If there apostolic succession why is it not mentioned in the scriptures?

  • Thread starter Thread starter guanophore
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually, it appears that he’d rather beat us over the head with that bible he worships.
As someone who came out of a born-again-Bible-based tradition, and who has many acquaintances who are still there and many acquaintances who have left the Catholic Church for “Bible” congregations, I have a sympathetic appreciation for the intensity of the prejudice against the Church.

If you haven’t experienced this for yourself, you cannot really appreciate the hold it has on people. It takes a powerful boatload of grace (and often a couple of decades) for a person to get past the idea that the Catholic Church is the enemy of Christ. Read my sig!
 
I didn’t say it was unbilbical but that you don’t find a specific phrase that says this.
One does not find a specific phrase in the bible that says it is the summation of all Divine Revelation because it was never intended to be that. Jesus taught His disciples orally, then He commissioned them to do the same. He empowered and trained teachers and preachers. Aposltes.
Is the Bible used in the catholic church used as a foundation for its doctrines?
No. The Foundation of the Catholic Doctrines is Jesus Christ, and the Apostolic Teaching. We do find these in the Bible, but they are not the Source. They are a reflection.
If you are referring to 2 Thes 2:15 then tell me specifically what traditions Paul was referring to?
The Way of the Kingdom is a lifestyle, not a “list”, ja4. Jesus lived this pattern with his Apostles, and they passed it on to those to whom they were sent.

"…you have become obedient from the heart
.to the pattern of teaching to which you were entrusted "(Rom 6:12)
i never have. I have never stated there are not other authorities in the church. What i have said is that the scriptures alone are the only inspired-inerrant word of God. Not tradition nor the church itself is inerrant-inspired.
Now you are being disingenuous again, ja4. Either you are contradicting yourself, or you have changed your mind, but don’t try to purport that you “never have” argued from the assumption that the Bible is the only authority.
All we have of what Jesus and the apostles taught is to be found only in the scriptures. The scriptures are sufficent for all that we need to live our lives in Christ.
40.png
justasking4:
The NT is inspired-inerrant. Nothing else is. It is the foundation for all doctrine and practices because it alone is inspired-inerrant. From it we can have everything we need for salvation. It actually makes this claim as you may know. I go to the inspired-inerrant scriptures as the final authority.
 
i disagree. If the pope is truly part of the successions of the apostles and is the vicar of Christ on earth then we should see evidence of this throughout time. To claim to be a vicar of Christ who is in succession of the apostles does mean they would be like Christ and the apostles not only in authority but in action.
It would sure be nice if this were true. I wish and pray fervently that all those who are in the Apostolic Succession would reflect in theri actions the purity of the call. However, it has not been the case. I agree with you, the pope is truly part of the Apostolic Succession, and the vicar of ;Christ on earth. We do see evidence of this throughout time. Unfortunately, personal holiness is not always in evidence.
If this is true and that person who was pope and acted in these evil ways would that negate him as vicar of Christ?
No, any more than the betrayal of Christ by Judas and Peter negates the teaching of Christ, or the calling he gave to them.
Will theologians be tortured and put to death if they don’t recant?
I am not sure why you are asking this question. Can you help me understand what this has to do with Apostolic Succession?
i don’t think this is a rabbit trail at all but an important part of this discussion. It helps us to see in history if there really is such a thing by studying what popes have done. If you say these evil popes were not popes then you have other problems to deal with.
Well, there were some people that claimed to be popes who were not. However, this subject will need another thread. The lack of personal holiness among certain disciples of Christ has no bearing on Apostolic Succession. If you want to discuss evil popes, you will have to open another thread.
 
Am i to believe that there are no different interpretations of the scriptures and catholic doctrine in the catholic church? i have met a number of catholics when i ask there interpretation what a particular passage means i usually get a number of different interpretations. What should i make of this?
Yes. The Catholic Church teaches one seamless gospel handed down to it from the Apostles. It contains no contradictions or errors because it’s Source is Christ.

There are a number of individual Catholics who are either uneducated or misled about what the Church teaches. Their ignorance or inexperience in no way negates the Teachings.
Can you recommed a good commentary on the Bible written by a catholic scholar? I’m looking for one that has interprets verses and passages of the scriptures.
No, ja4. The Catholic church does not “interpret verses and passages of the scriptures” in the manner in which you have been taught. The Church recognizes that the Scriptures are part of the Divine Deposit of Faith, and they are interpreted in the light of the Gospel message that has been faithfully handed down to us via the Apostolic Succession.
 
Then what am i to make of Pope Honorius who had been anathematized by the sixth Ecumenical Synod for teaching heresy?
Stop trolling ja4, and trying to derail this thread. As it has been explained to you multiple times, Honorous never taught any heresy, and he was not anathamatized for that reason. You are looking for ignorant Catholics so you can snare them into your anti-Catholic bias.

Your efforts to draw Catholics away from their faith, and your continual posting of anti-Catholic lies are against the forum rules. If you continue to do these things, it may affect your posting privileges.
Then what makes the catholic church any different that protestants who are accused of having thousands of different interpretations of the scriptures? Just as catholics accuse each protestant having his own private interpretation of scripture so do catholics.
Protestant Churches, by and large, do not claim to have Apostolic Succession, and do not claim to be the custodians of the Divine Deposit of Faith handed on to us through that Succession.

A Catholic will defer to that Authority, while a Protestant will “protest” (rebel) against the authority appointed by Jesus.
 
Thats a good question you asked the protestant. Now how would it be answered in the catholic church? Has it always been answered the same way?
You already know the answer to this one, it was given to you in Where is Bible in Bible. You STILL think it is amniotic fluid, even though you have been shown Chapter and Verse that this is not correct.😛
 
Then what makes the catholic church any different that protestants who are accused of having thousands of different interpretations of the scriptures? Just as catholics accuse each protestant having his own private interpretation of scripture so do catholics.
You already know the answer to this one too. I have told you that personal interpretation must be with the Framework of The Magesterium.
HOO, I get so tired of REPEATING myself :yawn:
Thank you. I’ll look into it.
You really are disingenious, you told another poster “I do a lot of reading already, so just tell me what it means”:tsktsk:
I therefore challenge you to prove that you have “looked into IT.”
 
Am i to believe that there are no different interpretations of the scriptures and catholic doctrine in the catholic church? i have met a number of catholics when i ask there interpretation what a particular passage means i usually get a number of different interpretations. What should i make of this?
Yes. The Catholic Church teaches one seamless gospel handed down to it from the Apostles. It contains no contradictions or errors because it’s Source is Christ.

There are a number of individual Catholics who are either uneducated or misled about what the Church teaches. Their ignorance or inexperience in no way negates the Teachings.
Can you recommed a good commentary on the Bible written by a catholic scholar? I’m looking for one that has interprets verses and passages of the scriptures.
No, ja4. The Catholic church does not “interpret verses and passages of the scriptures” in the manner in which you have been taught. The Church recognizes that the Scriptures are part of the Divine Deposit of Faith, and they are interpreted in the light of the Gospel message that has been faithfully handed down to us via the Apostolic Succession.
 
Then what makes the catholic church any different that protestants who are accused of having thousands of different interpretations of the scriptures? Just as catholics accuse each protestant having his own private interpretation of scripture so do catholics.
Three Guidelines for Reading Scripture
by Mark Shea

People who are approaching the Bible for the first time may be surprised to discover that the Church offers us only three basic guidelines for reading it. These are:
  1. Be especially attentive “to the content and unity of the whole Scripture”;
  2. Read the Scripture within “the living tradition of the whole Church”; and,
  3. Be attentive to the analogy of faith.
In these deceptively simple guidelines are enfolded, like the oak tree in the acorn, the entire pattern for reading Scripture in a healthy way. Let’s unpack them a bit.
holyspiritinteractive.net/columns/markshea/sheavings/47.asp
 
As someone who came out of a born-again-Bible-based tradition, and who has many acquaintances who are still there and many acquaintances who have left the Catholic Church for “Bible” congregations, I have a sympathetic appreciation for the intensity of the prejudice against the Church.

If you haven’t experienced this for yourself, you cannot really appreciate the hold it has on people. It takes a powerful boatload of grace (and often a couple of decades) for a person to get past the idea that the Catholic Church is the enemy of Christ. Read my sig!
Amen!👍 Truth, reason and logic fail. Only the power of prayer remains. Come, Holy Spirit!
 
As someone who came out of a born-again-Bible-based tradition, and who has many acquaintances who are still there and many acquaintances who have left the Catholic Church for “Bible” congregations, I have a sympathetic appreciation for the intensity of the prejudice against the Church.

If you haven’t experienced this for yourself, you cannot really appreciate the hold it has on people. It takes a powerful boatload of grace (and often a couple of decades) for a person to get past the idea that the Catholic Church is the enemy of Christ. Read my sig!
I like Bishops Sheens quote too:

“Not 100 people in the United states hates the Catholic Church but millions hate what they mistakenly believe her to be.”
 
I like Bishops Sheens quote too:

“Not 100 people in the United states hates the Catholic Church but millions hate what they mistakenly believe her to be.”
And don’t forget Chesterton: "I would have converted years earlier but the one thing that stopped me was – CATHOLICS!
 
From 1476 to 1834 probably between 3,000 and 5,000 people were executed in the Spainish inquisition. Keep in mind the inquisitions went on for centuries.
That is a reasonably accurate number, and I am impressed that you have given that answer.

Part two: How many of these people were killed by the Catholic Church directly versus being killed by the Spanish government?
 
It would not necessarily negate it. However i think there are other problems for it from a historical perspective. Early church history does not support the idea of a universal and recognized leader of the entire church in the late and 2 centuries. For one thing the church was to spread out and fragmented.
Oh.

I wonder why Paul went to visit Peter in Jerusalem twice then?

After all, he had seen the Lord personally and says that no one taught him his gospel.

Why would he feel the need to check his doctrine with anyone else, and was it just coincidence that Paul chose to consult with Peter whom Jesus named “the rock”?
 
Am i to believe that there are no different interpretations of the scriptures and catholic doctrine in the catholic church? i have met a number of catholics when i ask there interpretation what a particular passage means i usually get a number of different interpretations. What should i make of this?

Can you recommed a good commentary on the Bible written by a catholic scholar? I’m looking for one that has interprets verses and passages of the scriptures.
This was recommended on another thread:

haydock1859.tripod.com/index.html
 
Do you believe that the way the catholic church aligned itself with the secular authorties in the past centuries was what Christ intended for His church? Do you seriously believe that Christ intended His church to have inquistions that lasted for so long the resulted in the death and torture of so many people?
God’s first chosen people, the Israelites, were also imperfect. They also disobeyed God and committed many offenses against God and man, but we know that the Israelites were God’s chosen people despite the atrocities they committed because the teachings of the Israelites remained the same and the prophecies were fulfilled in them. Just as God selected a chosen people, he also built a church. This church He built would be a church of sinners because God always calls the sinners. We already know from the Bible that Christ was calling sinners to His church.

God always calls the lowly, the sinners, the humble, the poor, the barren, etc. so that He would show His power and people will know His chosen ones. He chose a fatherless man with a barren wife like Abraham and made him the Father of many nations. He did this so that all will know who God is. Only God has the power to bring life to a dead womb like Sarah and only God has the power to make a fatherless man like Abraham become the Father of many nations. And out of Abraham will come His chosen people - the Israelites.

Only God has the power to take a little shepherd boy like David who have absolutely no military skills and defeat a giant warrior like Goliath. Only God can take that same little shepherd boy and turn him into a king. Only God can take Moses who has a speech problem and turn him into a public speaker. Only God can make a group of Hebrew slaves from Egypt into a great nation - Israel. Moses prophesized to this group of slaves that one day they will become a nation.

Exodus 19:6 I will count you a kingdom of priests, a consecrated nation.

St. Peter made a similar prophecy regarding the Church that Christ built.

1 Peter 2:9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a consecrated nation, a people set apart to sing the praises of God who called you out of the darkness into his wonderful light.

There is only one Christian denomination that fulfilled the prophecy of St. Peter. The Catholic Church is the only one that became a nation - Vatican City. Christ created only one church. He did not create 200,000 different churches. The Catholic Church is the church that Christ built because it has shown God’s power by fulfilling the prophecy in the Bible. Only God has the power to turn a group of lowly slaves into a nation - Isarel. He did that and out of that nation came a savior. Only God has the power to turn His Church also into a nation, and there is only one Christian denomination that became a nation. This is done so that all will know the Church that Christ built and can see God’s power. Out of that church will come many saints because only God has the power to turn sinners into saints like the Apostles.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top