Show it to me in the Bible!


#1

Hehe I know I might’ve asked this before a long time ago but oh well…I forgot.

I would like to have a non-Catholic tell me where it says in the Bible that only God’s Word is all you need and NOTHING else!:cool: Where does it say that in the Bible?

Pssssttt…see, HERE are my Protestant “traits” along with Catholic! How funny is that? It’s like I’m using Protestant “traits” to defend my Catholic Faith!:D;)

Anyone?


#2

[quote=Paris Blues]Hehe I know I might’ve asked this before a long time ago but oh well…I forgot.

I would like to have a non-Catholic tell me where it says in the Bible that only God’s Word is sufficent!:cool: Where does it say that in the Bible?

Pssssttt…see, HERE are my Protestant “traits” along with Catholic! How funny is that?:D;)

Anyone?
[/quote]

Sufficient for what?


#3

[quote=thistle]Sufficient for what?
[/quote]

Sorry, I meant is all they need.:wink:


#4

[quote=Paris Blues]Hehe I know I might’ve asked this before a long time ago but oh well…I forgot.

I would like to have a non-Catholic tell me where it says in the Bible that only God’s Word is all you need and NOTHING else!:cool: Where does it say that in the Bible?

Pssssttt…see, HERE are my Protestant “traits” along with Catholic! How funny is that? It’s like I’m using Protestant “traits” to defend my Catholic Faith!:D;)

Anyone?
[/quote]

Hey Paris,
Just for clarification, God’s Word IS all we need for coming to a knowledge of Christ. As Catholics, we believe that. Protestants, on the other hand, generally believe that God’s “written” Word is all that one needs. God’s word, as Catholics understand it, also means:

  1. oral teachings of the Church (Tradition)
  2. Christ (the Word made flesh)

I don’t mean to be nit-picky. Rather, when I’ve been to presentations or studies with my sola-Scriptura friends, they tend to point out references to “Word” of God in Scripture and assume that “word” only refers to written word. I’m having an e-mail conversation with a Church of Christ preacher now, where we are discussing the fact that Scripture doesn’t tell us that God’s word is limited to written form.


#5

Just give them a bit more time. They’ll eventually rewrite the Bible to have whatever they want in it.


#6
  1. oral teachings of the Church (Tradition)

I’m not sure how one would rightly consider a “tradition” to be the word of God. Having faith in one’s God and having faith in one’s church/temple/mosque are two differing things.

This subject is also being debated over on USAP’s (Links removed as per CAF policy against board swarms.)
THE MAN himself is also asking about Marionism, a subject that is definitely above my head. :stuck_out_tongue:


#7

[quote=Malachi4U]Just give them a bit more time. They’ll eventually rewrite the Bible to have whatever they want in it.
[/quote]

:rotfl: :amen: :rotfl:


#8

[quote=JiminyC]I’m not sure how one would rightly consider a “tradition” to be the word of God. Having faith in one’s God and having faith in one’s church/temple/mosque are two udiffering things.

This subject is also being debated over on USAP’s (Links removed as per CAF policy against board swarms.)

THE MAN himself is also asking about Marionism, a subject that is definitely above my head. :stuck_out_tongue:
[/quote]

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRADITION AND SACRED SCRIPTURE

One common source. . .

CCC 80 "Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal."40 Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own “always, to the close of the age”.41

. . . two distinct modes of transmission

CCC 81 "Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."42

"And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."43

CCC 82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."44

Apostolic Tradition and ecclesial traditions

CCC 83 The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus’ teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. The first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition.

Tradition is to be distinguished from the various theological, disciplinary, liturgical or devotional traditions, born in the local churches over time. These are the particular forms, adapted to different places and times, in which the great Tradition is expressed. In the light of Tradition, these traditions can be retained, modified or even abandoned under the guidance of the Church’s Magisterium.


#9

Your posts #'s 6 & 8 have been edited due to the inclusion of a suggestion for other forum readers/members to visit someone else’s website for the purposes of dealing with anti-Catholic posts.

The forum in question is small,appears fairly new, and poorly moderated. There is no reason for any of you to support such a forum with responses to some of the literal trash that I found in looking it over. Therefore, all links to it have been removed as have all threads concerning it. I encourage all of you to defend the faith when you encounter the need, but I also encourage you all to refrain from supporting anti-Catholic websites and forums with your participation. The authentic answers are here and all the valid Catholic sites. If anyone honestly wants to know what we really believe, they’ll come to us for that info.

In an effort to illuminate and explain the Catholic faith, CA makes every effort to provide our participants with a pleasant and informative place on the internet where Catholics and non-Catholics may gather.

It is our hope that respectful dialogue and discussion will lead to better faith understandings. And so in charity, we ask that our forums not be used for encouraging mass visits to other websites. In the past these kinds of efforts, although perhaps well intentioned, leave participants at other websites with negative impressions.

Your cooperation in helping promote these aims of faith exposition, hope for fruitful discussion and charity in implementation are sincerely appreciated.

Your servant in Christ,
Michael Francis


#10

Forum Owner Replied to you, F. Michael. He took great exception to the fact that you labeled him as being anti-catholic. I can attest to the fact that there is something of a discussion going on over there, but he certainly is not taking one side to task any more than the other. His forum, while small, encompasses many different groups. It’s main focus is politics and the war on terrorism, not religion at all. Correction: He’s anti-Muslim if he’s anything, but has no interest in Islam one way or the other.
He is also 100% pro-free-speech and pro-freedom of expression, even if it’s distasteful or offensive. He will not however, tolerate any illegal activities. That is his stated policy and I’ve seen him implement it through this second iteration of the forum. I’ve also watched his actions over the last 3 previous years. He is not a nice guy, but he is fair, far more than he believes you were to him.

His response - my doing, not his. He’s something beyond angry at the moment. You might ask yourself why:

t’s topic #666. Even I’m intrigued by that! J.

I just got this via an email. It seems that the member (doesn’t matter who) has been posting on a catholic site and steered some people over here, which is cool with me. I encourage people to put links to this board anywhere they happen to land.

What I disapprove of is when such a organization takes on the rather ugly task of not only censoring the member over there but essentially stomping out their own people’s sense of free choice. Anti-Catholic website? THIS place? ********. Pro-freedom of speech AND expression…something they apparently have a problem with I guess. I’ll leave you with the email and you can judge for yourself:

(Your post was inserted here)

usapatriotsamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=666


#11

[quote=Malachi4U]Just give them a bit more time. They’ll eventually rewrite the Bible to have whatever they want in it.
[/quote]

ROFL

Basically, your problem really is, demonstrating that your current oral tradition really goes back in time to the apostles themselves. The only way to really do this is from written documents that start from the time of apostles.


#12

Paris, God bless you in the name of Jesus Christ. On this big blue earth full of sin, death, and disease-what else would you, or me, or anyone, need anything more than the direct Word of God in hope of being with him forever?

Have you read Moses book of Genesis? Yep, thats where the serpent achieves the fall of man, with its, crafty, clever, and oh so subtle words. Why do you think the serpent went to Eve? Well, we know Adam, received direct relevation from God to not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. But Eve did not receive that relevation, because God did not create her from Adam yet. After her creation, she got the oral “Word”, what catholics call “sacred tradition”, from Adam, a man. And to show you how fast and furious we can fall, the serpent not only got Eve to eat the forbidden fruit, but she also got Adam, who received DIRECT relevation from God, to disobey God’s command. So, after reading this account in Genesis you need to make a decision. If you cannot accept the fact that men who receive the Word of God second hand can be deceived, you definately have eternal issues to deal with. Sin and deception happened with the first two God created, so it can manifest itself on us even quicker.

Lets take a look at the book, the Gospel according to St.John-
Catholics will say, and they are correct to say, that there was no need to compose of a written account of Jesus after his accension into heaven. This was because those in the Jerusalem region were witnesses of Jesus and well aware of his ministry.

Why would St. John ever find the need to write a gospel book about Jesus? Think about it. He knew what was the truth. Im also pretty sure he would want nothing but the gospel of Jesus to remain true after he was gone. John was jewish, he knew of the book of Genesis and its story of Adam and Eve.

Anyways, when Jesus’ gospel of salvation spread beyond Jerusalem, and the eyewitness were no longer accessible, it is obvious that John must of felt the need to compose a written account to keep believers inspired to Jesus and to yes, to use his account to witness to all those down through the ages.

St.John writes in his gospel-“Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may beleive that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by beleiving you may have life in his name.” So ask yourself when you read this quote from St.John’s gospel of Jesus—What is St. John’s intention for you by reading this? He clearly tells you Paris, that he hopes you may believe in Jesus by his written word. Remember, if you believe St. Johns gospel, you believe he recieved the word of God directly. From his intention from the quote above, and our knowledge of the recipe for man to fall in Genesis, you can conclude that St.Johns words are totally unpolluted from the sin in this world. By your faith in God and Jesus, you have the Word of God in your hands. St.John gives his hope and approval that you, yourself may read and believe in Jesus’ teachings contained in that gospel. But wait, there is more. At the end of his gospel, it is written 21:24-25; “This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. *We know that his testimony is true. Jesus did many other things as well. If everyone of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.” *Christians

Now, by the works of the evil one, you will be confronted with the “what if”. The evil in this world wants all man to live in a world of “what if” and doubt. Now look back at the quotes from St.John’s gospel above. **You will be confronted by this from of lie-“Well St.John clearly states that not everything is written about all the miracles, words and works of Jesus, so we cant use this gospel writing to witness.” **

Think meat and potatoes. Remember the first quote above from St.John himself. Yes, there are other facts to write, but what he DID write down, he hopes it is sufficient enough for you to beleive in Jesus and his works and his word that came from his Father, our creator.
(cont.)


#13

(cont.)

And now that St.Johns written word of God can be had by everyone, there are those that try to lord over it for their own, man made “magesterium”. God is not the author of confusion. Psalm23-“The Lord is my shepard, there is nothing I shall want. He makes me…He leads me…He restores me…He guides me.” At first its just you and the Lord, and then you are in his eternal, heavenly church, which she calls no place home on this big, blue, earth full of sin, death, and disease. I hope you find faith to accept his word.

God bless you in the name of Jeus Christ.


#14

Hi
Could someone explain to me what Catholic’s mean by tradition and what tradition do they hold to.
Also Protestants, least the ones I know, believe that Christ is the (Logos) Word made flesh.

Thank You!
and as always forever Baptist
allischalmers


#15

stjosephradio.com/pages/books/apologetics/apologetics-concordance.htm

if you are interesting in finding Catholic beliefs in the Bible, buy this item. Love mine. Its the Cheat sheet!


#16

You sell snake oil, too, Geno?

There’s simply no way around it–St. Paul said to hold fast to both scripture AND the traditions they were taught. I know there’s no bottom to the well of Protestant sophistry, but facts is facts. You’re never going to be able to prove sola scriptura because it’s a self-refuting proposition.


#17

[quote=beckyann2597]stjosephradio.com/pages/books/apologetics/apologetics-concordance.htm

if you are interesting in finding Catholic beliefs in the Bible, buy this item. Love mine. Its the Cheat sheet!
[/quote]

That thing is awesome. Of course, the second you start proof-texting with a Protestant, they’ll just change the subject or tell you what a verse “really” means. You know–like “water” really meaning “amniotic fluid.”


#18

:amen:

Now, one of the things “…wrote down …” was this:

That scripture is profitable…

another:

The Church, not what was “…written down…” is the foundation of the Truth.

hopes???


#19

[quote=allischalmers]Hi
Could someone explain to me what Catholic’s mean by tradition and what tradition do they hold to.
Also Protestants, least the ones I know, believe that Christ is the (Logos) Word made flesh.

Thank You!
and as always forever Baptist
allischalmers
[/quote]

I feel this is important to an understanding between Catholics and Protestants, so I’m going to try to explain this a little bit. Catholics hold to two types of “tradition”. The first is Tradition (with a capital “T”); when Catholics refer to capital “T” Tradition, they mean Apostolic Tradition…the faith of the Apostles that has been handed down since St. Peter and the other Apostles. This Tradition is NOT allowed to be changed. Tradition (specifically Apostolic Tradition) is also refered to as Doctrine. An example of this would be the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. NOONE, NOT EVEN THE POPE, IS ALLOWED TO CHANGE DOCTRINE. The other “tradition” we hold to is merely an observance of our history. An example of tradition (small “t”) would be the Rite of Sending and Rite of Election for catechumens. Tradition, in the small “t” sense, is merely custom, or perhaps what we refer to as discipline, which is subject to change at the discretion of the Pope or the local Bishop. Another point I would like to make is that Catholics do not make a distinction between the “written Word” and “Word made flesh”. In Catholic mindset, there is only one Word, and that Word is Jesus, regardless of whether the Word is incarnate, written, held in Apostolic Tradition, the magisterium, or sacramental.


#20

[quote=montanaman]You sell snake oil, too, Geno?

There’s simply no way around it–St. Paul said to hold fast to both scripture AND the traditions they were taught. I know there’s no bottom to the well of Protestant sophistry, but facts is facts. You’re never going to be able to prove sola scriptura because it’s a self-refuting proposition.
[/quote]

Oral tradition is vital to spreading of the gospel of Jesus. It was practiced in Acts at will. Acts also shows us how the false gosple of telling beleivers there are laws to be observed, putting messianics and gentiles into bondage.

What I find laughable is that your magesterium you believe in can plop any doctrine they make up on any NT writing and find a way to connect the two. God knows what is each of our hearts, and there is a penalty we will pay if we preach a false gospel. That fact alone washes out any mystical magesterium. Yes, churches have elders and leaders, but the fact remains that the gospel St. Paul spread in the Greco/Roman empire, was sat on and lorded over for years.

Do you really believe, especially after the gospel was spread to jews first, gentiles second, that Jesus didnt want his new covenant gospel of salvation, which is free from ANY legal law or bondage to cover the earth in its purest form?

Read Acts 15 again, and compare it to what you call the one true church. Then read Romans 14:5-10/22-23. Do you really believe the Jerusalem council imposed anything to the Church of Antioch at all? The Church of Jerusalem basically told the Church of Antioch that those from the Church of Jerusalem went out and preached a false gospel by trying to put the Church of Antioch under the law again. The Council even went on to say they, the Church of Jerusalem does not want to burden them. But in unity with the love of the Holy Spirit, they made a REQUIREMENT, NOT LAW, that they would do well to avoid the things that could become stumbling blocks to their messianic jew bretheren. Now that is the Holy Spirit in motion. Teaching us that while we are free from any ordinance or law, we can still observe the things we want, as long as they are not stumbling blocks to ourselves or others. THAT IS HOW THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST FUNCTIONS! Now read Romans 14 on what St. Paul says. How does this match up to all the legalities and canon of the Vatican now? Holy days of obligations could be a stumbling block to believers, but the vatican imposes it. But there is always indulgences to be done. etc. etc. etc.


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.