Posted on 07/12/2020 5:39:35 AM PDT by metmom
Sorry, mm, but that belief was here long before Pope Francis. It was even there when you were a member of the Catholic Church.
John 21 does not support sacred tradition.
Two thousand years of word of mouth is reliable and trustworthy?
Yeah, right........
A 2000 year old game of telephone. What could go wrong
Read John 21 again.
Conclusion.
24 It is this disciple who testifies to these things and has written them,* and we know that his testimony is true.n
25 There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written.o
Verse 25 is talking about Sacred Tradition in my opinion.
From an organization that invented the concept of *doctrinal development* to explain away the fact that their teachings change even though they claim they’ve taught the same thing for 2,000 years, that their teaching never changes.
It’s from the Bible, right?
Your claim is that sacred tradition is word of mouth teaching.
The verse by John says that there were many other things that Jesus *DID*.
*DID*, not *SAID*. There’s a difference between doing and saying.
So you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but it is still wrong especially in light of the fact that Catholicism takes a verse that says one thing and claims it means another.
Are you saying you don’t believe Christ and the words in the Bible?
Oh, dear!
It’s like trying to nail Jello to the wall, getting RCC members to explain..ANYTHING..
How many years have we done this mm? We’ve both been here since 1998 and yet, almost 22 years later, what are the 3 things RCs continually try to foist upon us? The Body and the Blood. SINLESS Mary, and The Rock.
You never have to worry about being blindsided. It’s the Usual Suspects.
I don't believe the Catholic misapplication of a verse to mean something it doesn't say.
Show me where He taught sacred tradition.
And if you are going to go on about believing Christ's words, try this on for size.
Matthew 23: 8-10 But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers.And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ.
It is the role of the Catholic Church to help all believe in God, preach the Gospel and Baptize all nations. All are welcome to join the Catholic Church and sharing God’s plan for divine life with all people. We don’t judge people (but do condemn sin) as it is God’s role to judge us when we die.
The Pope Didn’t stop believing the Word of God like many others have abandoned their beliefs and follow the ways of the world.
Isn’t it better to dialogue with reason than fight wars with other religions?
Oh good! So what’s the gospel you teach/preach?? Waiting...
Keep waiting. Perhaps God will respond when you have enough humility to learn about the Gospel.
Oh I know about the Gospel. The Gospel that saves. The Gospel of the GRACE of God.
And I also know that I’m not spiritual Israel, that water baptism saves no one, that the Law saves no one, nor does the Sermon on the Mount, that works are useless when it comes to salvation, that Mary was not sinless, that Peter was not the “first pope”, that no man has the authority in this age of grace to retain/remit sins, that there is no such beginning of the Catholic Church through Peter, that Paul was not chosen to replace Judas for a REASON, that the Body of Christ did not begin nor does it continue as a RCC phenomenon, that Rome isn’t Jerusalem, and that the Pope isn’t God’s representative on this earth.
Do you know how I know this?? BECAUSE NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE FOUND IN GOD’S WORD. This is ALL traditions and doctrines of FALLEN MEN, who add to or take from God’s word of truth, in order to create a LIE. And ignorant people lap it up, never bothering to study His word for themselves, to make CERTAIN that what they are told is REALLY what God SAYS.
You are going to be judged by the gospel that God gave to Paul to give to the Body of Christ (Rom.2:16). THAT is the gospel of your salvation. If you are going to be judged by it, it seems you would be curious as to WHAT IT IS. Or not
The whole Roman system of catechizing the gospel-seeker is founded on the error-filled precept of allegorical views of the Written Word of God, and thus can never result in a consistent agreement of the Word, even among themselvess. Allegorism, introduced at the beginning of the Church Age, particularly by Platonic-leaning converted (not regenerated) Gentile Greek-educated philosophers, has led that cult astray for about two millenia. It is an approach that they simply will not abandon. It is because of that method constantly and consistently are at odds with simple literal reasoning and interpretation , so that you and I can never come into union with them on spiritual matters.
Only Jehovah Elohim can reach through that Satanic fog to save a few of them, and that is why we keep on trying. Even Luther and Calvin and Knox and the Wesleys could not surmount that barrier, and are also not in agreement with each other.
Referring to 1 Peter 3:16, the adjective ἀμαθής (ah-mah-thays) iscommonly and almost universally translated as "unlearned" or "ignorant"m interpretively having the lexical sense of "unschooled."
But that is not the sense meant by Peter in his reference to Pauline methodology. The adjective descends from its parent verb μανθάνω (mahn-thahn-oh) "to learn" spoken by Jesus ". . . come and learn from Me . . ." (Mt. 11:29). Then from that verb comes also the noun μαθητής (mah-thay-tays)m a learner, a pupil, or (scripturally), a disciple (Mt. 28:16 for example).
When applied to transferring spiritual discernment training from a discipler to a recruited student, gained by developing a relationship, exciting the recruit's curiosity, soliciting his/her participation, through transmitting the spiritual seedσπέρμα of the Gospel using the spoken Word (Rom. 10:16-17), watching the germination of belief, the momentous spiritual rebirth, and ever-continuing justification/sanctification proceeding thenceforth, that is μαθητεύω (mah-thay-tyoo-oh) "to recruit learner-disciples," inducting them by the rite of immersive baptizing (βαπτίζω = bahp-ti-zeh-oh), and congregating them for training (διδάσκω - dih-dahs-koh) in The Faith, in the doctrine commanded by their own Rabbi mentor, Jesus of Nazareth, whose method was literally and fully disclosing the elements seen in the Tanakh as "mysteries" (see Mt. 28:18-20)
The problem with Catholicism is that it tries to perform this with humans not regenerated in the Spirit, utilizing "teachers" who themselves are not reborn, and using the unreliable inconsistent conclusions arrived at by allegorical interpretation of selectively chosen, employing corrupted textforms that do not represent the doctrine (διδαχή = di da-khay) received from The Apostles (Acts 2:42).
OK, MHGinTN, here is what I've been trying to get at in a literal, logical, spiritual, scriptural but round-about way:
Peter's adjective ἀμαθής should be translated in plain-literal language as
That is, the spiritual maturation of a new-born babe-in-Christ is designed to uniformly take place through the exemplary methods of discipling endured by the Apostles (including Paul) in association with their mentor Jesus Christ, and their successors, in a direct line passing through them to today's regenerated Bible believer-servant-Friend follower of Jesus Christ.
To do otherwise results in a twisted, unstable presentation like that of the Romanists (ἀστήρικτος = ah-stayreek-tawss; vacillating) platform that confuses any Bible seeker, including the most experienced but soulish-minded scholar.
And because the whole Romanistic method is predicated on t non-scriptural Platonic allegorical foundation of their current Catechism, proceeding from the unreliable Patristics despite the fact that they wrongly suppose that their line of succession of leaders is apostolic in origin--it is NOT; and can never produce a debate in which you as using a literal-grammatical-historical-contextual hermeneutic can establish a dialogue that might bring a mutual agreement and conclusion.
It can never achieve an advancement of God's earthly estate and influence.
Never.
The only hope is that using a proper presentation of scriptural truths, The God may use it to reach through their Iron Curtain of spiritual unregenerated blindness to turn someone's heart to Him from their Hell-bound soulish religion.
With respect for your efforts, Bro.
smvoice: You SEEM to be a fool.....
He called me a fool too
You are going to be judged by the gospel that God gave to Paul to give to the Body of Christ (Rom.2:16). THAT is the gospel of your salvation. If you are going to be judged by it, it seems you would be curious as to WHAT IT IS. Or not
What a hypocrite you are smvoice. You keep telling us that all you have to do is believe and you will be saved. So, either you are saying ADSUM doesn’t believe or he’s not saved yet, OR there’s more to it than just believing. WHICH IS IT? CLARIFY YOUR POINT.
And while we in Romans 2, better take a look at verse 1, hypocrite.
You need to laugh more, while you still have the time. Laugh often and laugh loud, while you can. Because one day it’s going to turn to wailing and gnashing. My last advice for you.
Funny, that’s advice I already gave to MHGinTN. Now you are a plagiarist (just kidding about the plagiarism part).
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.