Replies

I would like for us to re-examine the opinion that anything which is not found in the Bible must have been either fraudulent or of pagan origin. This not the case.

As you know, the Apostles and disciples and their successors fanned out from Jerusalem during the first century AD to evangelize and plant churches throughout the Mediterranean basin (the coastal areas of Southern Europe, Northern Africa, Ethiopia, Eritrea and the Levant), up through what's now Iraq and Iran and into south-central Asia, along the Silk Road to the borders of Western China, among the Southern Caucasians and Southern Slavs, etc., a process that accelerated particularly after the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.

Very little of this is in the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles, most of which highlight Peter, James, John, Jude and, of course, Paul above all.

So, while all of the Apostles' teachings were authoritative, quite a bit of it did not come down to us in written form in the NT. What do we know from the NT about the missionary activities of Thomas Didymus, or the churches founded by Jude Thaddeus, or Bartholomew?

For this kind of information, we need to go to early guys like Polycarp (disciple of John the Evangelist) and Irenaeus (Polycarp's disciple), historians like Hippolytus of Rome and and Eusebius of Cesarea, and to the earliest manuscripts in places like Scythia [modern day Georgia] and Thrace[modern day Bulgaria].

They're not all going to be Roman Catholics, they're going to be Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian Church (Syria), Chaldean Church (Iraq), Coptic Orthodox (Egypt), the Mar Thoma Christians (India).You'll find that widely-dispersed, ancient communities are in agreement on many doctrines and practices, and so these things pass the history test. Agreement across languages, continents and cultures constitutes very strong evidence that these teachings were, as they claim, part of what was handed on to them by their founders, the Apostles.

I don't want to rattle on too long here, I just to point out that there's a lot there that is neither pagan nor fraud. It's Apostolic. You're got to take the whole dimensions of ancient Christianity into account.

This is where you'll find othewise inexplicable agreement on --- among other things --- customs like the Sign of the Cross, liturgical music and poetry, honor for the Lord's Mother as Blessed Mary Ever Virgin.

So, while all of the Apostles' teachings were authoritative, quite a bit of it did not come down to us in written form in the NT.

If the Holy Spirit did not see fit to include it in Scripture, then we don't need to know it either for salvation or to grow and mature in Christ.

Nor does that give anyone permission or authority to make up stuff that could have happened simply on the basis of the claim that Scripture doesn't say it didn't happen so we can assume it did until someone proves us wrong.

Also, there's the issue that someone making a truth claim, needs to be able to verify it and present proofs that their claim is reliable and verifiable. What are the sources that the Catholic church has to back up its claims about Mary, for example.

How do you know, after 2,000 years, that what someone claims was said by an apostle was REALLY something said by an apostle?

How do you know that it was passed down faithfully, without corruption?

Please provide the proofs for verification purposes.

“don’t want to rattle on too long here, I just to point out that there’s a lot there that is neither pagan nor fraud. It’s Apostolic. You’re got to take the whole dimensions of ancient Christianity into account.”

1. It isn’t inspired.
2. At best, it is second hand with no inspiration.

You are claiming that a purportedly important doctrine never made it into Sacred Scripture-that God somehow never inspired it... Nor any apostle taught it before 100 ad. Sorry, without prebelief, no one would buy any of the gymnastics your earlier post went through to find a possible rationale for this idea.

Apostles (briefly) taught, as did pastors and teachers. Their teaching was not equivalent in authority to Inspired Scripture.

What we do have in Scripture was by definition, inspired as the Holy Spirit moved men to write. There is a reason why He chose certain things and not others.

So much of the Catholic acretions are pagan in origin and do not show up in history until hundreds of years later. Many popes had histories of paganism. I am still waiting for your evidence from before 100 ad. Actually, I’m asking for it, but I don’t think it exists. Still I keep an open mind.

Best