Posted on 02/10/2015 5:33:20 AM PST by Gamecock
If Revelation 22:18-19 don’t say it, they come awfully close.
I think the “book” referred to in those passages is only the Book of Revelation.
"Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle."
- 2 Thessalonians 2:14
And the above Scripture is explicit with regard to both written and spoken traditions.
have an awfully close to nice day
Once I became a Christian, I have steadfastly believed that the scriptures are the inspired word of Almighty God. I acknowledge that scripture gives great authority to the church in its binding and loosing. However, everything ultimately goes back to scriptural authority, even in the Catholic and Orthodox tradition. For you can catch even them arguing, “Well, Jesus said this.” or “Jesus said that.”
We have no choice but to acknowledge the dependence of any denominational Church and of individual Christians on scripture. This is true of any denomination. The inevitably appeal to scripture.
That came to mind as I was reading the article, but I think that scripture is talking about Revelation. Every book of the bible is separate to me. the letters, the Gospels, the historical book (ACTS) and revelation are all separate books and letters bundled together in one volume.
BTW, I tend to agree with the author. I’m not trying to make the case that we can add books to the collection of books we call “The Bible”.
Yes, but those traditions have to be inline with scripture.
Does this mean we don’t need all the creeds and confessions, all the councils and conventions, to tell us what the Scriptures say? We can abandon these inventions of men which imitate the structure of the Catholic system? We can be baptized into the church Christ built, rather than into a man-made denomination? That’s great news!
bump
No
Which "we" among the 40K+ denominations is this particular author speaking for?
Perhaps. But it’s my understanding that the Bible is not just a collection of separate “articles” penned by numerous writers and bound together as a collection of sorts. It is an unbroken, harmonious thread of the Word and the Will of God; therefore someone who tampers with the Book of Revelation is also tampering with Amos or Philemon.
Aren’t we cautioned that “he that offendeth in one point of the Law is guilty of all”? John’s warning regarding plagues ties it together for me. The warning is in Revelation, the last book of the NT, while the plagues we’re warned about are described in the OT.
Sounds to me like a one-piece, unbroken thread that we divvy-up at our own peril. Of course, we have the freedom to divide it up any way we please; but we’ll answer for it later. JMHO,of course.
Thanks for the discussion.
The warning is in Revelation, the last book of the NT...
Yes, and your argument here is absolutely necessary for the doctrine of Sola Scriptura to have any credibility.
Revelation was written approximately 96AD. Which book was written after that?
It is stated in the beginning of the bible, the middle of the bible and the end of the bible...Cut and dried...Discussion closed...
Huh?
It is interesting to note that the same Pope (Pius IX) who developed the concept of papal infallibility also institutionalized the belief that Mary herself was born of an Immaculate Conception, of which there is no mention in the Bible. This was done in the 19th century.
As a Catholic, I think the closer we are to the Bible, the better. There are some Catholic disciplines, such as clerical celibacy which are NOT required in the Bible. To the contrary, priests were married men in the Bible and were encouraged to be married and good family men.
And the above Scripture is explicit with regard to both written and spoken traditions.
If we are to believe you, and your religion, there were oral traditions that we never learned of...It's like you are claiming that Paul said, 'I wrote some stuff that you will need to preserve for the future of the church...I also spoke some 'other' stuff that you can't write down, but you need to remember and pass on for a few thousand years...
If there were oral traditions, they would have to have been written down or they would have been forgotten, changed, or just lost...
I'd say you are pretty confused about that verse...
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.