Prior to 250 AD or so, the 4 Gospels were anonymous and later affixed by tradition

  • Thread starter Thread starter joe370
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
=tester;7205341]here is the issue in a nutshell:
Click to expand...
If Saint John the Apostle told Polycarp that “I wrote the Gospel According to John” : or that Matthew wrote the “Gospel According to Matthew”
Click to expand...
your answer would be that St. John was Catholic with a capital “C”.
Click to expand...
OK…
** IF you, a Catholic, define every single believer ** prior to 250AD as Catholic (upper case “C”) then you Catholic viewpoint is correct (lower case “c”)
Click to expand...
Is that your answer to the OP? :confused:
 
joe370 said:
Todd, where does the in the New Testament does the New Testament identify the apostle Matthew as the author of the gospel of Matthew, and Mark as the author of the gospel of Mark and Luke as the author of the gospel of Luke and the apostle John the author of the gospel of John? Maybe I overlooked it.** I believe these men are the authors because the tradition of the CC tells me that they wrote them.** Is there another way to know who wrote these 4 gospels outside CC tradition?
Click to expand...
Joe,

Has your church infallibly declared that the gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?

If so, where can I find this infallible declaration and how will I recognize it as being infallible?
 
SemperReformada said:
Joe,

Has your church infallibly declared that the gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?

If so, where can I find this infallible declaration and how will I recognize it as being infallible?
Click to expand...
Is that your answer to the OP? :confused: It was CC (since the gospels are anonymous) - that put the names Matthew, Mark, Luke and John to the 4 anonymous gospels, as well as Paul to the book of Hebrews.
 
joe370 said:
OK…
Click to expand...
Is that your answer to the OP? :confused:

it was a reply to your question that quoted…

If St. John told 10 believers who wrote the Gospel and they each told 10 others and they each told…

AND you claim every believer was Catholic then it was Catholic tradition that kept track of authorship…

BUT IF your point is that Sola Sciptura means NO tradition can ever be used: then you are mistaken.And that has been pointed out to you in the past.

From Catholic.com
“Even the principle of sola scriptura (“Scripture alone”), according to the sharpest Protestant scholars, means that the Bible is the ultimate authority—above councils and popes and any tradition**—but not that no commentary or tradition may be cited or utilized**.”
catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0402fea3.asp

From wiki
“Sola Scriptura is not a denial of other authorities governing Christian life and devotion. Rather, it simply demands that all other authorities are subordinate to, and are to be corrected by, the written word of God”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sola_scriptura​

From NEWADVENT.org

Sola scriptura (“Bible alone”)

The [first] objective [or formal] principle proclaims the canonical Scriptures, especially the New Testament, to be the only infallible source and rule of faith and practice, and asserts the right of private interpretation of the same, in distinction from the Roman Catholic view, which declares the Bible and tradition to be co-ordinate sources and rule of faith, and makes tradition, especially the decrees of popes and councils, the only legitimate and infallible interpreter of the Bible. In its extreme form Chillingworth expressed this principle of the Reformation in the well-known formula, “The Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible, is the religion of Protestants.”** Protestantism, however, by no means despises or rejects church authority** as such, but only subordinates it to, and measures its value by, the Bible, and believes in a progressive interpretation of the Bible through the expanding and deepening consciousness of Christendom. Hence, besides having its own symbols or standards of public doctrine, it retained all the articles of the ancient creeds and a large amount of disciplinary and ritual tradition, and rejected only those doctrines and ceremonies for which no clear warrant was found in the Bible and which seemed to contradict its letter or spirit. …"
 
joe370 said:
Is that your answer to the OP? :confused: It was CC (since the gospels are anonymous) - that put the names Matthew, Mark, Luke and John to the 4 anonymous gospels, as well as Paul to the book of Hebrews.
Click to expand...
Joe,

Has your church infallibly declared that the gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?

If so, where can I find this infallible declaration and how will I recognize it as being infallible?
 
SemperReformada said:
Joe,

Has your church infallibly declared that the gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?

If so, where can I find this infallible declaration and how will I recognize it as being infallible?
Click to expand...
Dear friends: Serious question: If the scriptures were written by Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, all of whom knew Jesus, and they were inspired by God or guided by the Holy Spirit, why do the contradict one another? I am seriously confused by all of this and I am trying to understand.

Your freind
Sufjon
 
SemperReformada said:
Joe,

Has your church infallibly declared that the gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?

If so, where can I find this infallible declaration and how will I recognize it as being infallible?
Click to expand...
I see…you want to bait me instead of answering the question…If it can be infallibly stated that Matthew is the author of the gospel of Matthew and Mark is the author of the gospel of Mark and Luke is the author of the gospel of Luke and John is the author of the gospel of John, then yes, the CC infallibly declared…

Now, what is your response to my OP? If my supposition is wrong I will gladly admit it.
 
Sufjon said:
Dear friends: Serious question: If the scriptures were written by Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, all of whom knew Jesus, and they were inspired by God or guided by the Holy Spirit, why do the contradict one another? I am seriously confused by all of this and I am trying to understand.

Your freind
Sufjon
Click to expand...
That would make a great thread…👍
 
Tester, this question is directed at non-Catholics that reject tradition. You don’t reject tradition; you believe that the tradition of the CC affixed the names to the anonymous gospels - right?
tester said:
Is that your answer to the OP? :confused:
Click to expand...
it was a reply to your question that quoted…

If St. John told 10 believers who wrote the Gospel and they each told 10 others and they each told…

AND you claim every believer was Catholic then it was Catholic tradition that kept track of authorship…

BUT IF your point is that Sola Sciptura means NO tradition can ever be used: then you are mistaken.And that has been pointed out to you in the past.

From Catholic.com
“Even the principle of sola scriptura (“Scripture alone”), according to the sharpest Protestant scholars, means that the Bible is the ultimate authority—above councils and popes and any tradition**—but not that no commentary or tradition may be cited or utilized**.”
catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0402fea3.asp

From wiki
“Sola Scriptura is not a denial of other authorities governing Christian life and devotion. Rather, it simply demands that all other authorities are subordinate to, and are to be corrected by, the written word of God”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sola_scriptura​

From NEWADVENT.org

Sola scriptura (“Bible alone”)

The [first] objective [or formal] principle proclaims the canonical Scriptures, especially the New Testament, to be the only infallible source and rule of faith and practice, and asserts the right of private interpretation of the same, in distinction from the Roman Catholic view, which declares the Bible and tradition to be co-ordinate sources and rule of faith, and makes tradition, especially the decrees of popes and councils, the only legitimate and infallible interpreter of the Bible. In its extreme form Chillingworth expressed this principle of the Reformation in the well-known formula, “The Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible, is the religion of Protestants.”** Protestantism, however, by no means despises or rejects church authority** as such, but only subordinates it to, and measures its value by, the Bible, and believes in a progressive interpretation of the Bible through the expanding and deepening consciousness of Christendom. Hence, besides having its own symbols or standards of public doctrine, it retained all the articles of the ancient creeds and a large amount of disciplinary and ritual tradition, and rejected only those doctrines and ceremonies for which no clear warrant was found in the Bible and which seemed to contradict its letter or spirit. …"
 
Sufjon said:
Dear friends: Serious question: If the scriptures were written by Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, all of whom knew Jesus, and they were inspired by God or guided by the Holy Spirit, why do the contradict one another? I am seriously confused by all of this and I am trying to understand.

Your freind
Sufjon
Click to expand...
I don’t think there any real contradictions. Most apparent contradictions can be explained fairly easily.
 
joe370 said:
I see…you want to bait me instead of answering the question…If it can be infallibly stated that Matthew is the author of the gospel of Matthew and Mark is the author of the gospel of Mark and Luke is the author of the gospel of Luke and John is the author of the gospel of John, then yes, the CC infallibly declared…

Now, what is your response to my OP? If my supposition is wrong I will gladly admit it.
Click to expand...
No I don’t want to bait you but the direction our conversation will go will depend on whether or not you believe that your church has infallibly stated the authors of the four gospels.

I assume from your answer you beleive that your church has in fact infallible declared this. Out of curiosity, how do you know your church has infallibly defined this?
 
joe370 said:
Prior to 250 AD or so, the 4 Gospels were anonymous and later affixed by the tradition of the CC, so why reject tradition and still believe that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were the living witnesses that authored the Gospels?
Click to expand...
I think another poster already pointed out that sola scriptura does not throw away all tradition.

Unless you believe the matter of gospel authorship to be a matter of dogma I have no idea what your purpose is.
 
SemperReformada said:
I think another poster already pointed out that sola scriptura does not throw away all tradition.

Unless you believe the matter of gospel authorship to be a matter of dogma I have no idea what your purpose is.
Click to expand...
This was a question for sola scriptura advocates who reject tradition. You clearly do not reject the tradition of the CC so this question is not for you. You believe that the CC affixed the names Matthew, Mark Luke and John to the anonymous gospels and tradition was what guided them do so, since no where in the gospels do the gospels identify an author- right?
 
SemperReformada said:
No I don’t want to bait you but the direction our conversation will go will depend on whether or not you believe that your church has infallibly stated the authors of the four gospels.

I assume from your answer you beleive that your church has in fact infallible declared this. Out of curiosity, how do you know your church has infallibly defined this?
Click to expand...
I don’t know, just as I don’t know, for certain, that the bible is infallible, but I have faith regarding both. Don’t you? Don’t you have faith that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are the true authors of those books? It seemed like you were baiting, but I was wrong…👍
 
joe370 said:
This was a question for sola scriptura advocates who reject tradition. You clearly do not reject the tradition of the CC so this question is not for you. You believe that the CC affixed the names Matthew, Mark Luke and John to the anonymous gospels and tradition was what guided them do so, since no where in the gospels do the gospels identify an author- right?
Click to expand...
I am unaware that the gospels identify their authors.
 
SemperReformada said:
I am unaware that the gospels identify their authors.
Click to expand...
They don’t, neither does the book of Hebrew; tradition of the CC affixed those names to those books. I have non-Catholic friends that reject catholic tradition so I don’t understand why they believe the catholic tradition that Matthew, Mark Luke and John definitely wrote those anonymous gospels.
 
SemperReformada said:
I think another poster already pointed out that sola scriptura does not throw away all tradition.

Unless you believe the matter of gospel authorship to be a matter of dogma I have no idea what your purpose is.
Click to expand...
It is not a matter of dogma but one of tradition. The purpose is to understand why some non-Catholics reject all catholic tradition (some non-Catholics, not all) - but embrace the catholic tradition that says that Matthew wrote the anonymous book called the gospel of Matthew and so on…regarding the other 3 gospel as well as a the book of Hebrews.

For example, a reference from Papias, Bishop of Hieropolis in the CC in Asia Minor (~110 to 125 AD) is our earliest account that the gospel’s anonymous author was named Matthew.

Your thoughts friend?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top