Is there reason to get testy with someone who is exploring a topic of conversation with you?
” Even to me, who tell you these things, give not absolute credence, unless thou receive the proof of the things which I announce from the Divine Scriptures.”
Yes, and St Paul told his readers to search the Scriptures for the veracity of his testimony. Which Scriptures? Well, it should be fairly obvious that he wasn't talking about the New Testament yet as it hadn't yet been compiled and codified. Just as Jesus opened the eyes of the Apostles on the road to Emmaus of all that the Old Testament proclaimed of the Christ, so St Paul exhorts his readers to open the pages and see the truth of his testimony. That is all that is being said here by the Bishop of Jerusalem.
My view of Scripture is that It is the inerrant Word of God. However, It is finite and tells only a specific story. Scripture proclaims Itself to be incomplete at the end of the Gospel of John. That is because the Word of God is a man, Jesus Christ, not just a book. The Book has a purpose but It is not a Catechism of all things, and proclaims just that. The Church is the one given authority to preach, teach and baptize.
“Yes, and St Paul told his readers to search the Scriptures for the veracity of his testimony. Which Scriptures? Well, it should be fairly obvious that he wasn’t talking about the New Testament yet as it hadn’t yet been compiled and codified.”
Athanasius predates Cyril, but both lived in the 4th century:
Here he is on the New Testament canon:
“Again, it is not tedious to speak of the books of the New Testament. These are: the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. After these, The Acts of the Apostles, and the seven epistles called Catholic: of James, one; of Peter, two, of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen epistles of Paul the apostle, written in this order: the first, to the Romans; then, two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the Ephesians, then, to the Philippians; then, to the Colossians; after these, two of the Thessalonians; and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John.” (Athanasius, Thirty-Ninth Festal Epistle, A.D. 367.)
Cyril gives the same list, though he leaves out Revelation. Both leave out the Apocrypha.
Ignatius, Polycarp and Irenaeus all know of the 4 Gospels, and quote from the vast majority of the New Testament, except maybe for 2 Peter and Jude.
So when Cyril is talking about the “scriptures,” he’s referring to that text you claim is “not enough,” didn’t exit, but of which he turns us to:
“Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures”
“If your next challenge is the usual off-roading into Catholic doctrines, I invite you to my homepage where I have linked some previous discussions and answers on these topics.”
You don’t know me very well, do you?
So, when the Apostle Paul said he didn't shrink from declaring all that God wants us to know (Acts 20:27) and further stating that, in the spiritual warfare ALL Christians are to wage, the Sword of the Spirit which is the Word of God, is the ONLY offensive weapon in our arsenal, we should not bother because the Catholic Church will fight it for us? Are we to ignore what God HAS revealed as the rule of the faith when the Catholic Church contradicts or adds to God's word doctrines that He did NOT reveal are part of the faith all Christians MUST hold?
The church is NOT some organization high and lifted up above the sheep, the church IS the sheep and we are ALL living stones being built up into the spiritual house which is Christ's body (I Peter 2:5). ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of the Holy Spirit and holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. Are we to ignore what God has said - which He has given ALL believers the same indwelling Spirit to teach us all things - and trust fallible, sinful men to tell us what is or is not the truth?
I can see why the Catholic Church wants to lower the esteem for Sacred Scripture - it gives them license to make it up as they go along. Not that different than what Joseph Smith did. Now I wonder who was his example for that?
How ironic that posting Scripture to support sola scriptura is invalid, but posting Scripture to support Scripture not being complete is valid.
My compliments on your well written posts. Sadly, if predictably, the responses of differences and disagreement fail to rise to the level of actual dialogue.
Pretty much how the RF has been for years and the major reason I cannot participate much.
Perhaps some are called to this ministry. Just not me. I lack the charity.