Posted on 07/09/2013 10:22:45 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
Post #70 said John 20:23 isn't even in the Bible, and that those who act as if it IS in the Bible, are "nicolaitans."
That's your position?
Is John 20:23 in your Bible?
He did not set aside the verse...in fact he pointed out that confession of one’s sins to others keeps a congregation honesty and builds trust....His point was directed as specifically confession in a closed box to an unknown priest....Twisting another’s words and thoughts is not a good thing
That is not the way I understand the comment that was made in 70.
The distinction was what the earliest manuscripts recorded and the placement of the Nicene Crede as being predecessor.
I believe you have severly misunderstood the argument
19 On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you." 20 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. 21 Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you." 22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained." 24 Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe." 26 Eight days later, his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. The doors were shut, but Jesus came and stood among them, and said, "Peace be with you." 27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing." 28 Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!" 29 Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe." 30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.
"Not in early MS, added by nicolaitans likely in the 4th century... It stands in contradiction to 1John 1:9, and just about all the rest of scripture."
As you can see, the contention here is that John 20:23 was inserted fraudulently into Scripture in the 4th century by these sketchy "nicolaitans," and hence is not legitimately Biblical. He said that Catholics confess to "nicolaitans,"indicating that Catholic priests are nicolaitans: which is a hoot, since all the Bibles contain this --- to him, offensive--- "nicolaitan" verse.
Is that your position, editor?
Is that your position, nifster?
And on the question of "confessing in a closed box to an unknown priest," that's not the way I have ever done it in the Catholic Church. Specifically: no closed box, no unknown priest. Never in my lifetime, and I've been going to Confession for 55 years.
People should actually check out the facts about other people's faith practices, because making obviously non-factual pronouncements about them is not a good thing. It damages the effectiveness of your argument, because it makes you look like somebody whose knowledge is, at best, patchy.
your church apparently practices confession far differently than the roman churches I am all to aware of
Then roman church has a different set of canonical books than do protestants....that cannot be disputed. I am not enough of a New Testament scholar to argue one way or the other as to which verses may have been added at a later dated.
There was much argument back and forth over lots of doctrine. Some of the doctrines were accepted others were not. This is true of many verses in both and new testament.
These are matters of contention and debate by folks with more education and experience in the field of original manuscripts than I have.
I do know that the Nicene Crede was in existence and in common usage before an officially accepted Bible was.
I wish no contention with you. My original question has yet to answered and that’s fine. Believe as you will. I have no desire to change your belief.
Everybody has the option of a face-to-face confession to a known priest. Everywhere, as far as I know.
Um, OK. What was your original question?
Which only indicates that you spent a lot of time spouting off about something that was not part of the original conversation. I have no desire to be contentious just for the sake of being contentious.
Done
If you recognize the priest it is by his voice. The churches I am aware of (in Colorado as well as California) do not have an open face to face confession....In fact they have a separate area of the church called the confessional.
But in every parish if you say "I want a face-to-face Confession," they have to accommodate you. Or if you say "I don't want to be face to face, I want to be behind a screen," they'll accommodate you. But most places--- for the past 40 years -- face-to-face is the standard. At least, that's my experience.
My present parish has a Confessional room where you can veer slightly to the lefthand and kneel at the screen, or take 2 steps around to the right and sit in the chair facing the priest.
Saturday. I'll go Saturday. (Note to self.)
I do not say that only RC ‘priests’ are nicolaitans, all of the major churches are loaded with them, and pretty much always have been.
Subdueing Yeshua’s sheep has been big business in the churches, just as it has been with Judaism before he was born.
Of course the corruptions are in all the translations/versions that mystery babylon has produced, and who would expect otherwise? Its not just the whore that does it, her daughters are happy to go along too.
I want to find them in the phonebook. Or online, if they don't have a land-line. And who would that be?
Just curious.
Pray to Yehova for enlightenment.
There has been much research and discovery since the finding of the scrolls at Qumran, and the collapse of the Soviet union, that has made bits and pieces of the original writings available, but I’m sure that no catholic would accept the work of Jewish scholars.
Bigot.
Just a realist.
Catholics are very regimented, and have far more pagan practices than the average protestant to shed.
Oh wow. Thanks for the heads up.
As I said.
For catholics, clinging to pagan traditions superceeds really finding Yeshua, and his Father.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.