But how do we even know what is the written Word of God without the authority of the Church to certify it? On what authority did Martin Luther remove seven books of the Old Testament (and attempted to remove seven books from the New Testament) that the Church had certified as Sacred Scripture for over one thousand years?
Additionally, Scripture (see Acts 15) testifies itself that the gathered Apostles and presbyters of the Church speak with the authority of the Holy Spirit. If that authority existed once, and Scripture cannot be denied, then it exists today. Moreover, the Bible shows that Paul gave Timothy and Titus, as well as those appointed by them, the mandate to preach the Gospel before the New Testament was even completed. How could they have done so if there were limited to what was written down? All that your biblical reference do is deny the private interpretation of Scripture, something that the Protestants are guilty of, not Catholics.
If Christians have disputes about the faith then they should follow the example found in Acts 15 and submit it to the rightful pastors of the Church rather than insist on their own private judgment as those who go “without any mandate from us [the Apostles and presbyters] have upset you with their teachings and disturb your peace of mind.” This is the way of the Bible, not private interpretation.
The Holy Spirit continues to guide the church today as it did back then.
On what authority did Martin Luther remove seven books of the Old Testament (and attempted to remove seven books from the New Testament) that the Church had certified as Sacred Scripture for over one thousand years?
The issue of the apocrypha was not certified as the catholic likes to claim. Those particular books were not accorded the same status as the other books of the OT until Trent.
Additionally, Scripture (see Acts 15) testifies itself that the gathered Apostles and presbyters of the Church speak with the authority of the Holy Spirit. If that authority existed once, and Scripture cannot be denied, then it exists today.
22Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men from among them to send to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas—Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren, Acts 15:22 NASB
Moreover, the Bible shows that Paul gave Timothy and Titus, as well as those appointed by them, the mandate to preach the Gospel before the New Testament was even completed.
Who gave Paul his authority to preach the Gospel?
Peter? Thomas? Any of the other disciples?
I really don't think you want to cite this passage in an attempt to prove "apostolic" succession.
As Paul was called by the Lord so are other men called today to preach the Gospel.
How could they have done so if there were limited to what was written down?
Well, we've asked before and we'll ask again....what record do we have of what they said?
Where is it?
All that your biblical reference do is deny the private interpretation of Scripture, something that the Protestants are guilty of, not Catholics.
LOL!
And what sources have you cited in your posts on this thread?
Are your comments regarding Acts 15 official roman catholic church teaching? If so, please provide the documentation.
Or, is this just your own personal interpretation?
Was this article that was posted approved by the Vatican? Did the Pope approve this? If not, we have to conclude this is the authors own personal interpretation. Just as your posts are your own personal interpretation.