Some think Matthew 4:4 is teaching sola Scriptura

[Cathoholic]

Thanks for sharing your perspective on this BoyGenius.

Insightful.

 

[jlhargus]

Yet no one remitted their sins leaving their sins retained.

Jesus has already forgiven them of their sins, they don’t need a man to validate their forgiveness. Jesus already forgave them freely, so they don’t need anyone to remit their sins

Jesus never said He would only remit your sins if you confess it to a priest; the forgiveness of sins is given freely without any conditions except that you be saved.

He did say [Jn20:21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. 22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: 23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.]

Those aren’t just meaningless words in Jn20. Someone must hear to know those sins before they can determine to remit or retain. Someone was clearly given the Holy Spirit to remit or retain sins. You posted earlier Jn20:21-23 was not just for the apostles but all God’s people. Was Christ just joking around with his disciples that day?

 

[medwigel]

Those aren’t just meaningless words in Jn20. Someone must hear to know those sins before they can determine to remit or retain. Someone was clearly given the Holy Spirit to remit or retain sins. You posted earlier Jn20:21-23 was not just for the apostles but all God’s people. Was Christ just joking around with his disciples that day?

The sin being referred to is the sin of unbelief.

Again, someone does not have to admit their sin to know that they have sinned. For example, Hitler and many of those who followed him did not see any wrong in the extermination of Jews; in fact they felt they were doing justice by kill those who “killed Christ”. I doubt Hitler would have said “I have committed a sin” and yet no one needs to hear his admission of guilt to know that he had sinned a millions time over.

 

[medwigel]

the Perpetual Virginity are there, and defensible as well

Matthew 12:46 While He was still talking to the crowds, it happened that His mother and brothers stood outside, asking to speak to Him. 47 Someone said to Him, “Look! Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside asking to speak to You.”

Luke 8:19 Then Jesus’ mother and His brothers came up toward Him, but they could not reach Him because of the crowd. 20 And He was told, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, asking to see You.”

Acts 1:14 All these with one mind and one purpose were continually devoting themselves to prayer, [waiting together] along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.

1 Corinthians 9:5 Have we not the right to take along with us a believing wife, as do the rest of the apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas (Peter)?

Matthew 13:55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And are not His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56 And His sisters, are they not [living here] among us? Where then did this Man get all this [wisdom and power]?”

Mark 6:3 Is this not the carpenter, [a]the son of Mary, and the brother of James and Joses and [c]Judas and Simon? Are His sisters not here with us?” And they were [deeply] offended by Him [and their disapproval blinded them to the fact that He was anointed by God as the Messiah]

Matthew 1:24 Then Joseph awoke from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and he took Mary [to his home] as his wife, 25 but he kept her a virgin until she had given birth to a Son [her firstborn child]; and he named Him Jesus (The Lord is salvation).

Rationalized these verses that refer to Jesus having brothers and sisters to this belief of Mary and “perpetual virginity”.

 

[Cathoholic]

Medwigel . . .

The sin being referred to is the sin of unbelief.

You don’t know that medwigel.

The Biblical text says sinS.

Why not just believe the Bible for what it says?

 

[Cathoholic]

Medwigel . . .

I doubt Hitler would have said “I have committed a sin” and yet no one needs to hear his admission of guilt to know that he had sinned a millions time over.

But they would have to hear your Hitler prototype’s sins and the penitent’s attitude toward those sins if they are to “bind” or “loose” them.

And this point about Jesus already forgiving them is a partial truth.

People still have to repent of their sins (and they still need to Confess their sins too). Were THEY not forgiven by Jesus? Yes.

But that forgiveness can be withdrawn. Just like forgiveness of debt was withdrawn by the King in the parable of the unmerciful servant.

 

[Cathoholic]

Medwigel . . .

Matthew 13:55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? . . .

WHY medwigel, do you think the people said “is this not the carpenter’s son”?

After all, if Jesus had all these uterine brothers and sisters WHY NOT just say

Matthew 13:55 Is not this ONE OF the carpenter’s sonS? Is not His mother called Mary?

You are aware Medwigel that the ancient Jews thought of each other as family so closely, that they didn’t even have a word for “cousin” right?

You are aware of this fact right?

The Greek does, but WHY should the inspired author be compelled to use a DIFFERENT WORD than what the Jewish people of the day SAID?

“Brothers” is just fine.

No uterine siblings medwigel. None.

Nobody was ever called the son or daughter of Mary in a biologic sense except Jesus.

The doctrine of the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary informs us not only how we ought to think of Mary, but ALSO it says something about the specialness of Jesus too.

As Tim Staples says . . . “All Marian doctrines have Christologic implications.”

https://shop.catholic.com/the-gospel-truth-about-mary-volume-1-mary-the-mother-of-god-and-the-immaculate-conception/

https://shop.catholic.com/the-gospel-truth-about-mary-volume-2-marys-perpetual-virginity-and-assumption/

New Eve, Mediatrix And Mother

 

[Cathoholic]

Medwigel . . .

Matthew 1:24 Then Joseph awoke from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and he took Mary [to his home] as his wife, 25 but he kept her a virgin until she had given birth to a Son [her firstborn child]; and he named Him Jesus (The Lord is salvation).

The “until” objection is irrelevant as to what occurs afterward.

If “until” denoted a necessary change in status, Jesus sitting at the right hand of the Father UNTIL His enemies are put under His feet . . . .

. . . Would mean in a medwigel paradigm, that Jesus gets pushed off His throne by the Father at the end of time.

You are adding to Scripture meanings and phrases that just are not there.

And these are not only traditions of men . . . .

. . . But they are traditions of men . . . That make void, God’s word and sometimes even His commandments.

And this is an unhealthy way to read Sacred Scripture medwigel.

And WHY do you think St. Joseph should abstain at all?

The angel never told him to abstain.

The angel told him to take her into his home.

WHY do you think St. Joseph abstained from marital relations AT ALL with his wife?

There is no sin in marital relations. So WHY do you think St. Joseph abstained?

 

[Cathoholic]

Mark 6:3 Is this not the carpenter, [a]the son of Mary . . .

NOT Mark 6:3 Is this not the carpenter, ONE OF THE SONS of Mary . . .

 

[Benadam]

have to admit their sin to know that they have sinned. For example, Hitler and many of those who followed him did not see any wrong in the extermination of Jews;

If someone isn’t concerned about doing wrong might not admit doing wrong. Any one concerned would not initiate genocide.

 

[Cathoholic]

Medwigel . . . ,

Acts 1:14 All these with one mind and one purpose were continually devoting themselves to prayer, [waiting together] along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.

Medwigel.

You forgot to mention the next verse in your Acts 1 quote so I thought I would take the liberty to show this in the passage to help make it clearer.

ACTS 1:14-15 14 All these with one accord devoted themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.
15 In those days Peter stood up
among the brethren (the company of persons
was in all about a hundred and twenty),
and said. . . .

That is a LOT of “bretheren” in that “company of persons” isn’t it?

 

[jlhargus]

Those aren’t just meaningless words in Jn20. Someone must hear to know those sins before they can determine to remit or retain. Someone was clearly given the Holy Spirit to remit or retain sins. You posted earlier Jn20:21-23 was not just for the apostles but all God’s people. Was Christ just joking around with his disciples that day?

The sin being referred to is the sin of unbelief.

How does one remit or retain unbelief? So if a believer says to an unbeliever I remit your unbelief does the unbeliever suddenly believe? If a believer says to a believer your unbelief is retained do they not believe anymore?

 

[jlhargus]

Again, someone does not have to admit their sin to know that they have sinned. For example, Hitler and many of those who followed him did not see any wrong in the extermination of Jews; in fact they felt they were doing justice by kill those who “killed Christ”. I doubt Hitler would have said “I have committed a sin” and yet no one needs to hear his admission of guilt to know that he had sinned a millions time over.

JL: Give me a break, Hitler would have to repent and confess his sins to have them remitted. If he didn’t repent and confess his sins would be retained. Where does your supposed only authority say or even remotely imply, “The sin being referred to is the sin of unbelief.” Answer it doesn’t you are totally making it up going outside scripture using a tradition of men.

This is one of most desperate attempts to hold a tradition of men I’ve seen in a long time. Quite frankly medwigel you must believe Christ was joking in Jn20. I hope your pastor didn’t give you that answer. Just read scripture without interpreting using those traditions of men you have been taught.

[Jn20:21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. 22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: 23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.]

Christ gave the Holy Spirit with the authority to remit or retain sins, plural to the apostles or if you wish all God’s people. Whoever those people are they can remit or retain sins plural. They must first know those sins before they can make the decision to remit or retain.

[2Cor5:18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. 20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God.]

Act[2Cor2:10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;]

Paul speaking of a believer’s sins evidently thought he could forgive the believer’s sins in the person of Christ, just as the Church teaches today.

 

[MT1926]

The sin being referred to is the sin of unbelief.

I’ve heard this line of defense before, but how are you coming to this conclusion? Especially when it is pretty clear that Jesus is speaking of the Apostles forgiving or retaining more than one kind of sin here.

Again, someone does not have to admit their sin to know that they have sinned.

I’m sure millions of sins are committed everyday behind closed doors. How would the Apostles be able to follow Jesus’ command unless their followers spoke their sins to them.

God Bless

 

[medwigel]

Again, someone does not have to admit their sin to know that they have sinned.

The Apostles are not needed to forgive sins because Jesus has already done this through His life, death and resurrection.
If Adam was able to bring sin into this world and no one had to validate sin, then surely what Jesus did if forgiving us of all our sins is strong enough where He does not need men to confer or validate this forgiveness upon others. The power of the Blood of Christ is strong enough to forgive us all once and for all of all sin!
How strong is your God?

 

[Cathoholic]

JOHN 20:19-23 19 On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” 20 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. 21 Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you.
AS THE FATNER HAS SENT ME, EVEN SO I SEND YOU."
22 And when he had said this,
he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
23 If YOU forgive the SINS of any, they ARE forgiven;
if YOU retain the SINS of any, they ARE retained.”

.

Medwigel . . .

The Apostles are not needed to forgive sins because Jesus has already done this through His life, death and resurrection.

Is Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John “not needed” either?

How strong is your God?

Given the fact that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, etc. ARE NEEDED, does this ALSO make Jesus LESS “strong”? . . .

. . . OR . . .

. . . Or . . . . does it reveal to us God’s plan for how HE wants this carried out?

.

The power of the Blood of Christ is strong enough to forgive us all once and for all of all sin!

That is exactly the point medwigel.

This is the way (in this context) to RECEIVE THE BLOOD OF CHRIST in the sense Jesus wants us to.

1st JOHN 1:5-9 5 This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light and in him is no darkness at all. 6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not live according to the truth; 7 but if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and
the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. 8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

 

[medwigel]

Act[2Cor2:10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;]

Paul is talking to laypeople about forgiving one another, not about priest forgiving people. The “ye” Paul is referring to is the people of Corinth and by extension all Christians.

2Cor5:18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. 20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God.]

This speaks of how Christ no longer holds our sins against us, He has reconciled Himself to the world. Nowhere does He say “go confess your sins to the priest so that you can be reconciled with Me”, Christ gives us all the ministry of reconciliation, the priest doesn’t give that to us.
Christ’s message is that of reconciliation because He paid the price for all our sins. Since we are reconciled with Christ we are forgiven and since we are already forgiven there is no need for a priest to tell me to go say 3 Hail Mary and 1 Our Father for me to attain something that Christ has already given me.
When you try to make me work for something I already have that’s called a con.

None of these Scriptures you are referencing calls for a man to confer forgiveness that Christ has already given us. We are called to forgive each other just has Christ has forgiven us.

This is one of most desperate attempts to hold a tradition of men I’ve seen in a long time. Quite frankly medwigel you must believe Christ was joking in Jn20. I hope your pastor didn’t give you that answer. Just read scripture without interpreting using those traditions of men you have been taught.

This is you just believing what you have been told and ignoring what the rest of the Bible says about forgiveness. Forgiveness is not contingent on you “confessing” your sins to anyone. You don’t want to face the fact that even if you were to hold onto your understanding, it still does not call people to confess their sins in search of forgiveness.
I am holding onto BIBLICAL traditions, you are the one who’s relying on outside sources and man made traditions.

 

[Cathoholic]

medwigel . . .

Paul is talking to laypeople about forgiving one another, not about priest forgiving people. The “ye” Paul is referring to is the people of Corinth and by extension all Christians.

I think St. Paul is talking about forgiving in “THE PERSON” of “CHRIST”. Greek = Prosopo.

Not in the “person” of “OURSELVES”.

This is a different dimension.

 

[Cathoholic]

Medwigel . . .

Christ gives us all the ministry of reconciliation, the priest doesn’t give that to us.

This is an example of Korah’s Rebellion medwigel and it also ignores the BINDING dimension of Confession.

It also ignores the context of James 5 and calling for the presbyteroi (“priests”) in the context of anointing and confession.

 

[MT1926]

The power of the Blood of Christ is strong enough to forgive us all once and for all of all sin!
How strong is your God?

So you are saying everyone is forgiven of their sins regardless of whether they repent or not? That doesn’t sound right?

I agree Jesus is the atoning sacrifice for the whole world. However, if we use your logic on this that would mean even your belief would mean the Blood of Christ isn’t strong enough and therefore everyone is saved regardless of their actions or beliefs.

Also, why would Jesus wanting us to confess our sins through the Apostles/Priests take anything away from His sacrifice? There’s a lot that Jesus doesn’t need us merr humans to do. But just cause Jesus doesn’t need us doesn’t prove He doesn’t want us.

I noticed you skipped my first question. So one again "…

I’ve heard this line of defense before, but how are you coming to this conclusion?

I’m sure you also realize this was the very first command given to the Apostles after His resurrection. Why would you think Jesus would you think the first command from Jesus is meaningless?

God Bless