Is Scripture MISSING Dogmas?

[Albion]

Eighteen posts since "ThatTrueLight" asked for one example of a doctrine referred to in 2 Thess. 2:15

Still nothing.

As was predicted.

 

[MoreCoffee]

The Blessed Virgin Mary's motherhood of God is one example. Another is The Blessed Virgin Mary's perpetual virginity, but that took a while to be fully fleshed out from the raw data; namely The Blessed Virgin Mary as the second Eve, mother of the faithful as well as mother of God, and the ark of the new covenant in the blood of Christ. Her virginity was always regarded as intact after the birth of the Lord Jesus Christ as is evidenced from first or second century documents giving an account thereof. And, of course, holy scripture points towards The Blessed Virgin Mary's perpetual virginity too though it is somewhat unclear.

 

[hedrick]

Would you say, then, that when Jesus says "the Spirit will lead you into all truth" it's not simply a promise, but also a challenge? I ask because it seems to me that that was exactly the task of early Christians: to gather together their collected experience, and then write them down, and then gather together those writings together with their ongoing experience as worshiping communities, and eventually bring together the synthesis that forms the basic Christian narrative and more specifically the confessions concerning Jesus Christ. That was the work, as I see it, of Irenaeus, Origen, and Augustine as regards the whole narrative, and the church councils as regards the identity of the in-and-revealed-through-Christ.

I agree. The question, however, is the extent to which their synthesis is normative. The work done by the early Church had to be done. They had to explain Christianity in a way that would be credible within their culture, and they had to deal with misunderstandings that could have seriously compromised the work of the Church. But they did this within a different culture from the one that Jesus and even Paul worked in, and thus used a different approach.

It's hard to imagine Jesus speaking of himself as one person with two natures. That doesn't mean that Chalcedon was illegitimate, but it was a reinterpretation within a culture that thought differently from the 1st Cent Jewish culture.

My problem is when the classical formulations are seen as more than a faithful way of understanding the truth within late antiquity. I think the challenge you mention is one that applies to every generation of Christians. Not that later generations start from scratch, of course. That would be silly, and it would ignore the wisdom of past generations, and increase the danger that we'd replay past heresies in new forms.

 

[SpyderByte]

The Blessed Virgin Mary's motherhood of God is one example. Another is The Blessed Virgin Mary's perpetual virginity, but that took a while to be fully fleshed out from the raw data; namely The Blessed Virgin Mary as the second Eve, mother of the faithful as well as mother of God, and the ark of the new covenant in the blood of Christ. Her virginity was always regarded as intact after the birth of the Lord Jesus Christ as is evidenced from first or second century documents giving an account thereof. And, of course, holy scripture points towards The Blessed Virgin Mary's perpetual virginity too though it is somewhat unclear.

The first documents speaking of her ever virginity are gnostic writings and heretical. In fact those same writings were rejected by popes and ecf's. Yet today their the foundation of dogmas found nowhere in the bible. Please post the verse that says Mary was a perpetual virgin. No eisegesis. I'll take that right along with the verse that says Mary was bodily assumed, which I asked for before, but it got ignored.

 

[MoreCoffee]

The first documents speaking of her ever virginity are gnostic writings and heretical. In fact those same writings were rejected by popes and ecf's. Yet today their the foundation of dogmas found nowhere in the bible. Please post the verse that says Mary was a perpetual virgin. No eisegesis. I'll take that right along with the verse that says Mary was bodily assumed, which I asked for before, but it got ignored.

Maybe, I am not convinced that is so. But even if it were so the point is not what is written but what was handed on as holy tradition because it came from Christ through the apostles to later generations and to the faithful today. That is what was asked for and what was given by way of examples.

 

[SpyderByte]

Maybe, I am not convinced that is so. But even if it were so the point is not what is written but what was handed on as holy tradition because it came from Christ through the apostles to later generations and to the faithful today. That is what was asked for and what was given by way of examples.

Except it wasnt. we were given assertions, including that every dogma of the RCC is found in Scripture, but I haven't seen them yet. I asked for 2 specifically.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Eighteen posts since "ThatTrueLight" asked for one example of a doctrine referred to in 2 Thess. 2:15

Still nothing.

As was predicted.

The Blessed Virgin Mary's motherhood of God is one example. Another is The Blessed Virgin Mary's perpetual virginity, but that took a while to be fully fleshed out from the raw data; namely The Blessed Virgin Mary as the second Eve, mother of the faithful as well as mother of God, and the ark of the new covenant in the blood of Christ. Her virginity was always regarded as intact after the birth of the Lord Jesus Christ as is evidenced from first or second century documents giving an account thereof. And, of course, holy scripture points towards The Blessed Virgin Mary's perpetual virginity too though it is somewhat unclear.

Except it wasn't. we were given assertions, including that every dogma of the RCC is found in Scripture, but I haven't seen them yet. I asked for 2 specifically.

Actually it was, see the first quote given above.

 

[SpyderByte]

Actually it was, see the first quote given above.

That was the assertion I was talking about. That and tadoflamb who asserted that every RCC dogma was found in scripture. You've made an assertion, now please back up that assertion with scripture.

 

[MoreCoffee]

That was the assertion I was talking about. That and tadoflamb who asserted that every RCC dogma was found in scripture. You've made an assertion, now please back up that assertion with scripture.

Brother tadoflamb is right. The thing is, scripture sometimes presents doctrine in subtle ways and it takes time and careful interpretation to discover and understand it.

But when you ask me to back up my assertion with scripture I say in return I did but by means of general observations about what holy scripture says. For example The Blessed Virgin Mary's motherhood of God comes from a consideration of who her Son is. Once we come to accept that he is the Lord Jesus Christ, Son of man and Son of God, and as the God's Son he is himself God and hence as Son of Mary we learn that Mary is the mother of God. The other example was also explained in my earlier post.

 

[hedrick]

Brother tadoflamb is right. The thing is, scripture sometimes presents doctrine in subtle ways and it takes time and careful interpretation to discover and understand it.

But when you ask me to back up my assertion with scripture I say in return I did but by means of general observations about what holy scripture says. For example The Blessed Virgin Mary's motherhood of God comes from a consideration of who her Son is. Once we come to accept that he is the Lord Jesus Christ, Son of man and Son of God, and as the God's Son he is himself God and hence as Son of Mary we learn that Mary is the mother of God. The other example was also explained in my earlier post.

You're saying that it's a legitimate extrapolation from Scripture. That's not the same thing as saying it's in Scripture. It goes beyond the point of this discussion to look at whether it's actually legitimate. As I'm sure you know, Christians have differed on that topic.

 

[barryatlake]

Albion, you ask;
"Eighteen posts since "ThatTrueLight" asked for one example of a doctrine referred to in 2 Thess. 2:15

Still nothing.

As was predicted."


MoreCoffee has offered Doctrine, you just don't believe.The Canon is probably the strongest example of 2 Thess. 2: 15. After all, some of the Bible was not written until sometime around 90 to 110 AD. No Christian before that time could have possibly known the full Canon - it had not been written yet. This is, like, two generations after the Resurrection.

 

[Albion]

Brother tadoflamb is right. The thing is, scripture sometimes presents doctrine in subtle ways and it takes time and careful interpretation to discover and understand it.

But when you ask me to back up my assertion with scripture I say in return I did but by means of general observations about what holy scripture says. For example The Blessed Virgin Mary's motherhood of God comes from a consideration of who her Son is. Once we come to accept that he is the Lord Jesus Christ, Son of man and Son of God, and as the God's Son he is himself God and hence as Son of Mary we learn that Mary is the mother of God. The other example was also explained in my earlier post.

Except that Mary as the mother of God isn't really an example. That's more a title than anything else, and it's also not a problem for most people who go by the Bible since we all know that Jesus is God incarnate and Mary was his mother. But when we turn to the more ridiculous stuff, there isn't anything in Scripture that even hints at them. Nevertheless, some denomination or other has made them into dogma, citing "tradition."

 

[barryatlake]

Albion, you wrote some denomination or other has made them into dogma, citing 'tradition."



This verse in Mk 7:8 can just be thrown out because this verse is referring to man-made traditions. “For you ignore God’s specific laws and substitute your own traditions.” So we can see that man-made traditions are not acceptable and are condemned.

Examples of Apostolic Tradition handed down from God.

“Teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.” Mat 28:20

“Remember, the word I spoke to you…” John 15:20

“And you also testify, because you have been with me from the beginning.” John 15:27

“I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you.” 1Cor 11:2

“This is the covenant with them which I myself have made, says the Lord; My spirit which is upon you and my words that I have put into your mouth. Shall never leave your mouth nor the mouths of you children nor the mouths of your children’s children from now on and forever, says the Lord” Isa 59:21

“Take as your norm the sound words that you heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus.” 2 Tim 1:13

“And what you heard from me through many witnesses entrust to faithful people who will have the ability to teach others as well.” 2 Tim 2:2

“But the word of God will last forever. And that word is the Good News that was preached to you.” 1 Pet 1:25

Read this verse carefully. "In all things I have shown you that by so toiling you ought to help the weak and REMEMBER the word of the Lord Jesus, that Jesus Himself said, 'IT IS MORE BLESSED TO GIVE THAN TO RECEIVE'." Acts 20:35 The word 'REMEMBER', doesn't it mean 'KEEP THE TRADITION'? Here is the important part, try to find where Jesus said, 'IT IS MORE BLESSED TO GIVE THAN TO RECEIVE', in the Gospels. You can't because it isn't there. Paul passed this phrase to the people by 'TRADITION'.

What about what John says in John 20:30 and John 21:25? Everything that Jesus did was not written in the Bible.

False man-made traditions with a lower case (t) are condemned by Jesus in Mat 15:1-9, Mark 7:3-13, 1Cor 2:13, Col 2:8, and 1:14. However; Apostolic Traditions are to be preserved. Ph 2:16, 2Thes 2:14-15, 2Tim 1:13-14, 2:2, 3:14, Heb 2:1.
I hope that clears up your misunderstanding of 2 Thess. 2;15 along with your mistaken idea of what tradition and Tradition are.

 

[MoreCoffee]

You're saying that it's a legitimate extrapolation from Scripture. That's not the same thing as saying it's in Scripture. It goes beyond the point of this discussion to look at whether it's actually legitimate. As I'm sure you know, Christians have differed on that topic.

Yes, and it isn't what the Catholic Church teaches. We don't say that the Marian dogmas are fully explained in holy scripture but we do say that they do not contradict holy scripture and that holy scripture does point to them albeit in subtle ways.

I am not much concerned about where Christians differ, we all know that there are many differences otherwise there would not be many churches and denominations and even more independent groups. But I was asked to give examples so I chose two.

• Mary's perpetual virginity and
• Mary as mother of God.

Albion objects that the latter is a mere title, okay, it may be little more than that yet it attracts endless posts in opposition to it in GT.

The former is a dogma and it is pointed to in holy scripture but not fully developed in it. Much as some elements of the Incarnation and the Blessed Trinity are not fully developed in holy scripture but are nevertheless affirmed by all Nicene Creed and Chancedonian formula supporting Christians.

 

[fhansen]

Then it must be God's "other" word, right?


Let's save time, and leaving aside the Bible verses that do indeed say just what you said here isn't in it.... Will your observation be followed by outraged denials if someone dares to say that traditionists don't have a very high opinion of the Bible?

Of course. You just need to study the history of Church dogma. Then you can be set straight on all this-no more speculation necessary.

 

[hedrick]

• Mary's perpetual virginity and
• Mary as mother of God.

Albion objects that the latter is a mere title, okay, it may be little more than that yet it attracts endless posts in opposition to it in GT.

Jesus as Son of God is just a title, but it has theological content. Saying that Mary is the mother of God is based on a specific approach to Christology. And in my view its importance is also tied to Mariology, even though in theory it can be defended purely on Christological grounds.

 

[SpyderByte]

Yes, and it isn't what the Catholic Church teaches. We don't say that the Marian dogmas are fully explained in holy scripture but we do say that they do not contradict holy scripture and that holy scripture does point to them albeit in subtle ways.

I am not much concerned about where Christians differ, we all know that there are many differences otherwise there would not be many churches and denominations and even more independent groups. But I ask asked to give examples so I chose two.

[*]Mary's perpetual virginity and
[*]Mary as mother of God.

Albion objects that the latter is a mere title, okay, it may be little more than that yet it attracts endless posts in opposition to it in GT.

The former is a dogma and it is pointed to in holy scripture but not fully developed in it. Much as some elements of the Incarnation and the Blessed Trinity are not fully developed in holy scripture but are nevertheless affirmed by all Nicene Creed and Chancedonian formula supporting Christians.

If these are things supported by scripture, let's see the sceipture.

 

[Albion]

Of course. You just need to study the history of Church dogma. Then you can be set straight on all this-no more speculation necessary.

Written exactly in the manner of one who has no response but wants the last word anyway.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

You're talking about the Athanasian Creed. And while it looks like it goes into detail, it is actually just using a whole series of divine attributes as multiple examples of a singular reality: one essence, three persons.

Matthew 19:5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’?

The Bible does not teach one to mean all that the Athanasian Creed claims.
The Bible does not teach that such specific knowledge is required for salvation.

Look at the difference between the Nicene and the Athanasian Creeds. One has known history, developed by committee. It shows a refined agreed on position. The other is of unknown origin, and obviously not a result of any position agreed on by any authorized committee. The creed goes beyond stating ones belief. With the damnation clause, it claims a new divine revelation. This creed written by a man has now added new conditions for salvation. Let me assure you that there are people in heaven that have not believed all in that creed.

How this dogma just appeared hundreds of years after Jesus and has continued to survive and is repeated as creed I find remarkable.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

It is a foundational, dogmatic insistence in some Christian communities/denominations that while the Bible is inerrant and inspired by God, that it nonetheless is MISSING a whole bunch of really super important things that Jesus taught and that we must know and believe...

Exactly which dogmas and which community or communities do you have in mind. The anonymity in the above quote may be a ruse, I am inclined to think it is.

The Athanasian Creed is professed by many churches. It contains a damnation clause meaning that you must profess what it says to obtain salvation. What it states is not directly taken from scripture.

This should satisfy as an example of dogma.