Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2010 14:38:09 GMT -5
Can someone help me understand these verses? I know the Catholic church uses them to substantiate the priests' confessional authority, but as a professing person, that particular interpretation doesn't work for me. Is this binding/loosing only for "sent ones"? And if they loose something in contradiction to scripture, how does that effect the person involved? Any insight or workers' notes greatly appreciated!
|
|
|
|
Post by open mind on Jun 3, 2010 21:37:52 GMT -5
|
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Jun 4, 2010 11:28:11 GMT -5
Ian Matthew 16:19 (New International Version)
19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."There are keys to the Kingdom of God and they are usually about spiritual warfare as this one is. It means you can pray and quote those words ‘binding’ and then ‘ loosing.’
We need the holy spirit to reveal what it is that needs binding.
You bind the evil and loose the heavenly/Godly- the opposite.
Lets say it is a spirit of witchcraft/Jezebel. You bind that in prayer and then “loose” the power of God to work in that situation. If it was confusion you would release freedom in the mind or the spirit of freedom.
I haven’t heard much preaching on this, I try it and it works. I could give a testimony on this but wont yet. -------------- 19On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 20After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord.
21Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you." 22And with that he breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven."Jesus was loosing peace here without using the words ‘to loose.’
If someone comes to you and confesses a sin and repents you can pray with them and get them to speak those words out. Because they are acknowledging the sin and confessing it they will receive forgiveness.
There is another scripture that refers too confessing our sins one to another. Its called sharing our burdens.
So it isn’t the fact that you are God and have the power to forgive it is the fact that you have the holy spirit if you are bornagain, and it is he in you who forgives.
We don’t have arrogance because we are his children, rather we should behave with humility because we are sinners too and we do sin. None are exempt while we are in our flesh b
Sent ones?
The Apostles were sent yes.
All christians have an anointing. When we were training as leaders over 20yr ago we did this alot with people who needed help. Its practical christianity to help your brothers and sisters in Christ. Praying and laying hands on them. THere are practical ways to pray to get set free and this is one of them.
Confession and repentence is a good thing.
You have to remember that Jesus was using the Apostles because they were close to him and he was teaching them, that doesnt mean that you must be an apostle. To do this.
He said recieve the holy spirit, he didnt say only you apostles can do this. The only requirement I can see is recieving the holy spirit.
|
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Jun 4, 2010 11:45:54 GMT -5
Jesus still calls and anoints people today.
Dont get hung up on the Apostles were for the early church.
They are a gift to the church from the early church until now.
A perfect example of why binding and loosing is necessary and powerful would be the way man has hindered the work of heaven over the Ages.
It is a simple statement but possibly one that needs more revelation from the holy spirit on the scripture.
As for me I just do it. I will try anything that works and this works.
|
|
|
|
Post by emy on Jun 7, 2010 15:42:23 GMT -5
Can someone help me understand these verses? I know the Catholic church uses them to substantiate the priests' confessional authority, but as a professing person, that particular interpretation doesn't work for me. Is this binding/loosing only for "sent ones"? And if they loose something in contradiction to scripture, how does that effect the person involved? Any insight or workers' notes greatly appreciated! In our meeting yesterday, someone spoke about this. His thought was that we go to heaven either holding on to the sin someone else has done, or we let it go and thus it does not follow us to heaven. How many of us hang on to sins others have done that are not even any concern of ours? The whole of the thought in the testimony was being careful in our relationships with others that we do not offend or turn anyone away. |
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Jun 7, 2010 15:56:45 GMT -5
Can someone help me understand these verses? I know the Catholic church uses them to substantiate the priests' confessional authority, but as a professing person, that particular interpretation doesn't work for me. Is this binding/loosing only for "sent ones"? And if they loose something in contradiction to scripture, how does that effect the person involved? Any insight or workers' notes greatly appreciated! In our meeting yesterday, someone spoke about this. His thought was that we go to heaven either holding on to the sin someone else has done, or we let it go and thus it does not follow us to heaven. How many of us hang on to sins others have done that are not even any concern of ours? The whole of the thought in the testimony was being careful in our relationships with others that we do not offend or turn anyone away. If you hold onto someone elses sin wouldnt that be 'taking on an offense that doesnt belong to us.' |
|
|
|
Post by emy on Jun 7, 2010 16:27:48 GMT -5
In our meeting yesterday, someone spoke about this. His thought was that we go to heaven either holding on to the sin someone else has done, or we let it go and thus it does not follow us to heaven. How many of us hang on to sins others have done that are not even any concern of ours? The whole of the thought in the testimony was being careful in our relationships with others that we do not offend or turn anyone away. If you hold onto someone elses sin wouldnt that be 'taking on an offense that doesnt belong to us.' Yes, it would. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2010 18:05:55 GMT -5
This is all food for thought and I appreciate it. What triggered this thought was the East/West difference on divorce and remarriage. We have a couple facing this issue (not yet married), and I was thinking that perhaps if they married back East and stayed there, then perhaps the workers' consensus on this issue would "loose" the sin that the West coast workers would have "bound". And that made me go deeper into to my own beliefs and wonder--quite apart from the D&R" conundrum-- if this was something I should be more aware in my own prayer life and fellowship with others.
|
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Jun 8, 2010 0:58:51 GMT -5
This is all food for thought and I appreciate it. What triggered this thought was the East/West difference on divorce and remarriage. We have a couple facing this issue (not yet married), and I was thinking that perhaps if they married back East and stayed there, then perhaps the workers' consensus on this issue would "loose" the sin that the West coast workers would have "bound". And that made me go deeper into to my own beliefs and wonder--quite apart from the D&R" conundrum-- if this was something I should be more aware in my own prayer life and fellowship with others. Heck Do you realise what you just wrote? |
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Jun 8, 2010 1:00:04 GMT -5
"Our warfare is not against flesh and blood but against spirits of wickedness in high places...."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2010 9:15:18 GMT -5
I don't understand your take on what I wrote.
|
|
|
|
Post by emy on Jun 8, 2010 14:40:54 GMT -5
"Our warfare is not against flesh and blood but against spirits of wickedness in high places...." Please advise which faction is wicked -- in your opinion of course? I am happy to let God make that judgment, for me. The whole quote of the verse is like this: For we are not fighting against flesh-and-blood enemies, but against evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against mighty powers in this dark world, and against evil spirits in the heavenly places.This doesn't apply to workers, who are MOST certainly flesh and blood, but to spirits, some deceptive, from powerful sources other than God. |
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Jun 8, 2010 14:53:47 GMT -5
"Our warfare is not against flesh and blood but against spirits of wickedness in high places...." Please advise which faction is wicked -- in your opinion of course? I am happy to let God make that judgment, for me. The whole quote of the verse is like this: For we are not fighting against flesh-and-blood enemies, but against evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against mighty powers in this dark world, and against evil spirits in the heavenly places.This doesn't apply to workers, who are MOST certainly flesh and blood, but to spirits, some deceptive, from powerful sources other than God.
Evil spirits/forces/principalities influence peoples lives/minds.
emy evil = wicked and Im sure in another version you will discover this
Dont have time to look it up
|
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Jun 8, 2010 14:56:04 GMT -5
hberry
This is all food for thought and I appreciate it. What triggered this thought was the East/West difference on divorce and remarriage.
We have a couple facing this issue (not yet married), and I was thinking that perhaps if they married back East and stayed there, then perhaps the workers' consensus on this issue would "loose" the sin that the West coast workers would have "bound".
I may have read it incoirrectly
I thought you said / meant that .... dont worry I can see what you meant now. Thought you meant something else and it would take too long to explain.
Sorry about that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2010 15:28:14 GMT -5
LOL; thanks for clarifying and the fault is mine for not stating my thoughts clearly enough. Words!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Jun 20, 2010 9:40:16 GMT -5
This is all food for thought and I appreciate it. What triggered this thought was the East/West difference on divorce and remarriage. We have a couple facing this issue (not yet married), and I was thinking that perhaps if they married back East and stayed there, then perhaps the workers' consensus on this issue would "loose" the sin that the West coast workers would have "bound". And that made me go deeper into to my own beliefs and wonder--quite apart from the D&R" conundrum-- if this was something I should be more aware in my own prayer life and fellowship with others. Hberry--your question indicates that you recognize something isn't quite right here. There is a key element missing here. There is no authority to bind or loose in this situation and the decision to be bound or loosed in heaven. Authority being the key element that is missing. 1. To whom did Jesus grant that authority? His apostles, and those who would succeed the apostles in actual apostolic succession. 2. There isn't even unity (earthly authority) between East and West in your church in this case. 3. Where does the Bible point us for truth? 1 Tim 3 15 But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth. 4. If your church cannot agree on such an important issue, how could they then toss it back and forth from East to West and expect that a decision could be loosed or bound in heaven? Doesn't figure, does it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2010 11:38:47 GMT -5
Out of curiosity, what scripture do you use to support the requirement for apostolic succession? The person to "fill" Judas's place was chosen by lot, but I'm drawing a blank as to which scripture would require "handing off" authority through the generations.
|
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Jun 20, 2010 15:29:34 GMT -5
Out of curiosity, what scripture do you use to support the requirement for apostolic succession? The person to "fill" Judas's place was chosen by lot, but I'm drawing a blank as to which scripture would require "handing off" authority through the generations. Acts 1:15-26 - the first thing Peter does after Jesus ascends into heaven is implement apostolic succession. Matthias is ordained with full apostolic authority. Only the Catholic Church can demonstrate an unbroken apostolic lineage to the apostles in union with Peter through the sacrament of ordination and thereby claim to teach with Christ's own authority. Acts 1:20 - a successor of Judas is chosen. The authority of his office (his "bishopric") is respected notwithstanding his egregious sin. The necessity to have apostolic succession in order for the Church to survive was understood by all. God never said, "I'll give you leaders with authority for about 400 years, but after the Bible is compiled, you are all on your own." Acts 1:22 - literally, "one must be ordained" to be a witness with us of His resurrection. Apostolic ordination is required in order to teach with Christ's authority. Acts 6:6 - apostolic authority is transferred through the laying on of hands (ordination). This authority has transferred beyond the original twelve apostles as the Church has grown. Acts 9:17-19 - even Paul, who was directly chosen by Christ, only becomes a minister after the laying on of hands by a bishop. This is a powerful proof-text for the necessity of sacramental ordination in order to be a legitimate successor of the apostles. Acts 13:3 - apostolic authority is transferred through the laying on of hands (ordination). This authority must come from a Catholic bishop. Acts 14:23 - the apostles and newly-ordained men appointed elders to have authority throughout the Church. Acts 15:22-27 - preachers of the Word must be sent by the bishops in union with the Church. We must trace this authority to the apostles. 2 Cor. 1:21-22 - Paul writes that God has commissioned certain men and sealed them with the Holy Spirit as a guarantee. Col 1:25 - Paul calls his position a divine "office." An office has successors. It does not terminate at death. Or it's not an office. See also Heb. 7:23 – an office continues with another successor after the previous office-holder’s death. 1 Tim. 3:1 - Paul uses the word "episcopoi" (bishop) which requires an office. Everyone understood that Paul's use of episcopoi and office meant it would carry on after his death by those who would succeed him. 1 Tim. 4:14 - again, apostolic authority is transferred through the laying on of hands (ordination). 1 Tim. 5:22 - Paul urges Timothy to be careful in laying on the hands (ordaining others). The gift of authority is a reality and cannot be used indiscriminately. 2 Tim. 1:6 - Paul again reminds Timothy the unique gift of God that he received through the laying on of hands. 2 Tim. 4:1-6 - at end of Paul's life, Paul charges Timothy with the office of his ministry . We must trace true apostolic lineage back to a Catholic bishop. 2 Tim. 2:2 - this verse shows God's intention is to transfer authority to successors (here, Paul to Timothy to 3rd to 4th generation). It goes beyond the death of the apostles. Titus 1:5; Luke 10:1 - the elders of the Church are appointed and hold authority. God has His children participate in Christ's work. 1 John 4:6 - whoever knows God listens to us (the bishops and the successors to the apostles). This is the way we discern truth and error (not just by reading the Bible and interpreting it for ourselves). - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Exodus 18:25-26 - Moses appoints various heads over the people of God. We see a hierarchy, a transfer of authority and succession. Exodus 40:15 - the physical anointing shows that God intended a perpetual priesthood with an identifiable unbroken succession. Numbers 3:3 - the sons of Aaron were formally "anointed" priests in "ordination" to minister in the priests' "office." Numbers 16:40 - shows God's intention of unbroken succession within His kingdom on earth. Unless a priest was ordained by Aaron and his descendants, he had no authority. Numbers 27:18-20 - shows God's intention that, through the "laying on of hands," one is commissioned and has authority. Deut. 34:9 - Moses laid hands upon Joshua, and because of this, Joshua was obeyed as successor, full of the spirit of wisdom. Sirach 45:15 - Moses ordains Aaron and anoints him with oil. There is a transfer of authority through formal ordination. www.scripturecatholic.com/apostolic_succession.html |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2010 19:16:43 GMT -5
Although I don't agree with how these verses are being used, it's interesting to see how the Catholic Church arrives at its conclusion and appreciate your effort. Thanks for the website reference; I always enjoy learning about other religions.
|
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Jun 20, 2010 19:31:50 GMT -5
Although I don't agree with how these verses are being used, it's interesting to see how the Catholic Church arrives at its conclusion and appreciate your effort. Thanks for the website reference; I always enjoy learning about other religions. yw  |
|
Prayers for all who have requested prayer, or for whom prayer has been requested.