Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fathers vs. the Evangelicals
http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/god.htm ^ | vanit

Posted on 10/27/2011 4:05:56 PM PDT by rzman21

I challenge Evangelicals to put their interpretation of the Bible and their theology up against the acid test of what the Early Church Fathers taught.

Perhaps, Evangelicalism is closer to the truth than Mormonism, but it still has a long way to go.

Purpose

This Web page is dedicated to the defense of Catholic doctrines within Patristic thought. The Catholic rule of faith consists of three coordinate and complementary authorities: Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and the teaching Church. The Church Fathers used both Scripture and Tradition to explain and defend the Catholic faith. Corunum's mission is to present the outline of Catholic doctrines as they appear in the writings of the Church Fathers.

What you will Find Inside

Corunum Apologetic Web site does not contain a library of the writings of the Church Fathers. There are a host of sites on the internet which offer the Ante-Nicene Fathers(ANF) edited by Cleveland Coxe and the Nicene Post-Nicene Fathers(NPNF) edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace.(cf. ANF/NPNF ). Inside you will find testimony from the Church Fathers on various Catholic doctrines listed in chronological order.

"See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out[through their office] the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is[administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." Ignatius of Antioch,Epistle to the Smyrneans, 8:2(A.D. 110),in ANF,I:89

Taught by St. Peter the Apostle

Against schism:

"Why are there strifes, and tumults, and divisions, and schisms, and wars among you? Have we not [all] one God and one Christ? Is there not one Spirit of grace poured out upon us? And have we not one calling in Christ? Why do we divide and tear to pieces the members of Christ, and raise up strife against our own body, and have reached such a height of madness as to forget that "we are members one of another?" Remember the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, how He said, "Woe to that man [by whom offences come]! It were better for him that he had never been born, than that he should cast a stumbling-block before one of my elect. Yea, it were better for him that a millstone should be hung about [his neck], and he should be sunk in the depths of the sea, than that he should cast a stumbling-block before one of my little ones. Your schism has subverted [the faith of] many, has discouraged many, has given rise to doubt in many, and has caused grief to us all. And still your sedition continueth." Clement of Rome[regn c.A.D. 91-101],To the Corinthians,46(A.D. 91),in ANF,I:17-18

Taught by St. Peter the Apostle


TOPICS: Catholic; Evangelical Christian; Religion & Culture; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholicism; evangelicals; mormonism; orthodox; romancatholicism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 501-527 next last

1 posted on 10/27/2011 4:05:58 PM PDT by rzman21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rzman21

What does “ taught by St. Peter the Apostle
mean when the quotes are by other, later persons, not Apostles, and not, insofar as I know, divinely inspired>


2 posted on 10/27/2011 4:14:30 PM PDT by chesley (Eat what you want, and die like a man. Never trust anyone who hasn't been punched in the face)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rzman21

I never understood the claim to sacred tradition as the apostles did not have any Christian traditions to call upon.


3 posted on 10/27/2011 5:13:18 PM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

Thank you, and amen.


4 posted on 10/27/2011 5:29:24 PM PDT by luckymom (Forget the baby whales, save the baby humans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rzman21
Unfortunately, Catholics and Eastern Orthodox don't agree with the church fathers about everything. Almost all the church fathers interpreted the Hexameron literally. But now Catholics/Orthodox, who bow to the fathers on every other issue, simply shrug their shoulders and say "they were men of their time" when it comes to the early chapters of Genesis.

Since Genesis 1-11 is not the slightest bit more impossible or unlikely than the virgin birth, resurrection of the dead, or real presence, I have concluded the near universal embrace of evolution and higher criticism by Catholics/Orthodox is based on nothing more than an antipathy towards the people with whom belief in Genesis1-11 is associated--a reason that is purely sociological, with no theological reasoning whatsoever.

5 posted on 10/27/2011 5:32:21 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rzman21

The Church Fathers used both Scripture and Tradition to explain and defend the Catholic faith.

Which explains the rampant heresy and the intro duction of paganism into the church.


6 posted on 10/27/2011 5:39:27 PM PDT by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chesley; rzman21

what it means is, if you taught me what baptism is, how it is to be performed and who is to be baptized, i would understand what you believed about baptism. since you are not an Apostle, i am free to disregard what you believe.
however, if someone was taught by the Apostle Peter, Paul or John and we know that person was ordained to the episcopate, then that person’s writing can be trusted to convey the teaching they received directly from an Apostle.
it is how the “universal” or “catholic” faith was developed. since the Apostles traveled the known Roman world preaching the same Gospel, someone in Syria, Turkey, Greece, Egypt, Rome, India, Jerusalem, etc. etc all received the same faith, the catholic faith.


7 posted on 10/27/2011 5:47:15 PM PDT by one Lord one faith one baptism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

So the Protestants all the sudden rediscovered the true hidden meaning some 1600 years later?

How quaint. I’m not about to address your strawman accusing the Church Fathers of paganism.

In the Protestant case, it’s invent your own religion.


8 posted on 10/27/2011 5:50:19 PM PDT by rzman21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: chesley

The Bible needs an interpreter. What makes you so confident that you are interpreting it correctly?

Are you saying that your pastor understands scripture or what it means better than the earliest Christians?


9 posted on 10/27/2011 5:53:49 PM PDT by rzman21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator

Chapter XXIII, “On the Development of Doctrine in the Church”

[54] “But some one will say perhaps, ‘Shall there, then, be no progress in Christ’s Church?’ Certainly; all possible progress. For what being is there, so envious of men, so full of hatred to God, who would seek to forbid it? Yet on condition that it be real progress, not alteration of the faith. For progress requires that the subject be enlarged in itself, alternation, that it be transformed into something else. The intelligence, then, the knowledge, the wisdom, as well of individuals as of all, as well of one man as of the whole Church, ought, in the course of ages and centuries, to increase and make much and vigorous progress; but yet only in its own kind; that is to say, in the same doctrine, in the same sense, and in the same meaning.

[55] The growth of religion in the soul must be analogous to the growth of the body, which, though in process of years it is developed and attains its full size, yet remains still the same. There is a wide difference between the flower of youth and the maturity of age; yet they who were once young are still the same now that they have become old, insomuch that though the stature and outward form of the individual are changed, yet his nature is one and the same, his person is one and the same. An infant’s limbs are small, a young man’s large, yet the infant and the young man are the same. Men when full grown have the same number of joints that they had when children; and if there be any to which mature age has given birth, these were already present in embryo, so that nothing new is produced in them when old which was not already latent in them when children. This, then, is undoubtedly a true and legitimate rule of progress, this the established and most beautiful order of growth, that mature age ever develops in the man those parts and forms which the wisdom of the Creator had already framed beforehand in the infant. Whereas, if the human form were changed into some shape belonging to another kind, or at any rate, if the number of its limbs were increased or diminished, the result would be that the whole body would become either a wreck or a monster, or, at the least, would be impaired and enfeebled.

[56] In like manner, it behooves Christian doctrine to follow the same laws of progress, so as to be consolidated by years, enlarged by time, refined by age, and yet, withal, to continue uncorrupt and unadulterated, complete and perfect in all the measurement of its parts, and so to speak, in all its proper members and senses, admitting no change, no waste of its distinctive property, no variation in its limits.

[57] For example: Our forefathers in the old time sowed wheat in the Church’s field. It would be most unmeet and iniquitous if we, their descendants, instead of the genuine truth of wheat, should reap the counterfeit error of tares. This rather should be the result’there should be no discrepancy between the first and the last. From doctrine which was sown as wheat, we should reap, in the increase, doctrine of the same kind’wheat also; so that when in process of time any of the original seed is developed, and now flourishes under cultivation, no change may ensure in the character of the plant. There may supervene shape, form, variation in outward appearance, but the nature of each kind must remain the same. God forbid that those rose-beds of Catholic interpretation should be converted into thorns and thistles. God forbid that in that spiritual paradise from plants of cinnamon and balsam darnel and wolfsbane should of a sudden shoot forth.

Therefore, whatever has been sown by the fidelity of the Fathers in this husbandry of God’s Church, the same ought to be cultivated and taken care of by the industry of their children, the same ought to flourish and ripen, the same ought to advance an go forth to perfection. For it is right that those ancient doctrines of heavenly philosophy should, as time goes one, be cared for, smoothed, polished; but no that they should be changed, not that they should be maimed, not that they should be mutilated. They may receive proof, illustration, definiteness; but they must retain withal their completeness, their integrity, their characteristic properties.

[59] But the Church of Christ, the careful and watchful guardian of the doctrines deposited in her charge, never changes anything in them, never diminishes, never adds, does not cut off what is necessary, does not add what is superfluous, does not lose her own, does not appropriate what is another’s, but while dealing faithfully and judiciously with ancient doctrine, keeps this one object carefully in view’if there be anything which antiquity has left shapeless and rudimentary, to fashion and polish it, if anything already reduced to shape and developed, to consolidate and strengthen it, if any already ratified and defined to keep and guard it. Finally, what other object have Councils ever aimed at in their decrees, than to provide that what was before believed in simplicity should in future be believed intelligently, that what was before preached coldly should in future be preached earnestly, that what was before practiced negligently should thenceforward be practiced with double solicitude? This, I say, is what the Catholic Church, roused by the novelties of heretics, has accomplished by the decrees of her Councils’this, and nothing else’she has thenceforward consigned to posterity in writing what she had received from those of olden times only by Tradition, comprising a great amount of matter in a few words, and often, for the better understanding, designating an old article of the faith by the characteristic of a new name.” –Saint Vincent of Lerins

http://www.agapebiblestudy.com/documents/Vincent%20of%20Lerins_The%20Development%20of%20Doctrine%20in%20the%20Catholic%20Church.htm


10 posted on 10/27/2011 5:56:00 PM PDT by rzman21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator

Chapter XXIII, “On the Development of Doctrine in the Church”

[54] “But some one will say perhaps, ‘Shall there, then, be no progress in Christ’s Church?’ Certainly; all possible progress. For what being is there, so envious of men, so full of hatred to God, who would seek to forbid it? Yet on condition that it be real progress, not alteration of the faith. For progress requires that the subject be enlarged in itself, alternation, that it be transformed into something else. The intelligence, then, the knowledge, the wisdom, as well of individuals as of all, as well of one man as of the whole Church, ought, in the course of ages and centuries, to increase and make much and vigorous progress; but yet only in its own kind; that is to say, in the same doctrine, in the same sense, and in the same meaning.

[55] The growth of religion in the soul must be analogous to the growth of the body, which, though in process of years it is developed and attains its full size, yet remains still the same. There is a wide difference between the flower of youth and the maturity of age; yet they who were once young are still the same now that they have become old, insomuch that though the stature and outward form of the individual are changed, yet his nature is one and the same, his person is one and the same. An infant’s limbs are small, a young man’s large, yet the infant and the young man are the same. Men when full grown have the same number of joints that they had when children; and if there be any to which mature age has given birth, these were already present in embryo, so that nothing new is produced in them when old which was not already latent in them when children. This, then, is undoubtedly a true and legitimate rule of progress, this the established and most beautiful order of growth, that mature age ever develops in the man those parts and forms which the wisdom of the Creator had already framed beforehand in the infant. Whereas, if the human form were changed into some shape belonging to another kind, or at any rate, if the number of its limbs were increased or diminished, the result would be that the whole body would become either a wreck or a monster, or, at the least, would be impaired and enfeebled.

[56] In like manner, it behooves Christian doctrine to follow the same laws of progress, so as to be consolidated by years, enlarged by time, refined by age, and yet, withal, to continue uncorrupt and unadulterated, complete and perfect in all the measurement of its parts, and so to speak, in all its proper members and senses, admitting no change, no waste of its distinctive property, no variation in its limits.

[57] For example: Our forefathers in the old time sowed wheat in the Church’s field. It would be most unmeet and iniquitous if we, their descendants, instead of the genuine truth of wheat, should reap the counterfeit error of tares. This rather should be the result’there should be no discrepancy between the first and the last. From doctrine which was sown as wheat, we should reap, in the increase, doctrine of the same kind’wheat also; so that when in process of time any of the original seed is developed, and now flourishes under cultivation, no change may ensure in the character of the plant. There may supervene shape, form, variation in outward appearance, but the nature of each kind must remain the same. God forbid that those rose-beds of Catholic interpretation should be converted into thorns and thistles. God forbid that in that spiritual paradise from plants of cinnamon and balsam darnel and wolfsbane should of a sudden shoot forth.

Therefore, whatever has been sown by the fidelity of the Fathers in this husbandry of God’s Church, the same ought to be cultivated and taken care of by the industry of their children, the same ought to flourish and ripen, the same ought to advance an go forth to perfection. For it is right that those ancient doctrines of heavenly philosophy should, as time goes one, be cared for, smoothed, polished; but no that they should be changed, not that they should be maimed, not that they should be mutilated. They may receive proof, illustration, definiteness; but they must retain withal their completeness, their integrity, their characteristic properties.

[59] But the Church of Christ, the careful and watchful guardian of the doctrines deposited in her charge, never changes anything in them, never diminishes, never adds, does not cut off what is necessary, does not add what is superfluous, does not lose her own, does not appropriate what is another’s, but while dealing faithfully and judiciously with ancient doctrine, keeps this one object carefully in view’if there be anything which antiquity has left shapeless and rudimentary, to fashion and polish it, if anything already reduced to shape and developed, to consolidate and strengthen it, if any already ratified and defined to keep and guard it. Finally, what other object have Councils ever aimed at in their decrees, than to provide that what was before believed in simplicity should in future be believed intelligently, that what was before preached coldly should in future be preached earnestly, that what was before practiced negligently should thenceforward be practiced with double solicitude? This, I say, is what the Catholic Church, roused by the novelties of heretics, has accomplished by the decrees of her Councils’this, and nothing else’she has thenceforward consigned to posterity in writing what she had received from those of olden times only by Tradition, comprising a great amount of matter in a few words, and often, for the better understanding, designating an old article of the faith by the characteristic of a new name.” –Saint Vincent of Lerins

http://www.agapebiblestudy.com/documents/Vincent%20of%20Lerins_The%20Development%20of%20Doctrine%20in%20the%20Catholic%20Church.htm


11 posted on 10/27/2011 5:56:00 PM PDT by rzman21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

The apostles preached first then wrote books. The oral word is the key to understanding the written word because it safeguards against heresies.

Do you trust a preacher who lived 16 centuries after Jesus to understand the apostles’ preaching better than one who personally heard the apostles preach?

The Apostolic Fathers knew Jesus’s apostles and heard their preachings.


12 posted on 10/27/2011 5:59:00 PM PDT by rzman21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rzman21; metmom; mas cerveza por favor
You just posted a challenge for Protestants to examine their beliefs by those of the church fathers. I point out to you that Catholics/Orthodox don't agree with the fathers on everything and now you defend Catholic/Orthodox dissent from the fathers by saying that of course church doctrine must "develop." So you're saying Protestants can't disagree with the fathers but Catholics/Orthodox can. Sheer hypocrisy.

Ain't it funny that Catholic belief "developed" away from a literal interpretation of Genesis 1-11 but not on other matters (real presence, virgin birth, resurrection of the dead, etc.)? It seems that Catholic doctrine very conveniently and coincidentally "develops" only with regard to Genesis 1-11. I wonder why? It's not as if the virgin birth is any more "scientific" than six day young earth creationism.

Hey, I understand. You're a Catholic convert from Evangelicalism, so you have to be an enthusiastic evolutionist and higher critic to prove you aren't still a Baptist (or whatever).

13 posted on 10/27/2011 6:24:38 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: rzman21
The Bible needs an interpreter. What makes you so confident that you are interpreting it correctly?

Do the teachings of the RC Church need an interpreter as well? How can you know that they teach without some intermediary interpreting their interpretation?

14 posted on 10/27/2011 6:33:23 PM PDT by Tramonto (9 9 9)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Tramonto

We don’t assert that scripture interprets scripture.


15 posted on 10/27/2011 6:37:13 PM PDT by rzman21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rzman21

Right, but does the interpretation of scripture interpret itself or do you need another layer of bureaucracy?


16 posted on 10/27/2011 6:42:49 PM PDT by Tramonto (9 9 9)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Tramonto

If it interprets itself and there is one God, then why all of the 1,000s of divergent opinions among those who cling to Sola Scriptura?

I wouldn’t call the bishops acting as the successors of the apostles bureaucracy.


17 posted on 10/27/2011 6:49:42 PM PDT by rzman21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: rzman21; Tramonto; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww; ...
If it interprets itself and there is one God, then why all of the 1,000s of divergent opinions among those who cling to Sola Scriptura?

Examples please. I'm sure you've been asked before as have other Catholics who spew the same party line.

Scripture does interpret Scripture. It must be internally consistent with itself. If there is an apparent contradiction, then the interpretation is wrong and it needs to be further investigated, not subjugated to a self-appointed allegedly infallible magisterium.

18 posted on 10/27/2011 7:05:12 PM PDT by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: rzman21



riune God.This section will deal with various aspects of the Holy Trinity in patristic thought. Corunum will cover such things as: God as Triune, the divinity of the Son, the divinity of the Holy Spirit and the procession of the Holy Spirit.

Holy Trinity
Documents illustrating that God is three divine Persons in the unity of one divine nature

God the Son
Documents illustrating that the Second Person of the Trinity,the Son, is consubstantial with the Father

Filioque
Documents illustrating that the Third Person of the Trinity,the Holy Spirit, proceeds from both the Father and the Son as one Principle.

God the Holy Spirit
Documents illustrating that the Third Person of the Trinity,the Holy Spirit, is God. The ante-Nicene Church did not express the deity of the Holy Spirit in very explicit terms, as much of the controversy in the ante-Nicene centered around the early Christological heresies. Much of the work for synthesizing the doctrine of the Holy Spirit's deity was accomplished by St. Athanasius and the Cappodocians.

19 posted on 10/27/2011 7:07:28 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rzman21
If it interprets itself and there is one God, then why all of the 1,000s of divergent opinions among those who cling to Sola Scriptura?

Maybe their doctrine is "developing?"

20 posted on 10/27/2011 7:09:31 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: rzman21

In the Protestant case, it’s invent your own religion.

That’s been about a 2000 year problem. The true meaning isn’t hidden it’s right there in the inspired written Word. Anyone who is truely seeking God will find it. The problem comes from people who aren’t sincere or who are taught by the insincere. The enemy isn’t the Protestants or the Catholics or the Orthodox. It’s people who aren’t interested in finding and submitting to God, using the Church for sinful purposes.


21 posted on 10/27/2011 7:15:52 PM PDT by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: metmom
It's like witnessing to a flock of parrots. They know 5 sentences and the only reason they repeat those is to get the "special" cracker.

"Brrrrrrkkkkk.. the gates of hell shall not prevail."

"Brrrrrkkkkk..Sola Scriptura..each man his own pope"

"Brrrrkkkkk..James 2:17"

"Brrrrkkkkk..And upon this rock"

"Brrrkkkkk..One billion strong...2000 years...brrrrrkkkkk".

22 posted on 10/27/2011 7:16:57 PM PDT by smvoice (The Cross was NOT God's Plan B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: rzman21

I do not trust some preacher, priest or pope to tell me what The Word says. I read it for myself. I prefer to go to the written word, and when I have questions of interpretation, I go back to the Greek.

That is why I hold scripture above all and measure the pronouncements of lay or ordained against scripture. For there have been many who were called but have fallen away.

Scriptorium Primoris


23 posted on 10/27/2011 7:25:12 PM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: smvoice; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww; count-your-change; ...

FOTFLOL!!!!!


24 posted on 10/27/2011 7:25:34 PM PDT by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: metmom; rzman21

examples please. ok, you asked, here you go:

baptists and lutherans both follow sola scriptura. baptists say Scripture teaches infant baptism is not biblical, the Lutherans say the Scriptures teach infant baptism.

who is correct?

want one more?

baptists say the Lords Supper is a memorial service and the bread remains bread. Lutherans believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist.

who is correct?

i could go on, let’s see how you do with these two examples of “sola scriptura”.


25 posted on 10/27/2011 7:49:52 PM PDT by one Lord one faith one baptism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: rzman21

Well, then I suppose you could show me from scripture the teaching of the bodily assumption of Mary.


26 posted on 10/27/2011 8:02:26 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

well, i suppose you can show me from Scripture the teaching of Mary not bodily assumed into heaven.


27 posted on 10/27/2011 8:05:05 PM PDT by one Lord one faith one baptism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: one Lord one faith one baptism

Please, are you sticking you tongue out while saying that? It is not possible to have any respect for that kind of comment.


28 posted on 10/27/2011 8:16:49 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

no


29 posted on 10/27/2011 8:21:46 PM PDT by one Lord one faith one baptism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: rzman21; smvoice; metmom; boatbums; daniel1212
"They [heretics] gather their views from other sources than the Scriptures...We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith" - Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3.1.1 - Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3.1.1 Sola Scriptura !

"I beg of you, my dear brother, to live among these books [scripture], to meditate upon them, to know nothing else, to seek nothing else." - Jerome (Letter 53:10)

"There is, brethren, one God, the knowledge of whom we gain from the Holy Scriptures, and from no other source. For just as a man, if he wishes to be skilled in the wisdom of this world, will find himself unable to get at it in any other way than by mastering the dogmas of philosophers, so all of us who wish to practice piety will be unable to learn its practice from any other quarter than the oracles of God. Whatever things, then, the Holy Scripture declare, at these let us look; and whatsoever things they teach, these let us learn; and as the Father wills our belief to be, let us believe; and as He wills the Son to be glorified, let us glorify Him; and as He wills the Holy Spirit to be bestowed, let us receive Him. Not according to our own will, nor according to our own mind, nor yet as using violently those things which are given by God, but even as He has chosen to teach them by the Holy Scriptures, so let us discern them." - Hippolytus, Against Noetus, ch 9

"For how can we adopt those things which we do not find in the holy Scriptures?" - Ambrose (On the Duties of the Clergy, 1:23:102)"We use Scripture to answer heresy and preceive that it is power and truth." - Basil the Great

“Let the inspired Scriptures then be our umpire, and the vote of truth will be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words.” - Gregory of Nyssa (d.ca, 395) “On the Holy Trinity”, NPNF, p. 327

“We are not content simply because this is the tradition of the Fathers. What is important is that the Fathers followed the meaning of the Scripture." - Basil the Great (ca.329–379) On the Holy Spirit, 7.16

“Neither dare one agree with catholic bishops if by chance they err in anything, but the result that their opinion is against the canonical Scriptures of God.” - Augustine (354–430) De unitate ecclesiae, 10

"For among the things that are plainly laid down in Scripture are to be found all matters that concern faith and the manner of life,--to wit, hope and love, of which I have spoken in the previous book. After this, when we have made ourselves to a certain extent familiar with the language of Scripture, we may proceed to open up and investigate the obscure passages, and in doing so draw examples from the plainer expressions to throw light upon the more obscure, and use the evidence of passages about which there is no doubt to remove all hesitation in regard to the doubtful passages." - Augustine (On Christian Doctrine, 2:9)

30 posted on 10/27/2011 8:34:34 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rzman21; Tramonto
>>We don’t assert that scripture interprets scripture.<<

That’s not what Augustine said.

"For among the things that are plainly laid down in Scripture are to be found all matters that concern faith and the manner of life,--to wit, hope and love, of which I have spoken in the previous book. After this, when we have made ourselves to a certain extent familiar with the language of Scripture, we may proceed to open up and investigate the obscure passages, and in doing so draw examples from the plainer expressions to throw light upon the more obscure, and use the evidence of passages about which there is no doubt to remove all hesitation in regard to the doubtful passages." - Augustine (On Christian Doctrine, 2:9)

31 posted on 10/27/2011 8:44:30 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

Powerful post, CB.


32 posted on 10/27/2011 8:51:13 PM PDT by smvoice (The Cross was NOT God's Plan B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: one Lord one faith one baptism
>>well, i suppose you can show me from Scripture the teaching of Mary not bodily assumed into heaven.<<

That’s a rather telling comment! So Catholics make up stuff and if it doesn’t say it’s not true in scripture it becomes new doctrine? Wow! That’s what I thought they did.

Maybe we could start on something a little simpler for you. Jesus disagrees with you on veneration of Mary.

Luke 11:27-28 27 And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. 28 But he said, Yea rather, (Greek Menounge: nay surely, nay rather) blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.

33 posted on 10/27/2011 8:52:17 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

Next.....


34 posted on 10/27/2011 8:53:51 PM PDT by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: smvoice

Looks like they taught Sola Scriptura to me.


35 posted on 10/27/2011 8:54:03 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: metmom; smvoice

:-) The Lord leads!


36 posted on 10/27/2011 8:55:19 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

There is something so inherently dangerous about the mentality that if something is not specifically addressed in Scripture you can make it up as you go because after all, Scripture didn’t say it DIDN’T happen.

No one can make up stuff and demand or presume that it is true simply because Scripture doesn’t specifically deny it.

For that matter, it doesn’t even really matter to most Catholics if Scripture does teach that something they claim isn’t true. They’ll just invoke *tradition* and *church fathers* over it and that’s the end of it, no matter how much the clear teaching of Scripture contradicts it.


37 posted on 10/27/2011 9:00:10 PM PDT by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Believe it or not, that’s a typical response I get when I ask that question.


38 posted on 10/27/2011 9:02:54 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: metmom; CynicalBear

The basis of all cults. Add to, take from, deny, deceive and demand obedience. It’s worked for what 2000 years now and counting. And 2 billion people march lock-step in blind obedience.


39 posted on 10/27/2011 9:08:29 PM PDT by smvoice (The Cross was NOT God's Plan B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

He CERTAINLY DOES!


40 posted on 10/27/2011 9:10:45 PM PDT by smvoice (The Cross was NOT God's Plan B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: rzman21

“We don’t assert that scripture interprets scripture.”

No, you most certainly don’t. Neither does the ELCA. Men sit in judgment of God either way. Funny coincidence, huh?


41 posted on 10/27/2011 9:20:39 PM PDT by Belteshazzar (We are not justified by our works but by faith - De Jacob et vita beata 2 +Ambrose of Milan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: smvoice
It's like witnessing to a flock of parrots.

Not penguins?

42 posted on 10/27/2011 9:23:54 PM PDT by Alex Murphy (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2703506/posts?page=518#518)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rzman21

Q: “If it interprets itself and there is one God, then why all of the 1,000s of divergent opinions among those who cling to Sola Scriptura?”

A: Sin.

The real answer is that Protestants shown their sin-weakened nature openly. Catholics hide it behind the skirts of the magisterium. But, make no mistake, both are fractured, because both are populated by the same critters ... us sinners. The history of Israel in the OT should be enough to instruct us in the truth of man’s weakness, corruption, and sin. But so often we look at their example and imagine that we will stand where they fell. Paul (by inspiration of the Holy Spirit) had something to teach us in that regard. Both sides disregard his warning at their peril.


43 posted on 10/27/2011 9:28:12 PM PDT by Belteshazzar (We are not justified by our works but by faith - De Jacob et vita beata 2 +Ambrose of Milan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

lol! If only penguins could be taught to parrot phrases. The best of both worlds..


44 posted on 10/27/2011 9:33:29 PM PDT by smvoice (The Cross was NOT God's Plan B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: smvoice

You can’t replace Dr. Eckleburg, nor will you ever be able to, so why don’t you quit trying?


45 posted on 10/27/2011 10:00:01 PM PDT by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rzman21

Yes, I thinks the Bible needs to be interpreted. It doesn’t need to be added to; however, which is what a lot of tradition is.

As for my pastor’s knowledge, or my own, well we can read the Church Fathers, and the Bible on our own. And we can compare what we see in one with what we seen in the other. It’s not like the Church Fathers were divinely inspired, or that their writings are a part of the canon. Quite possibly they are mistaken in parts.

All I’m saying is that blindly accepting any authorities word that this is what God said, or meant, is to surrender our own God-given intelligence.

True, we might be led into error that way, but who is to say that over the centuries the Catholic Church has not been led into error?

I think that if we follow the lead of the Holy Spirit to the best of our abilities, we won’t go too far wrong.


46 posted on 10/28/2011 5:59:43 AM PDT by chesley (Eat what you want, and die like a man. Never trust anyone who hasn't been punched in the face)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: rzman21

bflr


47 posted on 10/28/2011 6:25:43 AM PDT by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: one Lord one faith one baptism
however, if someone was taught by the Apostle Peter, Paul or John and we know that person was ordained to the episcopate, then that person’s writing can be trusted to convey the teaching they received directly from an Apostle.

None of your church fathers was taught by an Apostle...And here's what the Apostles said about your church fathers...

2Co 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

And

Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

48 posted on 10/28/2011 7:12:18 AM PDT by Iscool (You mess with me, you mess with the WHOLE trailerpark...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rzman21
The Bible needs an interpreter.

Yes it does...But not from any one from your religion...

Pro 3:5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

Luk 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Rom 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

Rom 8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

1Jn 5:6 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

1Jn 5:10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself:

We have the Teacher, living within us...Why would we go to some kook who wears a dress and red shoes who bows and prays to statues of Jesus' mother who tells you that he is the Holy Father???

We have the interpreter...

49 posted on 10/28/2011 7:39:19 AM PDT by Iscool (You mess with me, you mess with the WHOLE trailerpark...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

because you got a different answer than the other guy spouting the same “God told me” nonsense.


50 posted on 10/28/2011 7:42:59 AM PDT by papertyger (What has islam ever accomplished that treacherous, opportunistic, brutality couldn't do on its own?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 501-527 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson