Why the Apocryphal Books Rejected as Scripture.

[Valletta]

Where they tend to be the same is in foundational Christian doctrine which passes the test of being scriptural. Put another way, foundational Chastain teaching of the early church isn't at odds with sola scriptura and there isn't much if any division between Catholic and Protestant. It's certain doctrine and practices that came about centuries later, that's at odds with sola scriptura. I'd say it's much more like there's Christian doctrine which existed for centuries, and then there's Catholic doctrine that was put into practice centuries later, and that's where the division takes place.

The same 73 books of the Bible that were chosen by the Catholic Church in the late 300s comprised the one Bible of Christianity in all of Europe for over a thousand years until reformation times. At that time books of the Bible were dropped by Protestants, the idea of sola scriptura took off, and three different new and conflicting ideas on the Holy Eucharist, the source and summit of the Catholic faith, were put forth by the three leaders of the reformation. From these ideas, so many centuries later, thousands of Protestant denominations have been formed, all claiming to be following the Bible.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Where they tend to be the same is in foundational Christian doctrine which passes the test of being scriptural.

Where they are the same they follow the Creeds.

Put another way, foundational Chastain teaching of the early church isn't at odds with sola scriptura

I think that it is at odds with sola scriptura with its implied 66 book canon, one need only read the canons of the earliest councils to see how the fathers reasoned, they use both scripture and tradition as authoritative sources for doctrine.

It's certain doctrine and practices that came about centuries later, that's at odds with sola scriptura.

Prayer for the dead came immediately, it was a practise among the Israelites before the time of Christ and continued in the Church from its beginning until now. Veneration of Mary too is very early in the Church. The use of relics is in sacred scripture yet is, generally, rejected among Protestants is it not? Many similar practises and doctrines are Apostolic yet not specifically scriptural and these were practised and taught by the Church from the earliest times.

I'd say it's much more like there's Christian doctrine which existed for centuries, and then there's Catholic doctrine that was put into practice centuries later, and that's where the division takes place.

Then that would be an incorrect thing to say.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I wanted you to expound more on that for me to be able to give my view regarding it. That's why I prompted you to elaborate on the question you asked. As to what's biblical, I know that when Philip baptized the Ethiopian eunuch, they appeared to be alone at the time. If that's what you're getting at, that a baptism has to be a public event, although I don't know what doctrine (if any) says that. Or why it's relevant.

If you think of the meaning of baptism as something that is other than a public testimony to one's faith, then what other thing do you think it is?

 

[ozso]

If you think of the meaning of baptism as something that is other than a public testimony to one's faith, then what other thing do you think it is?

I don't have any thoughts on baptism other than a Christian should get baptised. If you're trying pin me down or whatever, this is going to go on for several more posts. So please, what are you trying to get at or get me to say?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I don't have any thoughts on baptism other than a Christian should get baptised. If you're trying pin me down or whatever, this is going to go on for several more posts. So please, what are you trying to get at or get me to say?

We're not engaged in a debate. I have no desire to "pin you down". I asked a question that your posts do not answer. Okay, I accept that. We can move on.

 

[ozso]

Where they are the same they follow the Creeds.

I think that it is at odds with sola scriptura with its implied 66 book canon, one need only read the canons of the earliest councils to see how the fathers reasoned, they use both scripture and tradition as authoritative sources for doctrine.

Prayer for the dead came immediately, it was a practise among the Israelites before the time of Christ and continued in the Church from its beginning until now. Veneration of Mary too is very early in the Church. The use of relics is in sacred scripture yet is, generally, rejected among Protestants is it not? Many similar practises and doctrines are Apostolic yet not specifically scriptural and these were practised and taught by the Church from the earliest times.

Then that would be an incorrect thing to say.

Praying for the dead, and relics aren't really a big issue regarding core Christian doctrine. Veneration of Mary isn't really either since both Catholics and Protestants agree with the doctrines of the hypostatic union and the Trinity.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Praying for the dead, and relics aren't really a big issue regarding core Christian doctrine. Veneration of Mary isn't really either since both Catholics and Protestants agree with the doctrines of the hypostatic union and the Trinity.

That's refreshing to read. So, in effect we are not at loggerheads on anything, right?

 

[ozso]

The same 73 books of the Bible that were chosen by the Catholic Church in the late 300s comprised the one Bible of Christianity in all of Europe for over a thousand years until reformation times. At that time books of the Bible were dropped by Protestants, the idea of sola scriptura took off, and three different new and conflicting ideas on the Holy Eucharist, the source and summit of the Catholic faith, were put forth by the three leaders of the reformation. From these ideas, so many centuries later, thousands of Protestant denominations have been formed, all claiming to be following the Bible.

I don't see why that's an issue with Catholicism since it values tradition over the Bible and objects to putting emphasis on the Bible.

 

[ozso]

That's refreshing to read. So, in effect we are not at loggerheads on anything, right?

You already pointed out the main things Catholics and Protestants are at loggerheads over; praying for the dead, relics, and the veneration of Mary. And I put those issues into perspective.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I don't see why that's an issue with Catholicism since it values tradition over the Bible and objects to putting emphasis on the Bible.

That is incorrect because the 73 book bible is Tradition but not the whole of it.

 

[ozso]

We're not engaged in a debate. I have no desire to "pin you down". I asked a question that your posts do not answer. Okay, I accept that. We can move on.

You're obviously trying to get a particular answer out of me, since the two answers I gave aren't answers in your opinion. But whatever, I agree, let's move on.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

You already pointed out the main things Catholics and Protestants are at loggerheads over; praying for the dead, relics, and the veneration of Mary. And I put those issues into perspective.

I see, and that is good. Yet I just replied to one of your posts where you say Catholics value tradition over scripture. That is an incorrect assessment for the reason I stated in my reply.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

You're obviously trying to get a particular answer out of me, since the two answers I gave aren't answers in your opinion. But whatever, I agree, let's move on.

No, that is not the case. I asked a question. I did not stipulate what answer you were expected to give.

 

[ozso]

I see, and that is good. Yet I just replied to one of your posts where you say Catholics value tradition over scripture. That is an incorrect assessment for the reason I stated in my reply.

I base that on what I have heard Catholics saying against following scripture over tradition, calling it worshipping the Bible above God.

 

[Valletta]

I don't see why that's an issue with Catholicism since it values tradition over the Bible and objects to putting emphasis on the Bible.

Please do not spread false information about Catholicism. The Catholic Catechism well spells out Catholic teaching, please use that and quote it instead of spreading fabrications. The Word of God, whether Sacred Tradition or Sacred Scripture, is to be treated with great reverence. Tradition is not valued "over" the Bible.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Please do not spread false information about Catholicism. The Catholic Catechism well spells out Catholic teaching, please use that and quote it instead of spreading fabrications. The Word of God, whether Sacred Tradition or Sacred Scripture, is to be treated with great reverence. Tradition is not valued "over" the Bible.

Be sure, my friend, to stipulate a Catholic Bible, with seventy three canonical books, because when Catholics say bible we do not usually mean the sixty six book Protestant versions.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I base that on what I have heard Catholics saying against following scripture over tradition, calling it worshipping the Bible above God.

Hearsay is not a very sound basis for judgement. That is why courts disallow it as evidence. So, when you write, "I base that on what I have heard Catholics saying", it appears to be hearsay evidence.

 

[Valletta]

I base that on what I have heard Catholics saying against following scripture over tradition, calling it worshipping the Bible above God.

80 "Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal."40 Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own "always, to the close of the age".41
. . . two distinct modes of transmission
81 "Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."42
"And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."43
82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."44

Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 1 SECTION 1 CHAPTER 2 ARTICLE 2

 

[ozso]

80 "Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal."40 Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own "always, to the close of the age".41
. . . two distinct modes of transmission
81 "Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."42
"And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."43
82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."44

Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 1 SECTION 1 CHAPTER 2 ARTICLE 2

That's something Catholicism came up with to address the unbiblical traditions Catholicism came up with. Basically Catholicism giving Catholicism a certificate of approval.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

That's something Catholicism came up with to address the unbiblical traditions Catholicism came up with. Basically Catholicism giving Catholicism a certificate of approval.

As it should be, because who else can judge the Church on Earth but God? No group of people can judge what God created, and he created the Church.