Where were the Protestants before the 1500's?

[benhur]

Yes, the Tradition that nothing trumps scripture. This does negate oral transmission.

Sorry, meant it does not negate the oral.

 

[MaryT777]

Aha! So Protestants are responsible for diets… I knew it!

 

[Nanotwerp]

Sorry, meant it does not negate the oral.

So why exactly are you a Protestant? What fault do you find in the Church that every other Christian church came from?

 

[benhur]

So why exactly are you a Protestant? What fault do you find in the Church that every other Christian church came from?

For one, your very statement here, that you definitely “are of Peter” (in the context that Paul used it). By the way, none of our churches are without fault, right ? And I could and have just as easily fall into quibbling that," I am of Paul".

 

[House_Harkonnen]

Good, you did not insult them this time.

Anyway, you have not answered the question…how could they disseminate those writings, and circulate them wide…with these going on…when you factor in not many could read or write, there was no paper as you know today, papyrus was expensive…and the Romans were running after the Christians and burning anything Christian the romans could find?

I have never insulted anyone on these forums, church father or anyone.

 

[House_Harkonnen]

So why exactly are you a Protestant? What fault do you find in the Church that every other Christian church came from?

I am a protestant because I believe it to be true.

 

[Jack007]

For one, your very statement here, that you definitely “are of Peter” (in the context that Paul used it). By the way, none of our churches are without fault, right ? And I could and have just as easily fall into quibbling that," I am of Paul".

10 Now I appeal to you, brothers and sisters,[d] by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you should be in agreement and that there should be no divisions among you, but that you should be united in the same mind and the same purpose. 11 For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there are quarrels among you, my brothers and sisters.[e] 12 What I mean is that each of you says, ‘I belong to Paul’, or ‘I belong to Apollos’, or ‘I belong to Cephas’, or ‘I belong to Christ.’ 13 Has Christ been divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

The CC did not split from anything in the name of peter. Other churches split from it as they had vested interests. And the catholic church is HOLY and has a glorious history.

 

[guanophore]

the point was that what was put to writing was to be authoritative, as if the apostles themselves orally gave it to us today.

Yes.

As to your point that not all important things were put to writing I of course disagree. That would make Paul wrong in suggesting the sufficiency of scripture to make us perfect unto every good work.

“All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” I Tim 3:`16

But Paul is suggesting no such thing. He is stating that Scripture is “profitable”. Profitable how? For teaching, ,training, the equipping of the saints. But to whom is this task given, in which the Scriptures are “profitable”?

"Therefore it is said,
“When he ascended on high he led a host of captives,
and he gave gifts to men.”…And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, 12** to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ**; Ephesians 4:7–14

You have been misled, benhur. Jesus never intended for His disciples to try to equip themselves for “every good work” by reading the bible alone. He provided a Church to accomplish this task.

Jesus gave gifts to persons so that in their hands, the Scripture would be profitable.

 

[guanophore]

Where was your church before the Reformation?.. "

The article goes on to say early church fathers used the same argument against heretics. It further states in a Catholic sense that this is a “new” thing.

Indeed…a different Gospel.

They also rebutted by saying the church is not defined by "heirarchy"

Representing a significant departure of what the Apostles believed and taught.

nor puts it’s trust in institutions

Shockingly, even one created by Christ.

and is invisible in the sense that it is also spiritual kingdom by those who visibly do righteously-

Also not entirely consistent with the Teaching of Christ, who established a visible, hierachical Church.

(apostolic is as apostolic does

Fortuately, this is also a lie, or all the Apostles would have disqualified themselves, abandoning Christ on the night before His sacrifice.

and God could operate in synods). (discussed at national synods, such as Gap in 1603.)

Certainly God can work whereever He wants. He chose to work through the Apostles, and after them, their successors, the Bishops. This was lost during the Reformation.

 

[zz912]

Sorry, but you tell me what this means , “That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.” ?

It means it is a necessary component that makes up a perfect man. Are you saying that a man of God does not need things like prayer, faith, humility, good work ethic, etc? Please tell me you are joking.

Again, you are changing the text. It actually says the Scripture is needed to be complete. You are changing it to say that ONLY Scripture is needed to be complete. You are twisting Scripture.

According to Paul how are we furnished, or what furnishes us per context of the text ?

Paul in this verse notes that the OT Scripture is necessary to be complete in the New Covenant. He is NOT saying it is the only thing. There are many other things a Christian needs that Paul discusses in other parts of his writings.

What is perfect ? Remember, Paul was trained, and studied scripture, and what others said of scripture, for the equipping of his Jewish ministry before Christ. Everything had to be rooted in the Law and their holy books, even their tradition. Paul’s admonition to Timothy, and even lay people for our ministries had no less of a foundation and does not negate a proper understanding of the temporary existence of oral tradition.

Please provide the chapter and verse when these oral traditions were written down.

 

[guanophore]

Sorry, but you tell me what this means , “That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.” ? According to Paul how are we furnished, or what furnishes us per context of the text ?

St. Paul details who does the furnishing (equipping the saints) in Eph, 4.

What is perfect ?

In this context, as in others, it means “complete”. Scripture is part of what we need to be fully equipped to serve God.

… and does not negate a proper understanding of the temporary existence of oral tradition.

It seems, benhur, that in addition to a deficient understanding of the Church, you have a deficient understanding of the Word of God. The Word of God has never been confined to the Scriptures, and the fact that it is not does not mean it is “temporary” in nature.

The Word of God has always been, and will continue to be till the end of the age, ,alive and well in the Church.

1 Peter 1:25 … but the word of the Lord endures forever.” And this is the word that was preached to you."

Your adherence to a myth that was created at the Reformation that the Word of God has a temporary existence (except for what is in your Bible) is a direct contradiction to what your Bible says.

0For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and return not thither but water the earth, making it bring forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater, 11 so shall my word be that goes forth from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and prosper in the thing for which I sent it.

Paul was not confined to the idea of a set canon, for the Jews always had “new” holy books as God so moved thru the ages, as that was continuing in NT. Another words, Paul was not ignorant of the possibility of future inspired writings besides from his pen.

So you are admitting that Paul was open to the Word of God that was not confined to the Scriptures? That is a very interesting double standard, one that came about during the Reformation,when the Reformers denied that the Word of God continues to be alive and well in the Church.

 

[PRmerger]

Sorry, but you tell me what this means , “That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.” ? According to Paul how are we furnished, or what furnishes us per context of the text ? What is perfect ? Remember, Paul was trained, and studied scripture, and what others said of scripture, for the equipping of his Jewish ministry before Christ. Everything had to be rooted in the Law and their holy books, even their tradition. Paul’s admonition to Timothy, and even lay people for our ministries had no less of a foundation and does not negate a proper understanding of the temporary existence of oral tradition. Paul was not confined to the idea of a set canon, for the Jews always had “new” holy books as God so moved thru the ages, as that was continuing in NT. Another words, Paul was not ignorant of the possibility of future inspired writings besides from his pen that would “profitable…that we may be perfect and thoroughly furnished” .

Let’s take a look at another verse in Scripture which states that something else makes us perfect–here, according to James, perseverance makes us “perfect and complete”.

“knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience. But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking nothing.”—James 1:3-4

I wouldn’t interpret that verse to mean that St. James is advocating a **Perseverance Alone **position. Would you?

 

[guanophore]

For one, your very statement here, that you definitely “are of Peter” (in the context that Paul used it). By the way, none of our churches are without fault, right ? And I could and have just as easily fall into quibbling that," I am of Paul".

No, benhur. Catholics consider all the Apostles to be in unity with one another. Therefore, to be in the boat with Peter is to be in the same boat with Paul.

31 “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, 32 but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren.” Luke 22:31–33

Satan wanted to scatter all the Apostles, but when Jesus prayed, he addressed Peter individually, then charged him with what we call the Petrine gifts. Peter (and his successors) are responsible for strengthening the brethren. This is why the successor of Peter is the visible sign of unity in Christ’s Church.

Jesus speaks to Peter in the singular here, so anyone who wants their faith not to fail needs to get into the prayer for Peter. That is why the Church is considered the “boat” of Peter. The boat that Peter is in has the promise from Jesus that his faith will not fail.

There was no disunity among the apostles. all were in unity together.

“But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the succession of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church [of Rome], because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition” (ibid., 3, 3, 2).

"The blessed apostles [Peter and Paul], having founded and built up the church [of Rome], they handed over the office of the episcopate to Linus. Irenaeus (Against Heresies, 3, 1:1 [A.D. 189])

And yes, the Holy Bride of Christ is pure and without fault. This cannot be otherwise, ,since Christ is her head, and the Holy Spirit is her soul. It is only the fallible persons contained in her that bear any fault.

The inability to see the divine elements of the incarnational church is another unfortunate outcome of the corruption at the time of the Reformation. The “church” was redefined by the reformers, so that now there is a grave misunderstanding that the church is “the body of believers on earth”, which defies the apostolic teaching.

 

[phil19034]

The latest NT book was writing around AD 100. What liturgy does your denomination use that was created before that?

Here are two Liturgies of the Mass/Divine Liturgy used by Catholics created by the 60s AD.

The Liturgy of the Blessed Apostles: catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=1877

and

The Divine Liturgy of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist Mark, the Disciple of the Holy Peter: catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=1876

You can also see these and other docs here:
catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/

(I’ve also attached screen shot as FYI)

God Bless.

 

[benhur]

The CC did not split from anything in the name of peter. Other churches split from it as they had vested interests. And the catholic church is HOLY and has a glorious history.

Correct and I never insinuated that division is from Peter or his name and thank you for the scripture I referenced. I do view denominationalism, including CC as one of them, can provide an opportunity to be in the flesh, or wrong attitude, as referenced by Paul in the scripture. Christian is Christian, be it Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant etc.

 

[benhur]

Let’s take a look at another verse in Scripture which states that something else makes us perfect–here, according to James, perseverance makes us “perfect and complete”.

“knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience. But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking nothing.”—James 1:3-4

I wouldn’t interpret that verse to mean that St. James is advocating a **Perseverance Alone **position. Would you?

It is not perseverance alone but in what ? faith in what ? hearing by what ?, the Word of God, Holy Writ being a sure thing.

 

[PRmerger]

It is not perseverance alone

Excellent.

So you need to be consistent and apply the same principle to “That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.”

It cannot mean Scripture Alone is what is necessary to make us perfect.

Consistency, ben. Consistency.

but in what ? faith in what ? hearing by what ?, the Word of God, Holy Writ being a sure thing.

Faith in Holy Writ alone sounds very much like Bibliolatry.

 

[zz912]

Correct and I never insinuated that division is from Peter or his name and thank you for the scripture I referenced. I do view denominationalism, including CC as one of them, can provide an opportunity to be in the flesh, or wrong attitude, as referenced by Paul in the scripture. Christian is Christian, be it Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant etc.

The Catholic Church is not a denomination. It is the ONE Church the Jesus built. There is no other Church.

 

[zz912]

It is not perseverance alone but in what ? faith in what ? hearing by what ?, the Word of God, Holy Writ being a sure thing.

1. Faith is in Christ, not the Bible. The Bible can’t save you.
2. Could you give some authoritative support for what books belong in the Holy Writ? Who exactly do you trust infallibly to declare to you which books belong in Holy Writ?

 

[PolycarpMeans]

It is not perseverance alone but in what ? faith in what ? hearing by what ?, the Word of God, Holy Writ being a sure thing.

Faith is not a state of mind (i.e. faith in something), it is a state of being, a state of action. We’ve got to get away from thinking of Faith, Hope, Love, etc… as abstract concepts. They are actions; in Luther’s German, and our closely related English we would say we have faith, as opposed to being in faith. That is what Luther failed to grasp, and what every Protestant “theologian” has failed to grasp ever since.

It is not having faith which imparts Grace to us. It is being in faith, which is a matter of deeds.

“Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.” Believed, verb, past tense, action; to put it more clearly a work.

"Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. - James 2:21-24 (In the reformers’ precious baby blanket, the Authorized King James Version)

And here even from Luther’s own hypocritical hand: “So sehet ihr nun, daß der Mensch durch die Werke gerecht wird, nicht durch den Glauben allein.” verse 24 again.

in English: “So see you all then, that Man (in the sense of Mankind) through the Works is justified (literally “may be made right”), not through the Faith alone.”

Luther had no way around this verse, and it made his addled mind so upset, that he actually removed the book of James altogether for a time, until other reformers, recognizing the predicament in which they be should they start deleting books from the New Testament canon as they had already resolved to do with the Deuterocanon, forced him to restore James, Hebrews, 2nd and 3rd John, and Revelation back into his version of the Bible.

This is hero of the reformation who is to be trusted in determining the practice of Christianity? This charlatan? And not the Holy Father at Rome?

This is the man whose interpretation of scripture is to be so believed as to dictate the right practice of faith and morals?

Sorry but that is madness.

In conclusion, with regard to the reformers; the following verse displays not only that they had no business interpreting scripture; but that the very premise of the reformation, that is, personal interpretation of the scriptures, is by its very nature contrary to scripture.

" We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." 2 Peter 1:19-20 (again the precious King Jamie translation)