C
- Status
C
Charles_R
Guest
Yes. What we need to realise is that Christ instituted a teaching church, a church with teaching authority. Christ did not command that his words be written down and studied; what he did was to present his life (and his teachings) for his disciples to follow. When teachings are written down it is not possible to foresee the many ways how these might be interpreted or reinterpreted by all and sundry. (Unless of course we make the text so explicit that it takes the form of a legal document). The Scribes and Pharisees, for example, paid more attention to the letter of the Jewish law and not the spirit. This is why the Father sends the Holy Spirit or Advocate – to guide his Church for all time.Clearly, you are reading a different Scripture:
Matthew 16:
18: And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19: And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
The Catholic Church—from Pentecost to today—accept no substitutes!
Also as the gospels admit, not everything Christ said or did has been written down. We need to need to refer what was taught and practiced in the early Church precisely because there is more to Christianity than just the gospels.
T
Teflon93
Guest
Thanks, but I’ll have to steer you toward Church Militant, Mikeledes, Philthy, clmowry, Br. Rich SFO, Pax, tgdesq, and others on the Apologetics Forum, not to mention CAF’s in-house apologists—they are my superiors in every fashion.
Not hardly—I was fortunate enough to get an engineering degree from the Air Force Academy and my professional career involves a lot of statistical analysis.
For anyone interested in argumentation, this college-level treatment of it from The Teaching Company is top-notch:
teach12.com/ttcx/CourseDescLong2.aspx?cid=4294
T
Teflon93
Guest
Amen, brother!
One of the more hopeful developments on an ecumenical front has been the “new monastics” movement as evangelicals discover this very fact.
It’s got a long way to go, but I suspect the “new” will eventually be dropped.
S
Soutane
Guest
For the first 300 years of Catholicism(Christianity)the Bible had not yet been compiled,nor approved by the Holy Catholic Church.Up until that time the Faith was taught and dogmas developed solely through Holy Tradition under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
The Church was not formed by Holy Scripture,Holy Scripture was formed by the Church.Holy Tradition is the equal to Holy Scripture as both came from the Church that Christ founded.And as Paul in the gospel indicates we are to do as follows,"So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us."2 Thessalonians 2:15.
The Immaculate Conception and Assumption were all contained in Holy Tradition.Holy Tradition and Holy Scripture are ultimately confusing and interpreted in error without the Magisterium of the Catholic Church,which the Holy Spirit protects against error.
There is nothing in Holy Tradition which contradicts or is in conflict with Holy Scripture.We follow the True Original Gospel.
ALL OF IT.
Holy Tradition And all 72 books of Holy Scripture(not the abridged and truncated version that appeared 500 years ago and approved by mere men.)
A
Arandur
Guest
I love the Teaching Company! Most of their courses can be found in local libraries.
Their treatments of history are pretty darn good, and a real eye-opener for most people unfortunately suffering under the propagandist history most of us have been taught, particularly as pertains to the Catholic Church and such subjects as the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Reformation, and the times of the Roman Empire.
Their treatments of history are pretty darn good, and a real eye-opener for most people unfortunately suffering under the propagandist history most of us have been taught, particularly as pertains to the Catholic Church and such subjects as the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Reformation, and the times of the Roman Empire.
S
Soutane
Guest
“The fact that the Church Christ founded continues unabated to this day; indeed, is far larger than all of Protestantism, is rather dispositive, don’t you think?”
Teflon in the interest of expanding my vocabulary could you please explain the word “dispositive”.I have checked an online dictionary to no avail.
Teflon in the interest of expanding my vocabulary could you please explain the word “dispositive”.I have checked an online dictionary to no avail.
T
Teflon93
Guest
Amen!
I urge caution on their religion courses, though—Bart Ehrman and the other “debunkers” are waaaay overrepresented. I learned this the hard way with Ehrman’s alleged “Historical Jesus” course, which was nothing of the sort. Look at the course content and bios of the lecturers on the religion courses closely or you might waste some hard-earned cash.
T
Teflon93
Guest
I’m sorry—hanging out too much with lawyers lately.“The fact that the Church Christ founded continues unabated to this day; indeed, is far larger than all of Protestantism, is rather dispositive, don’t you think?”
Teflon in the interest of expanding my vocabulary could you please explain the word “dispositive”.I have checked an online dictionary to no avail.
From dictionary.com
S
SemperReformada
Guest
The old 2Thess2:15 gambit.
Okay, please catalog what tradtions Paul was speaking of and tell me how you know this. I bet you, nor anyone else can do this, so why should I accept your prooftext? You have no way of knowing what Paul meant by “tradition” in that text.
The assumption didn’t even show up on the scene until centuries after the apostles. Didn’t the belief first make it’s way onto the scene via a heretical work?
T
Teflon93
Guest
So you believe the ECFs had NOTHING to say about this passage, then?
T
Teflon93
Guest
Bump, for reasons which will become clear shortly.
S
SemperReformada
Guest
You are kidding right?Clearly, you are reading a different Scripture:
Matthew 16:
18: And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19: And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
And since our Protestant brethren can always use a good dose of explicit argument, I’ll present mine in easy-to-follow format:
The fact that the Church Christ founded continues unabated to this day; indeed, is far larger than all of Protestantism, is rather dispositive, don’t you think?
- Christ founded the Church ~ 33 A.D.
- Christ gave binding and loosing authority to the apostles.
- Christ promised that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church.
- Protestantism was not founded until 1520 A.D, some 1,500 years AFTER Christ founded the Church.
- For Protestantism to be true, the gates of hell had to have prevailed against the Church.
- If the gates of hell prevailed against the Church, Christ had to be a liar.
- Lying is a sin.
- Christ never sinned.
- Therefore, Christ didn’t lie.
- Therefore, Protestantism is untrue.
The Catholic Church—from Pentecost to today—accept no substitutes!
If you are, it’s pretty funny
…if you aren’t then it’s just sad 
It’s amazing to me how Catholics can take a few verses out of Matt 16 and jump to so many conclusions.
Nothing in the so called Peterine verses quoted above should cause one to leap, and a big leap it is, to the conclusion that Peter was ever a pope. In fact, I don’t think most fathers ever thought Peter was the rock in Matthew 16, but even if he was, it’s still a very long leap to go from that to what modern Catholicism has done w/ the papacy. Isn’t it true that most fathers saw either Jesus as the rock or Peter’s confession?
You have made a bunch of statements without clarifying what your key terms mean.
What does the gates of hell prevailing against the church mean? I asked this before and you may have answered it but this is the first post of yours I have seen tonight.
Also, you didn’t define church, what does church mean?
The binding and loosing were given to the apostles but you haven’t even come close to establishing that was passed on in succession to the bishops or the pope.
All you have done is make statements, which apparently impresses some folks on the forum. I guess any defense of mother church is good
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
i hope some day you get it. so far you seem very lost. you must see that the CC is the One who knows. she was taught by the Apostles. i know you cannot understand this. because you only see the Bible and because of that you cannot understand who the Church is.
12 Therefore I intend always to remind you of these things, though you know them and are established in the truth that you have. 13 I think it right, as long as I am in this body, to arouse you by way of reminder, 14 since I know that the putting off of my body will be soon, as our Lord Jesus Christ showed me. 15 And I will see to it that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things.
S
SemperReformada
Guest
I hope you someday get it too.
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
12 Therefore I intend always to remind you of these things, though you know them and are established in the truth that you have. 13 I think it right, as long as I am in this body, to arouse you by way of reminder, 14 since I know that the putting off of my body will be soon, as our Lord Jesus Christ showed me. 15 And I will see to it that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things.You are kidding right?
If you are, it’s pretty funny
It’s amazing to me how Catholics can take a few verses out of Matt 16 and jump to so many conclusions.
Nothing in the so called Peterine verses quoted above should cause one to leap, and a big leap it is, to the conclusion that Peter was ever a pope. In fact, I don’t think most fathers ever thought Peter was the rock in Matthew 16, but even if he was, it’s still a very long leap to go from that to what modern Catholicism has done w/ the papacy. Isn’t it true that most fathers saw either Jesus as the rock or Peter’s confession?
You have made a bunch of statements without clarifying what your key terms mean.
What does the gates of hell prevailing against the church mean? I asked this before and you may have answered it but this is the first post of yours I have seen tonight.
Also, you didn’t define church, what does church mean?
The binding and loosing were given to the apostles but you haven’t even come close to establishing that was passed on in succession to the bishops or the pope.
All you have done is make statements, which apparently impresses some folks on the forum. I guess any defense of mother church is good
S
SemperReformada
Guest
I believe your church has never, ever defined a word spoken by Jesus or the apostles outside of that which we find in the scriptures.
Now, please catalog for me what Paul meant by traditions in 2Thess 2:15? I want to know what your church says about this.
I am waiting.
S
SemperReformada
Guest
If you want to ask me something about the Trinity, just ask.
I haven’t seen a post of yours mentioning anything about the Trinity so please don’t keep us all in suspense…let us know what’s on your mind.
I can only imagine that it’s the old Catholic belief that you can’t define the Trinity w/out tradition but you might surprise me.
T
Teflon93
Guest
The ECFs on 2 Thessalonians 2:15:
Basil the Great:
In answer to the objection that the doxology in the form “with the spirit” has no written authority, we maintain that if there is no other instance of that which is unwritten, then this must not be received. But if the greater number of our mysteries are admittedinto our constitution without written authority, then, in company with the many others, let us receive this one. For I hold it apostolic to abide also by the unwritten traditions. “I praise you,” it is said, “that you remember me in all things and keep the ordinances as I delivered them to you,” and “Hold fast the traditions by which you have been taught whether by word or by our epistle.” (On the Spirit 29.71)
Chrysostom:
Paul did not instruct Timothy in his duty through letters alone, but also through the spoken word. He shows this, both in many other passages, as where he says, “whether by word our our epistle,” and especially here. Let us not, therefore, suppose that Paul spoke anything imperfectly that was related to doctrine. For he delivered many things to Timothy without writing. He reminds him of this when he says, “Hold fast the form of sound words, which you have heard from me.” After the manner of artists, I have impressed on you the image of virtue, fixing in your soul a sort of rule, model, and outline of all things pleasing to God. Therefore, cling to these things, and whether you are meditating on any matter of faith or love, or of a sound mind, form your ideas from what I have taught you. It will not be necessary to consult others for examples, when all has been deposited within yourself. (Homilies on Second Timothy 3.1)
Basil the Great:
In answer to the objection that the doxology in the form “with the spirit” has no written authority, we maintain that if there is no other instance of that which is unwritten, then this must not be received. But if the greater number of our mysteries are admittedinto our constitution without written authority, then, in company with the many others, let us receive this one. For I hold it apostolic to abide also by the unwritten traditions. “I praise you,” it is said, “that you remember me in all things and keep the ordinances as I delivered them to you,” and “Hold fast the traditions by which you have been taught whether by word or by our epistle.” (On the Spirit 29.71)
Chrysostom:
Paul did not instruct Timothy in his duty through letters alone, but also through the spoken word. He shows this, both in many other passages, as where he says, “whether by word our our epistle,” and especially here. Let us not, therefore, suppose that Paul spoke anything imperfectly that was related to doctrine. For he delivered many things to Timothy without writing. He reminds him of this when he says, “Hold fast the form of sound words, which you have heard from me.” After the manner of artists, I have impressed on you the image of virtue, fixing in your soul a sort of rule, model, and outline of all things pleasing to God. Therefore, cling to these things, and whether you are meditating on any matter of faith or love, or of a sound mind, form your ideas from what I have taught you. It will not be necessary to consult others for examples, when all has been deposited within yourself. (Homilies on Second Timothy 3.1)
T
Teflon93
Guest
Bump again.
- Status