Did Christ at the cross end all the laws?

[LoveGodsWord]

Here in Romans 2, Paul says the Gentile who does not have the law still can follow it, at least in a sense:

For when Gentiles who do not have the Law instinctively perform the requirements of the Law, these, though not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience testifying and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them

This text shows that we need not look to a written list of commandments to "know God". So while, obviously, we all agree that "thou shalt not commit murder", this text from Paul demonstrates that we can acquire this knowledge without having access to the Law.

But even more damaging to your position is Romans 7:6

But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

Once more, I believe that in order to preserve your position, you are forced to change "serve in the oldness of the letter" to "be judged by the oldness of the letter".

That is a road I, for one, am not willing to go down.

Your claims here were address some time ago through the scriptures. This is only a repetition of what you stated earlier and an interpretation that is not supported in the scripture contexts your disregarding as shown earlier. I am still waiting for you to address my post to you on what you are saying here. As posted earlier, Paul does not contradict himself as Gods' Word does not contradict itself. You may want to consider the scripture context again but let me show why if it might be helpful.

Romans 2:1-16 is talking about God not being a respecter of persons and is contrasting Jews with Gentiles showing that God will render every man according to His deeds. The immediate context to Romans 2:14-15 that you quoted is in Romans 2:12-13 that says "For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified." Did you catch that?

Sin is defined in the scriptures as the transgression of God's law *1 John 3:4 or breaking anyone of Gods 10 commandments (James 2:10-11) or not believing Gods' Word (Romans 14:23). Paul agrees and says if we break God's commandments we sin in Romans 7:7 and through the law we have a knowledge of what sin is in Romans 3:20 which agrees with James in James 2:10-11 and John in 1 John 3:4.

Now let me ask again. Did you catch that? Romans 2:12-13 says "For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified." So Paul is saying that if you sin (transgress Gods' law) even if you do not know Gods' law (Gentiles) you will perish without the law and again if you sin (transgress Gods law) in the law (knowing Gods' law) you will be judged by the law.

Then Paul contrast this in Romans 2:14-15 that says; "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law (obey Gods law), these, having not the law (do not know the law), are a law to themselves: Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another."

That is if the gentiles that do now know Gods' law obey Gods' law they are not condemned of judged by the law because the law is written on their hearts because they are obeying it. They are a law unto themselves. This is God's new covenant promise (see Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Ezekiel 36:24-27). Then Paul continues the discussion around individual laws from God's 10 commandments to circumcision in the rest of Romans 2.

If you continue reading through to Romans 3:1-31 you will see Paul is showing both Jews and gentiles are all under sin. That is they have all broken God's law standing guilty before God of sin *Romans 3:19 because we have all sinned and are in need of God's grace through faith in Jesus. So Paul in Romans 2:14-15 is not saying that the gentiles never sinned. So there is no contradiction my side. The contradiction is all your side if you believe Paul is teaching lawlessness (without law). That interpretation does not make any sense because Paul shows that it is through the law we have a knowledge of what sin is in Romans 3:20 and Romans 7:7 and that genuine faith establishes Gods' law which is in contradiction to what your claiming because you are disregarding scripture context.

Take Care.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Here is the difference between your position and mine. You read these words and believe that this statement about the law is an eternal, never-ending truth.

By contrast, I read these words and interpret them within the context of what I see as an evolving redemption narrative.

If the case can be made that God has a plan for the world that changes with time, we need not interpret Proverbs 28:9 as in force today.

And the case for the evolving narrative is devastating. From Romans 3:

Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; 20 because by the works of the Law none of mankind will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes knowledge of sin. 21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 but it is the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe..

One would need to be blind to need understand verses 1 - 20 as a story about the past. Here, Paul refers to the giving of the Law:

Then what advantage does the Jew have? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2 Great in every respect. First, that they were entrusted with the actual words of God. 3 What then? If some did not believe, their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it?

Paul is telling us about history. And in verse 20, he arrives in the present:

But now apart from the Law ....

So the stuff in verse 20 about the Law giving knowledge of sin, is, yes, in the past. Why would Paul say "but now" if he was not saying "this stuff I have just been telling you is now behind us.

The Bible is not a set of timeless truths - it is a wonderful story of an evolving redemption narrative that reaches its climax at the cross.

Actually you do no such thing. Your teachings of lawlessness is scripture removed from it's context. The interpretation you have applied to the scripture you have removed from their context prove that a teachings of lawlessness (without Gods' law) or that Gods' law has been abolished is a false teaching. All of your claims so far have simply been proven to be false simply by adding the scripture context back in that does not support your interpretation of the scriptures. This has been proven and shown to you through the scriptures alone which you seem to be unwilling to address in post # 691; post # 722 linked; post # 723 linked; post # 724 linked; post # 732 linked; post # 756 linked; post # 757 linked; post # 358 linked; post # 359 linked; post # 361 linked that adds the context back in to the scriptures you provide that disagree with you. A teaching of lawlessness (without law) or Gods' 10 commandments being abolished is a false teaching and not supported anywhere in the bible.

Take Care.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Strawman - I have never denied that sin is lawlessness. You guys have taken it upon yourselves to change the general concept "lawlessness" to "lawlessness with respect to the Law of Moses". I am not making that illicit move so please stop misrepresenting my position. Again, nothing I have ever posted could be reasonably taken as denying that sin is lawlessness.

You must have me mixed up with someone else. I have never said you think sin is not lawlessness. I do not think you are reading the full post you are quoting from. Perhaps you should re-read it.

You are simply ignoring the content of my argument. Readers will know you are doing this. Was not metaphorical language used here to depict the destruction of Babylon?: 10For the stars of heaven and their constellations Will not flash forth their light; The sun will be dark when it rises And the moon will not shed its light And what about the statement from Jesus in the very text from Matt 5 that you cite about the Law lasting until all is accomplished. You may think it is a coincidence that Jesus's last words are these - I do not: "It is finished"

Not at all anyone following the conversation will see the context you have left out with the scriptures that have been provided that disagree with your claims and teachings here.

Take Care.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Nothing I have posted remotely puts me in the position of the pharisees in this passage.

You must have me mixed up with someone else your quoting a linked post of mine to another conversation.

They were distorting the Law during the time when it was in force. I am doing something fundamentally different - arguing that the NT tells us the Law of Moses, including the 10, are no longer in force this side of the Cross.

No. You are distorting the law this side of the cross if your promoting a teaching of lawlessness without law) or that God's 10 commandments have now been abolished. This is a false teaching. There is no scripture anywhere in the bible that says Gods law is abolished and no longer the standard of good when obeyed from the heart and evil when broken from the heart (see Matthew 5:17-26; 1 John 2:3-4; 1 John 3:4-10; Revelation 14:12). Their purpose is to give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken and righteousness when obeyed and to lead us to Christ that we might be forgiven through faith (Galatians 3:22-25) so that we can be born again into Gods' new covenant promise (see John 3:3-7; 1 John 3:4-9; from Hebrews 8:10-12 from Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Ezekiel 36:24-27). Your promoting teaching that is not biblical and seem to be unwilling to listen to anyone trying to help you here.

Take Care.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

All true, but you simply assume that God's plan is static - that the 10 will always give us knowledge of good and evil.

No not at all. In the new heavens and the new earth there will be no need for God's 10 commandments because all will have been fulfilled and everyone there will be living in Gods' new covenant promise who have been born again and given a new heart through faith in Gods' promises to walk in Gods' Spirit. All have been restored through love and love fulfills and obeys Gods' law from the heart. That time is not now however and all has not been fulfilled (see Matthew 5:17-26; John 3:3-7; 1 John 3:4-10; 1 John 2:3-4; 1 John 5:2-4; Revelation 14:12)

This is clearly not what Paul believes: But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

Your taking scripture out of it's context again. Read Romans 6:1-23 though to Romans 8:1-13. Romans 7:6 is not is not teaching lawlessness or God's law is abolished (read Romans 6- Romans 8). It is contrasting the law of sin in the flesh without God's Spirit and the Law of God which Paul calls holy just and good. Your disregarding the scripture contexts again. There is no separation of chapters in the book of Romans. Read Romans 6:1-23 through to Romans 8:1-13. The context contrasts those who live in the flesh against those who walk in the Spirit,

You guys are in the very undesirable position of having to argue that we need the 10 commandments to tell us right from wrong even though we have the indwelling Spirit.

Not at all we are in the desirable position of sharing the good new of God's Word and that we have a Savior that saves us from sin and being disobedient to Gods' law by giving us His Spirit to obey His Word through faith. Gods Word is the power of creation to all who believe and follow it simply by believing what Gods Word says. This is what is being taught in the scriptures where Peter says "Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord, according as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust." - 2 Peter 1:2-4. This is Gods' work in us (Philippians 2:13) as we believe His Word (see 1 John 5:2-4).

Do you not believe that telling us right from wrong would be part of the Spirit's role?

God's Spirit works through the truth of Word of God not outside of it (see John 6:63) and through the Word of God convicts the world of sin *John 16:8 which is defined in the scriptures as breaking anyone of Gods' 10 commandments and not believing and following what Gods' Word says (see James 2:10-11; Romans 7:7; Romans 3:20; 1 John 3:4).

Your disregarding the scripture context again while not addressing anything in my earlier posts that have already addressed your claims here.

No this is what you are doing and this has been proven in the scriptures provided to you in the linked posts you refuse to discuss in post # 691; post # 722 linked; post # 723 linked; post # 724 linked; post # 732 linked; post # 756 linked; post # 757 linked; post # 358 linked; post # 359 linked; post # 361 linked that adds the context back in to the scriptures you take out of context to try and support an unbiblical view that God's 10 commandments have been abolished. A teaching of lawlessness (without law) or Gods' 10 commandments being abolished is a false teaching and not supported anywhere in the bible.

Take Care.

 

[Nj_]

Protestant here, I'm not 100% sure what the EO and RC stance on Tradition is, but I think we can both agree that they sometimes seem to hold their traditions to the same level as Scripture, which is wrong, but that doesn't mean we should reject Tradition or* the Church Fathers.

To put it shortly, Scripture is magisterial and Tradition is ministerial. Scripture has ultimate importance as it is the Word of God, but Tradition is very useful when it is based upon Scripture.

This is why Creeds and Confessions are so important, they are not Scripture but they do accurately summarize Scripture and the basic doctrines of Christianity that are taught in Scripture.

I'm not sure if Aquila would agree with me here, and sorry to both of you for just randomly joining this conversation

 

[Nj_]

Protestant here, I'm not 100% sure what the EO and RC stance on Tradition is, but I think we can both agree that they sometimes seem to hold their traditions to the same level as Scripture, which is wrong, but that doesn't mean we should reject Tradition of the Church Fathers.

To put it shortly, Scripture is magisterial and Tradition is ministerial. Scripture has ultimate importance as it is the Word of God, but Tradition is very useful when it is based upon Scripture.

This is why Creeds and Confessions are so important, they are not Scripture but they do accurately summarize Scripture and the basic doctrines of Christianity that are taught in Scripture.

I'm not sure if Aquila would agree with me here, and sorry to both of you for just randomly joining this conversation

I was replying to expos4ever here btw, sorry it's my first time here

 

[LoveGodsWord]

The Scriptures admonish us to honor and obey those bishops and authorities over us and to keep the traditions handed down by word or letter. And we Catholics have been doing this for 20 centuries.

The scriptures do indeed teach we are to honor and obey those in authority over us in the faith. However if those in the faith depart Gods' Word in order to follow man-made teachings and traditions that lead us away from Gods' Word to break the commandments of God Peter tells us we ought to obey God rather than man in Acts of the Apostles 5:29 and Jesus also tells us we should not follow the teachings and traditions of men that lead us away from God and His Word to break the commandments of God in Matthew 15:3-9. This is why there was a reformation in the 16th century because the Catholic Church had been departing the faith from what the scriptures taught in preference to man-made teachings and traditions. Please do not misunderstand me here. I believe Gods' people are in every Church but the hour is coming and now is that God's true worshipers wherever they might be will worship the father in Spirit and in truth (see John 10:17; John 4:23-24; Revelation 18:1-5). God is calling all of us out from following man-made teachings and traditions to return to His Word and worship Him in Spirit and in truth.

God bless

 

[SabbathBlessings]

One of the misrepresentations we see in this thread is the insistence those who believe the 10 are retired therefore believe we are free to commit murder, adultery, etc.

This is, of course, false.

Whether you like it or not, our position does not force us into such a position no matter how much that would serve your agenda.

The reason is simple and cannot be misunderstood: we believe that the indwelling Spirit as well as the teachings of Jesus give us a moral compass.

You are free to disagree with what we believe to be the case about where one gets moral guidance. But you are most certainly not free to tell us that we believe something that we do not - that it is acceptable to sin.

It is an abject and pernicious falsehood to claim that we think its OK to sin.

Like I said previously, you are free to believe and teach want you want, but we are all accountable for what we do and teach. Matthew 5:19

The piece that I think your missing is not allowing God to be God. It is on God’s authority that we are to obey His commandments. When you remove God from this equation it is just man doing what he feels is right or wrong instead of being obedient to our Lord and Savior because He asked. There is a difference and I am truly sorry you don’t see this.

For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.Colossians 1:16

So when you see thou shalt not murder, or thou shalt not commit adultery, or worship other god etc. etc. - this is not something that is randomly in our bibles that came from some unknown source. Paul quotes directly from the Ten and says this is the law and breaking the law is defined as sin. 1 John 3:4 God wrote His law with His own finger, kept in the ark of the covenant in the Most Holy of God’s Temple where He dwells and is revealed in heaven. Revelation 11:19 Exodus 20

Not giving glory to God for everything that He made and especially something God wrote with His own finger His Holy Law, it not something I think is very wise, but again we do have free will. God bless and take care.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I was replying to expos4ever here btw, sorry it's my first time here

Welcome Nd, nice to meet you

 

[Nj_]

Welcome Nd, nice to meet you

Thank you! It's also nice to meet you, love your pfp!

 

[Christopher0121]

And precisely why should we believe that the tradition and historical teaching is beyond error?

There are many reasons. First, Christ promised that the very Church He founded upon Peter would prevail against all the powers of Hell...

Matthew 16:17-19
New Catholic Bible
17 Then Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you but my heavenly Father. 18 And I say to you: You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”​

The gates of Hell NEVER prevailed, nor will Hell prevail, against the very Church Jesus founded at that moment. Not a misty ethereal invisible mystical cult... but a REAL, tangible, official, authoritative, convening CHURCH. It has been on earth from that moment forward and has seen the rise and fall of every empire, nation, sect, schism, reformation, and movement... and she will endure and still be standing after they all splinter into THOUSANDS of different nations, cults, and sects.

Second, Jesus said...

John 14:26
New Catholic Bible
26 However, the Advocate, the Holy Spirit,
whom the Father will send in my name,
will teach you everything
and remind you of all​

that I have said to you.

This means the Holy Spirit has been guiding the Church as a whole through the ages. God isn't the author of confusion. When you take away the historic Church... you get the TENS OF THOUSANDS of different denominations, schisms, sects, heresies, and cults that we see today. While non-Catholics are united only in their rejection of the Catholic Church... they're all in a massive mosh pit of confusion and debate. We see it on these threads daily. God isn't the author of confusion. And every non-Catholic group is convinced everyone else is confused. LOL Truth is... there is a Church that predates them and has over 20 centuries of theological considerations. It would be wise to take note of that and not disregard it out of hand.

If one is wanting to be a Christian and enter the Body of Christ... the real Body of Christ... they must realize it is 2,000 years old. That means its original language isn't going to be English. LOL I will also have manners, traditions, and customs that are centuries and even in some cases millennia old. It will seem alien and ancient, antiquated and strange. It's a real 2,000 year old Church. lol I often tell non-Catholics not to judge the Catholic Church so harshly... when they are over 2,000 years old and have all that history (both good and bad) they will understand far more than they do now.

I find it MORE challenging to ask... why should I trust YOU, or another, or some garage band church start up with a concert style church... over the Church of the Saints, Councils, Bishops, and Deacons that has endured for over 20 centuries??? lol

Either we believe the Gates of Hell never have nor will prevail and the Holy Spirit leads the very Church Jesus founded upon Peter and His Apostles, and even their disciples, or we don't.

​

 

[Nj_]

There are many reasons. First, Christ promised that the very Church He founded upon Peter would prevail against all the powers of Hell...

Matthew 16:17-19
New Catholic Bible
17 Then Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you but my heavenly Father. 18 And I say to you: You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”​

The gates of Hell NEVER prevailed, nor will Hell prevail, against the very Church Jesus founded at that moment. Not a misty ethereal invisible mystical cult... but a REAL, tangible, official, authoritative, convening CHURCH. It has been on earth from that moment forward and has seen the rise and fall of every empire, nation, sect, schism, reformation, and movement... and she will endure and still be standing after they all splinter into THOUSANDS of different nations, cults, and sects.

Second, Jesus said...

John 14:26
New Catholic Bible
26 However, the Advocate, the Holy Spirit,
whom the Father will send in my name,
will teach you everything
and remind you of all​

that I have said to you.

This means the Holy Spirit has been guiding the Church as a whole through the ages. God isn't the author of confusion. When you take away the historic Church... you get the TENS OF THOUSANDS of different denominations, schisms, sects, heresies, and cults that we see today. While non-Catholics are united only in their rejection of the Catholic Church... they're all in a massive mosh pit of confusion and debate. We see it on these threads daily. God isn't the author of confusion. And every non-Catholic group is convinced everyone else is confused. LOL Truth is... there is a Church that predates them and has over 20 centuries of theological considerations. It would be wise to take note of that and not disregard it out of hand.

If one is wanting to be a Christian and enter the Body of Christ... the real Body of Christ... they must realize it is 2,000 years old. That means its original language isn't going to be English. LOL I will also have manners, traditions, and customs that are centuries and even in some cases millennia old. It will seem alien and ancient, antiquated and strange. It's a real 2,000 year old Church. lol I often tell non-Catholics not to judge the Catholic Church so harshly... when they are over 2,000 years old and have all that history (both good and bad) they will understand far more than they do now.

I find it MORE challenging to ask... why should I trust YOU, or another, or some garage band church start up with a concert style church... over the Church of the Saints, Councils, Bishops, and Deacons that has endured for over 20 centuries??? lol

Either we believe the Gates of Hell never have nor will prevail and the Holy Spirit leads the very Church Jesus founded upon Peter and His Apostles, and even their disciples, or we don't.

​

Peter is not the rock upon which the Church is built, it is the confession that he makes in verse 16, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

The Holy Spirit has indeed been guiding believers for over 2,000 years, but I would disagree that it has been the Roman Catholic Church that has been guided, I do want to know though, would you say that the teaching of the Roman Church has remained the same consistency throughout the 2,000 years you claim it has existed? Would you claim your soteriology is affirmed by both Scripture and the Church Fathers?

 

[Nj_]

Peter is not the rock upon which the Church is built, it is the confession that he makes in verse 16, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

The Holy Spirit has indeed been guiding believers for over 2,000 years, but I would disagree that it has been the Roman Catholic Church that has been guided, I do want to know though, would you say that the teaching of the Roman Church has remained the same consistency throughout the 2,000 years you claim it has existed? Would you claim your soteriology is affirmed by both Scripture and the Church Fathers?

I meant consistently btw

 

[Christopher0121]

And precisely why should we believe that the tradition and historical teaching is beyond error?

There's also the concept of AUTHORITY and IDENTITY. There have been good Popes and bad Popes. Down through the ages the Church has not always lived up to the ideals she's called to live up to. But... she's still the very Church Christ founded. And we can be assured she'll overcome all challenges from within and without.

Like I said... I can build a time machine and travel back to any point within the past 2,000 years and find my Church. And keep in mind... we're the largest Church on earth with 1.3 BILLION believers. We also run more hospitals, charities, shelters, schools, etc. than any other organization on earth. You can travel to any city in the free world... and find our Churches.

Yes... we're the target of many. And it was foretold...

Acts 20:30
New Catholic Bible
30 Even from your own ranks men will come distorting the truth in order to entice the disciples to follow them.​

Lutherans, Calvinists, Methodists, etc. all founded after the teachings of a man... and even more so when we see these Charismatic types who start concert style churches in their garages.

I draw much comfort knowing the Church I'm a part of is the same Church that held the Councils and has the minutes and deliberations of those Councils recorded. We are... the Church.

​

 

[Christopher0121]

Peter is not the rock upon which the Church is built...

It is written,

Matthew 16:17-19
New Catholic Bible
17 Then Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you but my heavenly Father. 18 And I say to you: You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”​

Hmmmmm... I'll trust Jesus.

As I stated before...


What does it mean to have authority to "bind and loose"? Remember, this was a Jewish phrase. The Jewish Encyclopedia explains it well...

Binding and loosing (Hebrew, asar ve-hittir) . . . Rabbinical term for ‘forbidding and permitting. The power of binding and loosing was always claimed by the Pharisees. Under Queen Alexandra, the Pharisees, says Josephus (Wars of the Jews 1:5:2), “became the administrators of all public affairs so as to be empowered to banish and readmit whom they pleased, as well as to loose and to bind.” The various schools had the power “to bind and to loose”; that is, to forbid and to permit (Talmud: Chagigah 3b); and they could also bind any day by declaring it a fast day (Talmud: Ta’anit 12a). . . . This power and authority, vested in the rabbinical body of each age of the Sanhedrin, received its ratification and final sanction from the celestial court of justice (Sifra, Emor, 9; Talmud: Makkot 23b).​

With this we realize that the Office of Peter was specifically invested with the authority to "forbid and permit" various interpretations, practices, feast days, devotions, etc. This is no joke. Jesus is appointing Peter the earthly head of the Church to lead it in His absence, which makes the reality of the Church from Peter down being led of the Spirit of even greater importance than merely the flights of fancy to support some private personal interpretation.

 

[expos4ever]

deleted own post.

 

[expos4ever]

Your taking scripture out of it's context again. Read Romans 6:1-23 though to Romans 8:1-13. Romans 7:6 is not is not teaching lawlessness or God's law is abolished (read Romans 6- Romans 8).

You are dancing. Let me try to "force" the issue. Forget other texts for the moment. Surely you have to agree that Paul did not write these words for no purpose whatsoever. So what, exactly, is Paul saying here:

But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

 

[Nj_]

It is written,

Matthew 16:17-19
New Catholic Bible
17 Then Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you but my heavenly Father. 18 And I say to you: You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”​

Hmmmmm... I'll trust Jesus.

This is from Chrysostom's Homily 54 on Matthew:

"What then says Christ? You are Simon, the son of Jonas; you shall be called Cephas. Thus since you have proclaimed my Father, I too name him that begot you; all but saying, As you are son of Jonas, even so am I of my Father. Else it were superfluous to say, You are Son of Jonas; but since he had said, Son of God, to point out that He is so Son of God, as the other son of Jonas, of the same substance with Him that begot Him, therefore He added this, And I say unto you, You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church; Matthew 16:18 that is, on the faith of his confession."

It is clear from reading the text that the rock is the confession, not Peter, this is why even St. John Chrysostom explains it this way, Chrysostom being a native Greek speaker.

This interpretation is also the only one consistent with the rest of Scripture that makes clear that Christ is the cornerstone.

- "This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone." - Acts 4:11

- "For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ." - 1 Corinthians 3:11

- "For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior." - Ephesians 5:23

 

[Christopher0121]

Protestant here, I'm not 100% sure what the EO and RC stance on Tradition is, but I think we can both agree that they sometimes seem to hold their traditions to the same level as Scripture, which is wrong, but that doesn't mean we should reject Tradition or* the Church Fathers.

Being Catholic I believe that the Scripture is a part of Sacred Tradition. Remember, our Councils compiled, translated, and established the Canon you're reading to me at the end of the Fourth Century. We compiled Scripture to serve as a final authority on the nature Christ in the midst of all the growing Christological controversies. Scripture wasn't produced to replace Bishops, Deacons, or oral tradition. It has a purpose, to be the final word on Christology. It is but one piece of a single divine puzzle.

Paul put it this way back when Sacred Scripture was first being written...

2 Thessalonians 2:15
New Catholic Bible
Therefore, stand firm, brethren, and hold fast to the traditions that you have been taught, whether by word of mouth or by a letter of ours.​

Protestants certainly recognize the letters (Epistles). However, what traditions and teachings do these Protestants keep that was delivered orally??? What are they? Well, many are referred to in the writings of the Church Fathers, and many were ruled upon and embraced by the Councils. The Catholic Church is so old, Western Civilization is founded upon our ideals. Even the very Calendar used today is Catholic. This is because we've kept all written and spoken traditions dating back to Christ and the Apostles.

To put it shortly, Scripture is magisterial and Tradition is ministerial. Scripture has ultimate importance as it is the Word of God, but Tradition is very useful when it is based upon Scripture.

But sadly as the TWENTY THOUSAND different non-Catholic theologies have proven... the Bible without historic foundation can be made to say anything. You see... I was a Pentecostal for over 30 years. I've been on many forums and I can tell you... all non-Catholics will debate until they are blue in the face disagreeing with each other not even realizing the problem is that no one has a final authority. Everyone is merely leaning on their own understanding... and the only thing they agree on is... rejecting the Catholic Church. lol And most are quoting and arguing with the Bible we produced! LOL

This is why Creeds and Confessions are so important, they are not Scripture but they do accurately summarize Scripture and the basic doctrines of Christianity that are taught in Scripture.

Amen! I'm thankful to hear that you believe in the Creeds and Confessions. These Creeds are products of our Church. We even have the minutes and records of deliberations held during those Councils that established the Creeds. The Holy Spirit who leads and guides into all truth was certainly present and guiding the Church.

I can only stress that one keep the Bible in perspective. First, we must avoid worshiping the Bible. Jesus didn't die to provide a book. Jesus didn't die to provide a glorified book club. Jesus died to establish and sanctify unto Himself a CHURCH, a body. It was this body, this CHURCH that produced the Bible. And we produced the Bible to serve as a final authority on the actual writings of the Apostles and a sure foundation for Christology. It isn't designed to be the only weapon or source of truth in the Church's arsenal. As the Holy Spirit has led and guided the Church many other sources exist. For example, holy icons. Yes, these are pictures and statues. However, they predate the Bible. These images were used to help a largely illiterate population learn Scripture and theological truths. They are NOT to be worshipped. They are mere wood, paint, and stone. However, they serve as windows into Heavenly realities and aid in devotional contemplation and meditation during prayer. Thing of them as the Bible painted... in fact, iconographers are said to "write" holy icons, not paint them. It is often said that a picture is worth a thousand words... well... to us icons are expressions of divine truth as much as the Scriptures are. The icon in my Avatar, it depicts Christ's two natures. This is why the image of Christ's face isn't balanced or equal. We used this icon to teach Christ's two natures in hypostatic union, which is a purely biblical truth. So, these icons are very much based on Scripture. Like the codex we know as Scripture they too are expressions of divine truth but in imagery. When I became Catholic and learned the history of all these things I never understood I was blown away. Today, I'm saddened when I hear non-Catholics berate, condemn, or deride such things. Because they do so outside of historical and cultural context. And they ignore the very biblical and Christian purpose of such things. Before I became Catholic, I'd call an icon an idol. However, after becoming Catholic I can pray before an icon and like a sermon in paint it speaks and preaches to my soul. Often, I can't help but weep before the icon. Why? It depicts the Word of God or truths about the Word of God in such a historical way. I am also comforted knowing my devotional practice dates back to the first and second centuries, a tradition that is painted and produced along the walls of the catacombs and earliest church buildings. I rejoice in that if I had a time machine... I can find my Church and most of my practices at any point within the past 2,000 years, for it is the actual Church that can trace its existence back to Christ and the Apostles.

I'm not sure if Aquila would agree with me here, and sorry to both of you for just randomly joining this conversation

Eh, we disagree on some things, but we both love Jesus and strive to keep Him central to our lives. You're good with me, brother. I might have some ancient traditions and practices that seem alien to you. And... that's okay! I mean, my Church is 2,000 years old. lol