Let's try this, a Sola Scriptura experiment

[Prodigal_Son1]

Be honest, you are asking Roman Catholic Christians to do a Sola Scriptura experiment. For what reason, to undermine the authority of Holy Scripture? The battle for the Truth lies within the authority of Holy Scripture over the Magestrium. Have you ever read the testimony of Scott Hahn? If you let go of the truth of Sola Scriptura, you are open to receive all kinds of teachings.

Tell me this, if the Bible alone is the way it was meant to be, why doesn’t scriptures state so? We both know the power of God to inspire word, why didn’t he inspire it be written that the Bible was all one needed? Why didn’t he inspire those scriptures to list the canon of the Bible, instead of leaving it to fallible men to decide what books were infallible?

Instead, God inspired it be written:

1Ti 3:15 if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.

Why didn’t God inspire it be written the Bible, instead of the Church, was the pillar and bulwark of the truth?

 

[ralphinal]

Marriage

Good one. Marriage, as defined as one man and one woman.

We are up to six.

 

[Reformed]

You just proved that sola scriptura is a huge lie. Holy Scriptures do NOT contain every word that comes from the mouth of God.
We all thank you very much for proving the invalidity of Scripture alone.

So, do I receive the Book of Mormon and Sacred Tradition as every word that comes from the mouth of God?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I have to add the doctrine of Church.

Also, the Sabbath

 

[Ilroy]

So, do I receive the Book of Mormon and Sacred Tradition as every word that comes from the mouth of God?

You can recieve the book of mormon if you like, but it’s not from the mouth of God…He gave us the Church as was pointed out earlier to be the pillar and foundation of truth. He guides His Church, as promised, into all truth. Sacred Tradition is part of that truth, as is Sacred Scripture.

Now, another truth proven from Scripture…the passing on of Apostolic authority from one generation to the next, which is the Magisterium.

 

[Reformed]

You can recieve the book of mormon if you like, but it’s not from the mouth of God…He gave us the Church as was pointed out earlier to be the pillar and foundation of truth. He guides His Church, as promised, into all truth. Sacred Tradition is part of that truth, as is Sacred Scripture.

Now, another truth proven from Scripture…the passing on of Apostolic authority from one generation to the next, which is the Magisterium.

God has a very high view of His Holy Scriptures:

Part of these verses is to document that a new birth is necessary to understand the Scriptures as compared to having the Magestrium tell you what Scripture means.

Luke 24:32
They said to one another, “Were not our hearts burning within us while He was speaking to us on the road, while He was explaining the Scriptures to us?”

Luke 24:45
Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures,

John 5:39
You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;

Acts 17:2
And according to Paul’s custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures,

Acts 17:11
Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.

Acts 18:24
Now a Jew named Apollos, an Alexandrian by birth, an eloquent man, came to Ephesus; and he was mighty in the Scriptures.

Acts 18:28
for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, demonstrating by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.

If you see the Scriptures point to the Roman Catholic Church, you have missed it. The Scriptures point to Jesus Christ.

John 14:6

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

 

[AlanF]

True, all of those can be defended using scripture. However, those who dispute these positions also use scripture.

I will allow exorcism and unction to make the list.

Don’t get me wrong, I fully beleive in the Real Presence and the Primacy and need of the Pope, but they have scriptures they claim (incorrectly) to show otherwise.

I think the Eucharist definately can be proved by Scripture. The protestant positions are defended by their own silly interpretations of Scripture that make no sence.
Their main defence is that “jesus was speaking metaphorically” when he said “this is my body”, when one reads the passage it is not like this, Jesus always makies it clear when he is speaking in parables and things.

“Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.” John VI:LIII

Many could not accept this and asked “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”, they left Jesus and Jesus let them go.
If the bread and wine did not literally become the Body and Blood of Christ then this event would have been totally inexplicable.

“Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.” I Corinthians XI:XXVII-XXIX

If the Real Presence were not true, this passage would make no sence at all.

This in my opinion proves the Eucharist using Sola Scripture.

 

[Reformed]

I think the Eucharist definately can be proved by Scripture. The protestant positions are defended by their own silly interpretations of Scripture that make no sence.
Their main defence is that “jesus was speaking metaphorically” when he said “this is my body”, when one reads the passage it is not like this, Jesus always makies it clear when he is speaking in parables and things.

“Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.” John VI:LIII

Many could not accept this and asked “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”, they left Jesus and Jesus let them go.
If the bread and wine did not literally become the Body and Blood of Christ then this event would have been totally inexplicable.

“Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.” I Corinthians XI:XXVII-XXIX

If the Real Presence were not true, this passage would make no sence at all.

This in my opinion proves the Eucharist using Sola Scripture.

Institution of the Lord’s Supper

26 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” 27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the [3] covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

Are you saying that the disciples are eating the literal flesh and drinking His literal blood before He actually shed His blood on the cross?

 

[ralphinal]

I think the Eucharist definately can be proved by Scripture. The protestant positions are defended by their own silly interpretations of Scripture that make no sence.
Their main defence is that “jesus was speaking metaphorically” when he said “this is my body”, when one reads the passage it is not like this, Jesus always makies it clear when he is speaking in parables and things.

“Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.” John VI:LIII

Many could not accept this and asked “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”, they left Jesus and Jesus let them go.
If the bread and wine did not literally become the Body and Blood of Christ then this event would have been totally inexplicable.

“Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.” I Corinthians XI:XXVII-XXIX

If the Real Presence were not true, this passage would make no sence at all.

This in my opinion proves the Eucharist using Sola Scripture.

I agree 100%. However, the smarter non-Beleivers hold that John 6 ties into John 5, where doing God’s will is food. I doubt we will see this argument made…unless I just gave it to them…

 

[AlanF]

Institution of the Lord’s Supper

26 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” 27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the [3] covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

Are you saying that the disciples are eating the literal flesh and drinking His literal blood before He actually shed His blood on the cross?

Yes.
If it is not the Body and Blood of Christ then why would he have said any of that in the first place, it would seem a weird thing to say. And also try explaining the other quotes I gave.

 

[Ilroy]

God has a very high view of His Holy Scriptures:

I never said He didn’t have a high view of His Sacred Scriptures…He also has a very high view of His Church, as it is His body.
I’m not going to sit here and play the old “pick and choose a bunch of verses that seem to prove my point” game…You need to view ALL of God’s word highly, not just the bits and pieces that suit you.

And another bit from Scripture to end my time with you on this thread…Peace be to you.

 

[AlanF]

That Christ died for our sins.

 

[ralphinal]

That Christ dies for our sins.

Good one. Back on track

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

God has a very high view of His Holy Scriptures:

Part of these verses is to document that a new birth is necessary to understand the Scriptures as compared to having the Magestrium tell you what Scripture means.

Luke 24:32
They said to one another, “Were not our hearts burning within us while He was speaking to us on the road, while He was explaining the Scriptures to us?”

Luke 24:45
Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures,

I have bolded and underlined part of your response for emphasis. Please note the Lord was SPEAKING to them, while He was EXPLAINING the scriptures to them. Also, note that Christ was speaking of Old Testament scriptures as the New Testament had not yet been written. Also, Luke did not write about this story until years after the death and resurrection of the Lord.

John 5:39
You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;

Again, the Lord is speaking about Old Testament scriptures that had been written foretelling the coming of the Messiah. Jesus was obviously identifying Himself to those that HEARD Him speak.

Acts 17:2
And according to Paul’s custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures,

Acts 17:11
Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.

They received the word of the Lord whose identity was confirmed by the Old Testament scriptures that foretold the coming of the Messiah.

Acts 18:24
Now a Jew named Apollos, an Alexandrian by birth, an eloquent man, came to Ephesus; and he was mighty in the Scriptures.

Acts 18:28
for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, demonstrating by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.

All Jews of that time were familiar with the scriptures of the Old Testament as the Scribes read the Old Testament scriptures to them in every synagogue and the temple very often.

If you see the Scriptures point to the Roman Catholic Church, you have missed it. The Scriptures point to Jesus Christ.

John 14:6

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Why didn’t Jesus write anything Himself? Why did Jesus tell the Apostles to go out and teach the Gospel instead of instructing them to write down everything He said?

I’ve debated your points above trying to get you to understand Christ was using Old Testament scriptures to identify himself. Another perfect example of the Lord identifying Himself for a final time from His mouth was while He was on the cross.

Mat 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, la’ma sabach-tha’ni?” that is, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”

Now let’s look at Psalms 22 to see if this really was the Lord identifying Himself to those Jews who knew scriptures by heart.

(cont.)

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Psa 22:1 To the choirmaster: according to The Hind of the Dawn. A Psalm of David. My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Why art thou so far from helping me, from the words of my groaning?
Psa 22:2 O my God, I cry by day, but thou dost not answer; and by night, but find no rest.
Psa 22:3 Yet thou art holy, enthroned on the praises of Israel.
Psa 22:4 In thee our fathers trusted; they trusted, and thou didst deliver them.
Psa 22:5 To thee they cried, and were saved; in thee they trusted, and were not disappointed.
Psa 22:6 But I am a worm, and no man; scorned by men, and despised by the people.
Psa 22:7 All who see me mock at me, they make mouths at me, they wag their heads;
Psa 22:8 “He committed his cause to the LORD; let him deliver him, let him rescue him, for he delights in him!”
Psa 22:9 Yet thou art he who took me from the womb; thou didst keep me safe upon my mother’s breasts.
Psa 22:10 Upon thee was I cast from my birth, and since my mother bore me thou hast been my God.
Psa 22:11 Be not far from me, for trouble is near and there is none to help.
Psa 22:12 Many bulls encompass me, strong bulls of Bashan surround me;
Psa 22:13 they open wide their mouths at me, like a ravening and roaring lion.
Psa 22:14 I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint; my heart is like wax, it is melted within my breast;
Psa 22:15 my strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue cleaves to my jaws; thou dost lay me in the dust of death.
Psa 22:16 Yea, dogs are round about me; a company of evildoers encircle me; they have pierced my hands and feet–
Psa 22:17 I can count all my bones-- they stare and gloat over me;
Psa 22:18 they divide my garments among them, and for my raiment they cast lots.
Psa 22:19 But thou, O LORD, be not far off! O thou my help, hasten to my aid!
Psa 22:20 Deliver my soul from the sword, my life from the power of the dog!
Psa 22:21 Save me from the mouth of the lion, my afflicted soul from the horns of the wild oxen!
Psa 22:22 I will tell of thy name to my brethren; in the midst of the congregation I will praise thee:
Psa 22:23 You who fear the LORD, praise him! all you sons of Jacob, glorify him, and stand in awe of him, all you sons of Israel!
Psa 22:24 For he has not despised or abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; and he has not hid his face from him, but has heard, when he cried to him.
Psa 22:25 From thee comes my praise in the great congregation; my vows I will pay before those who fear him.
Psa 22:26 The afflicted shall eat and be satisfied; those who seek him shall praise the LORD! May your hearts live for ever!
Psa 22:27 All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn to the LORD; and all the families of the nations shall worship before him.
Psa 22:28 For dominion belongs to the LORD, and he rules over the nations.
Psa 22:29 Yea, to him shall all the proud of the earth bow down; before him shall bow all who go down to the dust, and he who cannot keep himself alive.
Psa 22:30 Posterity shall serve him; men shall tell of the Lord to the coming generation,
Psa 22:31 and proclaim his deliverance to a people yet unborn, that he has wrought it.

Why did God inspire it be written to hold the traditions whether we learned them by word or epistle? Why didn’t God inspire it to be written ‘by epistle alone’?

2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.

I’ve asked this in a previous post which you have ignored, but it’s importance is pertinent to this discussion.

If the Bible alone is the way it was meant to be, why doesn’t scriptures state so? We both know the power of God to inspire word, why didn’t he inspire it be written that the Bible was all one needed? Why didn’t he inspire those scriptures to list the canon of the Bible, instead of leaving it to fallible men to decide what books were infallible?

Instead, God inspired it be written:

1Ti 3:15 if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.

Why didn’t God inspire it be written the Bible was the pillar and bulwark of the truth?

Sola scriptura is the reason there are so many denominations today. New Churches are started all the time. Is this the answer to our Lord’s prayer?

Joh 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth.
Joh 17:18 As thou didst send me into the world, so I have sent them into the world.
Joh 17:19 And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be consecrated in truth.
Joh 17:20 "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word,
Joh 17:21 that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Joh 17:22 The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one,
Joh 17:23 I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me.

Are all those denominations being perfectly one?

Why did God inspire St. Paul to write:

1Co 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing and that there be no schisms among you: but that you be perfect in the same mind and in the same judgment.

Are all those denominations, or schisms, speaking the same things, being perfect in the same mind and in the same judgment?

 

[Reformed]

Yes.
If it is not the Body and Blood of Christ then why would he have said any of that in the first place, it would seem a weird thing to say. And also try explaining the other quotes I gave.

Okay…here’s more:

60 When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” 61 But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? 62 Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. - John 6

Did the disciples know that they were eating the literal body of Christ and drinking His actual blood? And did Jesus know that His literal body and literal blood was being received by his disciples?

Consider all of Holy Scriptures before you conclude:

Luke 22:19
And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”

1 Corinthians 11:24
and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”

[1]Some manuscripts broken for Or as my memorial;

1 Corinthians 11:25
In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Okay…here’s more:

60 When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” 61 But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? 62 Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. - John 6

Did the disciples know that they were eating the literal body of Christ and drinking His actual blood? And did Jesus know that His literal body and literal blood was being received by his disciples?

And St. Paul explained what was meant by verse 63 as you’ve posted above.

1Co 2:14 But the sensual man perceiveth not these things that are of the Spirit of God. For it is foolishness to him: and he cannot understand, because it is spiritually examined.
1Co 2:15 But the spiritual man judgeth all things: and he himself is judged of no man.
1Co 2:16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

 

[AlanF]

Okay…here’s more:

60 When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” 61 But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? 62 Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. - John 6

Did the disciples know that they were eating the literal body of Christ and drinking His actual blood? And did Jesus know that His literal body and literal blood was being received by his disciples?

That doesn’t disprove the Eucharist.

 

[Reformed]

That doesn’t disprove the Eucharist.

I added a few more verses that should help. Please look again at my previous post.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Back on track with sola scriptura, even though it appears that Reformed is now trying to dodge that subject.

Why did God inspire St. Peter to write the difficulties of everyone understanding what was written in epistles, specifically St. Paul’s?

2Pe 3:15 And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation: as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you:
2Pe 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.