SPLIT: How does the catholic church define Tradition?

[guanophore]

Can you give a couple of examples of “the oral preaching of the Apostles” not recorded in the scriptures?

This is a false distinction that is improper. The entire NT came from the Sacred Tradition, and there has never been any effort to separate the two from one another (until the Reformation). For Catholics, the Teaching is one, undivided whole.

Besides, I think you just want to watch a goose chase. Whatever you are told, you will turn around and disregard it. You haven’t changed your pattern since you joined CAF!

Is the living Tradition of the church different than the scriptures? If so how?

The Scriptures completely reflect the Living Tradition of the Church. That is why we say the context of the NT is the Catholic Church. It was written by, for, and about Catholics. That is also why the understanding of it’s content should not be separated from the Source from which it came.

Some of these “Traditions” can easily be traced to the scriptures. Take Sunday worship. The reason for this would be because Christ rose on that day.

It is easy to see from Scripture how the early Christians tended to gather on Sundays. However, human “reason” and customs are not sufficient to set aside the commandments of God. God commanded that the Sabbath be observed on the 7th day, and Jesus did not set aside the commandments. On the contrary, Jesus and His Apostles observed them all!

Abortion, Trinity and Jesus as 100% man and God all have scriptural grounding. Not sure about coffee though.

None of these doctrines are "grounded’ in scripture. Like all the Catholic Teachings, they are grounded in Christ. We can see some reflections in scripture. I think you would be hard put to prove abortion is wrong using scripture. It is also obvious from all the early heresies that the Scriptures can be understood in other ways besides Trinity and the hypostatic union.

How about teachings i.e. Traditions not grounded in the scriptures?
Things like eating meat on Fridays is a sin or the wearing scapulars which both have an impact on a soul?

These are not Sacred Traditions, but disciplines of the Latin Rite.

How would the living Tradition help you understand Romans 5? Where would you go to find the living Tradition for this?

Rom 5:2 "…we rejoice in our hope of sharing the glory of God.

Usually the catechism resolves controversy.

Would you not agree that the reason the church does not sanction polygamy is that the scriptures never promote it and Jesus Himself taught that a marriage is only between one man and one woman (see Matthew 19:4-6)?

Actually, there are quite a few examples of successful polygamy in the Scripture. However, I agree about the Teachings of Jesus. These were being promulgated by the Church, though before the Gospels were written. That is why we say the Teachings are grounded in Christ, and not the Bible, though the Bible does reflect some of the Teachings.

Good questions and one that demands answers. i agree that Jesus taught and did many other things not recorded. However what exactly were these things? Can you give a couple of examples of what they were?

You have been given many examples, and have rejected them all.

There are serious problems with infant baptism. For one there are no specific examples of in the scriptures and secondly a person must first repent and believe in Christ before being baptised. Infants as you know are incapable of doing this.

This is only “serious problem” for Sola Scripturists. Those of Apostolic faiths do find examples in scripture, because we read the scripture in the light of Apostolic Teaching. Scripture does not mandate that a person must first repent and believe before baptism unless they are an adult who has reached the age of reason. There is no scriptural reason not to baptize disabled persons, for example, who cannot fulfill these requirements.
justasking4;3569721:

God did give authority to the church to teach but He did not promise it would be protected from error. We already see some error in the church in the NT. See Revelations 2:14-16 for example.

You are confusing persons embracing error with the Church Teaching error. These are two entirely different things. People are capable of error, God is not.

Rev 2:13-17

13 "‘I know where you dwell, where Satan’s throne is; you hold fast my name and you did not deny my faith even in the days of An’tipas my witness, my faithful one, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells. 14 But I have a few things against you: you have some there who hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, that they might eat food sacrificed to idols and practice immorality. 15 So you also have some who hold the teaching of the Nicola’itans. 16 Repent then. If not, I will come to you soon and war against them with the sword of my mouth. 17 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who conquers I will give some of the hidden manna, and I will give him a white stone, with a new name written on the stone which no one knows except him who receives it.’

This is probably not a good proof text. Jesus is talking to individual persons who have embraced error, not the Church. It is also a bad idea because it is clear that people can be members of the Church (Christ’s body) and yet be cut off if they embrace error. These kind of passages really throw a wrench in OSAS.

 

[guanophore]

Unitarians are not Christians.

There are plenty of groups that believe they are Christians, yet discount the Trinity, or other fundamental doctrines. Try asking a JW if they are Christian!

This particular doctrine has a long history of contraversy in the church of how to understand it.

No, ja4, it does not. The Real Presence has been taught continuously since the Last Supper. The controversy is among members of the Church who generally reject the Apostolic teaching to a greater or lesser degree, and among those who, for reasons I have never been able to grasp, want to try to use reason to “explain” the Divine Mysteries.

Part of this is due to our own falleness and in some cases ignorance.

I agree, but one of the reasons for this rampant fallenness and ignorance (even among those who claim to be Catholic) is separation from the Apostolic Teaching and Authority. No one who holds fast to what has been passed down to us falls into this error.

True followers of Christ are united on the essentials. There will be differences of opinion on secondary issues. This is also true in the catholic church. There is a wide difference of opinions on many issues in the catholic church itself.

I suppose this is true, but who decides what are “essentials”? Once the Authority that Jesus appointed is rejected, then everyone makes himself an authority.

There is a major difference, ja4, between the Teaching of the Church, which is whole and unified, and the fallen and disunified members, who fail to embrace the teaching.

I do hope and pray you’re not just being deliberately obtuse…

I hope and pray the same, Pixie. I think you will find, however, that your excellent posts will not be pursuasive to ja4, who only uses these questions as a ruse in his previously stated goals to pull Catholics away from their faith. He has been doing it consistently on dozens of threads for a year and a half now.

ja4 believes that the Sacred Tradition is false teaching, and wants Catholics to use the Bible to question and confront the Teaching Authority of the Catholic Church, because they have strayed from Biblical Truth.

And well they should question. 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. When you study the marian doctrines in light of the scriptures you will find that the support is not there. What you must do is be on guard against false teachers in your own church.

(talking about Sacred Tradition) might get someone who reads these posts to rethink their position.

"guanophore:

But you have already made it clear that you consider these “speculations of men” and false teaching that has crept into the Church, so why keep bringing it up?

i want to help others see it to.

ja4 believes all the Catholic Traditions he cannot find in his bible are “false gospel”.

I am sure that the lurkers will read and be benefitted, however, and that is why I keep posting. You can see by the stats that the people reading are sometimes 10 times the number who are posting.

 

[Pixie_Dust]

I hope and pray the same, Pixie. I think you will find, however, that your excellent posts will not be pursuasive to ja4, who only uses these questions as a ruse in his previously stated goals to pull Catholics away from their faith. He has been doing it consistently on dozens of threads for a year and a half now.

ja4 believes that the Sacred Tradition is false teaching, and wants Catholics to use the Bible to question and confront the Teaching Authority of the Catholic Church, because they have strayed from Biblical Truth.

ja4 believes all the Catholic Traditions he cannot find in his bible are “false gospel”.

I am sure that the lurkers will read and be benefitted, however, and that is why I keep posting. You can see by the stats that the people reading are sometimes 10 times the number who are posting.

What ja4 is doing for me is helping me become more grounded in my Catholic faith. I am a “convert” (technically “a Christian who reconciled fully to Christ’s Church” but that takes too long to type every time, lol!) who studied the Bible and the ECFs and realized I had to become Catholic! I didn’t like the idea at first, believe me. But the more I read Scripture in light of the Catholic teachings, the more I realized that Catholicism is TRUE and I am HOME.

I spent many years trying to find a church that fit “my” theology. I was my own authority on what the Scriptures taught and truly idolized my intellect. It’s no fun to be knocked off your own pedestal, but it was absolutely necessary and the best thing that ever happened to me. I am more at peace now than ever before and I know I am in the very place God wants me. Praise be to God!

 

[guanophore]

So present your complete list of the essentials, one that all Christians agree on.

Not on this thread, please!

True. Nor will you find a verse in Scripture that says the catholic church is the only authority either.
What does apostolic succession mean?

We just got started, and you want to derail this thread too?

Claire from DE;3571363:

So you have no way of knowing exactly what a given apostle preached? Just because they may have put into practice what an apostle taught orally would not mean you would know what it was.

You won’t know if you don’t learn the practices, this is true. That is why outsiders are not permitted to partake of the Divine Mysteries. These are reserved for the initiated only, and can only be accessed by faith.

There is no way to get away from “private interpretation of scripture” or church teachings. When you study your church’ teachings you must interpret what it says for yourself. The same goes for the scriptures.

This is true, but we have an unfailing standard to use, so that if our private interpretation is not consistent with Church Teaching, we can know that we are in error.

By this method you would not be using the living Tradition of your church but your own reasoning.

The two should not be separated. A properly informed and reasoned conscience must be guided by the Teachings of the Church.

You’re joking? Right? You have been presented documented answers to both of these. After all of the threads you’ve posted on. And this is the response I get?

Sadly, davidv, he is not “joking” but dead serious. This series of questions is part of the foil he uses to try to show Catholics that their Church is in error, and teaching false doctrines because he can’t find them in his bible. You can see from the quotes above, his goal is to convert us all to “bible christians”. Don’t let his agenda dissuade you, though, your posts have been great, and benefit the rest of us, and the lurkers, some of whom have also been taught anti-Catholic hatred and bigotry like ja4 has and it will help them.

There is no specific verse that says the catholic church is the only church that has authority. If so, where is it?

Matt 28:18-20
18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

This is where Jesus gives His authority to the first Catholics.

 

[Pixie_Dust]

What does apostolic succession mean? Where do the scriptrues claim that the church that possesses this attribute is always right?

All authority inside and outside the Church comes from God. Scripture tells us that. So the authority of the Church is God’s authority.

Matthew 28:18-19 And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

John 20:21 - Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me [with full authority on Heaven on Earth], even so I am sending you.”

Apostolic Authority is the authority of God the Father, as given to Christ and then to the apostles. When you heard the apostles pronounce on matters of faith and morals, you were hearing Jesus Christ Himself.

Luke 10:16 - “The one who hears you hears me, and the one who rejects you rejects me, and the one who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

John 14:16-17 - And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Paraclete (Helper), to be with you forever, 17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.

The apostles received the Holy Spirit of truth.

John 14:26 - But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

John 16:13 - When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.

The apostles were able to teach on faith and morals without error because they were guided by the Holy Spirit, who doesn’t make mistakes. The had the charism or the gift of infallibility. If a person is infallible, it doesn’t mean they cannot commit a sin, can never make a mistake, or that they will always teach what they should. In Catholic theology, infallibility means the person will not err in teaching on matters of faith and morals. Infallibility has nothing to do with math, physics, biology… It is a negative protection - simply prevents error from being taught.

Acts 8:30-31 - So Philip ran to him and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” 31And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

Scripture tells us we need a guide to understand Scripture, wouldn’t God give us an infallible guide to guide us into the truth of His Word?

1 John 4:6 We are of God. Whoever knows God listens to us; he who is not of God does not listen to us. By this we know the Spirit of truth and the spirit of error.

You can tell who is or is not of God by seeing who does, and who does not listen to John, the leaders in the Church, also known as the apostles and their successors.

 

[guanophore]

What ja4 is doing for me is helping me become more grounded in my Catholic faith. I am a “convert” (technically “a Christian who reconciled fully to Christ’s Church” but that takes too long to type every time, lol!) who studied the Bible and the ECFs and realized I had to become Catholic! I didn’t like the idea at first, believe me. But the more I read Scripture in light of the Catholic teachings, the more I realized that Catholicism is TRUE and I am HOME.

Yes, ja4 led me in a lot of research (before I figured out that he was not interested in learning the answers to his disingenuous questions. It is because of the anti-Catholic bigotry I encountered in his posts that I became a prayer warrior and a forum supporter, so I have no regrets.

I spent many years trying to find a church that fit “my” theology. I was my own authority on what the Scriptures taught and truly idolized my intellect. It’s no fun to be knocked off your own pedestal, but it was absolutely necessary and the best thing that ever happened to me. I am more at peace now than ever before and I know I am in the very place God wants me. Praise be to God!

Praise indeed! I spent three years in a Protestant Seminary trying to figure out which church I should join. After the ECF class, I came out more Catholic than I had ever been!

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;3572942]There are plenty of groups that believe they are Christians, yet discount the Trinity, or other fundamental doctrines. Try asking a JW if they are Christian!

You are probably right. Their “authority” would claim as much just as the catholic church authorities do. Its one authority against another. The better way is to study the scriptures and let the Scriptures determine this issue.

No, ja4, it does not. The Real Presence has been taught continuously since the Last Supper. The controversy is among members of the Church who generally reject the Apostolic teaching to a greater or lesser degree, and among those who, for reasons I have never been able to grasp, want to try to use reason to “explain” the Divine Mysteries.

I don’t know how well you know church history but there has been a long history on how to understand this and not all parties agreed.

I agree, but one of the reasons for this rampant fallenness and ignorance (even among those who claim to be Catholic) is separation from the Apostolic Teaching and Authority. No one who holds fast to what has been passed down to us falls into this error.

This is where some of our debate is. The church history shows that the catholic church has made errors even with “Apostolic Teaching and Authority”.

I suppose this is true, but who decides what are “essentials”? Once the Authority that Jesus appointed is rejected, then everyone makes himself an authority.

There is a major difference, ja4, between the Teaching of the Church, which is whole and unified, and the fallen and disunified members, who fail to embrace the teaching.

Huh? There are many differences in the catholic church on a broad range of doctrines and practices. Its not this great unified whole as you suggest.

I hope and pray the same, Pixie. I think you will find, however, that your excellent posts will not be pursuasive to ja4, who only uses these questions as a ruse in his previously stated goals to pull Catholics away from their faith. He has been doing it consistently on dozens of threads for a year and a half now.

ja4 believes that the Sacred Tradition is false teaching,

Huh??? I not even sure what this “Sacred Tradition” is.

and wants Catholics to use the Bible to question and confront the Teaching Authority of the Catholic Church, because they have strayed from Biblical Truth.

ja4 believes all the Catholic Traditions he cannot find in his bible are “false gospel”.

This i don’t remember saying. Would you happen to know where i said this?

I am sure that the lurkers will read and be benefitted, however, and that is why I keep posting.

I appreciated you doing this—

You can see by the stats that the people reading are sometimes 10 times the number who are posting.

Nice to have an audience isn’t?

 

[savedsinner]

The better way is to study the scriptures and let the Scriptures determine this issue.

Then you might enjoy the thread on Oneness Pentecostals.

The Oneness Pentecostals are using scritpure alone for there argument against the Trinity, and they have studied the scriptures very deeply and are allowing the scriptures to determine the issue aside from any Tradition at all.

 

[justasking4]

Part 1

grandfather;3572694]
Quote:
Would you not agree that the reason the church does not sanction polygamy is that the scriptures never promote it and Jesus Himself taught that a marriage is only between one man and one woman (see Matthew 19:4-6)?

grandfather
No! Scripture does not forbid polygamy.

Would you happen to have chapter and verse for this?

Quote:justasking4
Good questions and one that demands answers. i agree that Jesus taught and did many other things not recorded. However what exactly were these things? Can you give a couple of examples of what they were?

grandfather
The only way anyone could know what they were is by learning them from an apostle or someone to whom the knowledge (the tradition Paul says in scripture to keep) is passed, from the group that knows it. I have sited monogamy, infant baptism, praying for and to the dead. There are others.

None of the things you cite here were taught by Jesus or the apostles. All that we have of them is only to be found in the Scriptures.

Quote:justasking4
There are serious problems with infant baptism. For one there are no specific examples of in the scriptures and secondly a person must first repent and believe in Christ before being baptised. Infants as you know are incapable of doing this.

grandfather
There are problems for you who do not accept the continuous practice of the Church going back to the beginning, to which no one objected until modern times and which scripture does not forbid.

So you have no evidence at all that the apostles baptized infants.

Quote:justasking4
I wouldn’t go this far. There was some error and there was some truth.

grandfather
But you do go that far. You reject the beliefs and practices of the Christians who came before you as you see fit. The Church either believes lies about matters of faith going back to her beginning or does not. She knows truth or she does not. You can’t be a little pregnant. I met a baptist minister once who told me no church has all of its doctrines correct. It is arrogant to think you do. I asked him which of his doctrines are false. He said if he knew he would not believe them. I said if you do not know which are false then you do not know which are true. The definition of what a heretic is, the roots of the understanding of the word, is someone who picks and chooses which doctrines he will accept. Is that you?

I would say a heretic is one who teaches falsely. The only way to determine that is to look at what the Scriptures say. If the doctrine cannot be grounded in Scripture then its either false or mere speculation. If the doctrine contradicts Scripture then its a heresy.

Quote:justasking4
God did give authority to the church to teach but He did not promise it would be protected from error. We already see some error in the church in the NT. See Revelations 2:14-16 for example.

grandfather
Thank goodness you came along to fix it.

Someone has to do it—

If He gave authroity to teach, but did or can not prevent error, if He could not guarantee the teaching, he gave authority to teach error.

One thing you forget is that false teachers would come into the church and decieve many. There was no promised protection from this. It is up to the members of Christ to be diligent against these false teachers when they appear. In many cases they will be our own leaders.

 

[justasking4]

Part 2

The same Baptist minister counciled young women that it was ok for them to have abortions. He claims he bases all of his beliefs on the Bible.

Bad counsel. Keep in mind that the minister is infallible as no man is.

You asked for an example of apostolic tradition. I gave some. Here is another. The letters written by Barnabas and the Didache, from the first century specifically condemn abortion. This minister who claims authority to shepherd souls and that the Bible is the soul rule of faith advised girls to abort their babies and they did.

This may be good teachings but is it not from the apostles since its from around the 2nd century.

Maybe most Baptist ministers would strongly object to what he did. That does not matter. There is no unity of faith, and no authority is in the Church to teach, because all authority is in the Bible. How do we know truth? If the Bible is sufficient to teach us, why don’t Baptist ministers agree? Does the Holy Ghost tell one one thing and another something else?

There is much agreement in protestant churches on core doctrines. All believe Christ is God and died for our sins for example.

Quote::justasking4
There is no way to get away from “private interpretation of scripture” or church teachings. When you study your church’ teachings you must interpret what it says for yourself. The same goes for the scriptures.

grandfather
Nonsense!

Not sure i follow you. Anytime you pick up something to read or study you must interpret. If you didn’t you would have no understanding.

Quote::justasking4
Unitarians are not Christians.

grandfather
But they say they are. Who are you to say they are not?

They deny the deity of Christ. If you deny that, you are not a Christian. This can be clearly seen in I John 2:22-23:
22 Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son.
23 Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also.

grandfather
They split from the early Baptist movement. The Jehovah’s witnesses and Mormons also reject the Trinity and claim the Bible as their authority.

Claiming the Bible is not enough. What matters is being true to its teachings. Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses deny the deity of Christ and other doctrines.

Quote:justasking4
This particular doctrine has a long history of contraversy in the church of how to understand it.

grandfather
There will always be controversies. That does not mean the Church does not know and teach the truth about it. There were controversies in the time of John and Paul the apostles. So what? They get settled. There was no controversy on this doctrine until modern times. The continuous belief of the Church was rejected, once again.

There are some doctrines-practices in the catholic church that have not always been believed by the church.

Quote:justasking4
Part of this is due to our own falleness and in some cases ignorance.

grandfather
Correct!

Quote:justasking4
True followers of Christ are united on the essentials. There will be differences of opinion on secondary issues. This is also true in the catholic church. There is a wide

grandfather
I have heard this before. There are two problems with it. First, if it is true, that says that all the denominational divisions, the thousands, some say 28,000 plus, recognizable denominations that have formed by formal separation one from another, since the Reformation, were caused by trivial matters.

I personally don’t know any protestant church that has split over trival matters. Can you give me a couple of examples of a trivial matter?

Most that are splitting that i’m aware of are for church planting.

If we all agree on the important stuff, then all the division was allowed to happen over unimportant stuff. I went to the World’s Fair in NYC many years ago. There was a Baptist pavilion. The inscription over the door said, Welcome to the Baptist Pavilion. We are 110 denominations strong.

They were serious. Jesus commands unity of his followers. Division is disobedience to the one we call Lord, the person recognized to be obeyed, God. That is a sin.

Did you ask what they meant by “110 denominations strong”? It would not necessarily mean they all different kinds of beliefs.

He tells us to be one so the world will know it is He who sends us. If all of these Protestant splits occured over non-essentials how petty these people must be. Good grief! The second problem is the divisions are not over non-essentials. The Eucharist, sacraments, saints are essential. A double good grief.

No doubt people are going to have differences of opinion on all kinds of matters. I know many catholics who have all kinds of different beliefs about the catholic church. No 2 that i have meant agree exactly on everything. What unites the true church of Christ is the belief that Christ was sent into the world to save it. It would mean that all true believers believe in I Corinthians 15:1-4.
It is this and a few other things that unties the church. On secondary matters (though important) we may never agree on.

 

[justasking4]

Then you might enjoy the thread on Oneness Pentecostals.

The Oneness Pentecostals are using scritpure alone for there argument against the Trinity, and they have studied the scriptures very deeply and are allowing the scriptures to determine the issue aside from any Tradition at all.

If i were to discuss this with them i would study their doctrine and see how they use all of scripture to make their case. i would also make sure i understand the trinitarian doctrine so as to defend it.

 

[sodak]

None of the things you cite here were taught by Jesus or the apostles. All that we have of them is only to be found in the Scriptures.

Absolutely false. This really shows your lack of commitment to history and the truth. We have a TON of writings from the Early Church Fathers discussing these issues, some of these ECF’s were students of the Apostles. I would certainly listen to what they had to say!

By the way, you keep asking for chapter and verse. You’ve never yet given a good reason why everything should be measured against Scripture, or why Scripture is infallible. You need to do those things before applying your arguments. Even then, your arguments don’t really apply most of the time.

I realize that as always, you won’t bother to answer any of this, you will only try to ask more divisive questions. Personally, I really couldn’t care less if you answer, as I realize your answers are usually full of errors, refusal to acknowledge facts, and in some cases, outright lies.

I write responses like these for all the people reading these threads, so that they can see through your many deceptive tactics and calumny.

 

[guanophore]

You are probably right. Their “authority” would claim as much just as the catholic church authorities do. Its one authority against another. The better way is to study the scriptures and let the Scriptures determine this issue.

I suppose this might be true, if Scripture could “determine”. Scripture does not “act” or make decisions, and that is why this will not work. Jesus knew that, so He appointed those who He authorized to determine.

He commanded that disputes among the brethren be taken to the Church, not the Scripture.

I don’t know how well you know church history but there has been a long history on how to understand this and not all parties agreed.

This is very true, and precisely why we focus on those in unity with the Successor of Peter. When Jesus prayed, He prayed only for Peter. Therefore, only those in unity with Peter can cling to the infallibilty.

This is where some of our debate is. The church history shows that the catholic church has made errors even with “Apostolic Teaching and Authority”.

Only your history shows that, ja4, and this is because, for some reason I don’t understand, you cannot distinguish between the Holy and pure Bride of Christ and the fallible individuals joined to her that make errors.

Huh? There are many differences in the catholic church on a broad range of doctrines and practices. Its not this great unified whole as you suggest.

Persons who are not in unity with the doctrines of the Church are not Catholic. They may not know this, and still call themselves Catholic, but they are not. What distinguishes a Catholic is unity with the Teachings of Jesus, preserved in the Catholic Church.

This i don’t remember saying. Would you happen to know where i said this?

I just read a reference to this above - “imagination of men”.

What is this “Tradition” that you refer to? If its not found in the scriptures then it has to come originally from the mind of a man.

Could anything be a true Gospel that came from the mind of man?

 

[guanophore]

This may be good teachings but is it not from the apostles since its from around the 2nd century.

What makes you say it is not, since the documents themselves testify that their contents is from the Apostles?

Not sure i follow you. Anytime you pick up something to read or study you must interpret. If you didn’t you would have no understanding.

This is true. That is why we believe it is so important to interpret them by the same beliefs under which they were written.

There are some doctrines-practices in the catholic church that have not always been believed by the church.

This really doesn’t make sense…

No doubt people are going to have differences of opinion on all kinds of matters. I know many catholics who have all kinds of different beliefs about the catholic church. No 2 that i have meant agree exactly on everything. What unites the true church of Christ is the belief that Christ was sent into the world to save it. It would mean that all true believers believe in I Corinthians 15:1-4.

One begins to wonder what kind of Catholics you are frequenting! Perhaps they are lapsed Catholics that never understood their faith…

It is this and a few other things that unties the church. On secondary matters (though important) we may never agree on.

It is clear that your purpose here is to untie the Church. You seem to have a persistent focus on what divides.

Would you happen to have chapter and verse for this?

Not only is there no verse prohibiting polygamy, but there are many examples of it being practiced with no condemnation therof.

None of the things you cite here were taught by Jesus or the apostles. All that we have of them is only to be found in the Scriptures.

Indeed, they were, ja4, that is why we still practice them today. However, you will not be able to verify that, because you don’t have access to the part of their teachings that are not included in the NT.

So you have no evidence at all that the apostles baptized infants.

There are centuries of evidence. I think it would be very difficult to base it on scripture alone, though.

I would say a heretic is one who teaches falsely.

Can you explain where you came up with this definition? I don’t find it in scripture, or anywhere in church history.

The only way to determine that is to look at what the Scriptures say. If the doctrine cannot be grounded in Scripture then its either false or mere speculation. If the doctrine contradicts Scripture then its a heresy.

The problem with this method is that everyone interprets scripture diffferently. However, it is a confirmation of what I noted in the other post, that you consider Catholic teachings false, because you can’t find them in your bible.

One thing you forget is that false teachers would come into the church and decieve many. There was no promised protection from this. It is up to the members of Christ to be diligent against these false teachers when they appear. In many cases they will be our own leaders.

Not to worry, ja4, we are watching you very carefully! :knight2:

 

[kepha1]

Before the canon of the Bible, the Christian Rule of Faith **(TRADITION) **included

• belief in the Apostolic succession through the Episcopate,
• the authority of Tradition itself,
• the authority of Scripture,
• the three fold ministry (bishop-priest-deacon),
• the Eucharist as Sacrifice,
• belief in baptismal regeneration,
• prayers for the dead,
• veneration of the Saints,
• the Seven sacraments,
• the evangelical counsels, and others.
  The historical evidence is there for anyone who wishes to see it.

 

[guanophore]

Before the canon of the Bible, the Christian Rule of Faith **(TRADITION) **included

• belief in the Apostolic succession through the Episcopate,
• the authority of Tradition itself,
• the authority of Scripture,
• the three fold ministry (bishop-priest-deacon),
• the Eucharist as Sacrifice,
• belief in baptismal regeneration,
• prayers for the dead,
• veneration of the Saints,
• the Seven sacraments,
• the evangelical counsels, and others.
  The historical evidence is there for anyone who wishes to see it.

ja4’s goal is not really to see that, because if he did, he would have to relinquish some of the anti-Catholic bigotry in which he has been steeped and he is not ready do to so. However, for those who are lurking, great post!

 

[justasking4]

sodak;3577488]
Originally Posted by justasking4
None of the things you cite here were taught by Jesus or the apostles. All that we have of them is only to be found in the Scriptures.

sodak
Absolutely false. This really shows your lack of commitment to history and the truth. We have a TON of writings from the Early Church Fathers discussing these issues, some of these ECF’s were students of the Apostles. I would certainly listen to what they had to say!

This is what i was repsonding to this comment from grandfather:
" I have sited monogamy, infant baptism, praying for and to the dead. There are others".
It is not false to say that the Jesus and His apostles never taught about these things. They never taught that you are to baptize infants who cannot repent or believe. They never taught you are to pray to the dead. I misspoke on the polygamy issue. My mistake. They did not teach polygamy but monogamy.

By the way, you keep asking for chapter and verse. You’ve never yet given a good reason why everything should be measured against Scripture, or why Scripture is infallible. You need to do those things before applying your arguments. Even then, your arguments don’t really apply most of the time.

I have many times answered this. Maybe you missed them or forgot. Scripture is the final ultimate rule in which all doctrines and practices are to be measured by since they alone are inspired-inerrant. There is no higher authority than them.

I realize that as always, you won’t bother to answer any of this, you will only try to ask more divisive questions. Personally, I really couldn’t care less if you answer, as I realize your answers are usually full of errors, refusal to acknowledge facts, and in some cases, outright lies.

You speak nonsense… I have never lied on these threads. You want to bring a couple of examples of your accusations to the table please do so we can see if in fact they are lies or something else. Can you do that?

I write responses like these for all the people reading these threads, so that they can see through your many deceptive tactics and calumny.

:knight1: Great. We all appreciate your dilgence…

 

[justasking4]

Before the canon of the Bible, the Christian Rule of Faith **(TRADITION) **included

• belief in the Apostolic succession through the Episcopate,
• the authority of Tradition itself,
• the authority of Scripture,
• the three fold ministry (bishop-priest-deacon),
• the Eucharist as Sacrifice,
• belief in baptismal regeneration,
• prayers for the dead,
• veneration of the Saints,
• the Seven sacraments,
• the evangelical counsels, and others.
  The historical evidence is there for anyone who wishes to see it.

Would you happen to have the dates for these claims? It would help to understand when these things came about and if they werer applicable to the entire church. Thanks

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;3577615]
Originally Posted by justasking4
This may be good teachings but is it not from the apostles since its from around the 2nd century.

guanophore
What makes you say it is not, since the documents themselves testify that their contents is from the Apostles?

Scholarly opinion. Its to late to be of the apostles themselves. Secondly, just because a document has an apostles name on it does not automatically mean its of the apostles themselves. We know for example the gospel of Thomas and Peter were not written by them since they were written after the death of these apostles.

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;3577615]
Originally Posted by justasking4
One thing you forget is that false teachers would come into the church and decieve many. There was no promised protection from this. It is up to the members of Christ to be diligent against these false teachers when they appear. In many cases they will be our own leaders.

guanophore
Not to worry, ja4, we are watching you very carefully!

You may want to focus on your own leaders instead of me since i’m not part of your church. The doctrines that you are believing come from your own leaders and teachers and i think you are very troubled by what we have discussed about these matters. i don’t blame you.