PROTESTANTS! Answer me this....

[MrS]

God did not give a body of truth, different and apart from teaching of the Bible, which was carried intact through the centuries in an oral, unwritten form?

can I add new revelations? From the prophet Malachi to John the baptist, God did not give them new revelations. The Jews were responsible to obey the Word of God preserved in the Holy Scriptures, and nothing else.

Jesus did not expect expect the Jews to believe some extra-scriptural doctrine which was supposedly transmitted from the prophets of old by word of mouth. Jesus used the
**Scriptures **It is written’ - but He never appealed to tradition as if it carried equal authority.

He rebuked the Jews for adding traditions which in effect undermined the plain teaching of the Scriptures: Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition’ (please read Mark 7).

Whygo beyond what is written;he Bible is the Word of God, there is nothing of equal authority.Christ rejected tradition as an additional channel of revelation. (a demonstration of divine will) Jesus showed that the religious teachers were fallible - and how! Christ had absolute confidence in the Scriptures as the Word of God.

never appealed to tradition?? really.
So when He referred to the Seat of Moses… that was clearly written in the OT for all to believe?

The Word of God …is… The Word of God

Catholics should profess that we only believe in Sola Dei Verbum… only the Word of God,

The special graces that we receive however enable us to receive the Word of God from and by three Channels of Grace… three witnesses if you wish, or don’t wish.

The First…Scripture… we share it with you if you humble yourself to accept how Scripture came to us… by the guidance of and inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Otherwise you are just telling God you can do it yourself.

The Second… The Oral Traditions of the Church… we share that with you also if you humble yourself to realize that not all Truth is explicitly found in Scripture. Scripture itself proclaims this. Otherwise you are just telling God you can do it yourself

The Third… The Magisterium, or teaching body of that same Church which Jesus founded. It consisted first of the Apostles and by the directives of Christ Himself (also found in those parts of Scripture you and your pastor will avoid like the plague, or abuse with private interpretation)…that authority to teach the fullness of the Faith is passed on inside of the Church, not outside.

If you choose to walk away, like those in John 6… the Lord will let you… so who am I to try to force you to believe ALL that the Lord taught? It is called Faith… and the fullness of the faith is only found in the Church Jesus started… not the one you belong to started by a man (or a woman).

.

 

[MrS]

I have full confidence in the Holy Scriptures because they are “given by inspiration” or “God-breathed”

when I read the word of God he is speaking to me, and the Scriptures are the infallible rule of faith since God can neither lie nor err.

*Sola Scriptura *is not a claim that the Bible contains all knowledge.

John 21:25 says that not all that Jesus did is recorded in the book, but the bible does not have to be complete o function as the sole rule of faith for the church. but remember neither is tradition- I challenge you to give us one statement that Jesus said that comes to us by tradition and not from the Holy Scripture.

As the “late-comer” to Christianity… you have this backwards.

I would challange you to find something in NT Scripture that you must believe that was not first taught orally by the Apostles and the Early Church Fathers.

The fact is that the Catholic Christian Church was the ONLY body of believers by which God gave us all the Bible. If God, in His infinite wisdom and mercy would choose fallible, sinful Catholic Christian Church leaders (not the sinful flock) to declare what the Truth of Scripture was… why would that same God not guide these same men to interprerate that same canon of Scripture??

 

[MrS]

Here is the diffrence as Protestant we do not consider tradition doctrine divinely revealed just because it was past down on from generation to the next, there must be a more reliable standard to evaluate and confirm the truthfulness of our beliefs.

We use Scripture to prove teaching… Jesus also challenged the traditions of His day by appealing to Scripture. Roman Catholic “Sacred Tradition” cannot be checked by the Scriptures, because it is considered to be of equal value to the written Word of God.

I value tradition, but it is subordinate to the Bible

Then you can not believe in the Bible… because it was first handed down, and handed down, and handed down orally… not even a signature or declaration by the human author that he would “swear on the Bible to tell the Truth”.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Hi,

I think what upsets me the most is that catholics(on this forum and not all Im sure) put much more emphasis on the CHURCH then they do Jesus Christ. As an outsider looking in that is what I take away from the posts I have read since I have been participating.

Many if not all the posts I am referring to, all I hear is the church did this and the church did that and if I am saved it is through the church. What I should be hearing is Christ did this and Christ did that and I am saved through Jesus Christ. We cant even be part of His church(the bride of Christ) unless we believe in Him.

It really seems like you guys put more value in the church then Jesus Christ.

I do not say this to offend anyone. It is simply an observation from being on these forums. I just simply here more about belonging to the CC then belonging to Jesus Christ.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

They weren’t playing “telephone.”

Hi, Thank you for being charitable in our conversations. I appreciate it. No they werent playing telephone but they certainly could have misunderstood a teaching. Think how many times we hear someone say something and totally misread what they said or meant. I know I have done it. They werent any different back then. It even speaks of misunderstandings in the bible. Two people can hear the same thing and understand it in 2 completely different meanings(hence our different intrepretations.) Who is to say this didnt happen over the past 2000 years. Im sure it did. I would bet my inheritance on it.

The Mass has always been a public event, and any “tweaking” (changing it from Aramaic to Greek to Latin to vernacular languages, changes in the order of service, etc.) have always been totally public and well documented. Special care has always been take by the leaders of the Catholic Church to preserve the essentials, which are the words of Consecration and the actions on the Altar.

You dont know this for a fact. You only know it because the CC tells you it is so. The CC has no concrete proof. If it was oral Im sure the CC would have written it down as soon as the heretics acted up so as to have proof. You say they dont have the oral teachings written down. The way the CC has written down and clarified everything because of heretics, I just cant believe they wouldnt of written down and preserved oral teaching so they could fight it against people like me. That would be out of character for the CC.

Certainly the Bible is important, and it’s there to help us, but it’s not the be-all and end-all. We also need qualified helpers to teach us what it means, which means that we have to know that these teachers are reliable

-You are right about needing teachers to help us. And they should be reliable. How can we know they are reliable if we have nothing to measure their teaching by. If it is oral we have to rely on the Vatican to be telling the truth. Who do we then go to to see if they are telling the truth. The only answer is the bible. Which, again, is the concrete proof given to us by a Holy God.

it can’t just be anybody that comes along with an insight from the “Holy Spirit” - hundreds of cults have come into existence on a “word of the Holy Spirit” where someone “discovered” something in Scripture that nobody had ever seen before (ie: re-interpreted it according to his own liking, such as Joseph Smith and his many wives) - the oral tradition helps us with that.

How does oral tradition help if no one knows what they are Again you have to trust the Vatican and why should I trust the Vatican just like why should I trust my minister or the JW version or Joseph Smith. I shouldnt I should always go to the bible to discern what a man is telling me. I personally trust the Holy Spirit to teach me to discern the truth.

It’s only by first

throwing away the Mass that Protestants can then isolate those verses and come up with a symbolic interpretation. [/QUOTEI have been to Masses before and I dont think you have to get rid of the Mass at all to come to the conclusion that the Eucharist is

But the Mass came first, and the Bible came later - the purpose of the Bible was to help explain the oral tradition; not to replace it.

The only problem is that the bible does not explain much of oral tradition, if purgatory, the assumption and praying to Mary are part of oral tradition

I guess the reason I cant believe in oral tradition is because I have asked many times on this forum for what they are and people cant seem to give me an answer so I will have to assume it is because they dont know. The next conclusion one would take is that they dont know because there isnt any.

 

[PauloFreire2]

my son’s name!),

You’re asking for the impossible. Luther very selectively chose excerpts from the Bible that supported his theology, while ignoring those that didn’t. He, an Augustinian monk, naturally favored the thinking of Paul, and therefore based his postulations on Paul’s faith-centric views. Luther disliked and ignored the Book of James, conversely, which was incorporated in the New Testament by the Church deliberately to counter-balance Paul’s emphasis on faith.

Therefore, Lutheran types will always be able to produce a multitude of supportive quotes, while non-Lutheran types will always be able to produce a multitude of quotes that contradict them. It’s a waste of time, if one is attempting to ‘prove’ his position to be Biblically superior. It all comes down to what one wants to believe going into his Biblical research. In this case, one’s predispositions come first, not what’s taught by the Bible.

The Church compiled the New Testament for the very purpose of establishing balance and comprehensiveness. That’s precisely why it can’t be logically used by anyone to defend a single narrow view of Christianity. It’s an inclusive library of diverse documents. It’s not a book.

 

[St.Eric]

Hi,

I think what upsets me the most is that catholics(on this forum and not all Im sure) put much more emphasis on the CHURCH then they do Jesus Christ. As an outsider looking in that is what I take away from the posts I have read since I have been participating.

Many if not all the posts I am referring to, all I hear is the church did this and the church did that and if I am saved it is through the church. What I should be hearing is Christ did this and Christ did that and I am saved through Jesus Christ. We cant even be part of His church(the bride of Christ) unless we believe in Him.

It really seems like you guys put more value in the church then Jesus Christ.

I do not say this to offend anyone. It is simply an observation from being on these forums. I just simply here more about belonging to the CC then belonging to Jesus Christ.

AFH,
What you need to understand is that when Catholics talk about the Church, they are talking about Jesus Christ. As Catholics we understand and bleieve that the Church IS Jesus Christ. The Church is the visible, living body of Jesus Christ. Therefore, we are saved through the Church, which IS Jesus Christ. We are Saved through his body. his body is what wrought our salvation on the cross. His body now, on earth is what continues to save and is the conduit through which grace flows. The farther down the pipeline, as it were, the further away the original source of grace.
So, when you here a Catholic say “the Church” keep in mind that the Catholic is saying, Jesus Christ.

 

[Lampo]

AFH…Have you read this?:
newadvent.org/cathen/15006b.htm

 

[Lampo]

Matt. 2:23 - the prophecy “He shall be a Nazarene” is oral tradition. It is not found in the Old Testament. This demonstrates that the apostles relied upon oral tradition and taught by oral tradition.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

AFH,
What you need to understand is that when Catholics talk about the Church, they are talking about Jesus Christ. As Catholics we understand and bleieve that the Church IS Jesus Christ. The Church is the visible, living body of Jesus Christ. Therefore, we are saved through the Church, which IS Jesus Christ. We are Saved through his body. his body is what wrought our salvation on the cross. His body now, on earth is what continues to save and is the conduit through which grace flows. The farther down the pipeline, as it were, the further away the original source of grace.
So, when you here a Catholic say “the Church” keep in mind that the Catholic is saying, Jesus Christ.

Hi,
Thank you for that answer.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Matt. 2:23 - the prophecy “He shall be a Nazarene” is oral tradition. It is not found in the Old Testament. This demonstrates that the apostles relied upon oral tradition and taught by oral tradition.

Hi,

Thanks Ill check it out.

 

[PauloFreire2]

Some Catholics tend to put too much emphasis on the Church, and not enough on Christ. Some Protestants tend to put too much emphasis on the Bible, and not enough on Christ. In the end, it comes down to doing one’s best to follow the teachings of Christ and to respond to the salvation He offers, in the tradition one has embraced.

 

[cherirose]

You know what I agree with you we just have a different definition of who the church is. As I said above if we receive the message of Jesus Christ, repent and have the Holy Spirit dwelling inside of us then we are disciples as well. Your right not just anyone can teach the Word of God only those who believe.

Wait a minute, WE are disciples–they were THE disciples, the apostles, the founders of the Christian Church. They passed on their authority, their position to successors who in turn did the same. WE are in a very different position. Jesus had lots of disciples even back then, but he only conferred this authority and promise of being led into all truth to the apostles, the chosen 12. This is very different from what you are saying.

 

[St.Eric]

Some Catholics tend to put too much emphasis on the Church, and not enough on Christ. Some Protestants tend to put too much emphasis on the Bible, and not enough on Christ. In the end, it comes down to doing one’s best to follow the teachings of Christ and to respond to the salvation He offers, in the tradition one has embraced.

Please refer to post #185- The Church IS Christ and as such, one cannot emphasize it too much. That would be like saying we put too much emphasis on Eucharistic adoration and not enough emphasis on Christ when in reality the Eucharist IS Christ.

 

[mrs_abbott]

Matt. 2:23 - the prophecy “He shall be a Nazarene” is oral tradition. It is not found in the Old Testament. This demonstrates that the apostles relied upon oral tradition and taught by oral tradition.

What does this have to do with oral tradition? Matthew 2:23 reads: He went and dwelt in a town called Nazareth, so that what had been spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled, “He shall be called a Nazorean”.

 

[openmind]

1. Please reveal to me “the” ( the definition that speaks for all of the non Catholic denoms) definitive definition of “sola scriptura”
2. Please reveal to me “the” definition of “sola fide”
3. Please show me where the bible explicitly teaches both of thes doctrines.
4. Please show me where the bible teaches that each person is able to interpert the bible and that interpretation is valid.
5. Thank you so much for your guidance!

 

[openmind]

I was brought up to believe this, please read my delima from openmind and help me. I am past agruement, I just need help.

 

[Blue_Serenity]

Hi,

I think what upsets me the most is that catholics(on this forum and not all Im sure) put much more emphasis on the CHURCH then they do Jesus Christ. As an outsider looking in that is what I take away from the posts I have read since I have been participating.

Hi ALLFORHIM!!!
I don’t know how folks around here are, as I am new to these boards, but I live in a predominantly “Catholic community” and I’ve noticed this too. I mean no disrespect to anyone here but I read this thread and had to post, since it struck a chord with me.
Has anyone mentioned the Protestant and Catholic rift over the five solas yet? I saw scriptura and fide mentioned but wasn’t sure if the others were.

ALLFORHIM:

Many if not all the posts I am referring to, all I hear is the church did this and the church did that and if I am saved it is through the church. What I should be hearing is Christ did this and Christ did that and I am saved through Jesus Christ. We cant even be part of His church(the bride of Christ) unless we believe in Him.

It really seems like you guys put more value in the church then Jesus Christ.

So if I don’t join the CC, I’ll have a truer relationship with Christ? I always wondered about Catholics. I think that’s what brought me to this site. I want to genuinely understand. I was raised by non-church-goers. I barely knew God as a child. But I’m drifting off topic so let’s focus.

 

[JonathanKinsman]

The **BIBLE **is inspired by GOD. The church did not create the BIble, but rather the Bible was given to the church.

Q:Who gave the Bible to the Church? Which manuscripts for the OT and the NT?

The First Vatican Council declared: The books the church holds to be sacred and canonical not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor simply because they contain revelation without error, but because being written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and were as such committed to the church.

I cannot find this quotation in ANY Vatican I document. What is the source for it?

The Scriptures are the rule of faith because they are the Word of God and not because they were approved by the authority of the church

.

This is rife with illogical and insane conclusions. You have 3 distinct concepts in the first phrase (before the conjunctive) and your conclusion is a non sequitor to that tautology.

The Word of God is Jesus, the Logos. When quoted during the Mass (from one of the Gospels, for example), the people respond to the Priest’s “This is the Word of the Lord,” with “Thanks be to God.” This is an ancient Jewish custom from Synogogue and Temple days

How come Roman magisterium exalts itself to the highest? None can challenge their teaching by appealing to the Bible, since they claim that only the magisterium can interpret the Scriptures correctly, and magisterium can always go back ‘Sacred Tradition’ NO one knows contents of this Tradition apart from the teaching of the magisterium.

You have literally ZERO understanding of what the Magisterium is or Sacred Tradition. If you want to sound knowledgeable on this subject, read up on it in Dei Verbum (in English on the vatican.va website). Everything is explained there.

Pax Christi

 

[JonathanKinsman]

You dont know this for a fact. You only know it because the CC tells you it is so. The CC has no concrete proof. If it was oral Im sure the CC would have written it down as soon as the heretics acted up so as to have proof. You say they dont have the oral teachings written down. The way the CC has written down and clarified everything because of heretics, I just cant believe they wouldnt of written down and preserved oral teaching so they could fight it against people like me. That would be out of character for the CC.

Child,

We do know this for a fact, because Protestants and Catholics have studied the earliest writings on biblical exegesis since the bringing together of the bible in 382 by Pope Damasus I with conciliar approval (you know, ALL the bishops who were ordained [including the Bishop of Rome] by bishops who were ordained by bishops and so forth back to the Apostles).

You may not know it, you only know what you have been told or have interpreted by yourself without knowledge of the number of manuscripts for both the OT and the NT, or any understanding of the languages and interpretations (the traditional 4 levels of reading) of Jewish and early Christian, i.e. “Catholic,” [which means “universal” like in the Universal Church, the Catholic Church] writings like Didache, St Justin Martyr, St Iraneaeus, Tertullian, and others.

You only know what your pastor tells you, but hey, he says he’s got the Spirit and it’s moving him, so it must be what God meant, right??

.

The only answer is the bible. Which, again, is the concrete proof given to us by a Holy God. How does oral tradition help if no one knows what they are Again you have to trust the Vatican and why should I trust the Vatican just like why should I trust my minister or the JW version or Joseph Smith. I shouldnt I should always go to the bible to discern what a man is telling me. I personally trust the Holy Spirit to teach me to discern the truth.

Where does it say in the NT that the NT is the “only answer?”
Where does it say in the OT that the OT is the “only answer?”

When St Paul and the others (including Jesus) refers to “scriptures” they are referring to Hebrew scriptures.

To say or believe otherwise is to show extreme ignorance on some very basic historical truths.

The JWs and Adventists and Pentacostals and Mormons all attack the Church, the Catholic Church to justify their stranglehold on their respective groups.

That’s the irony of it. Your views and all the others who claim the ‘Solas’ is NO DIFFERENT than Charles Taze Russell, Ellen Gould White, Joseph Smith, Greg Laurie, Oral Roberts, Hal Lindsey: you have the sole, private inside scoop on what Christianity is all about and feel the burnin’ in your bosom and the flame upon your head.

There are no direct answers to these challenges: just the ironic pointing to recent Protestant belief as if it was always there in the Church.

Catholics read the bible, contrary to what Protestants pretend. I have been reading it longer than you have been alive and my parents were great readers of it too. My paternal grandparents have a Gaelic version and German version (pre dating Luther’s changed bible to fit his personal views) and my maternal grandparents have it in Slovak and Hungarian.

Wherever the Church went, the Bible was [usually] the first book hand lettered or printed. Vietnam was colonized by )(French Jesuits, which is why Vietnamese is the only Asian language with a western alphabet)

ALLFORHIM,

Your spiritual inheritance is Catholic. Don’t keep betraying your ignorance. Go read the bible (the NT) in its entirety: understand that Hebrews is addressed to christian Hebrews; that Revelation is a summation of all the prior images of the OT and NT and a statement, allegorically, of the triumphant Church and the Eucharist in the Mass on earth as it is in heaven.

It’s late, but I’m not done with your goofy allegations about Christianity and refusal to answer direct questions.

I will return tomorrow and continue.

Good night