If no Scriptrue For at least 10 years

[Adonia]

Of course they did, they were obedient Jews. But they did not preach the Gospel from it. Rather they preached the Gospel according to Jesus who came to fulfill the prophesies that were written the the OT.

Oops, this should have been a response to adonia, however, in respnse to your post: There are still references to the OT in our Mass readings. There will always be references to the OT Scriptures, they are sacred to Christinaity.

Oh yes, exactly! I am well aware of the constant references to Our Redeemer in the OT. It must have been a very exciting time knowing that they were living as the prophesies were being fulfilled.

 

[happilycatholic]

Oh yes, exactly! I am well aware of the constant references to Our Redeemer in the OT. It must have been a very exciting time knowing that they were living as the prophesies were being fulfilled.

 

[JonNC]

You are right to be confused by this “tradition of Protestant men”.

Another way of putting it is this: Did any of the apostles practice sola scriptura?

Nope!

Well, of course not, Randy. Why would the Apostles, or anyone else who knew them for that matter, need to? If you had the opportunity to talk with and listen to St. Paul himself, for example, or simply read his letters, which would you prefer to do? Sola Scriptura only applies to the post- apostolic era.

The written words of the Apostles are, as it were, primary sources of Christ’s time and just thereafter. It doesn’t make sense to disregard Tradition, but it also seems appropriate to measure Tradition against the writings of the apostles.

Jon

 

[ConfusedTim]

Well, of course not, Randy. Why would the Apostles, or anyone else who knew them for that matter, need to? If you had the opportunity to talk with and listen to St. Paul himself, for example, or simply read his letters, which would you prefer to do? Sola Scriptura only applies to the post- apostolic era.

The written words of the Apostles are, as it were, primary sources of Christ’s time and just thereafter. It doesn’t make sense to disregard Tradition, but it also seems appropriate to measure Tradition against the writings of the apostles.

Jon

Ok so did the first generation post apostolic Christians practice sola scripture? I dont think so.

 

[Zooey]

I would agree with this, with the qualification that by “The Church” in the last sentence, you are talking about the apostolic era.

Guess my catechesis wasn’t very good, because I hadn’t ever heard it this way. I can’t quote a scripture verse that says “trinity”, or “real presence”, or even “Lord’s Prayer”. The creeds aren’t in any scripture verse, nor is the Augsburg Confession.
Maybe I’m just not a good Protestant anymore.
Maybe I never was.

Jon

Maybe you’re just a sensible person who can see that SS simply doesn’t work.

The very early letter from Clement to Corinth is FULL of references to the OT and quotes as well. Yes, good catch.

Yes, this** is** a good point. A very good one.
My idea is that the early Church used Scripture to support (& develop) Tradition, and they used Tradition to support and develop Scriptures. And the Holy Spirit inspired both.
The problem is with people who divorce Tradition completely and even demonize it. They are left with the quandary that this thread addresses: That we did not have Christian Scriptures until after we had Christianity.

Christianity is based on the Word of God. The Protestant claim is that the Word of God can be found in its entirety in the Bible as we now have it, not that at every point in salvation history this was the case.

Edwin

Edwin, this is the point of view of reasonable people, but I know a lot of unreasonable ones who really & truly believe that the early Christians had (presumably by some supernatural means) all the knowledge that we have now that we have a complete Bible.

 

[Randy_Carson]

It shows my gross ignorance and also that of my protestant friends. For ever i just assumed (as a result of never really thinking about it) that Christianity was the bible and if you cant quote a scripture verse you dont have any basis for your beliefs.

Tim-

Scripture and Tradition flow from the same source and support one another perfectly, but they are not identical. This might help:

Articles on the Relationship Between Scripture and Tradition

The Complex Relationship between Scripture and Tradition
By James Akin
catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0510bt.asp

What Is The Relationship Between Scripture And Tradition?
By Mark P. Shea
chnetwork.org/journals/authority/authority_9.htm

Scripture And Tradition
catholic.com/library/Scripture_and_Tradition.asp

Sacred Scripture Depends on Sacred Tradition
by Stephen N. Filippo
catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0003fea3.asp

 

[Adonia]

To: happy catholic
I saw your picture of the Pieta at the New York worlds fair in the 60’s. I’ll never forget seeing it. It was quite something. What a beautiful wotk of art! My mother found much solace from it. (All the greif I was giving her with my presence on earth, I guess) Chuckle! Chuckle!

 

[happilycatholic]

To: happy catholic
I saw your picture of the Pieta at the New York worlds fair in the 60’s. I’ll never forget seeing it. It was quite something. What a beautiful wotk of art! My mother found much solace from it. (All the greif I was giving her with my presence on earth, I guess) Chuckle! Chuckle!

Thank you. God Bless and Keep You.

HC

 

[JonNC]

=Zooey;5634749]Maybe you’re just a sensible person who can see that SS simply doesn’t work.

I think I just got a lefthanded compliment here.

I certainly agree that a practice of SS which eliminates all the things I mentioned above doesn’t work. But then, I wouldn’t define that as sola scriptura, anyway.

I like the way you post, Zooey,
Jon

 

[JonNC]

Ok so did the first generation post apostolic Christians practice sola scripture? I dont think so.

Neither do I. They were still quite close to the era. But as we move away from it, the need for a norm becomes necessary. Scripture is the norm we have.

Jon