How do we know . . . .

[Trento]

That’s what I keep hearing, yet nobody can list even one proof. So, you’ll have to forgive my consternation.

You’re adlibbing, that’s not what Paul said. What Paul says is this:

2Thes 2:15; Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

What is said is hold fast to the teachings you have been taught whether by word or by our epistles. The key to translating this verse is to recognize that Paul says whether by/or. He does not say to hold fast to the teachings you have been taught both by word and our epistle. IOWs, he does not say both/and.

His reference is to the method in which those being taught received their teachings. He’s saying that whether a person has received these teachings by listening to a sermon or by reading and epistle, we must hold fast to them.

There is no reason to infer from this verse that he is implying that some teachings were written down and others were not.

Remember Paul said this in an ”epistle” that is included in Scripture. That’s how you know that Jesus said this. To what verse in particular are you referring, though?

.

As long as you are using Augustine.

As to those other things which we hold on the authority, not of Scripture, but of tradition, and which are observed throughout the whole world, it may be understood that they are held as approved and instituted either by the apostles themselves, or by plenary Councils, whose authority in the Church is most useful, . . . (Letter to Januarius, 54, 1, 1; 54, 2, 3; cf. NPNF I, I:301)​

I believe that this practice [of not rebaptizing heretics and schismatics] comes from apostolic tradition, just as so many other practices not found in their writings nor in the councils of their successors, but which, because they are kept by the whole Church everywhere, are believed to have been commanded and handed down by the Apostles themselves.​

(On Baptism, 2, 7, 12; from William A. Jurgens, editor and translator, The Faith of the Early Fathers, 3 volumes, Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1970, vol. 3: 66; cf. NPNF I, IV:430)​

. . . the custom, which is opposed to Cyprian, 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, 5,23:31, in NPNF I, IV:475)​

The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants [is] certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except Apostolic.​

(The Literal Interpretation of Genesis, 10,23:39, in William A. Jurgens, editor and translator, The Faith of the Early Fathers, 3 volumes, Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1970, vol. 3: 86)​

But those reasons which I have here given, I have either gathered from the authority of the church, according to the tradition of our forefathers, or from the testimony of the divine Scriptures, or from the nature itself of numbers, and of similitudes. No sober person will decide against reason, no Christian against the Scriptures, no peaceable person against the church.​

(On the Trinity, 4,6:10; NPNF I, III:75)​

It is obvious; the faith allows it; the Catholic Church approves; it is true.​

(Sermon 117, 6)​

Moreover, many Protestant church historians assert that Augustine did not believe in sola Scriptura. For example:​

Augustine's legacy to the middle ages on the question of Scripture and Tradition is a two-fold one. In the first place, he reflects the early Church principle of the coinherence of Scripture and Tradition. While repeatedly asserting the ultimate authority of Scripture, Augustine does not oppose this at all to the authority of the Church Catholic . . . The Church has a practical priority: her authority as expressed in the direction-giving meaning of commovere is an instrumental authority, the door that leads to the fullness of the Word itself.But there is another aspect of Augustine's thought . . . we find mention of an authoritative extrascriptural oral tradition. While on the one hand the Church "moves" the faithful to discover the authority of Scripture, Scripture on the other hand refers the faithful back to the authority of the Church with regard to a series of issues with which the Apostles did not deal in writing. Augustine refers here to the baptism of heretics . . .​

(Heiko Oberman, The Harvest of Medieval Theology, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, revised edition of 1967, 370-371)​

Augustine, therefore, manifestly acknowledges a gradual advancement of the church doctrine, which reaches its corresponding expression from time to time through the general councils; but a progress within the truth, without positive error, for in a certain sense, as against heretics, he made the authority of Holy Scripture dependent on the authority of the catholic church, in his famous dictum against the Manichaean heretics: "I would not believe the gospel, did not the authority of the catholic church compel me." . . . The Protestant church makes the authority of the general councils, and of all ecclesiastical tradition, depend on the degree of its conformity to the Holy Scriptures; while the Greek and Roman churches make Scripture and tradition coordinate.​

(Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. III: Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity: A.D. 311-600, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974; reproduction of 5th revised edition of 1910, Chapter V, section 66, "The Synodical System. The Ecumenical Councils," pp. 344-​

​

 

[Trento]

That’s what I keep hearing, yet nobody can list even one proof. So, you’ll have to forgive my consternation.

You’re adlibbing, that’s not what Paul said. What Paul says is this:

2Thes 2:15; Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

What is said is hold fast to the teachings you have been taught whether by word or by our epistles. The key to translating this verse is to recognize that Paul says whether by/or. He does not say to hold fast to the teachings you have been taught both by word and our epistle. IOWs, he does not say both/and.

His reference is to the method in which those being taught received their teachings. He’s saying that whether a person has received these teachings by listening to a sermon or by reading and epistle, we must hold fast to them.

There is no reason to infer from this verse that he is implying that some teachings were written down and others were not.

Remember Paul said this in an ”epistle” that is included in Scripture. That’s how you know that Jesus said this. To what verse in particular are you referring, though?

.

As long as you are using Augustine.

As to those other things which we hold on the authority, not of Scripture, but of tradition, and which are observed throughout the whole world, it may be understood that they are held as approved and instituted either by the apostles themselves, or by plenary Councils, whose authority in the Church is most useful, . . . (Letter to Januarius, 54, 1, 1; 54, 2, 3; cf. NPNF I, I:301)​

I believe that this practice [of not rebaptizing heretics and schismatics] comes from apostolic tradition, just as so many other practices not found in their writings nor in the councils of their successors, but which, because they are kept by the whole Church everywhere, are believed to have been commanded and handed down by the Apostles themselves.​

(On Baptism, 2, 7, 12; from William A. Jurgens, editor and translator, The Faith of the Early Fathers, 3 volumes, Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1970, vol. 3: 66; cf. NPNF I, IV:430)​

. . . the custom, which is opposed to Cyprian, 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, 5,23:31, in NPNF I, IV:475)​

The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants [is] certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except Apostolic.​

(The Literal Interpretation of Genesis, 10,23:39, in William A. Jurgens, editor and translator, The Faith of the Early Fathers, 3 volumes, Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1970, vol. 3: 86)​

But those reasons which I have here given, I have either gathered from the authority of the church, according to the tradition of our forefathers, or from the testimony of the divine Scriptures, or from the nature itself of numbers, and of similitudes. No sober person will decide against reason, no Christian against the Scriptures, no peaceable person against the church.​

(On the Trinity, 4,6:10; NPNF I, III:75)​

It is obvious; the faith allows it; the Catholic Church approves; it is true.​

(Sermon 117, 6)​

Moreover, many Protestant church historians assert that Augustine did not believe in sola Scriptura. For example:​

Augustine's legacy to the middle ages on the question of Scripture and Tradition is a two-fold one. In the first place, he reflects the early Church principle of the coinherence of Scripture and Tradition. While repeatedly asserting the ultimate authority of Scripture, Augustine does not oppose this at all to the authority of the Church Catholic . . . The Church has a practical priority: her authority as expressed in the direction-giving meaning of commovere is an instrumental authority, the door that leads to the fullness of the Word itself.But there is another aspect of Augustine's thought . . . we find mention of an authoritative extrascriptural oral tradition. While on the one hand the Church "moves" the faithful to discover the authority of Scripture, Scripture on the other hand refers the faithful back to the authority of the Church with regard to a series of issues with which the Apostles did not deal in writing. Augustine refers here to the baptism of heretics . . .​

(Heiko Oberman, The Harvest of Medieval Theology, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, revised edition of 1967, 370-371)​

Augustine, therefore, manifestly acknowledges a gradual advancement of the church doctrine, which reaches its corresponding expression from time to time through the general councils; but a progress within the truth, without positive error, for in a certain sense, as against heretics, he made the authority of Holy Scripture dependent on the authority of the catholic church, in his famous dictum against the Manichaean heretics: "I would not believe the gospel, did not the authority of the catholic church compel me." . . . The Protestant church makes the authority of the general councils, and of all ecclesiastical tradition, depend on the degree of its conformity to the Holy Scriptures; while the Greek and Roman churches make Scripture and tradition coordinate.​

(Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. III: Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity: A.D. 311-600, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974; reproduction of 5th revised edition of 1910, Chapter V, section 66, "The Synodical System. The Ecumenical Councils," pp. 344-​

​

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

What date was the Masoretic text written?

Forgive me...

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

What text did Christ use?

What text do ALL the ancient Churches say Christ used?

What were the books that were canonized?

Are all of them in the Masoretic text?

Forgive me...

 

[racer]

Based on this to start with.

"Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear 'I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven.'" St. Augustine of Hippo ("Sermon 295," c. 411 A.D.)

"If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly and safely do we number them from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, 'Upon this rock I will build my Church...' Peter was succeeded by Linus, Linus by Clement, Clement by Anacletus, Anacletus by Evaristus...." St. Augustine of Hippo ("Letter 53," 412 A.D.)

Gee, Trento, do you have to be so obvious? You don’t even bother changing the font color. You should at least post the link from which you acquired this quote:

http://www.catscans.com/catholicsite/papacy2.htm

"Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear 'I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven.'" St. Augustine of Hippo ("Sermon 295," c. 411 A.D.)

"If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly and safely do we number them from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, 'Upon this rock I will build my Church...' Peter was succeeded by Linus, Linus by Clement, Clement by Anacletus, Anacletus by Evaristus...." St. Augustine of Hippo ("Letter 53," 412 A.D.)

Do you even bother searching out the texts themselves and reading the quotes in context? Yep, you’ve given us yet another fine example of cut-n-paste from an unnamed source.

BTW, how do either of these quotes establish Petrine Primacy or Papal Infallibility? In the first post Augustine merely says that Peter respresents the Church I’ve given quotes to you regarding this. Do you assert that this negates Augustine’s teaching that the “Keys were given to the Church?”

From letter 53 your sources source:

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102053.htm

First, your quote in a bit more context:

. . . . To you it has moreover been proclaimed by the writings of the prophets and of the apostles, that the promises were given to Abraham and to his seed, which is Christ, Galatians 3:16 when God said unto him: "In your seed shall all nations of the earth be blessed." Having then such promises, if an angel from heaven were to say to you, "Let go the Christianity of the whole earth, and cling to the faction of Donatus, the episcopal succession of which is set forth in a letter of their bishop in your town," he ought to be accursed in your estimation; because he would be endeavouring to cut you off from the whole Church, and thrust you into a small party, and make you forfeit your interest in the promises of God.

2. For “IF” the lineal succession of bishops is to be taken into account, with how much more certainty and benefit to the Church do we reckon back till we reach Peter himself, to whom, as bearing in a figure the whole Church, the Lord said: "Upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it!"

Do you see the significance of Augustine’s words in a bit more context? “IF” being the defining word in that text. It was the Donatus people whom were espousing the superiority of “Episcopal succession.” So, Augustine basically says, well if that’s what counts, then how can they consider their Episcopal succession superior to the succession that reaches back to Peter.

Being a figure of the church is not the same as being the supposed "rock" upon which the church was built.

The meaning is considerably different when taken in more adequate context isn’t it? Anyhow, further down in this letter Augustine says:

Chapter 3

6. We rely, however, not so much on these documents as on the Holy Scriptures, wherein a dominion extending to the ends of the earth among all nations is promised as the heritage of Christ, separated from which by their sinful schism they reproach us with the crimes which belong to the chaff in the Lord's threshing-floor, which must be permitted to remain mixed with the good grain until the end come, until the whole be winnowed in the final judgment.

As for your "cherrypicked" quote on Sermon 295, thus far I have not been able to locate on CCEL.org or New Advent this sermon. I'm still looking.

 

[racer]

What text did Christ use?

Christ was God--He didn't need a text.

What text do ALL the ancient Churches say Christ used?

His voice. So?

What were the books that were canonized?

The ones in my bible.

Are all of them in the Masoretic text?

Forgive me...

Haven't read the whole thing.

 

[racer]

As long as you are using Augustine.

As to those other things which we hold on the authority, not of Scripture, but of tradition, and which are observed throughout the whole world, it may be understood that they are held as approved and instituted either by the apostles themselves, or by plenary Councils, whose authority in the Church is most useful, . . . (Letter to Januarius, 54, 1, 1; 54, 2, 3; cf. NPNF I, I:301)

Again, your taking words out of context. Here’s the hole of his statement in Letter 54 to Januarius:

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102054.htm

Letter 54 (A.D. 400)

Also called Book I of Replies to Questions of Januarius.


To His Beloved Son Januarius, Augustin Sends Greeting in the Lord.
Chapter 1

1. . . . I desire you therefore, in the first place, to hold fast this as the fundamental principle in the present discussion, that our Lord Jesus Christ has appointed to us a "light yoke" and an "easy burden," as He declares in the Gospel: Matthew 11:30 in accordance with which He has bound His people under the new dispensation together in fellowship by sacraments, which are in number very few, in observance most easy, and in significance most excellent, as baptism solemnized in the name of the Trinity, the communion of His body and blood, and such other things as are prescribed in the canonical Scriptures, with the exception of those enactments which were a yoke of bondage to God's ancient people, suited to their state of heart and to the times of the prophets, and which are found in the five books of Moses. As to those other things which we hold on the authority, not of Scripture, but of tradition, and which are observed throughout the whole world, it may be understood that they are held as approved and instituted either by the apostles themselves, or by plenary Councils, whose authority in the Church is most useful, e.g. the annual commemoration, by special solemnities, of the Lord's passion, resurrection, and ascension, and of the descent of the Holy Spirit from heaven, and whatever else is in like manner observed by the whole Church wherever it has been established.

Okay, Augustine says that the “authority” of plenary Councils is useful—not necessary. But, of what traditions is he speaking? Well, let’s read on. The quote says, e.g. annual commemoration, be special solemnities, of the Lord’s passion, resurrection, and ascension, and of the descent of the Holy Spirit from heaven, and whatever else is in like manner observed by the whole church wherever it has been established.

He is speaking about commemorations and celebrations that are carried out to celebrate each of the special solemnities mentioned here; the Lords passion, resurrection, and ascension and of the descent of the Holy Spirit from heaven. Now we know that Scripture recorded each of these events, so it is the observances and traditions practiced in celebration of these events of which Augustine speaks. He says the Church has the authority to proclaim days of celebration of these biblical events. Your citation is a blatant misrepresentation of what is being said here. In fact, read on:

Chapter 2

2. There are other things, however, which are different in different places and countries: e.g., some fast on Saturday, others do not; some partake daily of the body and blood of Christ, others receive it on stated days: in some places no day passes without the sacrifice being offered; in others it is only on Saturday and the Lord's day, or it may be only on the Lord's day. In regard to these and all other variable observances which may be met anywhere, one is at liberty to comply with them or not as he chooses; and there is no better rule for the wise and serious Christian in this matter, than to conform to the practice which he finds prevailing in the Church to which it may be his lot to come.For such a custom, if it is clearly not contrary to the faith nor to sound morality, is to be held as a thing indifferent, and ought to be observed for the sake of fellowship with those among whom we live.

He is clearly speaking of traditional observances and celebrations, not Church doctrine or dogma.

 

[racer]

I believe that this practice [of not rebaptizing heretics and schismatics] comes from apostolic tradition, just as so many other practices not found in their writings nor in the councils of their successors, but which, because they are kept by the whole Church everywhere, are believed to have been commanded and handed down by the Apostles themselves.

(On Baptism, 2, 7, 12; from William A. Jurgens, editor and translator, The Faith of the Early Fathers, 3 volumes, Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1970, vol. 3: 66; cf. NPNF I, IV:430)

Cyprian and Firmilian hotly disputed this practice, which puts a big glich in Uanimous Consent. Look what Augustine says. He supposes? Oh, he is speaking real authoritatively. Once again, he is speaking about church practice not doctrine.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/14082.htm

12. Cease, then, to bring forward against us the authority of Cyprian in favor of repeating baptism, but cling with us to the example of Cyprian for the preservation of unity. For this question of baptism had not been as yet completely worked out, but yet the Church observed the most wholesome custom of correcting what was wrong, not repeating what was already given, even in the case of schismatics and heretics: she healed the wounded part, but did not meddle with what was whole. And this custom, coming, I suppose, from apostolical tradition (like many other things which are held to have been handed down under their actual sanction, because they are preserved throughout the whole Church, though they are not found either in their letters, or in the Councils of their successors),—this most wholesome custom, I say, according to the holy Cyprian, began to be what is called amended by his predecessor Agrippinus. . . .

 

[racer]

Duplicate post . . . .

 

[racer]

I believe that this practice [of not rebaptizing heretics and schismatics] comes from apostolic tradition, just as so many other practices not found in their writings nor in the councils of their successors, but which, because they are kept by the whole Church everywhere, are believed to have been commanded and handed down by the Apostles themselves.

(On Baptism, 2, 7, 12; from William A. Jurgens, editor and translator, The Faith of the Early Fathers, 3 volumes, Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1970, vol. 3: 66; cf. NPNF I, IV:430)

. . . the custom, which is opposed to Cyprian, 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, 5,23:31, in NPNF I, IV:475)

Cyprian and Firmilian hotly disputed this practice. And, look at what Augustine really said, "I suppose . . ." He supposes? Yeah, that sounds really firm and authoritative to me. Sounds as if he doesn't really know where the practice came from. The dispute arose between Cyprian and Pope Stephen at a time when many people had fled the church and sacrificed to idols. It wasn't a practice that had deep roots in church tradtion at the time of Augustine. Cyprian and Firmilian disagreed, but Pope Stephen overruled their objections.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/14082.htm

12. Cease, then, to bring forward against us the authority of Cyprian in favor of repeating baptism, but cling with us to the example of Cyprian for the preservation of unity. For this question of baptism had not been as yet completely worked out, but yet the Church observed the most wholesome custom of correcting what was wrong, not repeating what was already given, even in the case of schismatics and heretics: she healed the wounded part, but did not meddle with what was whole. And this custom, coming, I suppose, from apostolical tradition (like many other things which are held to have been handed down under their actual sanction, because they are preserved throughout the whole Church, though they are not found either in their letters, or in the Councils of their successors),—this most wholesome custom, I say, according to the holy Cyprian, began to be what is called amended by his predecessor Agrippinus. . . . . .

 

[racer]

The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants [is] certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except Apostolic.

(The Literal Interpretation of Genesis, 10,23:39, in William A. Jurgens, editor and translator, The Faith of the Early Fathers, 3 volumes, Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1970, vol. 3: 86)

Um, who is being quoted here? I don't think it's Augustine.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

THe Catholic Church uses the same canon as the Eastern Churches.

Reformationist Christianity uses a watered down OT.

Amen.

So do the Jews then

http://www.christianforums.com/t5800024-the-man-in-zech-823.html

Zechariah 8:22 Thus sayeth YHWH-of Hosts: in-Days, the-those, which they-shall-take-firm-hold a-hem/wing, Ten Mortals/582 'enowsh, from-all Tongues-of the-Nations.
And-They-take-fast/hold in-hem-of a-Man/0376 'iysh, a-Judean/Y@huwdiy, to-say 'We-are-going with-You that We-hear Elohiym with-You'.

Mark 6:56 And the-where ever He into-journeyed into villages, the cities, the fields/hamlets, in the market-places, they place the ones being sick and they beside-called Him that if-even the hang-foot of the garment of Him they should be touching, and as manysoever as touch of Him/it, were Saved/eswzonto <4982> (5712).

 

[racer]

But those reasons which I have here given, I have either gathered from the authority of the church, according to the tradition of our forefathers, or from the testimony of the divine Scriptures, or from the nature itself of numbers, and of similitudes. No sober person will decide against reason, no Christian against the Scriptures, no peaceable person against the church.

(On the Trinity, 4,6:10; NPNF I, III:75)

I’m not going to bother to point out the flaws in your attempt to use this quote to affirm RC teachings. I simply ask how the prove or affirm Papal Infallibility or Petrine Primacy, or even equality between the authority of Scripture and the church?

BTW, do you have any thoughts regarding the OP? How do you know you have a clue about what Scripture or your church means?

 

[racer]

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15011.htm

Chapter 40 [XXVII.]—A Collection of Scripture Testimonies. From the Gospels.

This reasoning will carry more weight, after I have collected the mass of Scripture testimonies which I have undertaken to adduce. We have already quoted: "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners." Luke 5:32 To the same purport [the Lord] says, on entering the home of Zaccheus: "Today is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham; for the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost." Luke 19:9-10 The same truth is declared in the parable of the lost sheep and the ninety and nine which were left until the missing one was sought and found; Luke 15:4 as it is also in the parable of the lost one among the ten silver coins. Luke 15:8 Whence, as He said, "it behoved that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." Luke 24:46-47 Mark likewise, at the end of his Gospel, tells us how that the Lord said: "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believes, and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believes not shall be damned." Mark 16:15-16 Now, who can be unaware that, in the case of infants, being baptized is to believe, and not being baptized is not to believe? From the Gospel of John we have already adduced some passages. However, I must also request your attention to the following: John Baptist says of Christ, "Behold the Lamb of God, Behold Him which takes away the sin of the world;" John 1:29 and He too says of Himself, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish." John 10:27-28 Now, inasmuch as infants are only able to become His sheep by baptism, it must needs come to pass that they perish if they are not baptized, because they will not have that eternal life which He gives to His sheep. So in another passage He says: "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man comes unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6

 

[racer]

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15011.htm

Chapter 40 [XXVII.]&#8212;A Collection of Scripture Testimonies. From the Gospels.

This reasoning will carry more weight, after I have collected the mass of Scripture testimonies which I have undertaken to adduce. We have already quoted: "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners." Luke 5:32 To the same purport [the Lord] says, on entering the home of Zaccheus: "Today is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham; for the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost." Luke 19:9-10 The same truth is declared in the parable of the lost sheep and the ninety and nine which were left until the missing one was sought and found; Luke 15:4 as it is also in the parable of the lost one among the ten silver coins. Luke 15:8 Whence, as He said, "it behoved that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." Luke 24:46-47 Mark likewise, at the end of his Gospel, tells us how that the Lord said: "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believes, and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believes not shall be damned." Mark 16:15-16 Now, who can be unaware that, in the case of infants, being baptized is to believe, and not being baptized is not to believe? From the Gospel of John we have already adduced some passages. However, I must also request your attention to the following: John Baptist says of Christ, "Behold the Lamb of God, Behold Him which takes away the sin of the world;" John 1:29 and He too says of Himself, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish." John 10:27-28 Now, inasmuch as infants are only able to become His sheep by baptism, it must needs come to pass that they perish if they are not baptized, because they will not have that eternal life which He gives to His sheep. So in another passage He says: "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man comes unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6

 

[Trento]

Gee,


BTW, how do either of these quotes establish Petrine Primacy or Papal Infallibility? In the first post Augustine merely says that Peter respresents the Church I’ve given quotes to you regarding this. Do you assert that this negates Augustine’s teaching that the “Keys were given to the Church?”

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times] A provincial council of the province of Numidia at Milevis, [FONT=Times New Roman, Times] attended by sixty-one bishops, including St. Augustine. Imitating that of Pro-consular Africa, they also wrote to Pope Innocent:[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times]"Since God has by a special gift of His grace set you in the Apostolic See, and has given such a one as yourself to our times, so that it could rather be imputed to us as a fault of negligence if we failed to unfold to your Reverence whatever is to be suggested for the Church, than that you should be able to receive the same with contempt or negligence, [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, Times]we beseech you to imply your pastoral diligence to the great peril of the weak members of Christ."[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times]After exposing the heresy, the bishops continued:[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times]"In insinuating these things to your Apostolic breast we have no need to say much, and heap up words about this impiety, since doubtless they will move you in such wise that you will be altogether unable to refrain from correcting them, that they may creep no further....The authors of this most pernicious heresy are said to be Pelagius and Celestius, whom, indeed, we should prefer to be cured with the Church, rather than that they should be cut off from the Church, if no necessity compels this. One of them, Celestius, is even said to have arrived at the priesthood in Asia. Your Holiness is better informed by the Council of Carthage as to what was done against him a few years back. Pelagius, as the letters of some of our brethren say, is in Jerusalem, and is said to have deceived many there. Many more, however, who have been able to examine his views more closely, are fighting him on behalf of the Catholic Faith, but especially your holy son, our brother and fellow-priest, Jerome. But we consider that with the help of the mercy of our God, whom we pray to direct your counsels and to hear your prayers, those who hold such perverse and baneful opinions will more easily yield to the authority of your Holiness, which has been taken from the authority of the Holy Scriptures (auctoritati sanctitatis tuae, de sanctarum scripturarum auctoritate depromptae facilius....esse cessuros), so that we may be rather rejoiced by their correction than saddened by their destruction. But whatever they themselves may choose, your Reverence perceives that at least those many must be cared for whom they may entangle in their nets if they should not submit straightforwardly. We write this to your Holiness from the Council of Numidia, imitating our fellow bishops of the Church and province of Carthage, whom we understand to have written of this affair to the Apostolic See which your Blessedness adorns."[/FONT]

The authority of the Apostolic See, founded on Scripture.

I see that the Pope is that he has "more grace" [FONT=Times New Roman, Times] than the two provincial councils. [/FONT]
​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times]The Africans ask for an authoritative condemnation by the Pope of those doctrines which they had themselves condemned, in order that the evil may be entirely cut away. They imply the view that their decision was strictly binding only in Africa, while that of Innocent would have an Ecumenical or Universal force.[/FONT]

 

[Trento]

I’m not going to bother to point out the flaws in your attempt to use this quote to affirm RC teachings. I simply ask how the prove or affirm Papal Infallibility or Petrine Primacy, or even equality between the authority of Scripture and the church?

The application of Tradition to scripture by Augustine is reveald here by Protestant Historians
and seeing that the Protestant historians who are familiar with the Fathers; who specialize in patristics and Church history and history of theology or of doctrinal development of same, completely contradict you i will remain an amateur historian and not be guilty of "fundamental logical errors in evaluating the views of these church fathers."


Protestant Church historian Heiko Oberman notes concerning St. Augustine:

Augustine's legacy to the middle ages on the question of Scripture and Tradition is a two-fold one. In the first place, he reflects the early Church principle of the coinherence of Scripture and Tradition. While repeatedly asserting the ultimate authority of Scripture, Augustine does not oppose this at all to the authority of the Church Catholic . . . The Church has a practical priority: her authority as expressed in the direction-giving meaning of commovere is an instrumental authority, the door that leads to the fullness of the Word itself.
[SIZE=-1]But there is another aspect of Augustine's thought . . . we find mention of an authoritative extrascriptural oral tradition. While on the one hand the Church "moves" the faithful to discover the authority of Scripture, Scripture on the other hand refers the faithful back to the authority of the Church with regard to a series of issues with which the Apostles did not deal in writing. Augustine refers here to the baptism of heretics . . .​

[SIZE=-1](The Harvest of Medieval Theology, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, revised edition of 1967, 370-371)[/SIZE]

J.N.D. Kelly, AnotherProtestant patristic scholar, wrote:


The three letters [Epistles 175-177] relating to Pelagianism which the African church sent to innocent I in 416, and of which Augustine was the draughtsman, suggested that he attributed to the Pope a pastoral and teaching authority extending over the whole Church, and found a basis for it in Scripture.
(Ibid., 419)


According to Augustine [De doct. christ. 3,2], its Scripture's doubtful or ambiguous passages need to be cleared up by 'the rule of faith'; it was, moreover, the authority of the Church alone which in his eyes guranteed it's veractiy

[ C. ep. Manich. 6: cf. de doct. christ. 2,12; c. Faust Manich, 22, 79][SIZE=-1](Ibid., 47)[/SIZE]
Protestant Church historian Philip Schaff comments on St. Augustine's views of Scripture and Tradition:

Augustine, therefore, manifestly acknowledges a gradual advancement of the church doctrine, which reaches its corresponding expression from time to time through the general councils; but a progress within the truth, without positive error. for in a certain sense, as against heretics, he made the authority of Holy Scripture dependent on the authority of the catholic church, in his famous dictum against the Manichaean heretics: "I would not believe the gospel, did not the authority of the catholic church compel me."

(History of the Christian Church, Vol. III: Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity: A.D. 311-600, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974; reproduction of 5th revised edition of 1910, Chapter V, section 66, "The Synodical System. The Ecumenical Councils," pp. 344-345)


[SIZE=-1]He adopted Cyprian's doctrine of the church, and completed it in the conflict with Donatism by transferring the predicates of unity, holiness, universality, exclusiveness and maternity, directly to the actual church of the time, which, with a firm episcopal organization, an unbroken succession, and the Apostles' Creed, triumphantly withstood the eighty or the hundred opposing sects in the heretical catalogue of the day, and had its visible centre in Rome. [SIZE=-1]
[SIZE=-1](Ibid., Chapter X, section 180, "The Influence of Augustine upon Posterity and his Relation to Catholicism and Protestantism," pp. 1019-1020)


<B>The renowned historian Jaroslav Pelikan concurs with this general assessment of St. Augustine's views:

Concerning Augustine this authority of orthodox catholic Christendom . . was so powerful as even to validate the very authority of the Bible . . . But between the authority of the Bible and the authority of the catholic church (which was present within, but was more than, the authority of its several bishops past and present) there could not in a real sense be any contradiction. Here one could find repose in "the resting place of authority," [Bapt. 2.8.13] not in the unknown quantity of the company of the elect, but in the institution of salvation that could claim foundation by Christ and succession from the apostles. (The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine: Vol. 1 of 5: The​

</B>

Emergence of the Catholic Tradition: 100-600, Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1971, 303-304

​

[/SIZE][/SIZE]HISTORY of the CHRISTIAN CHURCH - Phillip Schaff


CHAPTER X.

CHURCH FATHERS, AND THEOLOGICAL LITERATURE

Quote Schaff--
"We recall his (Augustine's) famous anti-Manichaean dictum: "Ego evangelio non crederem, nisi me catholicae ecclesiae commoveret auctoritas." The Protestant would reverse this maxim, and ground his faith in the church on his faith in Christ and in the gospel. "

It was, indeed, a full and unconditional surrender of Augustine's mind and heart to God, but it was at the same time a submission of his private judgment to the authority of the church which led him to the faith of the gospel.


[/SIZE]
​

[/SIZE]

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

THe Catholic Church uses the same canon as the Eastern Churches. Reformationist Christianity uses a watered down OT.

Amen.

Uh . . . watered down? Explain?

The Hebrew texts are the same . . . and the DSS's proved this.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

What date was the Masoretic text written?

Forgive me...

Approx. 1000 AD to the best of my knowledge.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

What text did Christ use?

What text do ALL the ancient Churches say Christ used?

What were the books that were canonized?

Are all of them in the Masoretic text?

Forgive me...

Jesus probably used the Hebrew text (as He read from the Is scroll) and the LXX.

What were the books that were canonized?

Are all of them in the Masoretic text?

The Apocrypha were not canonized . . . and what was officialy recognized the Masoretic text did include.

You forget . . . even the JEWS did not consider the Apocrypha as inspired and on par with the 39 books of the OT.