John 20:22-23

[PaladinGirl]

How do you explain these two verses?

John 20:22-23

[Willo]

I have heard that scriputre explained as being tied in with what Jesus said in Matthew, about how if you don't forgive you won't be forgiven.

Someone once said this scripture is dealing with the same thing, you fail to forgive then the the sin of unforgiveness remains. etc

[JPPT1974]

For me it is hard to forgive my enemies if they have wronged me. As I can forgive those whom I know are loving and are my friends, I feel as though now I need to forgive my enemies even if they don't forgive me, God does in heaven. Which is more important IMO!

[MbiaJc]

How do you explain these two verses?

John 20:22-2322 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.


Sounds to me like Jesus was giving the Apostles power to forgive or not to forgive sin.

[ZiSunka]

How do you explain these two verses?

John 20:22-2322 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.

Oh Holly, please don't take two verses completely outside their context and tell us we have to believe in the idea that only priests can absolve our sins. :cry:

When we read this, we read "disciples" to be all his disciples, all those who would become followers of his teachings (literal meaning of "disciples" is "those who study under a particular teacher"), meaning all of us, not just a priestly class of special people. It certainly does not mean just the apsotles, it means all the disciples who were with him in the locked room, and those who would follow after them by faith.

Also, it doesn't even mean that some people can forgive our sins, because it would conflict with the part where Jesus says that only God can forgive our sins (he says several times that he forgave people publically so they would know that he had the authority to forgive sins, an authority known to belong only to God, thus being firm evidence that Jesus's true identity as God was for real).

And also, it doesn't mean that he was giving us the authority to forgive sins, he was giving us the responsibility to forgive people because if we refuse to forgive, those people walk around their whole lives with the burden of knowing they aren't forgiven, which is a difficult burden to bear.

Say someone sins against you, let's say they steal your dog. You find out they did it and demand your dog back. They meet you at the front door and know why you are there and they beg you to forgive them. If you refuse, they live knowing that you, a Christian, will not forgive them and they think that God won't forgive them either so they don't even ask God to forgive them because here you are, God's representative on earth and you tell them they can't be forgiven.

That's how what we forgive is forgiven, but what we refuse to forgive goes unforgiven.

[Joykins]

Jesus gave his disciples the power to forgive sins, through his gift of the Holy Spirit.

I think this means that the Holy Spirit is involved in the forgiveness.

[FreeinChrist]

Oh Holly, please don't take two verses completely outside their context and tell us we have to believe in the idea that only priests can absolve our sins. :cry:

When we read this, we read "disciples" to be all his disciples, all those who would become followers of his teachings (literal meaning of "disciples" is "those who study under a particular teacher"), meaning all of us, not just a priestly class of special people. It certainly does not mean just the apsotles, it means all the disciples who were with him in the locked room, and those who would follow after them by faith.

Also, it doesn't even mean that some people can forgive our sins, because it would conflict with the part where Jesus says that only God can forgive our sins (he says several times that he forgave people publically so they would know that he had the authority to forgive sins, an authority known to belong only to God, thus being firm evidence that Jesus's true identity as God was for real).

And also, it doesn't mean that he was giving us the authority to forgive sins, he was giving us the responsibility to forgive people because if we refuse to forgive, those people walk around their whole lives with the burden of knowing they aren't forgiven, which is a difficult burden to bear.

Say someone sins against you, let's say they steal your dog. You find out they did it and demand your dog back. They meet you at the front door and know why you are there and they beg you to forgive them. If you refuse, they live knowing that you, a Christian, will not forgive them and they think that God won't forgive them either so they don't even ask God to forgive them because here you are, God's representative on earth and you tell them they can't be forgiven.

That's how what we forgive is forgiven, but what we refuse to forgive goes unforgiven.

:amen:

[Flynmonkie]

How do you explain these two verses?
John 20:22-23
22And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

23Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

:wave:
In v22 He breathed on them Gr. emphusao only used here in the NT but used in the Septuagint in Genesis 2:7 for the Hebrew word naphah – to breathe or blow with force. The same Jehovah that breathed the breath life unto Adam so he became a living soul -is the same Lord that breathed on the apostles the Divine power. The first fruits of the resurrection, here bestows the first fruits of the Spirit, not only on the apostles but also on “them that were with them”. (Luke 24.33; Acts 1.14. & 2.1)

In v23 Remit is Gr aphiemi Always translated elsewhere “forgive” when sins or debts are referred to. We see here again that sins are to be forgiven, if not - ours will not be forgiven of us. If they are, ours will also.

[PaladinGirl]

Oh Holly, please don't take two verses completely outside their context and tell us we have to believe in the idea that only priests can absolve our sins. :cry:

When we read this, we read "disciples" to be all his disciples, all those who would become followers of his teachings (literal meaning of "disciples" is "those who study under a particular teacher"), meaning all of us, not just a priestly class of special people. It certainly does not mean just the apsotles, it means all the disciples who were with him in the locked room, and those who would follow after them by faith.

Also, it doesn't even mean that some people can forgive our sins, because it would conflict with the part where Jesus says that only God can forgive our sins (he says several times that he forgave people publically so they would know that he had the authority to forgive sins, an authority known to belong only to God, thus being firm evidence that Jesus's true identity as God was for real).

And also, it doesn't mean that he was giving us the authority to forgive sins, he was giving us the responsibility to forgive people because if we refuse to forgive, those people walk around their whole lives with the burden of knowing they aren't forgiven, which is a difficult burden to bear.

Say someone sins against you, let's say they steal your dog. You find out they did it and demand your dog back. They meet you at the front door and know why you are there and they beg you to forgive them. If you refuse, they live knowing that you, a Christian, will not forgive them and they think that God won't forgive them either so they don't even ask God to forgive them because here you are, God's representative on earth and you tell them they can't be forgiven.

That's how what we forgive is forgiven, but what we refuse to forgive goes unforgiven.

Lambslove, I wasn't telling you that you have to believe anything. I would never do that. Anyway, I still don't understand these two verses.

Also, I have decided to back to Baptist. I read an article on sola scriptura and I am honestly thoroughly convinced of the truth of sola scriptura.

[arunma]

Also, I have decided to back to Baptist. I read an article on sola scriptura and I am honestly thoroughly convinced of the truth of sola scriptura.

Holly, you've got to stop this. You can't continuously jump between the Baptist and Catholic churches. You've got to admit, you do this practically every week. As your brother in Christ, I feel it's my duty to tell you that there's something wrong with this. You need to pick one of these churches, and start attending.

You say you're "thoroughly convinced" about sola scriptura. But will you feel that way tomorrow? Probably not. And that means that you probably aren't as thoroughly convinced as you say you are.

I think you should just go ahead and attend the Catholic Church. It's hard to tell, but Catholic teaching does point out, at some level, that salvation is by faith rather than sacraments. So technically they're not heretics (although you couldn't tell by reading some of their literature). As long as you keep this in mind, I think you can experience salvation within the Catholic Church. You'd be better off as a Catholic than in your current state. If you keep jumping between the Catholic and Baptist churches, you'll never actually commune with fellow believers. And you'll probably end up jumping right into the devil's arms.

[PaladinGirl]

Holly, you've got to stop this. You can't continuously jump between the Baptist and Catholic churches. You've got to admit, you do this practically every week. As your brother in Christ, I feel it's my duty to tell you that there's something wrong with this. You need to pick one of these churches, and start attending.

You say you're "thoroughly convinced" about sola scriptura. But will you feel that way tomorrow? Probably not. And that means that you probably aren't as thoroughly convinced as you say you are.

I think you should just go ahead and attend the Catholic Church. It's hard to tell, but Catholic teaching does point out, at some level, that salvation is by faith rather than sacraments. So technically they're not heretics (although you couldn't tell by reading some of their literature). As long as you keep this in mind, I think you can experience salvation within the Catholic Church. You'd be better off as a Catholic than in your current state. If you keep jumping between the Catholic and Baptist churches, you'll never actually commune with fellow believers. And you'll probably end up jumping right into the devil's arms.

Why don't you just give me a chance? Have you ever thought that I just might stay in one place this time? :confused: But if I am not welcome here then I will leave. :sigh: All I ask is for some support this time. I know I have bounced around many times before but I am pretty sure of myself this time. Please, just give me a chance.

[arunma]

Why don't you just give me a chance? Have you ever thought that I just might stay in one place this time? :confused: But if I am not welcome here then I will leave. :sigh: All I ask is for some support this time. I know I have bounced around many times before but I am pretty sure of myself this time. Please, just give me a chance.

I didn't say you're not welcome here. You're always welcome here, and I'm sure that most Baptist churches would welcome you anytime as well. I'm trying to tell you that in your own spiritual interest, you should just stay with the Catholic Church. While you say that you're pretty sure of your decision this time, that's what you say every time. I know you'll change your mind again, which is why I'm trying to discourage it. You should start attending Catholic mass, and continue to do so for at least a month. Changing your mind about this every week isn't healthy.

You may disagree with certain Catholic teachings, but that's OK. There are some minor issues with which I disagree with my church. But I choose to continue attending anyway, because God will help me to work these issues out.

Is it OK to change denominations? Yes it is. In fact, I've thought for quite awhile about converting to Orthodoxy. But the key is: I've thought for quite awhile. And more importantly, I've prayed about this. Now I'm not sure if I'll convert or not, since I agree with virtually all of my church's teachings. But I know that if I ever do become Orthodox, that decision will be well-thought, and led by the Spirit.

Not that I'm trying to prop myself up as an example of the model Christian, but I think that it's necessary to take some time in making these decisions. I disagree with many Roman Catholic teachings, and I think it's better to be a Baptist. But all Christians must have our feet firmly planted somewhere. Even if that turns out to be the Catholic Church, you're better off growing in one faith community than roaming by yourself. Saint Peter says that the devil seeks us like a predator after its prey. Travelers avoid predators by traveling in groups, which is why God has ordained that Christians should fellowship. If you don't stay with one group, you'll fall victim to the enemy.

Rather than discussing this issue solely on CF, perhaps you should discuss it with a Catholic priest (or a Baptist pastor, depending on your mood the day you decide to seek advice). This is what we pay these guys for, so you should take advantage of the services that they offer.

[PaladinGirl]

I didn't say you're not welcome here. You're always welcome here, and I'm sure that most Baptist churches would welcome you anytime as well. I'm trying to tell you that in your own spiritual interest, you should just stay with the Catholic Church. While you say that you're pretty sure of your decision this time, that's what you say every time. I know you'll change your mind again, which is why I'm trying to discourage it. You should start attending Catholic mass, and continue to do so for at least a month. Changing your mind about this every week isn't healthy.

You may disagree with certain Catholic teachings, but that's OK. There are some minor issues with which I disagree with my church. But I choose to continue attending anyway, because God will help me to work these issues out.

Is it OK to change denominations? Yes it is. In fact, I've thought for quite awhile about converting to Orthodoxy. But the key is: I've thought for quite awhile. And more importantly, I've prayed about this. Now I'm not sure if I'll convert or not, since I agree with virtually all of my church's teachings. But I know that if I ever do become Orthodox, that decision will be well-thought, and led by the Spirit.

Not that I'm trying to prop myself up as an example of the model Christian, but I think that it's necessary to take some time in making these decisions. I disagree with many Roman Catholic teachings, and I think it's better to be a Baptist. But all Christians must have our feet firmly planted somewhere. Even if that turns out to be the Catholic Church, you're better off growing in one faith community than roaming by yourself. Saint Peter says that the devil seeks us like a predator after its prey. Travelers avoid predators by traveling in groups, which is why God has ordained that Christians should fellowship. If you don't stay with one group, you'll fall victim to the enemy.

Rather than discussing this issue solely on CF, perhaps you should discuss it with a Catholic priest (or a Baptist pastor, depending on your mood the day you decide to seek advice). This is what we pay these guys for, so you should take advantage of the services that they offer.

I told you already that I don't want to stay Catholic. I am not going to stay with a church that I disagree with. I do intend to talk with a Baptist pastor about this sometime. Thanks for your advice Arunma but I am not staying with the Catholic Church.

[arunma]

I told you already that I don't want to stay Catholic. I am not going to stay with a church that I disagree with. I do intend to talk with a Baptist pastor about this sometime. Thanks for your advice Arunma but I am not staying with the Catholic Church.

Well...OK. But may I remind you of this in a few days when you decide that you're a hardcore conservative Catholic?

[PaladinGirl]

Well...OK. But may I remind you of this in a few days when you decide that you're a hardcore conservative Catholic?

If that happens you may do so. It makes no difference to me.

[novcncy]

If that happens you may do so. It makes no difference to me.

Allright Holly. I couldn't possibly disagree with Arunma's conclusion any more. But I do agree with the core of his reasoning. Let me encourage you as enthusiastically as I can to get into a church (preferably, a good Baptist one ;) ). The importance of being in a local assembly is vital.

I'll pray for you.

[PaladinGirl]

Allright Holly. I couldn't possibly disagree with Arunma's conclusion any more. But I do agree with the core of his reasoning. Let me encourage you as enthusiastically as I can to get into a church (preferably, a good Baptist one ;) ). The importance of being in a local assembly is vital.

I'll pray for you.

Oh don't worry. I already have plans on attending a local Baptist church in my area. :)

[arunma]

Allright Holly. I couldn't possibly disagree with Arunma's conclusion any more. But I do agree with the core of his reasoning. Let me encourage you as enthusiastically as I can to get into a church (preferably, a good Baptist one ;) ). The importance of being in a local assembly is vital.

I'll pray for you.

I can't say I blame you. I'm not very fond of Roman Catholic theology, and I think that the Baptist denomination is more conducive to developing a Christian faith than the Catholic Church (not that you can't be a saved Catholic). But I figure that it's better to participate in some sort of Christian church rather than sit on the fence.

[mesue]

Joh 20:23 -

Whose soever sins ... - See the notes at Mat_16:19; Mat_18:18. It is worthy of remark here that Jesus confers the same power on all the apostles. He gives to no one of them any special authority. If Peter, as the Papists pretend, had been appointed to any special authority, it is wonderful that the Saviour did not here hint at any such pre-eminence. This passage conclusively proves that they were invested with equal power in organizing and governing the church. The authority which he had given Peter to preach the gospel first to the Jews and the Gentiles, does not militate against this. See the notes at Mat_16:18-19. This authority given them was full proof that they were inspired. The meaning of the passage is not that man can forgive sins that belongs only to God Isa_43:23 but that they should be inspired; that in founding the church, and in declaring the will of God, they should be taught by the Holy Spirit to declare on what terms, to what characters, and to what temper of mind God would extend forgiveness of sins. It was not authority to forgive individuals, but to establish in all the churches the terms and conditions on which men might be pardoned, with a promise that God would confirm all that they taught; that all might have assurance of forgiveness who would comply with those terms; and that those who did not comply should not be forgiven, but that their sins should be retained. This commission is as far as possible from the authority which the Roman Catholic claims of remitting sin and of pronouncing pardon.

Gotta' love E-Sword!

[arunma]

Yes, I'm quite fond of E-sword too!

[PaladinGirl]

Thanks Mesue. I think I understand it. It means that Jesus was telling them to tell what the conditions were for forgiveness right? Anyway, if that's what it says then why is it translated like it is? It is really confusing the way it is.

[Ragamuffins]

Also, I have decided to back to Baptist. I read an article on sola scriptura and I am honestly thoroughly convinced of the truth of sola scriptura.
What article was that if I may ask?

[mesue]

Thanks Mesue. I think I understand it. It means that Jesus was telling them to tell what the conditions were for forgiveness right? Anyway, if that's what it says then why is it translated like it is? It is really confusing the way it is.

:hug: You're welcome Holly :hug:
That would be a question for the translators :)
Some things are just plain confusing, or wacky. Read Ezekiel, especially the 1st Chapter. :D

[eldermike]

I tend to agree with Albert Barnes (Notes on the New Testament)
These two verses are important to setting up the church that Jesus was the head. He breathed on "them": this is important to notice here. One would have to assume that Jesus intended to give up the church to a group of men, or, He intended to keep Headship of it. It's clear that He intended to keep the job of Head of His church.

The process of forgiveness of sins is to be taught, (John 14:6) it's not a power given to any one of them or to any one of us. Because they were given the Holy Spirit they were also forgiven. Anyone who receives the same free gift (breath of life) is also forgiven. Anyone who rejects it keeps His sins and the wages, which is death.

The church began with a group of Spirit filled men, but they were not the power of the church, they did not have keys to heaven, they had a message and the Helper. The rest is the amazing but true story of what a few men filled with God did accomplish.

Today, we are those that have the breath, the message and the Helper. What shall we do with it?