Gospels or Epistles?


#1

Jesus said to keep the commandments and broke them down into 2 commandments. And there are the beatitudes. But what about everything the letters to the churches say do not this do not that. Are they secondary to Jesus's word? Protestants have argued with me over baptism. I say what Jesus said "in the name of the father, son and holy spirit..." So have told me about Acts where it is said to be baptised "...in the name of Jesus." So that's 2 different things. Should we listen to the gospels? I don't know how to act as an apologist to that baptism question. Is the catechism based on the gospels or tradition? Paul my favorite saint wrote most of the new testament.


#2

I look at the baptism question this way...If one is Baptized in the Father Son and Holy Spirit (Jesus words) then the other is covered...So there is no contradiction and nothing to worry about.

As to Jesus reducing everything to two commandments...
You will note that He says that all of the law and prophets rely on these two...Well - so does any instruction given in the Epistles.

Everything rests on the Law of Love....

Peace
James


#3

[quote="billcu1, post:1, topic:311638"]
Jesus said to keep the commandments and broke them down into 2 commandments. And there are the beatitudes. But what about everything the letters to the churches say do not this do not that. Are they secondary to Jesus's word? Protestants have argued with me over baptism. I say what Jesus said "in the name of the father, son and holy spirit..." So have told me about Acts where it is said to be baptised "...in the name of Jesus." So that's 2 different things. Should we listen to the gospels? I don't know how to act as an apologist to that baptism question. Is the catechism based on the gospels or tradition? Paul my favorite saint wrote most of the new testament.

[/quote]

Saint Paul was only referring to being baptized in the manner that Jesus commanded. He did not intend to contradict the plain instructions of our Lord by offering an alternative formula.


#4

Remember also that there were two baptisms being taught at that time: that of John the Baptist and that of our Lord. Any difference that is perceived in the Christian baptismal formula has been attributed to this linguistic factor. As Saint Paul says, "there is one baptism" (Ephesians 4:5) As well, in addition to Christ's explicit instructions in Matthew 28:19, there is also the Apostolic Tradition of the Trinitarian formula that has been handed down to us through the ages.


#5

a brief look at the history that we do have from the time suggests that no one ever abbreviated baptism. we have documents from the day that show exactly how the conducted the rite. three fold dunking was the method. unfortunately that won't help you with people who do not except the weight of history as a guide. was if what the apostles actually did does not matter if you can construe something different from what they said.


#6

[quote="billcu1, post:1, topic:311638"]
Jesus said to keep the commandments and broke them down into 2 commandments. And there are the beatitudes. But what about everything the letters to the churches say do not this do not that. Are they secondary to Jesus's word? Protestants have argued with me over baptism. I say what Jesus said "in the name of the father, son and holy spirit..." So have told me about Acts where it is said to be baptised "...in the name of Jesus." So that's 2 different things. Should we listen to the gospels? I don't know how to act as an apologist to that baptism question. Is the catechism based on the gospels or tradition? Paul my favorite saint wrote most of the new testament.

[/quote]


#7

The first readin on a SUnday is called the Epistle which is taken fromm the OT; the second reading is the same; however, the third reading is called the Gospel–the truth from God.

If you do not kow that much abouit your religion, than, I wouold change topics because ppotestaands are thinking they are always right


#8

[quote="St_Hilary, post:7, topic:311638"]
The first readin on a SUnday is called the Epistle which is taken fromm the OT; the second reading is the same; however, the third reading is called the Gospel--the truth from God.

[/quote]

This is incorrect. The first reading IS from the OT but it is not an "Epistle".

The word "Epistle" means "a long formal letter" and is applied to the letters in the NT
The term "Gospel" is actually an old English word that comes from "Good News". And it is indeed applied to the books of Christ's life among us written by the Incarnation.

Most importantly though...since ALL of these readings come from the Holy Bible, they are ALL the truth from God.

If you do not kow that much abouit your religion, than, I wouold change topics because ppotestaands are thinking they are always right

In charity....perhaps it is not only the OP who needs to learn more....

I note that your spelling is very poor above...I hope that you are OK...

Peace
James


#9

Keep in mind that all Scripture is in harmony with one another, so the Gospels do not contradict the other books of the Bible. It only takes time to find Church articulation of passages, whether its from official Church teachings or reliable commentary or good Catholic apologetics. Great Catholic thinkers such as St. Thomas Aquinas has tackled many of the questions that have puzzled readers of Scripture so there is very little that has been left unanswered for. Other posters have given excellent answers concerning the Trinitarian Baptism!


#10

Regarding the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) and the Epistles (Letters, of Paul and the seven "Catholic" Epistles) it is notable how often in the Epistles we get the command to love, in one or more of its forms--see Rom 13:8-10, Eph 4:2, 1 John 4:7, 21, James 2:8., to cite a few. They are not competing or contradictory teachings.

Rather, the letters were written to explain and develop what was inherent in the Gospel. "Love one another as I have loved you" or "Love your neighbor as yourself" or "Love your enemy" may be short--but what does it really mean? What does it look like? How do we do it? That's what the other commandments, inherent in these great commandments to love, help us to know and do.


#11

[quote="billcu1, post:1, topic:311638"]
Jesus said to keep the commandments and broke them down into 2 commandments. And there are the beatitudes. But what about everything the letters to the churches say do not this do not that. Are they secondary to Jesus's word? Protestants have argued with me over baptism. I say what Jesus said "in the name of the father, son and holy spirit..." So have told me about Acts where it is said to be baptised "...in the name of Jesus." So that's 2 different things. Should we listen to the gospels? I don't know how to act as an apologist to that baptism question. Is the catechism based on the gospels or tradition? Paul my favorite saint wrote most of the new testament.

[/quote]

...here's the main problem... many Protestants live up to their title!

Scriptures state that the Apostles preached the Gospel of Christ... but they also state that the Apostles preached the Gospel of God... are there two different Gospels?

...Scriptures state that Jesus will send the Holy Spirit from the Father (a snag with eastern and western Catholic Church)... yet Scriptures state that God is Spirit and that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God (the Father) and that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ (God the Son)... are Scriptures wrong? ...are there three different Holy Spirits?

What was Jesus' Command when He Breath upon the Eleven the Holy Spirit, to go preach and Baptize in the names or in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit? One Name, One God!

...further, is there a single passage in Scriptures that depicts/enumerates each step of the Sacrament of Baptism?

...finally, when preaching/teaching did the Apostles teach about the Father, the Son or the Holy Spirit? (trick question since they Taught the Holy Trinity)... was there one person of God that was preached with preference? Scriptures demonstrate that Christ is the main Person of God of Whom the New Testament Speaks... so would it not be terribly congruent that Jesus' Name get, in hollowood's terms, top billing? :rotfl::rotfl:

Maran atha!

Angel


#12

[quote="JRKH, post:2, topic:311638"]
I look at the baptism question this way...If one is Baptized in the Father Son and Holy Spirit (Jesus words) then the other is covered...So there is no contradiction and nothing to worry about.

As to Jesus reducing everything to two commandments...
You will note that He says that all of the law and prophets rely on these two...Well - so does any instruction given in the Epistles.

Everything rests on the Law of Love....

Peace
James

[/quote]

Excellent pick up, James!

...I totally forgot about that portion of the post! :o

Maran atha!

Angel


#13

…I concur! It seems that their theology is one part Scripture and ninety-nine parts exegesis–even if it contradicts Jesus’ Word!

Maran atha!

Angel


#14

[quote="bmonk, post:10, topic:311638"]
Regarding the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) and the Epistles (Letters, of Paul and the seven "Catholic" Epistles) it is notable how often in the Epistles we get the command to love, in one or more of its forms--see Rom 13:8-10, Eph 4:2, 1 John 4:7, 21, James 2:8., to cite a few. They are not competing or contradictory teachings.

Rather, the letters were written to explain and develop what was inherent in the Gospel. "Love one another as I have loved you" or "Love your neighbor as yourself" or "Love your enemy" may be short--but what does it really mean? What does it look like? How do we do it? That's what the other commandments, inherent in these great commandments to love, help us to know and do.

[/quote]

Hi, bmonk!

I concur! ...the Epistles are addressing matters of actual doctrinal usage... they breakdown Jesus' Ministerial Teachings into in-your-face topics... so that none could claim that Jesus' Teachings were too difficult to understand and that there's no reference source to use as guide--something the Church has continued to do through her Doctrinal Teachings!

Maran atha!

Angel


#15

[quote="jcrichton, post:11, topic:311638"]
...here's the main problem... many Protestants live up to their title!

Scriptures state that the Apostles preached the Gospel of Christ... but they also state that the Apostles preached the Gospel of God... are there two different Gospels?

...Scriptures state that Jesus will send the Holy Spirit from the Father (a snag with eastern and western Catholic Church)... yet Scriptures state that God is Spirit and that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God (the Father) and that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ (God the Son)... are Scriptures wrong? ...are there three different Holy Spirits?

What was Jesus' Command when He Breath upon the Eleven the Holy Spirit, to go preach and Baptize in the names or in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit? One Name, One God!

...further, is there a single passage in Scriptures that depicts/enumerates each step of the Sacrament of Baptism?

...finally, when preaching/teaching did the Apostles teach about the Father, the Son or the Holy Spirit? (trick question since they Taught the Holy Trinity)... was there one person of God that was preached with preference? Scriptures demonstrate that Christ is the main Person of God of Whom the New Testament Speaks... so would it not be terribly congruent that Jesus' Name get, in hollowood's terms, top billing? :rotfl::rotfl:

Maran atha!

Angel

[/quote]

Here's what they argue. That the father,son,and holy ghost mt 28:19 have a name. They came one in Jeus. Acts 2:38. So if you baptize in "the name of Jesus" your being baptized in the NAME of the father, son ,and holy ghost. I argue back there's never been a record back then of that being done. It doesn't matter. The facts don't matter. They make up their own teachings on the fly I guess.


#16

…it is the only way that an entity can claim authority… the sencond the Church’s Authority is acknowledged protestantism ceases to have any validity… so they will argue against the Church, against themselves, against their own theologies and credos while inventing anything that might put the Church in a bad light… their arguments are so prideful that they even blind themselves to what they are truly proposing (as the binding of the Holy Spirit for nearly fifteen hundred years or the claimed consistency among the thirty thousand plus groups/denominations–whose, from my experience, only true consistent teachings is: Catholic Church, bad!); they reject Church history (or adapt the ole selective reasoning) in spite of the fact that the Church is the only organism that has continuity throughout nearly two thousand years; in their bulldog obstinance, they will latch onto something and grind it down past none existence (infant Baptism), ignoring everything that challanges their belief.

We must pray that the Holy Spirit convicts them of the Truth so that they may come to the Fullness of Faith!

Maran atha!

Angel


closed #17

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.