How Do Protestants Avoid This Scripture?

[MorphRC]

[color=blue][font="Arial"][b][url="http://www.searchgodsword.org/"]The 1599 Geneva Study Bible[/url][/b][/color][/font]

[b]20:23 6[/b][/color] Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; [and] whose soever [sins] ye retain, they are retained.[/B]

[b](6)[/b] 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.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[b][font="Arial"][color=blue]<span style='font-family:Courier'>[url="http://devel.searchgodsword.org/com/jfb/view.cgi?book=joh&chapter=20&verse=23#Joh20_23"]Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible[/url][/color][/font]</span>[/b]

[b]John 20:19-23. JESUS APPEARS TO THE ASSEMBLED DISCIPLES.[/b]

[b]19-23.[/b] the same day at evening, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus--plainly not by the ordinary way of entrance.
and saith unto them Peace be unto you--not the mere wish that even His own exalted peace might be theirs (John 14:27), but conveying it into their hearts, even as He "opened their understandings to understand the scriptures" (Luke 24:45).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[color=blue][font="Arial"][b][url="http://devel.searchgodsword.org/com/mhc-com/view.cgi?book=joh&chapter=20&verse=23#Joh20_23"]Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible[/url][/b][/color][/font]

[b]Massive Commentary.[/b]


[color=red][b]Peoples New Testament Next...[/b][/color]

Edited June 28, 2004 by MorphRC

[MorphRC]

[b][color=blue][font="Arial"][url="http://devel.searchgodsword.org/com/pnt/view.cgi?book=joh&chapter=20&verse=23#Joh20_23"]People's New Testament[/url][/color][/font][/b]

[b]21. Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. [/b]
This is the Great Commission, more fully developed in Galilee a little later, and finally completed on Mt. Olivet, just before the Lord ascended. The Lord had trained the apostles for three years in order to fit them for this important work.

[b]23. Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, etc.[/b]
It will be seen at once, by a comparison with Matt. 16:19, that the keys then promised to Peter are now given to all the apostles, and all have similar power to open and shut, to remit sin, and to bind. The meaning is plain when we consider, first, the charge that the Savior was making, and, secondly, look forward and see how that charge was carried out; or, in other words, observe the apostles "remitting sins" and retaining them. It is the Great Commission to preach the gospel that the Savior gives for the first time in verse 21. It is with reference to carrying out that Commission that he speaks in verse 23. It was in order that they might present the terms of that Commission infallibly to the world that the baptism of the Holy Spirit was imparted, of which there is a foreshadowing in verse 22. The great end of that Commission was to declare to men "repentance and remission of sins" in the name of Christ. The following facts are manifest: (1) The Savior gave to his apostles his Commission that they might make known his will. (2) He bade them preach "remission of sins." (3) He gave them a measure of the Holy Spirit, and bade them wait until "endued with power from on high" by the baptism of the Holy Spirit. (4) When the Holy Spirit fell, they spoke as it "gave them utterance" (Acts 2:4). (5) They then declared, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, the terms on which "sins could be remitted." To anxious sinners they answer, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins." Here, then, they, directed by the Holy Spirit, "remit" and "retain" sins by declaring the terms on which Christ will pardon. Thus, also, they do in their preaching recorded through the Acts of the Apostles the very thing that the Savior gave them power to do. This power was not imparted to a hierarchy, nor to any ecclesiastical body, but to the apostles, and was fulfilled by them in declaring to the world the conditions of pardon and condemnation under the Commission of our Lord.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These appear to be the main interpretations people use. Hope it helps.

[phatcatholic]

ugh!

[MorphRC]

Did I do something wrong, or are you 'ughing' at what they interpretated?

[Hananiah]

[quote name='MorphRC' date='Jun 28 2004, 12:29 AM'] [b]The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible:[/b]

declaring, that all such persons as do so repent and believe, all their sins are forgiven for Christ's sake... [b]they are remitted unto them;[/b]

[b]whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained:[/b]
that is, that whatsoever sins ye declare are not forgiven, they are not forgiven. [/quote]
This interpretation is absolutely untenable. Mr. Gill has "remit" meaning two entirely differnt things, in the same sentence, without any contextual justification. He also has "retain" meaning two entirely different things, in the same sentence, without justification.

Whose soever sins ye remit (declare to have already been remitted) they are remitted unto them (actually remitted by God).

Whose soever sins ye retain (declare to have already been retained) they are retained (actually retained by God).

Contrast the Catholic interpretation:

Whose soever sins ye remit (actually remit) they are remitted unto them (actually remitted by God).

Whose soever sins ye retain (actually retain) they are retained (actually retained by God).

Edited June 28, 2004 by Hananiah

[P3chrmd]

[quote]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: and accordingly, [/quote]

This has to be the most uneducated analysis of any scripture I have ever read! I pitty anyone who buys this guy's commentary! I can see it now....

"This is my blood"....(commentary) Jesus can't really mean his true blood...did he cut himself and bleed in the cup...of course not!


Fundamentelists...You can't live with them...and you sure as hell CAN live without them!

[Quietfire]

[quote]I would like to clear something up about St. Thomas. According to many accounts he travelled to India and started Church's in that area. AS a matter of fact there is a rite called the Malabar Catholic Rite which i guess would be compared to how St. Andrew in the Ukraine. When St. Thomas brought the word to India communicatiosn between India and the West were soon lost afterwards however the Church continued to keep the traditions that were established by Thomas (no canocal bible only a few writtings really short of a full bible when Thomas went) so the whole Church relied on the Tradition brought by St. Thomas. During the Age of Exploration when Catholics in Europe arrived in India they were suprised to find a Christian Catholic Church that was virtually the same in belief as the one in Europe regarding priests, Eucharist, and other Catholic Beliefs. So to this day the Malabar Rite is in full communion with Rome. So kind of an interesting story i am sure there are others that no more details then me but very fascinating. That a Church that was cut off from the "corruption" of the Catholic Church of the middle ages and pre then and post then was believing the same thing as that of the Church in Europe....fascintaing indeed.[/quote]

Crusader 4,
I read that somewhere, and I am sure it was here. Can someone find the thread or link or something. This IS fascinating.


Peace :peace:

[Quietfire]

Ok I found it.

Just do a search on 'Malabar', showing posts and you will see them. And Crusader 4, you were right.

Here's the amazing thing. All those years alone and they were still following the same teachings as the Church.

Refute that!!!

Some of the title threads...

Holy Apostolic Catholic Assyrian Church
Obedience or Faithfulness
Rites, Roman etc.
Christian Church of India
The 30,000 Prostestant church big lie
Inferior Rite


Peace :peace:

[amarkich]

Morph, that is not an "interpretation" or "commentary" on Scripture; it is actually [i]changing[/i] what Scripture says and calling it an "interpretation", but I suppose you are accustomed to such theological nonsense as is the norm for Protestants.

[William Putnam]

[quote name='Archbishop 10-K' date='Jun 27 2004, 07:32 PM']Of course, "for the Apostles only" makes no logical sense, just like the primacy of Peter being "for Peter only." Authority in the Scriptures has, to my knowledge, always involved successors. For example, the priesthood, including the high-priest, the kings, judges, all of these had successors. Why not the Apostles as well?[/quote]
And all we need to do is see the beginning of successors, most notably, Paul preparing Timothy for his role as a successor, a bishop but not an apostle!

The only real difference in the two is, Timothy is a successor only, the word "apostle" reserved for those who were personally selected by Christ Himself in his "charter clergy, " the first to run His new infant Church.

Interestingly, while many of the more spectacular special "charisma's" began to wane as the Church grew, not so those powers of the bishopric/priesthood. Peter could raise the dead to life, whereby others could not, yet the successors of Peter, the bishops of Rome, still had the powers given to the apostles insofar as the runing of the Church, especially the sacramental powers of forgiving the sins of sinful men and women, and changing the bread and wine into the body and blood, soul and divinity of Our Lord Himself.

And we have the testimony of the early fathers who lived at the very edge of the end of the apostolic era to testify to that...

And even then, some of the successors had extraordinary special charismas of their own that testified to the faith...sometimes not manifest until after their death, usually a martyrdom.

St. Januarius comes to mind...

Often times it was even laypersons...

The late contempory Therese Neumann comes to mind...

For what it was worth.

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+


[i]I believe in God,
the Father Almighty,
Creator of heaven and earth;
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son,
Our Lord;
who was conceived by the holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died,
and was buried.

He descended into hell;
the third day He arose again from the dead;
He ascended into heaven,
sitteth at the right hand of God,
the Father almighty;
from thence He shall come to judge
the living and the dead.

I believe in the holy Spirit,
the Holy Catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and life everlasting.

Amen.[/i]

- [b]The Apostles Creed[/b] -

[MorphRC]

[quote name='amarkich' date='Jun 29 2004, 07:06 AM'] Morph, that is not an "interpretation" or "commentary" on Scripture; it is actually [i]changing[/i] what Scripture says and calling it an "interpretation", but I suppose you are accustomed to such theological nonsense as is the norm for Protestants. [/quote]
Are you having a go at me? or at the commentary only? I aint a Prot..like heck I would be...lol.

Maybe it would be better for dust or someone to put in nice big fat red letters 'Non-Christian' instead of Non-Catholic..even though Non-Catholic implies not being Christian..oy.

[MorphRC]

Well atleast their coming into use, for further apologetics.

[amarkich]

The attack was chiefly against the commentary; however, I was under the impression that you were a Protestant, that is why I worded the second half of my statement in that way. Were you not the one who was writing against the Muslims in a previous thread? Do you actually follow the way of the Samurai, Bushido? Further, do you believe in the Trinity? I seem to be confused slightly on your exact beliefs; perhaps you could explicate them here for me. God bless.

[MorphRC]

[quote name='amarkich' date='Jun 29 2004, 03:16 PM'] The attack was chiefly against the commentary; however, I was under the impression that you were a Protestant, that is why I worded the second half of my statement in that way. Were you not the one who was writing against the Muslims in a previous thread? Do you actually follow the way of the Samurai, Bushido? Further, do you believe in the Trinity? I seem to be confused slightly on your exact beliefs; perhaps you could explicate them here for me. God bless. [/quote]
Yeh Im the one that doesnt believe they worship the same god.
Not sure about the Bushido stuff, But Im studying it and practicing the physical side so far.
I believe the trinity to be historical, thats it.
I believe their is some 'higher being' if you will, that created everything, but whether its God in the jewish/christian sense Im dont know and confused about.

[P3chrmd]

[quote]Yeh Im the one that doesnt believe they worship the same god.
Not sure about the Bushido stuff, But Im studying it and practicing the physical side so far.
I believe the trinity to be historical, thats it.
I believe their is some 'higher being' if you will, that created everything, but whether its God in the jewish/christian sense Im dont know and confused about.[/quote]

Thats cool Morph! I know alot of folks confused...I NEVER try to force any of my beliefes on them...but they see how happy I am in my faith...and some of them are starting to understand that hey...maybe there is something to this God stuff!

So I invited one to pray the first part of the rosary with me...just into the first decade! It was a neat shared time of prayer together...God is the one who has to do the "converting" of people...he just uses us as the tools...to show the people what his love can do for us!

Oh well...anyways...I'll be praying for you Morph...and hope that you find your way to God in whatever way works best for you! Cause I understand that God speeks to all of us in different ways...because he knows we are all different, learn different, and respond different!

God Bless