Matt.15:2 Paul was an apostle, and this was the apostolic era during which Scripture was being written, and attending signs, such as the raising of the dead, were given to the apostles. Scripture has been completed. There are no more apostles, the current Polish Pretender with the mitre that blasphemously claims the title "Pontifex Maximus" included [Pontifex Maximus means "Highest Priest" Christ is the only Highest Priest we have ore need. "1Tim.2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;"
The "traditions" Paul referred to do not mean what the RCC erroneously teaches as tradition. Paul referred to the doctrines He taught under inspiration by the Spirit in the Scripture written by Him, and the Scripture available from other Apostles and the Old Testament Scripture. If by "tradition" one means doctrine and practice that conforms to the Scripture on which that tradition is founded then that is commended in Scripture, as in the verse cited by Paul. But when "tradition" means UNSCRIPTURAL doctrines and practices which have gradually become accepted and popular, the Bible in general and Jesus in particular constantly condemned this kind of tradition [which is the kind of meaning the Catholic church attaches to the word "tradition."]
Matt.15: 2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. 3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. 5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to [his] father or [his] mother, [It is] a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; 6 And honour not his father or his mother, [he shall be free]. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. 7 [Ye] hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with [their] lips; but their heart is far from me. 9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.
Col.2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. {rudiments: or, elements} {make a prey: or, seduce you, or, lead you astray}
Tell me anything Paul taught that contradicts Scripture. Then examine your church [the only real one as you so arrogantly put it]. The history of the RCC from its first attempts to gain ascendancy over all of the other churches in the 4th century, even going so far as to forge phony documents supposedly from Constantine that claimed preeminence for the Roman church.
Sorry, but the Bible does not call Peter the head of the apostles. Paul spoke with as much authority, and wrote much more of the New Testament than Peter. We at least know that Paul went to Rome, but there is no concrete evidence Peter ever did. Which makes sense, since Paul was to be the Apostle to the Gentiles and Peter the Apostle to the Jews.
Oh but wait, the Catholic church thinks that Peter is the rock on which the church is based, even though two different words are used for that foundation rock [huge stratum of rock] and Peter [small rock]. Peter never claimed to be the rock on which the church was built any more than any other Apostle. Let's let Peter identify the rock:
1 Pet.2:6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. 7 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, 8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
The Greek language is very precise, and it is the Greek language through which the Spirit moved on the Apostles to record Scripture.
1Cor.10:1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
When the Pope speaks "ex cathedra" his words must be in line with Scripture When I was speaking of the "Pope's words" I was speaking of his "ex cathedra" statements. Catholics say his words have to agree with Scripture. But in practice they do not. And in line with 2000 years of tradition? Claiming that Mary had an "immaculate conception" was not officially accepted until 1854. It took until 1950 to claim that Mary ascended bodily into heaven. Neither have any basis in Scripture at all. These are just two of the examples I listed previously of the Catholic church doing exactly what Jesus condemned, teaching as doctrines the inventions of men. Giving glory to Mary that is only due Christ.
Pius XII’s encyclical, Mediator Dei: Christ “has offered and continues to offer Himself as a victim for our sins.” Hebrews 9:25 says, “nor yet that he should offer himself often.” Hebrews 10:14, “For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified.”
Catholicism does not have a high view of Scripture: From the New Catholic Encyclopedia: “The Bible as a literary work had traditions that included myth” (Vol. 10, p. 184); “Some of the miracles recorded in Holy Scripture may be fictional and include imaginative literary exaggerations. The episode of Noah and the Ark is imaginative literary creation” (Vol. 9, p. 887); “The Gospels are not biographies of Jesus and still less scientific history” (Vol. 12, p. 403).
The RCC can't even unequivocally say that Christ is the only way of salvation. From Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994), #846: “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try by their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation.” [SOME OF THESE INDICTMENTS I LIST AGAINST THE RCC APPLY TO MANY PROTESTANT CHURCHES AS WELL]
We can think those who stood up to Rome's tyranny that we even have a Bible in our own common language to freely discuss here on Free Republic.
Bible translator and reformer, Tyndale was ordained as a priest in 1521, having studied Greek diligently at Oxford and Cambridge universities Following his studies he joined Sir John Walsh's household, with duties not easy to define. Some accounts describe him as a tutor to Sir John's children; some make him chaplain to the household; while another suggests he acted as secretary to Sir John.
One day Tyndale was engaged in a discussion with a learned man who told him it was better to be without God's law than that of the Pope. To this Tyndale retorted that he defied the Pope and all his laws, adding that if God were to spare his life, before many years passed he would cause a boy who drove the plough to know more of the Scriptures than this learned man. Tyndale had found his vocation: translation of the Bible into English.
Tyndale conferred with Luther in Germany and stayed on the continent translating the Bible from Greek into English. The printing of the translation was begun at Cologne in 1525, but was stopped by an injunction obtained by Johann Dobeneck, a vain and conceited man who hated the Reformation and opposed it in every possible way. Tyndale fled to Worms, where the book was printed. Copies were smuggled into England, where Archbishop Warham and Bishop Tonstall ordered them seized and burned.
Eventually Tyndale was betrayed by a friend and arrested in Brussels, Belgium. Despite the efforts of Thomas Cromwell and others to save him, he was tried for treason and heresy against the Church. He was condemned, degraded from holy orders, strangled, and his body burned. His last words were a prayer, "Lord, open the king of England's eyes."
Tyndale's influence upon English literature was great, chiefly through the use made of his renderings in the King James Version of the Bible (1611). It is estimated that 60 percent of this translation is derived from that of Tyndale.
NOTE: I RESPECT THE STANDS THAT THIS CURRENT POPE AND MOTHER THERESA TOOK FOR MORALITY AND AGAINST ABORTION. AND I APPRECIATE THE MANY PATRIOTIC CATHOLICS WHO VOTE THE CONSERVATIVE LINE ON THE MANY "VALUES" ISSUES TODAY. CATHOLICS WERE MORE VIGILANT IN OPPOSING ABORTION FROM THE BEGINNING THAN PROTESTANTS. BUT I DISAGREE THEOLOGICALLY WITH MANY RCC DOCTRINES BECAUSE I CANNOT FIND SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT FOR THEM. I BEAR NO PERSONAL ILL WILL AGAINST ANY CATHOLIC. I JUST FEEL COMPELLED TO TELL PEOPLE THAT CHRIST IS THE ONE WHO SAVES, NOT A DENOMINATION, AND IF SCRIPTURE DOES NOT SUPPORT A DOCTRINE, THEN IT IS NOT A PART OF TRUE CHRISTIANITY. I AM BLESSED TO HAVE MANY FRIENDS IN MY CHURCH WHO WERE CATHOLICS JUST A FEW YEARS AGO, BUT HAD NEVER HAD A PERSONAL SALVATION EXPERIENCE WITH CHRIST.
More self-interpreting nonsense. Note that when Judas hung himself the Apostles had to appoint and ordain a replacement Apostle for him, Matthias. (Acts 1: 21-26). What does the end of Scriptural revelation have to do with the end of preists, (presbyters), Bishops and Apostles? On the contrary, a perpetual Apostolic ministry and leadership was essential to the handing on of Divine Revelation. "Now in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers, Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Mana-en a member of the court of Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them." Then after fasting and praying they laid their hands on them and sent them off. (Acts 13: 1-3) So the Bible proves you are wrong yet again. Jesus commanded the Apostles: "go out into all nations and teach them all things whatsoever I have taught you", (Mathew 28:20).
Are you supposing that Jesus charged the Twelve with this monumental and perpetual task without allowing them the power to ordain other Aposltes? The Apostles, in order to fulfill Christ's command, had to lay hands on other disciples to ordain them as replacements and proxies :
Jesus gave the power to heal and forgive sins to the Apostles; (Luke 9:1, and Luke 22: 17-20), and the Apostles conferred these same God-given powers onto others in (I Timothy 4: 13 -14): "Till I come, attend to the public reading of scripture, to preaching, to teaching. Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophetic utterance when the council of elders laid their hands upon you".
Throughout Acts, Hebrews and Timothy, we see this Apostolic heirarchy and ordination of others in action: "Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Hebrews 13:17
Get your Latin and your scholarship straight for once so we can have a serious debate. "Pontifex Maximus" means, literally, "Supreme Pontiff", or in Catholic meaning, "bishop of bishops". "Pontiff" in eccliastical Latin translates only to "Bishop", and does not mean 'priest' in any way, shape, form or manner. As usual, the anti Catholics attack with lies, falsehoods, and utter disregard for facts.
Saint Paul's words are crystal clear in (2 Thess. 2:15): "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the tradition which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.". In fact, Paul then commands true Christians to keep away from people like you, who refuse to understand oral traditions to be as authoratative as the written Scripture: "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us."
Your Bible scholarship and attention to detail is terrible. Note that it was the Pharisees who are accusing the Apostles of not following the traditions of the Jews. Jesus then defends the Apostles, and assails the traditions of the Pharisees. The Pharisees were living according to the early Talmud, (then called the 'Mishna'). This was the man-made, early Rabinnical commentary on the Bible, and not the Bible itself. The Jews of Christ's day were indeed living according to "traditions of men", the Pharisees. For they stopped living according to the the Divinely inspired Torah and followed the teachings of the man-made Mishna, (Pharisaic commentaries on the Bible). Saint Paul, the son of a Pharisee, beautifully verifies this in (Galatians 1 13-14) when he says: "For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it; and I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the tradition of my fathers.
"You yourselves are our letter of recommendation, written on your hearts, to be known and read by all men; and you show that you are a letter from Christ delivered by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts. (2 Corinthians 3: 2-3)
As you hopefully have learned by now, if you can pay attention to detail, the "tradition of men" that Paul spoke of were the traditions of the Pharisees, the traditions he himself once followed, (Galatians `1: 13-13). The traditions that Paul himself now taught, (2 Thess. 2:15), were the legitimate traditions of God's Church, not "traditions of man". Does Paul condemn himself in 2 Thess. 2:15 when he commands Christians to follow both his epistles and oral traditions? Does Paul contradict himself in 2 Thess. 3:6 when he commands us to walk away from any brother not living in the traditions?
Again, your understanding of the Bible is shoddy.
No? The Bible almost always refers to the Apostles as "Peter and the eleven". How about these verses?
(1). "But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice and spoke to them.." (Acts 2:14)
(2). "and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve" (I Cor 5:15).
(3). "But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before into Galillee", (Mark 16:7).
(4). "Now when they had heard these things they had compunction in their heart, and said to Peter, and to the rest of the Apostles, what shall we do..." (Acts 2:37).
(5). Jesus gives the 'Keys to the Kingdom' only to Peter. (Mathew 16:18).
(6). Peter is the only Apostle allowed to walk on water. (Mathew 14:28).
(7). Only Peter is given the vision from God that all men can be saved. (Acts 10: 11- 16).
(8). Peter settles the dispute at the Council of Jersualem, and 'silenced the multitude'. (Acts 15: 7 -12).
(9). only Peter is assured by Jesus Christ Himself that his faith will never fail. (Luke 22:31-32).
(10). John outruns Peter to the Tomb, but suddenly stops and allows Peter to catch up, allowing him to be the first to go inside the Tomb of Jesus. (John 20:3-6).
(11). Jesus commands Peter, "feed my lambs, feed my lambs, feed my sheep". (John 21: 15-17).
Where have you been? No protestant or fundamentalist scholars make this claim anymore. The evidence that Peter died in Rome is so overwhelming that it's silly to even make the claim he never went to Rome.
The Christian historian Eusebius wrote in the 3rd century that Peter was martyred with Paul in Rome.
Saint Irenaeus, (2nd century bishop of Lyons, and disciple of Polycarp who was a friend of John the Evangelist), wrote that the Church at Rome was founded by Peter and Paul.
Origin also wrote that Peter died in Rome.
Saint Clement, (the Clement Paul mentions in the Bible), wrote that Peter died in Rome.
St. Ignatius, early 2nd century Bishop wrote that Peter died in Rome with Paul.
Saint Cyprian of Carthage, who died a martyr in 258 A.D., wrote: "On Peter the Lord builds His Chruch, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep....and He assigns like power to all the Apostles-Yet He founded a single chair---a primacy was given to Peter.." (Jurgens, 555-556).
I won't answer the rest of your silly posts because they are just the same old worn out allegations that have been around since Luther, Calvin, Zwingle and the other self-appointed popes and false authorities - - - and they are just too easy to refute. Your knowledge of Scripture and Church history is shallow, and all you have to talk about are the age old things that Protestant pastors and anti Catholic web sites spew day and night. But you just got your lunch eaten in this debate, if you chose to read it, that is. Maybe now you'll ask your pastor or fundamentalist instructor a few questions.
Hey! That would be me! Okay, well more than a few years ago, but I appreciate your post. And I know for a fact the pastor of your church and other pastors he is acountable with will tell from the pulpit to check what they say against the Word of God (the Bible) for accuracy.