Following Catholic History is Not Following Scripture

[CatherineofA]

Let me start by saying that I don’t agree with the title of the thread, but I had to choose one to summarize the point of the thread. I come from a Southern Baptist background and I often defend Catholicism to fellow Christians who are against it. I mention history and the church’s role over centuries, etc. I also mention that some evangelicals have left for the Catholic Church.

I found a clip on You Tube where this is discussed. Go to the clip and watch from seven minutes on. He says that following men in history is not following scripture. I disagree. I think at some point in history men decided what was going to make up scripture and we had traditions very early on before we had the formal “book”. Even the New Testament was written by those who were already following something. How would you argue what is said in this part of the clip if you answered him with a rebuttal?

youtube.com/watch?v=CMWbBB5wOW4

 

[MarcoPolo]

Could you post a few bullets of the person’s argument for those who cannot see the video.

 

[DebChris]

A question to ask is whether or not Word of God stands the test of time. Does history record the heroics of individuals who followed God’s Word despite the prevailing culture of the time?
How did the Word as we know it come to us in written form?
Remember that the Word came in the form of a man, the Word Incarnate in a particular place at a particular time in history.
Was not the place chosen because of its centrality to the world as known at that time?

 

[CatherineofA]

Could you post a few bullets of the person’s argument for those who cannot see the video.

One said that evangelicals are becoming Catholics by looking at history and what they say are church fathers or what church fathers said. He says they are going by what men said instead of looking at what the Bible says. How would you argue this?

 

[KingAlfred]

Let me start by saying that I don’t agree with the title of the thread, but I had to choose one to summarize the point of the thread. I come from a Southern Baptist background and I often defend Catholicism to fellow Christians who are against it. I mention history and the church’s role over centuries, etc. I also mention that some evangelicals have left for the Catholic Church.

I found a clip on You Tube where this is discussed. Go to the clip and watch from seven minutes on. He says that following men in history is not following scripture. I disagree. I think at some point in history men decided what was going to make up scripture and we had traditions very early on before we had the formal “book”. Even the New Testament was written by those who were already following something. How would you argue what is said in this part of the clip if you answered him with a rebuttal?

youtube.com/watch?v=CMWbBB5wOW4

Catholic ‘history’ produced your Bible. You’re welcome.

 

[RobHom]

One said that evangelicals are becoming Catholics by looking at history and what they say are church fathers or what church fathers said. He says they are going by what men said instead of looking at what the Bible says. How would you argue this?

Even though I haven’t watched the clip…I don’t have a fast enough connection right now…but I have heard this claim before. I disagree with his position entirely.

The premise of “sola scriptura” is that scripture is all there is, nothing else… but the problem there is that people are trying to confine God, and His creation to paper pages between two covers. I can’t remember the passage, but is there not a passage in scripture that says more or less that “not everything done by Christ is recorded in scripture, and that it would take hundreds of books to do so”?

Additionally, it is not realistic, rational, or intelligent to discount the writings of the early church fathers…especially when one is holding a Bible in their hands…of which the Canon of said Bible was established by the Catholic Church (Big “C”). And considering that over the past 5 centuries, mere men have taken it upon themselves to literally alter the Bible, creating “bibles”, that are not true to the original texts. The issue of the Apocryphal Books is one issue…many non-Catholics have claimed that the books were not inspired or too new, or whatever, however the finding of Dead Sea Scrolls in the caves of Qumram in 1947 changed all of that, though some non-Catholic bibles still contain books that are different.

Who are we as mere men, to say this or that, where God is concerned and His word. Is it not presumptuous of us to say that He has already said all He has to say to us? What if tomorrow scrolls are found and verified as proof positive of something different than has been believed for the past 2000 years… Do we as mere men and women have the right or power to just ignore it or say no?

Another example: Many say that the “importance of the Blessed Virgin Mary” to Catholics is “relatively new”… not so. In the founders of the reformation spoke out strongly in favor of Mary.
davidmacd.com/catholic/martin_luther_on_mary.htm
and then in 1917 a scroll was found, later validated in 1938 that showed that Mary was very important back in the 3rd Century or before… it records a prayer of intercession to Mary called the “Sub Tuum”. catholicculture.org/culture/liturgicalyear/prayers/view.cfm?id=1084

Many people say many things, but its interesting how honest and true historical facts can deflate claims and arguments.

I would also say that anyone foolish enough or arrogant enough to ignore the writings of the “Early Christian Fathers”…is making grievous mistakes.

Hope that helps!

Peace!!

 

[MarcoPolo]

One said that evangelicals are becoming Catholics by looking at history and what they say are church fathers or what church fathers said. He says they are going by what men said instead of looking at what the Bible says. How would you argue this?

I would ask them if they follow Jesus or if they follow men like Matthew, Mark, Isaiah, or Jeremiah, etc… If they admit God transmits His revelation through men, encourage the person and let them know, “Now you’re getting it!” And you can try to move on to Tradition through which God also operates through men.