Would you agree that the “traditions” in 2 Thes 3:6 whatever they were not the marian dogmas, purgatory, indulgences or treasury of merits since these came about centuries later. Correct?
Not by any means. Any development of doctrine later is based upon the Apostolic teaching that came before. For example, the doctrinal developments of the hypostatic union and the Trinity were developed from previous Apostolic Teaching. Since the Marian doctrines were first developed in the East, and this is where Paul taught the most, it is most likely that he is the one who drew the parallels to the Ark that we see in Luke’s gospel. We also know that Paul used the Septuagint, so he had Maccabees, and would understand and teach atonement for the dead. It is Paul that taught the doctrinal development of the Church as a “body” which is the foundation of the concept of indulgences and the treasury of merit.
These are probably in the Sermons of the Tyrannus.
Where in these passages is Paul making any reference to these things being specifically about an apostle?
Do you imagine that Paul does not consider himself to be an Apostle?
Where does he ever refer to Timothy or anyone else that they to were going to be apostles?
The successors of the apostles are called “bishops”. Timothy and Titus were bishops.
Furthermore we declare, state, define, and pronounce that it is altogether necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman pontiff."
I cannot see the conflict here. There is only ONE BODY. ONE CHURCH. Jesus gave the authority to Peter, who passed it on to his successor. All who are in union with Peter are covered by Jesus high priestly prayer.
How are you using the word “pope” here? If you mean by it the supreme leader of the church we know that it took some time before there was one recognized person who was head of the church. It actually took centuries.
I beg of you, ja4, “be transformed by the renewing of your mind”. This idea you have of “supremacy” is earthly, and not of God. Jesus was quite clear that those who were leaders were not to lord it over others, but to wash the feet.
Peter was recognized from the day he was named as Cephas (rock). It is not a role of “supremacy” as you erroneously believe. It is a role of chief servant. The Petrine ministry is to “strengthen the brethren”. “Pope” is Italian for “papa”. It is a term of endearment.
The way one “gets to be born-again and blood-bought” can be found in Romans 10:9-10:
Yes, but one cannot be born again without the water and spirit in which one is bathed in baptism.
You don’t need a sacrament to become born again and have new life in Christ.
If we don’t need it, why did Jesus command it?
I’m referring to John 17:20-21
Many people claim that this has not happened.
I agree that there is unity lacking in the Body. Many, such as yourself, have rejected those appointed by Christ, thus, rejecting Him. This hinders unity.
You would have to show me that the claims of the catholic church are grounded in the scriptures.
Fortunately, this will never happen. Christ, who is in all, through all, and for all, is the grounding for the Catholic Teachings. He who was, in the beginning was with God, and is God. He is the author and finisher of our faith. Catholicism is grounded in the person of Jesus. The Scriptures reflect this believe, for they are Catholic, but it is in Christ that our life appears, and not in the book.
Actually the Scriptures “belong” to the followers of Christ. It is by them that we know what to believe and live. We are to be “nourished” by them that we might grow in respect to salvation. See I Peter 2:2
Indeed! And all true followers of Christ are Catholic. The followers of Christ are members of His Body, of which He is the Head, and He does not distinguish Himself from her.
just because God used the church to tell us what the NT canon was does not mean that the church has been faithful to the scriptures. The Scriptures are not dependent on any pope or council for its authority since it derives its authority from Christ Himself.
The Church produced the Scriptures, and there is nothing in their content to which the Church that produced them is not faithful. Christ passed His authority on to the Apostles, who then passed that authority on to their successors. It was this authority that composed, defined, and closed the canon. The scriptures are authenticated by Christ, through His Church, the Holy Bride.
What do you mean the “context of the Bible is the Catholic Church”?
The NT was written by, for, and about Catholics. It represents in it’s entirety Catholic Sacred Tradition. It cannot be properly understood apart from that Tradition.
What does True Church mean?
Col 1:17-18
18 He is the head of the body, the church
All those who are joined to the Head.
Sorry, guano, that ISN’T what the Catholic Church teaches.
If you think not, then you need to refer to your catechism. Those in non-Catholic ecclesiastical communities that are validly baptized are considered our brethren in Christ. Granted, they are improperly joined to the One Body, because they reject various degrees of the Teachings of Christ. The Church teaches that there are not "churches’ but only One Church, One Body.
