Christian Forums and Message Board

In  John  20 :22  Jesus  breathed on them and  saith  unto  them  RECIEVE YE  HOLY  SPIRIT .

 Then  in  verse 23  Whose soever   SINS  ye  Remit unto  they  are  REMITTED  unto  them ,

 and  who  soever sins ye  RETAIN , they  are  RETAINED ,

 The  question is , can  man forgive  sins  and how  did they  forgive sins ?

 dan p

John 20:21-23~"Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

Here, unquestionably, our Lord has embraced, in a few words, the sum of the Gospel; for we must not separate this power of forgiving sins from the office of teaching, with which it is closely connected in this passage. Christ had said a little before, As the living Father hath sent me, so I also send you He now makes a declaration of what is intended and what is meant by this embassy, only he interwove with that declaration what was necessary, that he gave to them his Holy Spirit, in order that they might have nothing from themselves, nor trust in their own wisdom and power, but in the written word of God which they were commanded to preach.

The principal design of preaching the Gospel is, to proclaim how sinners are reconciled to God, and this is accomplished by the unconditional pardon of sins; as Paul also informs us, when he calls the Gospel, on this account, the ministry of reconciliation, (See 2nd Corinthians 5:18.) Many other things, undoubtedly, are contained in the Gospel, but the principal object which God intends to accomplish is to proclaim the righteousness of God that is freely imparted to sinner on Jesus' behalf by the truth of the gospel, to receive men into favor by not imputing their sins. If, therefore, we wish to show that we are faithful ministers of the Gospel, we must give our most earnest attention to this subject; for the chief point of difference between the Gospel and heathen philosophy lies in this, that the Gospel makes the salvation of men to consist in the forgiveness of sins through free grace. This is the source of the other blessings which God bestows, such as, that God enlightens and regenerates us by his Spirit, that he forms us anew to his image, that he arms us with unshaken firmness against the world and Satan. Thus the whole doctrine of godliness, and the spiritual building of the Church, rests on this foundation, that God, having acquitted us from all sins, adopts us to be his children by free grace.

While Christ enjoins the Apostles to forgive sins, he does not convey to them what is peculiar to himself. It belongs to him to forgive sins, not to man. This honor, so far as it belongs peculiarly to himself, he does not surrender to the Apostles, but enjoins them, in his name, to proclaim the forgiveness of sins, that through their agency he may reconcile men to God. In short, properly speaking, it is he alone who forgives sins through the redemption that CHrist secured for his people.
 
But it may be asked, Since he appoints them to be only the witnesses or heralds of this blessing, and not the authors of it, why does he extol their power in such lofty terms? I reply, since this gospel alone is the truth, and any man who preaches another gospel, it IS OUR DUTY to warn them that they fall under the curse of God, so in THIS SENSE we are saying your sins are NOT forgiven you, IF you preach another gospel other than free grace through Jesus' obedience, NOT MAN.

Most absurdly do the Papists, (who preach another gospel, and so do many other sects along with them ) on the other hand, torture this passage, to support their magical absolutions. If any person does not confess his sins in the ear of the priest, he has no right, in their opinion, to expect forgiveness; for Christ intended that sins should be forgiven through the Apostles, and they cannot absolve without having examined the matter; therefore, confession is necessary. Such is their wicked argument.  But they fall into a strange blunder, when they pass by the most important point of the matter; namely, that this right was granted first to the apostles and the faithful among the true churches of Christ, but in a different manner than what they think.  For Christ does not here appoint confessors, to inquire minutely into each sin by means of low mutterings, but preachers of his Gospel, who shall cause their voice to be heard, and who shall seal on the hearts of believers the grace of the atonement obtained through Christ. We ought, therefore, to keep by the manner of forgiving sins, is through the redemption that is in Jesus' faith and obedience, not in our works, and not by confessing our sins to another sinner, that may be much more wicked than ourselves! 

And to those whose sins you retain (we do this by using scriptures either exposing their false gospel, or their wicked lifestyle) Christ adds this second clause, in order to terrify the despisers of his Gospel, that they may know that they will not escape punishment for this pride. As the embassy of salvation and of eternal life has been committed to the believers, so, on the other hand, they have been armed with vengeance against all the ungodly, who reject the salvation of free grace, as Paul teaches, (2 Corinthians 10:6.) But this is placed last in order, because it was proper that the true and real design of preaching the Gospel should be first exhibited.

It ought to be observed, however, that everyone who hears the voice of the Gospel, if he does not embrace the forgiveness of sins which is there promised to believers, is liable to eternal damnation; for, as it is a living savior to the children of God, so to those who perish it is the savour of death to death, (2ndCorinthians 2:16.) Not that the preaching of the Gospel is necessary for condemning the reprobate, for by nature we are all lost, and, in addition to the hereditary curse, every one draws down on himself additional causes of death, but because the obstinacy of those who knowingly and willingly despise the Son of God deserves much severer punishment.

One more thought these scriptures we also can encourage those men and women who preach the pure gospel of free grace, apart from works that they are among the faithful that God has called out of this world into his kingdom~by them confessing that their sins are forgiven freely through Jesus' obedience.

Dan asked an honest and simple question.

In  John  20 :22  Jesus  breathed on them and  saith  unto  them  RECIEVE YE  HOLY  SPIRIT .

 Then  in  verse 23  Whose soever   SINS  ye  Remit unto  they  are  REMITTED  unto  them ,

 and  who  soever sins ye  RETAIN , they  are  RETAINED ,

 The  question is , can  man forgive  sins  and how  did they  forgive sins ?

We know that John 20:22 was Jesus commanding His disciples...

Obviously these were flesh and blood men that Jesus commissioned, once instilling the Holy Spirit onto tem and giving them the "power" of forgivness"

This is given to the whole group of disciples ( plural).

It ties to the promise in Matthew 16:19; And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

AND

Mathew 18:18  18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

The disciples' power to forgive sins is linked to the gift of the Spirit in John 20:22, and not in human power.

So can ALL men forgive? Can all who receives the Holy Spirit forgive?

I do not see it that way.

The RCC will tell you yes clergy can, and that is why in addition to daily Eucharist they impart "last rites"... the final forgiveness that can only be done by an ordained priest.

And while we are told we all must forgive others.... I do not believe that we have the deciding power to grant a divine forgiveness... even if we were over filled with the Holy Spirit for I just dont see common man sitting at a death bed telling the one dieing that they are forgiven

My feeling on women are simply my upbringing and no woman should preach at the pulpit.

Also... Just as husbands are declared to be the head of the home and are to lead (never domineer, but lead as servants, etc.), so men are to be the leaders in the church. And the reason why men are to be elders... never women, but they can be deacons because is one of helping the elders in their ministry.

Or so it goes in my church.

Certainly "Godly women are more than capable of exposing false gospel and exposing false professors and warning both"
but they have never, as far as I have read, been given the role of a man in the bible. Even those suggested as women disciples

As to the imparting of the Holy Spirit by Jesus on one...
 For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground: I will pour my spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring... Isaiah 44:3

Jesus offers the "Living Water" to the Samaritan woman at the well:

To the Samaritan woman at wellJesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. John 4:13-14

Jesus tells the Samaritan woman in John 4:21-24  that he can give her "living water." He also tells her that God is a spirit and that those who worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. He tells her this because the "living water" is the Holy Spirit. This is clear from the passage below.

John 7:37, 37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.

38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

Ummmm.... I so am conflicted as to whether to post the following link because you are going to shoot holes all over it ( because it is not one you will agree with)..... but it is the only one I have at the moment...... about women disciples....

https://www.cbeinternational.org/resource/article/mutuality-blog-magazine/jesuss-female-disciplesand-why-they-werent-among-twelve

Jesus’s Female Disciples…and Why They Weren’t Among “The Twelve”

But What About the Twelve?
Okay, yes, Jesus did have female disciples. But...they weren't named among the Twelve.

No, they weren't. But it had nothing to do with denying women a place in leadership roles. While Jesus was counter-cultural and controversial, confronting everything amiss in the culture was not what he was on earth to do. A large majority of the times he confronted culture it was a confrontation against other religious leaders and their hypocrisy. He was more focused on bringing the fulfillment of God’s covenants and kingdom.

To the Jews, the number twelve represented the government of God's kingdom. That kingdom was founded upon the twelve tribes of Israel, the twelve sons of Jacob. So the twelve named disciples correspond to the twelve tribes. Jesus was making a prophetic statement to the Jewish people, and specifically the religious leaders. The statement is not only in the use of the number twelve, but also in the gender. Jesus did not choose twelve men because men are superior or as a mandate for future leadership of his body but because the symbolism he was putting before the people has in it twelve men.

It’s interesting to note that after Acts 1, after the establishment of the new covenant through the blood of Jesus, the twelve disciples as “the Twelve” disappears from the landscape of early Christianity.

By choosing men, and not women, to serve as his twelve disciples, Jesus was not making a sexist statement, nor was he denying women a future leadership role in God’s kingdom. Instead, he was using prophetic symbolism the Jews knew well to give them the message that he was sent by the God of Israel, to call them to a new and living way of salvation. Just as old Jerusalem was founded on the twelve patriarchs, the new Jerusalem was founded on the twelve disciples.

Furthermore, the coming of the kingdom of God brought a new credential system. Forever expunged was the man-made notion that sons were the only ones to receive an inheritance or have authority in the name of God. In God’s kingdom, no longer would race, socio-economic status, or gender determine one's place, because ". . . in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith . . . There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:26, 28).

We are all chosen. We are all one in Christ. We are all disciples who have been commissioned to serve, vested with the authority of the King, and mandated to go and make disciples. When we realize that Jesus’s purpose in choosing who would be counted among the Twelve was not to create a model for church leadership, we are free to fully empower women to fulfill that commission and to serve in any capacity to which God has called them

Finally. In my opinion... Yes. Jesus commissioned His disciples (NO women) to forgive, but I shall stop as I am rambling , yet, again[/size]

OK Rella -  you opened a HUGE can of worms with that one.  I do agree that they are related, but most christians have absolutely no idea what our Lord was talking about in those passages.  It is much scarier than anyone could imagine.  And no amount of parsing the Greek texts will help.

The pentecostal churches of my background believed it was about binding the devil and loosing the power of God.  But in the rabbinic vernacular of the day, those terms had a specific meaning.  "Binding" meant that a certain action or doctrine was forbidden, and "loosing" meant that it was permitted. Here is the scary part: Our Lord was allowing MEN to create the New Covenant doctrines and practices, and promised that Heaven would back them up. The tenses of the verbs (ok -  a little Greek parsing) was past tense:  "... shall have already been bound/loosed in Heaven." The Hebrew and Aramaic term for that was halacha - meaning how you walk.

I want to hear more.  What are a few worms among friends... so long as they are not snakes.

You say " "Binding" meant that a certain action or doctrine was forbidden, and "loosing" meant that it was permitted. Here is the scary part: Our Lord was allowing MEN to create the New Covenant doctrines and practices, and promised that Heaven would back them up."

And that is somewhat what I understand and why I posted a reply to Dan's question in my faulty layman endeavor.

I, personally see not problem if our Lord picked those who would be hands on with this task.

Here you go:

https://www.emethatorah.com/binding-and-loosing-properly-understood

Thank you very much.  Very informative and brought an actual smile to my face on

" Moses spoke to the heads of the tribes of the people of Israel, saying, “This is what the LORD has commanded. If a man vows a vow to the LORD, or swears an oath to bind himself by a pledge, he shall not break his word. He shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth. (Numbers 30:1–2) "

I learned that 41 years ago when I made a vow.... and God has held me to it, rightfully, all this time

I 

 John 20:23  reads  like  this ,

 #1 WHOSE / TIS  is  in the  GENTIVE  CASE , and in the  Plural .

 #2  SO EVER / AN  a  DISJUNCATIVE PARTICLE ,

 #3  SINS / HAMARTIA is  a  noun , in the  ACUSSATIVE  CASE , and  is  plural

 #4 YE  REMIT / APHIEMI ,  verb  in the  Greek  AORIST  TENSE , ACTIVE  VOICE  , SUBJECTIVE MOOD  and is  in  the  Plural as  to  forgive  sins .

 #5 THEY  ARE  REMITTED / APHIEMI , in  the  PRESENT  TENSE , PASSIVE  VOICE , and in the  INDICATIVE  MOOD .

 #6 UNTO  THEM / AUTOS , is  a  PERSNAL  POSSESSIVE  PRONOUN ,  in the  Plural .

 #7 YE  RETAIN / KRATEO , in the  PRESENT  TENSE  , ACTIVE  VOICE , SUBJUNCATIVE  MOOD  , and is  Plural .

 #8 THEY  ARE  RETAINED / KRATEO  , VERB  in the  PERFECT  TENSE , PASSIVE  VOICE , INDICATIVE  MOOD , means  it is a  FACT  and in the  Plural .

 I  believe that  John  20:23  is  connected  to  Acts 2:38 , that  IF  anyone  was  BAPTIZED ,  there  SINS were   REMITTED  .

 But  if  they  refused to  be  BAPTIZED  there  SINS  were  RETAINED  forever , because it is  in the  Greek  PERFECT  TENSE  and in the  INDICATIVE  MOOD  as being  a  FACT .

 dan p

  The  people of  the  NEW  COVENANT  will  be   WATER  SPRINKED   , as the  New  Covenant is  for  Israel  and  Judah ,  Eze  36:25 38  and  Heb 8:8 .

 And  I  do  believe that  WATER  BAPTISM  was  used in  Acts 2:38 , and will  yet  be  BAPTISMS , during  the  GREAT  TRIBULATION .

 And  Mark 16:16--18  where  the  Greek  words , SHALL  FOLLOW /  PARAKIOUTHEO , SHALL CAST  OUT / EKBALLO  are  in  the  Greek  FUTURE  TENSE  and  why the  sign  gifts have  yet  to  be seen in  Mark  16:17  and  18 .

dan p

 

There is nothing about "sprinkled" in the definitions of bapto and baptizo.  They mean to dip, immerse, plunge and soak underwater.

Perhaps not in the definition, but was good enough for God....

EZ 36:25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

Unless you feel they were being cleansed from working in the fields of mud?

Perhaps not in the definition, but was good enough for God....

EZ 36:25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

Unless you feel they were being cleansed from working in the fields of mud?

But there is nothing to indicate that was a baptism.  On the other hand, this was: (one of many instances)

Leviticus 15:10
Whoever then touches any of the things which were under him shall be unclean until evening, and he who carries them shall wash his clothes and bathe in water and be unclean until evening.

https://www.thetorah.com/article/on-the-origins-of-tevilah-ritual-immersion

But there is nothing to indicate that was a baptism.  On the other hand, this was: (one of many instances)

Leviticus 15:10
Whoever then touches any of the things which were under him shall be unclean until evening, and he who carries them shall wash his clothes and bathe in water and be unclean until evening.

https://www.thetorah.com/article/on-the-origins-of-tevilah-ritual-immersion

I think many are hung up on a given word and not the spirit of an action . To me it is water that is of key importance... Baptism, and all variations and een sprinkling are secondary to what that water does

Quote from: Texas Conservative on Tue Sep 20, 2022 - 11:18:07

Ezekiel isn't talking about baptism.

But it is talking about cleansing from all filthiness'... which is what some believe is what baptism is all about

Endicott:

 Sprinkle clean water.—Comp. Hebrews 9:13; Hebrews 10:22. Ezekiel, the priest, here refers to those manifold purifications of the Law (e.g., Numbers 8:7; Numbers 19:9; Numbers 19:17; Leviticus 14:5-7; Leviticus 14:9, &c.) which were performed by means of water; yet he refers to these as a whole, in their symbolical signification, rather than to any one of them in particular. He speaks primarily of the cleansing from idolatry and such gross outward sins, and he treats of the people collectively; yet this purification, as the following verses show, must necessarily extend much farther, and be applied to them individually. It was the same symbolism which led in later ages to the use of baptism in the admission of proselytes to the Jewish Church, a practice adopted by the forerunner of our Lord in the preparation of the people for His coming. Baptism is also alluded to by our Lord Himself in His conversation with Nicodemus (John 3:5.) and afterwards established by Him as the initiatory sacrament of the Christian Church. (Comp. Ephesians 5:26; Titus 3:5; Hebrews 10:22.)

The Holy Nation:

First comes the great truth that the foundation, so far as concerns the history of a soul or of a community, of all other good is divine forgiveness {Ezekiel 36:25}. Ezekiel, the priest, casts the promise into ceremonial form, and points to the sprinklings of the polluted under the law, or to the ritual of consecration to the priesthood. That cleansing is the removal of already contracted defilement, especially of the guilt of idolatry. It is clearly distinguished from the operation on the inward nature which follows; that is to say, it is the promise of forgiveness, or of justification, not of sanctification.

I could go o and on...

Ezekiel is addressing the restoration of Israel, not the nuances of salvation in the New Covenant.  Specific context of the passage is paramount.

So... submersion seems to have arrived on the scene as a progression over the years.

Indeed.  And by the late 2nd temple period (1st century ad) it was firmly established that it was complete submersion (including every hair) and to make sure the water contacted every bodily surface, it was done in the nude.