can catholics Go To God Directly In prayers?

[DHK]

Yes and it does. You have the problem of using scripture like a smorgishboard. For instance you try to draw parallels in this post you make

Call it what you want. Comparing Scripture with Scripture is exactly what the Bereans did in Acts 17:11, and Paul commended them for it.

It has one simple flaw that throws your whole point of view out the window. John 20 and Matthew 18 aren't contextually related. They aren't the same topic. They aren't even the same subject.

That is your opinion. You are entitled to it. But it doesn't make you right. The incidents may be at different time periods, but the truths being taught are the same as the language indicates.

In John 20, Jesus gives authority to the Apostles to forgive and retain sin.

No he doesn't. It is your interpretation of a figurative passage. If he does, then demonstrate your belief by showing any passage in Scripture where any of the apostles forgave sin. They didn't, for they didn't have that power. In fact your interpretation contradicts the Bible, for the Word of God explicitly says:

"Only God can forgive sins." Mark 2:7

This is after the resurrection just before for he assends into heaven. He's not reviewing the topic of what to do if someone sins against you. No. Look at John 20 again verse 21 says the context here is Jesus is sending the Apostles out to evangelize Matthew 18 is a teaching within a list of teachings on sin and forgiveness.

He is teaching on discipline in the local church, which yes, does involve forgiveness, just as the passage in John 20 does require--forgiveness. But in what aspect?

Jesus in John 20 is giving authority by giving them the Holy Spirit and telling them what that authority entails which the text of the passage is clear the Apostles are given the authority to forgive and retain sin.

That authority is not clear. If it were clear you would be able to point to some instances where they exercised such authority but you can't. It is obvious that your interpretation is wrong.

Also where your problem comes in is that Jesus doesn't couch this statement with "if someone sins against you" Nor does he say "if they don't want to be forgiven". Sins are mentioned in general not a specific "against you". So what you've done is got two non-relevant parts of the bible

I'll stop you here just to say that no part of the Bible is "non-relevant." Always remember that.

and compared them to each other with out the slightest view that we have two different authors writing to two different audiences narrating two different time periods in Jesus time with us

I realize the RCC has a myriad of authors--too many to count, too many to remember, to many to write down. They are all categorized in a huge mythical source called Tradition which can include anything--factual or not. May I remind you that the Bible has but One author, and He is the Holy Spirit. The Bible is inspired by God the Holy Spirit and has no contradictions in it. Both passages quote the words of Jesus. They may have been at different times in the life of Jesus, but that doesn't take away from his inspired truth.

One before his death and resurrection and one after his death and resurrection. And speaking in two different contexts. So it is clear that you did this to support your personal view and applied it to two passages not related to each other in any way other than they happen to be two books out of the same library of scriptures we call the bible. Where as if you just read the verse in the context in which it was written you would have better understood the passage than read into it what you wanted it to say.

I know both passages quite well, and can probably quote them to you by memory. Whether or not they are in the same period of his ministry is not that relevant, as Jesus had to teach his disciples many things many times over. How many times did he tell his disciples that he was going to die, and still they never understood his words? They didn't grasp his teachings, though he told them again and again. There are many truths in the teachings of Jesus that are taught more than once. This one happens to be repeated as well. I am not saying it is the same event, but rather the same truth being taught.

You have the problem of giving evidence of where in Scripture any apostle forgave any person's sins. They didn't. The Bible expressly teaches that no man can forgive sins; but God alone. To teach that man has the power to forgive sins is blasphemy.

 

[33ad]

They do every time they go to confession

Inprosona Christi, the priest listens as Christ would listen
As Christ appointed him to in John 20- 22-23

 

[DHK]

They do every time they go to confession

Inprosona Christi, the priest listens as Christ would listen
As Christ appointed him to in John 20- 22-23

This is a fallacy, (and heresy), for no man can listen as Christ listens.
Christ is God. By your logic, all priests are making a claim to deity.

 

[Yeshua1]

They do every time they go to confession

Inprosona Christi, the priest listens as Christ would listen
As Christ appointed him to in John 20- 22-23

is jesus unable to get ALL prayers to his father directly? is he not mighty enough, does he require assistance?

who give the "absolution' for sins commited, God or man?

Since the Lord Himself will be the one to forgive us, since the father ONLY is to be talked to on it, what purpose does a RCC priest serve in the forgivenes process?

 

[Zenas]

Since the Lord Himself will be the one to forgive us, since the father ONLY is to be talked to on it, what purpose does a RCC priest serve in the forgivenes process?

You need to ask Jesus that. He's the one who set it up that way.

 

[The Biblicist]

You need to ask Jesus that. He's the one who set it up that way.

No sir he did not! That is pure Roman Catholic fantasy or more correctly babylonian babbel.

 

[Yeshua1]

You need to ask Jesus that. He's the one who set it up that way.

Strange that the Lord set it up, yet his own Apostles disregarded him in it!

 

[Zenas]

No sir he did not! That is pure Roman Catholic fantasy or more correctly babylonian babbel.

And this looks like Biblicist Baptist babbel. Biblicist rule of exegesis: If you don't like what scripture plainly says, ofuscate. If it's too clear to obfuscate, just change its meaning altogether and then claim context.

 

[Zenas]

Strange that the Lord set it up, yet his own Apostles disregarded him in it!

Yeshua, I gave you one instance of an apostle using the charism of absolution, 2 Corinthians 2:10, but you didn't like it so you ignored it. Are you of the Biblicist school of exegesis also?

 

[The Biblicist]

And this looks like Biblicist Baptist babbel. Biblicist rule of exegesis: If you don't like what scripture plainly says, ofuscate. If it's too clear to obfuscate, just change its meaning altogether and then claim context.

What Scripture? What context?

 

[Yeshua1]

What Scripture? What context?

from the "Gosepl according to Rome"

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Yeshua, I gave you one instance of an apostle using the charism of absolution, 2 Corinthians 2:10, but you didn't like it so you ignored it. Are you of the Biblicist school of exegesis also?

Good reference!!!!! Clearly Paul is following Jesus comand in exercising the authority given to him to forgive and retain sins and as he passed on his authority to the Church leadership in Corinth where he will forgive those whome they forgive like Christ will forgive those whom Paul and the other apostles forgive. Its consistent with the gospel of John.

 

[Zenas]

What Scripture? What context?

I could go back through your posts and cite dozens, but what I had in mind this time is John 20:21-23. Biblicist, let me tell you how plain this is. For many years I regarded the Catholic practice of confession to a priest as strange, unbiblical and ineffectual. Then one day in the mid 1990's I was reading through John 20 and ran across these verses. I had read this many times before without giving it any thought. But this time it jumped out at me and I recall exclaming, "There is a scriptural basis for this Catholic practice!"

I read the Bible footnotes and they gave some explanation about how this really was talking about the apostles preaching the gospel, but it wasn't convincing. It wasn't convincing because it was so unrelated to what the text was saying. If Jesus wanted to talk about preaching the gospel He would have been clear about it like He was in the synoptics.

That experience is what got me started toward the Catholic faith. I'm not there yet but all I'm lacking is the formalities.

 

[The Biblicist]

Good reference!!!!! Clearly Paul is following Jesus comand in exercising the authority given to him to forgive and retain sins and as he passed on his authority to the Church leadership in Corinth where he will forgive those whome they forgive like Christ will forgive those whom Paul and the other apostles forgive. Its consistent with the gospel of John.

You talk about eisgesis or drawing a fish out of a garden this takes the cake:

10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;

There is an EQUALITY being expressed here as in James "ONE ANOTHER" and if you can't see it, it is because you choose to be blind! Forgiveness of each other can only be "in Christ" as it is Christ that commanded we forgive one another and such is obedience "in Christ."

Hard up!

 

[The Biblicist]

You talk about eisgesis or drawing a fish out of a garden this takes the cake:

10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;

There is an EQUALITY being expressed here as in James "ONE ANOTHER" and if you can't see it, it is because you choose to be blind! Forgiveness of each other can only be "in Christ" as it is Christ that commanded we forgive one another and such is obedience "in Christ."

Hard up!

If a child of God MUST confess their sins to a Preist then it is impossible for them to pray directly to God becuase God will not accept prayers of those embracing unconfessed sin unless it is confession of the sin first.

Hence, Rome is denying that anyone can pray directly to God UNLESS they first come to men and confess their sins. This is so cultic that it is difficult to see how any rational individual could embrace such cultic nonsense as confessing sins to men and praying TO men living or dead.

 

[Zenas]

You talk about eisgesis or drawing a fish out of a garden this takes the cake:

10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;

There is an EQUALITY being expressed here as in James "ONE ANOTHER" and if you can't see it, it is because you choose to be blind! Forgiveness of each other can only be "in Christ" as it is Christ that commanded we forgive one another and such is obedience "in Christ."

Hard up!

Nonsense! Forgiveness is a Christian imperative but it is also practiced by complete infidels. I've seen it often and so would you if you got out more.

 

[Yeshua1]

If a child of God MUST confess their sins to a Preist then it is impossible for them to pray directly to God becuase God will not accept prayers of those embracing unconfessed sin unless it is confession of the sin first.

Hence, Rome is denying that anyone can pray directly to God UNLESS they first come to men and confess their sins. This is so cultic that it is difficult to see how any rational individual could embrace such cultic nonsense as confessing sins to men and praying TO men living or dead.

is the preisthood of RC priests to them different than the priesthood ALL believers in jesus have before God?

How does RCC seperate the two?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

is the preisthood of RC priests to them different than the priesthood ALL believers in jesus have before God?

How does RCC seperate the two?

One is administrative the other not.

 

[Yeshua1]

One is administrative the other not.

what does that mean?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

You talk about eisgesis or drawing a fish out of a garden this takes the cake:

10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;

There is an EQUALITY being expressed here as in James "ONE ANOTHER" and if you can't see it, it is because you choose to be blind! Forgiveness of each other can only be "in Christ" as it is Christ that commanded we forgive one another and such is obedience "in Christ."

Hard up!

Of course there is equality because he's acting on the Churche's behalf's as the Church acts on Christ behalf.

Anyone whom you forgive, I also forgive. Indeed, what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, has been for your sake in the presence of Christ

And of course they are being obedient because Christians are obedient to Christ and we are to forgive one another.