How Tradition Gave Us the Bible

Assoc of Students at Catholic Colleges ^ | Mark Shea

[Eagle Eye]

Since you deny that God is one, your premise about Isaiah is just plain silly.

God can't be one and three. To insist that he is is sheer insanity. And insanity is what I call it to deny clear Bible verses.

Start with there being one God and that God is one.

God is not a man that he should lie nor the son of man that he should repent.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

God is spirit.

Jesus was born in Bethlehem.

Jesus came in (gr: 'en' entirely within the realm of) the flesh.

Jesus was born, lived, and died. God subsequently raised him from the dead and seated him (Jesus) at his (God's) right hand.

The man Chrsit Jesus is the sole mediator between God and man.

Therefore, a trinity is unbiblical, a triune god is not the one the followers of Christ should follow, and anyone who sets another human as a mediator between God and men is in disobedience to God.

[pgyanke]

I'm done bludgeoning myself against your brick wall. May God bless you.

[Eagle Eye]

Yes, you'd best run away since you can't refute anything with Biblical authority.

[Rutles4Ever]

Whenever someone points out to you a conflict between your practice and the Scripture, you claim that the RCC and/or EOC have the right to change the Scriptures.

Where did anyone say this? If you have to fabricate to make a point, then you don't have a point.

Why then are you surprised that God split the Church just as He did Israel?

Another fabrication. Where does it say anywhere that God split the Church? Man split the Church. Specifically, Martin Luther.

Seriously, anything can become an idol if we let it become more important than our Lord or if we start performing acts of worship to it.

Define an "act of worship".

You claim that you're not really bowing down to the statue, but simply respecting the person the statue represents, and them as a servant of God

At one point, you seem to be saying that "worship" is subjective to the intent of the violator, yet you've made yourself judge and jury of those you THINK are worshipping as if it's strictly something objectively measured. Which is it?

With full support of their elders, members of both bow down to these statues, say ritualistic prayers to them, have festivals in their honor, etc

Like the American flag, the Pledge of Allegiance, and Flag Day? Is patriotism nation worship?

Yet, while following the example of the Pharisees in burying the true Word of God beneath your traditions, you want to post article after article attacking those who in principle, if admittedly not always in practice, seek to follow the Scriptures as the Lord did?

The Lord followed Scripture by revealing what was not explicitly revealed, but inferred, in the Old Testament. Jesus didn't have a problem with the Pharisee-endorsed traditions of circumcision and Passover, did He? As a matter of fact, Jesus explicitly told His disciples to follow what the Pharisees TAUGHT, not what they DID in spite of what they taught. He didn't come to "abolish" anything (certainly not tradition) and He didn't call the Pharisees false teachers, just hypocrites.

you want to post article after article attacking those who in principle, if admittedly not always in practice, seek to follow the Scriptures as the Lord did?

Do you feel threatened by these articles? If the faith you follow is strong, it should mean nothing to you.

Also, I daresay Jesus wasn't the fundamentalist in the Pharisee/Christ relationship. You know, pulling an oxen out of the ditch on the Sabbath, and all that...

So too might the Hindu point out that their idols merely represent their gods, and the gods are merely eminations of the Brahman. There's no practical difference.

They might, but then, the Catholic church doesn't have idols and doesn't raise either Mary or the Saints to the level of Christ, regardless of how many times you stomp your feet and say it.

Do you have a photograph of a loved one, thou "idol-worshiper"? Do you have a feast on their birthday, thou "idol-worshiper"? Do you pledge undying love to your spouse, thou "idol worshiper"?

If you are truly Christians, being conformed into the image of the Lord, then you should follow His example.

Jesus told His disciples to brush the dust from their feet if they weren't received. I'd do the same here, but I'm Catholic, and this is a Catholic thread, so maybe you should just leave instead.

Further, I see a lot of you trying to pile on here, but all of your arguments were refuted far earlier in the thread. You obviously haven't read my posts, or you wouldn't simply be repeating the same things over and over again.

Your earlier posts were not worthy of comment, nothing more.

I'm closing out my end of the debate.

Prayers answered.

[Buggman]

I'm just asking when did your church come along. When was it formed, by whom?

It was formed 1974 years ago by Yeshua HaMashiach, if you want to play that game. As I said, the sect of the Nazarines (Messianic Jews) is documented to have survived as a cohesive group for at least a thousand years after the Messiah came. I can't prove a continuation of leadership beyond that point, but I can prove a continuation of Spirit.

How? Very simple: Compare our teachings and practices to what is in the Bible, which predates Catholic tradition by between a century (the earliest ECF writings coming from the Second Century) and 1600 years (to the Exodus and the writing of the Torah).

For its modern history: For the last 50 or so years, and increasing number of Christians have been spontaneously and without a single human leader been discovering the Jewish roots of their faith. At the same time, and increasing number of Jews have been discovering that Yeshua HaMashiach, Jesus the Christ, really didn't teach against the Torah or tell them to stop being Jewish.

There was no central organization, no one leader. In 1989, a guy named David H. Stern put out the Messianic Jewish Manifesto, a commentary on the NT, and his own translation of the Bible. However, while this provided some direction in Messianic congregations, it would be inaccurate to call him the leader of the movement, as there were many others who have also published books on everything from a Messianic theology and Messianic commentaries to practical guides on keeping the Feastdays and other Torah-based Jewish customs.

You are used to thinking of the Church as a heirarchy, with a central authority handing down decrees from on high. The modern Messianic movement is a grass-roots effort, the result of the Spirit moving in many places at once. Mind you, the lack of central organization has its own problems (including a number of "Messianic" congregations that are quite fruity and even heretical; not that the RCC doesn't suffer from its own fruity parishes), but it has its advantages as well--most particularly that there is earnest discussion on the Scriptures, the one authority that we all agree on.

I'm not going to waste any more time on Messianic history with you. It's candidly irrelevant. Only whether our beliefs and practices come from the Scriptures matters. If you wish to challenge me on that basis, all well and good, but don't pull the tired argument that "the RCC's been here (visibly) the longest, so we must be right." To quote Tertullian, "Custom (i.e., tradition) without truth is error grown old."

[Buggman]

Have you ever been separated from a loved one? Did you have a picture?

Yes. Again, I'm not objecting to art, or even religious art. But to use your analogy, there's a difference between me keeping a picture of my grandfather around and the Japanese practice of building a whole shrine around that picture, bowing in front ot it, and saying a ritual prayer every day. One is just keeping a picture; the other is worshipping the dead.

[Buggman]

And that's all, folks. At a certain point, debate on a thread just becomes repetition of arguments already given, and we've long since reached that point.

God bless.

[Buggman]

Where did anyone say this? If you have to fabricate to make a point, then you don't have a point.

See post 153 (and my response in 182). For one example: The Bible says the Sabbath is on the seventh day; the RCC says it is on Sunday, and claims that the authority to bind and loose permits it to make the change. Ergo, you change the Word of God.

And now, I really am moving on. Seriously, before you make accusations that I'm making this stuff up of me, try going upthread to see what I was responding to.

[Rutles4Ever]

When is the "seventh day" exactly? Did the Jews follow the Julian Calendar? Where does it say in Scripture, "the Sabbath day is 'Saturday'"?

On the other hand, the calendar is a virtual tribute to pagan gods. Do you have a calendar?

[Uri’el-2012]

When is the "seventh day" exactly? Did the Jews follow the Julian Calendar?
Where does it say in Scripture, "the Sabbath day is 'Saturday'"?

On the other hand, the calendar is a virtual tribute to pagan gods. Do you have a calendar?

409 posted on 02/08/2006 11:22:38 AM MST by Rutles4Ever

We use G-d's calendar.

As outlined in the Holy Word of G-d.

b'shem Y'shua

[Invincibly Ignorant]

When is the "seventh day" exactly? Did the Jews follow the Julian Calendar? Where does it say in Scripture, "the Sabbath day is 'Saturday'"?

See those Jews were pretty smart. God confirmed which day it was by withholding manna in the wilderness on the seventh day. And we've counted every 7th day since. Just so happens to fall on the gregorian Saturday.

[pgyanke]

Yes, you'd best run away...

I'm just tired of trying to reason with a juvenile. Go away, kid.

[Eagle Eye]

No, the real problem is that you have been forced to face the fact that you are rejecting God's word in favor of man's traditions and doctrines of devils.

Calling me a juvenile and kid doesn't bother me in the slightest. It is obviously a diversionary tactic and defense mechansim done out of fright and ignorance.

God will still accept you but wants you admit your errors.

[TradicalRC]

Further, I see a lot of you trying to pile on here, but all of your arguments were refuted far earlier in the thread.

So were yours.

[TradicalRC]

He submitted to their authority only so far as it did not overstep or annul the Scripture, specifically the Torah. When they tried to condemn His disciples for eating a snack along the road on the Sabbath, did He submit to their judgment, or point out why they were wrong?

You're trying to have it both ways here

Actually, it is Christ Himself who had it both ways, you are merely ignoring the submission to authority issue.

Remember, Luther didn't leave the RCC on his own accord. He was kicked out for attempting to reform it over the issue of selling indulgences.

Nice try. Luther may have had a point regarding indulgences, but his real problems stemmed from setting himself up as a mini-Pope and deciding which books constitite the canon of Scripture and what the true nature of the Eucharist was. Two things that belonged to the Chair of Peter who holds the keys.

[Invincibly Ignorant]

For someone who preaches about the evils of "sola scriptura" it sure is amussing watching you insist on a literal interpretation regarding "the keys".

[D-fendr]

Thanks for the info.

If you have a question or disagreement on the Torah, who do you go to?

[pgyanke]

No, the real problem is that you have been forced to face the fact that you are rejecting God's word in favor of man's traditions and doctrines of devils.

It gets really tiresome demonstrating the same things over and over on FR. However, you, junior, have ticked me off...

See post #379 for an overt Old Testament attestation to the three distinct persons of our one God.

John 14: 7 "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him." 8 Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." 9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, 'Show us the Father'?

John 20:28 Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" 29 Jesus said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed."

2 Peter 1:1 Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ...

This next part is long but taken from the online Catholic Encyclopedia... it does a better job than I can do in a shorter time...

But apart from passages such as these, where there is express mention of the Three Persons, the teaching of the New Testament regarding Christ and the Holy Spirit is free from all ambiguity. In regard to Christ, the Apostles employ modes of speech which, to men brought up in the Hebrew faith, necessarily signified belief in His Divinity. Such, for instance, is the use of the Doxology in reference to Him. The Doxology, "To Him be glory for ever and ever" (cf. 1 Chronicles 16:38; 29:11; Psalm 103:31; 28:2), is an expression of praise offered to God alone. In the New Testament we find it addressed not alone to God the Father, but to Jesus Christ (2 Timothy 4:18; 2 Peter 3:18; Revelation 1:6; Hebrews 13:20-21), and to God the Father and Christ in conjunction (Revelations 5:13, 7:10). Not less convincing is the use of the title Lord (Kyrios). This term represents the Hebrew Adonai, just as God (Theos) represents Elohim. The two are equally Divine names (cf. 1 Corinthians 8:4). In the Apostolic writings Theos may almost be said to be treated as a proper name of God the Father, and Kyrios of the Son (see, for example, 1 Corinthians 12:5-6); in only a few passages do we find Kyrios used of the Father (1 Corinthians 3:5; 7:17) or Theos of Christ. The Apostles from time to time apply to Christ passages of the Old Testament in which Kyrios is used, for example, I Corinthians 10:9 (Numbers 21:7), Hebrews 1:10-12 (Psalm 101:26-28); and they use such expressions as "the fear of the Lord" (Acts 9:31; 2 Corinthians 5:11; Ephesians 5:21), "call upon the name of the Lord," indifferently of God the Father and of Christ (Acts 2:21; 9:14; Romans 10:13). The profession that "Jesus is the Lord" (Kyrion Iesoun, Romans 10:9; Kyrios Iesous, 1 Corinthians 12:3) is the acknowledgment of Jesus as Jahweh. The texts in which St. Paul affirms that in Christ dwells the plenitude of the Godhead (Colossians 2:9), that before His Incarnation He possessed the essential nature of God (Philemon 2:6), that He "is over all things, God blessed for ever" (Romans 9:5) tell us nothing that is not implied in many other passages of his Epistles.

The doctrine as to the Holy Spirit is equally clear. That His distinct personality was fully recognized is shown by many passages. Thus He reveals His commands to the Church's ministers: "As they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Ghost said to them: Separate me Saul and Barnabas . . ." (Acts 13:2). He directs the missionary journey of the Apostles: "They attempted to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not" (Acts 16:7; cf. Acts 5:3; 15:28; Romans 15:30). Divine attributes are affirmed of Him.

- He possesses omniscience and reveals to the Church mysteries known only to God (1 Corinthians 2:10);
- It is He who distributes charismata (1 Corinthians 12:11);
- He is the giver of supernatural life (2 Corinthians 3:8);
- He dwells in the Church and in the souls of individual men, as in His temple (Romans 8:9-11; 1 Corinthians 3:16, 6:19).
- The work of justification and sanctification is attributed to Him (1 Corinthians 6:11; Romans 15:16), just as in other passages the same operations are attributed to Christ (1 Corinthians 1:2; Galatians 2:17).

Now, as I said earlier, I can read as well as you and can clearly see Biblical text affirming the Godhead of Christ as taught by the RCC. Think on the following regarding your rejection of Church authority:

2 Peter 1:20 But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, 21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

Now I am done with you and will bang my head against this wall no longer. May the Spirit of God touch your heart and mind.

[D-fendr]

see buggman's post on the history of messaianic jewish christians..

[Buggman]

The difference is, I refuted the responses I was given, providing logical arguments, illustrations, and Biblical citations/examples which were never addressed by subsequent posters, or even those I posted them to. Instead, you just went for repeating things that I had already addressed.