Tradition can be misleading? So can the Bible.

[Elizabeth2]

Tell me then what are the “Traditions” that all catholics have believed for the past 2000 years?

I decided to go back and try and read this thread from the beginning and my head is spinning. I got so far and had to stop. As far as I got no one mentioned the Catechism of the Catholic Church. In it you will find what the Church believes. The teachings are very simple with Scripture quotations and references to the early Church fathers, the Didache and the Saints. If you want to find out how the Church interprets the Scripture you can also read the Documents of Vatican II, Papal encyclicals and Papal documents and books. Pope John Paul was a prolific writer and his writings are not difficult to understand.
Pope Benedict’s new book, “Jesus of Nazareth” is a very scholarly work yet simple and profound, with many insights. The Catholic Church has had 2,000 years plus of studying the scriptures, so she knows what she is talking about.
To equate the Traditions of the Catholic Church with the Traditions of men that Jesus condemned is a good example of applying the Scriptures in the wrong way: taking a passage and reading it out of context. St Paul tells his listeners to hold fast to the traditions they have been taught by writing and by word of mouth. Traditions in themselves are not bad, and non Catholic Churches have their traditions too.

---

Of courtesy it is much less
Than courage of heart or holiness
Yet in my walks it seems to me
That the grace of God is in courtesy.
Hilaire Belloc

 

[Elizabeth2]

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.

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.

Well I think he’s backing a lost cause but I answered some of his points as best I could,so I’ll leave that with him if he’s interested. I don’t believe in chasing after people if they’re not ready to listen. I find face to face encounters much better, the internet does have it’s limits. I just looked in to the forums because I had time over the holidays, and I’ve given what I have to offer in that short time, and I hope it bears fruit. If not now maybe later. God wants people to know the truth even more than we do, and he gives people lots of opportunities. Only he knows a person’s heart for sure.

 

[alanjeddy]

Well I think he’s backing a lost cause but I answered some of his points as best I could,so I’ll leave that with him if he’s interested. I don’t believe in chasing after people if they’re not ready to listen. I find face to face encounters much better, the internet does have it’s limits. I just looked in to the forums because I had time over the holidays, and I’ve given what I have to offer in that short time, and I hope it bears fruit. If not now maybe later. God wants people to know the truth even more than we do, and he gives people lots of opportunities. Only he knows a person’s heart for sure.

Justasking4, in my estimation has no credibility. what he proposes as a basis for scriptual interpretation has spawned many denominations each with their own beliefs. Sola Scriptura
is the problem. It is non biblical and they have no authoritative body to interpret scripture.

Scott Hahn is a much more brilliant theologian/ apologist than we could ever hope to be and he had no response for his student that asked him:" Show me in the bible where Sola Scriptura is scriptual". (Protestants, of course will erroneously counter with their 2 Timothy 3:16-17 claiming that Scripture as a rule of faith is sufficient. It only claims that Scripture is profitable. Many things can be profitable for moving one towards a goal Some of the bible is a complex combination of literal and allegorical texts and it requires the sacred deposit of faith, Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and magisterial teachings to accurately interpret them.

 

[justasking4]

D317;3140827]

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
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?
D317
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.

Many catholics like to make claims about the Traditions of their church. If they are going to do so and use them as a defense of the catholic church then its only right for me to ask exactly what these Tradiitons are specifically. I would suspect that many catholics would want to know what they are.
My questions remains: 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? (forget the details and lets go with a simple list)

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

Do you think Paul looked at Peter as being the supreme head of the church? Did any of the writers of the NT?

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.

Lets take your comment about the “hundreds of millions of individual interpretations of the Sacred Scripture rather than that of the one Church he founded on Peter” and see how this works out in the catholic church. Where has the catholic church infallibly defined-interpreted the Scriptures? As far as i know it has only interpreted less than 20 verses. That means when you want to know what a particular verse of the scripture means you can never know exactly unless its one of the very few. What this also means is that you are in the same boat as protestants. There also must be “hundreds of millions of individual interpretations of the Sacred Scripture” in the catholic church to.

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.

Again what does this have to do with understanding the Scriptures? Has your church infallibly interpreted these 2 verses so that you know the exact meaning of them?

May God bless you & happy New Year.

 

[justasking4]

Elizabeth2;3145096]
Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Tell me then what are the “Traditions” that all catholics have believed for the past 2000 years?

Elizabeth2
I decided to go back and try and read this thread from the beginning and my head is spinning. I got so far and had to stop. As far as I got no one mentioned the Catechism of the Catholic Church. In it you will find what the Church believes. The teachings are very simple with Scripture quotations and references to the early Church fathers, the Didache and the Saints.

What i’m finding is that catholics like to make claims about their Traditions but cannot tell me much these Traditions of the past 2000 years. I find this absolutely amazing.

I suspect most catholics have never read their own catechism. I have read parts of it and it does not address this issue either in any depth.

If you want to find out how the Church interprets the Scripture you can also read the Documents of Vatican II, Papal encyclicals and Papal documents and books. Pope John Paul was a prolific writer and his writings are not difficult to understand.

Have you read these works? For example can you tell me how the Church interprets the Scriptures?

Pope Benedict’s new book, “Jesus of Nazareth” is a very scholarly work yet simple and profound, with many insights. The Catholic Church has had 2,000 years plus of studying the scriptures, so she knows what she is talking about.

If this is so why hasn’t your church offically-infallibly interpreted the scriptures for its members? Where do you go when you want to know what a specific verse means?

To equate the Traditions of the Catholic Church with the Traditions of men that Jesus condemned is a good example of applying the Scriptures in the wrong way: taking a passage and reading it out of context.

Lets take a couple examples of catholic doctrine and see if it is of the Scriptures or of men. Take Mary’ assumption and being prayed to. Where are these things taught in Scripture?

If they are not found in Scripture then they must be the traditions of men.

St Paul tells his listeners to hold fast to the traditions they have been taught by writing and by word of mouth. Traditions in themselves are not bad, and non Catholic Churches have their traditions too.

I agree.

 

[alanjeddy]

What i’m finding is that catholics like to make claims about their Traditions but cannot tell me much these Traditions of the past 2000 years. I find this absolutely amazing.

I suspect most catholics have never read their own catechism. I have read parts of it and it does not address this issue either in any depth.

Have you read these works? For example can you tell me how the Church interprets the Scriptures?

If this is so why hasn’t your church offically-infallibly interpreted the scriptures for its members? Where do you go when you want to know what a specific verse means?

Lets take a couple examples of catholic doctrine and see if it is of the Scriptures or of men. Take Mary’ assumption and being prayed to. Where are these things taught in Scripture?

If they are not found in Scripture then they must be the traditions of men.

I agree.

You really need to talk about your own protestant churches failure to have any authority in the interpretation of scripture. Look what has happened. Do i have to remind you again and again?

 

[justasking4]

You really need to talk about your own protestant churches failure to have any authority in the interpretation of scripture. Look what has happened. Do i have to remind you again and again?

Since part of this forum is about Tradition, perhaps you can tell me what the Traditions are of the catholic church for the past 2000 years are?

 

[alanjeddy]

Since part of this forum is about Tradition, perhaps you can tell me what the Traditions are of the catholic church for the past 2000 years are?

Right now tell me why your faith has splintered into 30.000 denominations???

 

[justasking4]

Right now tell me why your faith has splintered into 30.000 denominations???

i think i answered this for you awhile back.

 

[guanophore]

What i’m finding is that catholics like to make claims about their Traditions but cannot tell me much these Traditions of the past 2000 years. I find this absolutely amazing.

What I find more amazing is how anyone serious about understanding the history of their faith can discount 2000 years of evidence!

I suspect most catholics have never read their own catechism. I have read parts of it and it does not address this issue either in any depth.

I suspect that you are right. However, you will have a hard time finding them here. Have you considered opening you own forum, or frequenting a forum managed by other anti-catholics in order to conduct your evangelical work?

Have you read these works? For example can you tell me how the Church interprets the Scriptures?

The Church interprets the Scriptures according to the Apostolic Tradition from whence they were produced. This is their context. This is the most appropriate way to interpret them.

If this is so why hasn't your church offically-infallibly interpreted the scriptures for its members? Where do you go when you want to know what a specific verse means?

Because the Church interprets Scripture as Jesus did, as a whole, and in the context in which it was written. We can always go to the Teaching of the Church, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.

Lets take a couple examples of catholic doctrine and see if it is of the Scriptures or of men. Take Mary’ assumption and being prayed to. Where are these things taught in Scripture?

You proceed from an erroneous foundation, ja4. You are assuming that something you cannot find in scripture is “of men”, and this is an error.

If they are not found in Scripture then they must be the traditions of men.

An erroneous conclusion from an erroneous premise. How could a person arrive anywhere else?

 

[guanophore]

Since part of this forum is about Tradition, perhaps you can tell me what the Traditions are of the catholic church for the past 2000 years are?

WARNING TO THREAD PARTICIPANTS

Don’t fall for this. ja4 is not interested in learning about church tradition. He has already made up his mind that there IS NO SUCH THING as Sacred Traditions.

What exactly were these “other things not written in the Scriptures”? What does your “oral apostolic tradition” tell you **exactly **they were? What are the specific things that Jesus spoke that are not in the Scriptures?

I spent months on this question with ja4, only to find out that he has no interest at all in learning about Sacred Tradition.Furthermore, he does not believe it exists. In the end, I learned that ja4 believes

1. “Sacred Tradition” is really only the speculation of men
2. The Teachers of the Church have led Catholics astray
3. Catholics fail to hold their teachers accountable for teaching errors
4. His goal in askng it is to create dialogue through which he hopes to convince Catholics of 1-3 above.

justasking4:

This is not true. 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.

But nevertheless it is important to see what these Traditions are, what is there origin and when did they begin. If you are going to defend the catholic church you going to have to defend its Sacred Traditions also. Scripture and Tradition go hand in hand in the catholic church.

guanophore:

My question is, why is it important to YOU, to know what these Traditions are? You have already said that you don’t believe anything that is not written in the Bible. Why do you keep asking about them?

justasking4:

Because the catholic church elevates these Tradition claims to the same level as the inspired-inerrant Scripture. Second, if catholics are going to believe that
these Traditions are at the same level as Scripture then its vitally important to understand specifically what these Traditions are.

guanophore:

You have already stated they are “speculations of men” and have no validity, since you do not see them in your bible.

justasking4:

i want to help others see it to. Engaging for the truth is never a waste of time. Secondly it might get someone who reads these posts to rethink their position.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=170992&page=11&highlight=you+must+do+is+be+on+guard+against+false+teachers+in+your+own+church

He is not, as his handle implies “justasking”. In fact this seemingly innocent question is just a ruse to try to pursuade Catholics to abandon the 'false" teachings of Catholicism and come to a true “Biblical” faith. It is a proselyzation tool, and not a genuine interest in learning about anything Catholic.

 

[alanjeddy]

Right now tell me why your faith has splintered into 30.000 denominations???

No , you never did.

 

[alanjeddy]

i think i answered this for you awhile back.

No, you never did. I did give you the reason why.

 

[justasking4]

alanjeddy;3154364]No, you never did. I did give you the reason why.

You might want to check post #330.
Here is what i wrote to you:
Quote:alanjeddy
Well then you tell me why are there 33,000 different Protestant denominations???

justasking4
A denomination is different than a church. I don’t think that there are that many denominations. There are many churches though for various reasons. Some churches split to start churches elsewhere. Some do split over theological reasons such as for homosexuality. There are a number of other reasons also.

Hope this helps—

 

[alanjeddy]

alanjeddy;3154364]No, you never did. I did give you the reason why.

You might want to check post #330.
Here is what i wrote to you:
Quote:alanjeddy
Well then you tell me why are there 33,000 different Protestant denominations???

justasking4
A denomination is different than a church. I don’t think that there are that many denominations. There are many churches though for various reasons. Some churches split to start churches elsewhere. Some do split over theological reasons such as for homosexuality. There are a number of other reasons also.

Hope this helps—

so the breaks were over homosexuality. So you think it had nothing to do over scriptual interpretation? I will say what i said before if you were a defense attorney we would all go to jail. If you were a prosecuting attorney we would all be set free. Your answer is weak, feeble and embarrssing.

 

[justasking4]

alanjeddy;3154554]

justasking4
A denomination is different than a church. I don’t think that there are that many denominations. There are many churches though for various reasons. Some churches split to start churches elsewhere. Some do split over theological reasons such as for homosexuality. There are a number of other reasons also.

Hope this helps—

alanjeddy
so the breaks were over homosexuality. So you think it had nothing to do over scriptual interpretation? I will say what i said before if you were a defense attorney we would all go to jail. If you were a prosecuting attorney we would all be set free. Your answer is weak, feeble and embarrssing.

We are seeing a break today over the issue of homosexuality. This is a legimate reason of a break.
The answers i gave you, are they false?

Would you leave your church if it sanctioned gay marriage?

 

[qui_est_ce]

WARNING TO THREAD PARTICIPANTS

Don’t fall for this. ja4 is not interested in learning about church tradition. He has already made up his mind that there IS NO SUCH THING as Sacred Traditions.

I spent months on this question with ja4, only to find out that he has no interest at all in learning about Sacred Tradition.Furthermore, he does not believe it exists. In the end, I learned that ja4 believes

1. “Sacred Tradition” is really only the speculation of men
2. The Teachers of the Church have led Catholics astray
3. Catholics fail to hold their teachers accountable for teaching errors
4. His goal in askng it is to create dialogue through which he hopes to convince Catholics of 1-3 above.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=170992&page=11&highlight=you+must+do+is+be+on+guard+against+false+teachers+in+your+own+church

He is not, as his handle implies “justasking”. In fact this seemingly innocent question is just a ruse to try to pursuade Catholics to abandon the 'false" teachings of Catholicism and come to a true “Biblical” faith. It is a proselyzation tool, and not a genuine interest in learning about anything Catholic.

Yes, Ja4 has been given various “lists” of traditions, verifiable historical evidence for the mass, the Real Presence, and other CC teachings. He rejects them all for the infallibility of the church of me.

And then when he gets tired of repeating himself on the thread, he just goes to another one and starts all over again.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3154207&postcount=262

 

[justasking4]

qui est ce;3155167]Yes, Ja4 has been given various “lists” of traditions, verifiable historical evidence for the mass, the Real Presence, and other CC teachings. He rejects them all for the infallibility of the church of me.

No lists for the past 2000 years of what the catholic church teaches have i seen. (Please don’t tell me its in your catechism because it checked and they are not there) Maybe i missed it.
So if you could point me to that post it would be greatly appreciated.

And then when he gets tired of repeating himself on the thread, he just goes to another one and starts all over again.

I don’t get tired with this so no need to worry.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3154207&postcount=262

 

[guanophore]

No lists for the past 2000 years of what the catholic church teaches have i seen. (Please don’t tell me its in your catechism because it checked and they are not there) Maybe i missed it.

Yes, you definitely missed it!

 

[Elizabeth2]

Since part of this forum is about Tradition, perhaps you can tell me what the Traditions are of the catholic church for the past 2000 years are?

Finally, justasking4, one question! You tend to shoot out questions like bullets from a gun. I’m a “view from the pew” person not a scriptural scholar or even an expert on Church teaching. But I would say you would start with the Creed. Now how about that. Do you agree to everything in the Apostles’ Creed?
I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
Creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord
He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit
and born of the Virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified,
died and was buried. He descended to the dead.
On the third day he rose again. He ascended into
heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the
Father. He will come again to judge the living
and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic
Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness
of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the
life everlasting. Amen
Can you say Amen to that brother?? And while we’re here maybe you’ve told others before, but what is your background? When you want to give someone directions where to go, it’s good to know where they are coming from.
and by the way Happy New Year.