Protestants, can a Catholic Priest forgive sins?

[Ginger2]

It just struck me now, this quote of yours.

If you don’t know what John 20:23 means
then the Bible is not plain to you.

If the Bible is not plain to you (by your own reasoning that the Bible is only plain to believers) then that makes you a non-believer.

If you are a non-believer, again by your own reasoning, that makes you a heretic.

If you are a heretic, why should anyone believe any of your interpretations.

lol

1. There is no place in the Bible that state one must have perfect understanding of every single verse in Holy Scriptures. Even the RC allows private interpretation as long as it doesn’t contradict church teaching.
2. It is plain in the Bible that only God forgives sins in the sense of purification, perfecting the human soul. Read Hebrews 10.
3. It is plain your interpretation is false because it contradicts the rest of the Holy Scriptures!

Your priests cannot forgive sins as God forgives sins.

1. Just because God reveals a little info at a time to virtually all his children as opposed to all at once as He did Saul, does not make a heretic of those who have not yet been given complete understanding of each and every Scripture.

Please give the post # where I supposedly said people who don’t understand are heretics.

 

[WindGirl]

Not agreeing with the Catholic interpretation of things doesn’t make anyone a non believer or a heretic.

 

[WindGirl]

Joe370 -

What a wonderful exposition you have made and all that was required was Faith and Reason.

This summarizes a perfect answer to the OP’s question very well indeed.

BUT… don’t be surprised if you get a response like this:

Wrong!

There are people bent on telling us that the CC is wrong! You can talk until you are blue in the face.

Maybe that’s because we know it IS wrong. And you can keep proclaiming it isn’t until you’re blue in the face.

 

[benedictus2]

lol

1. There is no place in the Bible that state one must have perfect understanding of every single verse in Holy Scriptures. Even the RC allows private interpretation as long as it doesn’t contradict church teaching.

.

Hey they are your words.

You said the Bible is plain **only **to believers. If the Bible is plain, that means the entire Bible is plain. YOU are the one who said that.

Then you followed it with, it is not plain to heretics because they are non-believers.

I merely followed your logic.

So now your words have come to bite you hmmm?

 

[benedictus2]

Maybe that’s because we know it IS wrong. And you can keep proclaiming it isn’t until you’re blue in the face.

Did you even read what Joe wrote? Did you understand it?

If you say it is wrong, tell us which part.

 

[benedictus2]

Not agreeing with the Catholic interpretation of things doesn’t make anyone a non believer or a heretic.

It seems to me you are butting in here without having even gone through the thread why heresy and heretics played a part in the discussion.

Please read. Then make a reasoned comment.

 

[Cinette]

Maybe that’s because we know it IS wrong. And you can keep proclaiming it isn’t until you’re blue in the face.

Apart from the irrefutable arguments supported by scripture which were presented by Joe370 there is no doubt that anyone with common sense would see the veracity of his exposition. It is solid and true.

Anyone denying this is just plain stubborn. How else can one explain such an attitude?

WindGirl surely this is unworthy of you? Can’t you see that your statement above is just a lot of wind? How can you treat Joe370’s post with disdain and be true to yourself? If you persist with this standpoint then you cannot be taken seriously.

 

[benedictus2]

Please give the post # where I supposedly said people who don’t understand are heretics.

Gladly! Post 508 and here it is:

benedictus2:

*The point is not Augustnie’s contention. *

When something is plain all believers would agree on it.

It is plain to all believers. It’s is not plain to heretics. Heretics are not believers.

 

[Ginger2]

Hey they are your words.

You said the Bible is plain **only **to believers. If the Bible is plain, that means the entire Bible is plain. YOU are the one who said that.

Then you followed it with, it is not plain to heretics because they are non-believers.

I merely followed your logic.

So now your words have come to bite you hmmm?

Post # please…

I believe it was you who brought up heretics, …

I said the basic Christian doctrines are believed by all Christians - even Catholics. These doctrines are found in the Scriptures and are plain to the believer.

You said they are not plain or there would be no heretics. I said heretics are not believers.

I said every believer must have perfect and complete understanding of every verse in Scriptures. Nor did I say the lack there of indicates he/she is a heretic.

Nice try, but twisting what I have said doesn’t make it so.

 

[Ginger2]

If you go back to my earlier post, I already said that if it is PLAIN then there would not be any TRINITARIAN HERESIES.

When something is plain all believers would agree on it…

Thank you for the post #.

As you can see, your post suggested some believers were heretics. I merely corrected you stating, “It is plain to all believers. It’s is not plain to heretics. Heretics are not believers.”

I did not say everyone who has not received understanding on this issue is a heretic

 

[benedictus2]

Post # please…

I have given this in my previous post along with the exact quotes.

I believe it was you who brought up heretics, …

Correct. You said the Trinity is plain from the Bible and I said if it is plain then there would not be so many herersies regarding the Tritny.

I said the basic Christian doctrines are believed by all Christians - even Catholics. These doctrines are found in the Scriptures and are plain to the believer.

You said they are not plain or there would be no heretics. I said heretics are not believers.

In correct. As I mentioned above, heresy came into the specific topic of the Plainess of the Bible as regards Trinity

I said every believer must have perfect and complete understanding of every verse in Scriptures. Nor did I say the lack there of indicates he/she is a heretic.

That, I don’t remember you saying (might have missed that post). We were not discussing the perfect understanding of the Bible but rather your claim that the Bible is plain to all believers. You did not say some parts of the Bible or some chapters of the Bible but you said THE BIBLE is plain. If it is plain, YOU will know what everything in it means because you claim to be a believer.

Nice try, but twisting what I have said doesn’t make it so.

Sorry, but I have just shown that no twisting was done.

 

[benedictus2]

Thank you for the post #.

As you can see, your post suggested some believers were heretics. I merely corrected you stating, “It is plain to all believers. It’s is not plain to heretics. Heretics are not believers.”

I did not say everyone who has not received understanding on this issue is a heretic

No you were the one who equated heresy with non-belief.
I merely stated that there were heretics. I neither classified them as believer or unbeliever.

Your contention was that the Bible is a book for believers and that is why it is plain to believers.

 

[Ginger2]

I have given this in my previous post along with the exact quotes.

I posted this before you gave me the post # you were refering to. It was from memory and I am involved in other threads.

 

[benedictus2]

I posted this before you gave me the post # you were refering to. It was from memory and I am involved in other threads.

Yes, I did realize that later.

 

[Ginger2]

No you were the one who equated heresy with non-belief.
I merely stated that there were heretics. I neither classified them as believer or unbeliever.

Your contention was that the Bible is a book for believers and that is why it is plain to believers.

Look at your post:

If you go back to my earlier post, I already said that if it is PLAIN then there would not be any TRINITARIAN HERESIES.
When something is plain all believers would agree on it.

Since when do we consider heretics “believers”?

All Christians believe the same basic Christian doctrines which are plainly spelled out in Scriptures and summarized in the Apostle’s Creed.

I even drew a parallel to help you understand in post # 494:

If I claim to be an vegetarian, does that make me an vegetarian? Or is it what I believe and what I eat and don’t eat that make me a vegetarian?

If I say I am I a vegetarian but I eat meat, am I a vegetarian?

If I say I am a Jew, but talk and behave like a Buddhist, am I a Jew?
If I say I am a Christian, but talk and behave like a humanist, am I a Christian?

Not everyone who claims the title Christian, is a Christian.

 

[guanophore]

lol

1. There is no place in the Bible that state one must have perfect understanding of every single verse in Holy Scriptures. Even the RC allows private interpretation as long as it doesn’t contradict church teaching.

You are correct, however, Catholics do not make the claim as you have that “the bible is plain”. Since you are making this assertion,then you must defend it. So far, you have not been able to do so.

2. It is plain in the Bible that only God forgives sins in the sense of purification, perfecting the human soul.  Read Hebrews 10.

This is very Catholic. It is God, working through people, that accomplishes this. Just as only God can be infallible, and worked through people to create the Scripture that testifies that God has given to His ordained the power to forgive sins.

3. It is plain your interpretation is false because it contradicts the rest of the Holy Scriptures!

It certainly contradicts your understanding of them. This is because Scripture was never intended to be separated from the Holy Tradition that produced it.

Your priests cannot forgive sins as God forgives sins.

We would say that God, who alone can forgive sins, works through the priest. This is how God set it up.

4. Just because God reveals a little info at a time to virtually all his children as opposed to all at once as He did Saul, does not make a heretic of those who have not yet been given complete understanding of each and every Scripture.

I agree. I would even go so far as to say that most Protestants, yourself included, cannot be charged with the sin of heresy. This would require that you did, at one time, understand and adhere to the Apostolic Teaching, which apparently you have not. One cannot fall away from something one never had.

 

[benedictus2]

Look at your post:

Since when do we consider heretics “believers”?

Heretics are believers. They just believe wrongly. They just don’t believe what you and i believe about the Trinity.

All Christians believe the same basic Christian doctrines which are plainly spelled out in Scriptures and summarized in the Apostle’s Creed.

I even drew a parallel to help you understand in post # 494:

If I claim to be an vegetarian, does that make me an vegetarian? Or is it what I believe and what I eat and don’t eat that make me a vegetarian?

If I say I am I a vegetarian but I eat meat, am I a vegetarian?

If I say I am a Jew, but talk and behave like a Buddhist, am I a Jew?
If I say I am a Christian, but talk and behave like a humanist, am I a Christian?

Not everyone who claims the title Christian, is a Christian.

The question is not whether they are Christians but whether they are believers. Some of the heretics believed Christ was God incarnate but that He was a separate God to the Father.

And that is why I keep saying this proves my point that the Bible is NOT PLAIN. Because if I agree with you that you are a believer, and yet you’ve plainly stated that there are passages even you do not understand hence not plain to you, then the Bible is not plain even to believers.

So now we’ve come back full circle. That was all this discussion was about: the plainess of the Bible. As I have said before some parts may be plain but some are not.

 

[Ginger2]

benedictus2,

OK, I see what you are saying, now.

But, since the Bible says Only One God, all other gods are false gods,…

Those who believe Jesus is a “lessor god” or “an angel” or “a good man” or simply “a prophet” are not believers because they are denying Jesus.

To be a Christian believer, you must believe that Jesus is who he said he is! If you do not believe Jesus is God incarnate, you are not a believer - you are a deny-er.

If you proclaim something contrary to what has been revealed to us by God, you are a heretic.

 

[guanophore]

Post # please…

I believe it was you who brought up heretics, …

This is just another example of how erroneous some of your “beliefs” really are.

I said the basic Christian doctrines are believed by all Christians - even Catholics. These doctrines are found in the Scriptures and are plain to the believer.

You are mistaken, Ginger2. There are uncounted fervent Christians who misunderstand the Scripture is clear evidence that this is not the case. If it were,there would be no "denominations. You amaze me when you make assertions like this. It is as if you are not in touch with reality!

You said they are not plain or there would be no heretics. I said heretics are not believers.

They are “believers”, because one cannot be a heretic unless one adheres to the true doctrine then abandons it. Most people that misunderstand the scriptures do so in good faith. For example, most people disregard that Jesus gave authority on earth for HIs Apostles to forgive sins in His name. They do not know any better. They are not heretics because they never received or understood the true Apostolic Teaching on this matter. A person that did, then willfully and knowingly rejected it, would qualify as a heretic. An “unbeliever” cannot be a heretic.

I said every believer must have perfect and complete understanding of every verse in Scriptures.

Perhaps you are getting frustrated, and are inadvertantly contradicting yourself?

Nor did I say the lack there of indicates he/she is a heretic.

I think you did, as has been posted above. If you are going to make wild, baseless, and ridiculous assertions, it might be better if you could keep track of them. It is even more discrediting (if that were possible!) that you make them, then deny that you made them!

Nice try, but twisting what I have said doesn’t make it so.

No, any more than your twisting the scriptures to deny the Apostolic faith.

 

[guanophore]

Since when do we consider heretics “believers”?

All Christians believe the same basic Christian doctrines which are plainly spelled out in Scriptures and summarized in the Apostle’s Creed.

No, Ginger2, this is a fantasy that you are harboring. I would like to believe it is true, but we know it is not. There are any number of fervent “believers” that reject at leasta some parts of what you consider “Christian Doctrines” and the meaning of what is written in the creed. For example, most reject the communion of saints.

A heretic is one who espoused orthodox belief, then left it. One cannot become a heretic without first being a believer.

I even drew a parallel to help you understand in post # 494:

If I claim to be an vegetarian, does that make me an vegetarian? Or is it what I believe and what I eat and don’t eat that make me a vegetarian?

If I say I am I a vegetarian but I eat meat, am I a vegetarian?

If I say I am a Jew, but talk and behave like a Buddhist, am I a Jew?
If I say I am a Christian, but talk and behave like a humanist, am I a Christian?

Not everyone who claims the title Christian, is a Christian.

We are in agreement on that point! And not everyone who claims to understand the scriptures really does.