Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Dear bbbbbbb,The great difficulty with Tradition is that nobody can really know what it is, because it is not written and, therefore, unverifiable. Thus, our RCC friends can say, in perfect innocence that it is obvious that the Pope is the head of the church because of "Apostolic Succession" which is part of True Christian Tradition. Apart from the Bible, everything else is pretty much up for grabs in Christianity.
Greetings Anglian. There is actually one Christian that post against the Muslims concerning the Arabic translations of the Koran and wonder if you know him? He appears to be more knowledgable with it than most Muslims are..........Dear LLOJ,
We use, oddly enough, Coptic, which, as you know, is the language many of the earliest Scriptures are written in; we also use Greek, of course, and Arabic; heck, we even use English when necessary
Peace,
Anglian
One thing that is certain is that any claimants to Christianity through physical succession cannot be acceptable to the church. Every NT letter writer except James warned strongly of the existence, incipient, if not actually present among Christians as they wrote, of false brethren. Paul warned the bishops of Ephesus that, after his departure, 'grievous wolves' would arise from among 'your own number'! So even if a teacher starts off in true faith, it does not mean that he will stay faithful. Bribery or persecution can easily turn a man from the straight and narrow. To claim succession from 'wolves' is of course disastrous, but these men that 'Tradition' people follow could have been the very sort of people that Paul warned of. 'Tradition' people don't know that they were not, and they cannot be truthful if they claim to know that they were not, and cannot be accepted into the church.The great difficulty with Tradition is that nobody can really know what it is, because it is not written and, therefore, unverifiable. Thus, our RCC friends can say, in perfect innocence that it is obvious that the Pope is the head of the church because of "Apostolic Succession" which is part of True Christian Tradition.
One thing that is certain is that any claimants to Christianity through physical succession cannot be acceptable to the church. Every NT letter writer except James warned strongly of the existence, incipient, if not actually present among Christians as they wrote, of false brethren. Paul warned the bishops of Ephesus that, after his departure, 'grievous wolves' would arise from among 'your own number'! So even if a teacher starts off in true faith, it does not mean that he will stay faithful. Bribery or persecution can easily turn a man from the straight and narrow. To claim succession from 'wolves' is of course disastrous, but these men that 'Tradition' people follow could have been the very sort of people that Paul warned of. 'Tradition' people don't know that they were not, and they cannot be truthful if they claim to know that they were not, and cannot be accepted into the church.
In fact, the traditions of man since the apostles left this world have in every case been akin to those of the Pharisees- outward show disguising inward disobedience and corruption, easy versions of tough truths. Real succession is doing as only Jesus and the apostles commanded, nothing more, nothing less. Protestants find that hard, too, but again, Christians do not associate with any who condone failure to do so.
And also a better understanding of the Scriptures.There is no stronger proof of the continual presence of Christ with his people, no more thorough vindication of Christianity, no richer source of spiritual wisdom and experience, no deeper incentive to virtue and piety, than the history of Christ's kingdom. Every age has a message from God to man, which is of the greatest importance for man to understand.
Hello bbbbbbbb,The great difficulty with Tradition is that nobody can really know what it is, because it is not written and, therefore, unverifiable. Thus, our RCC friends can say, in perfect innocence that it is obvious that the Pope is the head of the church because of "Apostolic Succession" which is part of True Christian Tradition. Apart from the Bible, everything else is pretty much up for grabs in Christianity.
I do not believe that is the same "clement" mentioned in Acts. But if that is the belief of others, that is ok with me and may not even be a proper name looking at the way it is in the Greek.Notice Paul acknowledges Clement to have his name in the book of life.
Clement later goes to Rome and becomes one of the first bishops there.
He explains succession in his letter.
I do not believe that is the same "clement" mentioned in Acts. But if that is the belief of others, that is ok with me and may not even be a proper name looking at the way it is in the Greek.
Hi. Again I myself am cynical of that.Reading Irenæus (III, iii) he tells us that Clement "saw the blessedApostles and conversed with them, and had yet ringing in his ears the preaching of the Apostles and had their tradition before his eyes, and not he only for many were then surviving who had been taught y the Apostles". Similarly Epiphanius tells us (from Hegesippus) that Clement was a contemporary of Peter and Paul.
That may prove that point of this thread, the ECFs understood scriptures better.Hi. Again I myself am cynical of that.
Dear Yarddog,That may prove that point of this thread, the ECFs understood scriptures better.
Hello Anglian,Dear Yarddog,
And not only that, they established which Scriptures were worthy of canonisation, and thus saved LLOJ from having to translate 1 Clement.
Peace,
Anglian
Dear Yarddog,Hello Anglian,
I'm sure if many of the people that criticize the ECFs would take the time to read them, without the distortions that their Church's traditions have applied to them, they would be amazed at the tremendous spirits of these great men of our past.
I do thank themfor allowing me to go back and review Clement and Ignatius. I have been blessed by this.
Let us all come together, in unity, as these fathers asked us.
Yarddog
Nope. They were not Solo Scriptura like I am.That may prove that point of this thread, the ECFs understood scriptures better.
Hi Anglian. I am quite satisifed with the 66 books that are in the Canon today, just not with the way they are translated as you well know.Dear LLOJ
There would be a consensus that it is not the same Clement. Nonetheless, one of our earliest books has 1 Clement bound in with other Scriptures as part of the Bible. Had it ot been for a decision of the Church, those who do believe in Sola Scriptura would be telling us it was a Spirit inspired text because it was in the Bible.
I still have to hear from any of our friends who believe in Sola Scriptura as to why they accept the NT as edited by the Church rather than the one in the Codex Sinaiticus or Codex Alexandrinus. If it is the book, the whole book and nothing but the book, then I remain puzzled as to why Protestants use the book canonised by the Bible rather than the one in the earliest surviving codices.
I don't know if you can explain it, but thus far, none of those who proclaim their belief in Sola Scriptura have done so. Maybe it remains a puzzle without a Protestant answer?
Peace,
Anglian
Hi Anglian. I am quite satisifed with the 66 books that are in the Canon today, just not with the way they are translated as you well know.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?