct me if I am wrong…

According to Catholic dogma, sin involves guilt and two kinds of punishment—eternal and temporal. Guilt and eternal punishment are remitted by means of the sacrament of penance. Temporal punishment must be atoned for in this life by good works and penitential practices, or in the next life in the fire of purgatory. An indulgence is a partial or a full (plenary) remission of temporal punishment by the application of the merits of Christ, Mary, and the “saints,” that are stored up in the “Treasury of the Church.” The “good works” required to obtain an indulgence can include a pilgrimage or the contributing of money to some “good” cause. In the past, money was thus raised for the Crusades and for the building of cathedrals, churches, and hospitals.

I believe that this dogma goes beyond what the Bible teaches when it claims that “a man is really made just,” or righteous, by the gift of divine grace bestowed at baptism. It is not baptism that washes away original sin, but it is Christ’s shed blood. (Romans 5:8, 9) There is a big difference between *really *being made righteous by God and being counted, or considered, as being righteous. (Romans 4:7, 8) Any honest Catholic, struggling in his fight against sin, knows that he has not really been made righteous. (Romans 7:14-19) If he were really righteous, he would have no sins to confess to a priest.

Furthermore, if Catholic dogma followed the Bible, the sin-conscious Catholic would confess his sins to God, asking forgiveness through Jesus Christ. (1 John 1:9–2:2) The intercession of a human priest at any stage of “justification” has no foundation in the Bible, no more than the accumulation of merits upon which the doctrine of indulgences is based.—Hebrews 7:26-28.

What Does the Bible Teach?

The temporal punishment due for sin, the idea that our works, united with the Blood of Christ, or the Treasury of merits of our Blessed Lady or the Saints, or indulgences are substitutes for contrition, or a magic formula that excuses our sins is a Protestant idea which is far from Catholic. What the truth is from the Catholic teachings going back 2000 years, is that since we have the debt for our sins, after we are forgiven them, by the means Jesus gave us, (which he could since He is God.) only after we have approched the Sacrament can we restore our communion with God. God’s justice requires that we repent, which includes not simply having sorrow for our sins, but making restitution, as best we can both to Him and to our fellow man, if they have been harmed by our sin. If we steal $100.00, it is not simply sufficent to be sorry that we stole the money, we must make restitution to the person we stole from, and restitution to God for breaking His law. The Church requires this as a condition of the absolution, or at the very least the desire, or intent to make restitution. (an example of only having the intent, would include; The same man confesses that he stole $100.00 from his neighbor, he is sorry for his sin, confesses it, has the intention to make restitution, on his way to the neighbors house, he is hit by a bus, and dies. Since his intention was to make restitution, but he did not have the opportunity to do so prior to his death, the absolution was valid.)

As it is God who forgives sin, through the means He gave us, when He gave the Apostles the authority to forgive sins, we depend on His Mercy, and His actions to work both through the Sacraments, (all seven) and outside of them when someone cannot receive them. So if someone has habitually tried to live a life of Grace, and has the intention of seeking God’s grace, dies without having a priest availible, God will not refuse him His grace, and forgiveness because a priest is not at hand. While God gave us the Sacraments as an ordinary or usual means of Grace, that does not bar Him from extraordinary means to bring us closer to Him.

The crux of the differences between most Protestants, and Catholics with regard to Justification can be distilled down to the idea held by many Protestants that Jesus, by His Incarnation and Death, erased our sins, past present and future. He no longer has any knowledge of them. From the Catholic point of view, Jesus is fully aware of our sinfulness, and offers forgiveness of them. The Incarnation does not magically remove our past, but rather promises us a Future, that is far different from the one we have without Him.

*1 Jn. 1: 8 "8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. *

1 Jn. 5: 16 "If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal." Mortal means sufficiently serious to KILL ones relationship with God!

*Jo. 20:21-23 "Jesus said to them again, “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.” ** Look at these 3 reading is light of Mt. 16:19 [Jesus speaking to Peter] *** 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." **

Thanks for the wonderful explaination above. GREAT JOB:thumbsup:

 

[dj_dave]

Filioque
The crux of the differences between most Protestants, and Catholics with regard to Justification can be distilled down to the idea held by many Protestants that Jesus, by His Incarnation and Death, erased our sins, past present and future. He no longer has any knowledge of them. From the Catholic point of view, Jesus is fully aware of our sinfulness, and offers forgiveness of them. The Incarnation does not magically remove our past, but rather promises us a Future, that is far different from the one we have without Him

Thank you for your explanation…but I need to continue from my post above…then get more of your thoughts…I’m sure there will be much disagreement but, because of so much false information about us–I just want you to KNOW what we belive. It is very different from all other religions. (Matt 7:13,14)

FIRST the Bible definitely teaches the doctrine of “justification,” or the way in which a human can be granted a righteous standing before God. WE ALL AGREE, we need to be put right with God, since we are all born, not as God’s children, but as “children of wrath.” (Ephesians 2:1-3) Whether God’s wrath remains upon us or not depends upon our accepting or refusing his merciful provision for reconciliation with him, the holy, righteous God. (John 3:36) That loving provision is “the ransom paid by Christ Jesus.”—Romans 3:23, 24.

The apostle Paul showed that Christ’s ransom sacrifice opens up two hopes, one “upon the earth” and the other “in the heavens.” He wrote: “God saw good for all fullness to dwell in him [Christ], and through him to reconcile again to himself all other things by making peace through the blood he shed on the torture stake, no matter whether they are the things upon the earth or the things in the heavens.”—Colossians 1:19, 20.

“The things in the heavens” are not for angels, angels are not ransomed by Christ’s blood. Rather, they are the humans bought with the Lamb’s blood to be “a kingdom and priests” with Christ in the “new heavens.” These have already been fully declared righteous through the blood of Christ. In addition,Jehovah has been making peace with “things upon the earth,” those humans who will become a part of the righteous “new earth.” (Revelation 5:9,10; 2 Peter 3:13) This gathering of “all things together,” both things earthly and things heavenly, “is according to his [Jehovah’s] good pleasure which he purposed in himself.”—Ephesians 1:9, 10.

To share in either of these two hopes, it is necessary to have a righteous standing before God, and this involves much more than merely “believing in Jesus.” Just what is involved for Christians who have the heavenly hope and for those whose hope is to live forever in a paradise on earth?

Adam was created a perfect, righteous, human son of God. (Luke 3:38) His righteousness was not credited, or imputed. It was inherent. From the standpoint of guiltlessness before Jehovah, Adam had no need to be “declared” righteous. As long as he submitted to God’s legitimate rulership, he maintained a good standing before his Creator.

However, he had not yet proved himself to be an integrity keeper and had not yet been judged worthy of the right to everlasting life on earth. For that, he had to show, over a period of time, faithfulness to Jehovah and attachment to righteousness. Had he thus proved his integrity under test, he would have received the right to everlasting life on earth.Luke 16:10) It would have been as if God had declared, or gone on record as stating, that Adam merited endless life. In symbol of this, Jehovah no doubt would have led him to “the tree of life” and allowed him to eat of its fruit.—Genesis 2:9, 16, 17; 3:22. THE TREE WAS REAL BUT FOR A SYMBOLIC PURPOSE–IT WAS GOD’S GUARANTEE OF ETERNAL LIFE…THAT EXPLAINS WHY HE LEFT IT GUARDED. Gen 3:24

“HAPPY are those hungering and thirsting for righteousness, since they will be filled.” (Matthew 5:6) Such thirst for righteousness will be fully satisfied not only for those to whom “the kingdom of the heavens belongs” but also for those who “will possess the earth.” (Matthew 5:10; Psalm 37:29) Both classes share in the hope expressed by the apostle Peter when he wrote: “There are new heavens and a new earth that we are awaiting according to his [God’s] promise, and in these righteousness is to dwell.” (2 Peter 3:13) Yes, Jehovah God has promised a righteous new heavenly government, “the kingdom of the heavens,” and a righteous “new earth,” or human society in a paradise earth.

But what exactly is to be understood by righteous new heavens and a righteous new earth? WE BELIEVE it means that both the new heavenly government and mankind on earth ruled by it must recognize God’s standard of right and wrong. Jehovah is “the abiding place of righteousness.” (Jeremiah 50:7) Righteousness is the very foundation of his sovereignty, or throne position in the universe. (Job 37:23, 24; Psalm 89:14) For there to be peace in the universe, Jehovah’s creatures have to recognize his right to establish the standards for what is righteous and for what is wicked. Conversely, our hope of a righteous New Order depends on Jehovah’s abiding by his standards.—Psalm 145:17.

The question thus arises as to how the holy and righteous God Jehovah could have dealings with unrighteous sinners. (Compare Isaiah 59:2; **Habakkuk 1:13.) **

How could he, while remaining faithful to his exalted standards of righteousness, choose from among sinners those who are to share in the righteous governmental “new heavens” and accept as his friends those who will be a part of the righteous “new earth”? To answer this, we must understand the Biblical doctrine of justification, or declaration of righteousness.

Continued soon…gotta go to work

 

[Filioque]

*1 Jn. 1: 8 "8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins *and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

1 Jn. 5: 16 "If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal." Mortal means sufficiently serious to KILL ones relationship with God!

Jo. 20:21-23 "Jesus said to them again, “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.” Look at these 3 reading is light of Mt. 16:19 [Jesus speaking to Peter] *** 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,*** and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Thanks for the wonderful explaination above. GREAT JOB:thumbsup:

Thanks for adding the Scriptural references. I thought I’d quoted our JW friends posting correctly, but it seems that in deleting some of the non-essential attacks, I omitted too much, making the first half of the posting look like they were my words. I guess I have to use the Preview Post from now on.

 

[dj_dave]

Jo. 20:21-23 “Jesus said to them again, “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.” Look at these 3 reading is light of Mt. 16:19 [Jesus speaking to Peter] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Likely, the disciples mentioned were principally the faithful apostles. (Compare verse 24.) By blowing on them and saying, “Receive holy spirit,” Jesus symbolically gave them notice that soon holy spirit would be poured out on them. Jesus went on to say that they would have authority concerning forgiveness of sins. Reasonably, his two statements are linked, one leading to the next.

Fifty days from his resurrection, on the day of Pentecost, Jesus poured out holy spirit. What did that accomplish? For one thing, those who received the spirit were born again as spiritual sons of God with the hope of being corulers with Christ in heaven. (John 3:3-5; Romans 8:15-17; 2 Corinthians 1:22) But that outpouring of spirit did more. Some recipients gained miraculous powers. By that means some could speak in foreign tongues that they did not know. Others could prophesy. Yet others could heal the sick or raise the dead to life.—1 Corinthians 12:4-11.

Since Jesus’ words at John 20:22 pointed to this outpouring of holy spirit on the disciples, his connected words about forgiving sins seem to mean that the apostles had divinely provided to them through an operation of the spirit a unique authority to forgive or retain sins.

The Bible does not give us a complete account of every time the apostles used such authority, but neither does it record every case when they used a miraculous gift to speak in tongues, to prophesy, or to heal.—2 Corinthians 12:12; Galatians 3:5; Hebrews 2:4.

One case that involved apostolic authority to forgive or retain sins involved Ananias and Sapphira, who played false to the spirit. Peter, who heard Jesus utter what we read at John 20:22, 23, exposed Ananias and Sapphira. Peter first addressed Ananias, who died on the spot. When Sapphira later came in and kept up the falsehood, Peter proclaimed her judgment. Peter did not forgive her sin but said: “Look! The feet of those who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out.” She too died on the spot.—Acts 5:1-11.

In this instance the apostle Peter used special authority to express a definite retaining of sin, a miraculous knowledge that God would not pardon the sin of Ananias and Sapphira. The apostles also appear to have had superhuman insight into cases where they were sure that sins had been forgiven on the basis of Christ’s sacrifice. So those spirit-empowered apostles could declare the forgiveness or retention of sins.

This is not to say that all spirit-anointed elders back then had such miraculous authority. We can see that from what the apostle Paul said about the man disfellowshipped from the Corinthian congregation. Paul did not say, ‘I forgive that man’s sins’ or even, ‘I know that the man has been forgiven in heaven, so accept him back.’ Rather, Paul urged the entire congregation to forgive this reinstated Christian and show love for him. Paul added: “Anything you kindly forgive anyone, I do too.”—2 Corinthians 2:5-11.

Once the man was reinstated into the congregation, all the Christian brothers and sisters could forgive in the sense of not holding against him what he had done. First, though, he would have to repent and be reinstated. How would that occur?

There are serious sins that congregation elders have to handle, such as stealing, lying, or gross immorality. They try to correct and reprove such wrongdoers, moving them to repentance. But if someone unrepentantly practices grave sin, these elders apply the divine direction to disfellowship the wrongdoer. (1 Corinthians 5:1-5, 11-13) What Jesus said at John 20:23 does not apply in such cases. These elders do not have miraculous gifts of the spirit, such as the ability to heal the physically sick or raise the dead; those gifts served their purpose in the first century and then ended. (1 Corinthians 13:8-10) Furthermore, elders today do not have divine authority to forgive serious wrongdoing in the sense of pronouncing a serious sinner clean in the eyes of Jehovah. This kind of forgiveness has to be on the basis of the ransom sacrifice, and only Jehovah can forgive on that basis.—Psalm 32:5; Matthew 6:9, 12; 1 John 1:9.

As in the case of the man in ancient Corinth, when a gross sinner refuses to repent, he has to be disfellowshipped. If he later repents and produces works befitting repentance, divine forgiveness is possible. (Acts 26:20) In such a situation, the Scriptures give the elders reason to believe that Jehovah has indeed forgiven the wrongdoer. Then, once the person is reinstated, the elders can help him spiritually to become firm in the faith. The others in the congregation can forgive in the same way the Corinthian Christians forgave the disfellowshipped man who was reinstated back then.

In handling matters this way, the elders do not make up their own standards of judgment. They apply Bible principles and closely follow Scriptural procedures that Jehovah set out. Hence, any forgiving or not forgiving on the part of the elders would be in the sense of Jesus’ words at Matthew 18:18: “Truly I say to you men, Whatever things you may bind on earth will be things bound in heaven, and whatever things you may loose on earth will be things loosed in heaven.” Their actions would simply reflect Jehovah’s view of matters as presented in the Bible.

Consequently, what Jesus said, as recorded at John 20:23, is not in conflict with the rest of the Scriptures, but it indicates that the apostles had a special authorization regarding forgiveness, in line with their special role in the infancy of the Christian congregation.

But DID JESUS REALLY GIVE ALL AUTHORTY TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH? what were the "Keys to the Kingdom?

 

[dj_dave]

The question thus arises as to how the holy and righteous God Jehovah could have dealings with unrighteous sinners. (Compare Isaiah 59:2; **Habakkuk 1:13.) **

How could he, while remaining faithful to his exalted standards of righteousness, choose from among sinners those who are to share in the righteous governmental “new heavens” and accept as his friends those who will be a part of the righteous “new earth”? To answer this, we must understand the Biblical doctrine of justification, or declaration of righteousness.

As was mentioned by one of the posters, in the Scriptures, sins are likened to debts. (Matthew 6:12,14; 18:21-35; Luke 11:4.) All men are sinners and are, therefore, heavily in debt before God. “The wages sin pays is death.” (Romans 6:23) Since they had been “sold under sin” by their forefather Adam, his descendants could do nothing to relieve themselves of this crushing debt. (Romans 7:14) Death of the debtor alone could wipe it out, “for he who has died has been acquitted from his sin.” (Romans 6:7) Footnote: The original words (di·kai·o′o [verb], di·kai′o·ma and di·kai′o·sis [nouns]) in the Christian Greek Scriptures, where the fullest explanation of the matter is found, basically carry the idea of absolving or clearing of any charge, holding as guiltless, and hence acquitting, or pronouncing and treating as righteous.—See W. Bauer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (revised by F. W. Gingrich and F. Danker), 1979, pp. 197, 198; also A Greek-English Lexicon, by H. Liddell and R. Scott (revised by H. Jones), Oxford, 1968, p. 429.

Further, no good works done during a sinner’s lifetime could buy back what Adam lost, nor even give him a righteous standing before God.—Psalm 49:7, 9; Romans 3:20.

How could Jehovah provide relief for fallen mankind without compromising his own standards of righteousness? The answer highlights Jehovah’s wisdom and undeserved kindness. The apostle Paul explains this beautifully in his letter to the Romans. He writes: “It is as a free gift that they [sinners] are being declared righteous by his undeserved kindness through the release by the ransom paid by Christ Jesus. God set him forth as an offering for propitiation through faith in his blood. This was in order to exhibit his own righteousness, because he was forgiving the sins that occurred in the past while God was exercising forbearance; so as to exhibit his own righteousness in this present season, that he might be righteous even when declaring righteous the man that has faith in Jesus.”—Romans 3:24-26.

By his undeserved kindness, Jehovah accepted Jesus’ sacrifice in behalf of Adam’s descendants. (1 Peter 2:24) It was an equivalent, or corresponding, sacrifice seeing that, as a perfect man, Jesus bought back what the perfect man Adam lost. (See Exodus 21:23; 1 Timothy 2:6.) Justice having been satisfied, Jehovah is lovingly willing to “wipe out,” or ‘blot out,’ the sins charged against the account of “the man that has faith in Jesus.” (Isaiah 44:22; Acts 3:19) If such a man remains faithful, not only does Jehovah refrain from ‘reckoning to him his trespasses’ but He actually credits righteousness to his account. (2 Corinthians 5:19) By means of this merciful credit arrangement, ‘many have been constituted righteous.’ (Romans 5:19) This is one aspect of justification, the act of God whereby a person is accounted guiltless. (Acts 13:38, 39) Who are the ones who have been justified, or declared righteous, during this system of things? This is where it gets interesting…I really want your views on this.

Naturally, I’m sure we all agree, Christ himself needed no credit of righteousness, since he was really righteous. (1 Peter 3:18) Having proved faithful unto death as a perfect man (“the last Adam”) and having sacrificed his right to life on earth, Jesus was resurrected by his Father, Jehovah. Jesus was “declared righteous in spirit,” that is, pronounced fundamentally righteous on his own merit and raised as “a life-giving spirit.” (1 Corinthians 15:45; 1 Timothy 3:16) By his sacrificial death, he provided the basis whereby Jehovah could credit righteousness to men and women of faith.—Romans 10:4.

Logically, those whom Jehovah chooses to make up the righteous “new heavens,” or Kingdom government under the King Jesus Christ, **are the first to benefit fully **from this merciful arrangement in this system of things. The book of Daniel depicts the ceremony in the heavens by which Christ, the Son of man, receives “rulership and dignity and kingdom,” so that “the peoples, national groups and languages [on earth] should all serve even him.” Then Daniel shows that “the kingdom and the rulership” are also given to “the holy ones of the Supreme One,” Jehovah.—Daniel 7:13, 14, 18,*27; compare Revelation 5:8-10.

As I have mentioned a number of times, the number of such “holy ones” chosen to rule with the Lamb Jesus Christ on the heavenly Mount Zion is revealed as being 144,000, “bought from among mankind.” (Revelation 14:1-5) These, together with Christ, make up the righteous “new heavens” of Jehovah’s new system of things.

The Bible book that is doubtless the most explicit on God’s declaring men righteous is Paul’s letter to the Romans. Interestingly, he addressed this letter to those “called to be holy ones.” (Romans 1:1, 7) This explains why the doctrine of “justification,” or declaration of righteousness, as outlined by Paul, is used in connection with the 144,000 “holy ones.”

The thrust of Paul’s reasoning in Romans is that neither Jew nor Gentile can obtain a righteous standing before God by means of works, whether these be done to conform to the Mosaic Law or simply out of respect for instinctive moral law. (Romans 2:14, 15; 3:9, 10, 19, 20) Jew and Gentile alike can be declared righteous only on the basis of faith in Christ’s ransom sacrifice. (Romans 3:22-24, 29, 30) However, the counsel in the closing chapters of Romans (12–15) shows that such faith–I think you will agree- must be backed up by godly works, as James also explains. (James 2:14-17) Such works simply prove that the justified Christian has the faith that is a prerequisite for justification by God.

Still, for what impelling reason do Christians who are “called to be holy ones” need to be declared righteous? This is where the second aspect of justification comes into account, namely, God’s declaring a person worthy of life as His perfect human son.

 

[PJM]

=dj dave-I just want you to KNOW what we belive. It is very different from all other religions. (Matt 7:13,14) 13 “Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few.”

FIRST the Bible definitely teaches the doctrine of “justification,” or the way in which a human can be granted a righteous standing before God. WE ALL AGREE, we need to be put right with God, since we are all born, not as God’s children, but as “children of wrath.” (Ephesians 2:1-3) Whether God’s wrath remains upon us or not depends upon our accepting or refusing his merciful provision for reconciliation with him, the holy, righteous God. (John 3:36) That loving provision is “the ransom paid by Christ Jesus.”—Romans 3:23, 24.

Jn. 3:36 “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him. “

***Jn. 15: 15" No longer do I call you servants, for the servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you. You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide; so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you. This I command you, to love one another." ***

Jn. 3:5 "Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

*Mt. 19: 17 “If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” *

Mt. 16:19 " I [Jesus] will give you [Peter and the CC] the keys of the kingdom of heaven, "

“The things in the heavens” are not for angels, angels are not ransomed by Christ’s blood. Rather, they are the humans bought with the Lamb’s blood to be “a kingdom and priests” with Christ in the “new heavens.” These have already been fully declared righteous through the blood of Christ. In addition, Jehovah This name was created in the 13th. Century and is not found in any Greek text. Pjm] has been making peace with “things upon the earth,” those humans who will become a part of the righteous “new earth.” (Revelation 5:9,10; 2 Peter 3:13) Ephesians 1:9, 10.

Mt. 13: 19 “When any one hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what is sown in his heart” [Pjm]

To share in either of these two hopes, it is necessary to have a righteous standing before God, and this involves much more than merely “believing in Jesus.” Just what is involved for Christians who have the heavenly hope and for those whose hope is to live forever in a paradise on earth? [A JW’s belief because heaven is already full with 144K Jewish Male Virgins Pjm].

However, he [Adam] had not yet proved himself to be an integrity keeper and had not yet been judged worthy of the right to everlasting life on earth. For that, he had to show, over a period of time, faithfulness to Jehovah and attachment to righteousness. Had he thus proved his integrity under test, he would have received the right to everlasting life on earth. Luke 16:10*) [Lk. 16:10 10* "He who is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much; and he who is dishonest in a very little is dishonest also in much…. Sorry I don’t follow you here…Pjm]

“HAPPY are those hungering and thirsting for righteousness, since they will be filled

.” (Matthew 5:6) Such thirst for righteousness will be fully satisfied not only for those to whom “the kingdom of the heavens belongs” but also for those who “will possess the earth.” (Matthew 5:10; Psalm 37:29) Both classes share in the hope expressed by the apostle Peter when he wrote: “There are new heavens and a new earth that we are awaiting according to his [God’s] promise, and in these righteousness is to dwell.” (2 Peter 3:13)

Mt. 5: 10 “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” Psalm 37: 29 “The righteous shall possess the land, and dwell upon it for ever.” 2 Pet. 3: “10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up. Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of persons ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be kindled and dissolved, and the elements will melt with fire! But according to his promise we wait for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. “

U]But what exactly is to be understood by righteous new heavens and a righteous new earth?

WE BELIEVE it means that both the new heavenly government and mankind on earth ruled by it must recognize God’s standard of right and wrong. Jehovah is “the abiding place of righteousness.” (Jeremiah 50:7) Righteousness is the very foundation of his sovereignty, or throne position in the universe. (Job 37:23, 24; Psalm 89:14) For there to be peace in the universe, Jehovah’s creatures have to recognize his right to establish the standards for what is righteous and for what is wicked. Conversely, our hope of a righteous New Order depends on Jehovah’s abiding by his standards.—Psalm 145:17.

Psalm 145: 17 “The LORD is just in all his ways, and kind in all his doings.”

Friend, sincere thanks for allowing us a better understanding of your beliefs. My notes are simply clarification, for those who may not know.

 

[dj_dave]

** This name was created in the 13th. Century and is not found in any Greek text. Pjm]**

has been making peace with “things upon the earth,” those humans who will become a part of the righteous “new earth.” (Revelation 5:9,10; 2 Peter 3:13) Ephesians 1:9, 10.

**do you say "Hallelujah? **notice the last 3 letters…The word hallelujah occurring in Psalms is a Hebrew request for a congregation to join in praise. It can be translated as “Praise Yah, you people”, and is usually worded in English contexts as “Praise ye the Lord” or “Praise the Lord”. This is not a direct translation, as Yah represents the first two letters of YHWH, the Hebrew personal name for God, and not the title “lord”.[1]

In the Hebrew Bible hallelujah is actually a two-word phrase, not one word. The first part, hallelu, is the second-person imperative masculine plural form of the Hebrew verb hallal.[2] However, “hallelujah” means more than simply “praise Yah”, as the word hallel in Hebrew means a joyous praise, to boast in God, or to act madly or foolishly.[3] The second part, Yah, is a shortened form of the name of God YHWH, sometimes rendered in English as “Yahweh” or “Jehovah”.

Jehovah (pronounced /dʒɨˈhoʊvə/) is a transliteration of יְהֹוָה, a vocalized Hebrew variant of the tetragrammaton that occurs 6518 times in the Ben Chayyim Hebrew Text of 1525 A.D.,[1] on which the Old Testament of the King James Bible is based. Two variants of יהוה occur in the Ben Chayyim Hebrew Text, and six other variants occur in the Leningrad Codex of 1008-1010 A.D., which is the oldest known complete extant Masoretic Text.

By long tradition, in Jewish culture the Tetragrammaton is not pronounced; when read, the word Adonai is substituted where יְהֹוָה appears in the text, and the vowels of the latter word are inserted in the text as is done when similar substitutions occur. Concerning the substitution of the name Adonai for God’s name, the 19th century Hebrew scholar Gesenius wrote:[2]

יְהֹוָה Jehovah, pr. name of the supreme God amongst the Hebrews. The later Hebrews for some centuries before the time of Christ, either misled by a false interpretation of certain laws ( Ex. 20:7; Lev. 24:11)or else following some old superstition, regarded this name as so very holy: that it might not even be pronounced. (see Philo, Vit. Mosis t.iii. p.519, 529)…DO YOU REALLY THINK GOD DOES NOT WANT HIS MANE KNOWN? See Ex 9:6; Ps 91:14; John 17:6;26; Ezek 38:18-23—*“‘And it must occur in that day, in the day when Gog comes in upon the soil of Israel (SPIRITUAL ISRAELGalatians 6:16.),’ is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah, ‘that my rage will come up into my nose. 19 And in my ardor, in the fire of my fury, I shall have to speak. Surely in that day a great quaking will occur in the soil of Israel. 20 And because of me the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the wild beasts of the field and all the creeping things that are creeping on the ground and all mankind that are upon the surface of the ground will be bound to shiver, and the mountains will actually be thrown down and the steep ways will have to fall, and to the earth even every wall will fall.’ 21 “‘And I will call forth against him throughout all my mountainous region a sword,’ is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. ‘Against his own brother the sword of each one will come to be. 22 And I will bring myself into judgment with him, with pestilence and with blood; and a flooding downpour and hailstones, fire and sulphur I shall rain down upon him and upon his bands and upon the many peoples that will be with him. 23 And I shall certainly magnify myself and sanctify myself and make myself known before the eyes of many nations; and they will have to know that I am Jehovah.’

Do you say JESUS? That is his name as much as Jehovah is God’s name.
nobody knows the correct pronounciation of God’s name --Also no one knows the correct pronounciation of Jesus, JEHU; JEHOASH; JEHOHANAN;JEHOIAKIM; JEHOSHAPHAT
and hundreds of others.

ect.