M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Theodoret
“I shall yield to scripture alone.” - Theodoret
“I shall yield to scripture alone.” - Theodoret
- Status
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Jerome
“When, then, anything in my little work seems to you harsh, have regard not to my words, but to the Scripture, whence they are taken.” - Jerome (Letter 48:20)
“I beg of you, my dear brother, to live among these books [scripture], to meditate upon them, to know nothing else, to seek nothing else.” - Jerome (Letter 53:10)
“When, then, anything in my little work seems to you harsh, have regard not to my words, but to the Scripture, whence they are taken.” - Jerome (Letter 48:20)
“I beg of you, my dear brother, to live among these books [scripture], to meditate upon them, to know nothing else, to seek nothing else.” - Jerome (Letter 53:10)
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Hilary of Poitiers
“Their treason involves us in the difficult and dangerous position of having to make a definite pronouncement, beyond the statements of Scripture, upon this grave and abstruse matter…We must proclaim, exactly as we shall find them in the words of Scripture, the majesty and functions of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and so debar the heretics from robbing these Names of their connotation of Divine character, and compel them by means of these very Names to confine their use of terms to their proper meaning…I would not have you flatter the Son with praises of your own invention; it is well with you if you be satisfied with the written word.” - Hilary of Poitiers (On the Trinity, 2:5, 3:23)
“Their treason involves us in the difficult and dangerous position of having to make a definite pronouncement, beyond the statements of Scripture, upon this grave and abstruse matter…We must proclaim, exactly as we shall find them in the words of Scripture, the majesty and functions of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and so debar the heretics from robbing these Names of their connotation of Divine character, and compel them by means of these very Names to confine their use of terms to their proper meaning…I would not have you flatter the Son with praises of your own invention; it is well with you if you be satisfied with the written word.” - Hilary of Poitiers (On the Trinity, 2:5, 3:23)
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Gregory of Nyssa
“we make the Holy Scriptures the rule and the measure of every tenet; we necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonize with the intention of those writings…And to those who are expert only in the technical methods of proof a mere demonstration suffices to convince; but as for ourselves, we were agreed that there is something more trustworthy than any of these artificial conclusions, namely, that which the teachings of Holy Scripture point to: and so I deem that it is necessary to inquire, in addition to what has been said, whether this inspired teaching harmonizes with it all. And who, she replied, could deny that truth is to be found only in that upon which the seal of Scriptural testimony is set?” - Macrina and Gregory of Nyssa (On the Soul and the Resurrection)
“we make the Holy Scriptures the rule and the measure of every tenet; we necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonize with the intention of those writings…And to those who are expert only in the technical methods of proof a mere demonstration suffices to convince; but as for ourselves, we were agreed that there is something more trustworthy than any of these artificial conclusions, namely, that which the teachings of Holy Scripture point to: and so I deem that it is necessary to inquire, in addition to what has been said, whether this inspired teaching harmonizes with it all. And who, she replied, could deny that truth is to be found only in that upon which the seal of Scriptural testimony is set?” - Macrina and Gregory of Nyssa (On the Soul and the Resurrection)
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Justin Martyr
“Pay attention, therefore, to what I shall record out of the holy Scriptures, which do not need to be expounded, but only listened to.” - Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho, 55)
“Pay attention, therefore, to what I shall record out of the holy Scriptures, which do not need to be expounded, but only listened to.” - Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho, 55)
B
Bwavenit
Guest
Check out William Jurgens
**"Faith of the early Fathers"Volume 1.**great book explains the teaching of the fathers by docturn
48 entries on sacred tradtion!
**"Faith of the early Fathers"Volume 1.**great book explains the teaching of the fathers by docturn
48 entries on sacred tradtion!
B
Bwavenit
Guest
check out this website for the rest of the statement.
socrates58.blogspot.com/2006/11/reply-to-jason-engwers-catholic-but.html
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Dave Armstrongs response is weak at best… It certainly doesn’t put Theodorets comments in any different light it only stands to throw more vegetables in a meat only stew…
R
runandsew
Guest
I really appreciate those quotes myfavoritmartin, but did those writers also write about the authority of apostolic tradition, or did they just write about scripture alone being the final authority? As Catholics we believe that only scripture alone is inspired. We do not believe that the traditions or the Magisterium are inspired, we believe that the Holy Spirit leads the Church from straying from away from the truth, but only Scripture is inspired, therefore it is unique.
You might say we believe in "Prima Scriptura
You might say we believe in "Prima Scriptura
R
runandsew
Guest
Papias
Whenever anyone came my way, who had been a follower of my seniors, I would ask for the accounts of our seniors: What did Andrew or Peter say? Or Phillip or Thomas or James or John or Matthew, or any of the Lord’s disciples? I also asked: What did Aristion and John the Presbyter, disciples of the Lord say. For, as I see it, it is not so much from books as from the living and permanent voice that I must draw profit (The Sayings of the Lord [between A.D. 115 and 140] as recorded by Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3:39 [A.D. 325]).
Irenaeus
For even creation reveals Him who formed it, and the very work made suggests Him who made it, and the world manifests Him who ordered it. The Universal [Catholic] Church, moreover, through the whole world, has received this tradition from the Apostles (Against Heresies 2:9 [A.D. 189]).
True knowledge is the doctrine of the Apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout all the world, and the distinctive manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every place, and has come even unto us, being guarded and preserved, without any forging of Scriptures, by a very complete system of doctrine, and neither addition nor curtailment [in truths which she believes]; and [it consists in] reading [the Word of God] without falsification, and a lawful and diligent exposition in harmony with the Scriptures, both without danger and without blasphemy… (ibid. 4:33 [A.D. 189]).
Tertullian
For wherever both the true Christian rule and faith shall be shown to be, there will be the true Scriptures, and the true expositions, of all the true Christian traditions (The Prescription of Heretics 19 [A.D. 200]).
Origen
Seeing there are many who think they hold the opinions of Christ, and yet some of these think differently from their predecessors, yet as the teaching of the Church, transmitted in orderly succession from the Apostles, and remaining in the churches to the present day, is still preserved, that alone is to be accepted as truth which differs in no respect from ecclesiastical and apostolic tradition (On First Principles Bk. 1 Preface 2 [circa A.D. 225]).
Eusebius
While [Ignatius of Antioch] was making the journey through Asia under the strictest military guard, he strengthened the diocese in each city where he stayed by spoken sermons and exhortations, and he especially exhorted them above all to be on their guard against the heresies which then for the first time were prevalent and he urged them to hold fast to the tradition of the Apostles to which he thought it necessary, for securities sake, to give form by written testimony (Ecclesiastical History, 3:36 [A.D. 325]).
Athanasius
Without prefixing Consulate, month, and day, [the Fathers] wrote concerning Easter, “It seemed good as follows,” for it did then seem good that there should be a general compliance; but about the faith they wrote not, “It seemed good” but, “Thus believes the Catholic Church”; and thereupon they confessed how they believed, in order to show that their own sentiments were not novel, but Apostolic; and what they wrote down was no discovery of theirs, but is the same as was taught by the Apostles (Letter on the Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia [A.D. 359]).
Basil
Of the beliefs and practices whether generally accepted or publicly enjoined which are preserved in the Church some we possess derived from written teaching; others we have received delivered to us “in mystery” by the tradition of the Apostles; and both of these in relation to true religion have the same force. And these no one will contradict; - no one, at all events, who is even moderately versed in the institutions of the Church. For were we to attempt to reject such customs as have no written authority, on the ground that the importance they possess is small, we should unintentionally injure the Gospel in these matters… (On the Holy Spirit 27 [A.D. 375]).
Jerome
Don’t you know that the laying on of hands after baptism and then the invocation of the Holy Sirit is a custom of the Churches? Do you demand Scripture proof? You may find it in the Acts of the Apostles. And even if it did not rest on the authority of Scripture the consensus of the whole world in this respect would have the force of a command. For many other observances of the Churches, which are do to tradition, have acquired the authority of the written law (The Dialogue Against the Luciferians 8 [A.D. 382]).
Whenever anyone came my way, who had been a follower of my seniors, I would ask for the accounts of our seniors: What did Andrew or Peter say? Or Phillip or Thomas or James or John or Matthew, or any of the Lord’s disciples? I also asked: What did Aristion and John the Presbyter, disciples of the Lord say. For, as I see it, it is not so much from books as from the living and permanent voice that I must draw profit (The Sayings of the Lord [between A.D. 115 and 140] as recorded by Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3:39 [A.D. 325]).
Irenaeus
For even creation reveals Him who formed it, and the very work made suggests Him who made it, and the world manifests Him who ordered it. The Universal [Catholic] Church, moreover, through the whole world, has received this tradition from the Apostles (Against Heresies 2:9 [A.D. 189]).
True knowledge is the doctrine of the Apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout all the world, and the distinctive manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every place, and has come even unto us, being guarded and preserved, without any forging of Scriptures, by a very complete system of doctrine, and neither addition nor curtailment [in truths which she believes]; and [it consists in] reading [the Word of God] without falsification, and a lawful and diligent exposition in harmony with the Scriptures, both without danger and without blasphemy… (ibid. 4:33 [A.D. 189]).
Tertullian
For wherever both the true Christian rule and faith shall be shown to be, there will be the true Scriptures, and the true expositions, of all the true Christian traditions (The Prescription of Heretics 19 [A.D. 200]).
Origen
Seeing there are many who think they hold the opinions of Christ, and yet some of these think differently from their predecessors, yet as the teaching of the Church, transmitted in orderly succession from the Apostles, and remaining in the churches to the present day, is still preserved, that alone is to be accepted as truth which differs in no respect from ecclesiastical and apostolic tradition (On First Principles Bk. 1 Preface 2 [circa A.D. 225]).
Eusebius
While [Ignatius of Antioch] was making the journey through Asia under the strictest military guard, he strengthened the diocese in each city where he stayed by spoken sermons and exhortations, and he especially exhorted them above all to be on their guard against the heresies which then for the first time were prevalent and he urged them to hold fast to the tradition of the Apostles to which he thought it necessary, for securities sake, to give form by written testimony (Ecclesiastical History, 3:36 [A.D. 325]).
Athanasius
Without prefixing Consulate, month, and day, [the Fathers] wrote concerning Easter, “It seemed good as follows,” for it did then seem good that there should be a general compliance; but about the faith they wrote not, “It seemed good” but, “Thus believes the Catholic Church”; and thereupon they confessed how they believed, in order to show that their own sentiments were not novel, but Apostolic; and what they wrote down was no discovery of theirs, but is the same as was taught by the Apostles (Letter on the Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia [A.D. 359]).
Basil
Of the beliefs and practices whether generally accepted or publicly enjoined which are preserved in the Church some we possess derived from written teaching; others we have received delivered to us “in mystery” by the tradition of the Apostles; and both of these in relation to true religion have the same force. And these no one will contradict; - no one, at all events, who is even moderately versed in the institutions of the Church. For were we to attempt to reject such customs as have no written authority, on the ground that the importance they possess is small, we should unintentionally injure the Gospel in these matters… (On the Holy Spirit 27 [A.D. 375]).
Jerome
Don’t you know that the laying on of hands after baptism and then the invocation of the Holy Sirit is a custom of the Churches? Do you demand Scripture proof? You may find it in the Acts of the Apostles. And even if it did not rest on the authority of Scripture the consensus of the whole world in this respect would have the force of a command. For many other observances of the Churches, which are do to tradition, have acquired the authority of the written law (The Dialogue Against the Luciferians 8 [A.D. 382]).
R
runandsew
Guest
John Chrysostom
“So then brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours” (2 Thessalonians 2:15). Hence it is manifest, that they did not deliver all things by epistle, but many things also unwritten, and in like manner both the one and the other are worthy of credit. Therefore let us think the tradition of the Church also worthy of credit. It is a tradition, seek no farther (Homilies on Second Thessalonians [circa A.D. 400]).
Vincent of Lerins
I have often then inquired earnestly and attentively of very many men eminent for sanctity and learning, how and by what sure and so to speak universal rule I may be able to distinguish the truth of Catholic faith from the falsehood of heretical pravity; and I have always, and in almost every instance, received an answer to this effect: That whether I or any one else should wish to detect the frauds and avoid the snares of heretics as they rise, and to continue sound and complete in the Catholic faith, we must, the Lord helping, fortify our own belief n two ways: first, by the authority of the Divine Law, and then, by the Tradition of the Catholic Church (Commonitory 2 [A.D. 434])
Theodoret
I have ever kept the faith of the Apostles undefiled… So have I learnt not only from the Apostles and the Prophets but also from the interpreters of their writings, Ignatius, Eustathius, Athanasius, Basil, Gregory, John, and the rest of the lights of the world; and before these from the holy Fathers in council at Nicaea, whose confession of the faith I preserve in its integrity, like an ancestral inheritance [styling corrupt and enemies of the truth all who dare to transgress its decrees] (Letters no. 89 [circa A.D. 443]).
"
“So then brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours” (2 Thessalonians 2:15). Hence it is manifest, that they did not deliver all things by epistle, but many things also unwritten, and in like manner both the one and the other are worthy of credit. Therefore let us think the tradition of the Church also worthy of credit. It is a tradition, seek no farther (Homilies on Second Thessalonians [circa A.D. 400]).
Vincent of Lerins
I have often then inquired earnestly and attentively of very many men eminent for sanctity and learning, how and by what sure and so to speak universal rule I may be able to distinguish the truth of Catholic faith from the falsehood of heretical pravity; and I have always, and in almost every instance, received an answer to this effect: That whether I or any one else should wish to detect the frauds and avoid the snares of heretics as they rise, and to continue sound and complete in the Catholic faith, we must, the Lord helping, fortify our own belief n two ways: first, by the authority of the Divine Law, and then, by the Tradition of the Catholic Church (Commonitory 2 [A.D. 434])
Theodoret
I have ever kept the faith of the Apostles undefiled… So have I learnt not only from the Apostles and the Prophets but also from the interpreters of their writings, Ignatius, Eustathius, Athanasius, Basil, Gregory, John, and the rest of the lights of the world; and before these from the holy Fathers in council at Nicaea, whose confession of the faith I preserve in its integrity, like an ancestral inheritance [styling corrupt and enemies of the truth all who dare to transgress its decrees] (Letters no. 89 [circa A.D. 443]).
"
R
runandsew
Guest
I am confused, if the Early Church Fathers taught Sola Scriptura, why would they also teach the authority of Apostolic Tradition?
Wouldn’t you think that if you were teaching Sola Scriptura, that this would be the only authority that you would write about, wouldn’t it be hypocritical to also write that Tradition also has authority?
I realize that if you believe in Sola Scriptura, you will still follow some church tradition; but you do not believe that it is binding or infallible. But the passages of the ECF’s that Catholics quote seem to say that besides the fact that Scripture is authoritative, that the Apostolic Tradition is also binding upon the Christian.
Wouldn’t you think that if you were teaching Sola Scriptura, that this would be the only authority that you would write about, wouldn’t it be hypocritical to also write that Tradition also has authority?
I realize that if you believe in Sola Scriptura, you will still follow some church tradition; but you do not believe that it is binding or infallible. But the passages of the ECF’s that Catholics quote seem to say that besides the fact that Scripture is authoritative, that the Apostolic Tradition is also binding upon the Christian.
N
Nicene
Guest
Read it again, you just proved my point.
The very thing you reject is the very thing he upholds and who does he say raves about something different?
And in the same work (notice that he is very blunt about those who reject tradition:
2. But, again, when we refer them to that tradition which originates from the apostles, [and] which is preserved by means of the succession of presbyters in the Churches, they object to tradition, saying that they themselves are wiser not merely than the presbyters, but even than the apostles, because they have discovered the unadulterated truth. For [they maintain] that the apostles intermingled the things of the law with the words of the Saviour; and that not the apostles alone, but even the Lord Himself, spoke as at one time from the Demiurge, at another from the intermediate place, and yet again from the Pleroma, but that they themselves, indubitably, unsulliedly, and purely, have knowledge of the hidden mystery: this is, indeed, to blaspheme their Creator after a most impudent manner! It comes to this, therefore, that these men do now consent neither to Scripture nor to tradition.
Does the above sound familiar?
There is quite a bit more that Iranaeus has to say about tradition, would you care to go through it? Aren’t tou taking Iranaeus out of context? (not a surprise)
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
N
Nicene
Guest
Lets look at 1 Cor 4:6 sinse you brought it up. Isn’t in fact Paul speaking about v 1:19, 31, 3:19- 20 in context of his letter?
If it is as you assert then (and if Paul considers what he writes to be canon, of which he gives no indication) then Thessalonians (written between 50-52) can be the only NT work he can speak of. Every other epistle and gospel was written after 54 when Corinthians was written. Please tell me that protestants don’t reject the Gospels and Epistles except for Corinthians and Thessalonians, and only accept the OT.
It is impossible to interpret your meaning any other way sinse the Gospels hadn’t been written yet and Paul knew nothing about their writing as a reference.
Is that the protestant assertion?
The test of integrity with honesty towards Gods word whether Paul was referring to anything else will be evident in your answer.
Do protestants accept the rest of the bulk of canon written after Corinthians? If so then the rest of your presentation above must be declared false.
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
N
Nicene
Guest
Umm exactly where is he saying scripture alone? He in fact is saying to listen to what he has to say concerning particular scriptures is he not?
Sinse you accept Justin Martyr as a reliable source as to what the true church believes and practices:
St. Justin Martyr Dialogue with Trypho, 100:5
*He became man by the Virgin, in order that the disobedience which proceeded from the serpent might receive its destruction in the same manner in which it derived its origin. For Eve, who was a virgin and undefiled, having conceived the word of the serpent, brought forth disobedience and death. But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy, when the angel Gabriel announced the good tidings to her that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her, and the power of the Highest would overshadow her: wherefore also the Holy Thing begotten of her is the Son of God; and she replied, ‘Be it unto me according to thy word.’ *
Protestants do believe Mary is the new Eve correct?
St. Justin Martyr First Apology, 61
*As many as are persuaded and believe that what we teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, are instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we praying and fasting with them. Then they are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, “Except ye be born again, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” *
Protestants believe that baptism is regenerative and not a symbol, correct?
St. Justin Martyr First Apology 66
And this food is called among us Eukaristia [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.
That the Eucharist is the real presence of Christ, his flesh and blood, correct?
St. Justin Martyr on the sacrifice of the Mass
On the day we call the day of the sun, all who dwell in the city or country gather in the same place.
The memoirs of the apostles and the writings of the prophets are read, as much as time permits.
When the reader has finished, he who presides over those gathered admonishes and challenges them to imitate these beautiful things.
Then we all rise together and offer prayers for ourselves . . .and for all others, wherever they may be, so that we may be found righteous by our life and actions, and faithful to the commandments, so as to obtain eternal salvation.
When the prayers are concluded we exchange the kiss.
Then someone brings bread and a cup of water and wine mixed together to him who presides over the brethren.
He takes them and offers praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and for a considerable time he gives thanks (in Greek: eucharistian) that we have been judged worthy of these gifts.
When he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all present give voice to an acclamation by saying: ‘Amen.’
When he who presides has given thanks and the people have responded, those whom we call deacons give to those present the “eucharisted” bread, wine and water and take them to those who are absent.*
Protestants do have the sacrifice of the Mass, correct? (Exactly the same today as 2000 years ago)
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
N
Nicene
Guest
Several points, which will take different posts to cover each effectively. Apostles means those who are “sent.” According to sacred scripture they passed on their apostolic offices through the laying on of hands, yet protestants don’t believe scripture in this.
First lets deal with God breathed Paul does tell us what scripture is for and it’s place:
16: All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
It is profitable and “theopneustos” inspired and yet before you go on with God breathed:
Jn 20:22: And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
23: If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”
It is a fundamental misunderstanding of the word theopneustos which is inspired by God and enephusêsen Jesus truly breathing on them as God did in Genesis with Adam. Christ breathes life into the church. One inspires; theopneustos. One gives authority: enephusêsen. Tough to top that.
Christ also promises in John:
Jn 14:16: And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you for ever,
17: even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him; you know him, for he dwells with you, and will be in you.
The reason for this? The word is living it is not read. The church is given authority, not scripture:
1 Tim 3:15: if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.
Jesus establishes this premise. He doesn’t say consult scripture, he says take it to the church and they will make the decision:
Mt 18:17: If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
18: Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
While the church may and will indeed consult scripture (particularly on doctrinal matters) the final authority is given to the church with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This is divine establishment.
Peter tells us about those who corrupt scripture as with 1 Tim 3:15:
2 Pet 3:16: speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures.
Protestants do believe Jesus is God do they not?
If there are no more apostles as postulated by protestants above then there is no more God breathed forgiveness and life in the church. The gates of hell prevailed against the church. If you claim the bible can forgive sins as the pillar and foundation of truth then you deify the bible, making it God.
Is this the protestant position?
Next we shall deal with Apostolic succession according to the bible.
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
N
Nicene
Guest
(reposted from old post of mine)
Sacred scripture is clearly on the catholic side here as God clearly intended to set up a heirarchy as demonstrated by Christ then the apostles by appointing bishops and laying hands on them.
You have forgotten one important element. The existance of the Catholic epistles in the first place. As well the existance of the Pauline letters.
For example, Paul did not found the church in Colossae, Ep’aphras did, a disciple of Paul. Yet Paul writes to them. I would say it is a good bet that he expects to be listened to. Under the local church theory, they don’t have to. Yet in Timothy some have decided to do just that and go their own way, starting their own churches. What does Paul have to say about that? What does Paul say about sticking with sound doctrine? Romans, Paul did not initially establish that church, he tells them he wishes to visit them. Yet again he expects to be listened to.
Next the catholic epistles (some protestants call them the general epistles now). They were to be sent to all the churches. James, John, Peter and Jude. To churches they had not established and to ones they had. Yet again, they expected to be adhered to. Under the local church theory they have no obligation to do so at all, they can toss the letters out if they want, because under the local church theory they can make doctrine.
Paul tells us (in Thessalonias and Timothy), and in Acts it is shown by Peter, the disposition of “Laying on of Hands”
Now under the local theory you have proposed they no longer have to listen to the apostles, the bishops themselves (appparenly they can now under this new guise ordain themselves) are unanswerable to anyone: meaning they don’t have to listen to the apostolic epistles. So the Church in Collossae established by Ep’aphras has no obligation to listen to the catholic epistles of James, John, Peter and Jude, not to mention the letter from Paul.
Somehow this local church, run by the local bishop, elected by himself (no laying on of hands), with authority to set doctrine doesn’t hold tenable by the very existance of those epistles outside of what the epistles themselves say.
The existance of the epistles themselves show the apostolic belief and intent of a church one and unified. They are building a church, it starts with a foundation, and the apostles are it. The apostles didn’t start with a finished product and build towards a foundation, just the opposite. In Timothy (Tim 1:6), we see and it is stated about the trasition of power (Tim 1:7) (not power in the traditional sense, but in the same power that Christ confers to the apostles). The Apostles confer power, “In persona Christi” (Paul 2 Cor 2:10) Timothy is also told to confer those same ecclesial powers on. Christ’s power is not intangible as the local church would have us believe, not a theologic thought, but a reality.
All of this is to fulfil Christs promises in John:
John 17:9: I am praying for them; I am not praying for the world but for those whom thou hast given me, for they are thine; 10: all mine are thine, and thine are mine, and I am glorified in them. 11: And now I am no more in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to thee. Holy Father, keep them in thy name, which thou hast given me, that they may be one, even as we are one.
Inherantly you say this prayer for the apostles was not answered. If it is not answered then Christ is A. a sinner, B. lost his faith, or C. is not who he says he is. In other words, as someone said to me recently, theologic suicide.
John 14:16: And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you for ever,
Sinse the apostles won’t be here forever on earth how can this be. Of course the apostles confer that power on: Again Tim, Corinthians, Acts, Tit, Mal, Eph. How do they appoint presbyters in every town? Laying on of hands.
Your arguement is untennable, the very existance of the episltes is testament to that. They were building, not starting with a completed building. You are attempting to tear away the building and start a new foundation. So either we trust the apostles and their mission, or we trust someone 2000 years later in a new church how it is. Under what authority do you deign to tell christianity how it is to be structured? For us, we state uncategorically, scripturally (which you claim not to deny) it is through the apostles and the imposition of hands, conferring the real and tangible power of Christ to bind and loose.
Of course sinse there is no authority as you claim, all the Pauline and Catholic epistles hold no wieght whatsoever. No one needs to listen to them under the protestant belief because there are no leaders to whom we are supposed to listen, including those sent out by Christ, it’s all local. Which makes all the new testament epistles in fact not inspired by God.
Again, your position is untennable.
Do protestants refute sacred scriptue yet again?
Lastly we will deal with what is the true church, the pillar and foundation of truth.
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
Sacred scripture is clearly on the catholic side here as God clearly intended to set up a heirarchy as demonstrated by Christ then the apostles by appointing bishops and laying hands on them.
You have forgotten one important element. The existance of the Catholic epistles in the first place. As well the existance of the Pauline letters.
For example, Paul did not found the church in Colossae, Ep’aphras did, a disciple of Paul. Yet Paul writes to them. I would say it is a good bet that he expects to be listened to. Under the local church theory, they don’t have to. Yet in Timothy some have decided to do just that and go their own way, starting their own churches. What does Paul have to say about that? What does Paul say about sticking with sound doctrine? Romans, Paul did not initially establish that church, he tells them he wishes to visit them. Yet again he expects to be listened to.
Next the catholic epistles (some protestants call them the general epistles now). They were to be sent to all the churches. James, John, Peter and Jude. To churches they had not established and to ones they had. Yet again, they expected to be adhered to. Under the local church theory they have no obligation to do so at all, they can toss the letters out if they want, because under the local church theory they can make doctrine.
Paul tells us (in Thessalonias and Timothy), and in Acts it is shown by Peter, the disposition of “Laying on of Hands”
Now under the local theory you have proposed they no longer have to listen to the apostles, the bishops themselves (appparenly they can now under this new guise ordain themselves) are unanswerable to anyone: meaning they don’t have to listen to the apostolic epistles. So the Church in Collossae established by Ep’aphras has no obligation to listen to the catholic epistles of James, John, Peter and Jude, not to mention the letter from Paul.
Somehow this local church, run by the local bishop, elected by himself (no laying on of hands), with authority to set doctrine doesn’t hold tenable by the very existance of those epistles outside of what the epistles themselves say.
The existance of the epistles themselves show the apostolic belief and intent of a church one and unified. They are building a church, it starts with a foundation, and the apostles are it. The apostles didn’t start with a finished product and build towards a foundation, just the opposite. In Timothy (Tim 1:6), we see and it is stated about the trasition of power (Tim 1:7) (not power in the traditional sense, but in the same power that Christ confers to the apostles). The Apostles confer power, “In persona Christi” (Paul 2 Cor 2:10) Timothy is also told to confer those same ecclesial powers on. Christ’s power is not intangible as the local church would have us believe, not a theologic thought, but a reality.
All of this is to fulfil Christs promises in John:
John 17:9: I am praying for them; I am not praying for the world but for those whom thou hast given me, for they are thine; 10: all mine are thine, and thine are mine, and I am glorified in them. 11: And now I am no more in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to thee. Holy Father, keep them in thy name, which thou hast given me, that they may be one, even as we are one.
Inherantly you say this prayer for the apostles was not answered. If it is not answered then Christ is A. a sinner, B. lost his faith, or C. is not who he says he is. In other words, as someone said to me recently, theologic suicide.
John 14:16: And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you for ever,
Sinse the apostles won’t be here forever on earth how can this be. Of course the apostles confer that power on: Again Tim, Corinthians, Acts, Tit, Mal, Eph. How do they appoint presbyters in every town? Laying on of hands.
Your arguement is untennable, the very existance of the episltes is testament to that. They were building, not starting with a completed building. You are attempting to tear away the building and start a new foundation. So either we trust the apostles and their mission, or we trust someone 2000 years later in a new church how it is. Under what authority do you deign to tell christianity how it is to be structured? For us, we state uncategorically, scripturally (which you claim not to deny) it is through the apostles and the imposition of hands, conferring the real and tangible power of Christ to bind and loose.
Of course sinse there is no authority as you claim, all the Pauline and Catholic epistles hold no wieght whatsoever. No one needs to listen to them under the protestant belief because there are no leaders to whom we are supposed to listen, including those sent out by Christ, it’s all local. Which makes all the new testament epistles in fact not inspired by God.
Again, your position is untennable.
Do protestants refute sacred scriptue yet again?
Lastly we will deal with what is the true church, the pillar and foundation of truth.
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
N
Nicene
Guest
Paul and Jesus tell us straight out what the true church is. The Apostles are the pillars and foundation.
1 Tim 3:15: if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.
Housed in each person, the ekklesia:
1 Cor 6:19: Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God? You are not your own;
Jn 6:55: For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56: He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.
Jn 14:23: Jesus answered him, "If a man loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.
which are built up into a spiritual house, the church of the living God, supported by the pillars and foundation
Eph 2:19: So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,
20: built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone,
21: in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord;
22: in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.
Which house the truth:
Jn 14:6: Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me.
This is the truth which the real church proclaims and houses. It is the house of the living God in communion with the trinity in reality. Each person a spiritual temple, each spiritual temple a stone, held up by the apostles and teachings, with the Lord as the cornerstone, which houses the truth, Jesus Christ. The curtain was torn so this reality could come into existance. God is not just approachable now, he is with us, he is around us, he is in us. The temple was destroyed and replaced with a living temple: the church.
The picture we can paint is a building housing the living God in catholic belief.
This is the church that is everywhere:
Acts 9:31: So the church throughout all - καθ ολης (catholic) Judea and Galilee and Sama’ria had peace and was built up; and walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit it was multiplied.
9:31 αι μεν ουν εκκλησιαι καθ ολης της ιουδαιας και γαλιλαιας και σαμαρειας ειχον ειρηνην οικοδομουμεναι και πορευομεναι τω φοβω του κυριου και τη παρακλησει του αγιου πνευματος επληθυνοντο
The Apocalypse is a revealing; revelation, not something hidden. I would suggest carefully going through with an eye towards covenant. It will show the temple, the gates, the foundations, the heavenly and earthly worship. The lamb that was slaughtered. What is used in the worship, how the body is used in worship. It reveals worship in truth and spirit.
This is the catholic church.
Do the protestants still maintain after all this that the apostles are no more? If so, then there are no more preachers, prophets, teachers etc. Do protestants actually not believe and refute Paul when he writes?:
13: For, “every one who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved.”
14: But how are men to call upon him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher?
15: And how can men preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach good news!”
Sent ones are the apostles, and those “sent” after them (also apostles, through the laying on of hands) which has been shown through scripture that Christ and the apostles intended and practiced.
Do protestants yet again not believe sacred scripture and refute it by saying there are no more apostles? If no one has been sent (and biblically we have been shown how) then there is no one to call upon, no one to hear the truth because there is no one “sent” to preach.
According to sacred scripture one must be sent, not just someone who decides he wants to. Apostolic succession. Do protestants really believe sacred scripture a lie? If the above scripture is rejected thee is no other conclusion.
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
1 Tim 3:15: if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.
Housed in each person, the ekklesia:
1 Cor 6:19: Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God? You are not your own;
Jn 6:55: For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56: He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.
Jn 14:23: Jesus answered him, "If a man loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.
which are built up into a spiritual house, the church of the living God, supported by the pillars and foundation
Eph 2:19: So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,
20: built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone,
21: in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord;
22: in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.
Which house the truth:
Jn 14:6: Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me.
This is the truth which the real church proclaims and houses. It is the house of the living God in communion with the trinity in reality. Each person a spiritual temple, each spiritual temple a stone, held up by the apostles and teachings, with the Lord as the cornerstone, which houses the truth, Jesus Christ. The curtain was torn so this reality could come into existance. God is not just approachable now, he is with us, he is around us, he is in us. The temple was destroyed and replaced with a living temple: the church.
The picture we can paint is a building housing the living God in catholic belief.
This is the church that is everywhere:
Acts 9:31: So the church throughout all - καθ ολης (catholic) Judea and Galilee and Sama’ria had peace and was built up; and walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit it was multiplied.
9:31 αι μεν ουν εκκλησιαι καθ ολης της ιουδαιας και γαλιλαιας και σαμαρειας ειχον ειρηνην οικοδομουμεναι και πορευομεναι τω φοβω του κυριου και τη παρακλησει του αγιου πνευματος επληθυνοντο
The Apocalypse is a revealing; revelation, not something hidden. I would suggest carefully going through with an eye towards covenant. It will show the temple, the gates, the foundations, the heavenly and earthly worship. The lamb that was slaughtered. What is used in the worship, how the body is used in worship. It reveals worship in truth and spirit.
This is the catholic church.
Do the protestants still maintain after all this that the apostles are no more? If so, then there are no more preachers, prophets, teachers etc. Do protestants actually not believe and refute Paul when he writes?:
13: For, “every one who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved.”
14: But how are men to call upon him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher?
15: And how can men preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach good news!”
Sent ones are the apostles, and those “sent” after them (also apostles, through the laying on of hands) which has been shown through scripture that Christ and the apostles intended and practiced.
Do protestants yet again not believe sacred scripture and refute it by saying there are no more apostles? If no one has been sent (and biblically we have been shown how) then there is no one to call upon, no one to hear the truth because there is no one “sent” to preach.
According to sacred scripture one must be sent, not just someone who decides he wants to. Apostolic succession. Do protestants really believe sacred scripture a lie? If the above scripture is rejected thee is no other conclusion.
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
N
Nicene
Guest
Just out of curiosity, sinse protestants claim to hold sacred scripture in such high regard, why do they not kiss sacred scripture and pray to God to make them worthy to proclaim his word?
Where is the reverance and awe, not to mention humbleness toward serving sacred scripture?
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
Where is the reverance and awe, not to mention humbleness toward serving sacred scripture?
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
- Status