Fundamentalism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Brian_Millar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And therein lies the difference. You’re talking about interpretations. I didn’t offer any interpretations. I just named the verses.
You named the verses in the context of your prior assumptions. For example, you named a set of passages on Baptism to defend the idea of an emotionalistic “born again” experience - Jesus and the Apostles didn’t define it that way. In fact, Jesus was very specific that to be “born again” is to be immersed in the waters of baptism in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
 
Alright. Let’s take just one of the issues you brought up - the primacy of the pope. Here are some quotes from early Fathers of the Church who taught about his primacy. What can you show us, from the early Church, that supports your idea that the Bible should be misinterpreted to say that Jesus did not indeed appoint Peter to be the earthly head of His Chirch?

Tatian the Syrian

“Simon Cephas answered and said, ‘You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.’ Jesus answered and said unto him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon, son of Jonah: flesh and blood has not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say unto thee also, that you are Cephas, and on this rock will I build my Church; and the gates of hades shall not prevail against it” (The Diatesseron 23 [A.D. 170]).

Tertullian

“Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter, who is called ‘the rock on which the Church would be built’ [Matt. 16:18] with the power of ‘loosing and binding in heaven and on earth’ [Matt. 16:19]?” (Demurrer Against the Heretics 22 [A.D. 200]).

“[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. . . . What kind of man are you, subverting and changing what was the manifest intent of the Lord when he conferred this personally upon Peter? Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys” (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).

The Letter of Clement to James

“Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter” (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221]).

The Clementine Homilies

“[Simon Peter said to Simon Magus in Rome:] ‘For you now stand in direct opposition to me, who am a firm rock, the foundation of the Church’ [Matt. 16:18]” (Clementine Homilies 17:19 [A.D. 221]).

Origen

“Look at [Peter], the great foundation of the Church, that most solid of rocks, upon whom Christ built the Church [Matt. 16:18]. And what does our Lord say to him? ‘Oh you of little faith,’ he says, ‘why do you doubt?’ [Matt. 14:31]” (Homilies on Exodus 5:4 [A.D. 248]).

Cyprian of Carthage

“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was *, but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. . . . If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).

“There is one God and one Christ, and one Church, and one chair founded on Peter by the word of the Lord. It is not possible to set up another altar or for there to be another priesthood besides that one altar and that one priesthood. Whoever has gathered elsewhere is scattering” (Letters 43[40]:5 [A.D. 253]).

“There [John 6:68–69] speaks Peter, upon whom the Church would be built, teaching in the name of the Church and showing that even if a stubborn and proud multitude withdraws because it does not wish to obey, yet the Church does not withdraw from Christ. The people joined to the priest and the flock clinging to their shepherd are the Church. You ought to know, then, that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishop, and if someone is not with the bishop, he is not in the Church. They vainly flatter themselves who creep up, not having peace with the priests of God, believing that they are
secretly * in communion with certain individuals. For the Church, which is one and Catholic, is not split nor divided, but it is indeed united and joined by the cement of priests who adhere one to another” (ibid., 66[69]:8).

Firmilian

“But what is his error . . . who does not remain on the foundation of the one Church which was founded upon the rock by Christ [Matt. 16:18], can be learned from this, which Christ said to Peter alone: ‘Whatever things you shall bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth, they shall be loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:19]” (collected in Cyprian’s Letters 74[75]:16 [A.D. 253]).

“[Pope] Stephen * . . . boasts of the place of his episcopate, and contends that he holds the succession from Peter, on whom the foundations of the Church were laid [Matt. 16:18]. . . . [Pope] Stephen . . . announces that he holds by succession the throne of Peter” (ibid., 74[75]:17).

Ephraim the Syrian

“[Jesus said:] ‘Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples’” (Homilies 4:1 [A.D. 351]).***
 
OK. Then tell us this. Why do the writings of all the Early Fathers of the Church directly contradict what you are saying?
Don’t care. As a Christian, I get my doctrine from the word of God, not from the “early fathers”.
 
Alright. Let’s take just one of the issues you brought up - the primacy of the pope. Here are some quotes from early Fathers of the Church who taught about his primacy.
Don’t care. As a Christian, I get my doctrine from the word of God, not from the opinions of men.
 
You can’t do it. Because your interpretations come from erroneous new inventions that are not supported in the early Church and were not taught by the apostles.
 
You can’t do it. Because your interpretations come from erroneous new inventions that are not supported in the early Church and were not taught by the apostles.
No, I’ve cited the word of God directly and have not offered any interpretations or any editorial comment on the verses.
 
Don’t care. As a Christian, I get my doctrine from the word of God, not from the opinions of men.
It is ONLY from the opinions of men. It completely contradicts what was taught by the apostles and held as true by ALL believers for the first 1500 years.
 
Don’t care. As a Christian, I get my doctrine from the word of God, not from the “early fathers”.
So, you’re saying that the people who actually sat at the feet of the Apostles and learned from them in person, and who read the original manuscripts of the New Testament in their churches, were less able to understand the Gospel than you? Even though you have never met the Apostles, and read the Bible in translation?
 
No, I’ve cited the word of God directly and have not offered any interpretations or any editorial comment on the verses.
Yes you have. You’ve claimed we are to go by the Bible alone - contrary to what the Scriptures and Sacred Tradition have always taught. You’ve claimed the primacy of the bishop of Rome is a fallacy contrary to what the Scriptures and thte Apostles taught. You have made several claims based on erroneous, man-made INTERPRETATIONS of the Bible.
 
No, I’ve cited the word of God directly and have not offered any interpretations or any editorial comment on the verses.
Actually, stating that when Paul wrote about Tradition he didn’t mean anything but the Gospels is an interpretation. A bad and wrong one, but it is definitely an interpretation. I personally think that if Paul had meant the gospels, he would have said “the gospels.” But considering that not all of the gospels had even been written at the time he wrote his letters, that would have been a bit difficult. Even for an apostle.
 
So, you’re saying that the people who actually sat at the feet of the Apostles and learned from them in person, and who read the original manuscripts of the New Testament in their churches, were less able to understand the Gospel than you? Even though you have never met the Apostles, and read the Bible in translation?
I’m saying that, while those men are welcome to their opinions, and their opinions are instructive, inasmuch as they align with scripture, it is scripture that is the authority, not their opinions.
 
Actually, stating that when Paul wrote about Tradition he didn’t mean anything but the Gospels is an interpretation. A bad and wrong one, but it is definitely an interpretation. I personally think that if Paul had meant the gospels, he would have said “the gospels.” But considering that not all of the gospels had even been written at the time he wrote his letters, that would have been a bit difficult. Even for an apostle.
Actually, the Gospel did exist. It had been preached throughout the Old Testament and in the church before the epistles were written.
 
I’m saying that, while those men are welcome to their opinions, and their opinions are instructive, inasmuch as they align with scripture, it is scripture that is the authority, not their opinions.
Wouldn’t you say the same thing for yourself?
 
Yes you have. You’ve claimed we are to go by the Bible alone - contrary to what the Scriptures and Sacred Tradition have always taught. You’ve claimed the primacy of the bishop of Rome is a fallacy contrary to what the Scriptures and thte Apostles taught. You have made several claims based on erroneous, man-made INTERPRETATIONS of the Bible.
Everytime I’ve cited scripture, I cited the verse. I did not attempt to interpret it or to offer any editorial comment on it whatsoever.
 
Who or what, according to the Bible, is the “pillar and foundation of the truth”?

It is the Church (1 Tim 3:15)
 
Actually, the Unbiblical doctrine of Purgatory says that men must go to this place in order to suffer for their sins in addition to Christ’s atonement.
We suffer anyway. In Purgatory, we join our sufferings with Christ’s suffering on the Cross, and make His sacrifice to be our own, and in this way, we pass from our own life into His life.
Neither say anything about Peter being the pope.
“Chief shepherd” is the Pope.
Don’t care. That Paul rebuked Peter shows that Peter was not infallible. Thus, not a pope.
St. Peter broke his own commandment. If he were not infallible, then his own commandment would not have even been God’s Law, to begin with; it would have just been his own personal opinion, so it wouldn’t have even mattered if he broke it.

It is because St. Peter’s own word was God’s Law that St. Paul had to rebuke him for breaking it.
 
Actually, the Gospel did exist. It had been preached throughout the Old Testament and in the church before the epistles were written.
We have plenty of prophecy referring to Christ in the OT, but the Gospels were written after His death, because they dealt with His life and ministry. Kind of hard to have them around before He lived, wouldn’t it be?
 
Everytime I’ve cited scripture, I cited the verse. I did not attempt to interpret it or to offer any editorial comment on it whatsoever.
Fair enough. But, you cited these verses to support your claims that contradict what the apostles taught. Then you accused the Catholic Church of inventing “traditions” and things like purgatory and the papacy.

Show us where the apostles taught or anyone in the early Church believed the things you are pushing. You can’t. They all support the Church’s claims. Always have and always will.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top