'Extra/other doctrines"?

[Prodigal_Son1]

The only reason one is hyperbole and the other isn’t is sacred tradition (early practice of 2nd century or later church members)?​

If we could find any early fathesr that cut off their hands, would that mean we’ve missed an (name removed by moderator)ortant teaching?

How do Protestants decide what is symbolic and what is not? How do you decide? What do you use to weigh the differences? Catholics do use the tradition; tradition that Paul told us to hold too, whether by word or epistle.

2Th 2:15 (2:14) Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.

Christ lived, died, was buried, arose and ascended into heaven in the first century. The final book of the Bible was written around the turn of the century, about the same time that St. Ignatius wrote his letters. Letters and other writings have been written since, up to the present day. Teachings and beliefs of Christianity has been documented well.

Early Christians, after the persecution ended, used to confess and do penance publically. That changed. Early Christians used to ‘flail’ themselves. Even Paul spoke of ‘chastising’ his body.

1Co 9:27 But I chastise my body and bring it into subjection: lest perhaps, when I have preached to others, I myself should become a castaway.

Who had the authority to change that? Who did Christ give the keys to the kingdom of heaven to, authority to bind and loose on earth, and the authority to forgive and retain sins?

 

[LayingHands]

You are Catholic but dont believe in indulgences?

Great Scots! Being Catholic now a days is almost impossible! Who can keep up with it?You would have to be a professional in contractural legalese just to update the changes in understanding their way of thinking! I think I will continue the practice of praying directly to my Father, The All, The One Supreme GOD, as is my inherent birthright, and bypass the hundreds of dogmas and perceived rituals, none which were practiced or ordained by Jesus Christ during his LIFE! Should I sin…I will pray to GOD directly and have this recorded in my Book of Life! Let GOD judge me, as he states is his right alone.

 

[Dokimas]

Dokimas, that is an objection ‘card’ often played by many Protestants. Jim Jones was a Protestant preacher. Jim Baker was a Protestant preacher. Jimmy Swaggert was a Protestant preacher. Are we to discern all of Protestantism by those that appeared ot have served Him less than perfectly? Are there any perfect people, who serve Him or not, on this earth?

Judas betrayed Christ, Peter denied Him 3 times, Thomas doubted Him; do we question Christ, or His teachings, because of those sins?

Christ built a Church and gave authority to, appointed/ordained, men of the Church, knowing all men and that none were sinless.

I don’t know what those Mobsters confessed, with a contrite heart. I can’t say if they received the body, blood, soul and divinity unworthily or not. There is only one that can see what’s in everyone’s heart.

We can only judge ourselves, so that we are not judged.

1Co 11:31 But if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.

I don’t have a list of protestant talking points. I read what you and others say and try to match it up with the Bible and with logic and share my thoughts (NOT the THOUGHTS of others).​

Jim Jones wasn’t a Christian.​

Seems you missed the point. I wasn’t saying the mobsters reveal anything about the CC. I was questioning how can those wicked mobsters actually eat and drink of Jesus’ Body and not die like Uzzah?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I don’t have a list of protestant talking points. I read what you and others say and try to match it up with the Bible and with logic and share my thoughts (NOT the THOUGHTS of others).​

Jim Jones wasn’t a Christian.​

Seems you missed the point. I wasn’t saying the mobsters reveal anything about the CC. I was questioning how can those wicked mobsters actually eat and drink of Jesus’ Body and not die like Uzzah?

 

[Filioque]

Seems you missed the point. I wasn’t saying the mobsters reveal anything about the CC. I was questioning how can those wicked mobsters actually eat and drink of Jesus’ Body and not die like Uzzah?

The penalty for touching the Ark of the Covenant was clearly spelled out.The charge of carrying the Ark and the rest of the holy implements was given to the family of Kohath (of the tribe of Levi). They, though, were not to touch any of the holy things that were still uncovered by Aaron (Num. 4:2-15).

The NT tells us that “Wherefore whosoever shall eat the bread or drink the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord.” No mention as with the Ark of a physical death penalty.

It is interesting to me however that when Saphorah and Annanias lied to the Holy Ghost by their fib to the Apostles, (to the Holy Ghost indirectly by lies to those comissioned by Jesus to lead His Church) they were struck dead.

Now this is not to deny any of the eucharistic miracles that have occured over the centuries. It does seem that they do occur when most needed, but not as a daily occurance that we can percieve.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

You would have to be a professional in contractural legalese just to update the changes in understanding their way of thinking!

There are no changes, with the exception of understandings from the laity maybe.

 

[mfbukowski]

ProdicalSon, IMO, the Holy Spirit is the Essence of Jesus.​

This doesn’t add up with the idea of why Mary had to be sinless. We are told that if Mary is the ark of the covenant which had to be sinless to hold the Presence of God, she must be sinless. Now you are telling me the real Presence of Jesus lives in you and me sinner through communion.

An interesting point

 

[LayingHands]

You are Catholic but dont believe in indulgences?

Again? What I believe and why…firstly, I do not believe in written doctrine, and created dogmas…which came into existence, AFTER Jesus Christ and his apostles passed from this Earth. In attempting to understand these WRITTEN CHANGES as the NEW TESTAMENT and for whatever reason adding the Jewish OLD TESTAMENT (Don;t you reason that Christ would have spoken of and added this to his preaching, had he wanted us to follow it while he walked this Earth?) and finding it IMPOSSIBLE to not only understand them, and all the updated changes in ritual and tithe understanding!?
I have in FAITH, made the decision, to keep to the GOOD NEWS of Jesus’s MESSAGE to ALL HUMANITY…that GOD sent Christ here to us, to preach the GOOD NEWS of our redemption as the PATH OF RETURN, in IMMORTAL SPIRIT, returning, after death, back to GOD. There was no more nor any less in his message! All Jews and Gentiles were included! Live as Christ lived, in willful goodness…loving GOD and becoming Godlike and spread Christ’s message of GOD’S redemption. This is your daily life goal and your soul & spirit’s purpose…why CONFUSE humanity with created, mismashed, legalese written, round & round, dogmas?! To what purpose is this done? The MOST IMPORTANT Comandment by Jesus “Love thy Father God, above all else”…its where I am and where I will stay…

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Again? What I believe and why…firstly, I do not believe in written doctrine, and created dogmas…which came into existence, AFTER Jesus Christ and his apostles passed from this Earth. In attempting to understand these WRITTEN CHANGES as the NEW TESTAMENT and for whatever reason adding the Jewish OLD TESTAMENT (Don;t you reason that Christ would have spoken of and added this to his preaching, had he wanted us to follow it while he walked this Earth?) and finding it IMPOSSIBLE to not only understand them, and all the updated changes in ritual and tithe understanding!?
I have in FAITH, made the decision, to keep to the GOOD NEWS of Jesus’s MESSAGE to ALL HUMANITY…that GOD sent Christ here to us, to preach the GOOD NEWS of our redemption as the PATH OF RETURN, in IMMORTAL SPIRIT, returning, after death, back to GOD. There was no more nor any less in his message! All Jews and Gentiles were included! Live as Christ lived, in willful goodness…loving GOD and becoming Godlike and spread Christ’s message of GOD’S redemption. This is your daily life goal and your soul & spirit’s purpose…why CONFUSE humanity with created, mismashed, legalese written, round & round, dogmas?! To what purpose is this done? The MOST IMPORTANT Comandment by Jesus “Love thy Father God, above all else”…its where I am and where I will stay…

**Joh 21:25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did which, if they were written every one, the world itself. I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written. **

Christ lived 33 years and spent 3 years ministering with Apostles, yet we have 4 Gospels to tell us what He did. How long would it take to sit down a read those 4 Gospels? A day? Two days?

Joh 20:30 Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book.
Joh 20:31 But these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God: and that believing, you may have life in his name.

It seems John is telling us that that which was written was so we would believe.

He also tells us, twice, that all things are not written and once he tells us, the word itself would not be able to contain the books that be written.

We also know Christ never wrote anything.

Christ started a Church and ordained those men He wanted to be in authority of His Church. Through His actions, He continued His teachings, which are written doctrines and ‘created’ dogmas, from the men of the Church.

Now I can understand your point, but it seems you wish to rant against the Church for some reason. It’s confusing to see one identify themself as Catholic and rant against it’s teachings?

 

[MyRdmrLvs]

The only reason one is hyperbole and the other isn’t is sacred tradition (early practice of 2nd century or later church members)?​

If we could find any early fathesr that cut off their hands, would that mean we’ve missed an (name removed by moderator)ortant teaching?

didnt one emasculate himself?

 

[MyRdmrLvs]

Great Scots! Being Catholic now a days is almost impossible! Who can keep up with it?You would have to be a professional in contractural legalese just to update the changes in understanding their way of thinking! I think I will continue the practice of praying directly to my Father, The All, The One Supreme GOD, as is my inherent birthright, and bypass the hundreds of dogmas and perceived rituals, none which were practiced or ordained by Jesus Christ during his LIFE! Should I sin…I will pray to GOD directly and have this recorded in my Book of Life! Let GOD judge me, as he states is his right alone.

there does seem to be quite a wide variety among those who call themselves Catholics. among protestants each variation is called a denomination. then we are ridiculed for the number of denominations. But variations within Catholisim seem to be little cause for concern.

 

[Filioque]

there does seem to be quite a wide variety among those who call themselves Catholics. among protestants each variation is called a denomination. then we are ridiculed for the number of denominations. But variations within Catholisim seem to be little cause for concern.

One would think so, but what the case usually is, are Catholics who either have been poorly catechized, or who having been instructed in the Faith, refuse to assent to not just those practices which are permitted but optional, but also those dogmatic and moral teachings that are required of Catholics. Whereas some Protestant groups allow for much more latitude on dogmatic issues.

An example would be the question about Origen, the early church father who is reported to have castrated himself. His excessiveness was the cause of his deposition from his post. The title of Early Church Father remains, not because he remained orthodox in Faith, nor that all of his writings are to be accepted on face value, but because before his defection, some of his writings reflected orthodox teaching, and are primary source documents of what issues were being discussed in the Early Church, both heretical and orthodox. We learn from reading him and others who later espoused other heretical views both what we should hold fast to, and what we should avoid, lest we fall into error. The Fathers argued the hot theological ideas of the day, the Church decided them. Individual Fathers, even those we recognize as Saints today, did not hold the authority as individuals to decide on dogma, but the Church in Council, or the Pope did under certain circumstances.

 

[Dokimas]

How do Protestants decide what is symbolic and what is not? How do you decide? (Context; other Biblical teaching). What do you use to weigh the differences? Catholics do use the tradition; tradition that Paul told us to hold too, whether by word or epistle.

2Th 2:15 (2:14) Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.​

** Mt 15:2 “Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.”
Mt 15:3 He answered and said to them, "Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?
Mt 15:6 ‘then he need not honor his father or mother.’ Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition.
Mr 7:8 “For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men–the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do.”
Mr 7:9 He said to them, "All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition.
Col 2:8 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.**

1 Peter 1:
17 And if you call on the Father, who without partiality judges according to each one’s work, conduct yourselves throughout the time of your stay here in fear;
18 knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers,
19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.

Christ lived, died, was buried, arose and ascended into heaven in the first century. The final book of the Bible was written around the turn of the century by an eye witness, about the same time that St. Ignatius )was he an eyewitness?)? wrote his letters. Letters and other writings have been written since, up to the present day. Teachings and beliefs of Christianity has been documented well.

Early Christians, after the persecution ended, used to confess and do penance publically. That changed. Early Christians used to ‘flail’ themselves. Even Paul spoke of ‘chastising’ his body.

1Co 9:27 But I chastise my body and bring it into subjection: lest perhaps, when I have preached to others, I myself should become a castaway.

Who had the authority to change that? ( I would guess if it’s a tradition passed down from the apostles, no one has the authority to change sacred tradition). Who did Christ give the keys to the kingdom of heaven to, authority to bind and loose on earth, and the authority to forgive and retain sins?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

was he an eyewitness?

Tradition has it, St. Ignatius was the child that Jesus pulled up onto His lap. We know he was a studentdisciple of St. John, an eyewitness, and it was reported he was ordained by St. Peter, another eye witness. Even though the link is from Wiki, you can look up St. Ignatius on other encyclopedias. Here’s a link on the Catholic Encyclopedia, on this website.

**St. Ignatius was Bishop of Antioch after Saint Peter and St. Evodius (who died around AD 67). Eusebius[3] records that St. Ignatius succeeded St. Evodius. Making his apostolic succession even more immediate, Theodoret (Dial. Immutab., I, iv, 33a) reported that Peter himself appointed Ignatius to the see of Antioch.

Besides his Latin name, Ignatius, he also called himself Theophorus (“God Bearer”), and tradition says he was one of the children Jesus took in His arms and blessed. St. Ignatius may have been a disciple of the Apostle John.[4]

St. Ignatius is one of the Apostolic Fathers (the earliest authoritative group of the Church Fathers). He based his authority on being a bishop of the Church, living his life in the imitation of Christ.**

What is the importance of being an eye witness? Of all the authors of the New Testament, Matthew, John, James, Jude and Peter were the only ‘eye witnesses’.

 

[Dokimas]

Tradition has it, St. Ignatius was the child that Jesus pulled up onto His lap. We know he was a studentdisciple of St. John, an eyewitness, and it was reported he was ordained by St. Peter, another eye witness. Even though the link is from Wiki, you can look up St. Ignatius on other encyclopedias. Here’s a link on the Catholic Encyclopedia, on this website.
From the New Advent, a catholic encyclopedia about Ignatius:

Also called Theophorus (ho Theophoros); born in Syria, around the year 50; died at Rome between 98 and 117.

More than one of the earliest ecclesiastical writers have given credence, though apparently without good reason, to the legend that Ignatius was the child whom the Savior took up in His arms, as described in Mark 9:35. It is also believed, and with great probability, that, with his friend Polycarp, he was among the auditors of the Apostle St. John. If we include St. Peter, Ignatius was the third Bishop of Antioch and the immediate successor of Evodius (Eusebius, Church History II.3.22). Theodoret (“Dial. Immutab.”, I, iv, 33a, Paris, 1642) is the authority for the statement that St. Peter appointed Ignatius to the See of Antioch. St. John Chrysostom lays special emphasis on the honor conferred upon the martyr in receiving his episcopal consecration at the hands of the Apostles themselves (“Hom. in St. Ig.”, IV. 587). Natalis Alexander quotes Theodoret to the same effect (III, xii, art. xvi, p. 53).

What is the importance of being an eye witness? Of all the authors of the New Testament, Matthew, John, James, Jude and Peter were the only ‘eye witnesses’. So Paul didn’t see Jesus or learn from Him?

 

[Dokimas]

ProdicalSon, what about the other verses in the NT that I posted speaking about tradition?

 

[tweetymom]

Great Scots! Being Catholic now a days is almost impossible! Who can keep up with it?You would have to be a professional in contractural legalese just to update the changes in understanding their way of thinking! I think I will continue the practice of praying directly to my Father, The All, The One Supreme GOD, as is my inherent birthright, and bypass the hundreds of dogmas and perceived rituals, none which were practiced or ordained by Jesus Christ during his LIFE! Should I sin…I will pray to GOD directly and have this recorded in my Book of Life! Let GOD judge me, as he states is his right alone.

You are so right brother. I always go directly to the Father. Too many rules and reglations for me to follow. Jesus’ Gospel is so simple, no need for all the rules.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

…

Dokimas,

Once again, it is with difficulty to respond to your posts, when you respond inside a quote.

I realized it was listed as ‘legend’ about St. Ignatius being a child Christ pulled to Himself.

Does this fact being openly admitted too disqualify anything else said about him, or his own writings?

Paul did receive a communication from the Lord, but it the same as being an eye witness to His ministries of 3 years with the Apostles? No, much of what Paul learned was through the ‘oral tradition’ of the others. Even with that stated, what about Mark or Luke, neither were eye witnesses. The fact is, the majority of the New Testament was written by those who learned from eye witnesses, as they were not eye witnesses themselves.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

You are so right brother. I always go directly to the Father. Too many rules and reglations for me to follow. Jesus’ Gospel is so simple, no need for all the rules.

Thanks for your opinion tweetymom. It would have been nice to have seen some sources supporting your belief.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

ProdicalSon, what about the other verses in the NT that I posted speaking about tradition?

Are we assuming there are contradictions in scriptures? Certainly not! There was a difference of the traditions of men and traditions of the Church. Passover was a tradition, but it was a correct tradition. Having scriptures explained by men of authority, is a tradition (Nehemiah 8). I feel it’s wrong to take traditions being corrected by the Lord to disqualify all traditions. Do we ignore the tradition of the Lord’s Supper?