Tradition can be misleading? So can the Bible.

[guanophore]

:banghead:

Knock any sense into there yet?

 

[guanophore]

Those books did not have the full support of the church and there were many who did not accept them as being fully inspired-inerrant.

This is a lie, or just a reflection of ignorance, I am not sure which. These books DID and DO have the FULL support of the Church, as represented by their adoption as canon by the Magesterium. There may be dissent in the membership, but the Church made the decision. There are some serious problems with these books. One of the differeneces between Protestant and Catholic is that Catholicism is a Theocracy,not a Democracy. Popular and unpopular vote and dissent notwithstanding, the Councils made the decisions, and those are the Teaching of the Church.

I wouldn’t say the church was “inspired” when compiling the canon but used a number of methods to determine which should be in the canon and which should not.

Then you would be in error, because no one can recognize what is Holy without Divine Revelation. Your love for the scripture, ja4, is a gift from God.

 

[alanjeddy]

No. What i’m referring to is the claim that the Magisterium is an infallible teacher. The catholic did give people in the 15-16th centuries to leave.

Converting is up to the Holy Spirit. What i’m interested is getting people to think deeply. I suspect for some this is not happening but getting a lot of catholics angry. For others perhaps it is getting them to think. I don’t know for sure.

I really don’t know what you are doing either. All you do is attack ( in a very weak and feeble manner) the tenits of our faith. You have never once made a strong argument for why you remain a protestant? Come on cat got your tongue? Come on I can’t wait to talk about Sola Scriptura and justfication by faith alone. And that’s just for starters.

 

[CTA1967]

Um, back to the topic, the “misleading” Bible itself teaches us to believe in “misleading” Tradition. Here’s guanophore’s signature:

“So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.” 2 Thess 2:15

 

[Elizabeth2]

I do think that the reformation was the will of Christ for a number reasons:
1- the roman catholic church had put so many obstacles to the gospel
2- corruption in the church that was going on for centuries.
3- to much power in the hands of a few men
4- the reformation made it possible for a greater spread of the gospel
5- it made it possible for the Scriptures to be given directly to the people.
6- made it possible for churches to be based on the model of the NT church.

1and2 Hmm St. Augustine, St Patrick (who they say converted Ireland practically single handed from paganism), so many people who brought Christianity to the people. They handed down Christianity to the masses for centuries before the Protestant Reformation. And do you mean to tell me that there was no corruption in the Protestant Churches of the Reformation? If so, then you don’t know your history.
3. Have you ever watched any of the preachers on TV, strutting up and down on their stage, saying God said this to me and God said that? Claiming far more infallibility than the Pope ever does.
4and5 At the time of the Reformation there were several Bibles in print. The printing press made the Bible available to the masses,who by the way were mostly illiterate.
6. I think if you go back to the Didache and early Christian writings you will find that they have more in common with the Catholic Church.
Having said that, I have learned much from Protestant writers about the Scriptures, because for many Protestants that is all they have. They do not believe in the Eucharist for example, and their Church services consist mainly of preaching and singing. And they have studied the Bible in depth. Unfortunately in some respects I think they cannot see the wood for the trees and miss out on a lot of important details, where the Church is concerned.
I would say many of them are probably better able to apply the Word of God to their lives than many Catholics are. For a long time we relied on priests and nuns to do it for us. But the Bible is more widely read today by many Catholics than it used to be. We’re catching up, so watch out!! !!! To me it’s a matter of balance. For Salvation history and the Church as a whole I believe what the Catholic Church teaches, but I can still take up the Bible and look for guidance from God in my life. There is no contradiction. It all boils down to a question of authority, who has the authority to speak for God. Catholics believe that Jesus left that authority to the apostles, with Peter singled out for the leadership role. And unless you are blind you can’t miss that. Jesus prophesied many things about what was to come, but he never prophesied a falling away from the Truth by the Church in fact he prophesied that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it. I have only come in at the tail end of this thread, so I don’t know what went before, but the Catholic Church does not condemn all Protestant teaching as error. Pope John Paul said, I think more than once, that what unites us is greater than what divides us. And I believe that Jesus would want us to dialogue in Charity rather than fight, and that seems to be at last what we are trying to do. There are many agreements that have been reached by the Catholic Church: with Evangelicals, Lutherans and so on. There is much we can agree on.

 

[Elizabeth2]

Just one other thing “justasking4” You mentioned that Protestant Churches follow Paul in his teaching. I found another instance in Galatians where it shows his solidarity with the authority of the apostles in the Church.
“So James, Cephas and John, these leaders, these pillars shook hands with Barnabas and me as a sign of partnership: we were to go to the pagans and they to the circumcised”.
You can’t quote Paul as being an example of division in the Church. In fact in Ephesians 4 he says: “Do all you can to preserve the unity of the Spirit by the peace that binds you together. There is one Body, one Spirit, just as you were all called into the one and the same hope when you were called. There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God who is Father of all, over all, through all and within all.”
We should be working to mend the divisions in the Church and assume good faith in the other person, and keep God in mind. Ecumenism and dialogue isn’t easy, or so I’ve found. We should handle it with prayer.

 

[c659smith]

Did Jesus Christ follow Sacred tradition in the Jewish faith.

Did he not go to the Temple and listen to Sacred teachings.

For those that believe they do not have to follow these are you more special then Jesus.

For Jesus said I have not come to abolish the old law but to bring a new covenant. Follow the Commandments etc…

 

[justasking4]

Just one other thing “justasking4” You mentioned that Protestant Churches follow Paul in his teaching. I found another instance in Galatians where it shows his solidarity with the authority of the apostles in the Church.
“So James, Cephas and John, these leaders, these pillars shook hands with Barnabas and me as a sign of partnership: we were to go to the pagans and they to the circumcised”.
You can’t quote Paul as being an example of division in the Church. In fact in Ephesians 4 he says: “Do all you can to preserve the unity of the Spirit by the peace that binds you together. There is one Body, one Spirit, just as you were all called into the one and the same hope when you were called. There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God who is Father of all, over all, through all and within all.”
We should be working to mend the divisions in the Church and assume good faith in the other person, and keep God in mind. Ecumenism and dialogue isn’t easy, or so I’ve found. We should handle it with prayer.

If there is going to be unity it must be based on the truth otherwise we really cannot have it in the way Christ prayed. Catholic and Protestant churches are united are some important doctrines but far apart on others.

 

[guanophore]

If there is going to be unity it must be based on the truth otherwise we really cannot have it in the way Christ prayed. Catholic and Protestant churches are united are some important doctrines but far apart on others.

It seems like you are promoting a unity based on scripture, rather than Apostolic Teaching. How do you suggest this be reached, since everyone interprets the Bible differently?

 

[alanjeddy]

It seems like you are promoting a unity based on scripture, rather than Apostolic Teaching. How do you suggest this be reached, since everyone interprets the Bible differently?

This is why there are 30,000 splintered protestant denominations

 

[c659smith]

Scipture alone I believe cannot provide salvation or a good chance at it.

If you read scripture a simple passage is “If thyne eye offends thee pluck it out”.

Now how would one interpet that if there were no Sacred Teachings?

Then we read Matthew and he goes through the geneology of Jesus Christ why did he do that?

Why were only 5 women in that Genology?

What do the 5 Women have in common?

How is that related to what Matthew is trying to say?

I learn this through 2000 plus years of interpetation of the scriptures for you surely do not believe I am smart enough to understand this on my own.

 

[c659smith]

Tradition

How many Christians have been to a passover or for that part understand why certain traditions are completed during this ceremony? I am glad my Roman Catholic Church keeps up the Tradition of Celebrating Passover the way Jesus did It for not only enlightening me but my children. It gives me a basis and knowledge of what the Jews went through in following God.
and how the Catholic Church came to be.

It is important to understand tradition to follow the way of Christ as without it you only have half the story as with the last Supper. Jesus and his Apostles were celebrating Passover Yet it was a day early.

This is why Sacred Scripture, Sacred Teachings, and Sacred Traditions are important to be taught as a whole and scripture alone just does not cut it.

 

[guanophore]

Come on what a weak, feeble response. You got to be kidding. This is why you have all those thousands of denominations.

I think it is a legitmate question to ask of ja4. He has made it clear that he rejects the Church as an authority, and adheres only to the Scripture. Yet, he complains that unity does not exist. What is weak and feeble about my question? No, I am not kidding.

Truth is never determined by authority but by the facts. If you don’t have the facts to back up a claim, you really can’t say you have the truth.

However, the only record we have are the scriptures. We don’t have any other trusted sources that tell us other things.

I believe that the scriptures are the inspired word of God but i don’t always believe what your church teaches is always right. In sense we must pick and choose what we will believe to be the truth. If you can’t find clear support for a doctrine (in scripture), then what you are left with is speculation. Speculation is not a foundation in which to build a doctrine on. Its like building on sand. It is only the scriptures that are infallible and inerrant. Not the church. ** The church has always had the scriptures but had chosen to introduce the doctrines of men instead.**

The apostles and prophets teachings (the inspired-inerrant Word of God) is the foundation of the church.
justasking4;2442881:

The problem is that if its not in the scriptures, its not inspired-inerrant. Those things not in the scriptures are not binding though. They do not carry apostolic authority.

We should only go by what is written. No more, no less.

(Scripture) is all we have. Anything else is mere specualtions and its not wise to build doctrines on speculations.

I have seen this claim many times about Sacred Tradition and those things not recorded in the scriptures. The NT is inspired-inerrant. Nothing else is. It is the foundation for all doctrine and practices because it alone is inspired-inerrant. From it we can have everything we need for salvation. It actually makes this claim as you may know. I go to the inspired-inerrant scriptures as the final authority.

You can claim to be led all you want but if its not in the scriptures nor are there any historical facts you don’t have the truth but speculations.

It could just as easily be shown in some respects how quickly the church was allowing unbilical teachings into the church at a very early stage.

What i see here is that those believe it primarily on the premise that the catholic church claims it so and that is enough. i don’t see most catholics here want to know the truth.

Perhaps you don’t know scripture that well. However the catholic church has not fully adhered to this but has introduced doctrines that the apostles never taught. It not about a stumbling block for me but the truth. If study the scriptures and church history you will not find the support for many of the claims made by the Roman Catholic church.

All we have of what Jesus and the apostles taught is to be found only in the scriptures. The scriptures are sufficent for all that we need to live our lives in Christ.

I see the major problems with catholicism in that in make claims about things but when you search for the substance of the claims its not to be found at least by me. What we have in catholic theology in many cases is a theology of specualtions.

justasking4:

The NT is inspired-inerrant. Nothing else is. It is the foundation for all doctrine and practices because it alone is inspired-inerrant. From it we can have everything we need for salvation.

justasking4:

The inspired Scriptures are not dependent on their inspiration on the authority of any church but on God Himself. As i’ve said above, the church was an instrument that God used. The instrument itself (the church) is fallible and fallen while the Scriptures are not.

justasking4:

No one has an infallible interpretation. Not even your church.

justasking4:

I know catholics accept these things as true. However due to the nature of these sacred traditons and the claims made in regard to them, they really don’t support what the apostles taught. Your church goes far beyond what the apostles taught with so many of its doctrines.

 

[c659smith]

Where is the facts about the Blessed Trinity.

I know all who proclaim themselves as true Christian Believe in that.

I do not see that word anywhere in the bible.

Where do we get it from? Could it be Sacred Teachings?

Where do we get the sign of the cross?

Is that in the Bible?

It is either you do not believe in Sacred teaching or agree Sacred teaching is an important aspect of Christianity

Now all we have left is tradition.

 

[Elizabeth2]

If there is going to be unity it must be based on the truth otherwise we really cannot have it in the way Christ prayed. Catholic and Protestant churches are united are some important doctrines but far apart on others.

Yes I agree. Pope Benedict has said and I can’t quote his exact words but something to the effect that “Love without truth is mere sentimentality and truth without love is sterile”. What I am trying to say in my postings is that we can only find the truth together if we realize that we are all members of the Body of Christ, and when we fight and argue it is His body that we are tearing apart. I think St. Paul says somewhere that we should speak the truth in love. As a budding apologist that is my aim, because I have friends of other denominations and I feel the division very strongly, it makes me very sad. It isn’t what Jesus intended for his Church. That you believe in the truth justasking4 I think is great. That, we have in common, because Jesus said “I am the way, the Truth…” If you want to try a specific topic of where you think we disagree, I would be willing to try and explain what the Catholic Church teaches and why.

 

[guanophore]

That you believe in the truth justasking4 I think is great. That, we have in common, because Jesus said “I am the way, the Truth…” If you want to try a specific topic of where you think we disagree, I would be willing to try and explain what the Catholic Church teaches and why.

I think you have a great attitude, and I commend you. However, please be aware that ja4 is not here to learn what the Church teaches, and why. He has already made up his mind on all those points.

Truth is never determined by authority but by the facts. If you don’t have the facts to back up a claim, you really can’t say you have the truth.

However, the only record we have are the scriptures. We don’t have any other trusted sources that tell us other things.

In sense we must pick and choose what we will believe to be the truth. I’m would think even you have certain qualms about some issues in your church.

If you can’t find clear support for a doctrine (in scripture), then what you are left with is speculation. Speculation is not a foundation in which to build a doctrine on. Its like building on sand. It is only the scriptures that are infallible and inerrant. Not the church. The church does not make the Bible infallible or inerrant. ** The church has always had the scriptures but had chosen to introduce the doctrines of men instead.**

The apostles and prophets teachings (the inspired-inerrant Word of God) is the foundation of the church.

We should only go by what is written. No more, no less.

I have seen this claim many times about Sacred Tradition and those things not recorded in the scriptures. The NT is inspired-inerrant. Nothing else is. It is the foundation for all doctrine and practices because it alone is inspired-inerrant. From it we can have everything we need for salvation. It actually makes this claim as you may know.I go to the inspired-inerrant scriptures as the final authority.

You can claim to be led all you want but if its not in the scriptures nor are there any historical facts you don’t have the truth but speculations.

What i see here is that those believe it primarily on the premise that the catholic church claims it so and that is enough. i don’t see most catholics here want to know the truth.

However the catholic church has not fully adhered to this but has introduced doctrines that the apostles never taught. It not about a stumbling block for me but the truth. If study the scriptures and church history you will not find the support for many of the claims made by the Roman Catholic church.

All we have of what Jesus and the apostles taught is to be found only in the scriptures. The scriptures are sufficent for all that we need to live our lives in Christ.

I see the major problems with catholicism in that in make claims about things but when you search for the substance of the claims its not to be found at least by me. What we have in catholic theology in many cases is a theology of specualtions.

justasking4:

It is the foundation for all doctrine and practices because it alone is inspired-inerrant. From it we can have everything we need for salvation. It actually makes this claim as you may know. I go to the inspired-inerrant scriptures as the final authority.

justasking4:

I’m not even referring to the Church as the source of these books (New Testament); only its role in identifying them as inspired. That’s all the church could do. It had no power to make these books inspired. Nor does its authority make them inspired. The inspired Scriptures are not dependent on their inspiration on the authority of any church but on God Himself. As i’ve said above, the church was an instrument that God used. The instrument itself (the church) is fallible and fallen while the Scriptures are not.

justasking4:

No one has an infallible interpretation. Not even your church. That’s means we must study the scriptures in light of historical contexts, word meanings and various other methods that will help us to understand the scriptures.

justasking4:

I know catholics accept these things as true. However due to the nature of these sacred traditons and the claims made in regard to them, they really don’t support what the apostles taught. Your church goes far beyond what the apostles taught with so many of its doctrines.

 

[Elizabeth2]

I think you have a great attitude, and I commend you. However, please be aware that ja4 is not here to learn what the Church teaches, and why. He has already made up his mind on all those points.

Thank you for the synopsis guanophore. It helps to know where j4 is coming from. It seems to me that j4 although critical is sincere in his/her beliefs. That doesn’t mean that j4 can’t come to a better understanding of Church teaching, and I have found that that is best done in an “attack free zone”, where people are not criticized for what they believe but where the discussion is respectful. I was hoping that by saying what I did, I could encourage that on both sides. When tempers and criticism get involved and people just hammer in their own points, then no one listens to anyone else. Feelings have to get put aside, and people have to be patient. It can be frustrating but I’ve found it’s the only way to true dialogue I don’t pretend to be an expert on what the Church teaches and due to other committments probably don’t have the time to do all the research necessary. But I was just hoping that from what I’ve learned in the last 60 odd years as a Catholic, I could help j4 understand a bit better or point him/her in the right direction.

 

[D317]

What exactly i.e. the details of all the Sacred Tradtions the Church passed on for those 1,500 years are? Do you have a simple list of them?

Why do you need a list? Just as the Pharisees, you will (and have) deny the truth. When confronted with facts, you will twist the argument.

Paul acknowledged the primacy of Peter, but you will not.

If you truly believe in your heart that the will of God through his Son Jesus Christ is to have thousands of individual congregations with different beliefs, to have no sacraments to sustain us on our faith journey, and to encourage hundreds of millions of individual interpretations of the Sacred Scripture rather than that of the one Church he founded on Peter; then you are not open to the truth.

Read Scott Hahn. Perhaps you may find the truth in his journey.

1 Timothy 3:14-15 Paul writes: “I am writing you about these matters, although I hope to visit you soon. But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is **the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.” **My emphasis added.

It does not say that Scripture alone is the pillar & foundation of truth. There was only one church at the time, which Paul recognized was founded upon Peter by Jesus Christ and the gates of hell will not prevail.

May God bless you & happy New Year.

 

[guanophore]

Thank you for the synopsis guanophore. It helps to know where j4 is coming from. It seems to me that j4 although critical is sincere in his/her beliefs. That doesn’t mean that j4 can’t come to a better understanding of Church teaching, and I have found that that is best done in an “attack free zone”, where people are not criticized for what they believe but where the discussion is respectful. I was hoping that by saying what I did, I could encourage that on both sides. When tempers and criticism get involved and people just hammer in their own points, then no one listens to anyone else. Feelings have to get put aside, and people have to be patient. It can be frustrating but I’ve found it’s the only way to true dialogue I don’t pretend to be an expert on what the Church teaches and due to other committments probably don’t have the time to do all the research necessary. But I was just hoping that from what I’ve learned in the last 60 odd years as a Catholic, I could help j4 understand a bit better or point him/her in the right direction.

Well, good luck, and more power to you. I spend many hours working on this some months back, until I realized that I was just going in circles.

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.

The scriptures do warn of false teachers in the church itself. There was no promise given by Christ that this would not happen. Thats the issue. There are no biblical roots for these marian doctrines. Why do you believe such a thing if the scriptures never teach such a thing?

(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 teachng 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”.

If what you say is true, then this would be a false gospel since Paul was totally unaware of the many doctrines in the catholic church. See Galatians 1:8-9. He never taught anything about the marian doctrines for example. That was never a requirement of the gospel he taught.

The scriptures warn that false teachers would come into the church itself and decieve many. How does a catholic go about applying this principle in their church today?

It could just as easily be shown in some respects how quickly the church was allowing unbilical teachings into the church at a very early stage.

If the catholic church was not corrupt, then why was desired in the catholic church itself for a reformation around the 15th century?

Do you consider the inquisitions that was supported by various popes for centuries a sign of corruption?

How about some of the popes, the vicars of Christ who were evil. Is this a sign of corruption?

(Magesterium)

Confront them and expose them.

I finally understood that his goal in being here is to pursuade Catholics to confront the false teachers (magesterium) who teach things that are not in the Bible.

 

[alanjeddy]

Why do you need a list? Just as the Pharisees, you will (and have) deny the truth. When confronted with facts, you will twist the argument.

Paul acknowledged the primacy of Peter, but you will not.

If you truly believe in your heart that the will of God through his Son Jesus Christ is to have thousands of individual congregations with different beliefs, to have no sacraments to sustain us on our faith journey, and to encourage hundreds of millions of individual interpretations of the Sacred Scripture rather than that of the one Church he founded on Peter; then you are not open to the truth.

Read Scott Hahn. Perhaps you may find the truth in his journey.

1 Timothy 3:14-15 Paul writes: “I am writing you about these matters, although I hope to visit you soon. But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.” My emphasis added.

It does not say that Scripture alone is the pillar & foundation of truth. There was only one church at the time, which Paul recognized was founded upon Peter by Jesus Christ and the gates of hell will not prevail.

May God bless you & happy New Year.

Amen i say to you my brother. Never cease to boldly proclaim the
truth. For how well we follow Jesus, who is the Way, the Truth and the Life, will ultimately determine where we will spend eternity. As I will turn 68 in the new year, I think a little more frequently to my mortality, when one day i will stand before He who is the truth. He who can not deceive nor be deceived. In the end we will be either winners or losers, forever.