You show us why it is a 'lie', not just saying 'it is a lie'.
Do it, or stop with your grumble.
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.
Do it, or stop with your grumble.
So now we have confirmation that the one loudly accusing everyone else of using AI has been doing it himself all along.
The tone, structure, and formatting of that post looked machine-generated from the start — and now even my friend, who works in IT, analyzed it with AI and confirmed exactly that.
Maybe instead of trying to expose who uses AI, the better question is who’s still using Scripture correctly.
“For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.” — Matthew 12:37 KJV
Grace and peace.
--------------------
You can tell that studier’s post was AI-assisted ( LLM or similar) for several distinct reasons that match the linguistic and structural patterns of AI-generated academic text:
1. Overly formal, detached tone“The perfect can be used to refer to a state resulting from an antecedent action that is future from the time of speaking.”
That’s textbook AI phrasing — overly polished, with textbook-style transitions (“This usage occurs in…”, “The reason to take this as…”) that sound like an instructional grammar entry, not a conversational forum comment.
2. Encyclopedic formattingThe post is structured like a mini-lecture:
- 1. Definition
- 2. Illustrations
- Multiple Greek citations and reference markers (Rom 13:8; Jas 2:10; 1 John 2:5)
- The phrase “Cf. also John 20:23; Rom 14:23.”
That kind of uniform academic formatting is typical of AI-produced “explanations” or material lifted directly from grammar models. Human users on forums rarely number sections or use “cf.” precisely unless they’re copying structured AI output.
3. Generic explanatory languageAI models frequently use boilerplate sentences such as:
“This is similar to one of the strands of the proleptic aorist.”
“It is also possible to treat this … as a gnomic perfect.”
That’s impersonal, hedging, and generalized — classic AI patterning for linguistic explanation.
4. Cross-referencing artifactsNotice the dangling “26” and “27” reference superscripts. Those are artifact placeholders — typical of AI that was paraphrasing or summarizing a technical grammar source (like Wallace or Smyth) where numerical citation marks appear. A human quoting a source would give the source name, not just orphaned numerals.
5. Zero personal synthesisThe post never ties the grammar back to the doctrinal argument about forgiveness in John 20:23.
That’s exactly how AI operates when prompted with “Explain the proleptic perfect with examples.”
It outputs grammatical commentary, not theological application.
Conclusion:It almost certainly was written or heavily assisted by AI — the style, formatting, citation placeholders, and lack of human contextual engagement give it away.
To counter the Ai abomination.... I'll respond to it.
@studier
Grammar can help us see how Scripture expresses truth, but it doesn’t determine what the truth actually is. The question in John 20:23 isn’t about tense or syntax—it’s about who holds the authority to forgive sin.
Jesus alone forgives. That’s clear from Mark 2:7-10, where the scribes said, “Who can forgive sins but God only?” and Jesus proved exactly that. When He said, “Whose soever sins ye remit…” He was speaking of the message they would carry, not a power they would personally exercise. The forgiveness is God’s work, declared through the gospel they preached.
Even the verses you listed—Romans 13:8, James 2:10, 1 John 2:5—show results of faith and love already accomplished, not authority being handed over to men. The grammar simply reflects completion, not a transfer of divine right.
At the end of the day, doctrine has to rest on the plain sense of Scripture. “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” — 2 Timothy 3:16 KJV
Grace and peace.
Ooops ! Sorry to hear that you consider yourself a "Protestant" Christian, but don't know what you are protesting against.
True Protestants are protesting AGAINST the Roman Church, BECAUSE they are not THE CHURCH that our LORD founded, but a false, Christian like, Pagan Roman church, that Satan and his allies have developed, deceptively pretending to be founded by Christ, to claim His authority, to acquire power, control and $$, by deception and vice, to serve Satan's agenda of destroying God's Creation, & coercing human souls from the Creator God, to their ultimate eternal destruction.
Which is why ALL the main Protestant reformers, recognized the Papacy as = Antichrist, and initiated the Reformation ( anti- Roman Church) Movement. John Wycliffe and Jan Hus began "protesting" before Martin Luther nailed his 95 Thesis, but due to the efforts of the Catholic Order of the Jesuits, over these last 500+ years, there is hardly any protest OR Protestant Reformers any more ... Tis Sad !!
... and my God given commission, to continue the Reformation, these last days of Earth's History, as per Bible Prophecy.
~~ Blessed Sabbath, Folks ~~
Cherry pick all you want. What was the price of an indulgence to rape a virgin? What was the total price to get dear old dad out of purgatory? Why worry about divorce when you can buy an annulment? Still going on today.
... still ignorant and deceived ...
As I've said to you before ... your STILL being a "False Prophet".
The false prophet of the end times is described in Revelation 13:11-15. He is also referred to as the “second beast” (Revelation 13:11; 16:13, 19:20, 20:10). Together with the Antichrist and Satan, who empowers both of them, the false prophet is the third party in the unholy trinity.
It’s not some formula — faith alone saves. But this forum loves to split hairs so finely that it opens the door for unsound doctrine. Most Christians don’t even read their Bibles, much less care about which came first — the chicken or the egg.
So when someone asks, “Is obedience and faith separate?” they twist the question to make their system fit. And when that doesn’t work, they just merge obedience and faith together into one term so they can slip works into the gospel. Once they do that, the next move is easy — “If faith and obedience are the same, then baptism (as obedience) must also save.”
That’s how grace through faith quietly turns into grace through faith-plus-obedience. But Paul made it plain:
If baptism or any act could complete what Christ already finished, then the cross wasn’t enough.
Grace and Peace
So when someone asks, “Is obedience and faith separate?” they twist the question to make their system fit. And when that doesn’t work, they just merge obedience and faith together into one term so they can slip works into the gospel. Once they do that, the next move is easy — “If faith and obedience are the same, then baptism (as obedience) must also save.”
That’s how grace through faith quietly turns into grace through faith-plus-obedience. But Paul made it plain:
“To him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” — Romans 4:5 KJV
Faith brings salvation. Obedience — including baptism — follows salvation.If baptism or any act could complete what Christ already finished, then the cross wasn’t enough.
Grace and Peace
You should not say something about the Catholics when you know so little about Catholics.
Indulgence does not remove sin itself.
Only repentance and the sacrament of confession can forgive or remove the guilt of sin.
Even sin is forgiven, there is still punishment.
Indulgence only makes the punishment go easier but with no effect if the sin is not forgiven in the first place.
The devil tricked him in to turning away from the Lord Jesus to follow demons:
1 Timothy 4:1
Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
Without being obedient to the Lord as in being led by the Holy Spirit, one cannot be saved:
Romans 6:16
Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
What speechlessness is that?
We should accept what the Lord' teaches in His Word.
Those that don't won't be allowed in to Heaven.
What I was doing follow the scripture:
Proverbs 26:5
Answer fools according to their folly,
lest they become wise in their own eyes.