Status
Not open for further replies.

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Now let us reject the traditions of man (Sola Scriptura):

“They worship Me in vain; they teach as doctrine the precepts of men.” You have disregarded the commandment of God to keep the tradition of men

Mark 7:7-8

Mark 7:6-13 is a case of Christ slam-hammering the supposedly sacred tradition of the magisterium of the one true nation church started by God at Sinai -- "sola scriptura"

Mark 7
6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”


Were we simply "not supposed to notice"??
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
BobRyan said:
The non-Christians of Acts 17:11 "studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF the things spoken to them by the Apostle Paul --- were SO"

Read the previous verse:

Acts 17:10:

As soon as night had fallen, the brothers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went into the Jewish synagogue.

This happened during the liturgical worship inside the synagogue, Paul and Silas weren’t handing out Bibles and pamphlets to people.

Hmmmm...

Is your argument against sola scriptura testing of apostolic teaching ... or is it against "having access to the Bible in our homes"??
 
Upvote 0

Barney2.0

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 1, 2017
6,003
2,336
Los Angeles
✟451,221.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Mark 7:6-13 is a case of Christ slam-hammering the supposedly sacred tradition of the magisterium of the one true nation church started by God at Sinai -- "sola scriptura"

Mark 7
6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”


Were we simply "not supposed to notice"??
So you ignored pretty much the majority of my post to tackle a strawman, there’s a difference between man made traditions and inspired tradition which Christ didn’t reject as per his own words:

"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.

Matthew 23:2-3

Christ didn’t reject everything the Pharisees taught.
 
Upvote 0

Barney2.0

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 1, 2017
6,003
2,336
Los Angeles
✟451,221.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
BobRyan said:
The non-Christians of Acts 17:11 "studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF the things spoken to them by the Apostle Paul --- were SO"



Hmmmm...

Is your argument against sola scriptura testing of apostolic teaching ... or is it against "having access to the Bible in our homes"??
Within the worship of a liturgical synagogue, or when the Apostles would read the scriptures during worship they would hear the scriptures and reflect upon them and teach them. Sola Scriptura has no historical basis and is absurd, read my previous long post that I posted in Sola Scriptura detailing why it cannot be true either from a scriptural or historical perspective.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I'll stick with what Jesus explicitly said. Jesus told us to listen to the Church. Jesus never said listen to the Bible.
...and yet He often referred his Apostles and others to Scripture for the authoritative answer to their questions or needs.

I'll stick with what Paul explicitly said.

Romans 4:3 For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS."

Romans 9:17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH."

Romans 10:11 For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED."

Romans 11:2 God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? 3 "Lord, THEY HAVE KILLED YOUR PROPHETS, THEY HAVE TORN DOWN YOUR ALTARS, AND I ALONE AM LEFT, AND THEY ARE SEEKING MY LIFE."

Galatians 3:8 The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "ALL THE NATIONS WILL BE BLESSED IN YOU."

Galatians 3:22 But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. (Here it is used as a synonym for Law which appears in both 21 and 24.)

Galatians 4:30 But what does the Scripture say? "CAST OUT THE BONDWOMAN AND HER SON, FOR THE SON OF THE BONDWOMAN SHALL NOT BE AN HEIR WITH THE SON OF THE FREE WOMAN."

1 Timothy 5:18 For the Scripture says, "YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING," and "The laborer is worthy of his wages."
 
  • Useful
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
Upvote 0

zoidar

loves Jesus the Christ! ✝️
Supporter
Sep 18, 2010
7,163
2,606
✟877,129.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
As you have seen in this thread, there are many man made ideas being floated around. Some have, on the surface, good arguments. But when tested they fail. Others are just plain silly.

I'll stick with what Jesus explicitly said. Jesus told us to listen to the Church. Jesus never said listen to the Bible.

I'll stick with what Paul explicitly said. The Church is the pillar of truth. Paul never said the Bible is the pillar of truth.

People twist the Word of God so badly I'm surprised heads dont break off.

What is the Church today? When I got born again I didn't belong to any church.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
What is the Church today? When I got born again I didn't belong to any church.
Of course Jesus was speaking of his following when referring to "my church." He did not have any of today's denominations in mind when saying this, and certainly not to the exclusion of all other ones.
 
Upvote 0

BBAS 64

Contributor
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
9,845
1,707
58
New England
✟484,036.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Within the worship of a liturgical synagogue, or when the Apostles would read the scriptures during worship they would hear the scriptures and reflect upon them and teach them. Sola Scriptura has no historical basis and is absurd, read my previous long post that I posted in Sola Scriptura detailing why it cannot be true either from a scriptural or historical perspective.

Good Day, Al

Just spent quite a bit of time looking over the post, I need to look up some of the ECF you have quoted.

Just to be clear there is nothing there that I find contrary to what I believe is the clearest presentation of the Historical view of Sola Scriptura as stared here:

"Well, we must begin by defining the doctrine under discussion this evening. And let me begin by defining what the doctrine of Sola Scriptura does not say.

First of all, it is not a claim that the Bible contains all knowledge. The Bible is not exhaustive in every detail. John 21:25 speaks to the fact that there are many things that Jesus said and did that are not recorded in John, or in fact in any book in the world because the whole books of the world could not contain it. But the Bible does not have to be exhaustive to function as the sole rule of faith for the Church. We do not need to know the color of Thomas' eyes. We do not need to know the menu of each meal of the Apostolic band for the Scriptures to function as the sole rule of faith for the Church.

Secondly, it is not a denial of the Church's authority to teach God's truth. I Timothy 3:15 describes the Church as "the pillar and foundation of the truth." The truth is in Jesus Christ and in His Word. The Church teaches truth and calls men to Christ and, in so doing, functions as the pillar and foundation thereof. The Church does not add revelation or rule over Scripture. The Church being the bride of Christ, listens to the Word of Christ, which is found in God-breathed Scripture.

Thirdly, it is not a denial that God's Word has been spoken. Apostolic preaching was authoritative in and of itself. Yet, the Apostles proved their message from Scripture, as we see in Acts 17:2, and 18:28, and John commended those in Ephesus for testing those who claimed to be Apostles, Revelation 2:2. The Apostles were not afraid to demonstrate the consistency between their teaching and the Old Testament.

And, finally, sola scriptura is not a denial of the role of the Holy Spirit in guiding and enlightening the Church.

What then is sola scriptura?

The doctrine of sola scriptura, simply stated, is that the Scriptures and the Scriptures alone are sufficient to function as the regula fide, the "rule of faith" for the Church. All that one must believe to be a Christian is found in Scripture and in no other source. That which is not found in Scripture is not binding upon the Christian conscience. "

As an Ex member of the Roman Church, I do find it quite amusing that a member of the Roman Church would try to use Scripture to prove anything....

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger : while commenting on the documents of Vatican II (article nine of Dei verbum), stated that “no one is seriously able to maintain that there is a proof in Scripture for every catholic doctrine.” See Joseph Ratzinger’s “The Transmission of Divine Revelation” in Herbert Vorgrimler, ed., Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II (New York: Herder and Herder, 1969), Vol. 3 Pg 195

I am willing to defend this view from Scripture and History.

In Him,

Bill
 
Upvote 0

zoidar

loves Jesus the Christ! ✝️
Supporter
Sep 18, 2010
7,163
2,606
✟877,129.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Of course Jesus was speaking of his following when referring to "my church." He did not have any of today's denominations in mind when saying this, and certainly not to the exclusion of all other ones.

Some said Christian people are the Church, this is my belief as well.
 
Upvote 0

BBAS 64

Contributor
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
9,845
1,707
58
New England
✟484,036.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Bible and the Church Fathers also quote oral tradition and the Old Testament also relies on oral tradition or quotes it. Historically the Bible would only be read in the liturgy of the Church, each area or city would probably only have one Bible in a specific Church at the time of the Roman Empire and through the medieval ages and would be read to the people during the liturgy. Regular people simply did not have copies Bibles in their homes until quite recently in the 1800s or so if I’m not mistaken. Here’s some quotes from the New Testament detailing the requirement of adhering to Apostolic tradition:

1 Corinthians 11:2 – Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

1 Corinthians 11:34 – if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home—so that when you come together it will not be for judgment. About the other things I will give directions when I come.

1 Thessalonians 1:5 – because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction. You know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake.

1 Thessalonians 4:2 – For you know what instructions we gave you through the Lord Jesus.

2 Thessalonians 2:5 – Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things?

2 Thessalonians 2:15 – So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6 – Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.

1 Timothy 6:20-21 – O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called “knowledge,” for by professing it some have swerved from the faith.

2 Timothy 1:13 – Follow the pattern of the sound words that you have heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus.

2 Timothy 2:1-2 – You then, my child, be strengthened by the grace that is in Christ Jesus, and what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also.

2 Timothy 3:14 – But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it

Philippians 4:9 – What you have learned and received and heard and seen in me—practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you.

2 John 1:12 – Though I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink. Instead I hope to come to you and talk face to face, so that our joy may be complete.

3 John 1:13-14 – I had much to write to you, but I would rather not write with pen and ink. I hope to see you soon, and we will talk face to face.

Acts 2:42 – And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.

Acts 8:28-31 – …and on his way home was sitting in his chariot reading the Book of Isaiah the prophet. The Spirit told Philip, “Go to that chariot and stay near it.” Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. “Do you understand what you are reading?” Philip asked. “How can I,” he said, “unless someone explains it to me?” So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

Acts 15:27 – We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth.

2 Peter 1:12-15 – Therefore I intend always to remind you of these qualities, though you know them and are established in the truth that you have. I think it right, as long as I am in this body, to stir you up by way of reminder, since I know that the putting off of my body will be soon, as our Lord Jesus Christ made clear to me. And I will make every effort so that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things.

John 17:20 – I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word

And now for the Church Fathers:

Papias

“Papias [A.D. 120], who is now mentioned by us, affirms that he received the sayings of the apostles from those who accompanied them, and he, moreover, asserts that he heard in person Aristion and the presbyter John. Accordingly, he mentions them frequently by name, and in his writings gives their traditions [concerning Jesus]. . . . [There are] other passages of his in which he relates some miraculous deeds, stating that he acquired the knowledge of them from tradition” (fragment in Eusebius, Church History 3:39 [A.D. 312]).


Eusebius of Caesarea


“At that time [A.D. 150] there flourished in the Church Hegesippus, whom we know from what has gone before, and Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, and another bishop, Pinytus of Crete, and besides these, Philip, and Apollinarius, and Melito, and Musanus, and Modestus, and, finally, Irenaeus. From them has come down to us in writing, the sound and orthodox faith received from tradition” (Church History 4:21).


Irenaeus


“As I said before, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although she is disseminated throughout the whole world, yet guarded it, as if she occupied but one house. She likewise believes these things just as if she had but one soul and one and the same heart; and harmoniously she proclaims them and teaches them and hands them down, as if she possessed but one mouth. For, while the languages of the world are diverse, nevertheless, the authority of the tradition is one and the same” (Against Heresies 1:10:2 [A.D. 189]).

“That is why it is surely necessary to avoid them [heretics], while cherishing with the utmost diligence the things pertaining to the Church, and to lay hold of the tradition of truth. . . . What if the apostles had not in fact left writings to us? Would it not be necessary to follow the order of tradition, which was handed down to those to whom they entrusted the churches?” (ibid., 3:4:1).

“It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors to our own times—men who neither knew nor taught anything like these heretics rave about.

“But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the successions of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles.

“With this church, because of its superior origin, all churches must agree—that is, all the faithful in the whole world—and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition” (ibid., 3:3:1–2).


Clement of Alexandria


“Well, they preserving the tradition of the blessed doctrine derived directly from the holy apostles, Peter, James, John, and Paul, the sons receiving it from the father (but few were like the fathers), came by God’s will to us also to deposit those ancestral and apostolic seeds. And well I know that they will exult; I do not mean delighted with this tribute, but solely on account of the preservation of the truth, according as they delivered it. For such a sketch as this, will, I think, be agreeable to a soul desirous of preserving from loss the blessed tradition” (Miscellanies 1:1 [A.D. 208]).


Cyprian of Carthage


“[T]he Church is one, and as she is one, cannot be both within and without. For if she is with Novatian, she was not with [Pope] Cornelius. But if she was with Cornelius, who succeeded the bishop Fabian by lawful ordination, and whom, beside the honor of the priesthood the Lord glorified also with martyrdom, Novatian is not in the Church; nor can he be reckoned as a bishop, who, succeeding to no one, and despising the evangelical and apostolic tradition, sprang from himself. For he who has not been ordained in the Church can neither have nor hold to the Church in any way” (Letters 75:3 [A.D. 253]).


Athanasius


“Again we write, again keeping to the apostolic traditions, we remind each other when we come together for prayer; and keeping the feast in common, with one mouth we truly give thanks to the Lord” (Festal Letters 2:7 [A.D. 330]).

“But you are blessed, who by faith are in the Church, dwell upon the foundations of the faith, and have full satisfaction, even the highest degree of faith which remains among you unshaken. For it has come down to you from apostolic tradition, and frequently accursed envy has wished to unsettle it, but has not been able” (ibid., 29).


Basil the Great


“Of the dogmas and messages preserved in the Church, some we possess from written teaching and others we receive from the tradition of the apostles, handed on to us in mystery. In respect to piety, both are of the same force. No one will contradict any of these, no one, at any rate, who is even moderately versed in matters ecclesiastical. Indeed, were we to try to reject unwritten customs as having no great authority, we would unwittingly injure the gospel in its vitals; or rather, we would reduce [Christian] message to a mere term” (The Holy Spirit 27:66 [A.D. 375]).


Epiphanius of Salamis


“It is needful also to make use of tradition, for not everything can be gotten from sacred Scripture. The holy apostles handed down some things in the scriptures, other things in tradition” (Medicine Chest Against All Heresies 61:6 [A.D. 375]).


Augustine

“[T]he custom [of not rebaptizing converts] . . . may be supposed to have had its origin in apostolic tradition, just as there are many things which are observed by the whole Church, and therefore are fairly held to have been enjoined by the apostles, which yet are not mentioned in their writings” (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 5:23[31] [A.D. 400]).

“But the admonition that he [Cyprian] gives us, ‘that we should go back to the fountain, that is, to apostolic tradition, and thence turn the channel of truth to our times,’ is most excellent, and should be followed without hesitation” (ibid., 5:26[37]).

“But in regard to those observances which we carefully attend and which the whole world keeps, and which derive not from Scripture but from Tradition, we are given to understand that they are recommended and ordained to be kept, either by the apostles themselves or by plenary [ecumenical] councils, the authority of which is quite vital in the Church” (Letter to Januarius [A.D. 400]).


John Chrysostom

“[Paul commands,] ‘Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you have been taught, whether by word or by our letter’ [2 Thess. 2:15]. From this it is clear that they did not hand down everything by letter, but there is much also that was not written. Like that which was written, the unwritten too is worthy of belief. So let us regard the tradition of the Church also as worthy of belief. Is it a tradition? Seek no further” (Homilies on Second Thessalonians [A.D. 402]).




The Bible was a collection of extant writings that were gathered up and canonized by the Church under specific conditions. The Apostolic traditon of the Church is what determined the canonicity of any book or letter that was to be included in the Biblical canon in the first place, which is why Sola Scriptura is ridiculous when you actually look at it from a historical perspective. Why would they form another Bible, when canonicity determined what was to be considered inspired and what wasn’t.


I’m not saying it negates tradition, it does however make attempt to make it obsolete or null. Also that seems to be an excuse more then anything else, if it’s your final authority on matters then your basically free to pick and choose what you like when it comes to tradition and the Church Father’s and exclude the rest whenever you feel like it. This is what the “reformers” did and what many Protestants both knowingly and unknowingly continue to do, this is nothing more then an excuse for Protestants to pick and choose what they like and reject what they don’t like, rendering Church tradition and the Church Fathers null and void.


How does that make any sense if scripture itself requires another tradition that determined its existence? Also as I said previously this is nothing more than an excuse on behalf of Protestants and other reformed groups to pick and choose what they like from tradition and the Church Fathers and reject the rest when ever it suits them, how do Protestants accept the Council of Ephesus yet reject its dogmatic decrees and canons, such as the its dogmatic pronounciation on the real presence of Christ:

“We will necessarily add this also. Proclaiming the death, according to the flesh, of the only-begotten Son of God, that is Jesus Christ, confessing his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into heaven, we offer the unbloody sacrifice in the churches, and so go on to the mystical thanksgivings, and are sanctified, having received his holy flesh and the precious blood of Christ the Savior of us all. And not as common flesh do we receive it . . . but as truly the life-giving and very flesh of the Word himself.” (Session 1, Letter of Cyril to Nestorius [A.D. 431]).

I wonder what John Calvin made of this, since if he was alive at the time of Ephesus he would have been condemned as a heretic for teaching Nestorianism by denying the real presence like Nestorius did on the basis that Christ isn’t physically present in the Eucharist.


How about Matthew 2:23:

and he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets, that he would be called a Nazarene.

You won’t find the statement in bold anywhere in the Old Testament and Matthew isn’t simoly making it up since he would have been called out by the Jewish audience of his time, so this is him quoting and appealing oral tradition right here. Acts 2:42 refers to the teachings of the Apostles, how was it finalized in the canon, I’m 100% sure not everything the Apostles taught is in scripture by John’s own admission in John 21:25:

Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

Many teachings of Christ weren’t written down by John and we can reasonably assume many teachings weren’t recorded in the New Testament, yet were past down orally:

In everything I showed you that by working hard in this manner you must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, “It is more blessed to give than to receive.”

Acts 20:35

You also won’t find the statements attributed to Christ here in bold anywhere in the four Gospels or anywhere else in the New Testament, so where was the Apostle Paul getting this from well he actually gives an answer:

The Gospel which is preached to me is not a man’s Gospel, but the Revelation of Jesus Christ.

Galatians 1:11-12

Now let us reject the traditions of men (Sola Scriptura):

“They worship Me in vain; they teach as doctrine the precepts of men.” You have disregarded the commandment of God to keep the tradition of men

Mark 7:7-8


Good Day, Al

Let apply some logic and reason to you use of the God breathed word ( BTW) it is the only thing we have that falls with in that category.

You Quote from Paul to the church in Thess: Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.

Ok what exactly he tell them?
When did he tell them?
Whom did he tell it to?
Where they the only ones to receive such information from Paul?
You seem to suggest that this information is out side of Scripture, Ok I would like you to prove such assertion.

I would please like historical Primary sources from you that you use to establish these facts.

Also you misquoted John... Things Jesus did not said.

And there are also many other things which And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that should be written.

In Him,

Bill
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
So you ignored pretty much the majority of my post to tackle a strawman, there’s a difference between man made traditions and inspired tradition which Christ didn’t reject as per his own words:

"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.
What you've referred to here isn't tradition at all. It's a reference to the (presumed) authority of the teachers of the law.

Actual Tradition, as taught by the various Catholic denominations (RC, EO, OO, etc), conceives of a second stream of divine revelation (after the Bible) that is equally as authoritative as the Bible. It is called Holy Tradition or Sacred Tradition and supposes that there are extra-Biblical beliefs that have always been accepted in the church and throughout the whole of the church.

The rejection of that man-made theory (Sacred Tradition) was asserted through use of the term Sola Scriptura.
 
Upvote 0

BBAS 64

Contributor
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
9,845
1,707
58
New England
✟484,036.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
As you have seen in this thread, there are many man made ideas being floated around. Some have, on the surface, good arguments. But when tested they fail. Others are just plain silly.

I'll stick with what Jesus explicitly said. Jesus told us to listen to the Church. Jesus never said listen to the Bible.

I'll stick with what Paul explicitly said. The Church is the pillar of truth. Paul never said the Bible is the pillar of truth.

People twist the Word of God so badly I'm surprised heads dont break off.

Good Day, Concretecamper

I agree with all you say here... The church is the Pillar (upholder) of truth.

But what is the "truth" that they are called to uphold?

1 Tim 3:14 I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these things to you so that, if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth. Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.

IN Him,

Bill
 
  • Like
Reactions: zoidar
Upvote 0

concretecamper

Member of His Church
Nov 23, 2013
6,742
2,553
PA
✟271,779.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
What is the Church today? When I got born again I didn't belong to any church.
the Church today is One, Visible, and Authoritative, just as Jesus described it would be. It has these same marks today as it did on Pentecost.

What you are doing is trying to fit your question to give you the answer you want.

There is One Church Christ founded. Find that Church and follow it. It is not some amoebic unidentifiable thing. It is Visible. It is One. It is Authoritative. Jesus said these things.

Saying there is One Church makes many uncomfortable. Saying it is an unidentifiable body of believers gives people cover to do their own thing. But it is not what Jesus said about His His Church.
 
Upvote 0

concretecamper

Member of His Church
Nov 23, 2013
6,742
2,553
PA
✟271,779.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
But what is the "truth" that they are called to uphold?
1. you dont need to answer this question before identifying the Church. Identify the One, Visible, and Authoritative Church first.
2. The Truth isnt something, it is Someone.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BBAS 64

Contributor
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
9,845
1,707
58
New England
✟484,036.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Some said Christian people are the Church, this is my belief as well.


Good Day, Peter

That would be consistent...

Augustine – The Church is the realm of Christ, His mystical body and His bride, the Mother of Christians. He also speaks of an inner and outer church, and the difficulty of telling from appearances who are members of this true church (the "enclosed garden spring shut up, fountain sealed, the paradise with the fruit of apples) who are the elect, and belong to the "invisible fellowship of love" (as opposed to the outer, historical Catholic Church).

"Moreover, that the word of God speaks to those who believe in Him as being one soul, and one synagogue, and one church, as to a daughter; that it thus addresses the church which has sprung from His name and partakes of His name (for we are all called Christians), is distinctly proclaimed in like manner in the following words, which teach us also to forget our old ancestral customs, when they speak thus: 'Hearken, O daughter, and behold, and incline thine ear; forget thy people and the house of thy father, and the King shall desire thy beauty: because He is thy Lord, and thou shalt worship Him.'" - Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho, 63)

Clement of Alexandria:

"For it is not now the place, but the assemblage of the elect, that I call the Church." (The Stromata, 7:5)
 
  • Informative
Reactions: zoidar
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
the Church today is One, Visible, and Authoritative, just as Jesus described it would be. It has these same marks today as it did on Pentecost.
That's not what Jesus said; it's an adaptation of his words done in order to justify the claims of one segment of his Church.

Saying there is One Church makes many uncomfortable. Saying it is an unidentifiable body of believers gives people cover to do their own thing.
Hmm. Now that's a separate point. But who is this that supposedly is saying the Church is an unidentifiable body of believers? No one posting on this thread seems to have done so.
 
Upvote 0

zoidar

loves Jesus the Christ! ✝️
Supporter
Sep 18, 2010
7,163
2,606
✟877,129.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
the Church today is One, Visible, and Authoritative, just as Jesus described it would be. It has these same marks today as it did on Pentecost.

What you are doing is trying to fit your question to give you the answer you want.

There is One Church Christ founded. Find that Church and follow it. It is not some amoebic unidentifiable thing. It is Visible. It is One. It is Authoritative. Jesus said these things.

Saying there is One Church makes many uncomfortable. Saying it is an unidentifiable body of believers gives people cover to do their own thing. But it is not what Jesus said about His His Church.

You are likely referring the RCC. I don't believe there is one organisation being the true Church. I believe we followers of Christ is the Church. RCC is very different from the first Christian churches.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BBAS 64

Contributor
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
9,845
1,707
58
New England
✟484,036.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
1. you dont need to answer this question before identifying the Church. Identify the One, Visible, and Authoritative Church first.
2. The Truth isnt something, it is Someone.


Good Day, Camper

But you have not answered the question, just begging questions.
How you may define the Church is not relevant to my question.

In Him,

Bill
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.