Slave to the Law

[brakelite]

Hi jlhargus,

That explains some of the source of inaccuracies that brakelite is presenting.

LOL I have quoted what in other circumstances you would regard as impeccable sources, all publications of your own church. Quotes that show 2 things.

1. That the change of the Sabbath to Sunday was done only by authority of the RCC
2. That change was made solely on the basis of tradition, because there is no Biblical justification for the change.

The fact that Dr Eck used that historical truth to counter Luther’s stand on sola scriptura draws only one conclusion. That Rome’s authority is validated through Protestantism acceptance of that change. That particular boast is actually made in other publications which I could find quotes for if you wish.

For the individual Sabbath keeper however, RCC claim to authority over that individual is invalidated completely, because he chooses to obey God rather than men.

That you fail to find an answer and resort to belittle me by aligning me with some odious (in your eyes) church reveals a dishonest approach to debate. I’ll neither confirm nor deny membership of said church, as the point is irrelevant.

 

[fhansen]

That authority is only active to those who choose to submit to it. “To whomsoever ye yield yourselves as servants to obey, his servants ye to whom ye obey”.Romans 6
You are welcome to submit to RCC authority, and the RCC is welcome to rule over you. But no-one is *obliged * to do so. The authority of the RCC is not, or ought not, a dictatorship, where one has no choice but to surrender ones will to the ruling authority. That is the way the Gentiles rule, “but that shall not be so with you” (Mark 10) Even God, though He is most assuredly sovereign, does not rule arbitrarily. He gives to each one of us the power of choice, and He certainly has not established a church that is to be more authoritarian than He is, in as much as removal of religious liberty.
The issue that most Protestants have with papal authority is the historically held position that all Christendom ought submit to her authority. How many 'heretics ’ were killed because they chose to submit to none but Christ and His word?
I choose to submit to the Lord … He has authority over me and if I should go astray He is well able to redirect my paths, using His word to do so.
Isaiah 30:20 And though the Lord give you the bread of adversity, and the water of affliction, yet shall not thy teachers be removed into a corner any more, but thine eyes shall see thy teachers:
21 And thine ears shall hear a word behind thee, saying, This is the way, walk ye in it, when ye turn to the right hand, and when ye turn to the left.
And if that word I hear behind me, or the teachers I hear before me should teach that which contradicts the word in the Scriptures, it is my duty to go by the scriptures. My eternal soul depends not on my obedience to man, but to God.
That is whyu I choose to keep the 4th commandment as God first intended it to be observed…on the 7th day, the specific 7th day after the first day of creation (not just any day as some propose) because it was that day God blessed, sanctified, and made holy, and it is that day, and that day alone, He asks us to remember to keep holy.
So I have a choice. Either obey God according to His word, (and as your own church’s publications declare, there is no evidence in scripture that God changed His mind) or obey the church according to its word and tradition, which it claims is the sign of her own authority.

The way it works-or the way it should work-when submitting to the authority of any person, institution, book, ideal, system of beliefs, is that one comes to agree with that authority. In any case what we are submitting to is a proposed set of beliefs or tenets, wherever they may be derived from. The problem many Catholics have with Protestantism is that the tenets come, more often than not, from their individual interpretation of scripture. They happen to believe their interpretation (as often as not it may actually be their denomination’s/pastors interpretation) represents Gods word-his will-and we happen to believe that the Church has been given the authority, rather than the individual, to interpret scripture- as well as tradition- in determining Gods will. Either way we believe we’re following God. Again, for a Catholic, he will come to agree with the Church, a matter of growth and conversion, or, for all practical purposes, not be Catholic. This agreement in faith is known as the sensus fidelium.

 

[CEM5]

LOL I have quoted what in other circumstances you would regard as impeccable sources, all publications of your own church. Quotes that show 2 things.

1. That the change of the Sabbath to Sunday was done only by authority of the RCC
2. That change was made solely on the basis of tradition, because there is no Biblical justification for the change.

The fact that Dr Eck used that historical truth to counter Luther’s stand on sola scriptura draws only one conclusion. That Rome’s authority is validated through Protestantism acceptance of that change. That particular boast is actually made in other publications which I could find quotes for if you wish.

For the individual Sabbath keeper however, RCC claim to authority over that individual is invalidated completely, because he chooses to obey God rather than men.

That you fail to find an answer and resort to belittle me by aligning me with some odious (in your eyes) church reveals a dishonest approach to debate. I’ll neither confirm nor deny membership of said church, as the point is irrelevant.

Hi brakelite,

recall that I said, “That explains some of the source of inaccuracies that brakelite is presenting”.

The “some” does not mean “all” sources.

brakelite, you fail to recognize that Sabbath does not mean Saturday!! Look at the commandment: God told mankind to work six days, then rest on the seventh day. The day after working 6 days straight is the 7th day! Not hard to figure out. We are not slaves of the law as the N.T. teaches and as Jesus taught. Show us where in the N.T.Jesus or the Apostles ever said to keep observing the same day as the Jews do for their sabbath day (ie: Day of Rest). What do you say to the fact that Jesus broke many Sabbath day observances and rebuked the Pharisees for their stiffling observances?

Here is an excellent site: earlychristianwritings.com/

Among the many letters of early Church is the Didache, written around 80 - 100 AD.

Chapter 14. Christian Assembly on the Lord’s Day. But every Lord’s day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one who is at odds with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: “In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations.”

Note, brakelite, that these teachings of the 12 Apostles clearly from the start show that our day of worship and observing our “sabbath” (day of rest/day set apart) is on the Lord’s Day.

You seem to forget (or deny?) that the Church was established by Jesus with Peter as the rock, of which Christ promised that the gates of hell would never prevail. Jesus promised His Church the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit and that the H.S. would lead this Church to all truth (in matters of morals and faith/teachings), Whatsoever this Church bound on earth, it would also be bound in heaven and whatsoever this Church loosed on earth then it would also be loosed in heaven. So, therefore, Jesus gave His ONE, HOLY, APOSTOLIC and CATHOLIC (universal = for ALL men who choose to belong to this kingdom on earth) the authority to determine correctly the Doctrines of the Church, and to forgive sins (or not) as well as the authority (which started from the Apostles) to worship God on the Lord’s Day. The Lord’s Day is the day after the Jews observe their day of rest: their sabbath day.

Recall that God ensured the Temple would be destroyed and vowed it would NEVER be rebuilt. Why? Because their is not to be anymore animal sacrifices and Jesus is the Temple and He is Lord of the Sabbath. We who are truly Christian follow the same day of worship and celebrate the Eucharist just as Jesus asked us to, and follow those Apostles and their successors’ teachings and traditions just as Christ permitted.

God gave us a kingdom on earth, and gave Peter the “keys to the kingdom” (symbol of authority, and this enabled whoever held those keys to rule the kingdom when the king was away or just too busy dealing with other matters). A kingdom is not a democracy, and if you don’t like the way the king rules or those whom the king has appointed to rule in his name, then you are free to leave, but you no longer are under the protection and guidance of the king and his kingdom. You are on your own. This is the Church, Christ’s beloved Bride, of which we are members under Jesus’ kingship (and his Royal steward - the one who has the keys to the kingdom: the Pope).

I choose to belong to God’s Church, His beloved kingdom.

blessings,

 

[jlhargus]

LOL I have quoted what in other circumstances you would regard as impeccable sources, all publications of your own church. Quotes that show 2 things.

1. That the change of the Sabbath to Sunday was done only by authority of the RCC
2. That change was made solely on the basis of tradition, because there is no Biblical justification for the change.

JL: That same Church also removed circumcission, by it’s own authority, using it’s new covenant Traditions. There was no biblical justification for the change.

You claim the early Church from the West to China observed Saturday. So why is it they now observe Sunday. Where was the outcry when this so called change occurred?

For the individual Sabbath keeper however, RCC claim to authority over that individual is invalidated completely, because he chooses to obey God rather than men.

JL: I would say the Sabbath keeper chooses to obey men rather than God. Separating themselves from the Church, the pillar and ground of TRUTH, 1Tm3:15. The scriptures tell us if one fails to listen to the Church to treat him as a tax collector and heathen, Mt18:17

That you fail to find an answer and resort to belittle me by aligning me with some odious (in your eyes) church reveals a dishonest approach to debate. I’ll neither confirm nor deny membership of said church, as the point is irrelevant.

JL: So do you find Hubert Armstrong’s teaching odious? I think you have confirmed membership by your post. As far as the point being irrelevant, not so, you like to critique others, while reserving the right to remain exempt from being critiqued.

 

[jlhargus]

Hi jlhargus,

Yes I am the same! Good to see you too, although I don’t believe this was your moniker then? Have a good day God bless

JL: Glad you are here you do an excellent job, my moniker has always been the same as now.

 

[GreggAlvarez]

Non-Catholics PLEASE READ

You see, our dear non-Catholic brothers and sisters… We are not at all trying to make utter acts of hubris in saying we are right, contrary to yours in insisting that we are wrong because of your understanding of our doctrine. We have given you many verses from Scriptures (which I certainly have no ability to do but I am glad they do) that lead us to believe beyond a reasonable doubt what we believe and why. We also have given faith-illumined extra-biblical reasons for believing what we believe beyond a reasonable doubt.

You cannot understand Catholic Tradition (Scripture, doctrine, belief, etc…) from a bias that we are wrong. Giving information that you are ex-Catholic is even worse for understanding Catholic doctrine and belief. The only way you can understand it is to erase all presuppositions and experience it. For example, the prayers (not meaning worship as most may think) to Mary, Queen of Heaven, the angels, saints and martys can give one numerous graces to the soul but a superficial idea of it would lead one to assume that we do not worship God alone.

In arguments against us, we have the upper hand and that is not only because we have the Truth; it is because we argue from the point that we are right and you argue from a point that we are wrong. It is easier to defend what one knows than to attack what one does not know. Is this highly prideful? Probably, but we will not back down from defending the Church that Christ, God in the flesh, founded.

Christ is the Word of God that was spoken at the Creation of our universe. Christ is also the Word of God made flesh to destroy sin and death at His Death, give us a new life by “putting on Christ” in the Resurrection and instilling in us a newfound hope of being with Our Lord in the Ascension. It is also said, “Ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ.” With all of this, this is a reason why we hold Sacred Tradition as oral (Christ spoke and is the Word spoken at Creation) and written (Christ is the Scriptures and written in the Scriptures). The Bible could not be written without the spoken Tradition anyway. Also, these (I am sure there are plenty more than I stated) are reasons why the Bible is only part of the Ultimate Picture (Christ), my friends.

You may want to ask yourself what a Christian is. Jesus is the Truth. Nothing He said was untruth, written and non-written. This is another reason why we believe (transcending knowledge) we have the Truth; that is, because we take Christ as much much more than some mysterious Man in a book, or rather a compilation of books, compiled by the Church several centuries later. This is our idea of Him. This is why I keep saying you all trivialize, because you fail to see the Man beyond the Bible and just see His story as a bunch of words. It is almost as if you said the Holy Spirit was just a spirit that is holy. When you belittle sin, you belittle Christ’s work. We see the bigger picture because we have, believe in and believe the Bigger Picture.

Is this trivializing the Bible? Certainly not. I am saying that the Bible is a gift from God, but not the ONLY gift from God as a source of Truth. That Source is God Himself through His Apostles (and prophets for the Old Testament).
Truth is much more than you take it to be and much more than we can ever know.

Do not inherently tell us that you know more about our Traditions than we do. Do not give the false sense of charity of praying for all religions when you are ready to attack without premise. Do not tell us that we cannot prove what you think we cannot prove. Do not say we worship the Church because you know that is not true. Do not call us fools for believing Christ’s words.

In addition to all the Bible verses and reasons my Catholic brothers have given, I offer here what my tiny brain can offer which is eclipsed by what they said.

St. Ignatius of Antioch (disciple of St. John, the Gospel writer) says, “Wherever Christ Jesus is, there is the Catholic Church.” Wherever Truth (Life, Love, Mercy, etc…) is, there is the Catholic Church. Somebody has to proclaim the Truth and that Truth is Christ. There is plenty of evidence to give one certitude that that somebody is the Catholic Church.

Sola Scriptura should lead an honest person to this and hence to the Church which is a gift from God protected from error by the Holy Spirit.

 

[brakelite]

The question I have regarding tradition and scripture is which takes second fiddle on points that are somewhat controversial? You may tell me that the church leaders, with much prayer and contemplation etc will decide, sometimes in favour of tradition, sometimes in favour of the scriptures.
Is that correct?

 

[Pitcharan]

Thanks DPMartin.

I was more of looking at following the commandments but it do not save. Example the rich young man of the Gospel (Mt 19 & Mk 10). He followed all the commandments but Jesus said he would not get eternal life. So following the commandments was not enough in this case. What is your thought?

When the Law was revealed through Moses, the means to fulfill the righteous requirements of the Law was also revealed: Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. (Deu 6:5-6). Only when we Love God, we receive the Grace to fulfill His commands.

There is a huge difference between observing a Law and fulfilling the righteous requirements of a Law. Please read John’s gospel. He says, Moses merely gave the Law, but Grace came through Jesus. Jesus demonstrated what it means to fulfil the righteous requirements of the law, and showed us the means to abide in God’s law through love which enables one to abide. Permit me to use this example: In my country there was till recently a law called POTA (Prevention Of Terrorism Act). Mere observing the law would mean not allowing terror to happen through vigilance and penal measures. Fulfilling its righteous requirements would mean, spreading love and removing hatred and rooting out evil from human hearts

 

[fhansen]

The question I have regarding tradition and scripture is which takes second fiddle on points that are somewhat controversial? You may tell me that the church leaders, with much prayer and contemplation etc will decide, sometimes in favour of tradition, sometimes in favour of the scriptures.
Is that correct?

We’re saying that both scripture and tradition are parts of her own history and she’s been given the duty to interpret/understand both-no need for contradiction. Scripture can sometimes appear to be internally contradictory-even though it’s not-simply because of the nature of the written word. That’s one reason it requires interpretation to begin with.

 

[jlhargus]

The question I have regarding tradition and scripture is which takes second fiddle on points that are somewhat controversial? You may tell me that the church leaders, with much prayer and contemplation etc will decide, sometimes in favour of tradition, sometimes in favour of the scriptures.
Is that correct?

JL: The simple answer they cannot contradict one another.

 

[GreggAlvarez]

The question I have regarding tradition and scripture is which takes second fiddle on points that are somewhat controversial? You may tell me that the church leaders, with much prayer and contemplation etc will decide, sometimes in favour of tradition, sometimes in favour of the scriptures.
Is that correct?

Neither takes precedence. They both are the Word of God and protected from error by the Holy Spirit. As a matter of fact, the Scriptures were written because of the oral Tradition. Do you agree?

And no to the last question. A difficulty in understand our doctrine strictly from Scriptures should not lead one to doubt the Church. A difficulty is just a difficulty. All in all Christ teaches us through His Mystical Body and keeps us from error by the Holy Spirit. Sacred Tradition is Tradition AND Scriptures… Both/And would be the proper way but I am unsure how to put that in a sentence. Truth does not contradict Truth.

 

[Robbinson]

Neither takes precedence. They both are the Word of God and protected from error by the Holy Spirit. As a matter of fact, the Scriptures were written because of the oral Tradition. Do you agree?

And no to the last question. A difficulty in understand our doctrine strictly from Scriptures should not lead one to doubt the Church. A difficulty is just a difficulty. All in all Christ teaches us through His Mystical Body and keeps us from error by the Holy Spirit. Sacred Tradition is Tradition AND Scriptures… Both/And would be the proper way but I am unsure how to put that in a sentence. Truth does not contradict Truth.

Agreed - scripture itself tells us we need an authoritative voice to help us understand:

**“And he rose and went. And behold, an Ethiopian, a eunuch, a minister of the Can’dace, queen of the Ethiopians, in charge of all her treasure, had come to Jerusalem to worship 28 and was returning; seated in his chariot, he was reading the prophet Isaiah. 29 And the Spirit said to Philip, “Go up and join this chariot.” 30 So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” 31 And he said, “How can I, unless some one guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.” **(Acts 8:27-31)

Blessings,

Brian

 

[brakelite]

Agreed - scripture itself tells us we need an authoritative voice to help us understand:

"And he rose and went. And behold, an Ethiopian, a eunuch, a minister of the Can’dace, queen of the Ethiopians, in charge of all her treasure, had come to Jerusalem to worship 28 and was returning; seated in his chariot, he was reading the prophet Isaiah. 29 And the Spirit said to Philip, “Go up and join this chariot.” 30 So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” 31 And he said, “How can I, unless some one guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him." (Acts 8:27-31)

Blessings,

Brian

That particular Ethiopian did not know the true God, he did not know Jesus, he did not even know intellectually who Jesus was, let alone experientially.And moreover, he did not have the Holy Spirit in him to communicate to him God’s will. So God sent to him someone who did know Him, someone who could explain what the scriptures meant.
Christians do have the Holy Spirit… Not just intellectually, but true Christians know Him personally and experientially. Jesus own promise that He will send His Spirit to give understanding can be claimed and He will honour His promise. This promise isn’t just to church leaders, but to all who know and love Him.
When the two disciples were returning home to Emmaus and discussing between themselves the events of the last few days, their hopes were dashed and they doubted all they had known of Jesus and heard of Him. But when Jesus came and walked with them, He opened their understanding and they found their hope again, even with joy. Jesus still is the interpreter of scripture. This role our Saviour has did not stop when He returned to heaven, He told His disciples that He would always be with them, that He would never forsake nor leave them.He promised that He would continue to guide His followers into all truth through the ‘Spirit of Truth’ (John 16:13) which is the very Spirit of Christ… (Rom. 8:9)
While teachers are helpful, various commentaries and concordances and hermeneutical studies are things which ought not be set aside, yet Jesus remains and will ever remain the greatest and most reliable interpreter of scripture, because it was the Spirit of Christ which inspired those very same scriptures in the fist place.And it is the Spirit of Christ which resides within each and every true child of God, guiding and leading him/her into all truth. His promises are true, and can be trusted.

 

[fhansen]

m. 8:9)
While teachers are helpful, various commentaries and concordances and hermeneutical studies are things which ought not be set aside, yet Jesus remains and will ever remain the greatest and most reliable interpreter of scripture, because it was the Spirit of Christ which inspired those very same scriptures in the fist place.And it is the Spirit of Christ which resides within each and every true child of God, guiding and leading him/her into all truth. His promises are true, and can be trusted.

This totally begs the question. Of course Jesus is the best teacher. And if He were here physically we certainly would all agree that there would be no need in the least for other teachers, commentaries, concordances, and hermeneutic studies-not even one reason for them to exist. But this is precisely why He established a Church-to continue His work on earth -guiding her by His Spirit. And that same Spirit resides within His believers, confirming Church teachings.

 

[CEM5]

That particular Ethiopian did not know the true God, he did not know Jesus, he did not even know intellectually who Jesus was, let alone experientially.And moreover, he did not have the Holy Spirit in him to communicate to him God’s will. So God sent to him someone who did know Him, someone who could explain what the scriptures meant.

This Ethiopian DID know the true God (He worshipped in the Temple in Jerusalem, and read the Septuagint (the “Old Testament”). His heart was open to finding out who was being spoken of (Jesus) in that particular passage and God’s Holy Spirit ensured that an Apostle was sent to proclaim the Good News of Jesus Christ and immediately after, he was baptized and received the saving grace of the Holy Spirit.

Christians do have the Holy Spirit… Not just intellectually, but true Christians know Him personally and experientially. Jesus own promise that He will send His Spirit to give understanding can be claimed and He will honour His promise. This promise isn’t just to church leaders, but to all who know and love Him.

No, brakelite, Jesus did not promise the whole world that the Holy Spirit would give understanding. Jesus gave this promise to the Church - those leaders, under Peter, and their successors (Bishops and Pope) whom Christ put in charge to “guide His sheep, feed his lambs”.

John 14:
16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate, to be with you forever. 17 This is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, because he abides with you, and he will be in you. 18 "I will not leave you orphaned; I am coming to you. 19 In a little while the world will no longer see me, but you will see me; because I live, you also will live. 20 On that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you.

Now, brakelite, Jesus was telling His Apostles these comforting words because the time was nearing for His crucifiction, and when you read this chapter in context, it clearly shows that Christ was telling only His Apostles (the foundation of the Church) this promise of truth - not every inidividual. Jesus also said if anyone couldn’t agree, then take it to the Church. If you refuse to listen to the Church, then you are to be treated as a gentile or tax collector (and these people were reviled).

Matthew 16:18 NRSA
And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.

Matthew 18:17 NRSA
If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector

When the two disciples were returning home to Emmaus and discussing between themselves the events of the last few days, their hopes were dashed and they doubted all they had known of Jesus and heard of Him. But when Jesus came and walked with them, He opened their understanding and they found their hope again, even with joy. Jesus still is the interpreter of scripture. This role our Saviour has did not stop when He returned to heaven, He told His disciples that He would always be with them, that He would never forsake nor leave them.He promised that He would continue to guide His followers into all truth through the ‘Spirit of Truth’ (John 16:13) which is the very Spirit of Christ… (Rom. 8:9).

Jesus opened the minds of His Apostles and taught them the meaning of the Scriptures. He did not open the minds of all His followers. He put His Apostles (and their successors) in charge of proclaiming the Good News to the world

Luke 24:27 NRSA
Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them the things about himself in all the scriptures.

Luke 24:45 NRSA
Then he opened their minds to understand the scriptures,

Mark 4:34 NRSA
he (Jesus) did not speak to them (other people) except in parables, but he explained everything in private to his disciples.

While teachers are helpful, various commentaries and concordances and hermeneutical studies are things which ought not be set aside, yet Jesus remains and will ever remain the greatest and most reliable interpreter of scripture, because it was the Spirit of Christ which inspired those very same scriptures in the fist place.And it is the Spirit of Christ which resides within each and every true child of God, guiding and leading him/her into all truth. His promises are true, and can be trusted.

Jesus resides in those who follow Him, however, He does not teach each single person what the meaning of Scripture is. He put His Church in charge of that. Refer to the Scripture I have provided above and below:

2 Peter 1:20 NRSA
First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation,

2 Peter 3: 1 This is now, beloved, the second letter I am writing to you; in them I am trying to arouse your sincere intention by reminding you 2 that you should remember the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets, and the commandment of the Lord and Savior spoken through your apostles… 15 and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures.

 

[CEM5]

P.S. brakelite,

Here are more words from Scripture:

1 Timothy 3:15 NRSA
if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth

Hebrews 13:17 RHE
Obey your prelates (means “bishops”) and be subject to them. For they watch as being to render an account of your souls: that they may do this with joy and not with grief. For this is not expedient for you.

1 Corinthians 11:2 NRSA
I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions just as I handed them on to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 NRSA
So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by our letter.

So, brakelite, what do you think of those Scriptures? Do you obey the prelates (bishops) that Jesus put in charge over our souls on earth? See, the Church is the kingdom on earth, and as such, in a kingdom, when the King is away, he puts his “right hand man” per se, in charge to rule and govern and tend to the people until he comes back. This is what the Royal Stewart’s role was, and to him was given the keys to the kingdom. This position was one that was held for life and was the king’s most trusted man. When the Royal Stewart died, another was chosen by the king to replace him.

This is how it is with the Catholic Church on earth. Jesus has physically left, and put “Peter” in charge (and thereafter Peter’s successors) until Jesus comes again in glory with the saints and angels. All are welcome (thus the “universal” = catholic Church) but none are forced to belong.

 

[jlhargus]

The question I have regarding tradition and scripture is which takes second fiddle on points that are somewhat controversial? You may tell me that the church leaders, with much prayer and contemplation etc will decide, sometimes in favour of tradition, sometimes in favour of the scriptures. Is that correct?

1TIM 6: Timothy, keep that which is COMMITTED TO THY TRUST, avoiding profane and vain babblings,

PHILIP 4:9 Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do]

2 THES 2:14 Whereunto he called you by OUR GOSPEL, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, WHETHER BY word, OR our epistle]

1 THES 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard, of us ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

Jn 14: 26: But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you].

2TIM 2:1 Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2 And the THINGS that thou hast HEARD of me among many witnesses, the same COMMIT thou TO FAITHFUL MEN, who shall be ABLE TO TEACH OTHERS also.

2 TIM 1:13 HOLD FAST THE form of SOUND WORDS, which thou hast HEARD OF ME, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. 14 That good thing which was COMMITTED unto thee keepKEEP BY THE HOLY GHOST which dwelleth in us.

Timothy received the gift of the Holy Spirit by laying on of hands. Holy orders, ordination, apostolic succession, in an unbroken line from the apostles, to bishop, to bishop till the end. It is thru the Holy Spirit that oral apostolic tradition is kept and discerned, by the church, as opposed to a tradition of men. Scripture tells us the Church is the pillar and ground of truth, NOT INDIVIDUALS, 1Tm 3:15. The church’s testimony is of no less value than scripture, because the Holy Spirit is the origin of both and ACTIVE IN BOTH, the Church discerned the cannon of scripture. As the council of Jerusalem wrote to the churches, Act15:28 For IT SEEMED GOOD TO THE HOLY GHOST AND TO US]

[2THESSALONIANS3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the TRADITION which he received of us.]

other scriptures speaking of the Church, 1Jn 4:6 We are of God Whoever knows God LISTENS TO US and he who is not of God DOES NOT LISTEN TO US BY THIS WE KNOW the spirit of TRUTH AND the spirit of ERROR

Jn 15:20…if THEY have KEPT my saying they WILL KEEP YOURS ALSO Jn 17:20 Neither pray I for these alone but for them which shall believe on me through their word.

[Eph3:7 Whereof I WAS MADE A MINISTER, ACCORDING TO THE GIFT of the grace OF GOD given unto me BY the effectual WORKING OF HIS POWER. 8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; 9 And **TO MAKE ALL MEN SEE what is THE FELLOWSHIP of THE MYSTERY, which from the beginning of the world hath been HID IN GOD, who created all things by Jesus Christ: 10 To the intent THAT NOW unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places MIGHT BE KNOWN BY THE CHURCH the manifold wisdom of God,] [2Cor5:20 Now then **we are ambassadors for Christ, as though GOD did BESEECH YOU BY US: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God.]

Paul even checked his teaching with that one fellowship, to be sure he was not teaching another doctrine or gospel. [Gal2:1 Then fourteen years after ** I WENT UP AGAIN TO JERUSALEM with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also. 2 And I went up BY REVELATION, and COMMUNICATED UNTO THEM that GOSPEL which I PREACH among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, LEST BY ANY MEANS I SHOULD run, or HAD RUN, IN VAIN.]

[Mt18:17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, TELL IT UNTO THE CHURCH: but IF HE NEGLECT TO HEAR THE CHURCH, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. 18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.]

Apostolic tradition is discerned by the help of the Holy Spirit givin in ordination to lead the Church into all TRUTH. All Christians receive the Holy Spirit in baptism, however to claim all are led into all TRUTH individually isn’t so, as seen clearly by thousands of interpretations of the same scripture.

The burden of proof is on those who deny oral Apostolic Tradition. They must show scripture saying ALL oral tradition is now in the written tradition of scripture or they must show scripture alone, which cannot be done. As Paul tells us in 2Thes, our gospel, WHETHER by WORD or our EPISTLE.