Who really founded the Catholic Church?
-
Observation of one that is a believer and a non believer?Originally posted by Icemoon:What stand?
I was just stating my observation. -
Don't think there is an "official" definition.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Alrite, but b4 that. I do wish to know the definition of Sola Scriptura. Every Protestant give me a different one. Do u know where an offical definition is....perhaps from Luther Confessiosn
Here is one I've found, quite recent - the Cambridge Declaration.THESIS ONE: SOLA SCRIPTURA
We reaffirm the inerrant Scripture to be the sole source of written divine revelation,which alone can bind the conscience. The Bible alone teaches all that is necessary for our salvation from sin and is the standard by which all Christian behavior must be measured.
We deny that any creed, council or individual may bind a Christian's conscience, that the Holy Spirit speaks independently of or contrary to what is set forth in the Bible, or that personal spiritual experience can ever be a vehicle of revelation. -
Observation of a fellow human being.Originally posted by M©+square:Observation of one that is a believer and a non believer?
Do you suppose believers have magic eyes? Duh. -
There is no need to write so much.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Wat sae u......i wrote alot of stuff....ok maybe not. Most of it came from Bible and verses in support of papacy...but i linked it.
You can quote the church fathers. So can Protestant apologists. Let me show you why your argument is strawman most of the time:
What did the Early Church believe about the authority of Scripture? -
Have you observed the works of Holy Spirit in a believers' life?Originally posted by Icemoon:Observation of a fellow human being.
Do you suppose believers have magic eyes? Duh. -
And where were you when they sinned?Originally posted by M©+square:Have you observed the works of Holy Spirit in a believers' life?
Do you choose to see the good things and ignore the bad? -
LOL...i quoted solely from Scriptures to show how biblcail the papacy is and the nature of the KEYS. Deal wif it pls.Originally posted by Icemoon:There is no need to write so much.
You can quote the church fathers. So can Protestant apologists. Let me show you why your argument is strawman most of the time:
What did the Early Church believe about the authority of Scripture?
Some of the Church Fathers in the site has been misquoted...i recognise irenaus for example.
They say:
"We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith - Irenaus
Actual teachings:
"Through none others know we the disposition of our salvation, than those through whom the gospel came to us, first heralding it, then by the will of God delivering to us the Scriptures, which were to be the foundation and pillar of our faith...
But when, the heretics are Scriptures, as if they were wrong, and unauthoritative, and were variable, and the truth could not be extracted from them by those who were ignorant of Tradition...And when we challenge them in turn what that tradition, which is from the Apostles, which is guarded by the succession of elders in the churches, they oppose themselves to Tradition, saying that they are wiser, not only than those elders, but even than the Apostles. The Tradition of the Apostles, manifested 'on the contrary' in the whole world, is open in every Church to all who see the truth...And, since it is a long matter in a work like this to enumerate these successions, we will confute them by pointing to the Tradition of that greatest and most ancient and universally known Church, founded and constituted at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, a tradition which she has had and a faith which she proclaims to all men from those Apostles.' Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3,1-3 (inter A.D. 180/199).
"Heretics assent neither to Scripture nor to Tradition." Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3,2,1 (inter A.D. 180/199).
They say:
This seal have thou ever on thy mind; which now by way of summary has been touched on in its heads, and if the Lord grant, shall hereafter be set forth according to our power, with Scripture proofs. For concerning the divine and sacred Mysteries of the Faith, we ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures." - Cyril of Juersalem
I say:
Option One: If Cyril was in fact
teaching sola scriptura, Protestants have a big problem. Cyril's
Catechetical Lectures are filled with his forceful teachings on
the infallible teaching office of the Catholic Church (18:23), the
Mass as a sacrifice (23:6-
, the concept of purgatory and the
efficacy of expiatory prayers for the dead (23:10), the Real
Presence of Christ in the Eucharist (19:7; 21:3; 22:1-9), the
theology of sacraments (1:3), the intercession of the saints
(23:9), holy orders (23:2), the importance of frequent Communion
(23:23), baptismal regeneration (1:1-3; 3:10-12; 21:3-4), indeed a
staggering array of specifically "Catholic" doctrines.
These are the same Catholic doctrines that Protestants claim are
not found in Scripture. So, if Cyril really held to the notion of
sola scriptura, he certainly believed he had found those
Catholic doctrines in Scripture. One would then have to posit that
Cyril was badly mistaken in his exegesis of Scripture, but this
tack, of course, leads nowhere for Protestants, for it would of
necessity impugn Cyril's exegetical credibility as well as his
claim to find sola scriptura in Scripture.
Option Two: Cyril did not teach sola scriptura; the Protestant
understanding of this passage is incorrect. That means an attempt
to hijack this quote to support sola scriptura is futile (if not
dishonest), since it would require a hopelessly incorrect
understanding of Cyril's method of systematic theology, the
doctrinal schema he sets forth in Catechetical Lectures, and his
view of the authority of Scripture. Obviously, neither of these
options is palatable to the Protestant apologist.
(Source:http://www.ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/SOLASCRI.TXT)
And btw Cyril said this:
"But in learning the Faith and in professing it, acquire and keep that only, which is now delivered to thee by the Church, and which has been built up strongly out of all the Scriptures....Take heed then, brethren, and hold fast the traditions which ye now receive, and write them and the table of your heart." Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 5:12 (A.D. 350).
They say:
Origen, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria support them
I say:
"We do not take our scriptural teaching from the parables but we interpret the parables according to our teaching." Tertullian, Purity 9,1 (c. A.D. 200).
'Let them show the origins of their churches, let them unroll the list of their bishops, through a succession coming down from the very beginning that their first bishop had his authority and predecessor someone from among the number of Apostles or apostolic men and, further, that he did not stray from the Apostles. In this way the apostolic churches present their earliest records. The church of Smyrna, for example, records that Polycarp was named by John; the Romans, that Clement was ordained by Peter. In just the same way, the other churches show who were made bishops by the Apostles and who transmitted the apostolic seed to them. Let the heretics invent something like that. ' Tertullian, The Prescription Against Heretics 32 (c. A.D. 200).
'But they, safeguarding the true tradition of the blessed teaching, which comes straight from the Apostles Peter, James, John and Paul and transmitted from father to son have come down to us with the help of God to deposit in us those ancestral and apostolic seeds' Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 1,11 (c. A.D. 205).
'For us...having grown old in the Scriptures, preserving the Apostolic and ecclesiastical correctness of doctrine, living a life according to the Gospel, is led by the Lord to discover the proofs from the Law and the prophets which he seeks.' Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 7,104 (c. A.D. 205).
"For those are slothful who, having it in their power to provide themselves with proper proofs for the divine Scriptures from the Scriptures themselves, select only what contributes to their own pleasures. And those have a craving for glory who voluntarily evade, by arguments of a diverse sort, the things delivered by the blessed apostles and teachers, which are wedded to inspired words; opposing the divine tradition by human teachings, in order to establish the heresy." Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, 7:16 (post A.D. 202).
"The Church's preaching has been handed down through an orderly succession from the Apostles and remains in the Church until the present. That alone is to be believed as the truth which in no way departs from ecclesiastical and apostolic tradition." Origen, First Principles 1,2 (c. A.D. 230).
"When heretics show us the canonical Scriptures, in which every Christian believes and trusts, they seem to be saying: 'Lo, he is in the inner rooms [the word of truth] ' (Matt 24.6). But we must not believe them, nor leave the original tradition of the Church, nor believe otherwise than we have been taught by the succession in the Church of God." Origen, Homilies on Matthew, Homily 46, PG 13:1667 (ante A.D. 254).
[size=normal]I am left to contend the Church fathers did not teach Sola Scriptura but rather Catholic Teachings that Tradition is to be used by the Church to intepretate Scriptures.[/size] -
I made a few rebuttals on the site u gave me above. They misquoted many Fathers.
-
Why dont u say how the Spirit has affected u?Originally posted by M©+square:Have you observed the works of Holy Spirit in a believers' life? -
Which means you didn't witness the works of Holy Spirit.Originally posted by Icemoon:And where were you when they sinned?
Do you choose to see the good things and ignore the bad? -
Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:
how was Irenaeus misquoted?
LOL...i quoted solely from Scriptures to show how biblcail the papacy is and the nature of the KEYS. Deal wif it pls.
Some of the Church Fathers in the site has been misquoted...i recognise irenaus for example.
[b]They say:
"We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith - Irenaus
Actual teachings:
"Through none others know we the disposition of our salvation, than those through whom the gospel came to us, first heralding it, then by the will of God delivering to us the Scriptures, which were to be the foundation and pillar of our faith...
But when, the heretics are Scriptures, as if they were wrong, and unauthoritative, and were variable, and the truth could not be extracted from them by those who were ignorant of Tradition...And when we challenge them in turn what that tradition, which is from the Apostles, which is guarded by the succession of elders in the churches, they oppose themselves to Tradition, saying that they are wiser, not only than those elders, but even than the Apostles. The Tradition of the Apostles, manifested 'on the contrary' in the whole world, is open in every Church to all who see the truth...And, since it is a long matter in a work like this to enumerate these successions, we will confute them by pointing to the Tradition of that greatest and most ancient and universally known Church, founded and constituted at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, a tradition which she has had and a faith which she proclaims to all men from those Apostles.' Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3,1-3 (inter A.D. 180/199). [/b]
and your translation is fansub one issit?
I quote from .. ahem .. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103301.htm1. We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.
how come your translation more different than mine?! my one like same as newadvent hor??
-
when they succumb to their flesh .. were you there to observe? hur hur.Originally posted by M©+square:Which means you didn't witness the works of Holy Spirit.
if the Holy Spirit is truly in the life of believers .. then they won't be any Crusaders liao. Man .. still succumb to their desires.
Luther almost tore up the bible. Why didn't the Holy Spirit stop him?
edit: opps .. my bad .. according to Mr Pope, he did tear up the bible, some books. -
Which brings back to my first query. Have you witness the works of Holy Spirit in a believers' life?Originally posted by Icemoon:when they succumb to their flesh .. were you there to observe? hur hur.
if the Holy Spirit is truly in the life of believers .. then they won't be any Crusaders liao. Man .. still succumb to their desires.
Luther almost tore up the bible. Why didn't the Holy Spirit stop him?
edit: opps .. my bad .. according to Mr Pope, he did tear up the bible, some books.
I've got my answer. -
I never deny the works of the Holy Spirit. Did I?Originally posted by M©+square:Which brings back to my first query. Have you witness the works of Holy Spirit in a believers' life?
I've got my answer. -
We haven't got our answer, btw.Originally posted by M©+square:Which brings back to my first query. Have you witness the works of Holy Spirit in a believers' life?
I've got my answer.
Why don't you say how the Holy Spirit has affected you? -
You've never witnessed the works of Holy Spirit, did you?Originally posted by Icemoon:I never deny the works of the Holy Spirit. Did I? -
What kind of works? Define.Originally posted by M©+square:You've never witnessed the works of Holy Spirit, did you?
Tongues?
the new life of a born-again Christian?
I've seen both. -
I'm a non Christian.Originally posted by Icemoon:We haven't got our answer, btw.
Why don't you say how the Holy Spirit has affected you?
Either way, it's not going to help at all. -
Lol, u must understand Icemoon, that the Spirit onli works went the successors of the Apostles congregate in (twos or threes) and exercise thier powers of binding and loosing. How do i put it....Originally posted by Icemoon:when they succumb to their flesh .. were you there to observe? hur hur.
if the Holy Spirit is truly in the life of believers .. then they won't be any Crusaders liao. Man .. still succumb to their desires.
Luther almost tore up the bible. Why didn't the Holy Spirit stop him?
edit: opps .. my bad .. according to Mr Pope, he did tear up the bible, some books.
The Apostles have the power of binding and loosing in doctrinal issues. To ensure they dont bind error in heaven, God sent them the Spirit to guide them in all Truth. Thats why Eucnimcal Councils can issue infallible doctrines. There is a mjor difference in teaching without error and living without error.
As a catholic, i will use Luther as an example. Luther acts were at best anti-christish in tearing off 7 books and almost tearing of James and Revelations. But his teachings (if i am a protestant) can be infallible if i believe the Spirit guided him). Similiarly, doctrine issued in a Council is infallible.
Im not sure abt the protestant pt of view. But Catholicism teaches that this gift of truth (as Irenaus puts it) is onli exercised by the Church in teaching doctrines. This is done in Councils haha. Other that that, this Bishops are not infallible.
"Wherefore it is incumbent to obey the presbyters who are in the Church...those who, together with the succession of the episcopate, have received the certain gift of truth..." Irenaeus, Against Heresies 26:2 (inter A.D. 180/199). -
you forgotten the discussion this afternoon with vince?Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Lol, u must understand Icemoon, that the Spirit onli works went the successors of the Apostles congregate in (twos or threes) and exercise thier powers of binding and loosing. How do i put it....
what do you understand by believers given the gift of the spirit? (hope I phrase it correctly) -
Don't worry.Originally posted by M©+square:I'm a non Christian.
Either way, it's not going to help at all.
Me not Christian either. -
Everyone has the Spirit. But onli the Apostles were given the gift of Truth.Originally posted by Icemoon:you forgotten the discussion this afternoon with vince?
what do you understand by believers given the gift of the spirit? (hope I phrase it correctly) -
The part in blue is added by you, I have not mentioned anything regarding being apart from tradition nor church.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:1) All believers possese the gift of truth to intepretate Scripture without Tradition or any Church
2) Its called Cathollic Church LOL> RCC refers to Latin Rite catholics....we must not forget our eastern brethen. -
Actually this was my question to vince.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Everyone has the Spirit. But onli the Apostles were given the gift of Truth.
in reply, he gave me some verses and told me to read them in context (meaning whole chapter?). Have you done the readings? -
In CCELOriginally posted by Icemoon:how come your translation more different than mine?! my one like same as newadvent hor??
1. It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these [heretics] rave about. For if the apostles had known hidden mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting to "the perfect" apart and privily from the rest, they would have delivered them especially to those to whom they were also committing the Churches themselves. For they were desirous that these men should be very perfect and blameless in all things, whom also they were leaving behind as their successors, delivering up their own place of government to these men; which men, if they discharged their functions honestly, would be a great boon [to the Church], but if they should fall away, the direst calamity.
2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority,(3) that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.
And the other Church Father....especially cyril of juerasalem...how can they quote from him....shooting themselves in the foot IMO.