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.
the fact that you believe a collection of books contains the word of God, and you are fairly confident you who the specific collection of books that have this, shows that you believe in some form of Tradition and you view it as authoritative
Except then we'd have four Holy Traditions because OO, RC, EO, P all have a different collection.
I'll go with Athanasius: they were handed down as divine and the minimalist 66 books for unity amongst us. The alternative, Tradition, simply doesn't take us where I hope we all want to go.
Several things are true and unavoidable--
Just about every known Christian church accepts the same 66 books of the Bible. A range of Catholic churches accept different ones in addition, but if there's anything universal in Christianity it's agreement that the 66 books are divinely revealed.
Also, each Catholic church has a different version of what's Tradition.
Those two facts leave us with an obvious conclusion about what to look to for guidance.
the fact that you believe a collection of books contains the word of God, and you are fairly confident you who the specific collection of books that have this, shows that you believe in some form of Tradition and you view it as authoritative
It is a church's beliefs. For ancient churches it is their deposit of faith.What exactly is Holy Tradition,
every single one no matter how small or large. I know Protestants like to believe they don't have one; but that is just a group of people deceiving themselves. It's like someone claiming to be a Christian, but rejecting religion. Self-deception.and how many Christian denominations practice them,
how many denominations are there?and how many different versions are there?
the fact that you believe a collection of books contains the word of God, and you are fairly confident you who the specific collection of books that have this, shows that you believe in some form of Tradition and you view it as authoritative
Most of us don't believe, as liberal theology now holds, that the Bible "CONTAINS" the word of God (mixed with the ponderings and theories of ordinary humans along with erroneous historical and literary references). We believe that it is divine revelation.
It still applies. You believing that the Bible is the Word of God or Divine Revelation, requires an external authority to make such a claim.Except then we'd have four Holy Traditions because OO, RC, EO, P all have a different collection.
I'll go with Athanasius: they were handed down as divine and the minimalist 66 books for unity amongst us. The alternative, Tradition, simply doesn't take us where I hope we all want to go.
It is what it is. The Sacred Tradition is what we believe. Now as a Catholic I believe that the source of this Deposit of Faith, comes straight from the Apostles, and has been handed down through the generations; but that doesn't take away the fact that Sacred Tradition is my belief system.To simply say it is a church's beliefs or a deposit of faith leaves a standard of origin wide open.
By the same method that we believe that Jesus is the Son of God, who redeemed us through His death and resurrection: Faith.It's really only one step removed, though, isn't it? How do you know that your particular set of Holy Traditions is actually the one that was handed down by the apostles?
Wide open.It is what it is.
They do, thus Sola Scriptura.I really don't understand the huge desire of Protestants to deny this fact.
Not if at least 66 books of the Bible declares it.You believing that the Bible is the Word of God or Divine Revelation, requires an external authority to make such a claim.
Up until the Protestant revolt, every know Christian Church except for Ethiopian accepted the 73 book Canon. It wasn't until the revolt that this number got reduced. So should all Christians just default to a minimalist view? That don't make sense on any level.Several things are true and unavoidable--
Just about every known Christian church accepts the same 66 books of the Bible. A range of Catholic churches accept different ones in addition, but if there's anything universal in Christianity it's agreement that the 66 books are divinely revealed.
Isn't Sola Scriptura a tradition in and of it self? Especially considering the early church didn't have the NT completed and subsequently complied initially?<snip>They do, thus Sola Scriptura.<snip>
Due only to denominationalism.Wide open.
Yeah, don't hold up though, due to the very fact that Sola Scriptura, is NOT a doctrine found in Scripture.They do, thus Sola Scriptura.
Hum... Which books in the Bible declare themselves as what you claim them to be? I can see one making a case for that for the Torah, Revelation... What others, and where do you find these passages that make these claims?Not if at least 66 books of the Bible declares it.
The same point of Rhamiel's applies as well. You believe the Bible contains Divine Revelation, is external to the Bible; thus you have a Sacred Tradition that you adhere to.
Yeah, a lot of folks have the same disillusion that they excepted the Bible in a vacuum.Another misuse of the term "Tradition."
I believe the Bible because I am persuaded by the Bible that it is true. I do not believe it because there is some track record of people in my culture accepting it.
Once again, "Tradition" is not just custom as you'd like us to think it is. It is a method by which alleged additional revelation from God is ascertained, at least in theory. The most obvious problem with the theory is that every Catholic church uses a different set of beliefs based upon the particular opinions from history that it chooses to accept, thus defying the basis on which "Tradition" supposedly reveals anything.
Depends on how broadly and abstractly we want to define it.
Is logic itself a tradition?
Isn't Sola Scriptura a tradition in and of it self? Especially considering the early church didn't have the NT completed and subsequently complied initially?
Okay then I'll narrow it down by asking isn't Sola Scriptura a Holy Tradition? (a sacred way of practicing and understanding religious doctrines within certain Christian denominations?)Depends on how broadly and abstractly we want to define it.
Is logic itself a tradition?
Do we reject slavery because it's "traditional" to do so?
Is sunlight a tradition?
Of course you are right about the attempt being made to turn everything in life into a product of their theological system just by slapping the word on it.
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?