SS practicing Christian: What do you say Scripture is?

[Larryk113]

What are the origins of the Happy Birthday song? Has everyone always sang that “forever?” Or did it start over the centuries?
I realize that this isn’t actually a part of Catholic Tradition and just an analogy. I think I understand the point. But I worry that just because “everyone has always done that, or always believed this,” does that mean that it has been around since the time of the apostles and is exclusively right? You can have a valid birthday without the “Happy Birthday” song.

When I was a Baptist, I asked myself where did the Traditions that we have come from. Altar call, communion once a quarter, Bible alone, etc etc. They came from a Protestant protesting the Protestant. That didn’t sit well with me. Would Jesus recognize my form Worship? We all have Tradition, the CC can trace their Tradition and authority all the way back. Read some of the early Church Fathers, It sounds like a Mass to me. I’m new to the CC so others are better at explaining things than I am. As of this Coming Week I will be in full communion with RCC!!! can’t wait!!

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

alwayswill;13745370]
To the question:
What do you say Scripture is?
(it’s the characteristics or attributes; not what is Scripture)

The Gospels and Epistles are the memoirs of the original Apostles of Jesus Christ, who lived and witnessed Jesus divine revelations and teachings. **Sacred Scripture is part **of the full Apostolic deposit of faith. Scripture by itself or “Sola Scriptura” does not possess the full deposit of faith from Jesus Christ and His Apostles.

The Gospels and Epistles of the Apostles reveal that Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of the written (scripture) Law, Prophets, Psalms see Luke 24:45.

Scripture is God breathed, because God does not accept testimony from man of who God is. Only God can reveal who God is. Scripture that is written by human writers are inspired by God the Holy Spirit who gives the human author divine revelation and inspiration to write that which God reveals from God.

Scripture then, is God proceeding divine revelation that is revealed by God from God, light from light, true God from True God. Without the Trinity and the divinely revealed economic procession of the Father, who eternally begets the Son, and the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son. Scripture becomes ink on a page that succumbs itself to every wind of doctrine invented by man.

That is why scripture teaches that; No one can confess Jesus is Lord without the Holy Spirit, and who ever denies the Father and the Son is Ant-Christ 1Jn. 2:21-22

Thus the scriptures give witness to the revelation of God given by God.
The “Sola” scriptures written are not the full revelation of God. That which Catholics hold to being the Sola= “The Word of God”, is personified in Jesus Christ who is the fullness of God in presence.

Col.2:9 “for in Him dwells the whole fullness of the deity bodily”, Col.1:15 He is the image of the invisible God".

The above scripture reveals God from God. Yet sola scriptura is not the fullness of God revealed. Jesus is “The Word of God”.

For my Catholic brothers and sisters; Our lectors response , at the conclusion after the first and second readings in the Liturgy of the Word; are not to say “The Word of the Lord”, the correct Lector response is “Word of the Lord”. When Lectors incorrectly respond “The Word of the Lord”, they appear to be limiting God to exist Sola in Scriptura or letters on a page. When Lectors correctly respond; “Word of the Lord” it opens our faith to what transpires next; The Word of God becomes flesh in our midst, who is the full revelation of God to our humanity.

The scriptures alone is not the fullness of God in presence.

Now to the SOLA:

• Are there any other God breathed writings (graphe theopneustos) not included in the Bible*?
  (*that we still have access to)

There exist God breathed divine revelations that are not written, but handed down from Jesus and the Apostles orally, when Jesus never writes.

The Liturgical ancient apostolic liturgy is God breathed and Trinity revealed in True presence. This is in practice today for 2000 years unchanged and accessible for all humanity to enter the Father’s presence through the Son’s presence in the Holy Spirit.

The ancient Apostolic Liturgy of the Word is God breathed and living.
The Apostolic sacraments instituted by Jesus Christ, is God breathed and living within the body of Christ and accessible.

The foundation of Jesus Christ, who builds His Church upon the Apostles is God breathed, in the Apostolic Successors, when Jesus breathed on the Apostles and gave them power in the Holy Spirit to forgive sin and retain sin. See John 20:22

The ancient Apostolic Liturgy of the Eucharist is God breathed and living. Here is Where the Sola Scriptura falls apart, because the Word of God made flesh is present in His body, blood, soul and divinity. That is why we Catholics believe that the Word of God is living.

The Word of God is not sola revealed in the sacred scriptures. When scripture gives testimony of God, by God from God.

Peace be with you

 

[Lenten_ashes]

I think the birthday song is a great way of explaining the Tradtion. It kinda puts it in a nutshell because everyone can relate.

Thanks

 

[Lenten_ashes]

When I was a Baptist, I asked myself where did the Traditions that we have come from. Altar call, communion once a quarter, Bible alone, etc etc. They came from a Protestant protesting the Protestant. That didn’t sit well with me. Would Jesus recognize my form Worship? We all have Tradition, the CC can trace their Tradition and authority all the way back. Read some of the early Church Fathers, It sounds like a Mass to me. I’m new to the CC so others are better at explaining things than I am. As of this Coming Week I will be in full communion with RCC!!! can’t wait!!

Congratulations and welcome home, Larry!

The biggest protestant tradition, by far, is bible-alone.

I tell people to read these two early documents… JUSTIN MARTYR – THE FIRST APOLOGY OF JUSTIN, and the DIDACHE.…then go to Catholic Mass and your Evangelical service on the same weekend and then you tell me, honestly, which service most resembles the early church.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

What are the origins of the Happy Birthday song? Has everyone always sang that “forever?” Or did it start over the centuries?
I realize that this isn’t actually a part of Catholic Tradition and just an analogy. I think I understand the point. But I worry that just because “everyone has always done that, or always believed this,” does that mean that it has been around since the time of the apostles and is exclusively right? You can have a valid birthday without the “Happy Birthday” song.

It’s been estimated that there were nearly 300 documents claiming to be Gospels the first few centuries after Jesus ascended. We know the 4 found in our bibles are the right ones thanks to Sacred Tradition and the Holy Spirit guided Church left to us by Jesus.

Just take a good hard look at the Gospel of Mark and ask yourself how do we know Mark wrote it? And, BTW who is “Mark”? How come I don’t see him listed with the 12 Apostles in Matthew 10:2-4 ?

We trust in God, true, but there were men involved and a process involved. If they aren’t trustworthy then our whole foundation falls on it’s face.

Pax

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

It’s been estimated that there were nearly 300 documents claiming to be Gospels the first few centuries after Jesus ascended. We know the 4 found in our bibles are the right ones thanks to Sacred Tradition and the Holy Spirit guided Church left to us by Jesus.

Just take a good hard look at the Gospel of Mark and ask yourself how do we know Mark wrote it? And, BTW who is “Mark”? How come I don’t see him listed with the 12 Apostles in Matthew 10:2-4 ?

We trust in God, true, but there were men involved and a process involved. If they aren’t trustworthy then our whole foundation falls on it’s face.

Pax

St. Mark is a disciple and companion of St. Peter. St. Mark owes his Episcopacy to St. Peter in Alexandria. St. Marks gospel is True, because he records his gospel from the witness of Peter himself, the synoptic gospels are a companion to Marks gospel, which is the most ancient of all the gospels.

Thus Antioch, Alexandria is where Peter installed bishops, while Peter leader of the Apostles remained in the capital of Pagan Rome as it’s overseer= Bishop along with St. Paul, when both are martyred in Rome. In fact Peter never left Rome because Peter’s remains are still there in present Christian Rome.

How do we know this? Oral Tradition and Sacred Scripture.
Just a little insight

 

[benhur]

That’s precisely why you are unable to follow Christ as He mandated – in His Church – you fantasise to produce error.

There is nothing “circular” about it.

The reality is that on the first level we argue to the reliability of the Bible as history. From that we conclude an infallible Church was founded. Then we take the word of that infallible Church that the Bible is inspired. It reduces to the proposition that, without the existence of the Church, we could not tell if the Bible were inspired. As St Augustine said, ‘I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.’ ”

Thus,
What is the Church’s role in Sacred Tradition?
The Church’s role in Sacred Tradition is to perpetuate and transmit to every generation all that the Church herself is and all that she believes.

Why is Sacred Tradition of equal authority with the Bible?
The Bible and Sacred Tradition are of equal authority because they are equally the word of God; both draw on the vision of God incarnate, who gave to the apostles what He came down on earth to teach.
therealpresence.org/archives/Q_and_A/Q_and_A_024.htm

That infallible Church established by the Christ has His full authority to “say so” as She teaches dogma and doctrine infallibly by His command.

Hi Abu

Still circular. So if we did not have the bible we would not know about the church ? Without the church we would not know that Paul wrote of theopneustos Writ ? The church interprets the bible which then says that same church is infallible ? And all this under the umbrella of what was supposed to be the singular intent of the word “theopneustos” ?

Blessings

 

[benhur]

Of course it is inspired by God, through His Catholic Church as both Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture are of equal authority because they are equally the word of God; both draw on the vision of God incarnate, who gave to the apostles what He came down on earth to teach.

Hi Abu,

Only Writ is termed “Theopnesutos”, and not tradition, in my opinion.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

Yes. It was given to the holy Apostles by Jesus Christ. They heard it with their natural ears and lived it, and transmitted it to succeeding generations through the Scriptures, through the Sacraments, and through their devotional practices, above all, through the Mass, which encompasses all of these modes of transmission.

What distinguishes the Scriptures from all other writings is that they are proclaimed at Mass in the Liturgy of the Word. We know what are the Scriptures because they are what is suitable to be proclaimed at Mass, as discerned by the Councils of Rome, Hippo, and Carthage in the later years of the fourth century.

Hi jm,

Thank you but only Writ is coined as “theopneustos”, in my opinion. For sure as you say the words of the Lord and then the apostles are now transmitted thru scriptures. Disagree that the Mass and Sacraments are infallibly "theopneustos’’ also, in that they have some tradition and evolving, at least in practice and perhaps more. That is for example, John 3:16 is still John 3: 16 unchanged since the beginning. Do not think the Mass is identical to the first Mass.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

Trying to identify and separate “God breathed writings” and their interpretation, from Christ’s Church has resulted in enormous harm.

Hi Abu,

Agree, but the church claiming Catholic sectarianism has also caused much harm.

Blessings

 

[simspt]

Hi Abu,

Only Writ is termed “Theopnesutos”, and not tradition, in my opinion.

Blessings

Hi Benhur,
Theopnesutos had a much broader meaning in the early Church. It was applied to Scripture, councils, eg. If you like I can give you sources.
A good book that was written by Craig Allert who is an Evangelical does a nice job of discussing this topic regarding Theopnesutos and its broad meaning during the early Church vs its much more narrow meaning today. IF interested here is a link to the book.

amazon.com/Scripture-Authority-Formation-Evangelical-Ressourcement/dp/0801027780

 

[mattp0625]

Scripture is the Word of God.

2 Tim 3:16 (Kjv): All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction…

Profitable for ministry, but nothing here about sole authority …

2 Tim 4:11 (Kjv): Only Luke is with me. Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the ministry.

If Mark is also profitable for ministry, meaning sole authority, we all have the wrong authority.

 

[mattp0625]

What are the origins of the Happy Birthday song? Has everyone always sang that “forever?” Or did it start over the centuries?
I realize that this isn’t actually a part of Catholic Tradition and just an analogy. I think I understand the point. But I worry that just because “everyone has always done that, or always believed this,” does that mean that it has been around since the time of the apostles and is exclusively right? You can have a valid birthday without the “Happy Birthday” song.

If you read the Didache, the letters of Ignatius of Antioch, or those of Irenaeus of Lyon, the core traditions are tracesble to the very beginning.

The disciples were first called Christians at Antioch (Acts 11).

 

[benhur]

Hi Benhur,
Theopnesutos had a much broader meaning in the early Church. It was applied to Scripture, councils, eg. If you like I can give you sources.
A good book that was written by Craig Allert who is an Evangelical does a nice job of discussing this topic regarding Theopnesutos and its broad meaning during the early Church vs its much more narrow meaning today. IF interested here is a link to the book.

amazon.com/Scripture-Authority-Formation-Evangelical-Ressourcement/dp/0801027780

His,

Ok thanks. I believe theopneustos in scripture is applied to "scripture’’, and not tradition or a magisterium or council. That early fathers may have applied it to other things is something else to be seen.

Blessings

 

[alwayswill]

Hi Benhur,
Theopnesutos had a much broader meaning in the early Church. It was applied to Scripture, councils, eg. If you like I can give you sources.
A good book that was written by Craig Allert who is an Evangelical does a nice job of discussing this topic regarding Theopnesutos and its broad meaning during the early Church vs its much more narrow meaning today. IF interested here is a link to the book.

amazon.com/Scripture-Authority-Formation-Evangelical-Ressourcement/dp/0801027780

yes, I would like sources that claim other known God breathed writings (Graphe Theopnesutos) are not included in the Canon

Thank you

 

[benhur]

as per Augustine on infallible Writ versus patristic writings :

" there is a* distinct boundary line *separating all productions subsequent to apostolic times from the authoritative canonical books of the Old and New Testaments…
Such writings (patristic) are read with the right of judgment, and without any obligation to believe… the distinctive peculiarity of the sacred writings, we are bound to receive as true’’

Reply To Faustus The Manichaean, 11:5)

 

[jmcrae]

Hi Abu

Still circular. So if we did not have the bible we would not know about the church ? Without the church we would not know that Paul wrote of theopneustos Writ ? The church interprets the bible which then says that same church is infallible ? And all this under the umbrella of what was supposed to be the singular intent of the word “theopneustos” ?

Blessings

It was the Church that declared it so, in 405 AD.

As to your opinion, of what authority is your opinion, and why should I heed it above the thousands of learned Bishops who not only agree together with one another, but at the same time, disagree with you? Why should I consider you to be greater than them?

 

[benhur]

Hi Benhur,
Theopnesutos had a much broader meaning in the early Church. It was applied to Scripture, councils, eg. If you like I can give you sources.
A good book that was written by Craig Allert who is an Evangelical does a nice job of discussing this topic regarding Theopnesutos and its broad meaning during the early Church vs its much more narrow meaning today. IF interested here is a link to the book.

amazon.com/Scripture-Authority-Formation-Evangelical-Ressourcement/dp/0801027780

His,

Here is a nice critique of his book.

“Again, I’m not suggesting that Allert has denied the existence of such passages in the fathers (Augustine’s infallibility of Writ but not patristic writ). He hasn’t. But I think that his book gives too little attention to such passages while giving far more attention to less significant passages referring to some sort of inspiration behind extra-Biblical sources.”

triablogue.blogspot.com/2007/06/response-to-craig-allerts-recent-book.html

Blessings

 

[benhur]

It was the Church that declared it so, in 405 AD.

As to your opinion, of what authority is your opinion, and why should I heed it above the thousands of learned Bishops who not only agree together with one another, but at the same time, disagree with you? Why should I consider you to be greater than them?

Hi j,

What did that council declare, that *theopneustos *applies to things/authorities other than Writ ?

As to my opinion, all I was saying is that Writ uses" theopneustos" only once, and as an adjective for Writ.

Blessings

 

[Larryk113]

u

It was the Church that declared it so, in 405 AD.

As to your opinion, of what authority is your opinion, and why should I heed it above the thousands of learned Bishops who not only agree together with one another, but at the same time, disagree with you? Why should I consider you to be greater than them?