Posted on 08/15/2023 8:57:23 PM PDT by ebb tide
...it is found in the (originally oral) Mishna.
Now I ask you, "Just what stuff that is WRITTEN down WASN'T 'originally oral'?"
I guess the conclusion a reasonable person can come up with is the either Rome messed up by NOT including it when it compiled the Jewish writings into the Old Testement, or the Jews, themselves, failed to hold it in that high of an opinion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishnah
(With or without the final "h")
Finally got through your rebuttal, bravo. “Tradition” sounds like so much Mishna, Zohar, Talmudic claptrap. A diversion of the Word of God.
“You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.”
― Ayn Rand
I’m not surprised you would quote someone who rejected faith and religion and supported abortion, even before it became legal.
Hey; even your evil popes were elected by righteous men - correct??
According to our tradition, tradition only authoritatively consists of and means whatever we say, and we say that according to our tradition, whatever we say tradition authoritatively consists of and means then it does.
Rome has presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares, and presumes protection from at least salvific error in non-infallible magisterial teaching on faith and morals.
Ahh yes:
Deut 4:2, Proverbs 30:6, 2 John1:9-11, 2Peter 1:20
Knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation.
And of course Revelation 22:18,19
I praise God some brave souls unchained the Word from the altar(s) and freely gave it to the world sans indulgences.
Same Church, same teachings, different locations with different people. Just like today.
This; vaguely; reminds me of...
Where can we find an 'OFFICIAL MORMON' teaching website??Official sites are sites supported by LDS officials unless said official sites are considered unofficial by said officials.At that point such sites are unofficial unless officially referenced for official purposes by officials who can do so officially.This should not be misconstrued as an indication that official sites can be unofficially recognized as official nor should it be implied that unofficial sites cannot contain official information, but are not officially allowed to be offical despite their official contents due the their unofficialness.Official sites will be official and recognized as official by officials of the LDS unless there is an official reason to mark them as unofficial either temporally or permanently, which would make the official content officially unofficial.This is also not to imply that recognized sites, often used on FR by haters and bigots cannot contain official information, it just means that content, despite its official status, is no longer official and should be consider unofficial despite the same information being official on an official site elsewhere.Even then the officialness my be amended due to the use of the unofficial information which may determine the officialness of anything be it official or unofficial depending on how and where it is used officially or unofficially.I hope this clear things up for the lurkers out there.The haters tend to make things complicated and confusing when it is all really quite crystal clear.--Ejonesie22
7/30/2015 was Ejonesie22’s last post.
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.