S
steve_b
Guest
Randy
- 93 responses on this topic
- has had 33 responses
- Status
J
JRKH
Guest
I too have been following the exchange here and have refrained from jumping in much because YD has complained about getting too many questions and answers from too many people. Frankly Randy has been doing a fine job in my opinion. He is taking a great deal of time and effort to make sure that his responses to YD are clear and correct. First by making sure he knows what YD is asking and second by trying to keep the discussion on a single issue or two.
I do like your comment about needing a moderator. This is frankly the very point I try to make about the Church being united, visible and authoritative. It is the Moderator for just such discussions between believers.
Peace
James
P
Philthy
Guest
And where, exactly, did Christ reveal that the Apostles were to record a NT rulebook of the faith??? Nowhere. He doesnt even hint at it. The only writings that are revealed as Scripture are an unspecified, unidentified number of letters of Paul. If this basic info was not committed to writing, the Apostles clearly knew that another mechanism was in place to hold the faith…Tradition.
And are you forgetting the little detail that the Apostles never handed us a “completed…written NT of Christ”? That happened HUNDREDS of years later. The authors of the NT did not know for certain that their writings were Scripture. Read the intro to Lukes Gospel - he sounds more like a reporter giving a second hand account than someone revealing divinely inspired Scripture.
Notice how Paul repeatedly refers to the ORAL TRADITION that Timothy has received and how Paul FAILS TO INCLUDE HIS LETTER as Scripture?
2 Tim1:13-14 Follow the pattern of the sound [fn] words that you have heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. By the Holy Spirit who dwells within us, guard the good deposit entrusted to you.
2 Tim 2:2 and what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.
Here’s Paul’s big chance to refer to “writings” and “parchments” as the future Scripture by which the Church will operate…
2Tim 4:13 When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books, and above all the parchments.
Silence! Notice he doesnt even bother to address the issue. Why? Because the writings are part of the Sacred Tradition, they are not the entirety of it.
P
Philthy
Guest
Uhhh, what exactly do you think Randy hasn’t addressed clearly and completely?? Did you read all of the posts?
J
jmcrae
Guest
Right. The Catholic Church is an assembly of 1.5 billion people who share common doctrine, morality, and practices. Our first ancestors were Jesus Christ and his Apostles, as we see when we trace the line of men who have occupied the Holy See, beginning with St. Peter.
It does, indeed. See how St. Paul received authorization from St. Peter to preach and proclaim the Gospel in the assembly. Look to St. Peter’s lawful successor - did he authorize your preacher? If not, then move on from that unlawful assembly, and join a lawful assembly.
If past performance predicts future behavior, we’ll still be in the same place we’ve been for these past 2,000 years.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
JacobG-
Let me see if I get this straight…
- You joined the forum today, and
- Out of ALL the active threads, you chose this one to read, and
- Your very first post is in support of Yankee-drifter who presumably <wink, wink> you have never met, and
- You include a public attempt to goad me into doing something I have said I will not do.
Talk about coinky-dinks. I mean, what are the odds of THAT?
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Yankee wants me to tell him what I think the gospel is so that he can determine if I am saved or not. I gave him an article from Jimmy Akin entitled, “What is the Gospel?” but that wasn’t what he wanted.
However, I addressed my reasons for not playing his game above.
J
jmcrae
Guest
They wrote the books that we now include in the New Testament (together with many others), but the canon of the New Testament was not defined until 405 AD, by Pope Innocent I.
The reason you have a Bible today is that the Catholic Pope promulgated the canon of the New Testament to the One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church by means of an infallible declaration, and they were required to obey him, and not disagree with him. Since if they had been allowed to disagree with him, we would still be puzzling over which books belong and which books to leave out, even to this very day.
Y
yankee_drifter
Guest
In order to be an apostolic church you have to adhere to exactly what the apostles taught. Any straying and you cease to be apostolic. Anything not taught by them is the commandments of men, not God. Any traditions that cannot be traced back to the apostles must be viewed as suspect and rejected. Did the apostles teach Christ is to be sacrificed continually on a wooden altar? Did they teach celibacy and the abstaining of certain foods? Infallible papacy? Veneration of Mary, angels, dead saints? Veneration of relics, images, crosses? Purgatory?
The answers I get is: well, its not in the Bible but its sacred tradition. I asked where are these traditions. Are they written down somewhere? Identifiable? Verifiable? Can we locate it? Not once did I get a direct answer on this forum. But ask the RCC and it says: no, you can’t find it in a library or in a book. Its tradition handed down. I ask: how do we know its from the apostles? That its authoritative? The RCC says: authority to write scripture was passed along by the apostles. I ask: where can we find such authority? Its nowhere found in the Bible. Not even a hint that any man after the apostles had this authority that he could pass along to include tradition. None is qualified today to be an apostle because none were eyewitnesses of Jesus. None of us was commissioned by Christ to establish His church on earth. Its already been done! The apostles were given a one time mission to build the church. To continually build upon the foundation which they have already laid is not possible. A foundation is laid only once. Since no man today is qualified to be an apostle, then apostolic succession is impossible.
What does the RCC really mean by tradition? The writings of the early church fathers? The teachings of the pope and councils? What do you do with a tradition that contradicts the Bible? The fathers? The pope? If your traditions agree with the Bible, then why do we need the traditions? If they disagree then you are teaching something contrary to God’s inspired Word. Even if we know a tradition came from a church father, how do we know he was right? The fathers were not unanimous on anything and the further in time we get, the more they disagreed. You run into a very serious problem because you have no final ultimate authority.
The answers I get is: well, its not in the Bible but its sacred tradition. I asked where are these traditions. Are they written down somewhere? Identifiable? Verifiable? Can we locate it? Not once did I get a direct answer on this forum. But ask the RCC and it says: no, you can’t find it in a library or in a book. Its tradition handed down. I ask: how do we know its from the apostles? That its authoritative? The RCC says: authority to write scripture was passed along by the apostles. I ask: where can we find such authority? Its nowhere found in the Bible. Not even a hint that any man after the apostles had this authority that he could pass along to include tradition. None is qualified today to be an apostle because none were eyewitnesses of Jesus. None of us was commissioned by Christ to establish His church on earth. Its already been done! The apostles were given a one time mission to build the church. To continually build upon the foundation which they have already laid is not possible. A foundation is laid only once. Since no man today is qualified to be an apostle, then apostolic succession is impossible.
What does the RCC really mean by tradition? The writings of the early church fathers? The teachings of the pope and councils? What do you do with a tradition that contradicts the Bible? The fathers? The pope? If your traditions agree with the Bible, then why do we need the traditions? If they disagree then you are teaching something contrary to God’s inspired Word. Even if we know a tradition came from a church father, how do we know he was right? The fathers were not unanimous on anything and the further in time we get, the more they disagreed. You run into a very serious problem because you have no final ultimate authority.
Y
yankee_drifter
Guest
Where is the tradition Paul is speaking of in 2 Thess.2:15, 3:6? He gathered them up and enclosed them together in his epistle. (2 Thess. 3:14). The instructions Paul gave to pass along, he had incorporated in his letters which are now part of the written Holy Scriptures.
The RCC claims that the apostolic authority that Paul taught was passed along to successors. Where did Paul say this? The only possible way tradition can be placed on a level with the Holy Scriptures is they must be “God Breathed”. Coming from God alone and not from men. Christ Himself would have to teach this. But the exact opposite is true. Paul wrote to Timothy to pass along to faithful men who will teach others. Not give this authority to men who will have the same authority that Paul had. He was an apostle. There are no apostles today. No one qualifies. Only the apostles had the authority to speak as Christ- not the church.The church is responsible for defending the teachings of Christ. Biblical Christianity’s definition of tradition is what Paul spoke orally, and this was made part and parcel of the 1st century revelation of Jesus Christ. What Paul and other apostles spoke, these traditions were ultimately imbued into the very Word of God.
The RCC believes there are ongoing traditions but cannot trace any of them back to the apostolic age.
What was actually passed along was the authority to proclaim Christ; to proclaim forgiveness in His name; to proclaim access to Christ. Christ did not pass along authority to men to become as He was. Scripture was passed along to be defended by the church.The church has no right to mess with the Scriptures nor add to them.
As for apostolic authority, Paul never passed on the authority that men can write out tradition and put it on a level with the Scriptures. You won’t find him giving such instructions.There are no apostles today because they completed their mission to establish Christ’s church. Therefore, the claim to have apostolic succession down to our day is not possible. We do not need men building the church. Its already been done!
The RCC claims that the apostolic authority that Paul taught was passed along to successors. Where did Paul say this? The only possible way tradition can be placed on a level with the Holy Scriptures is they must be “God Breathed”. Coming from God alone and not from men. Christ Himself would have to teach this. But the exact opposite is true. Paul wrote to Timothy to pass along to faithful men who will teach others. Not give this authority to men who will have the same authority that Paul had. He was an apostle. There are no apostles today. No one qualifies. Only the apostles had the authority to speak as Christ- not the church.The church is responsible for defending the teachings of Christ. Biblical Christianity’s definition of tradition is what Paul spoke orally, and this was made part and parcel of the 1st century revelation of Jesus Christ. What Paul and other apostles spoke, these traditions were ultimately imbued into the very Word of God.
The RCC believes there are ongoing traditions but cannot trace any of them back to the apostolic age.
What was actually passed along was the authority to proclaim Christ; to proclaim forgiveness in His name; to proclaim access to Christ. Christ did not pass along authority to men to become as He was. Scripture was passed along to be defended by the church.The church has no right to mess with the Scriptures nor add to them.
As for apostolic authority, Paul never passed on the authority that men can write out tradition and put it on a level with the Scriptures. You won’t find him giving such instructions.There are no apostles today because they completed their mission to establish Christ’s church. Therefore, the claim to have apostolic succession down to our day is not possible. We do not need men building the church. Its already been done!
C
crazzeto
Guest
Regarding the question, “Where is the Tradition Paul Speaks of”:
From 2 Thessalonians 2
drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=60&ch=2&l=14&f=s#x
From 2 Thessalonians 2
drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=60&ch=2&l=14&f=s#x
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Do you know the Gospel Randy?Yankee wants me to tell him what I think the gospel is so that he can determine if I am saved or not. I gave him an article from Jimmy Akin entitled, “What is the Gospel?” but that wasn’t what he wanted.
However, I addressed my reasons for not playing his game above.
I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.
J
jmcrae
Guest
If I know our Randy, he’s probably got all four of them memorized, and more besides.
Do you know the Gospel? St. Paul certainly did not believe in “once saved, always saved,” or “four spiritual laws” etc. If he had, he’d have produced tracts; not epistles, and he would never have rebuked the converted.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Right, which is why Protestantism is not only schismatic; it’s heretical by its very nature.
Certainly not, and nor do Catholic priests do this - rather, in the manner of Melchizedek, they offer bread and wine on the Altar (which can be made either of wood, like the Cross, or of stone, like Jacob’s altar) which Christ accepts, and then, because the bread and wine is not the sacrifice of salvation, Christ Himself then substantially replaces the priest’s offering of bread and wine with His own Sacrifice on the Cross, which is His own Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity. (This is what occurs during the Consecration at Mass.)
Yes - in many places in the New Testament, celibacy is praised as the better way.
We abstain from meat (carne) on Fridays because Jesus gave up His flesh (carne) for our salvation on a Friday. It’s kind of a pun, in Latin … we do this not because we “have” to, but in order to acknowledge and remember that Christ died on the Cross for our sins.
The gates of Hell shall not prevail. Matthew 16:19
Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Luke 1:28
So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them. Acts 19:12
And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. - Matthew 18:34
You just aren’t looking. How could the Apostles have been telling their followers what to do, if they had no authority over them? How could the Bible have even been written, if the men who wrote it had no authority from God?
How could St. Paul have ordained St. Timothy a Bishop, if he had no authority to pass on his own authority? How could St. Timothy have selected and ordained yet more Bishops, if St. Paul had not only ordained him a Bishop, but also handed on to him the power to ordain other Bishops? Yet we see that St. Paul lays hands on St. Timothy, and then gives him instructions on how to select other men for ordination to become Bishops. Of what use are those instructions to St. Timothy, if he has no authority to ordain those men to the Episcopacy?
Right, but once the basement has been dug and the cement has been poured, you don’t just leave it like that and try to live in it - you then build the house, and once you have the house, you then put in the furniture and the family. Jesus and the Apostles left us the foundation, but He wanted us to build up the house, and furnish it, and live in it.
In order to live as the Apostles and Jesus want us to live. We can’t be Christians simply by sitting in a chair reading the Bible. We have to make use of the Sacraments, and we have to live out the life that Christ is calling us to. That’s where the Tradition comes in - it shows us how to do that.
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Odd answer… There is only one Gospel message!If I know our Randy, he’s probably got all four of them memorized, and more besides.
I do know the Gospel.
And i’m guessing you have never done an in-depth study on the book of Romans, if you don’t think Paul understood Mans sinful nature and God’s grace and the completeness of the atoning work of the cross.
BTW the epistles weren’t really written as doctrinal letters, they were more about correction and encouragement.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Yes, but there are four Gospels in the Bible.
If a one-time declaration of faith in Christ were sufficient for eternal salvation, then what need would there have been for St. Paul to “correct” anyone?
The fact that he is correcting them and encouraging them tells us that, just as the Catholic Church teaches, our behaviour and our perseverance in faith are essential for us to be able to continue and remain in the state of grace.
P
Philthy
Guest
P
Philthy
Guest
I think this is a foolish, inflammatory and immature comment that reveals more about its author than its intended recipient.
P
patricius79
Guest
Yankeedrifter wrote:
Getting back to reality, it is very simple, as many are aware: the Church is one, because we are the Body of Christ, not the “bodies of Christ.”. The local Church’s are perhaps somewhat like various regions of the same body, taken command from the same Head, Jesus Christ. May his name be praised.
Right. And the idea that the Word of God means “Scripture alone” is an entirely unbiblical idea, especially in regard to the New Covenant. Cf. 2 Cor 3:3,6.
Getting back to reality, it is very simple, as many are aware: the Church is one, because we are the Body of Christ, not the “bodies of Christ.”. The local Church’s are perhaps somewhat like various regions of the same body, taken command from the same Head, Jesus Christ. May his name be praised.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Feel free to help me with that, Martin.
- Status