Please help refute this....Sola scripture vs Roman Catholicism

[CopticChristian]

Sola Scriptura is self-refuting because it is not found in scripture. It doesn’t get any simpler than that, does it?

And we can see the failure of Sola Scriptura in the many protestant denominations, along with the “new age” religions such as JWs, Mormonism, etc.

If Christ came to institute a Bible, then it would be evident to all believers and scripture would not refer to the Church as the pillar and foundation of truth…

I would not consider JW and Mormons as new age rather as mutations of Protestant thought.

 

[onemangang]

Well, when I say that there are different representations, I mean that there are different takes on Sola Scriptura that are mutually complmentary just as there are four Gospel accounts.

I don’t understand your comparison. Do you believe the gospel accounts contradict each other, since many protestant communities that claim Sola Scriptura do?

1. Can you establish which form of Sola Scriptura is an acceptable representation?
2. Oneness Pentecostals claim Sola Scriptura, is their representation complementary?
3. BTW who is the author of determining which different representation is complementary?

I’m not sure why you posted this, but I already know material like this exists and I’ve already read through a couple of very relevant and in-depth pages on calledtocommunion.com and have engaged with Catholics a number of times regarding Sola Scriptura. (This is why I say that I haven’t seen a successful refutation). I can appreciate that you posted links if you did it to make sure that I’m aware that RC resources are out there, but I’m more likely to respond to the arguments or claims that are supposed to refute Sola Scriptura if you engage with me more personally with the content to which you are referring me. Even if you are accustomed to quoting others or paraphrasing or condensing what others have said, that’s fine. If I’m not important enough for you to do that, I totally respect that; but I really don’t have time to read every part of every single blog post someone tosses me, especially when I tend to have a hard time seeing how some of the questions or arguments that Catholics present are relevant or cogent -whether that’s my fault or there’s. Thank you.

It boils down to epistemology I suppose. Since Christianity is a revealed religion, we would have to engage in a discussion on HOW has Christ revealed Himself to men, through what medium. I posit it was the Church, a visible, infallible religious authority that manifest in a visible social order. Christ chose to reveal Himself through a visible social order and the Scriptures bear witness. I do not, and will not separate Church Sacred Tradition, from the Sacred Scriptures. They are bound together by God, in a type of Holy Matrimony as one, Holy Mother Church.

This is a good starting point to enter a discussion on How has Christ revealed Himself to men, but It might demand a new thread. I would like to stay on topic.

My three question may be a good starting point for me to understand your position.

We should be able to recognize many or few representations of Sola Scriptura, but I could not ask you to name them all if there are many, however since you said " there are different representations, I mean that there are different takes on Sola Scriptura that are mutually complmentary just as there are four Gospel accounts" I would like to see you name four separate views that complement scripture!

If the Oneness Pentecostal account does, or does not, complement Sola Scriptura, how is that determined? What is the Criteria?

Who established the criteria that deemed what representations are complementary to Sola Scriptura?

Forgive me if I do not respond quickly, I will be busy for the next couple of days.
I will try to dialog with the free time I have.

Peace and Love in Christ!

 

[DJK100]

Hello there, I am new to these forums but I am struggling between my faith and that of scripture alone. I keep going back and forth, it’s torturous! Anyways I came upon this, so could you refute it, please? It talks about how the church wasn’t built on Peter also he has other thread talking of how Catholics were pagans turned Christians and that’s where we get most of the rituals.

prorege-forum.com/forum_entry.php?id=11558

Please listen to these…

download.biblechristiansociety.com/files/sola_scriptura.mp3

download.biblechristiansociety.com/files/apostolic_authority_and_the_pope.mp3

 

[Arizona_Samson]

You still come back to the same issue:** Who has the authority to determine SS as “proper”** or “improper” whether official or not.

The biggest sola scriptura proponent of them all, the One who proclaimed;

"Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth." John 17:17

Successful of refutation of against your list of authors? I have many names and they lived centuries before any of your SS heros existed.

My SS hero declared, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:58)

You have lists of people who existed before He did?

Roman Catholics have refuted SS for centuries now and it is not difficult at all.

If it “is not difficult at all” why are you unable to do so?

 

[Arizona_Samson]

Samson,

Help me understand you. Let us take this and look at another way. Tell me from your perspective which Churches did Christ not found. I will give you Scientology and then you go from there. Let’s just list them and see what we come up with.

Thank you

Good evening CC. What you’re proposing would take this thread off topic. Perhaps you could start a new thread where this could be discussed.

If you choose to do so your list will be easy to compile. In attempting to establish which churches *were not *founded by Christ I’d recommend approaching it as follows -

Go to any given churches website and examine their statement of faith. (What their faithful are required to believe in order to be a member of said church)

Once you’ve found out what a particular church believes, “examine everything carefully” (1 Thess 5:21) in light of what Christ actually taught, all of which is found only in Scripture.

Then simply add any church which requires it’s members to believe anything* De fide* that did not come from the mouth of Christ or His Apostles to your list. Since everything that Christ and His Apostles taught can only be found in Scripture you can add any church that requires a belief not found within the pages of Holy Writ to the list of churches that were not founded by Christ Jesus.

Pretty simple, don’t you agree?

 

[onemangang]

The biggest sola scriptura proponent of them all, the One who proclaimed;

"Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth." John 17:17

Nice the same author penned But there are also many other things which Jesus did; which, if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written. John 21:25

My SS hero declared, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:58)

The Same Guy who said in John 6:54 **Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.55He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.56For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.57He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. **

And also the same man would say in John 20:21 He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you.** As the Father hath sent me, I also send you.**22 When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost.23 Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.

And we have gone absolutely nowhere by slinging individual passages of scripture, hooray!

You have lists of people who existed before He did?

Really?

If it “is not difficult at all” why are you unable to do so?

I can’t speak for Nicea325 but your apologetic of Sola Scriptura seems to fall woefully short!

I know St. Augustine isn’t in the bible, but his words still ring true today.

St Augustine
"Your design clearly is to deprive Scripture of all authority and to make every man’s mind the authority of what he is to approve or disapprove of. This is not to be subject to Scripture, but to make Scripture subject to you. If you discard authority, to what, I beseech you, will you take yourself?" (Reply to Faustus the Manichaean, 32:19 [A.D. 400])

 

[CopticChristian]

Good evening CC. What you’re proposing would take this thread off topic. Perhaps you could start a new thread where this could be discussed.

If you choose to do so your list will be easy to compile. In attempting to establish which churches *were not *founded by Christ I’d recommend approaching it as follows -

Go to any given churches website and examine their statement of faith. (What their faithful are required to believe in order to be a member of said church)

Once you’ve found out what a particular church believes, “examine everything carefully” (1 Thess 5:21) in light of what Christ actually taught, all of which is found only in Scripture.

Then simply add any church which requires it’s members to believe anything* De fide* that did not come from the mouth of Christ or His Apostles to your list.** Since everything that Christ and His Apostles taught can only be found in Scripture **you can add any church that requires a belief not found within the pages of Holy Writ to the list of churches that were not founded by Christ Jesus.

Pretty simple, don’t you agree?

Wow,SamsonofArizona,

I am all about simplicity. You know as long as I have been on these threads I try to keep things down to earth as I am just a simple minded guy. You were the one that said this.

This begs the question: Why do you insist in clinging to the false assumption that your particular denomination is the sole and exclusive church which Christ founded?

I don’t like begging. I do like answering questions. You state here a false assumption. You state that one is clinging. You wrongly idenfify the Catholic Church as a denonimation. I wouldn’t do that. You see there is this dude, Guanaphore, and I have seen what he says about this. He will be all over this…swooosh, just like that. So I suggest you do not use this to define the Catholic Church. It is not a denomination. In your statement you state that someone is claiming sole and exclusivity to Christ founding their Church. Rather than pointing out the obvious I asked you a question.

Oh, Yeah. You say everything Christ and the Apostles taught can be found in Scripture. I do have one question about that. How do you know that what you refer to as Scripture is Scripture. It is a translation. Are translations infallible and true? Where are the original Scriptures? Were you aware that 1 & 2 Timothy, 2Thessolonians, Colossians and Ephesians were not written by Paul? That means that what is written is not written by an Apostle. How do you reconcile this with your notion that what the Apostles taught can be found in Scripture? Now the next question is where in the world do yoo find anywhere that all Scripture is inspired?

Anyway getting back to the Church question. If you believe that there are some that claim to be founded by Christ and others that are not founded by Christ. I thought that you could point out which Churches were not founded by Christ. I could start another thread on this. Will you join if I do?

 

[onemangang]

Good evening CC. What you’re proposing would take this thread off topic. Perhaps you could start a new thread where this could be discussed.

If you choose to do so your list will be easy to compile. In attempting to establish which churches *were not *founded by Christ I’d recommend approaching it as follows -

Go to any given churches website and examine their statement of faith. (What their faithful are required to believe in order to be a member of said church)

Once you’ve found out what a particular church believes, “examine everything carefully” (1 Thess 5:21) in light of what Christ actually taught, all of which is found only in Scripture.

Ok, only in scripture!

Then simply add any church which requires it’s members to believe anything* De fide* that did not come from the mouth of Christ or His Apostles to your list. Since everything that Christ and His Apostles taught can only be found in Scripture you can add any church that requires a belief not found within the pages of Holy Writ to the list of churches that were not founded by Christ Jesus.

Ok, so should I get baptized in the name of Jesus only Acts 2:38 ** Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.**

No reference to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit here, and that was after Christ sent them out to spread the good news! Scripture Alone says Jesus name with no reference to the Father and Holy Spirit after the great commission was given so

Pretty simple, don’t you agree?

So simple, one may begin to question why are there different interpretations of Scripture, when people hold to the bible alone!
The Oneness Pentecostals hold to Sola Scriptura!

 

[IggyAntiochus]

Nice the same author penned But there are also many other things which Jesus did; which, if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written. John 21:25

Do Catholics have evidence that they possess the words of Christ that were not written down?

“But these things are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, and thereby, inherit eternal life.”

Ditto on the slinging of Scripture passages, though.

St Augustine
"Your design clearly is to deprive Scripture of all authority and to make every man’s mind the authority of what he is to approve or disapprove of. This is not to be subject to Scripture, but to make Scripture subject to you. If you discard authority, to what, I beseech you, will you take yourself?" (Reply to Faustus the Manichaean, 32:19 [A.D. 400])

Come on oneman, you’re better than resorting to cherry picked father quotes! LoL. Augustine is not talking about the authority of the Church here, but the authority of the Gospel! Nor is he talking about interpretation. And since when have Protestants of a reformation stripe ever advocated each individual has the authority to discard Scripture that he doesn’t approve of?

 

[stewstew03]

I would not consider JW and Mormons as new age rather as mutations of Protestant thought.

I placed “new age” in quotes so as not to convey the idea that I was using it in the technical sense. They are, however, new age in that they “mutated” in the 19th century and are opposed to traditional Christian doctrine.

Although Mormonism is becoming more mainstream, I would still consider it a New Age cult (but we’re getting off topic).

 

[CopticChristian]

Do Catholics have evidence that they possess the words of Christ that were not written down?

“But these things are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, and thereby, inherit eternal life.”

Ditto on the slinging of Scripture passages, though.

Come on oneman, you’re better than resorting to cherry picked father quotes! LoL. Augustine is not talking about the authority of the Church here, but the authority of the Gospel! Nor is he talking about interpretation. And since when have Protestants of a reformation stripe ever advocated each individual has the authority to discard Scripture that he doesn’t approve of?

Iggy,

I have been to school. I learned. I know stuff. I teach stuff. Know what I know and learn I can chose to teach in a variety of ways. I can mime it. I can sign language it. I can act it out. I can speak. I can write. I can make a movie. I can write a book. I have choices.

I don’t know if you like to cook but if you happened to have watched “Worst Cooks in America” this is a good example. Bobby Flay and Anne Burrell faced off and taught the worst cooks to cook. No cookbooks were ever used on that show and if you watch “Chopped”, you will routinely see people cooking from what they have learned and interpreting dishes from what they know. Huh…you don’t need a cookbook to cook? These people learned what they know and then put it to use. So you can agree that it is possible to transmit information orally that is consistent with what it written.

I have learned how to improve my cooking by watching these shows and being taught orally without opening a book.

Here you will find the Journal of Oral Tradition home page.

journal.oraltradition.org/about

If you go to the right and click on Master index you will find yourself here

journal.oraltradition.org/

Scroll Down and click on

Oral Tradition in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam
Oral Tradition Volume 25, Number 1March 2010

journal.oraltradition.org/issues/25i

You can actually download this article and read it.

The term “oral,” which at one time seemed so clear, emerges not as some single quality but as overlapping or intermingled in varying ways with other modes (visual, acoustic, tactile,material, olfactory).

In antiquity, when no telephones, postal services, and internet connections existed, the transfer of information and knowledge depended on direct or indirect contacts and personal mediation.1 If one wanted to ask someone’s advice or tell him or her something, one would either have to go and visit that person oneself or send an oral or written message through an intermediary.2

In the three synoptic Gospels all communication between Jesus and his disciples, sympathizers, and local Jewish communities is conducted orally.

Obviously not every member of the gentile Christian Diaspora communities would have been able to read the Pauline letters him- or herself. These letters were intended to be read out loud to the assembled (house) communities by their literate sub-elite leaders or by specially appointed readers.7

Your question is answered this way. If the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth as the Bible says and if the Church is the means by which the manifold wisdom of God is knows as the Bible says in Ephesians, written about 95, then is that wisdom transmitted in writing only? Do you then place limits as to how the manifold wisdom of God is to be known through the Church?

This secular article points out what “oral” means.

The term “oral,” which at one time seemed so clear, emerges not as some single quality but as overlapping or intermingled in varying ways with other modes (visual, acoustic, tactile,material, olfactory).

Jesus said He would build a Church. God made it. Is the Church in the world or outside the world? If it is in the world then my Bible tells me this…

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

Ponder this.

 

[onemangang]

Do Catholics have evidence that they possess the words of Christ that were not written down?

“But these things are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, and thereby, inherit eternal life.”

Ditto on the slinging of Scripture passages, though.

I was merely slinging scripture to prove a point, that being, it doesn’t further the discussion at all, because each ecclesial community, and or individual, interprets scripture through the eyes of their own tradition!

Come on oneman, you’re better than resorting to cherry picked father quotes! LoL. Augustine is not talking about the authority of the Church here, but the authority of the Gospel! Nor is he talking about interpretation. And since when have Protestants of a reformation stripe ever advocated each individual has the authority to discard Scripture that he doesn’t approve of?

You’re right in one sense, I did cherry pick!

Please stop telling people what St. Augustine actually was saying in context, people may become wise to my wake up jolt! lol

Many bible only Christians are not reading history, so their exposure to St. Augustine consist of ** “in essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity”** Which, as you know, was not from St. Augustine, but a Lutheran theologian named Rupertus Melenius!

Sadly, many bible only Christians will not read anything from the Early Church Fathers! Often when they do, they become Catholic, or closer to Catholic, then what they were ie: Orthodox, Anglican or Lutheran anyways!

But I doth Protestesth part of your post!

As you know, most Protestant Christian communities have discarded the Deuterocanonical books, that are in fact Scripture!

“Reformed” Protestants who do not entirely discard tradition and history, were not my focus on this post. The ones who scream the Bible Only, and try to discard the rest of History and Tradition, is whom I was attempting to speak to!

Peace and Love in Christ!

 

[Nicea325]

The biggest sola scriptura proponent of them all, the One who proclaimed;

"Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth." John 17:17

My SS hero declared, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:58)

You have lists of people who existed before He did?

If it “is not difficult at all” why are you unable to do so?

Unable to do so? Seriously? I’ll do it now with little to no effort at all. You said:

*The biggest sola scriptura proponent of them all, the One who proclaimed;

Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth (John 17:17)*

How on earth do you come to the FALSE belief John is stating Jesus’ is making reference to Sola Scriptura in verse 17? Second, when and where does Jesus EVER state His Word is binded to the written Word only? Third, give me ONE verse where Jesus states the belief in the Bible-only?

BTW: If SS is valid as you claim,please tell us which Bible Abraham quoted from?

Unable to do so-eh? LOL! SS is a joke!

 

[IggyAntiochus]

I was merely slinging scripture to prove a point, that being, it doesn’t further the discussion at all, because each ecclesial community, and or individual, interprets scripture through the eyes of their own tradition!

Agreed.

You’re right in one sense, I did cherry pick!

Please stop telling people what St. Augustine actually was saying in context, people may become wise to my wake up jolt! lol

I will let you have your fun from now on

Many bible only Christians are not reading history, so their exposure to St. Augustine consist of ** “in essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity”** Which, as you know, was not from St. Augustine, but a Lutheran theologian named Rupertus Melenius!

You’re probably the only person on the planet that knows that. It wouldn’t surprise me being old Rupert was a proto-pietist, and pietists don’t care about truth, only their inner happy feeling. Blech.

But I doth Protestesth part of your post!

As you know, most Protestant Christian communities have discarded the Deuterocanonical books, that are in fact Scripture!

Agreed.

“Reformed” Protestants who do not entirely discard tradition and history, were not my focus on this post. The ones who scream the Bible Only, and try to discard the rest of History and Tradition, is whom I was attempting to speak to!

Peace and Love in Christ!

Yes, although what you’re referring to is a natural extension of Reformed and Anabaptistic sectarian theology.

 

[Phineas]

Catholics have always labeled Protestants as heretics for their willful separation from the “true” church. But this accusation applies rather to them. They are the ones who interposed a priestly hierarchy between Christ and man and made to non-effect two of the commandments of God by substituting man-inspired tradition for God inspired commandments.

Jesus spoke to the "priestly authorities " of His day and accused them of voiding the commandments of God by their man-made traditions (See Mark 15:9) And Paul warned:
Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Catholics claim their authority from Peter supposing that he was designated as head of the early church. But the New Testament gave no one apostle priestly authority over other apostles, and Peter himself said all believers were as priests :

1 Pet 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

1 Pet 2:9 But ye [are] a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

Catholicism made the Pope ( by tradition only and without Divine authority), the Vicar of Christ on Earth, and his subjects even began to call him “Your Holiness” and bow down and kiss his ring, but Jesus said:

Matt 23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, [even] Christ; and all ye are brethren.
23:9 And call no [man] your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
23:10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, [even] Christ.
23:11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
23:12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

When Cornelius bowed down to Peter, Peter was horrified ;
Acts 10:25 And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped [him]. 10:26 But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.

What would Peter think today if he saw all the bowing and scraping church members perform in the presence of the priests and the Pope?

The Bible says that the saints are those that have the faith of Jesus and keep the commandments of God. (Rev 14:12)

Jesus said in Luke 11:28 “Yea rather, blessed [are] they that hear the word of God, and keep it”
"
Paul said inRom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."

So it is those who hear the word of God , allow His spirit to dwell in them and keep His commandments who are His church. In speaking of the Catholic church’s errors in interposing the church hierarchy between Christ and man which led to the Reformation, historian, Merle D’Aubigne said

" Originally, whoever possessed the spirit of Jesus Christ was a member of the Church; now the terms were inverted, and it was maintained that he only who was a member of the Church could receive the Spirit."
As these ideas became established, the distinction between the people and the clergy was more strongly marked. The salvation of souls no longer depended entirely on faith in Christ, but also, and in a more especial manner, on union with the Church. The representatives and heads of the Church were made partakers of the trust that should be placed in Christ alone.

Sola Scriptura is our safeguard against tradition and doctrine which countermands the word of God.

Isaiah said it best:"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, [it is] because [there is] no light in them. Isa 8:20

The Protest at Speyer, Germany 1529.reaffirmed sola scriptura as stated in Isaiah 8:20, Quote:

“” that there is no sure doctrine but such as is conformable to the word of God; that the Lord forbids the teaching of any other doctrine; that each text of the holy Scriptures ought to be explained by other and clearer texts; that this holy book is in all things necessary for the Christian, easy of understanding, and calculated to scatter the darkness: we are resolved, with the grace of God, to maintain the pure and exclusive preaching of his only word, such as it is contained in the biblical books of the Old and New Testament, without adding anything thereto that may be contrary to it. * This word is the only truth; it is the sure rule of all doctrine and of all life, and can never fail or deceive us. He who builds on this foundation shall stand against all the powers of hell, while all the human vanities that are set up against it shall fall before the face of God." Protestant Protest at Speyer , Germany 1529.

 

[Nicea325]

Catholics have always labeled Protestants as heretics for their willful separation from the “true” church. But this accusation applies rather to them. They are the ones who interposed a priestly hierarchy between Christ and man and made to non-effect two of the commandments of God by substituting man-inspired tradition for God inspired commandments.

Jesus spoke to the "priestly authorities " of His day and accused them of voiding the commandments of God by their man-made traditions (See Mark 15:9) And Paul warned:
Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Catholics claim their authority from Peter supposing that he was designated as head of the early church. But the New Testament gave no one apostle priestly authority over other apostles, and Peter himself said all believers were as priests :

1 Pet 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

1 Pet 2:9 But ye [are] a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

Catholicism made the Pope ( by tradition only and without Divine authority), the Vicar of Christ on Earth, and his subjects even began to call him “Your Holiness” and bow down and kiss his ring, but Jesus said:

Matt 23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, [even] Christ; and all ye are brethren.
23:9 And call no [man] your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
23:10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, [even] Christ.
23:11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
23:12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

When Cornelius bowed down to Peter, Peter was horrified ;
Acts 10:25 And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped [him]. 10:26 But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.

What would Peter think today if he saw all the bowing and scraping church members perform in the presence of the priests and the Pope?

The Bible says that the saints are those that have the faith of Jesus and keep the commandments of God. (Rev 14:12)

Jesus said in Luke 11:28 “Yea rather, blessed [are] they that hear the word of God, and keep it”
"
Paul said inRom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."

So it is those who hear the word of God , allow His spirit to dwell in them and keep His commandments who are His church. In speaking of the Catholic church’s errors in interposing the church hierarchy between Christ and man which led to the Reformation, historian, Merle D’Aubigne said

" Originally, whoever possessed the spirit of Jesus Christ was a member of the Church; now the terms were inverted, and it was maintained that he only who was a member of the Church could receive the Spirit."
As these ideas became established, the distinction between the people and the clergy was more strongly marked. The salvation of souls no longer depended entirely on faith in Christ, but also, and in a more especial manner, on union with the Church. The representatives and heads of the Church were made partakers of the trust that should be placed in Christ alone.

Sola Scriptura is our safeguard against tradition and doctrine which countermands the word of God.

Isaiah said it best:"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, [it is] because [there is] no light in them. Isa 8:20

The Protest at Speyer, Germany 1529.reaffirmed sola scriptura as stated in Isaiah 8:20, Quote:

“” that there is no sure doctrine but such as is conformable to the word of God; that the Lord forbids the teaching of any other doctrine; that each text of the holy Scriptures ought to be explained by other and clearer texts; that this holy book is in all things necessary for the Christian, easy of understanding, and calculated to scatter the darkness: we are resolved, with the grace of God, to maintain the pure and exclusive preaching of his only word, such as it is contained in the biblical books of the Old and New Testament, without adding anything thereto that may be contrary to it. * This word is the only truth; it is the sure rule of all doctrine and of all life, and can never fail or deceive us. He who builds on this foundation shall stand against all the powers of hell, while all the human vanities that are set up against it shall fall before the face of God." Protestant Protest at Speyer , Germany 1529.

WRONG! Your highlighted words clearly shows you really have no idea what you are talking about. The CC did not interprose a hiearchy between man and God. That has to be one of the most ignorant comments I have heard from any Protestant. ALL of Protestanism is founded by mere men who had no such authority from God to divide and split His church into chaos and theological chaos.

Do yourself a favor,read church history and merely stop repeating 500 years of perverted history and misunderstandings of Catholicism

 

[PJM]

=Nicea325;9137129]Okay,then whose representation is consistent with SS and obviously who determines what constitutes “proper” representation? You still come back to the same issue: Who has the authority to determine SS as “proper” or “improper” whether official or not.

Successful of refutation of against your list of authors? I have many names and they lived centuries before any of your SS heros existed. Roman Catholics have refuted SS for centuries now and it is not difficult at all.

YOU ASK WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY?

BOTH GOD [2ND. TIM. 3:16] AND THE CC MT. 16:15-19; MT 28:16-20; JOHN 20;21-22; JN.14:16-17, jN.17:15-19 [FOR STARTERS]

And ALL WHO CLAIM ss BECAUSE ITS NOT IN THE BIBLE

 

[onemangang]

According to Zach Hunt of theamericanjesus.net/ We are all Heretics, Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox. read more here!

calledtocommunion.com/2012/03/are-we-all-heretics-a-reply-to-zack-hunt/

 

[onemangang]

According to Zach Hunt of theamericanjesus.net/ We are all Heretics, Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox. read more here!

calledtocommunion.com/2012/03/are-we-all-heretics-a-reply-to-zack-hunt/

 

[Nicea325]

YOU ASK WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY?

BOTH GOD [2ND. TIM. 3:16] AND THE CC MT. 16:15-19; MT 28:16-20; JOHN 20;21-22; JN.14:16-17, jN.17:15-19 [FOR STARTERS]

And ALL WHO CLAIM ss BECAUSE ITS NOT IN THE BIBLE:thumbsup:

:dancing: Unfortunately that is where the issue lies with so many Protestants: authority. For the life of me I have no idea how they can hold on to a belief Jesus’ founded His church with NO authority?