Featured Sola Scriptura in the Bible

Do you think I ever said that "the pope's relationship with God is claimed as a magic power" or the "Pope says the priests relationship with God is a magic power"??

What I said is that the RCC claims that the Priests "Retain the POWERS" to confect the body soul and divinity" of Christ in the mass - EVEN if that priest is excommunicated by the church for apostasy, or false doctrine.
============================================================

Catholic Digest – Jan 1995, pg 126

Q: Our former priest has been excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church and h as opened his own Church, which he calls “Christ Catholic Mission”. He now has some kind of connection with what he calls the “Catholic Church of God and Christ” with headquarters in Missouri. More and more people are attending his church. Some are former Catholics, but those I asked did not know whether this priest still had the power of consecrating the bread and wine for Communion. Does he? M.M

A.Yes. But he commits a grave sin of disobedience if he is excommunicated… The priest’s Consecration can be valid, that is, there can be the real change of bread and wine INTO the body and blood of Christ, but it is illicit because of his excommunication and brings him no actual graces.

You sometimes hear that the reason the Church recognizes the validity of an excommunicated priest’s Mass, and his continuing power to forgive sin, is the salvation of the dying in cases of necessity. But the deeper reason is the mark of the Holy Orders, along with Baptism and Confirmation, puts on the soul.

Of course “Mark on the soul” is just a figure of speech to indicate the difference between the baptized and the nonbaptized , the confirmed and the nonconfirmed, the ordained and the nonordained. Once the status of a soul is established by any of the three sacraments, it cannot be changed by any human power so as to be like it was before the reception of these sacraments.

The apostate priest does not lose the power to confect the Eucharist or forgive sins through the sacrament of Penance. He does, by his apostasy, lose the power to do these things licitly, without sin.

The legal mechanics of all this is that only the bishop has the fullness of the priesthood, the power to govern. Consequently, the ordained priest must have the permission of a bishop to exercise the powers of Consecration and absolving. The bread and wine consecrated by an excommunicated priest truly becomes the Body and Blood of Christ, [/i but the priest and anyone who knowingly receives Communion from him is guilty of extremely serious sin.

============================================================

So that is not "ME" claiming "Powers" for the priest. That is the RCC itself.

Powers -- to forgive sins.
Powers - to confect the body soul and divinity of Christ.


Now what you propose is "what if" - SDAs claimed that Ellen White has "powers" to confect the body soul and divinity of Christ - AND she had the 'powers' to forgive people of their sins... But then we claimed for her - that though she should go into apostasy and promote false doctrine - YET she does not "lose those powers" --

Your claim is - that if we said that about Ellen White - and you had said "magic powers" as your way of referencing this statement of ours -- Magic - to "mark the soul" of the baptized infant, and "magic" to transform bread into the body soul and divinity of Christ - ... I am not entirely sure I could fault you for doing so.

When you yourselves claim that these are "POWERS" that are "retained" by the excommunicated Priest - how in the world would you suppose that a Protestant would view it???

in Christ,

Bob

 

Let's ask "Pope Peter". Someone I think you would agree with me - is inspired by God.

2 Peter 1:19-21
19 So we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. 20 But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, 21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

 

IF Sola Scriptura is God's intended doctrine - then Jesus would hammer the Magisterium of Christ's day - "sola scriptura" - whenever it went into doctrinal error -- like this.

Mark 7
7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the Commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

In keeping with the much older form of it - found in Isaiah 8

Isaiah 8:20 "To the LAW and to the Testimony if they speak not according to this WORD they have no light"

And Jesus would instruct "from ALL the Scriptures" Luke 24:27.

And the Apostles would TESTED even by non-Christians - against SCRIPTURE "they studied the SCRIPTURES daily to see IF those things spoken to them by the APOSTLE Paul were SO" Acts 17:11

Especially to the error-agenda of the magisterium that Christ was hammering "sola scriptura" in Mark 7.

 

Something that is "not even supposed to exist" by the speculative argument that says Apostles can never be in error - must never be tested "sola scriptura".



Gal 1:6-9 - "Sola scriptura - known from NT times to judge modern teaching/doctrine"
--- EVEN if WE APOSTLES should preach error- a gospel contrary to what you received, - let him be accursed! --

6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we (APOSTLES), or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

 

Once the "protesting Catholics" like Luther figured this out - they would suddenly find a long line of points of deviation where the mother church had veered off of the path set for the NT church as documented in the Bible.

 

You left one out. Let's look at the text again --

Mark 7
7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the Commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

1. Commandment of God
2. Moses said
3. Word of God

And all of them refer to Ex 20:12 "Honor thy father and thy mother" - which is also scripture.

All 4 titles for the same text.

I have to go with God's choice.

But in that example - it is the one TRUE nation-church infallibly established by God at Sinai that has their magisterium getting hammered "Sola Scriptura" - something which I think many Catholics have argued "can not happen".

Likewise in Gal 1:6-9 Paul does not say "If it comes from one of US APOSTLES or an ANGEL from heaven - then no need to test it - just accept whatever is said".


Gal 1:6-9 - "Sola scriptura - known from NT times to judge modern teaching/doctrine"
--- EVEN if WE APOSTLES should preach error- a gospel contrary to what you received, - let him be accursed! --

6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

 

And so also with Acts 17:11 - instead of "they accepted whatever Paul said as true - since they were not even Christians in the first place and had no basis or authority test an Apostle"

And instead of saying "they were cursed because they studied the scriptures as if to check Apostolic teaching of Paul - when they had no basis for doing such a thing - especially since they were not even Christians in the first place" --

We find this - give as the reason for the blessing pronounced on them.

Acts 17:11 "they studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things (spoken to them by the APOSTLE Paul) were SO"

 

Your statement is not justified by the actual facts.

1. The 39 books of the real OT text is the same in Catholic Bibles as in protestant bibles
2. The NT text is the same.
3. The Jewish apocrypha is the only point of difference and even the Jews reject it as canon.

In fact - the Catholic Church's own Jerome rejected the Jewish Apocrypha as canon when doing the Latin Vulgate translation.

When we speak of Catholic doctrine failing a sola-scriptura test - we are talking about the SAME 39 books of the OT and the SAME 27 books of the NT that the RCC itself would confess as being in the Canon of scripture. So that is a red herring you are floating by us.

You don't have objective facts to support the hyperbole in your post.

 

Your statement is not justified by the actual facts.

1. The 39 books of the real OT text are the same in Catholic Bibles as in protestant bibles
2. The NT text is the same.
3. The Jewish apocrypha is the only point of difference and even the Jews reject it as canon.

In fact - the Catholic Church's own Jerome rejected the Jewish Apocrypha as canon when doing the Latin Vulgate translation.

When we speak of Catholic doctrine failing a sola-scriptura test - we are talking about the SAME 39 books of the OT and the SAME 27 books of the NT that the RCC itself would confess as being in the Canon of scripture. So that is a red herring you are floating by us.

You don't have objective facts to support the hyperbole in your post.

• Not according to actual history - where in fact all of the Hebrew Bible was completed, fixed, and read for 4 centuries prior to Christ.

• Not according to Jewish historians like Josephus who point out that the Jews were keeping the Hebrew Canon - unchanged in the Temple for over 400 years by that time.

• Not according to Christ where - in Luke 24:27 He teaches "From ALL the scriptures"

The fact that you want to read the Jewish Apocrypha is a choice you make.

The rest of us have the actual OT and NT - just as you also have.

And even your own Jerome - informs you that the Jewish Apocrypha is not in the canon.

So also did your own Glossa Ordinaria -- as it reminded you for over 500 years that Jerome was right about not claiming that the Jewish Apocrypha was part of the "canon"

When Jesus or apostles quote old testament its the Septuagint not the Jewish apocrypha.

And there is not one write in the NT or OT quoting the Jewish Apocrypha as "it is written" or "the Holy Spirit says" or "scripture says".

Our NT is the same.

the 39 books in our OT are -- the same.

But we reject the Jewish Apocrypha written by non-Christian Jews before the time of Christ. So also did Jerome reject it. So also did your own Glossa Ordinaria declare the Jewish Apocrypha to be external to the canon of scripture.

No way to escape that.