PROTESTANTS! Answer me this....

  • Thread starter Thread starter St.Eric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
mrs_abbott said:
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”.

:confused:
Click to expand...
The actual prophecy is not found in the OT, therefore it was passed orally. Oral Tradition.
 
Lampo said:
The actual prophecy is not found in the OT, therefore it was passed orally. Oral Tradition.
Click to expand...
Since it was put in scripture, unlike many Catholic doctrines, it is part of God breathed scripture.

Tradition is not ever referred to as being God breathed, not once.
 
Reformed1 said:
Since it was put in scripture, unlike many Catholic doctrines, it is part of God breathed scripture.

Tradition is not ever referred to as being God breathed, not once.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church “put” it in the Bible - decided it was inspired.

Mark 13:31 - heaven and earth will pass away, but Jesus’ Word will not pass away. But Jesus never says anything about His Word being entirely committed to a book. Also, it took 400 years to compile the Bible, and another 1,000 years to invent the printing press. How was the Word of God communicated? Orally, by the bishops of the Church, with the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit.
 
Lampo said:
The Catholic Church “put” it in the Bible - decided it was inspired.

Mark 13:31 - heaven and earth will pass away, but Jesus’ Word will not pass away. But Jesus never says anything about His Word being entirely committed to a book. Also, it took 400 years to compile the Bible, and another 1,000 years to invent the printing press. How was the Word of God communicated? Orally, by the bishops of the Church, with the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
1.) Has your church ever defined one single word uttered by Jesus or the apostles that isn’t recorded in scripture?

2.) Actually, it took you guys all the way to Trent before you had your “infallible” declaration of what the canon is and isn’t. While your point about the Word of God being communicated orally is true this doesn’t at all equate to legitimizing the many traditions your church clings to.
 
Reformed1 said:
2.) Actually, it took you guys all the way to Trent before you had your “infallible” declaration of what the canon is and isn’t. While your point about the Word of God being communicated orally is true this doesn’t at all equate to legitimizing the many traditions your church clings to.
Click to expand...
I believe the canon was decided at the Council of Rome in 382, then ratified at the Council of Hippo in 393 and again at the Council of Carthage in 397.
 
Reformed1 said:
Please show me where tradition in 2Thes 2:15 is called God breathed, or show me anywhere in scripture that it is referred to that way.
Click to expand...
I mention 2Thes 2:15 because Paul talks about Sacred Tradition; tradition taught by word of mouth and by letter. Is that invalid to you?
 
Lampo said:
I believe the canon was decided at the Council of Rome in 382, then ratified at the Council of Hippo in 393 and again at the Council of Carthage in 397.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe any of these three councils were or are considered infallible.

newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm has a good piece discussing this.

Apparently, you guys weren’t bound by your church to accept the canon, as you currently have it until Trent.
 
Lampo said:
No. So is that invalid to you?
Click to expand...
Sure, if it was taught by an apostle it is valid. Of course if Jesus taught it it is valid too.

But, so many of your traditions have a recorded history that doesn’t begin until several centuries after the apostles. There just doesn’t seem to be any evidence that the apostles believed many things that you now believe such as the immaculate conception, assumption of Mary, papal infallibility, etc.

Finally, my main problem or issue with tradition is that since your church claims infallibility, there is no way to test anything. Once your church binds something as dogma or doctrine, the debate is over. While you guys, or at least many of you guys claim to have a tripod based faith; magestrium, tradition and scripture it appears that it (your faith) is based primarily on the magesterium which decides what is and isn’t in tradition and what scripture means and what it doesn’t mean.

Interestingly enough, I understand that your church has only defined a few passages of scripture infallibly.
 
Reformed1 said:
I don’t believe any of these three councils were or are considered infallible.

newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm has a good piece discussing this.

Apparently, you guys weren’t bound by your church to accept the canon, as you currently have it until Trent.
Click to expand...
If you don’t consider them valid you might as well throw away your Bible because the Bible would not be then way we see it today. You might see the Acts of Peter, the Gospel of Judas, Gospel of Mary, and other Gnostic Books…

The Bible speaks the the Church which Christ establish has authority to form Councils and issue eddicts regarding faith and morals.

Biblical Passages that support Authoritative Church:

scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html
 
Reformed1 said:
1.) Has your church ever defined one single word uttered by Jesus or the apostles that isn’t recorded in scripture?

2.) Actually, it took you guys all the way to Trent before you had your “infallible” declaration of what the canon is and isn’t. While your point about the Word of God being communicated orally is true this doesn’t at all equate to legitimizing the many traditions your church clings to.
Click to expand...
Just like ALLFORHIM, you have it backwards…

The Church came first

Jesus taught (oral) and His teachings were shared

Jesus appointed only the 12 and gave them the authority to teach in His name (with Peter the first among equals)

As the Church (Jesus, Spouse of the Lord, and the Body of Christ) grew, letters were sent to outlying areas… many letters.

Eventually, as Jesus promised when He said the Holy Spirit would lead you (the Apostles and leaders of the Catholic Christian Church) into all Truth…the letters of Truth had to be separated from the letters of error… that was the job of the Church leaders… not the Reformers. The result was the Canon of Scriptures that is the Catholic Bible.

It is our Book… it is the book of the Catholic Church… get over it.

.
 
Mannyfit75 said:
If you don’t consider them valid you might as well throw away your Bible because the Bible would not be then way we see it today. You might see the Acts of Peter, the Gospel of Judas, Gospel of Mary, and other Gnostic Books…

The Bible speaks the the Church which Christ establish has authority to form Councils and issue eddicts regarding faith and morals.

Biblical Passages that support Authoritative Church:

scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html
Click to expand...
Well…are the three councils mentioned previously thought to have infallibly declared the canon or was it at Trent? The link I provided seems to indicate that it was at Trent. So, what is the verdict?
 
MrS said:
Just like ALLFORHIM, you have it backwards…

The Church came first

Jesus taught (oral) and His teachings were shared

Jesus appointed only the 12 and gave them the authority to teach in His name (with Peter the first among equals)

As the Church (Jesus, Spouse of the Lord, and the Body of Christ) grew, letters were sent to outlying areas… many letters.

Eventually, as Jesus promised when He said the Holy Spirit would lead you (the Apostles and leaders of the Catholic Christian Church) into all Truth…the letters of Truth had to be separated from the letters of error… that was the job of the Church leaders… not the Reformers. The result was the Canon of Scriptures that is the Catholic Bible.

It is our Book… it is the book of the Catholic Church… get over it.

.
Click to expand...
All this time I thought the scriptures were for everyone, I didn’t realize they were only for the catholic church.

Anyway, it appears that you guys went around 1500 years without having an infallible authority declare to you what the canon was. How sad your church leaders didn’t see fit to define this for you.
 
Reformed1 said:
1.) Has your church ever defined one single word uttered by Jesus or the apostles that isn’t recorded in scripture?
Click to expand...
yes the Trinity. It’s not in Scripture but it is strongly supported by the Council of Nicene sometime in the 300s A.D.
2.) Actually, it took you guys all the way to Trent before you had your “infallible” declaration of what the canon is and isn’t. While your point about the Word of God being communicated orally is true this doesn’t at all equate to legitimizing the many traditions your church clings to.
Click to expand...
The Council of Trent only reaffirmed what the Church of Christ already had in the Canon of Scripture which was being challenged by the **heretical **movement of Protestant Reformation.

The list comprise in the Council of Rome, Council of Hippo and Council of Carthage listed the Canon of Scripture. This was in response to Gnostic Gospels, which had been use by Christians and many of these books like the Gospel of Thomas were heretical and some even deny the resurrection. So the Council of Rome by the leaders of the Church to compelled a list of Scripture. The include the Septuguaint (Greek Translation of the OT written around 10-5 BC), and 27 Books of the NT. It was affirmed by Pope, and continued to be used by Christians since then.

If you look at any Bible written before 1517 they contain those deuterocanonical scripture like Maccabees 1 and 2. Martin Luther remove those books because he didn’t feel they should be in there.

St. Jerome’s translation of the Bible had those books and he had doubts using the Septuguaint but the Church made a final call, and proclaim those Book Canon.

Apparently my reformed friend, you know little about Catholicism and completely misunderstand it.
 
Reformed1 said:
Well…are the three councils mentioned previously thought to have infallibly declared the canon or was it at Trent? The link I provided seems to indicate that it was at Trent. So, what is the verdict?
Click to expand...
The Council of Trent was in response to Protestant Reformation. They only reaffirmed the Council of Rome in 382 A.D, Council of Hippo in 393 AD, and Council of Carthage in 397 A.D. I can go on further by listening other Councils that show the Church gave us the Bible.
 
Mannyfit75 said:
yes the Trinity. It’s not in Scripture but it is strongly supported by the Council of Nicene sometime in the 300s A.D.

The Council of Trent only reaffirmed what the Church of Christ already had in the Canon of Scripture which was being challenged by the **heretical **movement of Protestant Reformation.

The list comprise in the Council of Rome, Council of Hippo and Council of Carthage listed the Canon of Scripture. This was in response to Gnostic Gospels, which had been use by Christians and many of these books like the Gospel of Thomas were heretical and some even deny the resurrection. So the Council of Rome by the leaders of the Church to compelled a list of Scripture. The include the Septuguaint (Greek Translation of the OT written around 10-5 BC), and 27 Books of the NT. It was affirmed by Pope, and continued to be used by Christians since then.
Click to expand...
1.) The trinity is most definitely found in scripture. Try again.

2.) I may have mis-stated myself, but it is my belief that the canon was dogmatically declared at Trent and had not been bound as dogma before that. Am I right or not?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top