What Iam in your eyes?

[historyfan81]

Its my native language and I would like that

 

[AlbMagno]

Acá tenes:

https://apologia21.com/2012/11/01/el-primado-de-pedro/comment-page-1/

Gracias a esta pagina volví al catolicismo.

 

[Niblo]

Well, in regards to the immaculate conception, the belief was already around as Muslims believe it

Small clarification: There is no notion of ‘original sin’ in Islam. Every conception, therefore, is ‘immaculate’.

Whoops…have just read more of your posts…I see we are agreed…no concept of ‘original sin’ in Islam!

 

[Niblo]

Much less that a human is in any regard sinless

Not quite. In Islam there are three categories of folk who cannot sin: children before the age of reason (generally defined as puperty); the mentally impaired (where it can be demonstrated that their action resulted from their impairment); and folk when they are asleep.
Plenty of scope for a sinless life in the first two categories!

 

[De_Maria]

Anyway I don’t want to figth just a debate I mean we can have that right ?

Who’s fighting? You are providing your ideas and I disagree. I’m also asking specific and pointed questions. Is that making you uncomfortable?

For example, you still haven’t answered the question of where Scripture says that it is the highest authority? Are you implying that you didn’t get your opinion from Scripture? If not, where did you get that opinion?

And since Scripture shows the Church as a higher authority, what does that do to your opinion? Do you set aside your highest authority and hold to your opinion?

 

[historyfan81]

ple, you still haven’t answered the question of where Scripture says that it is the highest authority? Are you implying that you didn’t get your opinion from Scripture? If not, where did you get that opinion?

well it seems like i said you seem to jump to close to conclusion which …is not a good sing but it could be a honest mistake. so iam going to assume the best and think that .

iam not unconfortable i had dealt with catholics who wanted to see and i quote " my exectution" so no , its just that its best to tell things straigth so we migth avoid possible future problems.

and on the other

old testament

The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

new testament

For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe.

Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other. 1 Corinthians 4:6

we also see that in the he New Testament writers constantly appealed to the scriptures as their base of authority in declaring what was and was not true biblical teaching: Matt. 21:42; John 2:22; 1 Cor. 15:3-4; 1 Peter 1:10-12; 2:2; 2 Peter 1:17-19, etc. Of course, Acts 17:11

ok so apart from these verses i also said the bible is the earliest confrimed source
therfore it is confirmed and the earliest is the most reliable.

does this negate tradition? NO tradition is still important .

and yes scripture does tellls us the church is a higher authority , but then i again i never said i didnt have authority i just argued ,that it maybe some of its traditions are wrong to say the least.or not fully correct.

from scripture.

churches can be wrong revelation is a book and jesus basicily scolds many churches of there wrong doings.(makes sense since people do make mistakes)

even church leaders including the apostoles did this

so acording to scrpiture (if we take this examples) the church is not infalible it doest have a higth authority but it can commit mistakes.

so if the bible shows that church leaders can commit mistakes
and revisioinism puts doudts to the “facts” of catholic the church

then one has both an ecclesiatical argument and a secular argument to be a skeptic some catholic traditions.

 

[De_Maria]

De_Maria:

ple, you still haven’t answered the question of where Scripture says that it is the highest authority? Are you implying that you didn’t get your opinion from Scripture? If not, where did you get that opinion?

…and on the other

old testament

The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.

The Word of God is also spoken, as is clearly stated in Scripture:

Hebrews 13:7 Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: …

Hebreos 13:7 Acordaos de vuestros pastores, que os hablaron la palabra de Dios; …

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Notice that this is about “speaking” the Word of God.

Isaías 8:20 Reina-Valera 1960 (RVR1960)
20 !!A la ley y al testimonio! Si no dijeren conforme a esto, es porque no les ha amanecido.

Not about reading it. It’s about tradition. The Jews were primarily guided by tradition.

new testament

For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe.

Again, the Word of God that you HEARD from us. This is not about Scripture. This is about Sacred Tradition. The Word of God, spoken.

1 Tesalonicenses 2:13 Por lo cual también nosotros sin cesar damos gracias a Dios, de que cuando recibisteis la palabra de Dios que oísteis de nosotros, la recibisteis no como palabra de hombres, sino según es en verdad, la palabra de Dios, la cual actúa en vosotros los creyentes.

Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other. 1 Corinthians 4:6

This is the only verse which is about “what is written”. But it doesn’t say what is written where. You assume in the entire Bible. But it already exceeds the Old Testament, since this is the New. And the New had not yet been canonized. So, this is clearly about not exceeding the instructions he is giving them in 1 Corinthians.

cont’d

 

[De_Maria]

cont’d

we also see that in the he New Testament writers constantly appealed to the scriptures as their base of authority in declaring what was and was not true biblical teaching: Matt. 21:42;

That’s not what this verse says:

Matthew 21:42Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?

This verse says that Jesus is explaining the Scriptures to the people. Thus, showing that He is the authority over the Scriptures. It’s the same as if a math teacher were to say, “haven’t you read that 2 + 2 = 4?”

John 2:22When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

Again, nothing here about the Scriptures being the highest authority. Just that they believe the Scriptures, as do we.

But here, in this verse, the Scriptures depict the Church as the highest authority:

Mateo 18:17 Si no los oyere a ellos, dilo a la iglesia; y si no oyere a la iglesia, tenle por gentil y publicano.

Matthew 18:17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

cont’d

 

[De_Maria]

cont’d

No, they didn’t. They appealed to the Word of God.

Yes, they did. In fact, Scripture tells you that it is the Church which will Teach the Wisdom of God even in eternity:

Efesios 3:10 para que la multiforme sabiduría de Dios sea ahora dada a conocer por medio de la iglesia a los principados y potestades en los lugares celestiales,

Ephesians 3:10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

Nothing close to that is ever said about Scripture.

ok so apart from these verses i also said the bible is the earliest confrimed source
therfore it is confirmed and the earliest is the most reliable.

Actually, the earliest confirmed source is Sacred Tradition. Jesus Christ established the Church FIRST. He then commanded the Church to pass on His Traditions.

does this negate tradition? NO tradition is still important .

Sacred Tradition is the basis of the New Testament.

and yes scripture does tellls us the church is a higher authority ,

Then why don’t you believe it?

but then i again i never said i didnt have authority i just argued ,that it maybe some of its traditions are wrong to say the least.or not fully correct.

So, you don’t hold Scripture as the highest authority. You hold your arguments as a higher authority.

Listen. You acknowledge that Scripture holds the Church as a higher authority. And Scripture acknowledges that it is without error. What does that tell you about the Church, then? If Scripture says the Church is a higher authority, then the Church must be without error, as well.

from scripture.

churches can be wrong revelation is a book and jesus basicily scolds many churches of there wrong doings.(makes sense since people do make mistakes)

No. That is St. John, and he is scolding his bishopricks. Those are his churches, which he established and which he rules by the grace of our Lord, Jesus.

Revelation 1:4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia:
Apocalipsis 1:4 Juan, a las siete iglesias que están en Asia

even church leaders including the apostoles did this

so acording to scrpiture (if we take this examples) the church is not infalible it doest have a higth authority but it can commit mistakes.

On the contrary, Scripture repeatedly tells us that the Church is infallible:

1 Timoteo 3:15 para que si tardo, sepas cómo debes conducirte en la casa de Dios, que es la iglesia del Dios viviente, columna y baluarte de la verdad.

And you admitted as much, yourself, when you admit that Scripture holds the Church as the higher authority.

 

[historyfan81]

yeah the word of god is spoken.

Notice that this is about “speaking” the Word of God.

"Isaías 8:20 Reina-Valera 1960 (RVR1960)
20 !!A la ley y al testimonio! Si no dijeren conforme a esto, es porque no les ha amanecido.

Not about reading it. It’s about tradition. The Jews were primarily guided by tradition."

notice how they say they dont speak acording to his word , and testemonoy no mention of tradition heck not even alluding it

i tried to read the hewbrew since maybe there is something about that but from the hewbrew words
לְתוֹרָ֖ה , וְלִתְעוּדָ֑ה and yeah nothing in the linguistical context alludes to it as well

there is no mention of tradition , and in historical context the jews did use traditions i mean this is why we got the talmud later on . but in this context yeah its not talking about tradition .

its talking about the law of moses.

 

[historyfan81]

oh i did say the church has higher authority and i do belive in it , i just belive its infalibale

lets look at timothy shall we?

first context

First Timothy 3:15 is the end of Paul’s description of proper conduct for church members, including leaders. He nowhere mentions a unique power of these leaders to make doctrinal or interpretive decisions. Nor does he declare members of the body incapable of making those interpretations themselves. In fact, in verse 14 Paul specifically says that his written words are what define proper conduct. Paul is assigning authority to the written Word. He does not say, “The church will tell you what this letter means.”

At the start of the epistle, Paul explicitly tells Timothy to oppose those who teach unsound doctrine (1 Timothy 1:3–7, 18–19). He does not tell Timothy to oppose those who disagree with “the church” or with church leaders. This echoes other statements of Paul that indicate that the content of a belief is what matters, not the person who proclaims it (2 Corinthians 11:14; Galatians 1:6–8). Paul refers to those proclaiming the gospel as stewards of the truth, not the source of it (1 Corinthians 4:1; 9:17). Elsewhere, Paul explicitly says there is only one “true” foundation for our faith, which is Christ (1 Corinthians 3:11), so what he says in 1 Timothy 3:15 must be taken in that context.

another things is greek

two Greek words, στῦλος stylos and ἑδραίωμα hedraioma , translated as “pillar” and “foundation.” Stylos means “pillar, column, prop, or support” and is found in the New Testament only here, in [Revelation 3:12 , and in [Revelation 10:Hedraioma means “prop or support” and is found only in this verse. Both words come from Greek root words that imply something that stiffens, stabilizes, steadies, or holds. These are completely different words than what are used for other occurrences of “foundation” in English Bibles.

(this why i support to use the original language when in doudt about something)

 

[historyfan81]

No. That is St. John, and he is scolding his bishopricks. Those are his churches, which he established and which he rules by the grace of our Lord, Jesus.

jesus is speaking in that part of the book not jonh , and he is judging the the curches of asia as whole not just their leaders

 

[De_Maria]

notice how they say they dont speak acording to his word , and testemonoy no mention of tradition heck not even alluding it

Where does it say, Scripture?

So, if there’s no mention of tradition, there is also no mention of scripture.

In fact, testimony is a synonym of tradition. Since tradition is handed on by testimony.

### I. Scripture, Tradition and traditions - Andrews University
https://www.andrews.edu › ~fortind › Scripture-Tradition-traditions

The first considered the subject of the relation of Tradition to Scripture, regarded as the written prophetic and apostolic testimony to God’s act in Christ, whose …

 

[De_Maria]

historyfan81:

Much less that a human is in any regard sinless

Not quite. In Islam there are three categories of folk who cannot sin: children before the age of reason (generally defined as puperty); the mentally impaired (where it can be demonstrated that their action resulted from their impairment); and folk when they are asleep.
Plenty of scope for a sinless life in the first two categories!

But children grow up and sleepers wake up. So, what’s your point?

 

[De_Maria]

oh i did say the church has higher authority and i do belive in it , i just belive its infalibale

lets look at timothy shall we?

Sure.

first context

First Timothy 3:15 is the end of Paul’s description of proper conduct for church members, including leaders. He nowhere mentions a unique power of these leaders to make doctrinal or interpretive decisions.

He doesn’t need to. Or if he does, show me the rule that says that he needs to go into every detail of power structures.

Nor does he declare members of the body incapable of making those interpretations themselves. In fact, in verse 14 Paul specifically says that his written words are what define proper conduct.

Where? Provide chapter and verse.
Also provide the verse which says that oral commands can be disregarded.

Paul is assigning authority to the written Word. He does not say, “The church will tell you what this letter means.”

But Jesus tells you that if you don’t obey the Church, you are to be treated as a heathen.
And St. Paul tells you that you are not to befriend those who do not follow the tradition handed on to you.

At the start of the epistle, Paul explicitly tells Timothy to oppose those who teach unsound doctrine ([1 Timothy 1:3–7]

More support for the authority of Sacred Tradition and the Church.

(1 Timothy 1:3–7 ESV - As I urged you when I… | Biblia), 18–19). He does not tell Timothy to oppose those who disagree with “the church” or with church leaders. This echoes other statements of Paul that indicate that the content of a belief is what matters, not the person who proclaims it (2 Corinthians 11:14; Galatians 1:6–8). Paul refers to those proclaiming the gospel as stewards of the truth, not the source of it (1 Corinthians 4:1; 9:17). Elsewhere, Paul explicitly says there is only one “true” foundation for our faith, which is Christ (1 Corinthians 3:11), so what he says in 1 Timothy 3:15 must be taken in that context.

You just argued against your position.

another things is greek

two Greek words, στῦλος stylos and ἑδραίωμα hedraioma , translated as “pillar” and “foundation.” Stylos means “pillar, column, prop, or support”…
(this why i support to use the original language when in doudt about something)

In doubt about what? The Greek supports the idea that the Church holds up the truth. Thus, the Church is infallible. It doesn’t say that the Church sometimes holds up the truth and sometimes doesn’t. If that is what you believe, you are adding that in. It is not there.

 

[historyfan81]

in refering to that passege of isiah there , its talking about the law of moses , and not tradition , to that passage at least

“testemony is sinonuimus with tradition”

no, at least not in the old testament era

example the word for testemony is תְּעוּדָ֑ה (tə·‘ū·ḏāh) its only used 3 times in the old testament

in both times issah uses it he never even aludes to tradition

now the word was another meaning and in ruth is used
as confirmation of a transaction of property
so to say testemony means tradition is a big generalization , maybe for 4th century chirstians it was

not for ancient jews

 

[De_Maria]

jesus is speaking in that part of the book not jonh , and he is judging the the curches of asia as whole not just their leaders

Revelation 1:4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia:

in refering to that passege of isiah there , its talking about the law of moses ,

Like everything else, the Law of Moses was first spoken and then written. And, even after it was written, it continued to be spoken.

and not tradition , to that passage at least

“testemony is sinonuimus with tradition”

no, at least not in the old testament era
Yes, moreso in the Old Testament era, since the Jews followed tradition primarily and scripture secondarily.

example the word for testemony is תְּעוּדָ֑ה (tə·‘ū·ḏāh) its only used 3 times in the old testament

Have you ever looked up the word testament and compared it to testimony?

 

[historyfan81]

“He doesn’t need to. Or if he does, show me the rule that says that he needs to go into every detail of power structures.”

he dosent need to like you said , but then again just saying it would make a difernce , but in this case its an argument of silence for both of us.

“You just argued against your position.”
no beacuse i never claimed the church has no authority i claimed that its not ifalible , please understand that the church does have authortity no one here is denying that.

like i said for the greek
: Hedraioma means “prop or support” and is found only in this verse. Both words come from Greek root words that imply something that stiffens, stabilizes, steadies, These are completely different words than what are used for other occurrences of “foundation” in English Bibles.

since the modern undestanding of foundation is :an underlying basis or principle.

so
an underlying basis or principle.“≠” support , or stabilization

" Law of Moses was first spoken and then written. "

by whom? yeah GOD , so the torah was spoken by god

“Have you ever looked up the word testament and compared it to testimony?”

i dont think old hewbrews spoke english from what i know there is no word for testament in the tenakh

also testament is : something that serves as a sign or evidence of a specified fact, or event,

a testemony is : a formal written or spoken statement,

i still dont get the piont so i would like you to clarify this please

 

[De_Maria]

he dosent need to like you said , but then again just saying it would make a difernce ,

Of course, if he said everything you want him to say, it would make a difference.
And if he said everything I want him to say, it would make a different difference.

We live with what he said and don’t make up doctrines according to that which we wish he had said, but didn’t.

but in this case its an argument of silence for both of us.

No. It’s an argument of silence, for you. We don’t go by Scripture alone. Which you obviously do, regardless of your protesting that you don’t.

“You just argued against your position.”
no beacuse i never claimed the church has no authority i claimed that its not ifalible , please understand that the church does have authortity no one here is denying that.

Then you’re mixing your arguments with authority and error. Where does Scripture say that the Church Teaches error? Provide the verse.

like i said for the greek
: Hedraioma means “prop or support” and is found only in this verse. Both words come from Greek root words that imply something that stiffens, stabilizes, steadies, These are completely different words than what are used for other occurrences of “foundation” in English Bibles.

What is the Church Hedraioma in this verse?

HEDRAIOMA of the TRUTH

since the modern undestanding of foundation is :an underlying basis or principle.

so
an underlying basis or principle.“≠” support , or stabilization

Correct. Supporting the Truth.

" Law of Moses was first spoken and then written. "

by whom? yeah GOD spoken by god

Thank you.

“Have you ever looked up the word testament and compared it to testimony?”

i dont think old hewbrews spoke english from what i know there is no word for testament in the tenakh

Lol! What do the Old Hebrews have to do with this. It is Christian who call it the Old Testament. Why did Christians call this the Old Testament? Were they wrong in doing so?

 

[historyfan81]

Yes, moreso in the Old Testament era, since the Jews followed tradition primarily and scripture secondarily.

the basis of all their lives was the torah and the laws which it contained .

to say that the jews followed tradition first and scrptirure second is a very false statement (well depending on the era second temple judaisim did do that)

tradition did play a role yes but like i said the basis of everyhting was the torah