Apostolic

What special qualities does touching infer?

For all the Prots in here:

You say you only believe things that are stated in the Bible (Sola Scriptura).

You also believe that the specific 27 books in the New Testament are the true infallible word of God, and not other works like the Didache or Gospel of Peter/Thomas etc.

My question is: where in the Bible does it say or infer that those specific 27 books are the infallible word of God?

It doesn't. By believing those books belong in the New Testament, you are actually relying on church tradition for that belief.

Most traditional Protestants are fine with tradition. The point of Sola Scriptura is that when tradition and scripture collide, one beats out the other.

Now, can you answer my questions on apostolic succession?

Are you telling me that you believe your canon of scripture merely because your church tells it to you? No questions asked?

(1) I ask that because irl when talking to baptists/ non denoms the automatic phrase brought up is "that's not Biblical". And when you do show a passage about that topic they just brush it off saying "thats a wrong interpretation"

Anyways, Apostolic succession as I understand it starts with Jesus. When he tells Peter "you are Petros [greek meaning stone/boulder], and on this rock I will build my church and I will give you the keys to my kingdom" something like that.

Catholics believe this is referencing the Old Testament where when the King of Israel was absent, a Prime Minister would tend to the people in his absence. Essentially, we believe he became a stand-in for Jesus (though we do NOT believe Peter or Pope is/was divine; just wanna get that point across)

So Peter leaves Jerusalem, starts a church in Antioch. Once its built, he goes to Rome because at that time, it was the hub of the world so what better place to plant another church and spread the word?

He sets up the church there and becomes the Bishop of Rome. After a number of years he is sentenced to death in Rome. Not sure when in relation to that, but before he died he appointed the next Bishop of Rome.

that your parish/priest/bishop was consecrated/ordained by someone who was ordained by someone who was ordained by...who was ordained by one of the Apostles.

and what special properties does this confer?

After learning the history on how it was compiled and disputed in early church councils by the proteges of the Apostles, yes

(2) After that new Bishop was appointed, there has been a continued chain of leaders of the church to the modern day Pope - for the most part

There is some controversy in Papal lineage in a few periods, but ultimately it has remained the same church with the same teachings as the Apostles.

It means they claim they come from the apostles, even though they follow almost nothing that they taught.
youtu.be/cjpLdHCMsCU

Attached: _catholic practices versus scripture.png (1089x768, 66.88K)

They act on behalf of the Church and as a vessel for God to work through them.

So in confession - I believe - the priest isn't actually the one forgiving your sins, he's doing it on behalf of Jesus

It's easy to tell the Abrahamic religions are man-made hierarchies.

I speak for most learned Protestants when I say we do not take the word of any church as true on its face, on this topic or any others
The historical case is sound, and we have the arguments historically made around each books inclusion to consider.

We do not rely on some decree of tradition to arrive at the canon. We rely on our ancestors for having preserved the books, but not "relying on church tradition for this belief" in your words.
Not that it would be a contradiction with sola scriptura if we did by the way

Why does Jesus need an intermediary?

I'm not going to waste an hour pointing out how little you understand Catholicism. If you're truly confident in your perspective of Christianity, why don't you learn more about Catholicism from actual Catholic sources, not your Protestant friends

It's symbolic. There is a link of hands throughout history and clergy all the way to Christ, from Christ to God.

You are doing well with ebonics and acronyms! Keep it up, I can understand you!

If it is symbolic, why does it matter?

He doesn't

Same reason why Jesus set his Apostles out to forgive sins on his behalf, after Christ had already risen from the dead.

John 20: 19-23

It is a direct contradiction to Sola Scriptura because you're literally believing something not in scripture

Also check'em

So if one does not have their sins forgiven by a member of the canonical Catholic church (Rome) who himself was the latest of an unbroken line of clergymen who confer this forgiving power onto each other, your sins are not forgiven?

"Sola scriptura" does not mean "scripture alone".

That's not what sola scriptura means
why don't you learn more about Protestantism from actual Protestant sources, not your Catholic friends

It means scripture alone as the final authority in doctrine
The related doctrine of the sufficiency of scripture means the scripture contains all necessary teaching for Christian theology

>if it involves the spirit why does it matter
nigger if you don't see the significance of a series of handshakes and teachings going all the way back to the living christ i don't know what to tell you

post-hoc justification. Please try again.

Catholics believe you're forgiven if you see a priest

OR

Confessing to God directly while being contrite and truly remorseful and truly wanting to change your ways

Catholics like confession because you actually receive feedback and the priest can counsel you. Not sure if they need to precisely be Catholic or not

Also, what do you mean? Obviously it directly translates to Scripture Alone, but are you insinuating something else?