R
reteeks21
Guest
No, no, no! I was not lashing out at you. In fact, I NEVER thought that you were jumping on me as a prot. Please don’t think I was calling you out. I definitely wasn’t referring to you.
- Status
M
mangy_dog
Guest
Relax 'teeks,
His sign over us is peace.
I seriously mean the part of the Warning, Miracle and Chastisement. I really do pray that you come home. And I mean all this in love and charity…really.
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.
J
justasking4
Guest
I agree that perhaps many of the early churches did not have copies of the written scriptures. Without these there would have been some deficiencies.
What do you mean by Apostolic tradition? Can you give me a couple of examples of it in this period?
C
ChristianRoots
Guest
Oral teachings of the Apostles.
With no New Testament Scripture or living Apostles to refer to, how esle did the early Christains make sure they didn’t deviate from the fullness of the faith?
J
justasking4
Guest
Would you agree that the oral teachings of the apostles is found only in the written Scriptures?
This would take some research to answer this. It seems to me that the church would have absorbed some false teachings in various places. Revelations 1-3 attest to this.
C
CentralFLJames
Guest
Well among other things like fishing, breaking bread, shaking the dust of non believer’s towns off their shoes and being martyred for their faith the oral teaching tradition.
Jim
J
justasking4
Guest
These things are recorded in the Scriptures. Are you saying that these Apostolic traditions are found only in the Scriptures?Originally Posted by justasking4
What do you mean by Apostolic tradition? Can you give me a couple of examples of it in this period?
CentralFLJames
Well among other things like fishing, breaking bread, shaking the dust of non believer’s towns off their shoes and being martyred for their faith the oral teaching tradition.
Jim
C
ChristianRoots
Guest
J
justasking4
Guest
G
guanophore
Guest
Certainly not! Such a statement indicates that the Sacred Oral Tradition from which the Scripture was derived has gone extinct, something which the Bible never affirms.
It seems that way to you because you deny the promises of Christ, and the Power of God to perform the Word that He sent forth. On the contrary, the church has consistently and effectively prevailed over heresies from the days of the Acts of teh Apostles to the present. There are many places in scripture that attest to this.
G
guanophore
Guest
You can find them in the prayers and practices of the Apostolic Faiths. These are the places where the teachings of the Apostles have been preserved.
And how is one to identify an appropriate teacher?
Agreed, but how are they to be distinguished from the false teachers? How does one know they are not just having “itching ears” and gravitating to what is comfortable?
This is an anti-Catholic myth that you have been taught, ja4. It is one of the foundation stones of Protestantism. On the contrary, Jesus explained everything to His Apostles, and they entrusted that message to faithful men who were able to teach others also.
I agree with you, it is sad that more people do not even open the Bibles in the house. However, knowledge of God and relation with God is not reached by reading and study. God reaches out to use through his Divine Revelation. this is found in the Apostolic Teaching. Some of it may also be reflected in books, and one should study, but thinking that we can come into the fulness of faith by academic resources is hubris.
L
Lampo
Guest
Are you such a teacher? Are you an authentic interpreter of Scripture? If yes, who appointed you to be an authentic interpreter of the Bible? Is your interpretation of Scripture infallible? Am I an authentic interpreter of Scripture? If you are not an authentic interpreter of Scripture, then who is?
If the Catholic Church was proven to be wrong, on any of its doctrinal teachings, then I would either become a Jew or an atheist. There are no other alternatives. If the Church is not an institution we can turn to for infallible guidance in the areas of faith and morals, then we have no way of solving disputes as to what is and is not the truth in those areas. You might think, “Well, yes we do, we can simply open the Bible and read for ourselves.” Well, that was tried beginning around 1520. And, now, thousands of denominations later (each denomination going solely by the Bible), we have nothing but chaos in Protestant Christianity.
C
ChristianRoots
Guest
Jesus performed miracles not written down in Scripture.
My exact sentiments, too.
Let me rephrase: Did any group of early Christians have in their possession by the end of the first century the complete New Testament, meaning only the 27 current books and no other?
The further one is removed from an event, the clearer his understanding?? It’s actually the other way around.
Why would Jesus reveal his Word during ancient times, knowing the population did not have proper biblical tools at their disposal?
So, I guess as textual criticism and biblical scholarship, etc. improves through the next few decades, the next generation of people would have a clearer understanding of the faith as you do now?
I agree that today many people today dont read and study the Scriptures.
But the people and churches of the second century did hear from people who actually heard the Apostles preach. That’s pretty cool.
C
CentralFLJames
Guest
I agree on the treasure part. But the bit about knowing more about the faith I am not so sure about since a simple but correct faith is more profound than an academic faith that is full of academic errors - as is Protestantism for example. Luther spend a large part of his life studying scripture with a critical eye to the Church. He went looking for problems and found problems but missed the more fundamental message in the bible - love one another and submit to the authority of God’s Kingdom on Earth. There is no salvation in scholarship - only a possibility for a deeper understanding.
The Catholic Church has a vast treasure of intellectual, philosophical, theological, and tradition that far surpasses anything on the planet. The Catholic Church (the “Catholic Nation” if you will) is the longest standing in-tact church-state civilization still in existence on the planet (the Jews are all internally fragmented over secular and religious doctrine so they don’t qualify). It’s a shame that more in-name only “Christians” don’t take advantage of over 2,000 years of Catholic Church Teaching, scholarship, vast libraries and archives, pedigree, and tradition to increase the depth of their faith and insight beyond the fundamentalist level of reading comprehension of scripture to get the true message of Christ’s teaching.
Why is it that some people just a few years after they learn how to read seem to want to put the cart before the horse and have the student teach the teacher? That’s just disrespectful and arrogant.
James
R
Righteousone
Guest
Yea…get over it 101, we’ve been around for 2,000 years and we aren’t going away. It happened, it isn’t happening anymore here in our church, perhaps elsewhere, get over it, move on, it’s steal…It’s kind of hard to “get over” something that is still going on in some places, in varying degrees, so that’s not a solution to that concern. It is worth noting though that Catholics are not being especially singled out for persecution related to abuse law suits. It is happening to many others, lawyers and the press have an equal “field-day” with this kind of thing, no matter where it’s found.
I see some Catholic leadership as being much more accountable for their church’s actions, or lack thereof, than to just get defensive, and go on the counter-attack. You should follow the example of your leaders in this matter.
I have a lot of respect for church leaders who are accountable to the church, and to the public. No matter what church they are from…
J
justasking4
Guest
Yes.
What is an “authentic interpreter of Scripture”?
Since i’m in Christ and follow Christ and i study the Scriptures and if Christ calls me to teach at times then i guess i have been appointed.
Are you an authentic interpreter of the catholic church? If so, who appointed you?
No.
Until i know what you mean by an authentic interpreter of Scripture i can’t answer.
Huh? Why do you say this? Your church has been wrong on things and yet you don’t see a mass exodus of catholics from the church. You could also become a protestant.
There is much in your church that your leaders have left you hanging. For example it has infallibly defined less than 20 verses of the Scriptures. This means you don’t know with certainity what the thousands of other verse means. Secondly, catholics believe all kinds of different things about their church. Some say you must believe everything and others say not. Some say your conscience is your supreme guide while others say no. The point is that if you think that the catholic church is one unified whole its not true.
J
justasking4
Guest
That is true but we don’t know exactly what they were. They are closed off to us since we don’t have written records of them.
Do you think this happens much in the catholic church?
Probalby not.
Not necessarily so. For example we know more the World War 2 today than the person who lived through it and died in 1947. The reason is that we have had more and more data to look at that has come to light years after the war. The samething will also problably happen for 9-11. Even though we may have lived through it later historians will have access to far more material than we currently have available to us.
Its not necessary for people to believe His message to be saved and follow Him to have this indepth knowledge.
That certainly is possible. Lets take Jerome as an example. When he translated the Vulgate he was most likely alone and had a small and limited manuscripts to work with. It was a good translation. Today, we have more scholars, more manuscripts and greater technology to go even deeper and farther than he did.
Even though he lived closer to the events than we do we still have the advantage in scholarship etc to produce more accurate translations than he did.
I agree that would be cool. However the Christian of today can have so much more if he-she is willing to avail himself to the resources that are available. To think that you can have your own personal copy of the entire Scripture is a treasure that Christians in the 1st 1500 years of church history would have most likely died for.
L
Lampo
Guest
I didn’t mean for it to be a trick question. Are you someone who interprets Scripture?
By whom? You didn’t answer the question.
I at times interpret Scripture in the light of the teachings of the Church. I never argue anything that is outside of Church teaching. And, since the Church teaches infallibly, I can argue that all of the doctrines and dogmas that I put forth, are indeed infallible.
Since you admit to being fallible in all of your interpretations of Scripture, then why should I, or anyone else, risk the salvation of our souls on what you are saying?
Already covered I think.
Wrong according to your already admitted fallible interpretation of Scripture?
The Catechism says that “the task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ." This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.” (no. 85).
I think St. Augustine sums things up quite nicely:
“The Catholic Church is the work of Divine Providence, achieved through the prophecies of the prophets, through the Incarnation and the teaching of Christ, through the journeys of the Apostles, through the suffering, the crosses, the blood and the death of the martyrs, through the admirable lives of the saints. When, then, we see so much help on God’s part, so much progress and so much fruit, shall we hesitate to bury ourselves in the bosom of that Church? For starting from the Apostolic Chair down through successions of bishops, even unto the open confession of all mankind, it has possessed the crown of teaching authority.”
The Advantage of Believing, 391 A.D.
The Church is the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15). Whoever hears it, hears Jesus himself (Luke 10:16), and it is the court of final appeals (Matt 18:17). That Church is the Catholic Church, and Jesus still guides her into all truth.
The Church gives us leeway in interpreting Scripture. We are encouraged to read and interpret Scripture as long as our interpretations do not contradict the teaching of Jesus Christ and His Church.
Sadly, very true. That does not mean the Church isn’t unified. The Church has one set of teachings, doctrines and dogmas. The Church teaches Jesus’ Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity is truly present in the Eucharist. If I do not believe this it means I am not in full communion with the Church and should not call myself Catholic.
Instead of going by what “some say”, why don’t you go directly to the horse’s mouth? CCC
If Catholics want to pick and choose for themselves which of the Church’s teachings to accept and reject, that gives the right to all Catholics to do the same, which is wrong. These are called “cafeteria Catholics.”
According to you. Scripture, Sacred Tradition, the Magesterium, the Early Christians/Early Church Fathers and 2,000 years of Church teaching all disagree with you.
C
ChristianRoots
Guest
Were the miracles performed by Jesus not recorded in Scripture just as significant as those that were recorded in Scripture?
Among Catholic lay people, generally no. Among clergy and scholars, etc, most likely yes.
Unfortunately, this is how bias is also introduced to historical events. The danger now is someone starts giving his HIS OWN interpetation. How do we know which data appealed to him more (subconsciously, psychologically, etc.) in determining his results? Which data did he pay less attention to? Did he have an agenda to say things happened a certain way?
And by the way this can work the other way as well:
If given the opportunity, would you rather interview a college professor about D-Day in the year 2044, or would you rather interview someone who actually took part in the invasion of June 6, 1944 in the year 1947?
???
If it’s not necessary for people to have in-depth knowledge to follow Jesus except to believe His message, then why so much emphasis on bibilical study tools, or referring to early Christians as having an incomplete faith because they did not have all the current 27 books of the New Testament in their possession?
I guess it’s safe to say you would rather live in the future, say ca. A.D. 3050 (according to you we will have a better translation of the Bible than now) rather than A.D. 400. Not me.
J
justasking4
Guest
Part 1
Yes. Just as everyone else who reads and studies it.
By Christ. He gives gifts to the church for its ediification and building it up. All Christians have some kind of gift from Christ.
What is the basis for this? Where explicitedly did Jesus teach the church would always be infallible in all that it teaches?
You can either risk on the inspired-inerrant Scripture or fallible men who lead your church. Thats a choice you will have to make since no one is infallible.
Not just scripture but history shows evidence of it to.
- Status