Protestant saying hello

  • Thread starter Thread starter redshock
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Protestant101 said:
Because the written word is infallible; NOT people, including the Pope.!!
Click to expand...
So, what causes the written word to be “infallible”? (Actually, it’s inerrant. “Infallible” means “can’t teach incorrectly.” The Bible doesn’t get up and teach anything, though.)

Is it not the charism of infallibility that was given by God to the men who were writing the books of the Bible that causes it to be inerrant?

(The Bible didn’t fall from the sky. The men who wrote it also weren’t under any kind of a magic spell.)

So, doesn’t it make sense that God continued to protect those men, and in due time, their successors, from promulgating error to the Church, by means of the charism of infallibility, which they were given when they wrote the books of the Bible?

Why would God ever withdraw this gift from these leaders, having once given it? It makes no sense. 🤷
 
Protestant101 said:
:mad:

OK then. I won’t argue about this one for now; it would be a separate topic, but you have just proved that Tradition (so called) is NOT in the Bible; yet you say that your Tradition is “the Word of God??”

But surely, you can name atleast one more “tradition” not found in the NT? How difficult could that possibly be?
Click to expand...
LOL! What in the world are you talking about? You do understand that the Catholic Church does not go by the unbiblical doctrine of sola scriptura don’t you? Who said that all Tradition is found in the Bible? Catholics believe the Word of God is not limited to the written Word.
 
jmcrae said:
The Bible contains the Word of God, but it is not the whole thing. The remainder of the Word of God comes to us via the Holy Tradition (such as the information that there is, in fact, such a thing as the Bible, and the list of the books that belong in the Bible).
Click to expand...
The Word of God was given to others, well before the Catholic Church came into being.
Gen 15:1 After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.
Click to expand...
The Bible, that is, the written word, always gives us examples of the spoken word which are ALWAYS found in scripture, as opposed to Catholic “Tradition” or “spoken word” which is rarely found in scripture. Well did the Psalmist recognize the Truth given to Abram when he penned:
“Psa 119:114 Thou art my hiding place and my shield: I hope in thy word.”
Click to expand...
“Thou art my shield” is one of many examples where a spoken word (“tradition”) is actually found in the written word, and in this sense, ALL tradition must meet with agreement in the written word. Name ONE Catholic Tradition that does this.
 
Lampo said:
LOL! What in the world are you talking about? You do understand that the Catholic Church does not go by the unbiblical doctrine of sola scriptura don’t you? Who said that all Tradition is found in the Bible? Catholics believe the Word of God is not limited to the written Word.
Click to expand...
Explain to me where the idea that it is unbiblical came from? From what do you derive this statement?
 
jmcrae said:
The Bible contains the Word of God, but it is not the whole thing. The remainder of the Word of God comes to us via the Holy Tradition (such as the information that there is, in fact, such a thing as the Bible, and the list of the books that belong in the Bible).
Click to expand...
This is what were asking. You claim that the Word of God is more than the Scriptures. This is why we want to see exactly and specifcally what this is. If this is truly the Word of God i want to know who spoke it, under what conditions and why it is considered the Word of God.
Are you familar with Mormonism? Its my understanding that they to believe in revelation not only in the Bible but in their other books. At least with them i can go and study what these supposedly other revelations of God can be found and studied.
Catholics are making similar claims and yet refuse to tell us what they are specifically. It makes me believe they don’t exist. 🤷
 
Lampo;3438294]
Originally Posted by justasking4
Do you then consider all the 73 books in your Bible to be all the Traditions of your church?
Click to expand...
Lampo;
I do not.
Click to expand...
Then how do you identify specific Sacred Traditions outside the 73 books?
 
reteeks21 said:
Explain to me where the idea that it is unbiblical came from? From what do you derive this statement?
Click to expand...
There is nothing in Scripture to indicate that all doctrine is to be derived from Scripture. Indeed, Christian doctrine was being promulgated for at least a decade before even one word of the New Testament was written down. And also for at least three centuries, before the books of the New Testament were officially recognized as Scripture.
 
jmcrae said:
There is nothing in Scripture to indicate that all doctrine is to be derived from Scripture. Indeed, Christian doctrine was being promulgated for at least a decade before even one word of the New Testament was written down. And also for at least three centuries, before the books of the New Testament were officially recognized as Scripture.
Click to expand...
That does not answer my question as to where you get your basis for “faith alone” being heretical. Where do you get that from?
 
Protestant101 said:
Already done by the fact that neither you nor the so called 2000 years of catholic history has ever been able to disprove it.
Click to expand...
We know that they are Scripture because we believe the Pope who infallibly declared them to be so. (Pope Innocent I, 405 AD).

But if you refuse to believe the Pope, and refuse to admit that there are such things as infallible declarations, then how do you know that they are Scripture?

Who tells you, and why should you believe them? 🤷
 
reteeks21 said:
That does not answer my question as to where you get your basis for “faith alone” being heretical. Where do you get that from?
Click to expand...
That’s in the Epistle of James. Faith Alone is certainly not “biblical” - it directly contradicts the Bible.
 
justasking4 said:
Then how do you identify specific Sacred Traditions outside the 73 books?
Click to expand...
Actually, they have some “Traditions” that cannot be found within the 66 books, but that can be found in one of the 73 books, which of course explains why they so desperately require them all to be “canon.”

But; lets wait and see if they can supply us with one more Tradition not found in the NT.
 
Lampo said:
I identify them by means of the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Well; we all know that, we need to see another example of Tradition not found in the NT as so many here have already stated that they exist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top