Results 1 - 8 of 8
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Retain or forgive sins? | John 20:22 | flinkywood | 204785 | ||
Doc, I'd agree with you if scripture did: And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven. (Jas 5:15) This verse seems to echo both in form and practice Jesus' healing of the paralytic in Matthew 9:2-8, which indicates that Jerusalem elders, called to imitate Christ, were doing so in a manner already well established by the time of James' writing. These verses lend credence to an interpretation of John 20:23 as indicating that our Lord did indeed authorize the apostles to forgive sin - and most certainly in His name. I do appreciate your view of John 20:23 as a commission to declare what God has already done; but Jesus hadn't yet ascended to the Father and was still about the business of founding and teaching His fledgling church on earth. For sure we're called to proclaim the Gospel and to "be holy" as our Father is Holy, but in this verse forgiving and retaining, like binding and loosing, are more about institution than proclamation. And of course none of it, not one jot or tittle, would be possible without the atoning work of Christ. I also take issue with you about Jesus not partnering with the apostles. How else to take the meaning of, "As the Father sent me, so I send you"? These are his brothers, his family, what better partners? And though I respect J.C. Ryle's opinion, it does sound like saying, 'the fact that cars kill so many people proves they were never meant for driving.' In other words, a conclusion doesn't change a fact. Thanks for your careful reply. Colin |
||||||
2 | Retain or forgive sins? | John 20:22 | DocTrinsograce | 204830 | ||
Dear Colin, I'm glad, at least, that sola Scriptura is not yet a casualty of your doctrine. This passage in James is bearing for you an enormous amount of weight. You are, at least, not entirely alone in this interpretation. Although wholly rejected in the Reformation, the Roman Church reaffirmed their authority concerning the administration of general sacramental absolution (see Council of Trent, session 14, Canones de Sacramento Paenitentiae 4, 6 through 9), anathematizing everyone else. They use this particular passage, though, to support their teaching of "extreme unction" -- the, so-called, "last rights." Of course, they'd limit all this through the authority of apostolic succession, wherein they believe that Christ zotted the apostles, who zotted the elders, who zotted the pastors, who zotted ... etc. etc. If the zotting chain is broken, I guess, it all falls apart. Let's read the whole passage, in context. (I rather like Gary Zeolla's Analytical-Literal Translation of the New Testament, which I'll use here, if you don't mind.) Is anyone enduring hardship among you? Let him be praying. Is any being cheerful? Let him be singing praises. Is any sick among you? Let him summon the elders of the assembly [or, the church]. And let them pray over him, having anointed him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith will cure the one being ill, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, they will be forgiven to him. You yourselves be confessing your transgressions to one another, and be praying for one another, in order that you shall be healed [or, restored]. [The] petition of a righteous [person] itself has very powerful [or, many supernatural] effects. (James 5:13-16) Now, the Romanist exegetes have one up on you, Colin. They admit that the passage, in context, applies to those who are ill as the consequence of particular sin. They do not use it as a blanket authorization for the church's authority to forgive sins through confession. Interesting, though, that the causal connection you suggest isn't really necessary -- at least, in English. In other words, we don't see that the conditional "if he has committed sins..." doesn't necessarily mean "if the elders pray for him and he has committed sins..." One would think that the Holy Spirit might have rendered this causal connection a bit more clearly. After all, He is pretty emphatic about the remission of sins in Exodus 34:7; Psalm 32:1-2; 103:3; 130:4; Isaiah 43:25; 55:6-7; Jeremiah 31:34; Daniel 9:9, 19; Micah 7:18; Luke 5:20; 7:47-50; Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38-39; 26:18; Romans 3:24-26; 4:6-8; Ephesians 1:7; 4:32; Colossians 2:13; 3:13; Hebrews 10:17-18; 1 John 1:7-9. It is a blessing that He doesn't call us to build our doctrines entirely on the basis of a single Scripture. Perhaps Pastor Tim will be kind enough to shed a bit of light on the Greek in James 5:15. In Him, Doc |
||||||
3 | Retain or forgive sins? | John 20:22 | flinkywood | 204857 | ||
Doc, Setting aside the Reformation and apostle-zotting, James 5:14-15 isn't bearing but sharing the weight of Matthew 9:6-8 (authority to "men"); John 20:23 (forgiving and retaining), Matthew 18:18 (binding and loosing). These verses resist the formulation, if I understand your thesis correctly, 'Only God forgives sin, ergo Jesus gave no man such authority." Read together and literally, these passages (John 20:23 especially) indicate the contrary. Where our interpretations coincide is that in either case the Spirit of Christ is the active agent (e.g. John 4:2), be it through His apostles or otherwise. Colin |
||||||
4 | Retain or forgive sins? | John 20:22 | stjohn | 204859 | ||
Dear Colin: I have posted this before but it hopefully will give you a proper perspective on these verses. God and God alone has the power to forgive sins! I think John Gill exposits from this part of Scripture clearly and succinctly. "Ver. 23. Whose soever sins ye remit,.... God only can forgive sins, and Christ being God, has a power to do so likewise; but he never communicated any such power to his apostles; nor did they ever assume any such power to themselves, or pretend to exercise it; it is the mark of antichrist, to attempt anything of the kind; who, in so doing, usurps the divine prerogative, places himself in his seat, and shows himself as if he was God: but this is to be understood only in a doctrinal, or ministerial way, by preaching the full and free remission of sins, through the blood of Christ, according to the riches of God's grace, to such as repent of their sins, and believe in Christ; declaring, that all such persons as do so repent and believe, all their sins are forgiven for Christ's sake:" --John Gill's Compleat Exposision Of The Whole Bible. Shalom John |
||||||
5 | Retain or forgive sins? | John 20:22 | flinkywood | 204870 | ||
John, I agree with Gill's statement from, "...to such as repent of their sins..." through to the end; that's the basis of our conversion, isn't it? What precedes that portion doesn't square with John 20:23, if not for the literalness of the verse (along with the others I cited), then because Christ, as God, can authorize whom He pleases. Colin |
||||||
6 | Retain or forgive sins? | John 20:22 | stjohn | 204879 | ||
Colin: The problem with that interpretation is that IT doesn't square with what the rest of the Bible teaches about who has the power to forgive sin. If you don't like what Gill had to say,... Matthew Henry has this to say on John 20:23 --"Christ directed the apostles to declare the only method by which sin would be forgiven. This power did not exist at all in the apostles as a power to give judgment, but only as a power to declare the character of those whom God would accept or reject in the day of judgment." John Darby's synopsis --"The evangelist is far from exhausting all that there was to relate of that which Jesus did. The object of that which he has related is linked with the communication of eternal life in Christ; first, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and, second, that in believing we have life through His name. To this the Gospel is consecrated." The Geneva study Bible Note: "The publishing of the forgiveness of sins by faith in Christ, and the setting forth and proclaiming the wrath of God in retaining the sins of the unbelievers, is the sum of the preaching of the gospel." Jamieson, Faussett and Brown, have this to say-- 23. Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, etc,--In any literal and authoritative sense this power was never exercised by one of the apostles, and plainly was never understood by themselves as possessed by them or conveyed to them. (See on Mt 16:19). The power to intrude upon the relation between men and God cannot have been given by Christ to His ministers in any but a ministerial or declarative sense--as the authorized interpreters of His word, while in the actings of His ministers, the real nature of the power committed to them is seen in the exercise of church discipline." J Vernon McGee, very simply puts it as,--" What will remit sin (verse 23)? The gospel. The gospel must be preached before sin can be remitted." John Wesley's notes read, --"Verse 23. Whose soever sins ye remit - (According to the tenor of the Gospel, that is, supposing them to repent and believe) they are remitted, and whose soever sins ye retain (supposing them to remain impenitent) they are retained. So far is plain. But here arises a difficulty. Are not the sins of one who truly repents, and unfeignedly believes in Christ, remitted, without sacerdotal absolution? And are not the sins of one who does not repent or believe, retained even with it? What then does this commission imply? Can it imply any more than, 1. A power of declaring with authority the Christian terms of pardon; whose sins are remitted and whose retained? As in our daily form of absolution; and 2. A power of inflicting and remitting ecclesiastical censures? That is, of excluding from, and re-admitting into, a Christian congregation." The answer to his rhetorical questions are of course, (and what others have written) giving us a consensus that the apostles were never given such authority as some expositors would irresponsibly give them, by the way. Only God Himself can forgive sin, it's as simple as that. King David understood this very well, when the prophet Nathan spoke to him about his adulterous affair with Bathsheba, and what amounted to murder, though not directly by his hand, of, Uriah the Hittite. David, the man after God's heart, as well Nathan the Prophet, understood, that it was God, that he sinned against, and that God, was the one who could forgive that sin. 2 Sam 12:13 Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the LORD." And Nathan said to David, "The LORD also has taken away your sin; you shall not die. Shalom John |
||||||
7 | Retain or forgive sins? | John 20:22 | DocTrinsograce | 204880 | ||
With an infallible (or is that inflatable?) Pope, who needs sound exegesis, let alone scholarly exegesis? :-) Nevertheless, good research, brother John. |
||||||
8 | Retain or forgive sins? | John 20:22 | stjohn | 204885 | ||
Doc: I rather like inflatable. I'll presume permission to use it. Thanks Brother. :-) |
||||||