Christ Died For Our Sins

The Berean Call ^ | Jun 1 2004 | Dave Hunt

[CynicalBear]

>>But He wanted to be sure that He taught ONE truth<<

Which is contained exclusively in scripture. Catholics, Mormons, and Muslims put their faith in the writings of fallible men.

>>“Go forth and TEACH...,” both His written and unwritten words.<<

No where in scripture did He say to teach "unwritten words" other than what the apostles taught. The only infallible source we have for what He and the apostles taught is scripture. Anyone gullible enough to believe that word of mouth hasn't changed in 2000 years is head in sand stupid.

[Steelfish]

“No where in scripture did He say to teach “unwritten words” other than what the apostles taught.”

Incredible beyond belief!

Perhaps we can now understand why a constellation of eminent Lutheran theologians have decamped and converted over to Catholicism.

So the early Church fathers who used the sacred oral tradition to check and cross check the hundreds of written fragments and included some texts and discarded the others, and who had assembled the canonical texts after some 300 years of theological study, somehow were told to keep mum about the unwritten word of God?

As early as 110 A.D., not even fifteen years after the book of Revelation was written, while on his way to execution St. Ignatius of Antioch wrote:

“Where the bishop is present, let the congregation gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church”. The Church believes that when the bishops speak as teachers, Christ speaks; for he said to them: “He who hears you, hears me; and he who rejects you, rejects me” (Lk 10, 16).

Precisely to make sure that the Apostles’ teachings would be passed down after the deaths of the apostles, Paul told Timothy, “[W]hat you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2). In this passage he refers to the first three generations of apostolic succession—his own generation, Timothy’s generation, and the generation Timothy will teach.

The Church Fathers, who were links in that chain of succession, regularly appealed to apostolic succession as a test for whether Catholics or heretics had correct doctrine. Thus Catholic tradition on the sacraments is a belief, tradition, and practice for 2000 years.

By your lights until the heresy of Protestantism washed ashore eleven centuries after the Catholic Church, under infallible Petrine authority, had assembled the books in the Bible in AD 382 in the Synod of Rome, (Those books you called scripture did not fall from the skies and self assemble themselves in the order you find them), the Church, and all its saints, martyrs, and theologians got it all wrong.

Maybe they mistaken included or excluded some books as part of the canonical text.

In which case must logically doubt infallible Petrine authority?

If so, each of the 30,000 sects of Protestantism should try assembling their own Bible books. Then we won’t have this argument.

Protestants can choose from anyone of 30,000 different Bibles, and we Catholics will continue with the Bible we have had from AD 382?

Since Protestants also used the Catholic liturgical calendar for Christmas and Easter, they may as well celebrate Christmas and Easter on some other dates they choose as well.

Deal?

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

Well said.

[CynicalBear]

Spoken like a true cultist! I understand that Catholics like the Mormons, and Muslims have their "writings" and "teachings" of their so called "church fathers" and "prophets". The truth is that by the time John wrote Revelation six of the seven churches written to were already teaching error. Yet you want us to rely on later writings which have little or no base in what the apostles taught. You want us to rely on the story telling through centuries of fallible men. I've seen that game played Steelfish. The story is never the same after passing through several people let alone several generations of people. I'm not gullible enough to trust the story after the last guy.

Oh, and that denomination stuff? I'm not impressed nor swayed. If you ever see me defending "denominations" you will realize at that time I might be impressed. I don't worship a "denomination" nor identify with one. So don't waste your time.

[MamaB]

Amen. In all the different churches I attended over the years, each and every one taught directly from the Bible. No tradition junk. They are like people who vote for dems just because my pa did and my grandpa did. No thinking for one’s self. I can still remember taking my Bible to church to follow along from the time I learned to read. Now, I have it on my iPad because the size can be adjusted. I do not know where these fake ideas come from. I am curious enough to look up info if it does not sound or read right. Just like I investigate politicians to see exactly where each stands. Every voter should do that. God bless.

[Steelfish]

OK, so now you reveal your true “theological” self. YOU alone have the right to rely ONLY on the written Word (as assembled of course under the infallible Petrine authority by the Church Christ founded eleven centuries before the curse and heresy of Protestantism came ashore) and give it YOUR own definite interpretation.

Fine.

Now I can sympathize with the likes of Billy Graham; Jeremiah Wright, Jim Jones, Benny Hinn, Creflo Dollar, the Moonies, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Jimmy Swaggart, Tammy Faye Baker, “Bishop” TD Jakes, Joel Osteen, and David Koresh.

[CynicalBear]

All of those you mentioned are just like the Catholics. They didn’t think they needed to stay with what the apostles taught. They added to it or left parts out. Typical of all apostates.