Protestants: Where is the Bible in the Bible?

[brother_dan_mac]

No, most certainly not! All I was saying was that I saw a whole lot of disrespectful comments flying back and forth, and could not and do not forsee an end to it if we don,t act as children of Christ. As we are told by Him- Seek first the kingdom of God and all these will be added unto you. The alusion to 2nd Corinthians 12 to 13 was waranted, because the body of Christ as a whole entity [all christians] is under attack by the media and by non-beleivers and other faiths enough, and we do not want to appear as a group of lunatics that cannot agree on anything if and when they come in to our church- or inthis case, thread- and are spouting off as speaking in tounges, without rhime or reason. I also wanted to include another quote from Paul to the Corinthians: The hand cannot say to the foot that it is not a part of the body [of Christ] because it is not a hand. Anyone who is redeemed by the blood of Christ is a valid part of His body,with Jesus as the head. Anyone who has a real relationship with Jesus shoul be able to see His presence in christians of other faiths, and should also see where other churches are strong where theirs is weak, therefore the above bible quote. furthermore, I want to say that I do not think that anyone on this thread has such ill intent that they feel utter con tempt for other christians, and only wanted to help everyone get back in touch with our mission as servants of Jesus Christ a little bit, that’s all. if we all keep in mind that god loves us all the same and more than we can immagine, we should all be able to have discussions on any subject with intagrity and emotions in tact…

As for me, I am not nor do I claim to be, perfect. I have a long way to go in that endeavor. I will continue to pray for Christ’s Church, in all it’s forms and factions and individual beleifs, so that it may be one in Spirit so as to bring about the salvation and meet the needs of the world, even if we do not agree on points that have no significant bearing on Salvation. as to the question posed here in this thread, it is apparent that all of us are created as individuals by God, and therefore will have some kind of variation in their beleifs [no matter how large or small] , that in essence every human being can technically be considered a church unto themself. Think about it. As we live out our lives, we all adhere to what helps us grow closer to God. If we are really good, we can become someone who is quoted by following generations. Every human being ever created has unlimited potential for goodness.This is at the essence of our knowlege that every life is a sacred and precious cretion of God, and has inherant dignity. ANYONE can be HOLY!

MAY GOD LOOK DOWN ON YOU AND SMILE!

P. S. Sorry if this turned into a dissertation- guess I had more to say than I thought-dodn’t mean it for just you, but for all, myself included.

 

[Little_Mary]

If I am reading what Justasking is saying correctly it looks like they will pick and choose the traditions that they accept and which that they do not, because some tradition is Ok and some is not. (???!!!??)

So Trinity and Sunday, they won’t question those because those are the ones passed down (through tradition!!) to them in Sunday School.

Don’t forget Wednesday night church, altar calls, sola scriptura, and adding “for thine is the kingdom, power and glory…” to the end of the Lord’s Prayer, which is a Catholic tradition, btw.

 

[Lampo]

Does it occur to them they are questioning the same Tradition that determined the New Testament in their Bibles?

 

[justasking4]

Does it occur to them they are questioning the same Tradition that determined the New Testament in their Bibles?

Couple of questions:
1- What do you mean by Tradition? Can you define it for me?

2- Is it wrong to question Tradition?

 

[Lampo]

Couple of questions:
1- What do you mean by Tradition? Can you define it for me?

2- Is it wrong to question Tradition?

1. I mean what the Church says Tradition is.
   newadvent.org/cathen/15006b.htm
2. Nothing wrong with questioning it. The problem is REJECTING it.

Church Councils, like Hippo (occurred before the Bible), which established the Canon of Scripture, are part of Tradition.

 

[qui_est_ce]

The question has been answered…Elvis has left the building. Thank you.

I told you the thread would be dead if we didn’t go off topic. Are we going to change the name of the Thread to whose interpretation of Scripture should we believe?

 

[qui_est_ce]

Nowhere. But it does say that the Church is the pillar and bulwark of the Truth. (1 Tim 3:15).

Not the bible, the Church.

Someone pointed out in another post that the bible doesn’t mention the word trinity either. But we know from studying the bible that there is a trinity.

To re-iterate: The Church is over 2,000 years old. It’s no slouch.

If you want more than that, you need to go to the library. Don’t take if from a catholic or a protestant. Study the history and figure it out for yourself.

:tiphat:

When I was a little kid, and I wanted to know something, my annoying big brother would always say, “Look it up.” It became a buzz word in our house. I say it to my kids all the time too!

 

[justasking4]

Lampo;2804698]1. I mean what the Church says Tradition is.
newadvent.org/cathen/15006b.htm

Is this what you mean—refers sometimes to the thing (doctrine, account, or custom) transmitted from one generation to another;?

1. Nothing wrong with questioning it. The problem is REJECTING it.

Do you have some kind of list of these Traditions in the church so people can know exactly what these Traditions are? After all if you are going to accept something then you should know what it is. Correct?

Church Councils, like Hippo (occurred before the Bible), which established the Canon of Scripture, are part of Tradition.

 

[MariaG]

Is this what you mean—refers sometimes to the thing (doctrine, account, or custom) transmitted from one generation to another;?

Do you have some kind of list of these Traditions in the church so people can know exactly what these Traditions are? After all if you are going to accept something then you should know what it is. Correct?

The closest thing to a list would be the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

A “list” would be difficult since to understand things like the “Immaculate Conception” which would certainly be on the list , one needs to understand that the definition is truly defining Christ, and not Mary. So one needs to understand the teachings on Christ first.

Lists are easy to misinterpret if taken out of context.

God bless,
Maria

 

[Little_Mary]

When I was a little kid, and I wanted to know something, my annoying big brother would always say, “Look it up.” It became a buzz word in our house. I say it to my kids all the time too!

Yes, especially when they ask what a particular word means!

I just think if a non-Catholic is interested enough in the Catholic church to question it then the most un-biased information they are going to get is from history.

“To be steeped in history is to cease to be protestant!”

 

[qui_est_ce]

Yes, especially when they ask what a particular word means!

I just think if a non-Catholic is interested enough in the Catholic church to question it then the most un-biased information they are going to get is from history.

“To be steeped in history is to cease to be protestant!”

Ya. I’m leaving this thread now, because the original post ws answered. I’m going to that new one Lampo started.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Ya. I’m leaving this thread now, because the original post ws answered. I’m going to that new one Lampo started.

Oh wait, the new thread is on the Assumpution. I thought it would be whose interpretation wins.

 

[Lampo]

Is this what you mean—refers sometimes to the thing (doctrine, account, or custom) transmitted from one generation to another;?

Do you have some kind of list of these Traditions in the church so people can know exactly what these Traditions are? After all if you are going to accept something then you should know what it is. Correct?

Bingo!

I provided you with a list off the top of my head I don’t know how many times! Is this what you’re wanting? Or some “official” list from the Vatican? I think you have a good idea what this “list” consists of, you are just rejecting it. Yes I should know what the Traditions are, and I do.

 

[justasking4]

Lampo;2806070]

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Is this what you mean—refers sometimes to the thing (doctrine, account, or custom) transmitted from one generation to another;?

Do you have some kind of list of these Traditions in the church so people can know exactly what these Traditions are? After all if you are going to accept something then you should know what it is. Correct?

Lampo
Bingo!

I provided you with a list off the top of my head I don’t know how many times! Is this what you’re wanting?

i remember seeing something but i’m not sure who put it out. Something about one leader in the NT and Mary.

Or some “official” list from the Vatican?

Something like that would sure help.

I think you have a good idea what this “list” consists of, you are just rejecting it. Yes I should know what the Traditions are, and I do.

I want to see the substance of this claim of Sacred Traditions and know them in depth. There are a lot of unknowns in regards to these traditions and i have yet to see any depth of knowledge from the catholics i have encountered. Since its agreed among catholics and protestants that at least 66 books of the Bible are inspired-inerrant, i think one of the primary issues are the Sacred Traditions that the catholic church puts at the same level as the Scriptures themselves. This topic may not be the one to dicuss this though.

---

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

Then where is this other Revelation that is inspired-inerrant that is not contained in the Scriptures themselves? Can you give me a couple examples of this revelation that is not in the scriptures that is God-breathed?

Divine Revelation has been transmitted to us via three modes - Sacred Scriptures, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium.

I have (as well as others here) already given examples on more than one occasion. But, here again (just a handful)

Sunday
Trinity
Apostolic Succession
Papacy
Sacraments
Marian dogmas

Note that most Tradition is to be found to some degree or another in Scriptures, though not always explicit.

Would you happen to know what the first Tradition was after the apostles died?

There was not one bit of new Tradition after Saint John died. Public revelation closed with his death. What has occurred is that our understanding of that deposit handed down by the Apostles has increased.

That might be. But you are making a claim about the oral traditions of the apostles and claiming these oral traditions are revelations to are you not?

Yes, Sacred Tradition is one of the three modes of Revelation. (CCC 74-100)

 

[brother_dan_mac]

well, I guess I’ll try the other post as well, but if i hear one word of whining, I am DONE!

 

[Lampo]

For j4…EVERYTHING the Catholic Church claims and teaches is Tradition. Does that cover it?

 

[justasking4]

For j4…EVERYTHING the Catholic Church claims and teaches is Tradition. Does that cover it?

Depends what you mean by Tradition. When i study the gospels i don’t think of them as “traditions” and i don’t think scholars do either but as history.

 

[Lampo]

Depends what you mean by Tradition. When i study the gospels i don’t think of them as “traditions” and i don’t think scholars do either but as history.

I know you don’t. Sounds like you need to do some re-thinking. I gave you the definition of Tradition. Did you read it? I can also point you to the Catechism of the Catholic Church and what it says is Tradition.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Depends what you mean by Tradition. When i study the gospels i don’t think of them as “traditions” and i don’t think scholars do either but as history.

J4,

For Tradition, read about the practices of the early Christians. Read about what was done, how it was done, what they thought of Mary. I’m talking about the people who KNEW the Apostles. How did they practice Church? The very first heresy we know about happened in Acts. There were those who wanted to continue in the Old Law and insisted on Circumcision of Gentiles. Until Peter stood up and spoke. That was the first Church Council, the Council of Jerusalem. Peter had the Authority (the Keys). It was not a vote. Peter had a Divine Revelation, and he decided no circumcision. Acts is in the Bible as we know it today. But at the time there was no New Testament, just letters, and oral preaching. It was only when people disagreed on something and started preaching it, that the Church stepped in and made a decision on who was right and who was wrong. Arianism, Nestorianism. Today, Christians (except JW’s) reject Ariansim and Nestorianism as heresy. But it was the Authority of Peter, the Chair in Rome, that examined these different teachings, prayed about them, and made a declaration.

The history of the very early church is very interesting. But not all of it is inspired, it’s just history. so it is not in the Bible.

Go read, from an unbiased source, the history of the early Church. You will find ALL believed in the Real Presence. Reader’s Digest has a real good one. I will give you the title tomorrow. You can get it at the public library. It’s a very, very good read.