Why would the Catholic Church put together a Book that disproves thier own doctrine?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JustaServant
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JonNC said:
And other protestants don’t speak for Lutherans.

Thanks, Edwin

Jon
Click to expand...
The point that seems to be being missed is I said in the OP:
Asked this question today to a fundamentalist up in the apologetics playground. He is trying to disprove a Catholic teaching by using the “neutral source” of the Bible.
Click to expand...
Not all Protestants are fundamentaliststs. That is why I worded it the way I did.
 
JustaServant said:
The point that seems to be being missed is I said in the OP:

Not all Protestants are fundamentaliststs. That is why I worded it the way I did.
Click to expand...
Admirably. But as often happens, the thread swerved away from the OP:p
 
JonNC said:
Sola scriptura merely says these things are not equal to scripture, when it comes to doctrine. That’s all!
Jon
Click to expand...
Where does Scripture say that the Church and Tradition are not equal to Scripture? And where does Scripture say that Scripture is the final arbiter of doctrine?
 
zz912 said:
Where does Scripture say that the Church and Tradition are not equal to Scripture? And where does Scripture say that Scripture is the final arbiter of doctrine?
Click to expand...
Where does it say that scripture and tradition are equal? And why does it matter?

Jon
 
JonNC said:
Where does it say that scripture and tradition are equal? And why does it matter?

Jon
Click to expand...
Why does it matter?? Well if there is something that holds equal authority to Scripture, then we ought to listen to it with just as much fervor as Scripture, and let it help interpret Scripture.

*2 Thes 2:15 Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.

1 Cor 11:2 I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you.*
 
JustaServant said:
Asked this question today to a fundamentalist up in the apologetics playground. He is trying to disprove a Catholic teaching by using the “neutral source” of the Bible.
I thought I would ask both Catholics and non-Catholics this simple quesion.
It begins with the premise of course that the Catholic Church put together the Bible we have.
Why would the Catholic Church put together a Book that disproves thier own doctrine?
Click to expand...
A thought : the ancient Jews put together and passed down the books of the Tanakh (the OT for Christians), yet they do not identify Christ with the Messiah, the Son of Man, etc. as described in OT prophecy. Christians believe the OT supports their doctrine and that non -Christian Jewish interpretation, where it does not admit Christ, is incomplete or incorrect.

Might Protestants be treating Catholics the same way, acknowledging that Catholics put together and passed down the Bible but also thinking that at some time most fell into spiritual darkness and could not see the true meaning of the Scriptures (save a few saved by grace, by faith alone)?
 
zz912 said:
Why does it matter?? Well if there is something that holds equal authority to Scripture, then we ought to listen to it with just as much fervor as Scripture, and let it help interpret Scripture.

*2 Thes 2:15 Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.

1 Cor 11:2 I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you.*
Click to expand...
We ought to listen to Tradition even if it is not equal to scripture, because so much of what we undestand about scripture comes via Tradition, the Fathers, etc. And it is important to hold fast to Traditions.

But my question is really why does it matter if scripture explicitly doesn’t say to hold scripture as the norming norm. We know and agree that scripture is the word of God. Using that word of God as the norming norm for determining doctrine, holding teachings accountable seems to me a good thing, keeping in mind what I just said about Tradition.

Jon
 
Madaglan said:
A thought : the ancient Jews put together and passed down the books of the Tanakh (the OT for Christians), yet they do not identify Christ with the Messiah, the Son of Man, etc. as described in OT prophecy. Christians believe the OT supports their doctrine and that non -Christian Jewish interpretation, where it does not admit Christ, is incomplete or incorrect.

Might Protestants be treating Catholics the same way, acknowledging that Catholics put together and passed down the Bible but also thinking that at some time most fell into spiritual darkness and could not see the true meaning of the Scriptures (save a few saved by grace, by faith alone)?
Click to expand...
I guess some might say that, but I don’t think that at some time the CC fell into “spiritual darkness”. Some errors, yes, but not spiritual darkness.

But you make a good point, recognizing the role of the OHCAC in the compilation of what we now acknowledge as scripture doesn’t compromise our beliefs regarding it.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
But you make a good point, recognizing the role of the OHCAC in the compilation of what we now acknowledge as scripture doesn’t compromise our beliefs regarding it.

Jon
Click to expand...
no it makes it totaly ridiculous
 
saveusfromhell said:
no it makes it totaly ridiculous
I didn’t say you stole the money, it’s a simple statement and in 1500 years you would imagine that someone reading it would not have much problem understanding it, unless words change their meaning like brother, supernatural, gay have done.

Unfortunately there are 6 different meanings even now to that statement and the only way to know is to talk to someone who heard them or Tradition capital T as Catholics know it.
the jews use the 3 legged stool approach to understanding, as catholics do. luther sits on a one legged stool

**I **didn’t say you stole the money
I didn’t say you stole the money
I didn’t say you stole the money
I didn’t say you stole the money
I didn’t say you stole the money
I didn’t say you stole the money
stressing the highlighted word alters the meaning, is it plausible God would have left us open to such pitfalls? I think, although not sure, it was St Augustine said it can take up to 300 years to know the fruits of something. 40000, denominations from Luther speaks of the fruits of his labours,
Click to expand...
 
zz912 said:
Why does it matter?? Well if there is something that holds equal authority to Scripture, then we ought to listen to it with just as much fervor as Scripture, and let it help interpret Scripture.

*2 Thes 2:15 Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.

1 Cor 11:2 I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you.*
Click to expand...
What are those traditions St. Paul talked about brother? It would help the discussion greatly.

Thanks.
 
To all my Protestant Brothers and Sisters.Scott Hahn,Was once a Protestant minister .He hated Catholic. Said that they were not even Christians. That the Pope was the antichrist.
Well ,the Holy Spirit came to him,And he became a Catholic.Go to
secure.catholicity.com/ and get a free CD on The Conversion of Scott Hahn.and listen to what he has to say.What do you have to loss?
God be with you all.
 
=saveusfromhell;9487055]
Click to expand...
I didn’t say you stole the money, it’s a simple statement and in 1500 years you would imagine that someone reading it would not have much problem understanding it, unless words change their meaning like brother, supernatural, gay have done.
Click to expand...
Are you making a point here for Tradition or development?
Unfortunately there are 6 different meanings even now to that statement and the only way to know is to talk to someone who heard them or Tradition capital T as Catholics know it.
the jews use the 3 legged stool approach to understanding, as catholics do. luther sits on a one legged stool
Click to expand...
And did you read what I’ve said in this thread about Tradition?
We ought to listen to Tradition even if it is not equal to scripture, because so much of what we undestand about scripture comes via Tradition, the Fathers, etc. And it is important to hold fast to Traditions.
Click to expand...
Is it plausible God would have left us open to such pitfalls?
Click to expand...
I think it highly plausible that our human sin gets in the way of our understanding. The fact is that even those who claim that scripture and Tradition are equal sources of truth regarding the faith fail to agree - since at least 1054.
I think, although not sure, it was St Augustine said it can take up to 300 years to know the fruits of something. 40000, denominations from Luther speaks of the fruits of his labours,
Click to expand...
40,000 denomintations from Luther is simply ludicrous. Very few western non-catholic communions have the roots in Lutheranism. All of them, however, to one degree or another, be it directly or indirectly, have their roots in the CC.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
Just a thought, here. Just because Justice Ginsberg is an American, and a Supreme Court justice at that, doesn’t mean she has the correct interpretation of the Constitution.

Further, the Bible was compiled by the **undivided **Church. So, which part of the now divided Church has the right interpreation?

Jon
Click to expand...
The easy answer is the one guided by the infallible Holy Spirit. The Church is the pillar and foundation of the infallible truth.
Hope that helps
Peace
David
 
David said:
The easy answer is the one guided by the infallible Holy Spirit. The Church is the pillar and foundation of the infallible truth.
Hope that helps
Peace
David
Click to expand...
Right, David, but which one? there is so much in Orthodoxy I find appealing, and other things in the CC I find appealing. But the fact is there is a number of disagreements: Purgatory, Filioque, universal jurisdiction, to name but a few.

Jon
 
Jharek,
I agree. If I constantly used that source to claim that there are really 248 (or whatever the number) Catholic Churches, it would seem ludicrous, as well.

I can’t answer for the teachings of other communions, anymore than the CC can for Old Catholics. The real issue is doctrine, and the fact is that Catholics and Lutherans share a vast number of doctrine. Wish we shared more, and I pray the Spirit will fix that.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
Right, David, but which one? there is so much in Orthodoxy I find appealing, and other things in the CC I find appealing. But the fact is there is a number of disagreements: Purgatory, Filioque, universal jurisdiction, to name but a few.

Jon
Click to expand...
🤷 Only the RCC still has the same teachings that existed 2000+ years ago.That fact is in line with what Jesus promised us when he spoke to Peter. “Gates of hell shall not prevail against it”, yadda yadda. Proof’s in the pudding.

As to your disagreements, there are of course a metric ton of threads and resources here on those, which I’m sure you’ve perused (or intend to). The things which you disagree with were practiced by the earliest leaders of the Church, and neither Jesus nor his Apostles later ever stopped anyone from practicing them. Given that Jesus was obviously ok with changing and correcting what needed to be changed, things like Purgatory and the like cause me no trouble at all…what’s good enough for Jesus is good enough for me.
 
…in fact, the more I think about it, the better it seems that there are some things that people might disagree with. It parallels growing up: As we grow from children into adults, there are things we learn and do that we don’t initially agree with, but we do because we know that our parents know better (or we learn the hard way that they do, depending on how much horomone-driven angst one possessed as a teenager!).

The same with the RCC…one has to submit to authority if one is to be guided into a deeper and more mature faith. Many question that authority, but if one is really going to seek after the Truth, there are going to be places in which it is found easily, and places in which there is effort and hardship to find it. Part of this effort, for many people, is cultivating the faith required to trust Jesus’ words and ability to do what he said he would do for all of us.

Jesus knew this better than anyone, trusting his Father even unto death on a cross. Just my two cents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top