M
Michael_Francis
Guest
These off topic and derailing posts have been split off here to form their own thread. Please be sure to maintain the highest level of charity.
MF
MF
- Status
R
Ravyn_Guiliani
Guest
I don’t know why this got moved–it is a book about a conversion story–which I thot the OP asked for…oh well.
G
guanophore
Guest
When I read this I have to laugh.
I marvel that anyone can say such a thing. The NT did not even began to be written for 20 years, and was being composed for another 60. During the 80 years after the death of Christ, the gospel was transmitted primarily orally, and supplemented with the Holy Writings as they became available. If the Church did not preserve the Teaching of Jesus, then there would have been nothing to write!
I did not say that these Teachings are not presented. I said they are not accessible to persons such as yourself who lack faith. Since you believe they don’t exist, it will not be possible for you to access them.
Do you realize how many times Jesus said “be it done to you according to your faith”?Catholics believe that there was one Deposit of Faith, and that this was concluded with the death of the last Apostle. If something is not consistent with that Faith that was passed on to us, it is rejected. So, Mormonism is rejected, as well as OSAS, Sola Scriptura, and a number of other modern innovations.
Gal 1:7-9
8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.
This gospel was received orally, ja4. It was “preached” just as it has been for 2000 years. You are bringing “a different gospel”. What does St. Paul say to let you be?
On the contrary, ja4, we are well aware that you are here, and we are watchful of every move you make!
No need to blow your horn. We know that what you are bringing is false.Secondly, Jesus did not teach anything about some kind of “Apostlic Authority” that would have authority over the Scriptures.
Oh! That must have been in the verse where He commanded them to write the NT!
How did THAT get left out ? 
Do you think the things that Jesus taught were not worthy of remembering?
Aaah. This is the bottom line, is it not? It is a rebellion against the authority appointed by Christ.
ja4 has discerned a calling that he believes is from God to root the weeds out of the wheat field. He does not think it proper to wait until the end of the age, or to let the angels purge the field. He wants to get the weeds out NOW! He considers the Catholic faith to be a false religion, and wants all Catholics to become “bible christians”. I agree that in his narrow world, his intentions are “best” according to the knowledge that he has. Most of us here find his attitude offensive.
Thanks for sharing your testimony!
I
Ignatius
Guest
It is absolutely true, as you will discover. I was totally convinced of the falsehood of the Catholic Church because my pastors told me so. Well, I found out that it was they, and the churches founded by men in the 16th century or even later that were false. And you will discover this as well, either in this life or the next.
May the grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God the Father, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit always be with you.
Yours in Christ.
V
VociMike
Guest
This is simply a false tradition of men, and it was never taught by the Church before the errors of the Protestant Reformation arose. Not only does the Catholic Church not teach this, but neither does the Orthodox Church. It’s an invention.
N
Newbie2
Guest
Yeah, it’s that word, “only” again. Very non-biblical.
J
justasking4
Guest
Are you saying that there are other writings of the apostles outside of the Scriptures? If so, specifically what are they?
C
CentralFLJames
Guest
My dear JA4 I am sure you mean well but have you ever considered that you are parroting just another false heretical teaching of man yourself and are deceiving not only others but yourself as well? Like so many narrowly focused bible-only-Christians and do-it-yourself-christians you have a little bit of the truth but also have a whole lot of error. This condition causes you and people like you to become conflicted when presented with the whole universal truth and utterly blind to the condition that you in fact propagate a false teaching.
Indisputable proof that you are propagating a false teaching:
Jesus promised THE APOSTLES that they would receive the Holy Spirit (John 15:26-27) and ‘you will testify also, because you have been with Me from the beginning.’ This is assurances that The Holy Spirit would teach through the works of The Apostles. The Apostolic teaching commission and tradition continued for about 400 years predominantly through spoken work - NOT WRITTEN WORD. As we Catholics have informed and enlightened you dozens of times now the written NT scriptures did not even exist as a cohesive cannon for about 400 years after Christ. Do you really think God let His people, many who could not even read or write wander in darkness for 400 years? Do you think the Apostles and early Church Father’s had no authority to write what they did or to have authority to teach “over” what they said and wrote?
I am assuming you are an adult and have an adult mind. Correct me if this is a wrong assumption and you are under age 18. But please, let’s all be adults here and try to be reasonable. OK? These things you say are unsubstantiated conjectures that no adult mind could possibly accept at face value without some corroborating evidence or some at-face-value mature intellectual appeal.
Can you define what JA4 means by Tradition?
We have the entire tradition of the OT teachings and traditions. Can you show a few examples where Jesus did not teach based on the traditions of the OT? Do you not recollect Jesus going to the Temple at age 12 to celebrate the passover or even at his early age to be presented by Mary & Joseph to Simeon for His dedication? Jesus lived and breathed tradition. Why do you attach such a negative connotation to tradition when the Apostle Paul requires the aid of Tradition (2 Thess. 2:15). Moreover, the Apostle here refers to the scriptures which Timothy was taught in his infancy - which was OT not NT.
So why the paranoia about tradition?I don’t think you understand what the Catholic Church means by tradition. The term does not refer to legends or mythological accounts, nor does it encompass transitory customs or practices which may change, as circumstances warrant, such as styles of priestly dress, particular forms of devotion to saints, or even liturgical rubrics. **Sacred or apostolic tradition consists of the teachings that the apostles passed on orally through their preaching. These teachings largely (perhaps entirely) overlap with those contained in Scripture, but the mode of their transmission is different. **
These teachings have been handed down and entrusted to the Church. It is necessary that Christians believe in and follow this tradition as well as the Bible (Luke 10:16). The truth of the faith has been given primarily to the leaders of the Church (Eph. 3:5), who, with Christ, form the foundation of the Church (Eph. 2:20). **The Church has been guided by the Holy Spirit, who protects this teaching from corruption (John 14:25-26, 16:13). **
Do you not trust the Holy Spirit and God’s power with preserving The Church Teaching that Catholics have been handing down through the Apostolic Tradition for 2000 years?
More Tradition Here:
No what is most dangerous is personal and private interpretation that you and and others believe with all your heart is true. It is so sad to God to see those who are disobedient to God’s appointed authority on earth (The Catholic Church) to argue against His authority because it puts to test His Mercy and His Justice. God does not want to punish those who seek the truth but on the other God can not permit those who work against Him to harm and persecute His Church. Recall how Paul was converted. Thank God too since Paul was guilty of being complacent to murdering Christians. When through your personal zeal of righteousness you reject Church Authority and try to use The Church’s Scriptures against itself to divide truth you wound The Body of Christ in a very pernicious and grave way. You, JA4, leave yourself open to satisfying your own speculations and operate to undermine God’s works. Take heed.
James
J
justasking4
Guest
Even though i agree with some of your response you have failed again to address the issue that is there is no teachings of Jesus outside the NT canon. All that we know He taught can only be foudn there.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
JA4, John’s ministry lasted for about 60 years. His memoirs(Gospel) and his Apocalypse was not written until near his death. Exactly what did John preach and teach from for the most part of his ministry? The New Testament as you know it did not exist during most of his ministry.
What did he teach and preach from?
What did he teach and preach from?
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
Send us the rationale behind this peculiar statement of yours. Perhaps the verse stating “All Jesus said and did is communicated by way of the pen.”
J
justasking4
Guest
i’m in awe of your powers to read minds over the net.
Not sure why you are saying this. i never claimed that the church has no authority to teach.
i have an idea but its more important to understand what catholics by it. It seems you do offer a definition which needs to be discussed.
It depends what you mean by OT tradiitons. If you call teachings etc that we have direct access through the scriptures so be it.We have the entire tradition of the OT teachings and traditions. Can you show a few examples where Jesus did not teach based on the traditions of the OT? Do you not recollect Jesus going to the Temple at age 12 to celebrate the passover or even at his early age to be presented by Mary & Joseph to Simeon for His dedication? Jesus lived and breathed tradition. Why do you attach such a negative connotation to tradition when the Apostle Paul requires the aid of Tradition (2 Thess. 2:15). Moreover, the Apostle here refers to the scriptures which Timothy was taught in his infancy - which was OT not NT.
This is the problem. What are these apostolic traditions that were passed on orally (not in scripture)?
Before i can answer this i need to know specifically what are the "
Apostolic Tradition for 2000 years"? When i have asked for the details about this i continually hammered for asking it.
What i’m exhorting you and others of your church is to look deeply what your church teaches and promotes as the truth. There are many doctrines and practices that are unbilical and not what Christ taught.
P
pismopal
Guest
Have YOU studied the doctrines of the Catholic Church. I said studied, not parrot what you heard once or just made up from whole cloth. You are like a broken record and records are ancient technology broken or not. If I were you I would not worry too much about purgatory because I’m thinking you may not go there anyway. The whole idea of truth is to discern what truth is, not pick the path of least resistance or to hold fast to what grandma told you. Be a searcher for truth and read it for yourself. If you have not read the Catechism and the supporting references, you are never going to learn anything about Catholic “doctrine”.
C
CentralFLJames
Guest
Did God appoint you as his heavenly policeman to make sure that His Church is not breaking the law? Can you point to the scripture that appoints you as the protector of God’s Church? We have St Michael already thanks. So what law are you trying to enforce and by what authority do you attempt to. The Church utterly rejects your assertion that it teaches anything contrary to what Jesus taught or what He authorized The Church to teach.
The doctrines and practices we have today, especially the sacramental ones, are a direct result of Apostolic Teaching and the authority passed on through apostolic succession and the revelations of The Holy Spirit.
You act as if the bible is a cook book of things that are permitted to be done by The Church. We Catholics have told you hundreds of times that sola scriptura, by scripture alone, is a false teaching of man that the Church utterly rejects. So it is pointless to keep bringing this up. The Church assembled the bible as a teaching aid to spread the good news - it was not meant to be a thing that teaches itself though.
That said, what the Catholic Church teaches and does is 100% consistent with what she wrote into NT scripture since that was done through the workings of the same Holy Spirit of God as we currently rely on for additional insights and revelations.
James
K
Khariz
Guest
This is an interesting thread.
JA4, since nobody is explaining to you where you can read the stuff you are looking for:
Start here with the Catechism: vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm
Every time the Church makes a statement in the whole thing, they cite it with the appropriate scripture or tradition from where that comes. You seem interested in things that are backed up by tradition only, without scripture.
Those things are few and far between, but when you find one, the Catechism will typically point you to the Church Father’s document or other writing that explains the origin of the doctrine.
Another great resource is newadvent.org/ There you can look up say Mary and read linked articles to understand say…the immaculate conception doctrine.
With these two resources alone, you can find or find out about pretty much every doctrine and trace it back to it’s origin. You can find HOW tradition interrelates to the Bible.
I warn you though, as the road is not easy. You can’t spend 15 minutes looking at a topic, say “oh this is hogwash” and move on. What many people have a hard time doing is setting aside their feelings long enough to undertstand that Catholic tradition isn’t some arbitrary garbage that some pope 1000 years ago made up.
I know you don’t feel like many of the explanantions you have been given in this thread were helpful, but I hope that the resources I have mentioned will help your research into certain doctrines.
JA4, since nobody is explaining to you where you can read the stuff you are looking for:
Start here with the Catechism: vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm
Every time the Church makes a statement in the whole thing, they cite it with the appropriate scripture or tradition from where that comes. You seem interested in things that are backed up by tradition only, without scripture.
Those things are few and far between, but when you find one, the Catechism will typically point you to the Church Father’s document or other writing that explains the origin of the doctrine.
Another great resource is newadvent.org/ There you can look up say Mary and read linked articles to understand say…the immaculate conception doctrine.
With these two resources alone, you can find or find out about pretty much every doctrine and trace it back to it’s origin. You can find HOW tradition interrelates to the Bible.
I warn you though, as the road is not easy. You can’t spend 15 minutes looking at a topic, say “oh this is hogwash” and move on. What many people have a hard time doing is setting aside their feelings long enough to undertstand that Catholic tradition isn’t some arbitrary garbage that some pope 1000 years ago made up.
I know you don’t feel like many of the explanantions you have been given in this thread were helpful, but I hope that the resources I have mentioned will help your research into certain doctrines.
D
Della
Guest
There are no doctrines or practices of the Catholic Church that are “unbiblical”. There are ones that are not explicitly stated in the Bible, which is an entirely different matter. Some of them are: the Trinity (as we believe in it today); the nature of Christ (read up on the Arian heresy); that Christ was truly raised from the dead, body and soul–yes it was disputed in the Early Church in spite of the teaching of the Apostles. These matters weren’t settled by consulting the Bible alone.
The NT was compiled not to prove the teachings of the Church but as a canon to be read in the liturgies of the Church. The Bible is the witness to the truths taught by Christ and the Apostles, not a proof-text for anything. It was never intended to be that. It wasn’t until Martin Luther that anyone conceived of the idea that all we need is the Bible to know what is true doctrine/practice. That idea is not a Christian teaching, but one made up by men who wanted to diverge from what the Church has always taught and needed an excuse to do so. And that’s a plain historical fact.
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
L
Lampo
Guest
JA4, do you believe that the entire word of God is important? (Deuteronomy 8:3 - "He therefore let you be afflicted with hunger, and then fed you with manna, a food unknown to you and your fathers, in order to show you that not by bread alone does man live, but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of the LORD.)
Do you believe that not all of God’s words were written down? (John 20:30-31 - "Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of (his) disciples that are not written in this book.)
If you believe that all of God’s words are important, and not all of them were written down, where can you find these important words that were not written down?
V
VociMike
Guest
I am saying that the deposit of faith, given to the apostles and thus to all Christians, is not limited to the Scriptures. If you want to know what that entire deposit of faith is, look to all the dogmas and doctrines of the Catholic Church.
B
bnapgh
Guest
Three questions:
- How do you believe the New Testament defines: ‘‘every word which proceedeth out of the mouth of God’’
- Logically, how does ‘‘by every word which proceedeth out of the mouth of God’’ mean ‘‘and by no other way’’?
- First please read the following scripture quotes:
Matthew 26:26 26 …said: Take ye and eat. This is my body…
Mark 14:22 …said: Take ye and eat. This is my body
Now, please explain what the verb ‘‘is’’ means in each.
Or do you, like Bill Clinton, say it depends on your definition of ‘‘is’’.
How is a solo scriptura Christian to feel confident in his or her own definition of ‘‘is’’?
What if they are wrong?
- Status