Posted on 01/31/2010 2:03:15 PM PST by NYer
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter. 2 Thessalonians 2:15
According to most Evangelicals, a Christian needs only to believe those teachings found in Scripture (a.k.a. the Bible). For these Christians, there is no need for Apostolic Tradition or an authoritative teaching Church. For them the Bible is sufficient for learning about the faith and living a Christian life. In order to be consistent, they claim that this "By Scripture Alone" (sola Scriptura) teaching is found in Scripture, especially St. Paul's Letters.
The passage most frequently used to support the Scripture-Alone belief is 2 Timothy 3:16-17. St. Paul writes:
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 perfect (complete, adequate, competent), equipped for every good work. [2 Tim. 3:16-17, RSV]
According to those that hold this belief, Scripture is sufficient since it is "profitable for teaching" and makes a Christian "perfect, equipped for every good work." On closer examination though, it becomes apparent that these verses still do not prove this teaching.
Verse 16 states a fundamental Christian doctrine. Scripture is "inspired by God" and "profitable for teaching" the faith. The Catholic Church teaches this doctrine (CCC 101-108). But this verse does not demonstrate the sufficiency of Scripture in teaching the faith. As an example, vitamins are profitable, even necessary, for good health but not sufficient. If someone ate only vitamins, he would starve to death. Likewise, Sacred Scripture is very important in learning about the Christian faith, but it does not exclude Sacred Tradition or a teaching Church as other sources concerning the faith.
St. Paul in verse 17 states that Scripture can make a Christian "perfect, equipped for every good work." In this verse he is once again stressing the importance of Sacred Scripture. In similar fashion, the proverb, "practice makes perfect," stresses the importance of practice but does not imply that practice alone is sufficient in mastering a skill. Practice is very important, but it presumes a basic know-how. In sports, practice presupposes basic knowledge of the game rules, aptitude and good health. Elsewhere in Scripture, "steadfastness" is said to make a Christian "perfect and complete, lacking in nothing." [James 1:4] Even though the language (both English and Greek) in this verse is stronger, no one claims that steadfastness alone is enough for Christian growth. Faith, prayer and God's grace are also needed. Likewise in verse 17, St. Paul presumes God's grace, Timothy's faith and Sacred Tradition (2 Tim. 3:14-15).
Verses 16-17 must be read in context. Only two verses earlier, St. Paul also writes:
But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it... [2 Tim. 3:14]
Here St. Paul suggests Tradition. Notice that Paul did not write, "knowing from which Scripture passage you learned it" but instead he writes, "knowing from whom you learned it." He is implying with the "whom" himself and the other Apostles. Earlier in the same letter, St. Paul actually defines and commands Apostolic Tradition - "what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also." [2 Tim. 2:2] Also if St. Paul were truly teaching the sufficiency of Scripture, verse 15 would have been a golden opportunity to list the Books of Scripture, or at least give the "official" Table of Content for the Old Testament. Instead Paul relies on Timothy's childhood tradition:
...and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the Sacred Writings (a.k.a. Scripture) which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. [2 Tim. 3:15, RSV]
Even though profitable in instructing for salvation (but not sufficient), St. Paul still does not list which Books. He also does not suggest personal taste or opinion as Timothy's guide. Instead Paul relies on Timothy's childhood tradition to define the contents of Scripture. Verses 14-15 show that verses 16-17 presuppose Tradition.
Verse 15 brings up the problem of canonicity, i.e. which Books belong in Scripture? Through the centuries the Books of Scripture were written independently along with other religious books. There were smaller collections of Books, e.g. The Books of Moses (Torah), that were used in Synagogues. The largest collection was the Greek Septuagint which the New Testament writers most often cited. St. Paul in verse 15 probably referred to the Septuagint as Scripture. Only after the Councils of Carthage and Hippo in the 4th century A.D. were all of the Books of Scripture (both Old and New Testaments) compiled together under one cover to form "the Bible." Already in Jesus' time, the question of which Books are Scripture, was hotly debated. As an example, Esther and the Song of Solomon were not accepted by all as Scripture during Jesus' day. The source of the problem is that no where in the Sacred Writings are the Books completely and clearly listed. Sacred Scripture does not define its contents. St. Paul could have eliminated the problem of canonicity by listing the Books of Scripture (at least the Old Testament) in his Letters, but did not. Instead the Church had to discern with the aid of Sacred Tradition (CCC 120). Canonicity is a major problem for the Scripture-Alone teaching.
As a final point, verse 15 suggests only the Old Testament as Scripture since the New Testament was written after Timothy's childhood. Taken in context, verses 16-17 apply only to the Old Testament. "All Scripture" simply means all of the Old Testament. If verses 16-17 were to prove that Scripture is enough for Christians, then verse 15 would prove that the Old Testament is enough!
Some Christians may cite 1 Corthinians 4:6 as more proof for the Scripture-Alone belief:
I have applied all this to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brethren, that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favour of one against another. [1 Cor. 4:6, RSV]
This verse does not condemn Sacred Tradition but warns against reading-between-the-lines in Scripture. The Corinthians had a problem of reading more into the Scripture text than what was actually there. The main question with this verse is which Sacred Writings are being referred to here? Martin Luther and John Calvin thought it may refer only to earlier cited Old Testament passages (1 Cor. 1:19, 31; 2:9 & 3:19-20) and not the entire Old Testament. Calvin thought that Paul may also be referring to the Epistle Itself. The present tense of the clause, "beyond what is written" excludes parts of the New Testament, since the New Testament was not completely written then. This causes a serious problem for the Scripture-Alone belief and Christians.
Bible verses can be found that show the importance of Sacred Scripture but not Its sufficiency or contents. There are Bible verses that also promote Sacred Tradition. In Mark 7:5-13 (Matt. 15:1-9), Jesus does not condemn all traditions but only those corrupted by the Pharisees. Although 2 Thessalonians 2:15 does not directly call Sacred Tradition the word of God, it does show some form of teachings "by word of mouth" beside Scripture and puts them on the same par as Paul's Letters. Elsewhere the preaching of the Apostles is called the "word of God" (Acts 4:31; 17:13; 1 Thess. 2:13; Heb. 13:7). The Scripture-Alone theory must assume that the Apostles eventually wrote all of these oral teachings in the New Testament. At least for St. John, this does not seem to be the case (John 21:25; 2 John 12 & 3 John 13-14). Also no Apostle listed in the New Testament which Books belong in Scripture. Now these oral teachings were eventually written down elsewhere to preserve their accuracy, e.g. St. Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians, written 96 A.D. (Phil. 4:3) or St. Ignatius' seven letters written 107 A.D. Clement's letter is found in the Codex Alexandrinus (an ancient Bible manuscript) and was even considered by some early Christians to be part of Scripture.
Both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition are the word of God, while the Church is "the pillar and bulwark of the truth." [1 Tim. 3:15] The Holy Spirit through the Church protects Both from corruption. Some Christians may claim that doctrines on Mary are not found in the Bible, but the Scripture-Alone teaching is not found in the Bible. Promoters of Scripture-Alone have a consistency problem, since this is one teaching not found in Scripture.
bookmark
Jesus said for anyone to 'see' the kingdom of God they must be born from above. Now busy little fingers changed the words from above to 'again', but if you will do a little home work you will find that from above is what Jesus was telling Nicodemus.
Those described in the book of Jude, those that left their estate and refused to be born of woman as was Christ will not 'see' the kingdom of God. They like the devil have already been judged to death.
So every soul that made the choice to be born of woman into the flesh, whether or not the flesh was born has earned that opportunity to 'see' the kingdom of God. Now that does not necessarily mean they will enter the kingdom of God.
And when the last willing soul take that journey into this flesh age, as all who will, will be given that opportunity, then the 'end' will begin.
They were both part of the group known as "teachers of the Law", religious leaders in Jesus' day. Although they disagreed on some major doctrines like the resurrection of the dead, they quite often teamed up on the early Christians. They came together against John the Baptist as told in Matthew 3:7
But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
They also came against Jesus many times as told in Matthew 16:1
The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired him that he would shew them a sign from heaven.
And in Matthew 26 it sounds like they all got together to get him:
3Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas,
4And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him.
So, NL, I don't see the big deal about Paul being a Pharisee. Why do you?
As i posted earlier you are stuck in the Old Testament where adherence to laws of conduct such as weird hair cuts, grooming standards, male genital mutilation, and dietary requirements are paramount. Christ came to replace these covenants with a New and Everlasting Covenant. Easter, Christmas, and Sunday Worship are to celebrate His birth and resurrection and our Salvation.
For future reference I will respond to you if you ask a legitimate question regarding the Trinitarian Catechism of the Catholic Church or any of its Encyclicals and dogma, but will ignore any lies or provocations.
Some believe that there are two gods some believe that there are three gods. Many who believe in three gods reject the greater part of the Holy Word of G-d. By rejecting the Holy Word of G-d they reject He who is the Holy Word of G-d: Yah'shua There is only one YHvH.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
Christmas marks the date of the conception of Christ, regardless of what the Babylonians practiced. I do agree that Easter became the compromise of attracting the numbers by putting the image of Christ over an eons old ‘quick like a bunny’ orgy.
Christ certainly and none of the predestined writers of the Holy Scripture ever gave a hint that Easter was to replace Passover. But oh well I surely do not think that practice will be straightened out until Christ returns with that double edged sword... the WORD of truth.
You wrote:
“WRONG AGAIN !!!”
Nope.
“281–133 BC.”
Rome existed long before then.
You’re the one who is wrong.
How many dogmas do you know?
Or are you talking about doctinre?
Big difference.
You wrote:
“Show me where Easter, christmas and Sunday worship is taught in the Holy Word of G-d .”
Easter - Acts 12:4 (KJV)
Christmas - Wisemen brought gifts.
Sunday worship - http://www.scripturecatholic.com/sunday_worship.html
Ignored for reasons given. Future posts from you will be unread.
Sanctification versus justification. Justified once, but continually sanctified. There is a difference.
Repeating lies don't make them true.
Bump for Monday reading
Are you a Messianic Jew? Just curious, not trying to be confrontational.
Isaiah 1:14 Your new moon and your appointed feasts My soul hateth: they are a trouble unto Me; I am weary to bear them.
The Heavenly Father did not appoint Easter sun rise worship with the ‘quick like a bunny’ orgy mantra. Christ became our Passover, and that means in Him the ‘death’ angel is force to passover us that remember the price that was paid.
Nicely done. But a wasted effort, I am sure.
Christmas marks the date of the conception of Christ
Christmas actually marks the Nativity, the Feast of the annunciation in Catholicism marks the Conception of Christ
Easter - Acts 12:4 (KJV) Christmas - Wisemen brought gifts. Sunday worship - http://www.scripturecatholic.com/sunday_worship.html
Where in the Holy Word of G-d do you find Pagan Easter , Pagan Christmas or Sunday worship ? I realize the Roman "church took it upon itself at Nicea to reject YHvH and insist on Paganism. I'll as the question again
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
Yes I have accepted Yah'shua
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
(YHvH is my salvation) as my Messiah.
Repeating lies don't make them true.
Read history Read the papers produced at Nicea. Seek YHvH's salvation.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
Christmas actually marks the Nativity, the Feast of the annunciation in Catholicism marks the Conception of Christ
According to Luke the date of the winter solstice, the shortest day of the year of sun light, also coincides with the date of conception. I will go with what Luke says. The birth of Christ would be nearer to the fall equinox.
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.