Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: MarkBsnr; bkaycee
So was Matthew 28:19. So was 1 John 5:7. So was Mark 16:9-20. How about the whole of John 21? And a whole raft of others. Do you admit it or not? If yes, then I admire your willingness to grasp what is. If not, then what?

The OT is seen through the New. As a matter of fact, for several hundred years, the OT was thought to be spurious and not necessarily for early Christians. It took the Councils to bring them back into general acceptance.

The 21st. chapter of John??? Well, I guess you can't use the "feed my sheep" command from Jesus to Peter anymore to prove he was the first Pope, can you? Oh, and that part about "there were also many other things which Jesus did that if they should be written, every one, the world itself could not contain the books that should be written", I guess you can't use that one anymore either to prove "Tradition" is just as authoritative as Scripture, can you?

That last part about it taking the "Councils" to bring the Old Testament back into "general usage", have you forgotten that the NT is full of references from the Old Testament as well as numerous future prophecies? Why on earth would the early Christians - who were mostly Jewish - reject the OT or discontinue reading it, proving Jesus as the Messiah from it and studying it? What makes you think that when they concluded their worship services and sang a "psalm", that is wasn't referring to the Psalms in the OT? Honestly, sometimes I get the impression that the early church is thought to be nothing but a bunch of idiot bumpkins without The Church to show them everything.

941 posted on 06/22/2011 9:55:37 PM PDT by boatbums (my cat erased my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 924 | View Replies ]


To: boatbums
The 21st. chapter of John??? Well, I guess you can't use the "feed my sheep" command from Jesus to Peter anymore to prove he was the first Pope, can you? Oh, and that part about "there were also many other things which Jesus did that if they should be written, every one, the world itself could not contain the books that should be written", I guess you can't use that one anymore either to prove "Tradition" is just as authoritative as Scripture, can you?

Why attack me? Are these original or later additions? Yes or no.

Why on earth would the early Christians - who were mostly Jewish - reject the OT or discontinue reading it, proving Jesus as the Messiah from it and studying it?

You don't know this? They converted from Judaism. That meant that they were dead from Judaism. The OT did not mean anything because they had a new Testament from God. Read some history, please.

Honestly, sometimes I get the impression that the early church is thought to be nothing but a bunch of idiot bumpkins without The Church to show them everything.

They started to diverge immediately. Read Acts and Paul especially. The Church needed to herd them in because they were starting to believe in all kinds of weird things.

965 posted on 06/23/2011 5:23:16 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 941 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson