Posted on 08/18/2011 7:18:16 AM PDT by marshmallow
Just sitting here shaking my head........LOL
"I'm not surprised that you couldn't find the errors."
Can't find what isn't there.
"Consider the case of the man who truly believes that the moon is made of green cheese."
I did. I also told him when packs for his trip, he needn't pack any hors d' oeuvres.
A belief system that works is not a failure.
....” poured out through his Church.”
.......rather thru it’s people...and that to be “Witnesses of Christ”...not the church itself.
It is thru Christ living His life thru us by the power of His Spirit. We ourself have no power.
The Church is all those who are believers no matter their church affiliation....no one specific church saves nor sanctifies.....it was and remains God's work in us as believers....and our witness to the Christ and His finished work....
Sorry, but saying that doesn't make it true.
Are you then saying it's a lie that the church is comprised of believers? I think Christ would disagree. He prayed a great price for ALL who come to Him.
Those who are in Christ Jesus comprise the church....those who are not His are not the church.
The church of God is comprised of believers everywhere according to the Biblical definition.
1 Corinthians 1:2
To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours:
Galatians 1:13
For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it.
Also 1 Corinthians 14 and Ephesians 5
Campion: Sorry, but saying that doesn't make it true.
Neither does your saying so make something so.
Acts 2:21 And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.'
Acts 4:12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."
Romans 10:13 For "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."
Jesus alone saves. Not a church. No organization that lifts itself up as the only way to God. Not Catholic. Not Protestant. Not Evangelical. Not Mormon. Not JW. Not anyone. No pope or priest died for my sins. Jesus did. Only He can save and forgive.
If you want to disagree with that, you can argue with God about it. But show us proof out of HIS word to support your case.
Great scripture references Metmom.....thank you and will look at these closer.
WRT the "Seal of Confession", I do not see a clear Biblical basis for Thomas Aquinas to say: By the very fact that Christ permitted, nay ordered, that all baptised sinners should use the sacrament and consequently make a secret confession. I'd like to see the chapter and verse to back that one up.
Me, too, but I’m not holding my breath.
Precedent, you know.
and consequently make a secret confession.
Why the great secrecy in many religions? Jesus certainly taught openly, and so did his Apostles. Crowds came and listened....people were converted "openly".
It is well known among those who study occults and false religions....one of the first "heads up" for any who are seekers is if there is secrecy....if so you are on the wrong path.
I. What is intended by faults in this text.
1. Offenses against our neighbor.
2. Public offenses, or offenses against the public.
3. Secretly besetting sins, or those secret lusts and appetites, and passions, and temptations and states of mind that easily beset, and frequently overcome us.
4. Offensive and injurious traits of character. There are very few persons who have not more or less features of their character that are particularly offensive, either to good morals or good breeding, and are therefore injurious and disastrous in their tendencies and results. These are to be regarded not as isolated faults, but as faults of character--habitual faults, in opposition to accidental or occasional faults. All such faults should be confessed, one to another.
5. Such weaknesses and infirmities as lay us open to the power of temptation. These weaknesses may be owing to some constitutional infirmity, or they may arise out of evil habits that have acquired great power over us. Whatever they are, if they are faults in such a sense as to bring us into legal bondage to sin, they doubtless come within the scope of the Apostle's meaning.
6. All such things as grieve the Spirit of God, and hinder our growth in grace.
II. To whom this confession is to be made?
1. To those especially who have been injured by our faults. That we are under obligation to confess to them, and make what reparation is in our power, is too plain to need comment.
2. Public sins are to be confessed to the public. By this I mean, that if sins have been injurious to the public, to the Church, or to the world, or to both, the confession should be as public as the injury.
3. But especially does this text require confession to our praying friends. "Confess your faults one to another," says the Apostle, "and pray one for another that ye may be healed." Although the duty of confessing sin to all that have been injured, is abundantly taught in other parts of scripture; yet in this particular text, the Apostle manifestly intended to enjoin the duty of confessing our faults to praying friends, for the purpose of enlisting their sympathies and prayers in our behalf.
4. And more especially still does he seem to require the duty of confessing our faults to eminently praying persons; for he immediately adds, "The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much." Hence it is plain, that the Apostle designed to direct persons to confess their faults especially to those who offer effectual fervent prayer. (see link for the full article)
I believe that, as Christians, we are commanded to be open and honest with each other. This MUST be our attitude, then, to confess our sins/faults to one another so that we are held accountable, so that those we have wronged may know of our admission of wronging them and, in turn, forgive us. If we do not forgive others, God says he will not forgive us. We must also PRAY for each other so that we can be free from secret sin. We have veered so far away from what Christ intended for us to be as a community of saints. That, to me, is the true doctrine of confession. Going before the throne of grace and coming clean about our wrong, going before those we have wronged so that they have an opportunity to forgive us and being as open and honest before our brothers and sisters in Christ so that we know how to pray for one another and God WILL heal us - all of us.
What is meant by the injunction, "confess your faults one to another"?
1. There is no reason for supposing that this text gives any countenance to the Roman Catholic doctrine of confession to priests. You understand the doctrine so long prevalent in that communion under the name of "auricular confession," so called because it was made in the private ear of the priest. This doctrine holds that all are bound to make auricular confession of every act and of every thought upon which their conscience is at all troubled. Consequently the system makes the priest the repository of all the sins of the church--of all the most private sins of all its members, male or female, to be confessed on pain of damnation. Every one who is acquainted with the results of this system, knows that they have been naturally pernicious to the purity and morals of both priest and people. It is most manifest that the apostle did not contemplate and could never sanction such a system. Confessing faults one to another is not the same thing as confessing all faults to the priest only.
2. Although there is nothing in the text which specially defines the sins contemplated, yet we are doubtless to understand the apostle here to infer primarily to faults committed against others, and to enjoin the confession of faults to those whom we have injured. The doctrine of confession in this form is abundantly taught and implied in the scripture, and is therefore, we may suppose, the particular thing intended here. The principle involved in this may however extend somewhat farther, namely,
(1.) to the confession or disclosure of our besetting sins and of our peculiar temptations and weaknesses. It is plain that by making our confidential Christian friends acquainted with these temptations and besetments of ours, we may enlist their sympathies and prayers in our behalf, and thus secure valuable aid in resisting and overcoming these temptations.
(2.) The principle of the text may also include those sins which though not properly committed against particular individuals, are yet naturally committed in the presence of others, and therefore become a scandal to religion and a stumbling-block to our associates. For example, irritability, which so often stumbles others, and becomes a besetting sin; censoriousness--the practice of speaking harshly of others, and which is often a sore grievance not merely to those against whom we speak evil, but against every benevolent mind that hears us. These and other sins of this class it is plain should be confessed. In saying these things you will observe I do not say that men are bound to reveal every thing they know--all the sins of which they think themselves guilty--even such as are known to none but themselves and God. It does not appear that the Bible makes the duty of confession to men thus universal.
I have often been struck with the different manner in which different individuals hear the announcement of the doctrine of sanctification. Proclaim to a body of professed Christians the fact that through grace they may in this life be delivered from all sin, and the reception of it will often speak volumes in revealing their real character. It serves to show their precise attitude towards sin. For example, I once preached in Rochester on this subject, and no sooner had the congregation dispersed than one man came to me, saying with great earnestness--"Mr. Finney, that is too good news to be true." There was a minister in that audience, however, who did not regard it as good news at all. He did not seem to treat the doctrine as if he had any desire to have it true.
Who has not observed this very difference? Preach the doctrine of a present salvation from sin to a man really panting to be delivered from sin, and he will hail it with intense interest, if not at once with open-hearted welcome. He will receive it most readily if he thinks it may be true. He will long to have it prove true, and his heart will throw no obstacles in the way of his candidly investigating its evidence, and cordially embracing all that evidence can be found to sustain.
But if he does not want it to prove true, he will cavil against it bitterly--will repel its evidence stubbornly, and of course will be likely to reveal himself unconsciously as the enemy of all righteousness. He will show that he takes no interest in being made free from sin at present--no real interest in being free from sin ever.
These developments of character are vastly better testimony to one's real state of mind than can elsehow be given. No man ever yet caviled against this doctrine who in heart longed to become holy. Even if he does not believe the doctrine true, and hence feels constrained to oppose it, there will be no spirit of cavil. When you see men cavil at any doctrine, you may know they do not want it to be true. It is not congenial to their hearts.
Who does not know that the doctrine of entire sanctification has of late received a great deal of opposition under a pretense of zeal for the truth, and opposition to error, which after all has been nothing more nor less before God and the whole world than a mere spirit of caviling and a most manifest opposition to truth and disinclination to have that doctrine proved true? It has been mournful and appalling to notice the exhibition of real opposition to holiness which has manifested itself in many quarters within the last few years. I am sure I do not say this censoriously. It is what every body knows to be true who has kept his eye open to the real manifestations which have been made through the pulpit and the press, through ecclesiastical organizations and in many other ways against the doctrine of holiness in this life.
But to return. When Christians reveal their deep sin to their brethren, it is always implied that they are really panting after holiness--that they abhor these sins which they confess, and are ready to do any thing however humiliating to mortify these horrible sins they so much hate.
The Bible says, in several different places, that it's by faith and baptism, not faith alone. Do I need to quote chapter and verse?
As far as your post about confessing directly to those you've wronged, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it, but it doesn't replace the sacrament of confession instituted directly by Our Lord in John 20:22-23.
Actually there is one thing wrong with it: it's sometimes impossible, if the person you've wronged is dead or cannot be contacted (or if contacting them would itself be uncharitable or imprudent), or if the persons you've wronged are a group whom it be impossible to address, etc. Not all sins are committed in the context of a personal relationship between individuals. And what about sins that are contained wholly within a person's thoughts? The one individual who is always wronged by our sins is God himself, and that is why he instituted the sacrament.
Sorry for misspelling your screen name. Ping to posts 33 and 34.
Since I don't for a second believe that the Church saves anyone except in and through Christ, according to his will, through the power given it through the Holy Spirit, I think it's a strawman to point me to verses like Acts 4:12 as if I believed otherwise.
I should point out that, e.g., Romans 10:13 was written to Christians, not pagans. Plenty of people will "call on the name of the Lord" and will not go to heaven. Read Mt 7:21 if you don't believe me.
You seem to have Quite accurate discernment and perceptions on the matter . . . imho.
The Magicsterical of the powermongering Vatican pretend-Mary-Ishtar-Goddess Cult strikes again.
.
.
HOWEVER
IN GENERAL . . . while I think the Vatican folks mangle confession and forgiveness rather wholesale out of Biblical whack
most Proddy groups don't get to the first base on it.
SCRIPTURE SAYS
CONFESS YOUR FAULTS ONE TO ANOTHER [not an elite priestly caste of powermongers]
THAT YOU MAY BE HEALED.
How many Proddy sermons have you heard on that?
It appears confession is far more than simply bringing our sins to the Lord. Though IMO that's where you go first and foremost. And certainly sharing a struggle with sin among Christians you trust is beneficial....helps to work thru what might be some barriers you yourself cannot see.
How can a Priest or Pastor forgive ones sin's? For they certainly are fully sinners themselves....they cannot do the forgiving that only Christ can offer....it was His blood shed not theirs. Forgiveness is from the Lord first and foremost....for in sinning against others’ we have actually sinned against Him by doing so....it is He who cleanses us then.....a Priest or Pastor or clergy cannot offer that since they are sinners. Furthermore, even if they could then why would Christ have had to died? What purpose then his death, resurrection and the life He offers....it would be for nothing then.
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.