Foundation

[Fredricks]

petra:

There are several books that were purported to have been written by people who knew Jesus (Gospel of Peter, 1 and 2 Clement, Epistle of Barnabas), which we now know were not written by those people. While some of these were circulated and regarded as scripture by some local churches before the canon was fixed, the Church correctly discerned that they were not inspired. The conclusions that today’s scholars draw are not in a vaccuum. They draw upon the discernment of the early Church in regard to what was authentic and what was not. Again, you are a beneficiary of Sacred Tradition.

In post #230, you say, “Known authorship is one standard that Protestants recognize when talking about the canon.” Which is it? Is authorship a standard or not? How do you personally know that Hebrews is inspired?

First let me ask what form such evidence might take, assuming we are talking about things that are not spelled out in extreme detail in the scriptures. Before I proceed with answering this question, do you agree that it may be found by reading about what was common practice during the early Church?

Might you also agree that another angle to verifying Sacred Tradition is to look at doctrines that you personally accept, but which are not spelled out in detail in the Scriptures?

Are these both acceptable criteria?

No, not all of Sacred Tradition is directly stated in the Bible. The Bible is a subset of Sacred Tradition, not the other way around. The doctrine of the Trinity is a great example.

You have stated elsewhere that tradition did carry the early church until the point that the inspired writings were collected and bound into one volume. How could this tradition been a derivative of a compiled book that did not yet exist?

Again, to state the obvious, Sacred Scripture is derivative of Sacred Tradition.

No, I’m not being literal. You should not throw out the scriptures because they are God’s Word. But my point is that your acceptance of the Scriptures is without rational basis. You cannot explain why it is that you believe the selected books to be inspired. And in doing so you presuppose the infallability of Sacred Tradition.

Petra
Do not do that, you cannot expect me to answer when I said I was going to try to be fair to Awful and answer his three questions. Its like some other poster who keeps asking me questions when I said I would have nothing to do with her. Dont be that way, perhaps you skipped over it by accident though. If so, my apologies.

 

[Fredricks]

I just looked and saw my three questions post was not directly labeled to Awful. Do not be too broad with your questions Awful, it will take forever. Maybe just two then if you are too broad.

 

[Fredricks]

Here I am making up rules. After you ask that those two or three(if they are too broad I will only answer two if time permits)
You can dissect, rip apart, shred my answers but then, ask three or two more and I will answer those until you cannot think of anything to ask me. When you rip my answers apart, or whomever, I will only respond to Awful and his next set of questions. You can even start a different thread to do that if you wish Awful, you might wish to.

 

[Eden]

Fredricks:

Its like some other poster who keeps asking me questions when I said I would have nothing to do with her.

That’s me. Did you think I would just go away? I’m here to give your wavering brethren the other side of the story. The fact that you do not counter my posts is very useful as it prevents you from confusing anyone with erroneous teachings.

 

[petra]

Fredricks:

Petra
Do not do that, you cannot expect me to answer when I said I was going to try to be fair to Awful and answer his three questions. Its like some other poster who keeps asking me questions when I said I would have nothing to do with her. Dont be that way, perhaps you skipped over it by accident though. If so, my apologies.

Don’t be what way? What did I skip? I don’t see a post that indicates the above. When did you say you would have nothing to do with Awful?

You are under no compulsion to answer me right away. Please, respond to Awful first. I look forward to continuing our conversation when you are ready.

 

[petra]

Fredricks:

Here I am making up rules. After you ask that those two or three(if they are too broad I will only answer two if time permits)
You can dissect, rip apart, shred my answers but then, ask three or two more and I will answer those until you cannot think of anything to ask me. When you rip my answers apart, or whomever, I will only respond to Awful and his next set of questions. You can even start a different thread to do that if you wish Awful, you might wish to.

Fredricks, with all due respect, you can’t establish forum rules. If you want to have a private conversation with Awful, you can PM her. Or you can simply ignore posts on this forum. But this is a group discussion, and you can’t forbid people from posting.

I understand that you are one person (at least you appear to be now), and it takes time to converse with several others. Answer Awful first, then address other questions when you’re able. Or, you might suggest to the others in your group that they enter into the dialog, too.

I am really interested in talking more with you. We are at a critical point in the dialog, and if you back down, it appears that you are conceding. I’m sure you don’t wish to give that appearance.

 

[Fredricks]

petra:

Fredricks, with all due respect, you can’t establish forum rules. If you want to have a private conversation with Awful, you can PM her. Or you can simply ignore posts on this forum. But this is a group discussion, and you can’t forbid people from posting.

I understand that you are one person (at least you appear to be now), and it takes time to converse with several others. Answer Awful first, then address other questions when you’re able. Or, you might suggest to the others in your group that they enter into the dialog, too.

I am really interested in talking more with you. We are at a critical point in the dialog, and if you back down, it appears that you are conceding. I’m sure you don’t wish to give that appearance.

With all due respect, I can control who I answer and under what circumstances.
Everyone is welcome to post and read. I will answer Awful is all I am saying. this way awful, at least, can never accuse me of being evasive. I do not wish to PM this. I want to answer all the questions, but I really need them to be something that is reasonable, I think Awful will do that. I am a person of my word and will do only that.

I OFFICALLY CONCEDE TO PETRA.
How is that for appearance?

I will address Awful because it has been rude of me to skip around. I offically ask Petra, if willing, to be next in line.
Back to reading.
You have a lot of class Petra, do not read otherwise into anything I am saying.

 

[Eden]

Fredricks:

I OFFICALLY CONCEDE TO PETRA.
How is that for appearance?

It would appear that Fredericks has now decided not to answer anyone.

I just read his last four or so posts and I see words but no substance.

Basically, he has spent four posts explaining through smoke and mirrors that he will respond at some time in the future because he has no answer as of yet. A very disappointing turn of events, indeed.

 

[petra]

Fredricks:

I offically ask Petra, if willing, to be next in line.
Back to reading.

That sounds good to me. I’ll check in tomorrow.

Enjoy the day,

petra

 

[awfulthings9]

Hey Fredericks,

First off, thank you for your invitation. I’ll go ahead and ask within this thread since my questions will be within the context of the original post (my own). Additionally, and because my questions might be a bit broad, I will only ask two questions and I won’t accuse you of being evasive if you only answer one of them - we’ll get to the other later. I hate it when people use a shotgun approach (which I was also guilty of in the OP), so I don’t want to shower you with too much. If you only chose to answer one, may I request you take the first one? Also, if you have addressed one of these questions somewhere in this or another thread, accept my apologies and feel free to direct me there with a link instead of repeating yourself.

Secondly, I apologize for not responding quicker. I saw your offer this morning, but we were heading out the door and my wife made me leave. Believe me, I would much rather have been discussing theology with the great minds in here (you included) than shopping.

Okay, question number one: We, as Catholics, accept the New Testament table of contents in large part because a teaching church, which we believe to be guided by God, defined it and because the Tradition upheld certain books. Let’s say I agree with you, however, and reject that teaching church and that Tradition, by what means can I have confidence that the correct books were picked? Please make sure your answer addresses all the books of the NT (including Hebrews and all four Gospels) and please qualify your answer by explaining where that criteria is defined.

Question number two: Let’s say I’m an agnostic searching for truth. How would I know with certainty that the Bible is inspired. It claims inspiration for itself, of course, but so do many other religious texts. Again, I’m not looking for proof that the Bible is simply accurate, which we agree it is, but actually God-breathed. As Catholics, our answer to this would involve elements that you reject, so I want to know how you resolve it.

Incidentally, it wasn’t too long ago that I spent some time trying to convince myself to become Protestant. My inability to come up with good Protestant answers to these, and question number three (I’ll post later so as not to overwhelm you with questions) are the reasons I did not.

By the way, can I ask with which “denomination” or Protestant group you claim affiliation? Just to help me in this discussion and to level the playing field since you know where I’m coming from as a Catholic.

Yours in Christ,
-Spencer

 

[Fredricks]

By the way, can I ask with which “denomination” or Protestant group you claim affiliation? Just to help me in this discussion and to level the playing field since you know where I’m coming from as a Catholic.

Yours in Christ,
-Spencer

What you know of my name and then my denomination would make me completely defenseless against harassing phone calls or emails at work and home with one little google search.
I cannot.
If at some time you wish to know my denominations stance on any issue, you could make it one of your questions. I am a member of my denomination for many reason, not all of them doctrinal.
I will go to work on your question. Right now, we are celebrating.

 

[Nicene]

Fredricks:

What you know of my name and then my denomination would make me completely defenseless against harassing phone calls or emails at work and home with one little google search.
I cannot.
If at some time you wish to know my denominations stance on any issue, you could make it one of your questions. I am a member of my denomination for many reason, not all of them doctrinal.
I will go to work on your question. Right now, we are celebrating.

No offense but what a cop out.

I profess to be catholic and everyone knows my name yet have never once recieved any of those things from one person. Imagine that. I seem to remember Christ saying we should die for their belief in him and we would be persecuted for them.

You still haven’t answered my questions from seven days ago which you said demanded your response.

Actually it smacks of “I can’t defend of my churches practice any more than I accuse you, therefore I refuse to say what it is.”

At least the catholic church proclaims it’s beliefs openly, no matter how unpopular, instead of hiding them.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[Nicene]

I am a member of my denomination for many reason, not all of them doctrinal.

Betting this is an understatement.

By the way, you mentioned earlier that the word “catholic” isn’t found in scripture. Can you show me where “denomination” is in scripture? Or even the name of yours?

Personally I think “denomination” is a modern word for “division”, which I can certainly show in scripture.

Denomination, a modern “Tradition”.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[Fredricks]

Nicene:

No offense but what a cop out.

I profess to be catholic and everyone knows my name yet have never once recieved any of those things from one person. Imagine that. I seem to remember Christ saying we should die for their belief in him and we would be persecuted for them.

You still haven’t answered my questions from seven days ago which you said demanded your response.

Actually it smacks of “I can’t defend of my churches practice any more than I accuse you, therefore I refuse to say what it is.”

At least the catholic church proclaims it’s beliefs openly, no matter how unpopular, instead of hiding them.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

I cannot imagine that Catholics would be offended discussing Catholicism on a Catholic board. You just never know. I have become a one poster at a time responder to substantial questions.

 

[Fredricks]

Nicene:

Betting this is an understatement.

By the way, you mentioned earlier that the word “catholic” isn’t found in scripture. Can you show me where “denomination” is in scripture? Or even the name of yours?

Personally I think “denomination” is a modern word for “division”, which I can certainly show in scripture.

Denomination, a modern “Tradition”.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

You seem angry. Obviously YOUR team did not make the Sweet 16!!!
Back to typing

 

[Nicene]

Fredricks:

You seem angry. Obviously YOUR team did not make the Sweet 16!!!
Back to typing

More evasion I guess.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[Eden]

I continue to check in to see if “Dr. Fredericks” has answered how the canon of his Bible was set. Not yet?

 

[Eden]

Fredricks:

I cannot imagine that Catholics would be offended discussing Catholicism on a Catholic board. You just never know. I have become a one poster at a time responder to substantial questions.

Unfortunately, now he is responding substantial questions by one poster at a time with no substantial answers.
Fredericks:

I will only respond to you if I am going to do this. I have not read the OP in a long time so lets break it down. Ask me any three questions.

I just looked and saw my three questions post was not directly labeled to Awful. Do not be too broad with your questions Awful, it will take forever. Maybe just two then if you are too broad.

Here I am making up rules. After you ask that those two or three(if they are too broad I will only answer two if time permits)

With all due respect, I can control who I answer and under what circumstances.
Everyone is welcome to post and read. I will answer Awful is all I am saying. this way awful, at least, can never accuse me of being evasive. I do not wish to PM this. I want to answer all the questions, but I really need them to be something that is reasonable, I think Awful will do that. I am a person of my word and will do only that.

I OFFICALLY CONCEDE TO PETRA.
How is that for appearance?

I will address Awful because it has been rude of me to skip around. I offically ask Petra, if willing, to be next in line.
Back to reading.
You have a lot of class Petra, do not read otherwise into anything I am saying.

What you know of my name and then my denomination would make me completely defenseless against harassing phone calls or emails at work and home with one little google search.
I cannot.
If at some time you wish to know my denominations stance on any issue, you could make it one of your questions. I am a member of my denomination for many reason, not all of them doctrinal.
I will go to work on your question. Right now, we are celebrating.

All of this and still no answers.

 

[awfulthings9]

Fredricks:

What you know of my name and then my denomination would make me completely defenseless against harassing phone calls or emails at work and home with one little google search.
I cannot.
If at some time you wish to know my denominations stance on any issue, you could make it one of your questions. I am a member of my denomination for many reason, not all of them doctrinal.
I will go to work on your question. Right now, we are celebrating.

Sigh.

 

[Nicene]

We do reject undocumented Sacred Tradition as on par with the Bible. If anyone could prove important components of Sacred Tradition that would be something to try.

2 Thess 2:15: So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.

You disagree with Paul. He gives the same weight to both. Or can you show us where it says in this passage that the letter he is sending (which is now scripture but wasn’t at the time) is to be given more weight than those traditions by word of mouth?

In fact he says to hold firm to those traditions “by word of mouth”

You have contended that all those traditions were written down as what is now the canon. Show and prove scriptually which traditions were written down (bear in mind the last epistles from Paul were to Timothy)

The Holy Spirit does interpret for all Christians…

Show this in scripture please.

BEFORE YOU SAY that the Holy Spirit is respnsible for all the denominations, remember Catholicism has only one right interpretation even if Catholics do not agree.

Satan is the author of division not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit would never be responsible for denominations, it negates Christ’s promise and prayer to be as one.

Likewise for the Bible and the Holy Spirit. I would contend that the majority of Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox AGREE( I paused to think) 75% of the time, even though we look different.

I would have to disagree with you. Catholic and Orthodox would be much closer than this (even seperated by use of terminology) In protestantism you are encompasing quite a spectrum of beliefs. It would be more proper to say for example Anglicans Lutherans and Methodists remain doctrinally closer after they left the church. However Christ never promised the church 75% of the truth by the Holy Spirit.

Given your confession of such it remains that there must be in fact one church Christ founded that holds 100% truth or Christianity is a hoax. Where is this church?

Peace and God Bless
Nicene