It is called, saying... "I'm sorry." That's all it involves. Its healthy and expected. That is what James spoke of.
What, with no mention of what the transgression was???
You are making a bad move. A naive move.
You agreed with me earlier, are you really trying to not understand my points. I didnt say blab, I said admit to the one who was wronged.
Okay the verses you listed do not forbid admitting, acknowledging (confessing) and asking for forgiveness from the one wronged. If you stole $10 dollars from your Dad, can you not admit (confess) your theft from him and ask is forgiveness??
Why do remain obstinante in saying it is wrong to confess a sin that you committed to that person that specifically.
Nowhere in the Bible are we told to confess personal private sins to one another.
The apostle John wrote: If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 Jn. 1:9).
If one refuses to concede his sin, what then?
There are three possible venues of confession:
- to God alone;
- to God and to other persons - who may have been victims of the sin, or privy to it;
- a general public acknowledgment.
Let us think about each of these for a moment.
First, when one has sinned a sin that is against God alone, or perhaps known only to the Omniscient One, the matter can be settled between the principals involved. For example, if one, in anger, mentally lashes out at the Lord (as Job did on occasion), he need merely, in his petition to the Father, ask for forgiveness. It is not necessary to blab mental sins to the entire world, as a former President did, for instance, when he told the whole of society of his spiritual lapses of lust for some women.
Second, when our sin is known to others, we are obligated to confess the fault - at least to those who are privy to the situation. Altercations that are private should be settled between him and thee alone (Mt. 18:15). Occasionally, though, it is the case that a brother sins against another, but the transgressor does not have the courage to approach the offended party directly, acknowledging wrong and asking pardon. Rather, he will walk down the church aisle and make a generic confession: I have done and said things against others that I shouldnt have; I ask for your prayers. That is not the way to remedy a personal sin against another.
Third, there is the matter of public confession. Sometimes ones sin is so widely identified that nothing but a public confession will suffice to satisfy the matter.
Near the conclusion of his third missionary campaign, Paul came to the city of Ephesus. As a result of his teaching, a church was established. These saints were zealous initially, with a genuine love for the Lord (cf. Rev. 2:4). Some of them, though, became entangled again in their old habits - apparently reverting to magical practices (for which Ephesus was known). According to Lukes record, though, they were convicted of their error, and they came confessing and declaring their deeds (Acts 19:18). The sense of this passage seems to be this: These erring brethren openly acknowledged what had been widely known, i.e., their sinfulness in practicing magical crafts. Additionally, they brought their little scrolls, containing ritual inscriptions, and burned them in the sight of all (19:19).
I am drawing my understanding from these scriptures above. Confession (admitting) of a transgression (wrong) to the inured party and confessing the sin to God are related yet different in application and reason.
I am not endorsing telling my sins to a priest or whoever so that I may now know Im forgiven, and I can have a clear conscience, nor have I ever said this.