Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
do you have actual scripture to support your doctrine?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjGuru
Do you have a scripture that states Judas was damned?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjGuru
Do you have a scripture to support this?
Everything that is included in the Bible was included because the Catholic Church said it belongs there. The Bible is the Catholic Church's book that it has made available to the world.
It was compiled, preserved, and promulgated by the Catholic Church.
Scripture must be read within the framework of Catholic Tradition and dogma. The Church came first.
We are not a proof-texting religion. You can take a few verses here and there and build any doctrine you want around them. That's not how Christianity works. Scripture must be understood in the light of Tradition.
Church at Corinth: Abuse of the common meal, sexual immorality, and claims of spiritual superiority over one another were just a few of the many issues of the Church at Corinth. Other issues included bringing lawsuits against one another in public.
And these problems were corrected by Tradition? Or were they corrected by Paul's letters, what later became known as scripture?
Church at Corinth: Abuse of the common meal, sexual immorality, and claims of spiritual superiority over one another were just a few of the many issues of the Church at Corinth. Other issues included bringing lawsuits against one another in public.
And these problems were corrected by Tradition? Or were they corrected by Paul's letters, what later became known as scripture?
Both. Paul's letters are part of the Tradition of the Church.
Everything that is included in the Bible was included because the Catholic Church said it belongs there. The Bible is the Catholic Church's book that it has made available to the world.
It was compiled, preserved, and promulgated by the Catholic Church.
Scripture must be read within the framework of Catholic Tradition and dogma. The Church came first.
We are not a proof-texting religion. You can take a few verses here and there and build any doctrine you want around them. That's not how Christianity works. Scripture must be understood in the light of Tradition.
So scripture is not your Anchor of truth you church traditions hold that spot. I then find it ironic that you found fault with Michael Way for doing the same thing with what he believes science teaches over the scriptures.
Do you even realize that what you are doing is giving others authority over what you think, telling this is truth and this is not. Do you really believe we need others to tell us what to believe, did the Holy Spirit somehow fail to come and lead us into all truth. Why be double minded? Scripture says one thing, your church says another and you simply refuse the mind of Christ for the mind of man.
Sorry if I seem harsh but i keep seeing this same scenario played out over and over and not just by you.
You no longer believe the scriptures because you have given your church authority over the scriptures
Others no longer believe the scripture because they have given science authority over the scriptures
And more and more are now given ANE paganism authority over the scriptures.
Tis no wonder people have stopped believing in the scriptures and turned to atheism.
Everything that is included in the Bible was included because the Catholic Church said it belongs there. The Bible is the Catholic Church's book that it has made available to the world.
It was compiled, preserved, and promulgated by the Catholic Church.
Scripture must be read within the framework of Catholic Tradition and dogma. The Church came first.
We are not a proof-texting religion. You can take a few verses here and there and build any doctrine you want around them. That's not how Christianity works. Scripture must be understood in the light of Tradition.
Not so mike, the OT was in place as scripture a long time before the RCC said it was scripture and took it and put it in their own bible.
So scripture is not your Anchor of truth you church traditions hold that spot.
I affirm 1 Timothy 3:15. The Church is the pillar of truth. That is not to say that Scripture isn't true; of course it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma
I then find it ironic that you found fault with Michael Way for doing the same thing with what he believes science teaches over the scriptures.
"Science" is not divinely authoritative. Scripture and Tradition are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma
Do you even realize that what you are doing is giving others authority over what you think, telling this is truth and this is not. Do you really believe we need others to tell us what to believe,
Yes. The Catholic Church was explicitly founded by Christ Himself for the purpose of leading men to all Truth and finally to salvation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma
did the Holy Spirit somehow fail to come and lead us into all truth.
Not at all. The Holy Spirit works through the Church to lead us into all truth. If you want to follow the Holy Spirit, then you must follow the Church.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma
Why be double minded? Scripture says one thing, your church says another and you simply refuse the mind of Christ for the mind of man.
This is simply not true. The Scriptures are ours and they are authoritative. Certain Scriptures can *seem* to contradict one another, so they must be interpreted in the light of Tradition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma
Sorry if I seem harsh but i keep seeing this same scenario played out over and over and not just by you.
You no longer believe the scriptures because you have given your church authority over the scriptures
This is a false accusation. I do believe the Scriptures. I just don't *interpret* them the way you do.
Not so mike, the OT was in place as scripture a long time before the RCC said it was scripture and took it and put it in their own bible.
This has nothing to do with my point. All of the books of the New Testament had also been written for hundreds of years before they were canonized into Scripture at the end of the 4th century.
Everything that is included in the Bible was included because the Catholic Church said it belongs there. The Bible is the Catholic Church's book that it has made available to the world.
It was compiled, preserved, and promulgated by the Catholic Church.
Scripture must be read within the framework of Catholic Tradition and dogma. The Church came first.
We are not a proof-texting religion. You can take a few verses here and there and build any doctrine you want around them. That's not how Christianity works. Scripture must be understood in the light of Tradition.
Tradition has been used to abuse the word of God for thousands of years, predating the RCC's existence. It was even abused in Jesus' day by those who were entrusted with preserving the oracles of God (Rom 3:2). A few examples of such abuse are found here:
Mat 15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
Mat 15:6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
Mar 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.
What I find of interest is that Jesus called Jewish tradition "your tradition". Christ would not identify with it, at least not the ones He repudiated, even though Jesus Himself was a Jew, raised in the Jewish Synagogue.
I'm not necessarily Sola-Scriptura as the Protestant church is, because the concept of "tradition" is found in scripture. The Greek term "παράδοσις", translated as "tradition" or "ordinance" in the KJV, is found 11 times or so in the Greek NT.
When the term is employed by Paul, it's used in the sense of orally being taught what had been previously written down on parchment. The term "παράδοσις" carries with it the meaning of "delivery". It's not only about what is being said, but how it's being delivered. Obviously, there were no printing presses in Paul's day, and good scribes were hard to come by, so virtually everything that circulated among congregations was "oral" rather than transcribed from original source material and hand delivered to it's congregants.
When I was a student in school, I remember an experiment where the person sitting farthest back in class would read to the student sitting in front of them a very short single paragraph story. That student would then tell the story to the person sitting in front of them, etc. After the short story made it's way to the front of the class it was then written on the black board for the class to read. The original story had became indecipherable. Much like what tradition can do to scripture.
Tradition, from my perspective, is simply the word of God being delivered orally to a congregation, rather than being read from parchment (Gk "μεμβράνα"). Whether delivered orally (tradition) or by letter (parchment), the two must always agree. And it's not a matter of interpretation. They must agree "verbatim". If you don't have written scripture (parchment) to support what you say orally (tradition), then oral tradition can make the word of God "of none effect".
If you don't have written scripture (parchment) to support what you say orally (tradition), then oral tradition can make the word of God "of none effect".
Surely you are familiar with the Scriptural defenses for the doctrine of eternal hell.
They've been re-hashed so many times in this thread. You want to re-hash them again?
Frankly, I find that exercise tedious and uninteresting. It will just amount to the same thing pneuma and I have been doing - us explaining to each other why a particular Scripture doesn't mean what the other poster thinks it means.
It is only illustrative of the fact that we need an Authority other than Scripture alone. Scripture alone simply does not work, because there are nearly as many possible interpretations for any given Scripture as there are human beings.
Yes. The Catholic Church was explicitly founded by Christ Himself for the purpose of leading men to all Truth and finally to salvation.
Are you using the term "Catholic" in the sense of being the "universal" church, the body of Christ in general, or specifically as being the RCC, as opposed to the Eastern Orthodox and Protestant churches, for example?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
