ss again

[JerryZ]

Your “always” I differ with. Others have been honest enough to admit several NT writers refer to Nt writings as scripture peter Paul revelation maybe. That oral came first is immaterial. Several NT writers are explicit as to the purpose of their writings, to set the record straight. They had written records and lawyers back then too and the Nt writers, were aware of the unsurpassed value of " getting it in writing" …As to your hands off criticizing my church policy all I can think off is that you are definitely of Peter , or what am I to you, for those that are for me are not against me our Lord says. Even your Lucien gentum puts me in the Body of Christ and as such I have the responsibility to discern all things to see if they are so, without lying to our Lord.

Woah! wait a second are you saying that when the New Testament was written the writers used a self referential mode declaring that what they were writing WAS scripture allready?

That is a novel interpretation, I have never heard about anyone making such a claim until now.
That would denote a huge lack of humility on the writer part, the books of the Old Testament were not declared “Inspired” immediately after being written especially those that followed the Pentateuch (The first 5 Books), and the same is true of the books of the New Testament. Unless you have some new incontroversial discovery on this.
Please Elucidate some more.

As for your contention that written records are “better” that oral tradition. That flies in the face of how the ancient tribes used to propagate their history.
Even in recent years isolated tribes have been found that made no use whatsoever of writing and used oral means to preserve their history and traditions.
I guess if you don’t have television and other mass media distractions you can concentrate on using your memory to commit your particular tribe’s traditions.

In Eastern countries devout people are still required to commit to memory the Pentateuch in the case of Jews and the Quran for the Muslims.
For those societies it is not good enough to be able to read their sacred books, you are to be able to recite from memory.
In fact Jesus demonstrated this very fact in many passages of the New Testament, I challenge you to find exactly where Jesus did this.
There is a very special place and time that HE did this, hint: Calvary.

All validly baptized people ARE members of the Church, the Catholic Church albeit they are in an imperfect relationship with Her. We pray that all the members of the Body of Christ make it to be in full communion for then we fulfill what Jesus prayed for before HE left us.

---

 

[edkw55]

http://conciliaranglican.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/sola-scriptura-alert-bible-alone-error.jpg

This is a good one…

 

[edkw55]

Don’t have abrogation that is newer teachings.we are talking about method of conveyance of same teachings hence truth is not above truth. What we are talking about is source as in oral or tradition that is unwritten vs what is written. As far as Paul and possible contradictions I am suggesting I do not know anything except that which has been handed to us via writing and tradition etc. The writing that has been handed down is more trustworthy than those handing it down and I don’t think they would mind me saying so and may not want it any other way. The last thing a good salesman says is, “Take my word for it” .

I agree benhur. That would of coarse be the Bible. And as you also said “I have the responsibility to discern all things to see if they are so” and God commands us to do just that…SS.

Ed

 

[Jon_S_1]

I agree benhur. That would of coarse be the Bible. And as you also said “I have the responsibility to discern all things to see if they are so” and God commands us to do just that…SS.

Ed

How do you determine what writings should be relied upon…what writings should be in the Bible?

 

[benhur]

This idea is nothing but fantasy. This is the part where I say the church’s tradition is consistent for those 1600 years. And you point out a paragraph here a paragraph there that you say supports yours. So I show history and thousands of documents showing a Catholic Church with seven sacraments and the same ecclesiology today, as it was in the first century and then you find one paragraph of one document, or even one sentence and say See look its all wrong and I am right see that sentence.

You ignore that the guy writing the document said mass, and listened to confessions, and preached from the deuterocanonicals, and submitted to his bishop, etc…etc…etc…

Im not going there today.

But I think that you are kidding yourself if you believe what you write. It is a position of ignorance or a position of blindness.

Well,they may have submitted but it is tough to rock the boat when there are no lifeboats around…and maybe I might be traditional like you, listening to fathers, of the reformation. If I am ignorant or blind I am in good company.

 

[Seraphignatius]

Well,they may have submitted but it is tough to rock the boat when there are no lifeboats around…and maybe I might be traditional like you, listening to fathers, of the reformation. If I am ignorant or blind I am in good company.

You’re in the company of men who called the epistle of St. James the epistle of straw, were unashamed about adding words to the bible to make it seem like it supported them, evidently thought the eighth commandment was thou shall bear false witness against thy neighbor, and preached a god who created men with the expressed purpose of torturing them in eternal hellfire.

 

[benhur]

I can agree to this.

What we hold about the visible church is that Christ gave it doctrine and authority and the Holy Spirit to protect it. All that is found in the Bible too!

If your Bible is a product of the Holy Spirit and the visible church, how can you say there is no longer a visible church (one body).

Have not denied a visible church.If that visible church has admitted to doing some wrong stuff that she no longer does how do you know she no longer does some of the right stuff ?..it has been addressed enough as to how we do not submit to the CC yet receive her bible and many other things from her.

 

[benhur]

You’re in the company of men who called the epistle of St. James the epistle of straw, were unashamed about adding words to the bible to make it seem like it supported them, evidently thought the eighth commandment was thou shall bear false witness against thy neighbor, and preached a god who created men with the expressed purpose of torturing them in eternal hellfire.

I said I listen to them as I listen to all. What I take is another thing. Good thing I am my own pope and don’t buy the stuff you mentioned either. …However, accurate critique is better than “pleasurable” critique. Luther added one word only and I am not a German linguist to say for sure if it was a “pleasurable” error or not. As far as James there were others who said similar things. Even Jerome prefaced many of the books in his vulgate with his opinion,a few not so flattering. I am in no position to comment fully or accurately on 5 point Calvinism.

 

[benhur]

i

I agree benhur. That would of coarse be the Bible. And as you also said “I have the responsibility to discern all things to see if they are so” and God commands us to do just that…SS.

Ed

Amen

 

[adf417]

…Because I have the feeling your desire is unity by the Orthodox, the Protestants and many others forsaking all their convictions that differ with Rome and casting full allegiance to her, for only she is visible Truth…Sorry I can not help you here…so your “peace” is appreciated and likewise wished back.

Good morning Ben. Blessing be with you.

My desire is unity for sure! God knows I have had many reasons to leave “Rome” and will consider doing so for the sake of unity. Show me where the unity is outside of “Rome” and that will be a focus of mine.

How does the bolded statement above ever fit into this SS position this thread is based on? How is it the simple questions I have asked to this point not be answered through the SS position. If someone in your local community (church) asks the exact questions would you actually dance around them as you have done me? (think someone with a low IQ like myself)

Peace!!!

 

[kozlosap]

Lol you actually got me to press the “x” frantically …

I need to make a HUGE copy of this and hang it around my neck!
(Maybe CAF should add this as a smilie too!)

 

[edkw55]

…Because I have the feeling your desire is unity by the Orthodox, the Protestants and many others forsaking all their convictions that differ with Rome and casting full allegiance to her, for only she is visible Truth…Sorry I can not help you here…so your “peace” is appreciated and likewise wished back.

Good morning Ben. Blessing be with you.

My desire is unity for sure! God knows I have had many reasons to leave “Rome” and will consider doing so for the sake of unity. Show me where the unity is outside of “Rome” and that will be a focus of mine.

How does the bolded statement above ever fit into this SS position this thread is based on? How is it the simple questions I have asked to this point not be answered through the SS position. If someone in your local community (church) asks the exact questions would you actually dance around them as you have done me? (think someone with a low IQ like myself)

Peace!!!

Christian unity is a wonderful thing. Jesus High Priestly Prayer.

In the case of unity between the Catholic Church and Protestants, division is the only solution so long as Rome holds the position She does on such Important issues as authority and justification. What benhur said has Everything to do with the “SS position this thread is based on”. I do believe this is what what benhur means when he says “Sorry I can not help you here” Correct me if I am wrong benhur.

Ed

 

[edkw55]

How do you determine what writings should be relied upon…what writings should be in the Bible?

Ultimately, it was God who decided what books belonged in the biblical canon. A book of Scripture belonged in the canon from the moment God inspired its writing. It was simply a matter of God’s convincing His human followers which books should be included in the Bible. It is crucial to remember that the Church did not determine the canon. No early Church council decided on the canon. It was God, and God alone, who determined which books belonged in the Bible. It was simply a matter of God’s imparting to His followers what He had already decided. The human process of collecting the books of the Bible was flawed, but God, in His sovereignty, and despite our ignorance and stubbornness, brought the early Church to the recognition of the books He had inspired.

Call me ignorant I reckon.

Ed

 

[Jon_S_1]

Ultimately, it was God who decided what books belonged in the biblical canon. A book of Scripture belonged in the canon from the moment God inspired its writing. It was simply a matter of God’s convincing His human followers which books should be included in the Bible. It is crucial to remember that the Church did not determine the canon. No early Church council decided on the canon. It was God, and God alone, who determined which books belonged in the Bible. It was simply a matter of God’s imparting to His followers what He had already decided. The human process of collecting the books of the Bible was flawed, but God, in His sovereignty, and despite our ignorance and stubbornness, brought the early Church to the recognition of the books He had inspired.

Call me ignorant I reckon.

Ed

I agree, but find it mind boggling that God who inspired these men, in the same meeting as he inspired the compilation of the New Testament also inspired 73 books total. You reject 7 of the books of the Old Testament listed in the same paragraphs as the New Testament canon.

In addition God inspired men who opened and closed their meetings with mass and were bishops in a church you reject.

So why on earth would you say God inspired the New Testament when you reject most everything else this group of men claimed was coming from God’s inspiration.

 

[edkw55]

I agree, but find it mind boggling that God who inspired these men, in the same meeting as he inspired the compilation of the New Testament also inspired 73 books total. You reject 7 of the books of the Old Testament listed in the same paragraphs as the New Testament canon.

In addition God inspired men who opened and closed their meetings with mass and were bishops in a church you reject.

So why on earth would you say God inspired the New Testament when you reject most everything else this group of men claimed was coming from God’s inspiration.

I would say that He is mind boggling.

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord.“As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.” Isaiah 55:8-9

That God chose to save any of us sinners, His eternal plan of salvation, His Love, His Mercy, such amazing Grace, He gave us His Son, His Church, His Bible, that is mind boggling.

Seems to me we don’t credit for much of anything…

Soli Deo Gloria! To Him be the glory forever. Amen.

 

[Jon_S_1]

I would say that He is mind boggling.

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord.“As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.” Isaiah 55:8-9

That God chose to save any of us sinners, His eternal plan of salvation, His Love, His Mercy, such amazing Grace, He gave us His Son, His Church, His Bible, that is mind boggling.

Seems to me we don’t credit for much of anything…

Soli Deo Gloria! To Him be the glory forever. Amen.

That’s a cop out.

You are telling me that it is just a mystery that you can accept the New Testament.

Take off the blinders.

Start seeking the truth. You are so committed to a man made doctrine you over and over again ignore reality and come up with the absurd to defend it.

It is not any different than a Mormon defending their Book of Mormon. Complete ignoring of history and reality.

 

[adf417]

Christian unity is a wonderful thing. Jesus High Priestly Prayer.

In the case of unity between the Catholic Church and Protestants, division is the only solution so long as Rome holds the position She does on such Important issues as authority and justification. What benhur said has Everything to do with the “SS position this thread is based on”. I do believe this is what what benhur means when he says “Sorry I can not help you here” Correct me if I am wrong benhur.

Ed

Greetings Ed,
As much as I would like to follow you on this I just can’t because Christianity is a bit bigger than the Catholic Church and Protestants. We mustn’t forget about our Orthodox brothers.

So if there were absolutely no Catholic Church in existence today, where is the unity in Christianity and how can SS determine what this unity is? Who gets to decide if baptism is or is not cleansing, efficacious, salvific…? Who determines who is and is not in communion with who? Who gets to determine what justification is?

Peace!!!

 

[edkw55]

That’s a cop out.

You are telling me that it is just a mystery that you can accept the New Testament.

Take off the blinders.

Start seeking the truth. You are so committed to a man made doctrine you over and over again ignore reality and come up with the absurd to defend it.

It is not any different than a Mormon defending their Book of Mormon. Complete ignoring of history and reality.

How incredibly stupid of me. I don’t know what I would have done had you not straightened me out.

Ed

 

[edkw55]

Greetings Ed,
As much as I would like to follow you on this I just can’t because Christianity is a bit bigger than the Catholic Church and Protestants. We mustn’t forget about our Orthodox brothers.

Hi adf417,

I agree.

So if there were absolutely no Catholic Church in existence today, where is the unity in Christianity and how can SS determine what this unity is? Who gets to decide if baptism is or is not cleansing, efficacious, salvific…? Who determines who is and is not in communion with who? Who gets to determine what justification is?

Peace!!!

I would say the Church is in existence today and has been for nearly two thousand years. As to the rest of what you said, wow, I’m not that bright, above my pay grade maybe…keep the lines of communication open and above all pray for the unity we all so deeply desire.

Peace be to you as well.

Ed

 

[Porknpie]

God … brought the early Church to the recognition of the books He had inspired

To this I say

Ed,

God’s followers, those early Christians who discerned what writings were inspired and inerrant were Catholic Bishops. They discerned seventy three books to be sacred scripture at the Council of Rome in 382 and then at the Synod’s of Hippo and Carthage in 393 and 397. The below list is from the Council of Rome:

“The order of the Old Testament begins here: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book; Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Joshua [Son of] Nave, one book; Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; Kings, four books [ie., 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings]; Paralipomenon [Chronicles], two books; Psalms, one book; Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus [Sirach], one book. Likewise the order of the Prophets. Isaias one book, Jeremias one book,…lamentations, Ezechiel one book, Daniel one book, Osee … Nahum … Habacuc … Sophonias … Aggeus … Zacharias … Malachias … Likewise the order of the historical [books]: Job, one book; Tobit, one book; Esdras, two books [Ezra and Nehemiah]; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; Maccabees, two books.” Council of Rome, Decree of Pope Damasus (A.D. 382).

God willed that there be seventy three books in the bible.

Unfortunately, some 1,200 years later, 7 books have been removed from protestant bibles.

This is against God’s will … and against the apostolic faith handed down from Christ to the apostles. Even the original King James Bible of 1611 had all 73 books.

PnP