When the Word just isn’t enough

Out of His Mouth ^ | February 11, 2014 | Timothy F. Kauffman

[RnMomof7]

Ping

[Alex Murphy]

Here come the keyword hijinks!

[bonfire]

In other words, they lied.

[Mark17]

In before the Catholics. 😆

[Salvation]

Source link is not working.

[Salvation]

A former Catholic —

now a member of Southwood Presbyterian Church (PCA).

Move on, folks.

[Salvation]

Why do you accuse a saint of not telling the truth?

Novena with Saint Peter Julian Eymard for Prayer in the Presence of the Blessed Sacrament [Prayer]
Eucharistic Stations Of The Cross (Saint Peter Julian Eymard)
Corpus Christi (by St. Peter Julian Eymard)
A series of reflections from St. Peter Julian Eymard Blessed Sacrament(Catholic Caucus)
St.Peter Julian Eymard[Apostle of the Eucharist]

[kinsman redeemer]

Worked for me!

I was logged in.

[bonfire]

Read the article.

[bonfire]

It works just fine but you have to actually click on the link first! ;)

[redleghunter]

“This law is invariable, so much so that Richard of St. Laurence felt authorized to place on the lips of Our Lord the following words, ‘No one can come to Me unless My Mother draws him to Me.'” (Eymard, 207)

“The Scripture account of the conversion of the penitent thief requires some tradition to clear it up. …Now it is an ancient tradition that the penitent thief was on the right hand of the Cross; and it seems likely that Mary, if she moved about, would yet stand most upon that side, as S. John would feel it the place of honour, and yield it to her. S. Ephrem attributes the conversion of the thief to her intercession.” (Livius, 299)

so 'glad' Richard of St. Laurence felt 'authorized' to speak for our Lord Jesus Christ.

[Elsie]

HERESY!!

“Contenson places on the dying lips of Jesus these merciful words: ‘0 men, be hold your Mother! My Wounds are the sources of grace, but their streams, their currents, are spread abroad only by the channel of Mary.'” (Eymard, 204)

[Elsie]

Sweet words whispered in ears...

[Elsie]

Why do you accuse a saint of not telling the truth?

Why not?

They get accused of telling the truth!

[kinsman redeemer]

key words. I haven't noticed. I assume the keywords describe discontent. Right?

Here is a key line from the article

Lacking any evidence for a certain teaching from the Bible, some of the sources (ancient and otherwise) simply create the teaching by placing words “on the lips” of Jesus, Mary and John.

Now we'll read the tired (and frequently met) challenge to "Prove 'Sola Scriptura'" and the insistence that everything we need to know is not written... Saying something like "Even scripture leads me to conclude that traditions are justified BECAUSE they're not included in the Bible."

This distortion gives license to do, say, believe anything that can be imagined. This is the way of the Roman Catholic Church and it stalwart adherents.

The Word of God is enough:

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

If anyone want to tell me again that the RCC preserved Scripture then I'll gladly say "Thanks!"

Now, Study It! Examine It! Love It! There's your BREAD! You will grow strong by doing this.

Strong enough to break the chains that bind you!

I know this is true.

[metmom]

Getting the popecorn out.

[Alex Murphy]

....lacking Biblical evidence for their traditions, the ancient sources simply place the teachings on the lips of Jesus, Mary and John, or invent the facts necessary to support a belief or practice in which they are already engaging.

• Richard of St. Laurence already believed that Mary is the mediator of all graces, and therefore “felt authorized” to put the doctrine on Jesus’ lips.
• Ambrose already believed that Mary, was worthy of being first to witness the resurrection, and therefore simply invented the “fact” that she was.
• S. Ephrem already believed that Mary was worthy of seeing Jesus transfigured, and therefore simply invented Mary’s eye-witness to it.
• Peter Chrysologus already believed Mary was present at the Resurrection, and therefore simply assumed that she must have been present in the person of Mary Magdalene.

In every case, the belief came first, and the evidence followed. The pattern for Rome is this: “we already know this to be true, so there is no error in creating evidence to support it.” This is why I call “Tradition” the historical revisionism that it clearly is.

....I must acknowledge that there is no explicit verse that directly settles [the question of Mary's supposed "Immaculate Conception"]. At the same time, I don’t think that an explicit verse is necessary to prove that something is scriptural. I think that if a doctrine is implied in Scripture or logically follows from what we find in Scripture, and if there is nothing in Scripture that directly refutes it, then that belief can be considered scriptural.
-- from the thread In Defense of the Immaculate Conception: Part 2

[Kandy Atz]

In every case, the belief came first, and the evidence followed.

This is true of most religious error, whether in Rome or anywhere else.

Always stick with God's Word, and examine everything in the Light of His Truth. If you don't, just like Eve, God's Word gets embellished, misquoted, and eventually ignored. The moment you exalt the reasoning of some man or theologian above God's Truth, you are in trouble. The article clearly points out the danger of the opinions of men, and how they quickly depart from the Truth. With just a few moments of careful study of God's Word, all the error above would have been quickly abandoned. A vigilant body of Believers who knew God's Word should have quickly corrected such errors. Instead, they were allowed to fester and grow, leading folks further away from the Truth. Now, we also have to contend with Arguments From Age, since Kermit the Hermit wrote something in the 6th century that was not properly disputed and corrected, it is now seen by the religious to be equal or superior to Scripture!

God gave us His Word and the Holy Spirit for a reason - so that you would know His Truth, and the Truth sets you free from the father of lies.

[metmom]

Now we'll read the tired (and frequently met) challenge to "Prove 'Sola Scriptura'" and the insistence that everything we need to know is not written... Saying something like "Even scripture leads me to conclude that traditions are justified BECAUSE they're not included in the Bible."

Funny. When we are challenged to support sS, we do it.

When Catholics are challenged to support sacred tradition, all we get is ***CRICKETS***.