Posted on 06/11/2017 10:27:59 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
The point of origin of the Christian faith is Jesus Christ.
This page reviews the transmission of the Christian faith from Jesus Christ and the Apostles through the Traditions of the early Christian Church and the formation of the Canon of the New Testament of the Bible.
God has revealed himself to man through Divine Revelation, by sending us his beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. God chose to reveal himself to us so that we may become partakers of his divine nature (2 Peter 1:4). God first made himself known by creating our first parents, Adam and Eve, in his image and likeness (Genesis 1:26-28). Following the Fall of Adam and Eve through original sin, God's promise of Redemption gave them the hope of salvation (Genesis 3:15). In preparing for the redemption of the human race, God made covenants with Noah, Abraham, Moses and the people and prophets of Israel. Salvation history is fulfilled through the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Word made Flesh.
Our appropriate personal response in our relationship with Christ Jesus is what St. Paul calls "the obedience of faith" (Romans 1:5, 16:26)!
There were three stages in the formation of the Gospels: the Life and Teachings of Jesus Christ, the Oral Tradition of the Apostles, and the Written Word.
(Excerpt) Read more at jesuschristsavior.net ...
SHHHhhh...
...don’t point out the disparity here.
Wow!
I see your point.
I hear ya, Cousin!
Likewise...
I have never once seen a Catholic FReeper explain WHY they do NOT ACCEPT what their very own Early Church Fathers taught about MAtthew 16:18.
Oh?
There are a LOT of 'prayers' recorded in the Bible.
Do any of THOSE show up on your radar at all?
Really?
Galatians 3:1
You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you?
All WHO???
I think you Catholics have claimed that ALL were under the authority of Rome at this time.
Watch the first 40 minutes of "The Nun's Story" with Audrey Hepburn.
... this puzzling strawman...
And who was one of other scholars who rejected or doubted apocryphal books as being Scripture proper (seen even in Trent), and thus Rome does not follow his judgment in the very thing you invoke him for.
(2)his evidence of what the faithful believed in the early centuries of Christianity.
And who testified that “The presbyter is the same as the bishop,...And this is not my private opinion, it is that of Scripture. If you doubt that bishop and presbyter are the same, that the first word is one of function, and the second one of age, read the epistle of the Apostle to the Philippians....it is fitting that the bishops, on their side, do not forget that if they are set over the presbyters, it is the result of tradition, and not by the fact of a particular institution of the Lord." (Commentary on Tit. 1.7, quoted. in “Religions of authority and the religion of the spirit," pp. 77,78. 1904, by AUGUSTE SABATIER. A similar translated version of this is provided by "Catholic World," Volume 32, by the Paulist Fathers, 1881, pp. 73,74).
But while Rome invoke the "unanimous consent of the "fathers," she picks and chooses among what is actually not unanimous consent.
And consistent with the inconsistency such with Scripture, what Jerome (among others) taught about marriage is certainly not what the NT church taught:
On First Corinthians 7 Jerome presents this false dilemma
"It is not disparaging wedlock to prefer virginity. No one can make a comparison between two things if one is good and the other evil ." (''Letter'' 22). "It is good, he says, for a man not to touch a woman. If it is good not to touch a woman, it is bad to touch one: for there is no opposite to goodness but badness. But if it be bad and the evil is pardoned, the reason for the concession is to prevent worse evil."
But Paul is not teaching that marriage is evil yet is allowed and pardoned prevent worse evil, but both are good, yet celibacy is better - for those so gifted - as regards pursuit of personal holiness, especially considering the imminent judgment to come.
Then we have this reasoning:
"If we are to pray always, it follows that we must never be in the bondage of wedlock, for as often as I render my wife her due, I cannot pray. Which excludes sexual relations as being an expression of Christian love, and if anything that prevents concentration on prayer is to be rejected then a whole list of things Scripture sanctions can be added.
And then we have this wresting of Scripture to teach marriage being unclean:
This too we must observe, at least if we would faithfully follow the Hebrew, that while Scripture on the first, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth days relates that, having finished the works of each, “God saw that it was good,” on the second day it omitted this altogether, leaving us to understand that two is not a good number because it destroys unity, and prefigures the marriage compact. Hence it was that all the animals which Noah took into the ark by pairs were unclean. Odd numbers denote cleanness . St. Jerome, Against Jovinianus Book 1 http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf206.vi.vi.I.html
So much for 2 x 2 evangelism, while "if we would faithfully follow the Hebrew" "God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day." (Genesis 1:31)
Tradition means the Word of God is passed from one person to another, face to face.
http://www.wikihow.com/Play-the-Telephone-Game
If my wife tells me more than 3 items to get at the store; she’d better WRITE them down!
But if they got led AWAY from the Truth...
Galatians 3:1 comes to mind.
But I believe that there ARE those who are in the LDS religious organization that will be in Heaven. Many FReepers who post here are EX Mormons; who, like some ex-Catholics; have abandoned the extra, non-biblical albatrosses that hung around their necks for the simplicity that is found in Sola Jesus.
Rome; like Nature; abhors a vacuum.
Don't feel bad; as most Mormons don't either!!
"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned;
and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given,
and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned.
- JoD 3:266 (July 14, 1855)
Actually, in Hebrew the key words, for "my," are not there, thus it reads,
"Psa 69:5 God, thou knowest foolishness, sins not hid from [Thee]. "
Another example: in vv 23-29, the Psalmist calls down vengeance, wrath, fury and desolation upon his oppressors; the exact opposite of the suffering Messiah's words at Calvary, where he asks his Father to forgive them.
But which refer to the future, as when the Lord read Isa 61:1:
"The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD "
He left out the rest of v. 2:
Isa 61:2 , and the day of vengeance of our God.
Which He did preach, as He basically did Psalm 69: 23-29
And then some of the same RCs just reiterate the same refuted polemics on another thread. Meaning they only see what will support the object of their security.
It's worse than that.
Joseph Smith was COMMANDED by God to re-translate the KJV of the bible.
He did so and it is known as the Inspired Version.
The bigger question now is:
Why doesn't the LDS organization USE it?
It still uses the 'suspect' KJV!!
Prints it right in with all the OTHER LDS scriptures in the QUAD!
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.