N
newbie1234
Guest
What do you mean by read my signature?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
N
newbie1234
Guest
See post 636Again that verse does not say the Bible is the Sole Authority Alone… so you are very wrong.
N
newbie1234
Guest
see post 636I’m sorry, but it says useful, not the only thing to be used for teaching, refutation, etc. In fact, the word only or alone or any word to describe exclusive is not used at all. Sorry, not convinced. Any other verse you like to show me?
N
newbie1234
Guest
Are you at the point in your faith that you need proof that the bible is the inspired Word of God?Prove the inspiration of what you consider scripture.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
The verse says The man of God can be COMPLETE and thoroughly equipped by using scripture.Maybe you don’t have a bible around so I will type out 2tim3:16-17 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for DOCTRINE, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
17that the man of God may be COMPLETE, thoroughly equipped for EVERY good work.
It does not say that the man of God needs anything else to be complete. Am I reading something into this verse that is not there. Or is it pretty plain to understand?
I don’t see anything there that says that it is the sole authority.2tim3:16-17
See also post 636
In fact the very same author tells us elsewhere “the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.” (1st Timothy 3:15)
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
You got your dates all wrong. The 27 Books were ratified in 382 A.D in the Council of Rome.Council of Carthage first ratified the 27 books of the nt ad397
Origen ad185-ad254 had all 27 books as we know them today
well before they where ratified in 397. More info coming
Council of Rome came first in 382 A.D, (whereby Pope Damasus started the ball rolling for the defining of a universal canon for all city-churches). Listed the New Testament books in their present number and order; Council of Hippo,
the Council of Hippo 393 A.D , which began “arguing it out.” Canon proposed by Bishop Athanasius.,
Council of Carthage 397 A.D. The Council of Carthage, which refined the canon for the Western Church, sending it back to Pope Innocent for ratification. In the East, the canonical process was hampered by a number of schisms (esp. within the Church of Antioch). However, this changed by …
The Ecumenical Council of Nicaea II in 787 A.D, which adopted the canon of Carthage. At this point, both the Latin West and the Greek / Byzantine East had the same canon. However, … The non-Greek, Monophysite and Nestorian Churches of the East (the Copts, the Ethiopians, the Syrians, the Armenians, the Syro-Malankars, the Chaldeans, and the Malabars) were still left out. But these Churches came together in agreement, in 1442A.D., in Florence.
Council of Florence in 1442 A.D, At the Council of Florence, the entire Church recognized the 27 books. This council confirmed the Roman Catholic Canon of the Bible which Pope Damasus I had published a thousand years earlier. So, by 1439, all orthodox branches of the Church were legally bound to the same canon. This is 100 years before the Reformation.
Council of Trent 1546 AD, the Catholic Church reaffirmed once and for all the full list of 27 books. The council also confirmed the inclusion of the Deuterocanonical books which had been a part of the Bible canon since the early Church and was confirmed at the councils of 393 AD, 373, 787 and 1442 AD. At Trent Rome actually dogmatized the canon, making it more than a matter of canon law, which had been the case up to that point, closing it for good.
and so end the canon of Scripture it was settled in the Council of Trent.
D
dbacks5439
Guest
Newbie, read what’s before that verse. 2 Timothy 3:10-11 says, “You have followed my teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance, persecutions, and sufferings, such as happened to me in Antioch, Iconium, and Lystra, persecutions that I endured. Yet from all these things the Lord delivered me.” “You have followed my teaching”, is a key statement from Paul. He is saying that Timothy has learned what the scriptures say in light of Tradition. Word of mouth and by example from Paul to Timothy. Scriptures are helpful, very much so. However, Sacred Tradition is needed as well, as stated in 2 Thess. 2:15. How can the verse you gave me be reconciled with the verse I just gave?
N
newbie1234
Guest
The way I read the verse is, I can be complete using only the Word of God.I don’t see anything there that says that it is the sole authority.
In fact the very same author tells us elsewhere “the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.” (1st Timothy 3:15)
If YOU would like to use other authorities or sources, that is fine.
The key is that a man of God COULD be complete being guided by the bible alone.
It doesn’t say I must use the bible alone.
Does that seem reasonable?
C
Church_Militant
Guest
No, not really. That is clearly your personal interpretation of it yet an objective reading does not support your premis of “only”.The way I read the verse is, I can be complete using only the Word of God.
If YOU would like to use other authorities or sources, that is fine.
The key is that a man of God COULD be complete being guided by the bible alone.
It doesn’t say I must use the bible alone.
Does that seem reasonable?
Furthermore 1st Timothy 3:15 says otherwise.
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
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. 2 Peter 3:16What do you mean by read my signature?
If I add 2 Peter 3:15-16 it would read more like this.
If you say the the Epistles are easily read, you just contradicted Peter, the Apostle. The Epistles are not so easy to understand. Self interpreting the Scripture themselves can lead to destruction.And count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 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.
E
Eden
Guest
Origen may have had all 27 books of the New Testament as we know them today. But his Canon also included the Shepherd of Hermas, the Codex Alexandrinus and I and II Clement. So, your statement about Origen actually agrees with what we have said. The Canon was set by the Catholic Church in the late 4th and early 5th centuries at the Councils of Carthage and Hippo. That is why you are not using Origen’s Canon today.Council of Carthage first ratified the 27 books of the nt ad397
Origen ad185-ad254 had all 27 books as we know them today
well before they where ratified in 397. More info coming
Source: tmch.net/ntcanon.htm
So, you are recognizing the authority of the Catholic Church to discern and approve the Canon of the New Testament in your Bible, but you do not recognize the Catholic Church as having the authority to discern and approve apparitions.
N
newbie1234
Guest
Paul does not use the word tradition in2tim10-11Newbie, read what’s before that verse. 2 Timothy 3:10-11 says, “You have followed my teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance, persecutions, and sufferings, such as happened to me in Antioch, Iconium, and Lystra, persecutions that I endured. Yet from all these things the Lord delivered me.” “You have followed my teaching”, is a key statement from Paul. He is saying that Timothy has learned what the scriptures say in light of Tradition. Word of mouth and by example from Paul to Timothy. Scriptures are helpful, very much so. However, Sacred Tradition is needed as well, as stated in 2 Thess. 2:15. How can the verse you gave me be reconciled with the verse I just gave?
Furthermore Paul teaches us exactly how to live and act in most situations through his epistles. We need no other source. 2thess2:15 also says tradition learned from epistles.
We look at epistles and make tradition. I have no problem following tradition that comes from epistles. However if the tradition is NOT in the epistles, I don’t have to follow it.
D
dbacks5439
Guest
funny. He said either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours. What does oral statement mean?
N
newbie1234
Guest
Halleys does not say Origen included those other books, however eusibius researched and claimed they were spurious. According to HalleysOrigen may have had all 27 books of the New Testament as we know them today. But his Canon also included the Shepherd of Hermas, the Codex Alexandrinus and I and II Clement. So, your statement about Origen actually agrees with what we have said. The Canon was set by the Catholic Church in the late 4th and early 5th centuries at the Councils of Carthage and Hippo. That is why you are not using Origen’s Canon today.
Source: tmch.net/ntcanon.htm
So, you are recognizing the authority of the Catholic Church to discern and approve the Canon of the New Testament in your Bible, but you do not recognize the Catholic Church as having the authority to discern and approve apparitions.
N
noma
Guest
Even if newbie were, where would we infer that Origen would have such amazing powers, as to determine what is Scripture?Origen may have had all 27 books of the New Testament as we know them today. But his Canon also included the Shepherd of Hermas, the Codex Alexandrinus and I and II Clement. So, your statement about Origen actually agrees with what we have said. The Canon was set by the Catholic Church in the late 4th and early 5th centuries at the Councils of Carthage and Hippo. That is why you are not using Origen’s Canon today.
Source: tmch.net/ntcanon.htm
So, you are recognizing the authority of the Catholic Church to discern and approve the Canon of the New Testament in your Bible, but you do not recognize the Catholic Church as having the authority to discern and approve apparitions.
Where does this power come from? How can newbie be sure he is correct, if he only trusts the authority of Scripture?
Else, should he accept by faith that Scripture is complete, then he is using his judgement (enlightened by God, maybe) as well as Scripture. But this Catholics also do, when they assert the authority of the Pope.
T
The_Confused_1
Guest
In the book of Acts, doesn’t it talk about whole houses and whole families being baptized. It’s likely that those houses; those families included young children and even infants.And also in mathew’s gospel, doesn’t Jesus say"let the children come to me. Do not hinder them. The Kingdom of God belongs to such as these." Just a thought.ok sounds good
but how can an infant believe in christ if he can’t speak
mark 16:16
N
newbie1234
Guest
Again, if you would like be be under oral statements fine. I will be guided by epistles. From what we are discussing it seems that you can be led by oral traditions or sacred traditions and I could be lead by epistles and the bible. So according to the bible you are perfectly fine with your oral traditions and I am fine with my bible, agreed?funny. He said either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours. What does oral statement mean?
E
Eden
Guest
Acts 2:42 - the members obeyed apostolic tradition (doctrine, prayers, and the breaking of bread). Their obedience was not to the Scriptures alone. Tradition (in Greek, “paradosis”) means “to hand on” teaching.
1 Cor. 11:2 - Paul commends the faithful for maintaining the apostolic tradition that they have received. The oral word is preserved and protected by the Spirit.
Eph. 4:20 – Paul refers the Ephesians to the oral tradition they previously received when he writes, “You did not so learn Christ!”
Phil. 4:9 - Paul says that what you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, do. This refers to learning from his preaching and example, which is apostolic tradition.
Col. 1:5-6 – of this you have heard before in the word of the truth, the gospel, which has come to you. This delivery of the faith refers to the oral tradition the Colossians had previously received from the ordained leaders of the Church. This oral tradition is called the gospel of truth.
1 Thess.1:5 – our gospel came to you not only in word, but in the power of the Holy Spirit. Paul is referring to the oral tradition which the Thessalonians had previously received. **There is never any instruction to abandon these previous teachings; to the contrary, they are to be followed as the word of God. **
1 Thess. 4:2 – Paul again refers the Thessalonians to the instructions they already had received, which is the oral apostolic tradition.
2 Thess. 2:5 – Paul yet again refers the Thessalonians to the previous teachings they received from Paul when he taught them orally. These oral teachings are no less significant than the written teachings.
2 Thess. 2:15 - Paul clearly commands us in this verse to obey oral apostolic tradition. He says stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, either by word of mouth or letter. This verse proves that for apostolic authority, oral and written communications are on par with each other. Protestants must find a verse that voids this commandment to obey oral tradition elsewhere in the Bible, or they are not abiding by the teachings of Scripture.
2 Thess. 2:15 - in fact, it was this apostolic tradition that allowed the Church to select the Bible canon (apostolicity was determined from tradition). Since all the apostles were deceased at the time the canon was decided, the Church had to rely on the apostolic tradition of their successors. Hence, the Bible is an apostolic tradition of the Catholic Church. This also proves that oral tradition did not cease with the death of the last apostle.
2 Thess. 3:6 - Paul again commands the faithful to live in accord with the tradition that they received from the apostles.
2 Thess. 3:7 - Paul tells them they already know how to imitate the elders. He is referring them to the tradition they have learned by his oral preaching and example.
1 Tim. 6:20 - guard what has been “entrusted” to you. The word “entrusted” is “paratheke” which means a "deposit." Oral tradition is part of what the Church has always called the Deposit of Faith.
2 Tim. 2:2 - Paul says what you have heard from me entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. This is “tradition,” or the handing on of apostolic teaching.
2 Tim. 3:14 - continue in what you have learned and believed knowing from whom you learned it (by oral tradition).
From scripturecatholic.com
1 Cor. 11:2 - Paul commends the faithful for maintaining the apostolic tradition that they have received. The oral word is preserved and protected by the Spirit.
Eph. 4:20 – Paul refers the Ephesians to the oral tradition they previously received when he writes, “You did not so learn Christ!”
Phil. 4:9 - Paul says that what you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, do. This refers to learning from his preaching and example, which is apostolic tradition.
Col. 1:5-6 – of this you have heard before in the word of the truth, the gospel, which has come to you. This delivery of the faith refers to the oral tradition the Colossians had previously received from the ordained leaders of the Church. This oral tradition is called the gospel of truth.
1 Thess.1:5 – our gospel came to you not only in word, but in the power of the Holy Spirit. Paul is referring to the oral tradition which the Thessalonians had previously received. **There is never any instruction to abandon these previous teachings; to the contrary, they are to be followed as the word of God. **
1 Thess. 4:2 – Paul again refers the Thessalonians to the instructions they already had received, which is the oral apostolic tradition.
2 Thess. 2:5 – Paul yet again refers the Thessalonians to the previous teachings they received from Paul when he taught them orally. These oral teachings are no less significant than the written teachings.
2 Thess. 2:15 - Paul clearly commands us in this verse to obey oral apostolic tradition. He says stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, either by word of mouth or letter. This verse proves that for apostolic authority, oral and written communications are on par with each other. Protestants must find a verse that voids this commandment to obey oral tradition elsewhere in the Bible, or they are not abiding by the teachings of Scripture.
2 Thess. 2:15 - in fact, it was this apostolic tradition that allowed the Church to select the Bible canon (apostolicity was determined from tradition). Since all the apostles were deceased at the time the canon was decided, the Church had to rely on the apostolic tradition of their successors. Hence, the Bible is an apostolic tradition of the Catholic Church. This also proves that oral tradition did not cease with the death of the last apostle.
2 Thess. 3:6 - Paul again commands the faithful to live in accord with the tradition that they received from the apostles.
2 Thess. 3:7 - Paul tells them they already know how to imitate the elders. He is referring them to the tradition they have learned by his oral preaching and example.
1 Tim. 6:20 - guard what has been “entrusted” to you. The word “entrusted” is “paratheke” which means a "deposit." Oral tradition is part of what the Church has always called the Deposit of Faith.
2 Tim. 2:2 - Paul says what you have heard from me entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. This is “tradition,” or the handing on of apostolic teaching.
2 Tim. 3:14 - continue in what you have learned and believed knowing from whom you learned it (by oral tradition).
From scripturecatholic.com
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
2 Thessalonians, chapter 2:15Paul does not use the word tradition in2tim10-11
Furthermore Paul teaches us exactly how to live and act in most situations through his epistles. We need no other source. 2thess2:15 also says tradition learned from epistles.
We look at epistles and make tradition. I have no problem following tradition that comes from epistles. However if the tradition is NOT in the epistles, I don’t have to follow it.
**So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter. **
1 Thessalonian, Chapter 4 verse 1-2.
**Finally, brethren, we beseech and exhort you in the Lord Jesus, that as you learned from us how you ought to live and to please God, just as you are doing, you do so more and more. For you know what instructions we gave you through the Lord Jesus. **
How did the Thessalonian learned and received instructions? They were taught orally by Paul.
1 Corinthians Chapter 11:1-2.
Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ. I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you.
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
Not the Pope alone though. It’s the bishop in union with the Pope also known as the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. As an ex-Catholic, you should know this. The problem with newbie is that he believe its Scripture Alone.Else, should he accept by faith that Scripture is complete, then he is using his judgement (enlightened by God, maybe) as well as Scripture. But this Catholics also do, when they assert the authority of the Pope.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.