Surpassing Sola Scriptura

"The parallel between Peter and the rest of the Apostles on the one hand, and between the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops on the other hand, does not imply the transmission of the Apostles’ extraordinary power to their successors;

Then they are not actual apostles, as they fail of the requirements of personal discipleship, and degree of supernatural attestation, and of virtue:

Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, (Acts 1:21)

Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord? (1 Corinthians 9:1)

But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. (Galatians 1:11-12)

Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds. (2 Corinthians 12:12)

Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ. (Romans 15:19)

Insomuch that they brought forth the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that at the least the shadow of Peter passing by might overshadow some of them. (Acts 5:15)

But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, In stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings; By pureness, by knowledge, by longsuffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned, By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, (2 Corinthians 6:4-7)

And which enabled the unity of the NT church, in contrast to today.

And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. (Acts 2:43)

And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; (and they were all with one accord in Solomon's porch. (Acts 5:12)

Dan Rather Dismisses Liberal Media Bias Claims: ‘This Is A Sham http://www.mediaite.com/tv/dan-rather-dismisses-liberal-media-bias-claims-this-is-a-sham/

On this supposed "apostasy": When was it?

When the Mormons used to come around I used to ask them the exact same question, surprise, surprise they could never answer it either.

It isn’t a matter of “was.” She is formally and officially apostate to the present hour.

The question is: When did the apostasy occur? What date did it begin?

1) What, in the mind of a Catholic, was the proper response to the corruption of the pre-reformation Catholic church, including but not limited to the selling of indulgences? What was the proper response to a church that was violating the teachings of the Bible?

Do not expect straight answers from RCs, as they are in bondage to defend Rome, and are not to engage in objective examination of evidence in order to ascertain the veracity of RC teachings, but are to simply submit to them under the premise of Rome being the infallible authority. Thus Scripture is subjected to being a servant to support Rome, versus the veracity doctrines being dependent upon the weight of Scriptural substantiation, upon which the church began.

All of which RCs cannot refute. And in fact Martin Luther was excommunicated for exposing corruption, that of doctrinal corruption, thus resulting in his excommunication by a recalcitrant Rome. While Luther was not correct in all he held to, nor did Rome reject all that he wrote (though much more from Luther would follow), but both purgatory and indulgences are simply not Scriptural.

All the verses which clearly speak of a N.T. believer's postmortem condition (Luke 23:43; Acts 7:59; 1Cor. 15:52; 2 Cor 5:8; Phil. 1:23; 1 Th 4:17; 1Jn. 3:2) show it is with the Lord, in whose presence there is fulness of joy (Ps. 16:11). All the Thessalonians would be the Lord if he had returned oin their lifetime, as expected. (1Ths. 4:17) Bless God. (Been through the arguments before.)

Moreover, is not simply suffering the produces righteous character, but being tempted, and which Scripture only shows this life is for with its manifold temptations, contrasting “now” being the time of trials, “now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations..might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ: (1 Peter 1:6,7) and our “the sufferings of this present time” (Rm. 8:18) versus later, and thus the Lord Himself as made perfect through sufferings, in being “tempted in all points like as we are, yet without sin.” (Heb. 2:10; 4:15)

As historian Philip Schaff wrote: By attacking the abuses of indulgences, Luther unwittingly cut a vein of Medieval Catholicismî (History of the Christian Church, Vol. VII, 160).

But the modern RC blithely dismisses such as fuss about nothing.

Also, in contrast to the imagination of modern RCs, Rome was far from clearly defined in its theology. As one researcher states, "Recent research on the Reformation entitles us to sharpen it and say that the Reformation began because the reformers were too catholic in the midst of a church that had forgotten its catholicity..." “If we keep in mind how variegated medieval catholicism was, the legitimacy of the reformers' claim to catholicity becomes clear." And between extremes “were many combinations; and though certain views predominated in late nominalism. In condemning the Protestant Reformation, the Council of Trent condemned part of its own catholic tradition." Pelikan, pp. 51-52.(Pelikan, pp. 46-47 ). — Jaroslav Pelikan, The Riddle of Roman Catholicism (New York: Abingdon Press, 1959, p. 46)

See CFs on Scripture for one thing. The RC recourse of Rome is to presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares.

As no less a RC than Manning asserted,

"It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive, and their pretension was to revert to antiquity. But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine...I may say in strict truth that the Church has no antiquity. It rests upon its own supernatural and perpetual consciousness. Its past is present with it, for both are one to a mind which is immutable. Primitive and modern are predicates, not of truth, but of ourselves... The only Divine evidence to us of what was primitive is the witness and voice of the Church at this hour."] - The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost, pp. 227-228

Also, the idea of a restoration being needed just before the Reformation hardly seems improbable, as they both mean the same thing, and even the poor spiritual and moral conditions necessitated it. See recent post.

2)The bible tells us Saint Peter was granted infalability by Jesus. If Peter had passed on that infalability to the next Bishop of Rome don’t you think that might have been recorded in scripture or at least somewhere? It seems to me that such an event would have been chronicled in detail by the church itself.

Indeed. Yet nowhere in Scripture do we see an apostolic successor except for Judas, which was to maintain the number of the 12, (Rv. 21:14; Acts 1:15ff) thus only one is chosen. And rather than supporting apostolic succession, the Holy Spirit conspicuously never mentions any successor for the apostle James who was martyred, (Acts 12:1,2) or preparations for another pope, despite its cardinal importance for Rome and the careful chronicling of important events and details of the early church.

And the RC recourse to tradition further indicts it as being contrary to the NT church, as the church became increasingly deformed as time went by, while even those early Cfs it invokes for support evidence the acorn turned into a different tree. Even Catholic scholarship provides evidence against the claims of Rome's perpetuated Petrine papacy to whom all the church looked to as its infallible head in Rome.

3)The Pope does not choose his successor, the Catholics elect the next one. That would mean that primacy comes not from the Pope but rather from the church itself. If one does accept that there is a church with primacy, since the great schizm how do I know that the Catholics are it rather than the Eastern Orthodox?

Good question, as they both claim to be the one true and infallible church. But division in Catholicism, is nothing new, and which includes on substantial issues that will never be fully resolved i am quit sure.

"The Orthodox Church opposes the Roman doctrines of universal papal jurisdiction, papal infallibility, purgatory, and the Immaculate Conception precisely because they are untraditional." Clark Carlton, THE WAY: What Every Protestant Should Know About the Orthodox Church, 1997, p 135.

Also, the Orthodox Church does not believe in indulgences as remissions from purgatoral punishment. Both purgatory and indulgences are inter-corrolated theories, unwitnessed in the Bible or in the Ancient Church, and when they were enforced and applied they brought about evil practices at the expense of the prevailing Truths of the Church. — http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith7076

See here for more.

The procedure for electing the pope is not the issue, and while it has evolved over the history of the Church. Rome has never even elected (TMK) any of her supposed successors by the non-political OT Scriptural method of casting lots (Prov. 16:33) used by Peter and the 11, but instead her elections have often involved political machinations, and electing manifestly immoral men who were not fit to be even church members.

On this supposed "apostasy": When was it? When the Mormons used to come around I used to ask them the exact same question, surprise, surprise they could never answer it either.

That is easy as it was progressive,though it will take some space to briefly it.

We can see the deformation from the NT church in substance early on, progressively taking on things which were not seen in the NT and in contrast to it. Even if such was done with seemingly right motive, but as with the Jewish magisterium, progressively thinking of itself above that which is written. (1Cor. 4:6)

Paul Johnson, author of over 40 books and a conservative popular historian, writes,

The Church was now a great and numerous force in the empire, attracting men of wealth and high education, inevitably, then, there occurred a change of emphasis from purely practical development in response to need, to the deliberate thinking out of policy.

This expressed itself in two ways: the attempt to turn Christianity into a philosophical and political system, and the development of controlling devices to prevent this intellectualization of the faith from destroying it. The twin process began to operate in the early and middle decades of the third century, with Origen epitomizing the first element and Cyprian the second.

The effect of Origen’s work was to create a new science, biblical theology, whereby every sentence in the scriptures was systematically explored for hidden [much prone to metaphorical] meanings, different layers of meanings, allegory and so forth.....

Cyprian [c. 200 – September 14, 258] came from a wealthy family with a tradition of public service to the empire; within two years of his conversion he was made a bishop. He had to face the practical problems of persecution, survival and defence against attack. His solution was to gather together the developing threads of ecclesiastical order and authority and weave them into a tight system of absolute control...the confession of faith, even the Bible itself lost their meaning if used outside the Church.

With Cyprian, then, the freedom preached by Paul and based on the power of Christian truth was removed from the ordinary members of the Church, it was retained only by the bishops, through whom the Holy Spirit still worked, who were collectively delegated to represent the totality of Church members...With Bishop Cyprian, the analogy with secular government came to seem very close. But of course it lacked one element: the ‘emperor figure’ or supreme priest...

[Peter according to Cyprian was] the beneficiary of the famous ‘rock and keys’ text in Matthew. There is no evidence that Rome exploited this text to assert its primacy before about 250 - and then...Paul was eliminated from any connection with the Rome episcopate and the office was firmly attached to Peter alone...

...There was in consequence a loss of spirituality or, as Paul would have put it, of freedom... -(A History of Christianity, by Paul Johnson, pp. 51 -61,63. transcribed using OCR software) Then we have further deformation in periods as that of Damasus 1 (366-384) who began his reign by employing a gang of thugs in seeking to secure his chair, which carried out a three-day massacre of his rivals supporters. ...Ammianus Marcellinus reports that they left 137 dead on the field. (J. N. D. Kelly, “The Oxford Dictionary of Popes” (Hardcover), pp. 32 )

Just like the NT in Acts. Yet Rome made him a "saint."

Damasus was indefatigable in promoting the Roman primacy, frequently referring to Rome as 'the apostolic see' and ruling that the test of a creed's orthodoxy was its endorsement by the Pope.... This [false claim to] succession gave him a unique [presumptuous claim to] judicial power to bind and loose, and the assurance of this infused all his rulings on church discipline. - Kelly, J. N. D. (1989). The Oxford Dictionary of Popes. USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 32 ,34;

Moving along,

The sixth century found Rome sunk too low by war and pestilence for many churches to be built; but at this time took place the transformation of ancient buildings into Christian shrines. Instead of despising the relics of paganism, the Roman priesthood prudently gathered to themselves all that could be adopted from the old world. Gregorovius remarks that the Christian religion had grown up side by side with the empire, which this new power was ready to replace when the Emperor withdrew to the East.

The Bishop of Rome assumed the position of Ponlifex Maximus, priest and temporal ruler in one, and the workings of this so-called spiritual kingdom, with bishops as senators, and priests as leaders of the army, followed on much the same lines as the empire. The analogy was more complete when monasteries were founded and provinces were won and governed by the Church. - Welbore St. Clair Baddeley, Lina Duff Gordon, “Rome and its story” p. 176

Then you had those times it seems so many FR RCs seem to long for.

in the 1180s, the Church began to panic at the spread of heresy, and thereafter it took the lead from the State, though it maintained the legal fiction that convicted and unrepentant heretics were merely 'deprived of the protection of the Church', which was (as they termed it) 'relaxed', the civil power then being free to burn them without committing mortal sin. Relaxation was accompanied by a formal plea for mercy; in fact this was meaningless, and the individual civil officer (sheriffs and so forth) had no choice but to burn, since otherwise he was denounced as a 'defender of heretics', and plunged into the perils of the system himself. — Paul Johnson, History of Christianity, © 1976 Athenium, p. 253

Canons of the Ecumenical Fourth Lateran Council, 1215:Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and to the best of their ability to exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church; so that whenever anyone shall have assumed authority, whether spiritual or temporal, let him be bound to confirm this decree by oath.

But if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province. If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff, that he may declare the ruler’s vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action. - http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran4.asp

More .

And besides previous messy times, we have the schism of the 14th and 15th centuries, of which Cardinal Ratzinger observed,

"For nearly half a century, the Church was split into two or three obediences that excommunicated one another, so that every Catholic lived under excommunication by one pope or another, and, in the last analysis, no one could say with certainty which of the contenders had right on his side. The Church no longer offered certainty of salvation; she had become questionable in her whole objective form--the true Church, the true pledge of salvation, had to be sought outside the institution. It is against this background of a profoundly shaken ecclesial consciousness that we are to understand that Luther, in the conflict between his search for salvation and the tradition of the Church, ultimately came to experience the Church, not as the guarantor, but as the adversary of salvation. — Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith for the Church of Rome, “Principles of Catholic Theology,” trans. by Sister Mary Frances McCarthy, S.N.D. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1989) p.196 ).

..."one pope (Gregory XII) had voluntarily abdicated; another (John XXIII) had been suspended and then deposed, but had submitted in canonical form; the third claimant (Benedict XIII) was cut off from the body of the Church, "a pope without a Church, a shepherd without a flock" (Hergenröther-Kirsch). It had come about that, whichever of the three claimants of the papacy was the legitimate successor of Peter, there reigned throughout the Church a universal uncertainty and an intolerable confusion, so that saints and scholars and upright souls were to be found in all three obediences. On the principle that a doubtful pope is no pope, the Apostolic See appeared really vacant, and under the circumstances could not possibly be otherwise filled than by the action of a general council." - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04288a.htm

We also had the hindrance of Rome to free access of and literacy of the Scriptures, as a latter development.

Finally we come to the time of the Reformation, which prior history and what follows provides context for, which while far from perfect for sure, was necessary and set multitudes of captives free to know the Lord and greatly expand the kingdom of God thru the centuries, including thru America, and thus was a blessing for Catholics as well.

And not that the church has ceased before that, as it still professed the truths by which faith comes, (Rm. 10:17) but which souls had to see thru the trapping of institutionalized religion. Yet souls were yet save in it, as is the case today, with the one true church being the body of Christ, as was the case in Scripture, not just the church at Ephesus, and none looked to an infallible pope in Rome as its supreme exalted head.

But Rome increasingly ceased to be the viable visible manifestation of that body, as is the case today, and while not totally apostate, it overall has become as the gates of Hell for her multitudes, myself having been one of them. Thanks be to God.

Cardinal Bellarmine: "Some years before the rise of the Lutheran and Calvinistic heresy, according to the testimony of those who were then alive, there was almost an entire abandonment of equity in ecclesiastical judgments; in morals, no discipline; in sacred literature, no erudition; in divine things, no reverence; religion was almost extinct. — Concio XXVIII. Opp. Vi. 296- Colon 1617, in “A History of the Articles of Religion,” by Charles Hardwick, Cp. 1, p. 10,

• Erasmus, in his new edition of the “Enchiridion,” “What man of real piety does not perceive with sighs that this is far the most corrupt of all ages? When did iniquity abound with more licentiousness? When was charity so cold?” — “The Evolution of the English Bible: A Historical Sketch of the Successive,” p. 132 by Henry William Hamilton-Hoare

“Probably as many as half the men in orders had ‘wives’ and families. Behind all the New Learning and the theological debates, clerical celibacy was, in its own way, the biggest single issue at the Reformation. It was a great social problem and, other factors being equal, it tended to tip the balance in favour of reform. As a rule, the only hope for a child of a priest was to go into the Church himself, thus unwillingly or with no great enthusiasm, taking vows which he might subsequently regret: the evil tended to perpetuate itself.” (Johnson, History of Christianity, pgs 269-270)

It is truly vital to know all the words of God because He does not change:

For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. - Mal 3:6

That says don’t add to or subtract from the Bible. It does not say, nor does it imply, that the Bible is all there is.

The subject of Deuteronomy 4:2 is the words/commandments of God not 'all that there is.'

Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. - Deuat 4:2

He makes the same point again here:

Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men - Mark 7:7

And He followed it with examples.

Thankyou for the scripture dear Alamo-Girl.Your love of His Word is plain to see.
and thankyou so much Daniel for all your work.Though I read and try to digest every post I'm glad for the pings!...."Therefore said he unto them, The harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth labourers into his harvest."...praise God for those He sends!

"It is truly vital to know all the words of God because He does not change:"

"...If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."..."Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."..."I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name."

>>There is much that was passed down sola word-of-mouth, and more that we received through personal revelations.<<

So what’s your provable source for what the apostles taught that wasn’t written by them in the written record we have?

1 Corinthians 4:6 And these things, brethren, I did transfer to myself and to Apollos because of you, that in us ye may learn not to think above that which hath been written, that ye may not be puffed up one for one against the other,

There is much that was passed down sola word-of-mouth, and more that we received through personal revelations.

Well just post one then...If there is ANY truth to your statement, just post a single one of those things...Anything???

All The Apostles and Jesus were Baptized entire Families from the Youngest to the oldest were Baptized.

Baptized, baptizō, to immerse, to submerge, not sprinkle unless that is all one can do. Baptism pictures death and resurrection, (Rm. 6:3,4) and you do not bury souls by just sprinkling them.

Somehow as an associated reform Presbyterian or a Non Denominational Calvary Church it’s not necessary..

That would be a fringe church, as Presbyterians support it, but with a poster stating according to one survey, 90% of congregations sprinkle; 7% pour; 1% immerse; and 2% submerse.

And Calvary Chapels practice believer's baptism by immersion.

The Catholic Church Has Apostolic Succession..

Catholic Church Has Assertions. Her messy (up to 3 years vacancy, rival popes and uncertainty which is right, immoral popes, etc.) unbroken succession does not constitute Apostolic Succession, even if it were not scandalous.

For she fails of the qualifications and attestation given to those whose chair she presumes to fill, and Scriptural record, and is contrary to them. See above and 265

That says don’t add to or subtract from the Bible. It does not say, nor does it imply, that the Bible is all there is.

The apostle John already told us that no more knowledge than what he has written is required for us to receive salvation...That part of the argument is settled...It is recorded in scripture...It is a done deal...

>>Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men - Mark 7:7<<

That should frighten even the most ardent Catholic into understanding that the Catholic Church teaches doctrines not taught in scripture. It’s possible to worship God in vain. What a sobering thought.

Well you will answer for sewing division in the Body.

We would all be more impressed if you used the correct words in context: sew 1

verb (used with object), sewed, sewn or sewed, sew·ing. 1. to join or attach by stitches.

2. to make, repair, etc., (a garment) by such means.

3. to enclose or secure with stitches: to sew flour in a bag.

4. to close (a hole, wound, etc.) by means of stitches (usually followed by up ).

verb (used without object), sewed, sewn or sewed, sew·ing. 5. to work with a needle and thread or with a sewing machine.

The word you actually meant to use: sow 1 verb (used with object), sowed, sown or sowed, sow·ing.

1. to scatter (seed) over land, earth, etc., for growth; plant.

2. to plant seed for: to sow a crop.

3. to scatter seed over (land, earth, etc.) for the purpose of growth.

4. to implant, introduce, or promulgate; seek to propagate or extend; disseminate: to sow distrust or dissension.

5. to strew or sprinkle with anything.

I can’t give an exact date, but we know from Scripture it began in the earliest days as the Roman Catholic Church was forming. Century by century she heaped new errors upon old errors, new heresies upon old heresies. She gradually grafted ancient pagan practices into her system and forced them upon her congregants. It took centuries for anything resembling the papacy to develop. But once there was a pope, people didn’t kiss his toe on day one, nor did they worship (or “venerate”) relics, idols, and images on day one, nor did they cite vain rosaries on day one. For instance, it wasn’t until 998 (some list other dates, but 998 is most oft cited) that, despite Matthew 15:10-11, fish on Fridays was mandated. Adoration of the host (the wafer god made by human hands) wasn’t mandated until the 13th century. I believe it was Honorius who added that bit of blasphemous idolatry. She has continued to add new practices and dogmas all the way to the present era.

“And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.”
—Matthew 15:10-11

Writing of the “son of perdition” who would be revealed in time, the Apostle Paul said, “For the mystery of iniquity doth already work...”

The Catholic Church corrupted what was in the Greek manuscripts which have been proven.

Would this be the exact same Greek manuscript used when translating the KJV,NIV, etc...? You don't have to answer Christians know the answer.

If you’d take the time to read a bible you’d know that Jesus Christ is the Word...The scripture is the word...

So according to your (il)logic, Jesus is scripture.

>>how about the word “alone” that Luther inserted after the word “faith”<< You sure do ask a lot of questions without answering mine. What’s up with that? How about you show us another provable source for what the apostles taught.

To be clear, I'm not arguing for apostolic tradition as some are on this blog.