In that case, why should Jesus breathed on them (the disciples) and said to them (the disciples).
And said 'Whose sins you forgive are forgiven ' and not use first person 'I'??
Do protestants have a reasonable non-Roman-Catholic explanation for John 20:22-23?
- Thread starter PaulThomson
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
In that case, why should Jesus breathed on them (the disciples) and said to them (the disciples).
And said 'Whose sins you forgive are forgiven ' and not use first person 'I'??
O
OLDBUTNEW
Guest
Sadly, the Catholic Church has made this whole idea up, of having to confess your sins to a priest! The priest has no Biblical authority to do this!
The first person "I" is also here. Jesus uses the second person to commission the disciples, but the perfect passive verbs reveal that He remains the true source - the implicit “I” behind their action: “You forgive because I have forgiven - and that forgiveness stands; you retain because I have retained - and that retention remains.” The Spirit’s commissioning empowers them to declare and communicate this reality, yet the forgiveness or retention already exists and continues in Christ’s completed work under His absolute authority. Their action is not causal but declarative - they proclaim what God has done and what still stands, and their authority is valid only when fully aligned with Christ, His Gospel, and His Spirit.
I've given this more time this morning and reread your post. A few comments in the order of what I've highlighted above:
- I think this interim grace is interesting in the sense you've mentioned and possibly in a broader sense that we just don't have record of - i.e. all of what went on with the Apostles for the approx. 50 days after John20.
- I'm hesitant about this second highlight. I see your point, but they're being sent out commissioned to forgive or retain based in what's been forgiven or retained. I'm not sure the personal judgment is what's in view. Or maybe it is but it's not only what's in view.
- I at this point agree with the third highlight. They may have declarative authority, but only in line with the Gospel. But even here there are issues. I don't recall any place in the NC where we see Apostles or Disciples forgiving or retaining sins in a salvific sense. They're proclaiming, teaching, commanding repentance and believing, but forgiving and retaining sins? Only God has all the facts and knows the heart.
- Which brings in another thought; I see you were in Matt18. What about Matt18:15-20 in Church Judiciary matters? Leadership is commissioned to both forgive and to retain in such proceedings. Paul for example did exercise such authority in Corinth. Forgiveness and retention post-resurrection and then ascension is done pursuant to the perfected aspect of what Christ had/has accomplished. Matt18:20 so frequently used in the broadest of sense is in the context of Church Judicial Hearings and Paul is later very critical of those who treat this judicial function lightly 1Cor6.
Please follow your scripture!
John 20:21–23
“As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.”
Hebrews 5:1
“Every high priest is appointed to act on behalf of men in relation to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins.”
Priests mediate between God and humanity, just as Christ does perfectly. Catholic priests share in that priesthood through Him.
In the real world, do we need the Police Commissioner to do all the police work himself?
He passed his authority to his subordinates which then have the same authority as he.
We as believers have the authority to forgive those who sin against us. We do not have the authority to absolve of sin those who have committed sins against others. The latter is what the Catholics claim for their priests… without biblical support.
Would that mean I forgive your sin against me, but Jesus would still throw you to the fire lake?
I have just showed you the biblical support in #25.
I can quote you more if you need them.
You show us how you would interprete these verses if you think I was wrong on their meaning.
Catholic priests do not absolve your sin by his own power . They do it on behalf of Jesus.
When they say after the confession:
“I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,”
it is Christ Himself who forgives through the priest.
TruthDefender, I’m having trouble organizing my thoughts this morning, but let me try to explain what I meant.
Now the people of Sodom were wicked and sinners against the LORD exceedingly. (Gen 13:13)
No man is commanded or able to forgive those who have sinned against the LORD, only God can forgive that. Abraham could plead to the LORD on behalf of the people of Sodom, he could NOT forgive the people of Sodom.
We are commanded to forgive those who have sinned and trespassed against us personally.
Considering the verse in the OP question.
If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” (John 20:23)
This cannot mean a man can forgive sins or trespasses against God, only God can do that. Therefore, another explanation for John 20:23 must be found that does not contradict the fact that only God can forgive sins. For me, the most satisfactory answer is to consider it according to the tenses and I find Matt 18:18 to illustrate what I mean.
'Verily I say to you, Whatever things ye may bind upon the earth shall be having been bound in the heavens, and whatever things ye may loose on the earth shall be having been loosed in the heavens. (Matt 18:18 Young’s Literal Translation)
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. 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. (1John 1:7-10)
The believers, those who walk in the light, have the promise of God in heaven that based on the blood of Jesus Christ, the believer’s sins will be forgiven upon confession. The promise was from God in heaven before it was proclaimed to men. Only as the good news is preached to man can it be said that man forgives sin in the sense of ministering.
I suppose another explanation for John 20:23 could be viewing the promise restricted to the 12 Apostles who received the Holy Spirit in a fuller way then men did in later times. Just as the signs of an Apostle listed in Matt. 10:1-8 were for the 12 and those they personally laid hands upon alone, and not active for believers today, that can give another explanation for John 20:23. It was spoken to the 12 Apostles alone, not for any man today, and I reject ‘apostolic succession’ as unfounded in scripture.
T
TruthDefender
Guest
In context, Jesus was talking to His apostles and no one else. A priest is nothing more than a member of a local congregation.
Any male member can get up and give a sermon. Only Jesus is the mediator between God the Father and men, not some man.
Catholic priests have their authority from bishops. Bishops have their authority from Pope.
Popes are successors of Peter. Peter had his authority directly from Jesus.
The Roman church modeled their form of Christianity after the religious culture of their day. As such, they created a caste system of priest and laity whereby only the priests were given certain graces reserved for "God's servants". It is here that the whole system went off the rails. While God gave His Son to the world to show us His own nature, the Roman man needed to contend with the cloistered few to even have his sins forgiven.
That said;
After Jesus spoke the above about forgiveness, He died, was raised as Christ, and said this:
"And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”
If the imperative regarding forgiveness is "Forgive everyone for anything" then how are we to address Paul's words here:
"Alexander the Coppersmith did me much harm. May the Lord repay him according to his works. 15 You also must beware of him, for he has greatly resisted our words."
If the works of the Coppersmith are forgiven, then there is no debt to be paid. Yet, if the works required a repayment by the Lord (which is true according to Paul), then the cost of his works remained on the books as a debt, so to speak.
By all means, if you feel compelled to forgive everyone their sins then do so. But, if you struggle with this then seek out a mature saint who knows what it means to "forgive or retain".
That said;
After Jesus spoke the above about forgiveness, He died, was raised as Christ, and said this:
"And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”
If the imperative regarding forgiveness is "Forgive everyone for anything" then how are we to address Paul's words here:
"Alexander the Coppersmith did me much harm. May the Lord repay him according to his works. 15 You also must beware of him, for he has greatly resisted our words."
If the works of the Coppersmith are forgiven, then there is no debt to be paid. Yet, if the works required a repayment by the Lord (which is true according to Paul), then the cost of his works remained on the books as a debt, so to speak.
By all means, if you feel compelled to forgive everyone their sins then do so. But, if you struggle with this then seek out a mature saint who knows what it means to "forgive or retain".
T
TruthDefender
Guest
Why use a human mediator, when we have Jesus? There is no example of a person using a human mediator, other than the apostles; no other Christian doing this.
You do the praying, the asking for forgiveness—- talk to the Father through Jesus—-
“But you, when you pray, go into your room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in the secret place; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly.”
Matthew 6:6 NKJV
“For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous, And His ears are open to their prayers; But the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.””
I Peter 3:12 NKJV
Thanks PaulThomson, for your post. I have a similar take on this verse as you. I have never viewed the verse as having anything to do with Catholic versus Protestant at all. I see the verse as simply saying that when a person is born again to be in Christ, they receive the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is able to discern whether another person is sincere in their position in relation to Christ and whether they are continuing in sin or, instead, in belief and trust. Any sincere person receives forgiveness from the person who is born again (and therefore from God), since the born again person has God's Holy Spirit and can tell if they are faking their sincerity. God put his true believers in charge on earth, to follow him, with the ministry of reconciliation. They are not in charge in the sense that they have earthly physical groups or hierarchies, but they are ruling and reigning with Christ spiritually. Although it is true that if we forgive, we are forgiven, it is not the main thrust of the message in the verse you quoted, I think. Rather, it is encouragement that we have been given the Holy Spirit and can therefore forgive (in a correct manner), always forgiving if the repentance is sincere. If the repentance was fake or not sincere, we would want to continue to warn or instruct the person with the gospel, hoping and praying that they would receive it, and could therefore be forgiven. A similar verse is the following: "And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. "
T
TruthDefender
Guest
Ok, but I don’t see this hierarchy type thing in the NT pattern for the church (not a building, but people/ members). (?)
The word “Bishop” is an elder (watches over the flock), then we have deacons (they take care of building, tech issues), and teachers (various male members, or one full time preacher). I hope I didn’t miss anything, but this is part of the pattern.
Everything is adhering to the pattern given to us in the NT.
“Brethren, join in following my example, and note those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern.”
Philippians 3:17 NKJV
FYI, promoting Catholicism is not permitted on this site. Persist and you will be banned.
T
TruthDefender
Guest
I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel,
GALATIANS 1:6 NKJV
For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or
I CORINTHIANS 11:4 NKJV
which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.
GALATIANS 1:7 NKJV
As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.
GALATIANS 1:9 NKJV
But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.
GALATIANS 1:8 NKJV