• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.

A Biblical Defense of Catholicism

Discussion in 'One Bread, One Body - Catholic' started by Chris†opher Paul, Sep 25, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Chris†opher Paul

    Chris†opher Paul Based on a True Story

    +4
    A Biblical Defense of Catholicism

    Bible literalists, fundamentalists, and protestant in general, hold the view that the Holy Bible is the one source of Truth about God and salvation. Sola Scriptura has been the rallying cry of these Christians since the Reformation. Some have a tendency to attack the Catholic Church on the grounds that its teachings are unbiblical, due to the fact that certain doctrines declared by the Church are not explicitly stated in the scriptures. Since it isn't obvious to them where these doctrines originate in the Bible, they conclude that the Church has corrupted the basic beliefs of the Christian faithful over the centuries.

    Since the earliest times, before there were even any protestants, Christians believed that there were two sources of religious truth, which is the viewpoint still held by Catholics to this day. The first source is Sacred Scripture and the second is Sacred Tradition. In fact, there wasn't even a Bible available for centuries until the Catholic Church, using its authority given to it by Jesus Christ, decided what was valid scripture and compiled the Bible in the third century. The beliefs of the early Church have been passed down through the Church via various writings and oral traditions, and are not always explicitly stated in the Holy Scriptures. Occasionally, official doctrine has been declared based on these traditional beliefs, such as the Trinity and the Immaculate Conception, for example. It is this sort of declaration by the Church which seems to bother the protestant Christians the most. Without the belief that Jesus Christ set up the Catholic Church as the guardian of scripture and authority on doctrine through His original Deposit of Faith, it is understandable why they would take issue with the "non-biblical" teachings.

    However, beliefs of authority aside, we all agree that the Holy Scriptures are to be used for correction, so let's apply this same standard of measure to the protestant beliefs and see if the Bible upholds or refutes their stance.

    1. Sola Scriptura is self-contradictory.

    The protestant belief that the Christian faith is to be found only in the Bible is actually refuted by the Bible itself. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that we are to go by the scriptures alone. But even if we did go by the scriptures alone, the scriptures tell us not to do so, thus, the idea that we should go by the scriptures alone is self-contradictory.

    The following scripture is a favorite employed by protestants seeking to attack the authority of the Church:

    "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness." (2 Timothy 3:16)

    What these critics fail to realize is that this scripture does not say ONLY scripture, rather, it says that ALL scripture is to be used for correction. In fact, when we do use all of the scripture, the Catholic doctrines that are not obvious in individual scriptures themselves, can easily be defended. So, as the Bible instructs us, I shall use scripture to correct the protestant errors, and also to show that the Catholic doctrines are Biblically sound.

    2. The Bible says Apostalic Tradition and Scripture are valid.

    Not only does the Bible not say to only use the Bible, it clearly states that oral tradition and scriptures are to be used in teaching the Christian faithful.

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

    Further, the Bible itself tells us that the complete teachings of Christ are not recorded in the scriptures.

    "There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written." (John 21:25)

    Jesus Himself wrote nothing, except some scribbles in the dust which were later rubbed out. The Bible tells us that Jesus directed none of the Apostles to write a single word. His instruction to them was simply, "Go and teach."

    In Mark 3:14 and 16:15, Jesus commands the apostles to preach the gospel to the world, not to write it to the world.

    Even in the ancient times, Moses had the law read only every seven years. The Word of God has always been taught orally. (Deut. 31:9-12)

    Other examples of Jesus and the Apostles relying on Oral Tradition:

    Matt. 28:19; Mark 16:15, Matt. 28:20, Luke 1:1-4, John 20:30, 21:25, Acts 8:30-31, Heb. 5:12, 1 Cor. 5:9-11, 1 Cor. 11:2, Phil. 4:9, Col. 4:16, 1 Thess 3:10, 2 Thess 2:14, 2 Thess 2:15, 2 Thess 3:6, 1 Tim. 3:14-15, 2 Tim. 2:2, 2 Tim. 3:14, James 4:5, 2 Peter 1:20, 2 Peter 3:15-16, 1 John 4:1, 1 Sam. 3:1-9, 1 Kings 13:1-32, Matt. 15:3, Mark 7:9, Acts 2:42, Acts 20:7, John 17:20, 1 Cor. 11:2, Phil. 4:9, 2 Thess. 2:15, 2 Thess. 3:6, 2 Thess. 3:7, 1 Tim. 6:20, 2 Tim. 2:2, 2 Tim. 3:14, Matt. 2:23, Matt 23:2, John 19:26, Acts 20:35, 1 Cor. 7:10, 1 Cor. 10:4, Eph 5:14, Heb. 11:37, Jude 9, Jude 14-15, 2 Thess 3:6

    3. Scripture says not to interpret scripture privately.

    2 Peter 1:20 - Peter says that interpreting Scripture is not a matter of one's own private interpretation.

    Therefore, it must be a matter of "public" interpretation of the Church. The Divine Word needs a Divine Interpreter, which Jesus promised He would send in the form of the Holy Spirit, to keep the teachings of the Church correct. Private judgement leads to divisions, and the devil understands the tactic of divide and conquer.

    2 Peter 3:16 - Peter explains that the Scriptures are difficult to understand and can be distorted by the ignorant to their destruction. God did not guarantee the Holy Spirit would lead each of us to infallibly interpret the Scriptures, only the Apostles. The leaders of the Catholic Church are the successors of the original apostles, and thus, are the ones guided by the Holy Spirit.

    If we are not to use scripture alone, and if we are not to interpret it for ourselves, then the only option is to have an official interpretor of scripture, which is the Catholic Church.

    4. Scripture says that the Church is the pillar of truth, not the scripture itself.

    Jesus set up His Church as the official guardian of the Word and said that the Gates of Hell would not prevail against it. He put Peter, the first Pope, in the position of authority over the other apostles and told him that whatever they bind on earth, will be bound in Heaven. The Catholic Church has an unbroken line of succession from Peter as the head of the Church, and thus, the authority given by Jesus to define religious truth.

    "I am writing you about these matters, although I hope to visit you soon. But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth." (1 Timothy 3:14)

    "And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hell will not overcome it." (Matthew 16:18)

    Further support for the Primacy of Peter is found:

    Matt 10:2; Mark 1:36; 3:16; Lk 6:14-16; Act 1:3; 2:37; 5:29, Matt. 14:28-29, Matt. 16:16, Mark 8:29; John 6:69, Matt. 16:17, Matt. 16:18, Matt. 16:19, Matt. 17:24-25, Matt. 17:26-27, Matt. 18:21, Matt. 19:27, Mark 10:28, Mark 11:21, Mark 14:37, Mark 16:7, Luke 5:4,10, Luke 7:40-50, Luke 8:45, Luke 8:51; 9:28; 22:8; Acts 1:13; 3:1,3,11; 4:13,19; 8:14, Luke 9:28;33, Luke 12:41, Luke 22:31-32, Luke 24:12, John 20:4-6, Luke 24:34, John 6:68, John 13:6-9, John 13:36; 21:18, John 21:2-3,11, John 21:7, John 21:15, John 21:15-17, Acts 1:13, Acts 1:15, Acts 2:14, Acts 2:38, Acts 3:1,3,4, Acts 3:6-7, Acts 3:12-26, 4:8-12, Acts 5:3, Acts 5:15, Acts 8:14, Acts 8:20-23, Acts 9:32-34, Acts 9:38-40, Acts 10:5, Acts 10:34-48, 11:1-18, Acts 12:5, Acts 12:6-11, Acts 15:7-12, Acts 15:12, Acts 15:13-14, Rom. 15:20, 1 Cor. 15:4-8, Gal.1:18, 1 Peter 5:1, 1 Peter 5:13, 2 Peter 1:14, 2 Peter 3:16, Rev. 14:8, 16:19, 17:5, 18:2,10,21, Matt. 23:11; Mark 9:35; 10:44

    Copyright, 2002, s0uljah
     
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. Chris†opher Paul

    Chris†opher Paul Based on a True Story

    +4
    I go on to defend the Catholic doctrines that are commonly attacked, but that part isn't done yet.
     
  3. niwde

    niwde Member

    256
    +1
    the problem right now is that whether non catholic christians wnat to accept it or not

    it is very simple to tell
    what ever we do either right or wrong there is still some fellow who would not agree
    like Jesus when he spoke 2000 years ago,the pharasees didn't want to listen to him,instead tried all ways to get rid of him
    Mother Theresa,such a self sacrificing figure was also ridiculed by certain parties in India
    I am sure when Mr Bush wanted to get hold of Osama,there was certain parties who also ridicule and criticise him
    What the heck

    i think u should post this thread where everybody can read
    i just get so bored with this
    u qouted so much verses but people will qoute other verses to go against u from the bible also

    BIBLE VS BIBLE
    WHAT IS THIS???????????

    the bible is contradicting its own contents
     
  4. Chris†opher Paul

    Chris†opher Paul Based on a True Story

    +4
    Oh, I already know the response.

    "The Bible clearly doesn't mean that! You are twisting scripture!"

    Of course, this interpretation was accepted for 1500 years, but we will ignore that little logical problem in their protests.
     
  5. Live!

    Live! ex-creationist

    70
    +0
    Other Religion
    Single
    US-Democrat
     
  6. Chris†opher Paul

    Chris†opher Paul Based on a True Story

    +4
    The only one in existence when that scripture was written.
     
  7. VOW

    VOW Moderator

    +15
    Catholic
    Married
    To Live:

    The Church established by Jesus Christ upon Peter, the Rock.


    Peace,
    ~VOW
     
  8. jukesk9

    jukesk9 Dixie Whistlin' Papist

    +82
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Republican
    ie, The Holy Catholic Church.
     
  9. Hoonbaba

    Hoonbaba Catholic Preterist

    +54
    Catholic
    Hi guys,

    I've been a while. I just thought I'd drop by on this discussion. I don't know if I mentioned this to anyone, but I don't intend on becoming Catholic any time soon.

    God placed me where I need to be and he'll continue to lead me where he wants me to go.

    I don't agree with a few little things, but I still love the Catholic church! :)

    Lately I've been studying the sacraments and it's just amazing. One of these days I might write a book on them or something :)

    Anyway, enough rambling.

    The big problem I have with sola scriptura, as well as sacred tradition, is that I don't know what's right! LOL :)

    Actually there's one problem I have with Catholicism, but that has to do with eschatological stuff, but I won't get into that again.

    Anyway, for me, I primarily hold on to the Bible's teachings as authoritative, for the sake of not endorsing heretical ideas, and I'm sure the Catechism teaches that the Bible is certainly VERY authoritative.

    Also, I noticed something strange: Who put the Old testament together? This I don't know anything about. Based on the NT authors, the scriptures were referring to the old testament. Here's what I mean:

    Luke 21:22 speaks of 'all that has been written' (i.e. the old testament)

    Luke 24:44 speaks of scripture as the law, prophets, and the psalms.

    Luke 24:27 mentions how Jesus said that Moses and all the prophets spoke about him and so jesus 'explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself'.

    In light of these passages, I have a question that makes me wonder: By the time Jesus was doing his ministry, the scriptures (i.e. old testament) existed. This begs the question: Who put it together?

    The reason I bring this up is that, depending on the answer, I think it can give way for protestants to say, "Sola scripture".

    Honestly I'm so confused with this matter, thus I stick to Sola scriptura.

    -Jason
     
  10. Hoonbaba

    Hoonbaba Catholic Preterist

    +54
    Catholic
    Is it true that the Catholic church regards protestants as brethren? In other words, aren't protestants considered part of the church, described in 1 Tim 3:15?

    But of course, I'm not saying the Church has the right to teach ungodly teachings.

    God bless!

    -Jason
     
  11. The Squalid Wanderer

    The Squalid Wanderer The Fool

    416
    +2
    Anglican
    Dear Hoonbaba,

    The New Testament also refers to itself as Scripture (Peter calls Pauls writings Scripture).

    As for the O.T., it was assembled by Israel under the guidance of God
     
  12. Hoonbaba

    Hoonbaba Catholic Preterist

    +54
    Catholic
    Hi Squalid Wanderer,

    I agree, but can you elaborate? I'd like to know more about it.

    God bless!

    -Jason
     
  13. VOW

    VOW Moderator

    +15
    Catholic
    Married
    To Hoonbaba:

    Take a "Bible as Literature" class. The Old Testament is studied then.

    Much of the early Old Testament was oral history, stories passed down from generation to generation. By the time Moses came along, these histories were beginning to be written down.

    The Jews split up into the Twelve Tribes, and each tribe was responsible for its own history. From the telling and the retelling, the stories changed a little bit over the years. Later, when the tribes reuinted, there were editor scribes who collected all the written histories and tried to piece them together into a unified whole.

    Fascinating stuff!

    Now, to another topic:

    Who did you talk to that put the doubts into your mind about Catholicism? If you have questions, please, bring them to this forum and we can discuss them together! You once truly had an understanding on Sacred Tradition, how it came to exist, and how Tradition was used to discern Sacred Scripture, and how the two were meant to be used together. I'm curious to know what caused you to lose faith in Sacred Tradition.

    Your journey in faith has been a wonder to behold, Brother. I hope you come back to this forum and share your thought with us again.



    Peace,
    ~VOW
     
  14. The Squalid Wanderer

    The Squalid Wanderer The Fool

    416
    +2
    Anglican
    Dear Hoonbaba,

    Elaborate on what exactly? On the manner in which the O.T. was assembled? Do you need anything more detailed than what VOW offered above?
     
  15. Hoonbaba

    Hoonbaba Catholic Preterist

    +54
    Catholic
    Hi VOW,

    I never lost faith in Sacred Tradition. I find it biblical :) It's just that I don't adhere to it. I don't think it's necessary for the Christian to believe in it. In fact, I think it's possible to live a Christian life without the Bible. Our persecuted brethren live like that all the time :)

    In anycase, the only major problem I have with Catholicism is sacred tradition. Everything else is understandable. I can see why sacred tradition is biblical. Even jewish tradition fit in NT theology (the following comments are from a friend):

    By the way, VOW can you point me to some books on Bible as Literature? I don't know if the class is available at my school.

    God bless!

    -Jason
     
  16. VOW

    VOW Moderator

    +15
    Catholic
    Married
    To Hoonbaba:

    Well, Hon, when I took the two classes of "the Bible as Literature," the text we used was.....the Bible!

    Let me look around...



    Peace be with you,
    ~VOW
     
  17. Hoonbaba

    Hoonbaba Catholic Preterist

    +54
    Catholic
    VOW,

    But the Bible doesn't tell us how the Old Testament was put together :)

    God bless!!

    -Jason
     
  18. isshinwhat

    isshinwhat Pro Deo et Patria

    +605
    Eastern Orthodox
  19. isshinwhat

    isshinwhat Pro Deo et Patria

    +605
    Eastern Orthodox
    Correct me if I am wrong, but weren't the Old Testament Scriptures more of an ongoing collection of writings than a closed Canon? For the Jews, the Old Testament Canon wasn't closed until 60 years after Christ's death. Before that time, it was an open corpus, was it not? Does that mean that the Jews could technically add to their Canon now? Hmmmm..

    Neal
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...