I
Ignatius
Guest
The New Testament writings came after the Church!
- Status
R
rinnie
Guest
Look at it this way there was the church even before the NT. What is the NT it is all about making the CHurch. The bible was writtten years and years after Christ. Jesus came here and left us the church that is again what the NT is all about sending the apostles to start the church right, Then how could the bible be here before the church. You would not have the NT in it then.
A
Always_For_Him
Guest
So, after all these pages of posts, knowing that Jesus’ teachings were only spread by Word of mouth and Sacred Tradition until the Bible was written (and even through the Reformation because most couldn’t afford Bibles), do the Protestants reading this thread still believe that the Bible came first? Do you believe in Apostolic Authority because now you know that it was through Apostolic Succession and Apostolic Authority that Jesus’ teachings were written down and became the Holy Bible? If you believe in Apostolic Authority, then don’t you have to believe that the Catholic Church is the One Church founded by Christ?
R
rcjones
Guest
Hmm… Much of this thread has focussed on trees, some even cutting down the trees, rather than seeing the forest.
Simply say, “Dad, I love you and I love Christ. At this time in my life I think I can draw closer to Christ, here. If I am truly his sheep, he won’t let me get lost, and if I am lost, He didn’t find me there and maybe he will here. Jesus accepted the prayer of the Publican who prayed ‘Lord have mercy on me a sinner’. And that will be the prayer on my lips continually.”
This from a non-Catholic,
A
Always_For_Him
Guest
That is beautiful and true, but there is so much more to it and to the topic of this thread. Jesus taught through Word and Sacred Tradition MANY, MANY things he wanted us to do. Believing in him and seeking his forgiveness for sins is paramount. But, there is so much more we are commanded to do. That is the point, to these discussions at all. Protestants don’t believe in Catholocism. Protestants don’t believe in Apostolic Succession. Protestants don’t believe in Apostolic Authority (which gave us the BIBLE, by the way.) If it weren’t for the successors of the Apostles taught by Jesus himself - THE CATHOLIC CHURCH - Protestants wouldn’t have Holy Scripture at all. If you believe in the Bible at all (even though the Protestant Bible was drastically altered from the original Bible), then you have to believe in Apostolic Authority because it is through that that you have a Bible. We have followed the same teachings of Christ, and we have continued the same Sacred Tradtion that Christ followed. He founded his Church and commanded us to. Even through scandalous times, Christ’s teachings were NEVER prevailed against. He promised to guide his One Church, and he is.
R
rcjones
Guest
And it is unfortunate that you are more interested in winning an argument against people who aren’t even here defending their positions than in the relationship between a father and daughter.
1 ¶ Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
… And though I be Catholic and can mouth the mass in Latin and reignite the flames of Holy Inquisition, if I have not love…
The daughter asked for answers to do battle with her father… the proper answer is for her to love her father and honor him, and let the Lord do the battles. This OP issue has nothing to do with the Church vs. the Bible when seen in this light.
Besides, you are swinging at straw men. Protestants know that the Bible canon was formed by the church. Do you really presume that they are morons? They simply do not identify the early church and the present RCC as one and the same. But that is a topic for another thread. IMHO. This one concerns a relationship between father and daughter.
A
Always_For_Him
Guest
S
steppenwolf1218
Guest
Actually, if you read the original post it is between her and a Baptist relative. Now I have many friends of many faiths not just christian. I’m involved with interfaith efforts for the poor and homeless on a volunteer basis. I’ve worked with the Billy Graham crusade under his son Franklin where the effort was not based on evangelizing one particular faith but it is an effort to envangelize people back to their faiths whatever that may be. I say this because these efforts I’m involved in are with people whose only objective is to help those in need in the name of God. It doesn’t what we believe particularly, it only matters that we help in the name of God. We can only pray they listen to the Holy Spirit and go as He guides them. That said, I also well know the difficulties of families who are interfaith. Invariably, some relative or relatives are self proclaimed experts who see it as their purpose in life to bring down the whore of Babylon, which is usually the Catholic Church but it can be just about any religion besides their own. They argue, ridicule, condemn and pretty much make the “outcast” feel sheepish. Not good family values but nonetheless it’s what they hold as right and their “God given calling”.
It’s shameful that there are those like this when I know so many christians and Jews who are simple God fearing and God serving individuals. This isn’t about winning an argument. This is about empowering a young lady to be able to stand up for her beliefs and enable her to make her own choices without having to be bullied.
As far as the Bible goes, if one can’t read the history books well enough to know that the Catholic Church did indeed hold councils to determine the canon of the Bible then there isn’t much sense in arguing about it. We can only pray for you. But I understand the faulty logic of it all. The various Protestant sects must dissect the Catholic Church from Christ otherwise they can not legitimize their own beliefs. The failed logic to that is if it were true then all that would mean is that there would be no church which could claim Christ as their founder and the promise of Jesus that the gates of Hell would not prevail against His Church would have been empty and meaningless.
R
rcjones
Guest
If that is the purpose of your post, then I apologize for misinterpreting this:
It sure appeared to me that you had another purpose.
A
Always_For_Him
Guest
You know, after considering your post and re-reading mine, I have to say, that I can see what you are saying. If you read through this thread and others, you will see how difficult it is for Catholics to discuss or prove anything at all because the non-C’s refute everything we say because they have different beliefs. So, sometimes it does take a little “proving” to get around all of the naysaying. I really didn’t mean to offend you. I am sorry for that.
R
rcjones
Guest
I’m not offended at all. Life’s too short. In this medium it is too easy to forget that there is a person behind the ASCII text, and also to forget that our ASCII text get separated from our personalities.
I am guilty of both.
I am happy to make your aquintance.
R
rcjones
Guest
Oh, and most protestant denominations include the creeds and recognize the the early councils.
It is their definition of Church that permits them to not arrive at the same conclusion that Catholics have about succession and the rest.
So your friends are simply ignorant, not representative of Protestantism.
On the other hand, those of the Restoration Movement, such as the Cambellites, will deny the creeds and the councils and opt for not mentioning that the canon was collected by men of the church. For all of the tradition that they deny, they hold pretty strong to some traditions concerning dress, musical instruments and other things peculiar to their own non-denominational denomination.
Even more ironic is the KJV only crowd which deny the councils and the tradition yet somehow believe in the inspiration of the KJ translators because the title page says “authorized”.
But I am sure I have my peculiarities as well.
It is their definition of Church that permits them to not arrive at the same conclusion that Catholics have about succession and the rest.
So your friends are simply ignorant, not representative of Protestantism.
On the other hand, those of the Restoration Movement, such as the Cambellites, will deny the creeds and the councils and opt for not mentioning that the canon was collected by men of the church. For all of the tradition that they deny, they hold pretty strong to some traditions concerning dress, musical instruments and other things peculiar to their own non-denominational denomination.
Even more ironic is the KJV only crowd which deny the councils and the tradition yet somehow believe in the inspiration of the KJ translators because the title page says “authorized”.
But I am sure I have my peculiarities as well.
A
Always_For_Him
Guest
A
Always_For_Him
Guest
Very good discussion points. We all have to realize that we have to find One Truth. There are too many beliefs/differences out there.
A
Always_For_Him
Guest
Besides knowing many Protestants, it is some of my understanding/intepretation of what I was hearing as I attended these services that has made me believe what I think about Protestantism. I am not Protestant, so I shouldn’t act like I know everything. But, I really think I have been exposed to enough to understand fundamental differences. It isn’t just my friends as you say. It has been my general understanding most of my life, especially my adult life. Many discussions later, I hear so many untruths regarding the Catholic Church, it’s beliefs and interpretation of Scripture, etc… I honestly think that most people have a “childs faith”. They still believe what they have been taught by their parents and their Church and most don’t seek to find the Truth for themselves as they become adults. I think we all are a little guilty of that. I have questioned things and every single time, the answers have been right there in early Church writings. I truly believe the Catholic Church has remained True to the original teachings of Christ. I really don’t think anyone has been able to prove otherwise.
G
guanophore
Guest
Many of them do not. They do not accept anything from the Catholic Church, even Christ. I presume that some of them are quite ignorant.
It is my prayerful home that the RCC and the early church are not “one and the same”.
R
rcjones
Guest
My intent in the post was to move the discussion from people to the ideas.
It is quite proper to say that the people in your experience believe this or that. But to label Protestantism as being against the councils is incorrect.
Protestantism accepts the early councils. They also do not dismiss tradition entirely. As Catholicism identifies continuity through the pope, Protestantism identifies a set of core beliefs as identifying the invisible church and in some cases the visible church. These core beliefs and traditions are used in Protestant apologetics, and appeals to the early fathers are common in Protestant debate.
Protestantism is not as anti-catholic at the creedal level as many imply in their posts here, even reciting the Nicene creed:
“And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church.”
As I said, it is their definition of what the church is that allows them to part company.
My point was that the churches known as protestant not only officially recognize the councils that put the canon together, but also have officially adopted some of the creeds.
It is quite proper to say that the people in your experience believe this or that. But to label Protestantism as being against the councils is incorrect.
Protestantism accepts the early councils. They also do not dismiss tradition entirely. As Catholicism identifies continuity through the pope, Protestantism identifies a set of core beliefs as identifying the invisible church and in some cases the visible church. These core beliefs and traditions are used in Protestant apologetics, and appeals to the early fathers are common in Protestant debate.
Protestantism is not as anti-catholic at the creedal level as many imply in their posts here, even reciting the Nicene creed:
“And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church.”
As I said, it is their definition of what the church is that allows them to part company.
W
walker_p
Guest
Thank You. Ellen G. White was a massive liar and hypocrite and a plagiarist. Seventh Day Adventists are just deceived beyond belief. SDAs often try to throw mud at true Biblical prophets to try to make the liar Ellen White look good in comparison. Message to all SDAs worldwide: you cannot salvage Ellen White. Let her go. She is a lost cause - as are your phony doctrines.
W
walker_p
Guest
If you want to give the Bible its rightful place, then stop your man made false doctrine of sola scriptura. The Bible upholds oral tradition as a means of communicating truth. The Bible never claims to be the final authority. The Bible says that is the Church’s role. When speaking ex-cathedra the Pope is infallible. Other than the book of Revelation, show me where Jesus commanded his Apostles to write books. The word of God has always been oral and written and was always mediated to the people. The people were never left to their own devices to privately interpret the word of God - until the so-called reformers (who did not reform anything but invented new doctrines which did not exist for the previous 15 centuries) created all this chaos and confusion among protestants.
W
walker_p
Guest
Without authority, you have no truth.
- Status