There is a big difference between codified and a available. Of course to writings of the apostolic era were available.
Jon
- Status
Jon
J
jmcrae
Guest
Both those included in the New Testament and those not.
Indeed. But they were available.Both those included in the New Testament and those not.
EDIT: They also had a working view of the various books. See the link regarding Eusebius.
ntcanon.org/Eusebius.shtml
Jon
R
rinnie
Guest
I totally agree, and Crucification was horrible also. But Jon I think the point we need to make here, and what we cannot seem to get acrossed is 2 things.
The first thing is the Church had no control how death was given back then it was up to Roman Law, it was what allowed Judicial Torture.
The second thing is Luthers statement is in direct conflict with scripture.
Herectics being burned is not against scripture. Scripture states that heretics (people who never accept Christ in this world or the next) will suffer the unquenchable fire thats eternal.
Luther stated that Heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit.The Church is being accused of teaching a lie and that is not fair.
Do you agree with Luther or the teaching of the bible?
J
jmcrae
Guest
Right. But they were starting with the Holy Tradition, and supporting their conclusions with various Apostolic writings. Not the other way around.
I think Christ sets the example with the women accused of adultery - “He who is without sin cast the first stone.” I don’t think to say that burning “heretics” is contrary to the will of the Spirit is accusing the Church of teaching a lie. Again, lie assumes an intentional attempt to deceive. We can disagree about something without accusing each other of being liars.
If the Catholic Church had the power today to do so, would she approve of burning people at the stake?
Jon
This is in the fourth century, what Tradition did they have that would help them to determine the doctrine of the Trinity? They had the writings and teaching of the apostles and their immediate successors. What else?
Jon
R
rinnie
Guest
Unfortunately Jon as much as we hate to use that word it has to come into play.You either have the truth or a lie.
The CC has no power nor had any power to rule this world.
If the CC had its way it would in most circumstances disagree with the death penalty. But as like back then it has no power.
The only Power it has is to teach the truth.
Let me ask you once more, another way, How can there be an unquenchable fire thats eternal in hell be a teaching against the Spirit? When the teaching came from the HS?
Here is another question, Okay lets say the Pope in those days did not feel it was to harsh, what does that have to do with the word of God? His opinion is not the word of God nor ever was.
We have never said we had a Pope who was without personal sin, or had personal opinions that were the true word of God.
Let me ask you this, Okay I go to a Priest right now and confess my sin, He has the power to forgive my sin, even if he is at that time in a state of sin himself. Do you see what I am saying?
We haven’t always had the best Popes in the past, like we have been blessed with today.
But what does their personal sin or sins have to do with having the power to speak for God.
I mean do you really believe that Peter, Paul, etc never had an evil thought, or that we agreed with every single personal opinion they had.
S
SteveVH
Guest
They had the teachings of the Apostles, both oral and written; the sacred deposit of faith. They also had the abiding presence of Christ and the guidance of the Holy Spirit as Jesus promised. What more did they need?
Then it comes down to the Eighth Commandment…
That’s not. Burning people at the stake - a temporal fire - is. Judgement belongs to the Lord, not the Catholic Church and not Luther.
No argument.
Yes.
Nothing. That’s not my argument. I think I have a reasonably good understanding of what infallibility *ex cathedra *means. I just don’t see evidence for it in scripture or Sacred Tradition.
Of course not.
Jon
J
jmcrae
Guest
The Sacraments - the words and rituals belonging to them. The Sign of the Cross. The Glory Be. Various primitive versions of the Apostles’ Creed. The Mass. Various hymns. Various litanies and prayers - all of which would have supported the idea of Jesus being God, and that the Holy Spirit is also God, together with the Father.
And where did they get these ideas from? They got them from the apostles writings, and the teachings of those who followed them and heard it from them.
Jon
J
jmcrae
Guest
Not as much from the writings, as from, “This is how it is done in our Church.” From seeing it done, over and over again. From being taught these prayers and hymns from earliest childhood. From life-long habit. Which then could be tested and traced back to the Apostles, and found to be correct. But they got it from the same place we do - their parents and Sunday School teachers.
R
rinnie
Guest
Okay if what you are saying is true, and judgement in this world is from the Lord then why do People still get sentenced to death by lethal injection. If it was back in the day of Roman Law it would be burned.
I am still at a loss how you feel Roman Law was an invention of the RCC? The only thing the Church could do and did do, was try to help the people the best they could to save their lives.
The bishops would have had knowledge of the writings. Again, it is a mistake to conclude that the Doctrine of the Trinity did not come from the Church. Equally, it would be a mistake to conclude they did not use the writings of the apostles.Not as much from the writings, as from, “This is how it is done in our Church.” From seeing it done, over and over again. From being taught these prayers and hymns from earliest childhood. From life-long habit. Which then could be tested and traced back to the Apostles, and found to be correct. But they got it from the same place we do - their parents and Sunday School teachers.
Jon
R
rinnie
Guest
Heresy was a crime against the state. Roman Law in the code of Justinian made it a capital offense.
The Church’s response was to at least give a fair inquisition.
But people will believe what they choose, and that is fine.
But where was Roman Law taught an Infalliable teaching of the RCC?
The Church’s response was to at least give a fair inquisition.
But people will believe what they choose, and that is fine.
But where was Roman Law taught an Infalliable teaching of the RCC?
J
jmcrae
Guest
The Bishops selected which writings to use based on the Tradition. Not the other way around.
R
rinnie
Guest
How do you feel that you have the mind of the Bishops etc at that time. Do you know what their personal opinion was.
Did the Church ever state that they agreed with Roman Law and believed that burning people alive was indeed the true word of God. Because thats pretty much what we are getting accused of here.
And I don’t think it is fair to make a claim that it was the will of the RCC that they be burned. The RCC never had a position to make that decision.
The only decision they could possibly do is use the laws of evidence presided over knowledegable judges and render the true decision.
IF they were so for it why were they the only ones who went out of their way to try to save the person from being put to death? They offered them confession and saved thousands of lives that without their effort would have no chance.
I am sorry in that culture heretic’s were to be put to death, but it was the culture of that time, not the RCC.
Because the culture today has changed has nothing to do with the way it was.
Protestants burned witches alive, were quite noted for it. Catholic’s never burned anyone.
Do you really think the RCC had any power to change Roman Law? And that if they could they would not? But regardless what you think has nothing to do with the way it was.
R
rinnie
Guest
Okay let me ask this. When Jesus was crucified on the cross and the 2 thieves were on each side of him, did he condemn the Law for crucifying them?
WHen the good their spoke and said we deserve our crime, did Jesus say no you did not?
And what is worse honestly, to steal something or speak heresy against God?
WHen the good their spoke and said we deserve our crime, did Jesus say no you did not?
And what is worse honestly, to steal something or speak heresy against God?
- Status