G
Ginger2
Guest
Please, Name one thing Tradition teaches Jesus said or did that is not recorded in scripture.
Just one church father who quoted Jesus saying something that is not already written in the Scriptures.
- Status
Just one church father who quoted Jesus saying something that is not already written in the Scriptures.
W
wmscott
Guest
Just a quick definition of Sacred Tradition: The true “rule of faith”—as expressed in the Bible itself—is Scripture plus apostolic tradition (not manmade tradition), as manifested in the living teaching authority of the Catholic Church, to which were entrusted the oral teachings of Jesus and the apostles, along with the authority to interpret Scripture correctly. There exists a close connection and communication between sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture. For both of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For sacred Scripture is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the apostles, sacred Tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit.
Now you ask a question regarding “Name one thing Tradition teaches Jesus said or did that is not recorded in scripture.” to be honest this is a loaded question. By the same standard I could ask show me where you find any apostle, prophet, or Christ Himself where the word “Trinity”, or the words “Scripture Alone”, or “Faith Alone” was ever used. You cannot, although either possibly you, or definitely others will cite specific verses and say well you have to read into the verses to glean the understanding and intent of the verses to get to these points.
The problem is that this is a fallible personal interpretation, there are not any Protestant denominations that I know of that has a teaching authority which granted by Christ. Whereas the Catholic Church has the living teaching authority, established by Christ to protect and correctly interpret Sacred Scripture. This is well documented many times in Sacred Scripture.
Therefore, I will name two things that are not in Sacred Scripture, which through the Catholic Churches authority to interpret Scripture correctly through apostolic succession and Sacred Tradition that it goes against Gods will and that is Embryonic Stem Cell research and human cloning. I am sure there are more examples I am not citing that can be produced, these are just two off of the top of my head.
G
Ginger2
Guest
No, just the DR which was Translated from the error ridden Vulgate. Doctrines in the RC have been formed based on these errors.
However, the Catholic Bible I had as a child, seems to be pretty accurate.
G
Ginger2
Guest
lol Are you trying to suggest no Christian would know these things are immoral if the RC had not said so?
Nice try, but you still have not answered my question:
Your claim is Tradition is necessary because Jesus did and said many things not written in the Scriptures: (ref: Jo 20:30)
2. Name one thing Tradition teaches Jesus said or did that is not recorded in scripture.
E
estesbob
Guest
I agree that there is a large bit of gnosticism in those who adhrere to sola scriptura. Not only was it not from the Apostles it pre-dates Christ. It was a pagan belief that tried to co-opt Christianity. I find it very ironic that so many Protestant (starting with Luther) believe they have latched onto something “new” when in reality it has been around since before the Church itself.
E
estesbob
Guest
Evidently not. We now have main stream Protestant denominations that embrace homosexuality and abortion as being moral. Of course when one accepts no authority in determining matter of faith and morals but themselves this is inevitable.
G
Ginger2
Guest
SS is not the topic of this thread, but I would like to point out I agree the Catholic definition of SS is heretical. But ML didn’t invent SS as defined by Catholics or otherwise. Catholics just like to make that claim to try to discredit non-catholics.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=4867452&highlight=sola+scriptura#post4867452
Catholics adhere to a definition of SF that means works are irrelevant in Christian living. Protestant agree that is a false doctrine.
Luther said this about faith: "Thus, it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire! "
G
greggy53
Guest
All of the Catholic Bibles descended from the original Latin Vulgate translation. It was the First edition!
G
Ginger2
Guest
Of course their are no Catholics who would ever approve abortion or homosexuality. The church is absolute authority and they all followed what the Pope has declared.
Father Balasuriya was excommunicated but later was reunited to the Church without retracting his beliefs or denouncing the volume he wrote entitled ‘‘Mary and Human Liberation,’’
How can he be reunited with the Church if he is still a heretic?
Catholics have the same problems with this as Protestants.
Why should this surprise us? The Bible warns us they will do just that.
“False prophets who come in sheep’s clothing” This is not people who opening deny God or curse the church. “Sheep’s clothing” indicates they are pretending to be one of you. For Catholics, this would be someone who poses as a Catholic.
Are you unaware there are priests spreading false testimony in Catholic Churches, too?
If that particular parish all likes hearing certain lies, should I hold it against the entire Catholic Church?
But even if all Catholics agreed explicitly, that is no reason for me to believe things that are taught contrary to the Holy Scriptures. Afterall, JW’s are all consistent in their heresy. That stands as proof , believing something doesn’t make it true, not even if a great number of people agree to believe it.
Ginger
G
Ginger2
Guest
G
Ginger2
Guest
Eph 3:4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ
This says “when we read we can understand” what we are reading.
In contrast,
No matter how clear and concise the RC or anyone else explains Scriptures, it’s useless unless God opens the mind of the listener to understanding and his heart to acceptance.
We all have freewill and some people will reject the truth, just because they want to.
This is a known fact. It says so in the Bible.
That means your “infallible” interpretations are worthless.
Act 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, 4 Some of the Jews were persuaded …
This says Paul he explained/interpreted the Scriptures to them. Some accepted the truth and some denied it.
Those who believed did not believe in the Scriptures because Paul explained the Scriptures (ie infallible interpretation) - They believed what Paul said because the Scriptures proved Paul was telling the truth.
Those who did not believe, denied because they choose not to believe.
Again, this demonstrates the RC’s “infallible interpretation” is useless.
Faith is a matter of choice and understanding only comes from God.
God reveals Himself to whom He will - with or without the help of any man or organization.
Just as Jesus revealed the Gospel to Paul, so can the Holy Spirit reveal it to the rest of us.
Paul did not need the Apostle’s to explain Christ Jesus to him - Jesus appeared to Saul and opened his mind to knowledge of the Christ and God’s plan for salvation without the assistance of a single Apostle.
Finally, God promises not to let His own be led astray.*
My sheep listen to my voice;* I know them,* and they follow me.* *
I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish;
no one can snatch them from my hand.
John 10:27-28
Ginger
This says “when we read we can understand” what we are reading.
In contrast,
No matter how clear and concise the RC or anyone else explains Scriptures, it’s useless unless God opens the mind of the listener to understanding and his heart to acceptance.
We all have freewill and some people will reject the truth, just because they want to.
This is a known fact. It says so in the Bible.
That means your “infallible” interpretations are worthless.
Act 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, 4 Some of the Jews were persuaded …
This says Paul he explained/interpreted the Scriptures to them. Some accepted the truth and some denied it.
Those who believed did not believe in the Scriptures because Paul explained the Scriptures (ie infallible interpretation) - They believed what Paul said because the Scriptures proved Paul was telling the truth.
Those who did not believe, denied because they choose not to believe.
Again, this demonstrates the RC’s “infallible interpretation” is useless.
Faith is a matter of choice and understanding only comes from God.
God reveals Himself to whom He will - with or without the help of any man or organization.
Just as Jesus revealed the Gospel to Paul, so can the Holy Spirit reveal it to the rest of us.
Paul did not need the Apostle’s to explain Christ Jesus to him - Jesus appeared to Saul and opened his mind to knowledge of the Christ and God’s plan for salvation without the assistance of a single Apostle.
Finally, God promises not to let His own be led astray.*
My sheep listen to my voice;* I know them,* and they follow me.* *
I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish;
no one can snatch them from my hand.
John 10:27-28
Ginger
A
Arandur
Guest
Your challenge needs to be clarified. Are you looking for an explicit, word-for-word quote from Jesus, or step-by-step action?
I thought what we were talking about here was Truth, for which we don’t need the above, but we do need to know the truth of Christ’s teachings, the truth of the “remembrance of all things” that the Spirit guides the Church into. Now, “all things,” does that sound like something that could be contained in a single lifetime, when we are talking about the truth of an infinite God?
Anyway, here are some teachings that require Jesus’s truth that are not explicitly recorded in Scripture as clear word-for-word sayings or doings of Jesus: the Trinity, the moral status of abortion, the moral status of war, just how the Church should be organized, just how Scriptures ought to be canonized, and any number of particulars about how the Christian life should be lived. Yes, we are given guidance in the Bible for these, supports and foundations for them. But the particulars are revealed in Tradition. Scripture supports true Tradition. This has always been the position of the Catholic Church.
G
Ginger2
Guest
Prove to me the RC is not irrelevant.
Name one thing Tradition teaches Jesus said or did that is not recorded in scripture.
Name one thing Tradition teaches Jesus said or did that is not recorded in scripture.
C
cides23
Guest
What about scripture, why you didn’t mention anything about scripture, the New Testament. Yes the nature of GOD 3 divine person but one GOD but my point was the word Trinity and Tertullian was part of the Catholic Church at the time until he fell into heresey.
So you didn’t say anything about the 27 books that makes up the New Testament. Now where in the bible does it say, these are the inspired books no more and no less… So answer this one… With out the Church guided by the HOly SPirit we would not have what we have as the New Testament.
A
Arandur
Guest
None of your Scripture verses say what you think they do–namely, that Scripture is the ONLY authority. “Precepts” can come from other sources, and “teachings” clearly have. 2 Timothy 3, for instance, earlier in the same passage, has Paul FIRST instructing that people keep to HIS TEACHING. He had teaching authority, as a specially-ordained part of the Church. What do you think he did in his personal visits? Just read his writings that became Scripture? No, there was very obviously more to it. Writings were only a part. And of course we even have writings as scripture that are explicitly not directly from God, but Paul’s own advice. So he’s telling people that it is essential to follow his teachings not contained in writing, while even writing some things that he says need not be followed absolutely.
Again, you have refused to comment on any of the instances of Scripture that point to Tradition and the teaching authority of the Church. You choose to willfully reject those Scriptures that clearly refer you to tradition and the teaching authority of the Church, so how can we even believe that you accept Scripture wholly, rather than just picking and choosing what fits your worldview, your own preferences?
I
inkaneer
Guest
Ginger wrote:
“Your claim is Tradition is necessary because Jesus did and said many things not written in the Scriptures: (ref: Jo 20:30)
2. Name one thing Tradition teaches Jesus said or did that is not recorded in scripture.”
REPLY: First of all, that is not the claim the church makes. The claim is that Jesus empowered His Church with authority to make decisions on those matters of faith and morals that HE DID NOT TEACH. That is the source of the initial Apostolic authority and subsequent church authority. We only need to look at the Book of Acts to see where this was done. Jesus never told the Apostles to ordain deacons but they did. When did Jesus say that priests [presbuteros] were to be ordained? But we read where the priests [presbuteros or elders] were present and were to be called when one was sick. Jesus never told the Apostles to elect successors to themselves but they did. Jesus never told the APostles to appoint bishops but they did. And the best example occurs in Acts Chapter 15 at the council of Jerusalem where the question of should Gentile converts to the Church be circumcized is finally decided. Jesus never taught anything on it. But it is recorded that the Apostles said the following:
"28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: [Acts 15:28]
They did not consult scripture but rather claimed a direct inspiration from the Holy Spirit. If they had followed the scriptures they would have said that the gentiles should be circumcized for that was the claim of the Judacizers who claimed scripture as their authority. The New Testament was not in existence yet and when it would come into existence the circumcision requirement of the OT would not be there because the Church’s Oral Tradition had already decided the issue.
Now maybe you can show us how, in light of 2 Thess 2:15 you can claim sola scriptura is a doctrine taught by either scripture or Jesus.
“Your claim is Tradition is necessary because Jesus did and said many things not written in the Scriptures: (ref: Jo 20:30)
2. Name one thing Tradition teaches Jesus said or did that is not recorded in scripture.”
REPLY: First of all, that is not the claim the church makes. The claim is that Jesus empowered His Church with authority to make decisions on those matters of faith and morals that HE DID NOT TEACH. That is the source of the initial Apostolic authority and subsequent church authority. We only need to look at the Book of Acts to see where this was done. Jesus never told the Apostles to ordain deacons but they did. When did Jesus say that priests [presbuteros] were to be ordained? But we read where the priests [presbuteros or elders] were present and were to be called when one was sick. Jesus never told the Apostles to elect successors to themselves but they did. Jesus never told the APostles to appoint bishops but they did. And the best example occurs in Acts Chapter 15 at the council of Jerusalem where the question of should Gentile converts to the Church be circumcized is finally decided. Jesus never taught anything on it. But it is recorded that the Apostles said the following:
"28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: [Acts 15:28]
They did not consult scripture but rather claimed a direct inspiration from the Holy Spirit. If they had followed the scriptures they would have said that the gentiles should be circumcized for that was the claim of the Judacizers who claimed scripture as their authority. The New Testament was not in existence yet and when it would come into existence the circumcision requirement of the OT would not be there because the Church’s Oral Tradition had already decided the issue.
Now maybe you can show us how, in light of 2 Thess 2:15 you can claim sola scriptura is a doctrine taught by either scripture or Jesus.
W
wmscott
Guest
Laugh all you want, but you know as well as I do that there are a vast majority of Christians who support Stem cell research, and maybe a little less on Cloning. To you it might be wrong, so what, you got something right. What you do not understand and possibly never will accept is why Sacred Tradition exists. You keep saying “Your claim is Tradition is necessary because Jesus did and said many things not written in the Scriptures” or “ Name one thing Tradition teaches Jesus said or did that is not recorded in scripture”, well in my opinion I did, you just refuse to see it.
Therefore, I will put forward another, the Blessed Mothers Immaculate Conception and Perpetual Virginity. This is taught by the Church and is doctrine. In addition, it was never an issue and need official proclamations until after the Reformation. However being a Protestant, I am skeptical that you will accept this answer. I really do not think there is any answer that is going to satisfy you. Not because we can’t live up to your double standard, but because you will not accept anything Catholic as valid.
However, I think you are missing the point and deflecting the necessity of Sacred Tradition. This may be inadvertent or by design, I do not know. However, what is important is that Sacred Tradition exists is because of the following reasons, I provide them to you so that you can more fully understand Sacred Tradition:
continued…
W
wmscott
Guest
PART TWO
Taken from the Catechism of the Catholic Church
“In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority.” Indeed, “the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time.”
“This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called Tradition, since it is distinct from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it. Through Tradition, “the Church, in her doctrine, life and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes.” The sayings of the holy Fathers are a witness to the life-giving presence of this Tradition, showing how its riches are poured out in the practice and life of the Church, in her belief and her prayer."
"The Father’s self-communication made through his Word in the Holy Spirit, remains present and active in the Church: “God, who spoke in the past, continues to converse with the Spouse of his beloved Son. And the Holy Spirit, through whom the living voice of the Gospel rings out in the Church - and through her in the world - leads believers to the full truth, and makes the Word of Christ dwell in them in all its richness.”
“In His gracious goodness, God has seen to it that what He had revealed for the salvation of all nations would abide perpetually in its full integrity and be handed on to all generations. Therefore Christ the Lord in whom the full revelation of the supreme God is brought to completion (see Cor. 1:20; 3:13; 4:6), commissioned the Apostles to preach to all men that Gospel which is the source of all saving truth and moral teaching, (1) and to impart to them heavenly gifts. This Gospel had been promised in former times through the prophets, and Christ Himself had fulfilled it and promulgated it with His lips. This commission was faithfully fulfilled by the Apostles who, by their oral preaching, by example, and by observances handed on what they had received from the lips of Christ, from living with Him, and from what He did, or what they had learned through the prompting of the Holy Spirit. The commission was fulfilled, too, by those Apostles and apostolic men who under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit committed the message of salvation to writing.”
"But in order to keep the Gospel forever whole and alive within the Church, the Apostles left bishops as their successors, “handing over” to them "the authority to teach in their own place.“This sacred tradition, therefore, and Sacred Scripture of both the Old and New Testaments are like a mirror in which the pilgrim Church on earth looks at God, from whom she has received everything, until she is brought finally to see Him as He is, face to face (see 1 John 3:2).”
“And so the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved by an unending succession of preachers until the end of time. Therefore the Apostles, handing on what they themselves had received, warn the faithful to hold fast to the traditions which they have learned either by word of mouth or by letter (see 2 Thess. 2:15), and to fight in defense of the faith handed on once and for all (see Jude 1:3) (4) Now what was handed on by the Apostles includes everything which contributes toward the holiness of life and increase in faith of the peoples of God; and so the Church, in her teaching, life and worship, perpetuates and hands on to all generations all that she herself is, all that she believes.”
Christ knew that there would be those who would twist and pervert the Gospels. The Catholic Church through Apostolic succession and Sacred Tradition, have for over 2000 years defended Christ’s Church, His teachings, and His will from heresies, error, and ignorance. Look at the heresies that had to be defended against, The Circumcisers (1st Century), Gnosticism (1st and 2nd Centuries), Montanism (Late 2nd Century), Sabellianism (Early 3rd Century) , Arianism (4th Century), Pelagianism (5th Century) , Semi-Pelagianism (5th Century) , Nestorianism (5th Century), Monophysitism (5th Century), Iconoclasm (7th and 8th Centuries), Catharism (11th Century), Protestantism (16th Century), Jansenism (17th Century). Some of these are still alive today. There is a so-called Protestant religion that teaches that God is one and that Jesus is just a man operating today. if you want I could keep going, bottom line is that there is a valid and Biblical reason for Sacred Tradition.
I hope this helps.
A
Arandur
Guest
And you will find Catholic reference to support ALL its doctrines in Scripture. The concepts are all in Scripture, just not always clearly, succinctly, and explicitly stated so as to avoid all confusion. You may not agree with the Church’s arguments from Scripture, but that does not mean that they are not there.
You must admit that even though you yourself accept the Trinity, this was an incredibly hard topic for the early Christians, the result of many, many bitter heresies and divisions that the Catholic Church was instrumental in overcoming through its teaching authority. There were the Arians, the Manicheists, Gnostics, Dualists, Montanists, Monophysites, etc. And, of course, though it is present in concept in the OT, the Jews totally reject the concept of the Trinity.
So while the doctrine of the Trinity may have been present in the Scriptures and is supported by them, it took the teaching authority of the Church to confirm it in the face of all the challenges against it from those who didn’t think it was in the Scriptures!
This is extremely important, because you could just as easily be rejecting the trinity like any of those early believers on the very same basis by which you are rejecting other Catholic teachings now–you say they’re not present in Scripture. Well, they attempted the same argument against the Trinity.
So you see, you have defeated yourself. By admitting that the Trinity is a doctrine present in concept throughout the Bible, even though it was disputed vehemently by many (and still is by some today), you admit that the Church’s other doctrines that it claims are supported by Scripture could very well by true. You just reject the authority of Christ in His Church. Really, the position you’re in is the exact same as if you rejected the Trinity. You, like others of those times, could think by your own interpretation that the Trinity is not to be found in Scripture. You would be horribly wrong. Your refusal to bow to Christ’s authority in the matter and instead wallow in the ignorance of your own prideful “authority” to self-interpret would leave your soul in danger.
G
Ginger2
Guest
The Triune nature of God is explicit in Scriptures.
The Father is God (Phil. 1:2), Jesus is God (Titus 2:13), and the Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4)
There is Only One God
ISAIAH
43:10 …Before me there was no God, and after me there will be none
Jesus is the One God
JOHN
10:33 The Jews answered him, “…you, although being a man, make yourself God.
The Jews wanted to stone Jesus for claiming to be God.
Only one Savior who is the one true God
ISAIAH 43:11 I am YHWH, and besides me there is no savior.
Only one Savior who is Jesus
LUKE 2:11 because there was born to you today a Savior, who is Christ [the] Lord,…
Only serve the one true God
Luke 4:8 You shall worship the Lord Your God and serve Him only
We serve Jesus
Col 3:24 it is the Lord Christ whom you serve
Only worship the one true God
EXODUS 20:5….because I, YHWH, your God am a God exacting exclusive devotion, …
Worship Jesus
MATTHEW
28:17 When they saw him (Jesus) they worshipped him;
Every Knee will bow to God
ISAIAH
45:23 ….that to me every knee shall bow, every tongue confess…
Every Knee will bow to Jesus
PHIL
2:10-11 …that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,…
God is the Creator of all things
ISAIAH 48:13 My own hand laid the foundations of the earth and my right hand spread out the heavens;
Jesus is the creator of all things
JOHN 1:3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.
God is the source of life
PSALMS 36:9 For by you is the source of life.
Jesus is the source of life
John 5:21 Indeed, just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whomever he wishes.
WHO IS THE FIRST AND LAST?
GOD
ISAIAH44:6 This is what YHWH has said, … “I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no God.”
JESUS
REVELATION
1:17-18 ….I am the first and the Last, ….and the living one, and I became dead, but look! I am living forever and ever,… Obviously, Jesus is the one who became dead but lives forever.
Ex. 21:
22 "If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely [e] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.
Luk 1:41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
etc., etc., etc.,…
These seem clear to me.
- Status