L
lanman87
Guest
Yes, at the time the Apostles and Elders were teaching the Gospel orally and in writings. The writings are what became Scripture and became the tool by which the later church defended and taught the Gospel.
- Status
H
HopkinsReb
Guest
No, but I also wouldn’t say that about the Bible. Rather, I think I’d say they’re God-guided.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Sure, it became one of the tools the Church later used.Vonsalza:
Yes, at the time the Apostles and Elders were teaching the Gospel orally and in writings. The writings are what became Scripture and became the tool by which the later church defended and taught the Gospel.
The very same visible, tiered Church Christ established before a single word of the NT was even written.
And per the words of Paul himself, scripture and tradition were going to be the norms for the Church.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
So you don’t think 2 Tim 3:16 applies to the New Testament…
16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God[b] may be complete, equipped for every good work.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Sure. Which at the time meant the different collections of Jewish writings (since the Old Testament didn’t exist in that form yet).HopkinsReb:
So you don’t think 2 Tim 3:16 applies to the New Testament…
16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God[b] may be complete, equipped for every good work.
That’s actually the actual texts he’s writing about there…
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
I will gladly hold to any tradition that can be shown to have been taught by the Apostles.
L
lanman87
Guest
Yes, but does it apply to the New Testament as well?
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Oh, don’t put words in Pauls mouth, Ian. He didn’t add “as spoken by the apostles” to that verse.theCardinalbird:
I will gladly hold to any tradition that can be shown to have been taught by the Apostles.
You did.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
As a single collection of texts? How could it? It didn’t exist.Vonsalza:
Yes, but does it apply to the New Testament as well?
T
theCardinalbird
Guest
It was the tradition handed down from the Apostles to their successors and to those successors after them and to those successors after them and it is the same tradition that we still see in the Catholic Church of today and has been preserved by Apostolic Succession
L
lanman87
Guest
I didn’t say that. I said that was taught by the Apostles.
For something to be a tradition in this context it has to be something “taught by us”.
H
HopkinsReb
Guest
What I mean is I don’t think He was dictating. Metaphors get confusing.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
I gotta go, but consider for yourself why Paul was considered an apostle.
Was he one of the original 12? No…
There were lots of “prophets” in ancient days. It was one way to make a living if you were a charismatic speaker.
What set Paul apart from all the other hacks that claimed to be a preacher for Christ is the actual fact that he was confirmed as an apostle by none other than St. Peter himself, temporal head of the visible Church.
And per later writings, this authority was to be passed on by the visible laying-on-hands of the leaders of that visible Church.
No room here for false-prophets that didn’t bear this visible mark.
Was he one of the original 12? No…
There were lots of “prophets” in ancient days. It was one way to make a living if you were a charismatic speaker.
What set Paul apart from all the other hacks that claimed to be a preacher for Christ is the actual fact that he was confirmed as an apostle by none other than St. Peter himself, temporal head of the visible Church.
And per later writings, this authority was to be passed on by the visible laying-on-hands of the leaders of that visible Church.
No room here for false-prophets that didn’t bear this visible mark.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
I though you said you were a solo or sola scripturist?
Where does it say THAT in scripture? Nowhere…
Been fun gents. I gotta go.
L
lanman87
Guest
So which apostle taught the assumption of Mary?
Which apostle taught the infallibility of the Pope?
If it was handing down then surely you know which apostle taught and when and to whom? And even if you could give me a list, how do I know you didn’t just make it up? or someone in 1450 didn’t make it up, or someone in 450 didn’t make it up?
L
ltwin
Guest
All churches hold to traditions, and those who say they don’t aren’t being honest. Having Holy Communion weekly, monthly or quarterly is a tradition, for example.
Sola Scriptura essentially is the idea that the church should not claim any tradition, practice or doctrine to be infallible or necessary to salvation unless these can be proven by Scripture. Scripture alone is the infallible authority.
The 39 Articles of Religion puts it this way:
“Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.”
The Westminster Confession puts it this way:
“VI. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.[12] Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word:[13] and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature, and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed.[14]”
Now, different Protestant churches apply Sola Scriptura in different ways and to different degrees. Ash Wednesday is a good example of this.
Some Protestants would say Ash Wednesday is not in the Bible, and therefore it is forbidden. Others would say that Ash Wednesday is not a necessary tradition, but it can be a beneficial observance as long as no one is made to feel like they have to take part.
Last edited:
T
theCardinalbird
Guest
Why do the Apostles and only the Apostles have the only teaching power of the Church? Why not their successors? Christ sent a paraclete after all.
The Apostles chose successors to carry on the mission of the Church, settle doctrinal disputes that often arose among the faithful. Do you really think that the biblical records are the only way the Church can be sure of God’s ordinances?
For crying out loud, the question of whether Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ was a created being or true God and true man was not settled by the Bible and only the Bible, after all Arius (major supporter and author of the Arian heresy) and Athanasius (Major defender of Orthodox Christianity) both used the Bible and the Holy Apostles words to support their beliefs. But guess what triumphed in the end? Sacred Tradition, which only was being called into question because a faction in the Church was going against it.
Did Christ say that he will be with the Church up until the Apostles’ death? Or did he say he will be with the Church always? Wouldn’t Christ be smart enough to endow the Apostles with authority which can be later passed on to their successors?
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
The successors must teach what the apostles taught. Apostolic Succession was about the Apostolic teachings being preserved not Apostolic revelation, which all agree ceased when the last Apostle died (or the revelation to that last apostle ceased).
The Biblical records are the only way to be sure of what the Apostles actually taught. Any tradition or teaching that deviates from that is no longer apostolic. The question then becomes, “How do we know if our tradition or teaching is apostolic or not”? The Catholic answer is “Because we say so”. The Protestant answer is because it is affirmed by Scripture.
It doesn’t meant that everything we do has to be in scripture. There is no command to have Sunday School in scripture. However, there is the instruction to teach the Gospel. Sunday School is a practical way in our modern culture to put the Gospel into action. It is a way we teach the Gospel.
Last edited:
H
HopkinsReb
Guest
So, again, how do we know which books constitute scripture? The Apostles didn’t leave us a list.
- Status