Simple and babe like truth : Scriptural sufficiency

[justinthemartyr]

Justasking,

To say that it would be a violation of the warning is not accurate.

Jesus promised to guide His church into all Truth, not some, not most, but all Truth by the power of the Holy Spirit. The keys given to Peter(cephas,rock) and His power to bind and loose along with the other apostles(first bishops of the church) tell us that the teaching authority of the church and the final analysis of the teachings of the church brought down through the magesterium Christ appointed, safeguard the faith. Yes there have been false teachers, and they are dealt with on an individual basis. If they fail to adhere to the Truth that the Magesterium has brought forth then the are anathematized.

This is the difference from when I was non Catholic, where you had no idea what was actually true or not, and every church pretty much came up with a different interpretation of the same teaching with no safeguard. The church Christ built has the safeguard built into the magesterium by the power of the Holy Spirit Christ gave it.

 

[justasking4]

Anathemas concerning holy images

1. If anyone does not confess that Christ our God can be represented in his humanity, let him be anathema.
2. If anyone does not accept representation in art of evangelical scenes, let him be anathema.
3. If anyone does not salute such representations as standing for the Lord and his saints, let him be anathema.
4. If anyone rejects any written or unwritten tradition of the church, let him be anathema.

What specifically are the “unwritten tradition of the church”? Can you give me a couple of examples of what these are?

 

[mercygate]

What specifically are the “unwritten tradition of the church”? Can you give me a couple of examples of what these are?

Not hardly. It bothers me when people throw around the word “unwritten” as if Jesus took the Apostles into some smoke-filled room and whispered stuff in their ears that they, in turn, whispered into the ears of those who came after. Hooey!

By the time something enters Tradition, with a capital “T”, it has been thought, lived, prayed, struggled, and seared by the fire of the Holy Spirit until there is no longer any doubt that it is true.

The Church is not an esoteric operation, it is an open, exoteric, living organism with absolutely no secrets – other than the mysteries into which she is led as she matures through history and engages the challenges of every age. By that I mean, for example, the way doctrine develops as the faith encounters new questions or new situations – like the delineation of the doctrine of transubstantiation you are working on in another thread. For almost a thousand years, everybody just believed in the Real Presence. The definition of how this happens was forced when Tradition addressed the challenge and matured into the fuller definition.

Perhaps the most avialable example of “unwritten” tradition might be infant baptism. There is scriptural warrant for it but nowhere does Scripture say that a specific infant was baptized. But **EARLY **documents in the Church address the question of whether baptism should withheld until the 8th day of life. So we KNOW that the early Christians were doing it. But even at that, the tradition is WRITTEN before the year 250.

 

[guanophore]

What specifically are the “unwritten tradition of the church”? Can you give me a couple of examples of what these are?

Warning to other thread participants

Don’t fall for this. I spent months on this question with ja4, only to find out that he has no interest at all in learning about Sacred Tradition. Furthermore, he does not believe it exists. In the end, I learned that ja4 believes

1. “Sacred Tradition” is really only the speculation of men
2. The Teachers of the Church have led Catholics astray
3. Catholics fail to hold their teachers accountable for teaching errors
4. His goal in askng it is to create dialogue through which he hopes to convince Catholics of 1-3 above.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=170992&page=11&highlight=you+must+do+is+be+on+guard+against+false+teachers+in+your+own+church

He has had dozens of forum members share with him about Sacred Traditions, and has rejected any and all evidence. Before you go on a wild goosechase, you might want to consider doing a search on justasking4 and tradition. There you can find numerous threads where he uses this apparently innocent line of questioning in an effort to get Catholics to confront and expose the Magesterium for teaching error.

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;3159321]

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
What specifically are the “unwritten tradition of the church”? Can you give me a couple of examples of what these are?

Quote:
Originally Posted by guanophore
Warning to other thread participants

Don’t fall for this. I spent months on this question with ja4, only to find out that he has no interest at all in learning about Sacred Tradition. Furthermore, he does not believe it exists. In the end, I learned that ja4 believes

1. “Sacred Tradition” is really only the speculation of men
2. The Teachers of the Church have led Catholics astray
3. Catholics fail to hold their teachers accountable for teaching errors
4. His goal in askng it is to create dialogue through which he hopes to convince Catholics of 1-3 above.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthrea…r+ own+church

He has had dozens of forum members share with him about Sacred Traditions, and has rejected any and all evidence. Before you go on a wild goosechase, you might want to consider doing a search on justasking4 and tradition. There you can find numerous threads where he uses this apparently innocent line of questioning in an effort to get Catholics to confront and expose the Magesterium for teaching error.

What kind of catholic are you that slanders me like this?? This is absolutely sickening and it is a wicked sin on your part.

---

 

[alanjeddy]

I will go one step further guanophore and all the others are being too kind with you. You have rec’d compelling arguments corroborating the Catholic truths from many people. Stop being such a stupid jerk.

 

[alanjeddy]

What kind of catholic are you that slanders me like this?? This is absolutely sickening and it is a wicked sin on your part.

---

WHY DON’T YOU DO US ALL A FAVOR AND LEAVE FOR GOOD?

 

[guanophore]

What kind of catholic are you that slanders me like this?? This is absolutely sickening and it is a wicked sin on your part.

I am a Catholic who was hoodwinked! I took all your questions seriously for many months, spent hours researching (none of which I regret) and answered every one of them as clearly and completely as possible!

Slander would be telling something about someone that is not true. Do you deny that these are your positions and your quotes? If there is anything that I have posted here that you think does not accurately represent you, I will be happy to provide the evidence.

justasking4:

The church has always had the scriptures but had chosen to introduce the doctrines of men instead.

justasking:

And well they (Catholics) should question(their teachers). The scriptures warn of false teachers in the church who will decieve many. That is why you should hold your church accountable to what the scriptures teach.

justasking:

What you must do is be on guard against false teachers in your own church.

justasking:

Engaging for the truth is never a waste of time. Secondly it might get someone who reads these posts to rethink their position.

 

[guanophore]

I will go one step further guanophore and all the others are being too kind with you. You have rec’d compelling arguments corroborating the Catholic truths from many people. Stop being such a stupid jerk.

Charity, Alan, Charity!

WHY DON’T YOU DO US ALL A FAVOR AND LEAVE FOR GOOD?

How is he going to pursuade all the Catholics to rebel against the magesterium if he doesn’t engage the Catholics?

He hopes he can tire us all out;…

(Please don’t tell me its in your catechism because it checked and they are not there) Maybe i missed it. I don’t get tired with this so no need to worry.

“It is like sport to a fool to do wrong” Prov 10:23

 

[justasking4]

I am a Catholic who was hoodwinked! I took all your questions seriously for many months, spent hours researching (none of which I regret) and answered every one of them as clearly and completely as possible!

Slander would be telling something about someone that is not true. Do you deny that these are your positions and your quotes? If there is anything that I have posted here that you think does not accurately represent you, I will be happy to provide the evidence.

I am a Catholic who was hoodwinked! I took all your questions seriously for many months, spent hours researching (none of which I regret) and answered every one of them as clearly and completely as possible!

Slander would be telling something about someone that is not true. Do you deny that these are your positions and your quotes? If there is anything that I have posted here that you think does not accurately represent you, I will be happy to provide the evidence.

Yes i do deny it. How can anyone sitting at a computer think they can know the motives of another person on a forum like this?
I was serious and remain so. You are guilty of slander which is a false and damaging statement: a false and malicious statement that damages somebody’s reputation.

 

[guanophore]

Yes i do deny it. How can anyone sitting at a computer think they can know the motives of another person on a forum like this?
I was serious and remain so. You are guilty of slander which is a false and damaging statement: a false and malicious statement that damages somebody’s reputation.

If it is impossible to sit at a computer and know the motives of another, then how can you find me “guilty of slander” via this little window? I gleaned these beliefs from your statements, your postings. If they are false and damaging, what does that say about the things you have written here on the forum? I agree with you, your statements are false and damaging, but mostly to yourself.

Are you not proud of your reputation as a Bible Christian? You seem to be! Are you not gratified to point out to Catholics that their false teachings are not Bible based? How is this damaging your reputation? You have even said that you are relieved that you are not Catholic, so that you don’t have to defend the Teachings.

I would hate to be in your shoes in having to defend all these various doctrines your church teaches. Your load is far heavier than mine in that you are forced to believe things that cannot be defended by Scripture.

"justasking:

There is a lot of evil in the history of the catholic church. Even up to this day.

**What the catholic church has done is to nullify the scriptures **by mandating celibacy as a requirement for being a priest. Its not that the celibacy per se is wrong, but that the catholic has mandated it as a requirement in violation of the scriptures.

Do you no longer stand behind these statements, ja4?

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;3160260]

Quote:
Originally Posted by alanjeddy
I will go one step further guanophore and all the others are being too kind with you. You have rec’d compelling arguments corroborating the Catholic truths from many people. Stop being such a stupid jerk.

Charity, Alan, Charity!

Quote:
Originally Posted by alanjeddy
WHY DON’T YOU DO US ALL A FAVOR AND LEAVE FOR GOOD?

I can’t. I like you guys to much to leave…

How is he going to pursuade all the Catholics to rebel against the magesterium if he doesn’t engage the Catholics?

Now there’ a thought…

He hopes he can tire us all out;…

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;3161532]

Quote:

Originally Posted by justasking4
Yes i do deny it. How can anyone sitting at a computer think they can know the motives of another person on a forum like this?
I was serious and remain so. You are guilty of slander which is a false and damaging statement: a false and malicious statement that damages somebody’s reputation.
guanophore
If it is impossible to sit at a computer and know the motives of another, then how can you find me “guilty of slander” via this little window?

You make false statements about my motives which you clearly write out.

I gleaned these beliefs from your statements, your postings. If they are false and damaging, what does that say about the things you have written here on the forum? I agree with you, your statements are false and damaging, but mostly to yourself.

i don’t think i can convince you otherwise. I’ve read enough of your comments to convince me of this. Its to bad. i think you had some good insights and we could have had some great discussions. If you think i hoodwinked you i’m sorry about that. That has never been my intentions with anyone out here ever. i know i can’t stop you from spreading your comments about me to others but thats the way its going to have to be apparently.

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;3161532]
Are you not proud of your reputation as a Bible Christian? You seem to be!

How so?
What i do find is a tragic in not only with catholics but protestants don’t know the Scriptures that well. To think that the Scriptures, the inspired-inerrant Word of God is not well known among those that claim Christ is shocking.

Are you not gratified to point out to Catholics that their false teachings are not Bible based?

My hope is to get catholics to look deeply at what their church teaches. For some this is paramount to heresy.

How is this damaging your reputation?

You make false accusations without even knowing me. No one likes to have their reputation damaged.

You have even said that you are relieved that you are not Catholic, so that you don’t have to defend the Teachings.

This is true because of what the Scriptures teach and history. i think this is why so many are angry with me here. This is why at times I Thes 5:21 cannot be difficult for many when applied.

 

[guanophore]

You make false statements about my motives which you clearly write out.

What I have done is collect you postings, and observed the patterns. The only thing I have learned about ja4 is from the ja4 postings. I am Sola ja4!

Are you denying that you stated clearly that your goal in asking the questions was to get people to rethink their position?

i don’t think i can convince you otherwise.

If I did not think people could change, I would not be participating and supporting this forum. Anyone can repent anytime before death. Are you not praying that I will repent, and accept that Scripture is the only thing we have from the Apostles?

I have read enough of your comments to convince me of this. Its to bad.

I do hope you are convinced that I will not reject my faith just because you don’t agree with it.

i think you had some good insights and we could have had some great discussions. If you think i hoodwinked you i’m sorry about that. That has never been my intentions with anyone out here ever.

You will excuse me if I disagree on this point.

 i know i can't stop you from spreading your comments about me to others but thats the way its going to have to be apparently.

I am not spreading my own comments, ja4, but your own. Everything I have posted has been from one of your posts. I have included the references as much as possible, so that the readers can see the original posts. I did not make any of them up, and I will stand on everything I have posted of yours as 100% accurate. I did not even correct spelling and grammatical errors, as painful as it was to refrain.

 

[guanophore]

My hope is to get catholics to look deeply at what their church teaches. For some this is paramount to heresy.

This is consistent to what I said about your motives.

You make false accusations without even knowing me. No one likes to have their reputation damaged.

I have only posted here what you yourself have said. You are right, I don’t know anything about you except what you have posted here. If you don’t like what you said, and your comments are damaging to your reputation, whose fault is that? You are the one who wrote that stuff.

I would hate to be in your shoes in having to defend all these various doctrines your church teaches. Your load is far heavier than mine in that you are forced to believe things that cannot be defended by Scripture.

This is true because of what the Scriptures teach and history. i think this is why so many are angry with me here. This is why at times I Thes 5:21 cannot be difficult for many when applied.

 

[Chancellare]

We do not suggest that everything Christ ever said or did is recorded in Scripture. It is not an encyclopedia of all information, or even all spiritual information. Rather, it is sufficient for its purpose. This is best illustrated at the end of John:
And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name (John 20:30,31).
See how simple this is?

Pardon my poor eye-sight but, where is the word ‘sufficient’ written in the passage you quoted?

 

[seekerz]

Pardon my poor eye-sight but, where is the word ‘sufficient’ written in the passage you quoted?

Best post of the entire thread

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

What kind of catholic are you that slanders me like this?? This is absolutely sickening and it is a wicked sin on your part.

---

justasking4it:

You are a mean spirited soul. Go away in peace.

No one slanders you, you slander the Catholic Church and ignore direct questions.

You are only here to feel self-righteous about your ‘faith.’

Good for you, you’re a better Christian than the rest of us poor souls who have nothing but the True Presence and the teachings of our Lord as preserved for almost 2000 years.

Gee, you’re so lucky.

Robert

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

Was that scripted? I posted ONE VERSE

and you ignored it altogether. Do you agree or disagree that if we read what is “written” we can believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, and by believing have life in His name? That is all I asked and you went on some parade.

I’ll address what you posted when you address what I posted (since *you *replied to me).

Is John wrong in stating what he says?

OnlineHarvest:

St John was definitely NOT referring to that “How-To-Be-Your-Own-Preacher-Book” which we call Holy Scripture and is more commonly known as the Bible (assembled finally in 382 AD by Papal direction).

He was referring to his own account, his Gospel.

Of course you probably believe in some underground proto-evangelical church which was repressed by those mean Catholics for centuries and did not come out of the underground under the Protestant revolt of the 16th century?? Right??

Or do you have some other agenda here?

Robert