A quick question: who do you think wrote the first five books of the OT? Would you say, "Moses"? I imagine you would. And yet none of those five books is signed. You are believing this not because of the ipsissima verba of the Scriptures, but because of the Sacred Tradition --- OralTradition---of the Jews.
Likewise: who do you think wrote the four Gospels? Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John? Good: but actually, those Gospels are anonymous: unsigned and internally unattributed. Why do we say "Matthew, Mark, Luke and John"? Because of Oral Tradition.
You think The Gospel of John is a part of Scripture? Very good.How about the Gospel of Thomas? Or the Didache? Once again, the canon of the New Testament was settled by Sacred Tradition. The very making of the New Testament Canon was a development of doctrine.
None of the books of the OT was included on a First Century AD index --- or 2nd or 3rd century, for that matter --- indicating which books are Sacred Scripture and which are not. The first "New Testaments" were scattered manuscripts. There was no Table of Contents. Over a period of time--- and gradually -- in a process that spanned centuries --- the Churches settled on a Church-wide agreed list of New Testament Scriptures, determined liturgically ("What were they using for public prayers?") and confirmed hierarchically ("What list was approved in synods and councils?)
So without Tradition there would be no Canon of Scripture.
Nor even does the existence of the full Canon of Scripture necessary for salvation. Was not the Thief on the Cross next to Jesus saved? And not one jot or one tittle of NT Scripture had been written at that ppoint. Didn't St. Stephen the deacon, the first holy martyr, go to Heaven? Of course he did. But at that time there was not one written Gospel, no NT whatsoever. What he knew about Christ, he got from the Apostolic preaching. Oral Tradition.
It was Tradition that came first, and gave rise to Scripture. Tradition is not just some unnatural "growth" or tumor that got attached to the Church in the ages after the Gospels were written.
Tradition --- not the "empty traditions of men, but Sacred Tradition and its authority--- preceded Gospel.
And if the Holy Spirit were not teaching reliably through Oral Tradition and through such structures as Church synods and councils, the 27-book New Testament would never have existed, or would have passed out of circulation just as innumerable ancient books passed out of circulation and were forgotten forever. Thanks be to God.
Now there is a perfect example of going above what is written. First of all, it's been shown over and over in these threads that what was considered scripture was established long before there was a Catholic Church. Peter already considered Paul's writings scripture.
Second, it was God who preserved His word to us as He promised He would. For Catholics to try to take credit IS putting men over what is written. Catholics should keep in mind that God used Judas, Balaam's donkey, and many evil people to bring forth His will. He will also use the anti Christ during the tribulation. If He used the Catholic Church to bring His word forward it is no reflection on the correctness of the Catholic Church.
>>What he knew about Christ, he got from the Apostolic preaching. Oral Tradition.<<
Now please prove from an infallible source that everything the Catholic Church teaches today is what the apostles taught that you call "tradition".
>>Tradition is not just some unnatural "growth" or tumor that got attached to the Church in the ages after the Gospels were written.<<
It most certainly is if what the Catholic Church teaches wasn't taught by the apostles. Paul wrote that if someone teaches something they didn't that person was to be considered accursed. Not one Catholic to date has shown proof that the apostles taught the assumption of Mary.
>>Thanks be to God.<<
You type that it seems as an afterthought. After giving credit to the Catholic Church. Let me remind you that God will use the anti Christ in order for Christ to return. Like I said, if God used the Catholic Church to bring His gospel forward it is no indication that the Catholic Church is true to that word today because it most certainly is not.
The concept of today's "tradition" in the Catholic Church is nothing but a power grab to keep the followers in line and subjected to them. Their concept of "tradition" does NOT go back to the apostles but is only a ruse to adjust their teaching as time goes on.
If you are suggesting that I accept the bible as the word of God because of Jewish or any other tradition, you are absolutely incorrect...
You think The Gospel of John is a part of Scripture? Very good.How about the Gospel of Thomas? Or the Didache? Once again, the canon of the New Testament was settled by Sacred Tradition. The very making of the New Testament Canon was a development of doctrine.
Certainly not in my case nor millions of others...
The bible I believe is the word of God did not come thru Africa as the Catholic bibles do...The bible I read and trust comes from manuscripts that agree with the earliest translated bibles which were the Old Latin Bibles which came from the Greek and Hebrew of the Jews of the bible...
The letters that Paul and the others were distributing to the churches are what my bible comes from and the book of Thomas certainly is not in there...
The O.T. canon mentioned in the N.T. was established long before Jesus showed up...The N.T. canon was established by those who passed out the books and letters during the lifetime of the apostles...
The early church fathers write of the books of the bible...The only canon of a bible that came from your religion is a re-write of the original canon...
So without Tradition there would be no Canon of Scripture.
I think you mean Catholic tradition...And as CynicalBear pointed out, that's unbiblical...So there's absolutely no reason to believe it...
It was Tradition that came first, and gave rise to Scripture. Tradition is not just some unnatural "growth" or tumor that got attached to the Church in the ages after the Gospels were written.
The bible tells us exactly how it worked out...And no, it was not a 'growth or tumor'...It was GOD...
Joh_14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
And if the Holy Spirit were not teaching reliably through Oral Tradition and through such structures as Church synods and councils, the 27-book New Testament would never have existed, or would have passed out of circulation just as innumerable ancient books passed out of circulation and were forgotten forever. Thanks be to God.
Oh brother (sister)...I guess God should thank you for saving the day for him...
Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Psa 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
Thank you but I'll takes God's word over any from your or another's religion, any day...