Posted on 03/28/2005 9:10:37 AM PST by TheTruthess
Sewell Hall
When God gave His law by Moses to Israel, He made no provision for the division of His people into sects and parties. But by the time Jesus came into the world, division was well entrenched. There were the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essenes, and doubtless others. It was assumed that all who were serious about religion would be associated with one of these. But to which of these parties did Jesus belong? Of course, He belonged to none of them. He maintained His independent, non-sectarian relationship with God to the very end. For this reason, they all opposed Him.
Jesus did not provide for His followers to be divided into sects and parties. Rather He desired that they might be united. After praying for His apostles, He then prayed that all His disciples may be one as He and the Father are one (John 17:20-21).
Through the years, however, divisions have developed and has been perpetuated by the writing of creeds and the formation of denominational organizations. The result is that now among professed followers of Jesus there are many bodies (denominations), many faiths (creeds), and many baptisms.
How different the present situation from the unity described in the New Testament. The apostle declared, "There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all" (Ephesians 4:4-6).
Many today regret the division among believers and wish it did not exist. They desire the uniting of all the denominations and work diligently to that end. But they assume that until this is accomplished, there is nothing an individual can do but join one of the existing divisions and maintain a kind and tolerant spirit. Nothing in the teaching or practice of Jesus supports this approach to unity.
Jesus did not undertake to convene an ecumenical conference designed to effect a merger of Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes into one super sect. Neither did He pray that His disciples might be united into one super denomination. He prayed rather that individual believers might be united in Himself and in the Father. His teaching was designed to turn individuals from the doctrines and traditions of men to the simple word of God.
In the first century the church was simply composed of all who were saved by Jesus Christ through repentance and baptism, and it continued to grow as others were saved (Acts 2:38-47). Groups of these saved people met in various cities and each group was a church. Though united in Christ, they were independent of any human association or federation. Christ directed them through His inspired apostles, teaching them how they were to worship and work together.
If we obey the same instructions given through the Lord's apostles, repenting of our sins and being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, we too will be saved. When we are saved, the Lord will add us to His church as He added them. They joined no other religious organization; neither should we. In Christ, we are united with all others who are in Him.
As members of the Lord's church, we must then study carefully the New Testament's description of that church and the instructions given to it. This is found in the book of Acts and in the letters which follow it. Since the apostles were guided by the Holy Spirit, we can be sure that the churches under their instruction were exactly what Jesus wanted them to be. If we duplicate these early churches the Lord will be pleased with us.
Unfortunately, the fissiparous tendency in the Church existed from the very beginning, as one can see in the letters of Paul warning against division. What held the Church together in New Testament times was Apostolic authority. We see this in the "Council of Jerusalem" described in Acts, and in Paul's repeated invocation of his own authority. There quickly arose various heresies that denied one or another basic Christian doctrine. In response to this, the early Church invoked the writings of the Apostles and evangelists, the traditions that had been handed down in the churches (especially the greatest and oldest churches, like that of Rome), and the authority of bishops. In other words, "canonical" Scripture, Hierarchy, apostolic Tradition, Dogma, and Creeds all developed over the same period of time and were the ways that the Body of Christ defended itself from the corruption of false teaching. One can see this process unfold in early Christian writings, such as the letter of Clement (ca. 97 AD), the letters of Ignatius of Antioch (ca. 107 AD), the "Martyrdom of St. Polycarp" (ca. 155 AD), etc. If you want to know more about the early Church read the writings of the early Church Fathers. The term "Catholic Church was used in those writings even before the last book of the New Testament
was completed.
The word "Catholic" may have appeared in those writings...but in the New Testament it was referred to as "Church Of God.
Acts 20:28
1 Corinthians 1:2
1 Corinthians 11:22
1 Corinthians 15:9
2 Corinthians 1:1
Galatians 1:13
1 Thessalonians 2:14
1 Timothy 3:5
And just when would that be? Date please.
"The term "Catholic Church was used in those writings even before the last book of the New Testament was completed.
And just when would that be? Date please."
Ignatius of Antioch to the Smyraeans, written about 107 AD.
CHAPTER VIII.--LET NOTHING BE DONE WITHOUT THE BISHOP.
See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is[administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.
I would say that this was written after the NT letters were written. However, it is safe to say that the term "catholic" is not an invention of Ignatius, and was probably in use for some time. The word catholic refers to the universality of the Church, not only in location, but in its composition - all inclusive.
Regards
"In the first century the church was simply composed of all who were saved by Jesus Christ through repentance and baptism, and it continued to grow as others were saved (Acts 2:38-47). Groups of these saved people met in various cities and each group was a church. Though united in Christ, they were independent of any human association or federation"
Seems to be a contradiction in your article that you posted. Does God covenant with an individual, or with a "nation"? Above implies we are to come to God as individuals, and that the community that formed was "independent of any association". The Acts of the Apostles refutes that (council of Jerusalem was binding on other Christians). The apostles had been given authority by Christ, and this was accepted by the community. We don't come to God only as individuals, but as part of a community. To do away with the community of God, the Church, is to do away with God's plan, both in the OT and the NT.
Also, is formulating a creed divisive in of itself? During times of disagreement, isn't the community responsible in formulating what it believes? Isn't that the point of many of Paul's letters, to correct faulty interpretations and beliefs (ex. 1 Corinthians)? One then can know, for certain, what is "orthodox", and what is "heresy". There must be a point where a belief is set down. Considering that Christianity is based on an objective reality, the Paschal Mystery, we would expect objective beliefs to exist. God has revealed His teachings to the community. Once this is known, those who are not interested in following the Church community go their own way. The Creed does not cause division, man's pride and refusal to accept Church authority divinely given is the problem.
Regards
Firstly, the conference in Jerusalem (Acts 15, Gal 2) was a meeting between representatives of two congregations directly involved in a dispute.
Some men came from Jerusalem to Antioch and told the Antioch church that the church in Jerusalem taught that Gentiles had to be circumcised. Paul knew better because he had received his gospel by revelation of the Holy Spirit.
Paul didn't go to Jerusalem to get the truth - he had the truth - and he was prepared to set straight anyone who taught differently. And, sure enough, when all the parties got together and discussed the issue, it was discovered that the Judaizers were liars; the Jerusalem church taught the same gospel as Paul. Case closed.
This was not a council dispensing new rules ala Nice, Trent, ad nauseum. This was two congregations resolving an issue between those two congregations.
Secondly, which of the following have been found to contain error over the last 2 millenia?
Scripture
Hierarchy
Tradition
Dogma
Creeds
Paul told the Ephesians: I received it by revelation, I wrote it down, you read it, you can understand it. I'll go with Scripture. The rest has repeatedly been proven untrustworthy over the years.
Thanks for doing such a concise job of presenting the truth.
"Some men came from Jerusalem to Antioch and told the Antioch church that the church in Jerusalem taught that Gentiles had to be circumcised. Paul knew better because he had received his gospel by revelation of the Holy Spirit."
"Paul didn't go to Jerusalem to get the truth - he had the truth - and he was prepared to set straight anyone who taught differently"
Are you implying that Paul received revelation from the Holy Spirit, but the other apostles, James, Peter, etc., didn't? So the apostles were know-nothings until Paul saved the day? Then why did Paul meet with Peter for two weeks to ensure that they were both on the same page? Paul himself says that he received teachings from the tradition of the Apostles. So to say that Paul was going to set straight the Apostles is incorrect.
"This was not a council dispensing new rules ala Nice, Trent, ad nauseum. This was two congregations resolving an issue between those two congregations"
You misunderstand the point of what IS a council. A council, either Trent, Nicea, or Jerusalem, is called because there is a question regarding the faith. Reading Church History will reveal what each of those were in the above cases. For Jerusalem, should Gentiles become Jews first? Some CHRISTIANS said YES! Others said NO! So there is a dispute. Based on apostolic teachings from Christ, they determined that Jesus did not mean for the Gentiles to become Jews first - thus the determination made. Same of Nicea... Jesus was truly the essence of God. Same as any other council. No new doctrine is made up. Belief is codified and clarified. The faithful now are made aware of the limits of what is considered orthodox faith.
"Secondly, which of the following have been found to contain error over the last 2 millenia?
Scripture
Hierarchy
Tradition
Dogma
Creeds"
Errors can be made in interpretating Scripture, (example: Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, you shall not have eternal life. What does that mean to you?), so your argument doesn't follow.
Regards
"Thanks for doing such a concise job of presenting the truth."
What is the pillar and foundation of the Truth?
Regards
And just when would that be? Date please."
Ignatius of Antioch to the Smyraeans, written about 107 AD.
As you admitted, that AD107 date is well after the NT canon's completion, and does not neccessitate the use of the term "catholic" before NT completion, only that it came to be used at least during the 2nd century.
The vast body of evidence places the completetion of the NT before AD70 and the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.
I am not arguing against the term "catholic", but the date it came into use and why. Justin Martyr also used the term early in the 2nd century and the evidence points to it being used to distinguish orthodox Christians from the Gnostics and other cults claiming to be Christian.
You are referring to 1 Timothy 3:15. However, the idea that the church is the ultimate source of truth, as Catholics believe, is not what is being taught in this passage. The church is to uphold and defend the truth, but the ultimate authority for truth is Jesus Christ. Jesus said "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14:6).
"AD107 date is well after the NT canon's completion"
I am not certain on when the NT was completed. I have seen scholarly research say that John didn't complete Revelation until the 90's. I believe the term "catholic" was probably applied to the church before we first see it in Ignatius. I do agree with you that the term "catholic" refers to the then orthodox church, as opposed to heterodox communities in existence at the turn of the century.
Regards
"However, the idea that the church is the ultimate source of truth, as Catholics believe, is not what is being taught in this passage."
Catholics don't teach what you are implying, that the church is the ultimate source of truth. That source is God Himself. The Church considers God's source of revelation to be Apostolic Tradition and Scripture. The Church is the guardian of Apostolic Tradition and Scripture - Tradition in what Paul refers to as oral teachings from the Apostles that cannot be changed, and Scripture, esp. its interpretation. (even Satan can use Scripture).
So we are in agreement, in essence. The problem comes from those who decide that Scripture ALONE is to be the rule of faith - something not taught by anyone for over 1000 years after Christ. That was my point of contention.
Regards
Please show me something from Apostolic Tradition that is not in Scripture, and yet you believe should be obeyed practiced today. Thanks.
Paul is adamant that any "tradition" be in conformity and agreement with the inspired Word given in the Scriptures. That is where the conflict arises.
Concerning "sola scriptura", we do not reject tradition, only those traditions that are in conflict with Scripture, with Scripture being the final court of arbitration on all things pertaining to faith and practice.
Not true.
"But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work." II Timothy 3:14-17 (RSV)
ANASTASIUS OF ANTIOCH
"It is manifest that those things are not to be inquired into, which Scripture has passed over into silence. For the Holy Spirit has dispensed and administered to us all things which conduce to our profit" Anagog Contemp in Hexem lib 8 init
ATHANASIUS
"...for the tokens of truth are more exact as drawn from Scripture, than from other sources..." De Decretis 31
"The holy and inspired Scriptures are sufficient of themselves for the preaching of the Truth" Contra Gentiles 1,1
"These [canonical] books are the fountains of salvation, so that he who thirsts may be satisfied with the oracles contained in them: in these alone the school of piety preaches the Gospel; let no man add to or take away from them." Festal Letters 39
"For they were spoken and written by God" De Incarnatione 56 "...the Scriptures...will learn from them more completely and clearly the exact detail of what we said" ibid 56
"Scripture is of all things most sufficient for us" Ad Epis Aeg 4
"Divine Scripture is sufficient above all things" De Synodis 6
ANTONY OF EGYPT
"The Scriptures are enough for instruction" Vita S. Antoni 16
AUGUSTINE
"What more shall I teach you than what we read in the Apostle? For Holy Scripture fixes the rule for our doctrine, lest we dare to be wiser than we ought" De Bono Viduitatis 2
"Let us therefore give in...to the authority of the Holy Scriptures" De Peccatorum 33
"Let us search for the Church in the Sacred Scriptures" Epis 105
"[H]e will find there in much greater abundance things that are to be found nowhere else, but can be learnt only in the wonderful sublimity and wonderful simplicity of the Scriptures" De Doctr Christ 2,42,63
"It believes also the Holy Scriptures, old and new, which we call canonical, and which are the source of the faith by which the just lives..." De Civ Dei 19,18
BASIL THE GREAT
"The hearers taught in the Scriptures ought to test what is said by teachers and accept that which agrees with the Scriptures but reject what is foreign" Moralia 72,1
"Therefore let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on whichever side be found doctrines in harmony with the word of God, in favor of that side will be cast the vote of truth" Epis Ad Eustathius
CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA
"How can we prove and certify as true something which Sacred Scripture does not attest?" Glaphyra on Genesis PG 69,53c
CYRIL OF JERUSALEM
"In regard to the divine and holy mysteries of the faith, not the least part may be handed on without the Holy Scriptures. Do not be led astray by winning words and clever arguments. Even to me, who tell you these things, do not give ready belief, unless you receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of the things which I announce. The salvation in which we believe is not proved from clever reasoning, but from the Holy Scriptures." Catechetical Lectures 4,17
"...that you also, by ranging over the Sacred Scriptures, may lay hold of salvation for yourself, and, sated with the Scriptures, you may say: 'How sweet to my palate are your promises, sweeter than honey to my mouth!' [citing Psalm 118(119):103]" ibid 9,13
"Now do not fix your attention on any skill of language on my part, for perhaps you may be deceived; unless you get the testimony of the prophets on each point, do not believe what is said. Unless you learn from the Holy Scriptures regarding the Virgin, the place, the time, the manner [concerning the Incarnation], 'do not receive the witness of man' [citing John 5:34]." ibid 12,5
"'He was buried, and He rose again the third day, according to the Scriptures' [1 Cor 15:4]. An Apostle has sent us back to the testimony of the Scriptures; from the same source we will do well to discover the hope of our salvation." ibid 14,2
"Let us assert of the Holy Spirit, therefore, only what is written; let us not busy ourselves about what is not written. The Holy Spirit has authored the Scriptures; He has spoken of Himself all that He wished, or all that we could grasp; let us confine ourselves to what He has said, for it is reckless to do otherwise." ibid 16,2
JOHN CHRYSOSTOM
"Therefore I beg you all that you give up what appeals to this one or that one and that you address all these questions concerning these things to the Scriptures." Homily 13 on 2 Corinthians
"If anything is said without Scripture, the thinking of the hearers limps. But where the testimony proceeds from the divinely given Scripture, it confirms both the speech of the preacher and the soul of the hearer." Commenting on Psalm 95
"But when Scripture wants to teach us something like that, it interprets itself and does not permit the hearer to err. I therefore beg and entreat that we close our ears to all these things and follow the canon of the Holy Scripture exactly." Homily 13 on Genesis
"As a trusty door, Scripture shuts out heretics, securing us from error..." Joann 58
"Everything in the divine Scriptures is clear and straightforward; they inform us about all that is necessary" Epis 2 ad Thess 3,4
IRENAEUS
"[B]eing most properly assured that the Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of God and by His Spirit" Against Heresies 2,28,2
"The Apostles at that time first preached the Gospel but later by the will of God, they delivered it to us in the Scriptures, that it might be the foundation and pillar of our faith" ibid 3,1,1
"Since, therefore, the tradition from the Apostles does thus exist in the Church, and is permanent among us, let us revert to the Scriptural proof furnished by those Apostles who did also write the Gospel, in which they recorded the doctrine regarding God, pointing out that our Lord Jesus Christ is the truth, and that no lie is in Him" ibid 3,5,1
JEROME
"Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ" In Isaiah Prologue
ORIGEN
"It is necessary to take the Holy Scriptures as witnesses; for our comments and statements without these witnesses are not trustworthy" In Jerem 1,7
"For he knows that Scripture, as a whole, is God's one perfect and complete instrument, giving forth, to those who wish to learn its one saving music..." In Matt tom 2
TERTULLIAN
"If it is nowhere written, then let it fear the woe which impends on all who add to or take away from the written word" Ad Hermogenes 22
"It is right that His conduct be investigated according to the rule of Scripture" Ad Marcion 3,17
THEOPHILUS OF ANTIOCH
"It would be acting according to demonic inspiration to follow the thinking of the human mind and to think there could be anything divine apart from the authority of the Scriptures" Pascal Letter of 401
Nay, we do not reject those traditions which are in agreement with the Holy Scriptures, but we do reject those traditions which are in direct conflict with the Scriptures.
"Please show me something from Apostolic Tradition that is not in Scripture, and yet you believe should be obeyed practiced today. Thanks"
No problem.
The Rule of Faith, which expanded to the Apostle's Creed, which expanded to the Nicene/Constantinople Creed. They are derived from the correct understanding of Scripture and Apostolic Tradition.
Interpretation of Scripture that matches what Apostolic Tradition has handed down. Heretics use the same Scriptures.
Councils and their determinations are to be obeyed. The Council of Jerusalem sets this precedence, since it is in Scipture.
Liturgy (public worship) as ordered by the rule of faith; for example, we worship Jesus as equal to God. This is not entirely clear from Scripture ALONE! Ask Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses (or Arians)
Are these sufficient?
Regards
The Bible clearly states that Jesus is God. Just because a cult does not understand this does not mean it isn't clear in the Bible.
As for the interpretation of Scripture, it is not the place of the church to interpret Scripture for it's members. The Bereans were considered "more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so" (Acts 17:11). Accepting something just because the church says it is so is in direct contradiction with the Scriptures.
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.