- This topic is empty.
- Posts
I thought this bit was quite interesting:
8. Ephesians 4 Refutes the Protestant “Proof Text”
“All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16–17).
This passage doesn’t teach formal sufficiency, which excludes a binding, authoritative role for Tradition and Church. Protestants extrapolate onto the text what isn’t there. If we look at the overall context of this passage, we can see that Paul makes reference to oral Tradition three times (cf. 2 Tim. 1:13–14; 2:2; 3:14). And to use an analogy, let’s examine a similar passage:
“And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (Eph. 4:11–15).
If 2 Timothy 3 proves the sole sufficiency of Scripture, then, by analogy, Ephesians 4 would likewise prove the sufficiency of pastors and teachers for the attainment of Christian perfection. In Ephesians 4, the Christian believer is equipped, built up, brought into unity and mature manhood, and even preserved from doctrinal confusion by means of the teaching function of the Church. This is a far stronger statement of the perfecting of the saints than 2 Timothy 3, yet it does not even mention Scripture.
So if all non-scriptural elements are excluded in 2 Timothy, then, by analogy, Scripture would logically have to be excluded in Ephesians. It is far more reasonable to recognize that the absence of one or more elements in one passage does not mean that they are nonexistent. The Church and Scripture are both equally necessary and important for teaching.
Hi CA:
I am still reading, but you made the following comment:
Quote If there is one thing certain, it is that the New Testament depicts Christ as having called his twelve apostles and as having personally founded his Church upon them (Matt. 16:18, Eph. 2:20), although not a book of the New Testament was written until some twenty or thirty years after the death of Christ. And so, did Jesus personally found the church upon the Apostles or is the rock upon which the church is founded, the Apostle Peter?
Love in Christ,
MartyHi CA:
I am still reading, but you also say:
Quote Tradition is essentially the living memory of the Church, manifesting itself primarily in her authentic and infallible teachings, in which the Holy Spirit, according to the promise of Christ, preserves her from the possibility of error and leads her into “all truth” (John 16:13). Were not things like the crusades and the inquisition errors that the Catholic church made?
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (942767 @ Sep. 03 2009,10:40) Hi CA: I am still reading, but you made the following comment:
Quote If there is one thing certain, it is that the New Testament depicts Christ as having called his twelve apostles and as having personally founded his Church upon them (Matt. 16:18, Eph. 2:20), although not a book of the New Testament was written until some twenty or thirty years after the death of Christ. And so, did Jesus personally found the church upon the Apostles or is the rock upon which the church is founded, the Apostle Peter?
Love in Christ,
Marty
Great question. Christ is the, of course, the head of the church which is His body. The apostles were the foundation upon which He built it. Peter is the first among apostles since he received the headship among apostles from the Lord. (an office similar to what Joseph received from Pharoah…which we can read about in line of Davidic Kings)In Matt. 16:19, Jesus gives Peter the keys to the kingdom.
“And I will give you (singular – “thee” in the DRB and KJV) the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed, even in heaven.”
This is a direct parallel with the Old Testament Isaiah 22:20-24:
“And this shall be in that day: I will call my servant Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah. And I will clothe him with your vestment, and I will strengthen him with your belt, and I will give your authority to his hand. And he shall be like a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. And I will place the key of the house of David upon his shoulder. And when he opens, no one will close. And when he closes, no one will open. And I will fasten him like a peg in a trustworthy place. And he will be upon a throne of glory in the house of his father. And they will suspend over him all the glory of his father’s house: various kinds of vessels and every little article, from the vessels of bowls even to every instrument of music. ”
We can see this borne out through the book of Acts:1:15-26 – Peter takes leadership of the first apostolic succession
2:14 – Peter preaches the first gospel sermon and takes the leadership on the day of Pentecost
3:6-8 – Peter performs the first miracle after the ascension of Christ
5:1-10 – Peter passes judgment upon Ananias and Saphira
10:9-16 – Peter receives the doing away of the Mosaic Kosher laws
10:44-48 – Peter baptizes the first Gentiles and receives them into the ChurchWhenever the list of apostles is given, Peter is listed first. Matthew 10:2-4, Mark 3:16-19, Luke 6:14-16, and Acts 1:13
In Galatians 1:18, we learn that St. Paul, before beginning his public ministry, spent 15 days with Peter. St. Paul gave as proof of his orthodoxy and veracity of his revelation from Christ that Peter “added nothing to me”….clearly stating the necessity of agreeing with this apostle doctrinally.
In John 21:15-17, Jesus directs Peter to feed his sheep.
Then, when they had dined, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Feed my lambs.” He said to him again: “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Feed my lambs.” He said to him a third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was very grieved that he had asked him a third time, “Do you love me?” And so he said to him: “Lord, you know all things. You know that I love you.” He said to him, “Feed my sheep.”
Notice that Jesus tells this to Peter three times, the exact number of times that Peter denied him. The fact that Jesus told Peter this, and no other, indicates that Jesus considers Peter to be the leader of His Church on earth, not John, James, or Matthew.
In Luke 22:31-32, Jesus tells Peter that satan wants to sift him like wheat.
“And the Lord said: “Simon, Simon! Behold, Satan has asked for you, so that he may sift you like wheat. But I have prayed for you, so that your faith may not fail, and so that you, once converted, may confirm your brothers.”
Notice satan didn’t ask for any other apostle to sift. Why? Because satan knows that if he gets the leader, the rest will scatter (remember how the Philistines scattered after David killed Goliath? Remember how the apostles took off after Jesus was captured in the Garden of Gethsemane? (And by the way, Satan is using that exact same method today; using church scandals with the leaders to make the rest of us flee The Church). Jesus then tells Peter that He has prayed for HIM, so that HIS faith will not fail, so that he can be completely converted, and then HE can strengthen the other apostles. Sounds like a leadership conference, doesn’t it?
In John 20:3-6, the younger John and the older Peter both run to the tomb of Jesus to see for themselves if Christ had risen or not. The younger John gets there first, but deferring to his leader, does not go in, leaving that honor to Peter.
“Peter then came out with the other disciple, and they went toward the tomb. They both ran, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first; and stooping to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in. Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb; he saw the linen cloths lying”
Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 02 2009,10:18) Quote (david @ Aug. 26 2009,18:38) Saying “Sola Scriptura is logically untenable” is great for the person who doesn't follow scripture….or can't back up his beliefs by scripture, or does things that obviously go against scripture…..etc.
What are you talking about? Gibberish!We are the ones who truly honor Scripture in the highest sense AND have the correct interpretation of the Scriptures.
You're stalling, David. You can't handle this conversation. Just admit it.
You, being a Catholic are not allowed to talk about “honoring scripture.”How many Bible's have Catholic bishops burned?
How long did you keep the Bible in a dead language?
How long did you outlaw reading or even possessing a Bible?
How many people have you killed because they wanted everyone to have a Bible?If by “honoring scripture” you mean trying to destroy it, sure…”honoring scripture.”
Quote (942767 @ Sep. 03 2009,10:45) Hi CA: I am still reading, but you also say:
Quote Tradition is essentially the living memory of the Church, manifesting itself primarily in her authentic and infallible teachings, in which the Holy Spirit, according to the promise of Christ, preserves her from the possibility of error and leads her into “all truth” (John 16:13). Were not things like the crusades and the inquisition errors that the Catholic church made?
Love in Christ,
Marty
Great question. Notice I wrote “infallible teachings”. The Crusades and Inquisition were not teachings. Catholics and even popes have definitely made errors in conduct throughout history, just as the first apostles did. But remember that fact that the apostles were “not already perfect” (Phil. 3:12) while being used to write infallible Scripture. And we see in the book of Galatians that even Peter was not free from the sin of hypocrisy. Yet God used them and gave them an infallible charism when they taught and bound the teachings of the faith upon the people of God.Do you see the difference?
Quote (david @ Sep. 03 2009,11:23) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 02 2009,10:18) Quote (david @ Aug. 26 2009,18:38) Saying “Sola Scriptura is logically untenable” is great for the person who doesn't follow scripture….or can't back up his beliefs by scripture, or does things that obviously go against scripture…..etc.
What are you talking about? Gibberish!We are the ones who truly honor Scripture in the highest sense AND have the correct interpretation of the Scriptures.
You're stalling, David. You can't handle this conversation. Just admit it.
You, being a Catholic are not allowed to talk about “honoring scripture.”How many Bible's have Catholic bishops burned?
How long did you keep the Bible in a dead language?
How long did you outlaw reading or even possessing a Bible?
How many people have you killed because they wanted everyone to have a Bible?If by “honoring scripture” you mean trying to destroy it, sure…”honoring scripture.”
We honor Scripture and esteem it so highly that, yes, we destroyed erroneous translations much like your NWT. Truth is eternally important.If I found a NWT today, I'd probably burn it.
God love you
JOHN 13:35
“By this all will know that YOU are my disciples, if YOU have love among yourselves.””What of the “teaching” of love?
Is not “love your enemies” (Matthew and Luke) one of your teachings?
Hi CA,
You honour scrupture?
You hold your human traditions just as high[Vat2]We can live without them but not the bread of scripture.
Quote We honor Scripture and esteem it so highly that, yes, we destroyed erroneous translations much like your NWT. Truth is eternally important. If I found a NWT today, I'd probably burn it.
And if you found one five hundred years ago, you'd burn it, along with me, the one holding it.
Quote (david @ Sep. 03 2009,11:31) Quote We honor Scripture and esteem it so highly that, yes, we destroyed erroneous translations much like your NWT. Truth is eternally important. If I found a NWT today, I'd probably burn it.
And if you found one five hundred years ago, you'd burn it, along with me, the one holding it.
Neither I, nor the church would. But maybe the government you were under would have…unfortunately. But…this is not dogma but human error. Not part of infallible teaching. God gives us all free will.God love you
Hi CA:
You say:
Quote In Galatians 1:18, we learn that St. Paul, before beginning his public ministry, spent 15 days with Peter. St. Paul gave as proof of his orthodoxy and veracity of his revelation from Christ that Peter “added nothing to me”….clearly stating the necessity of agreeing with this apostle doctrinally. This is what the scripture states:
Quote Gal 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called [me] by his grace, Gal 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:
Gal 1:17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.
Gal 1:18 ¶ Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.
But the Apostle Paul did spend 15 days with the Apostle Peter, but he says this:
Quote Gal 1:10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. Gal 1:11 ¶ But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
Gal 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
And did not the Apostle Paul correct the Apostle Peter here?
Quote Gal 2:11 ¶ But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. Gal 2:12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
Gal 2:13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
Gal 2:14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before [them] all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
Gal 2:15 We [who are] Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
The Apostle Peter may have been given the office of the Chief Apostle over the 12, but we see he was not infallible, and he was not the rock upon which the church was founded.
The Apostle Paul addressing the divisions in the church states the following:
Quote 1Cr 3:5 ¶ Who then is Paul, and who [is] Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? (I would say that this would apply to the Apostle Peter and to the Popes as well.) 1Cr 3:6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
1Cr 3:7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
1Cr 3:8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
1Cr 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, [ye are] God's building.
1Cr 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
1Cr 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
Love in Christ,
MartyHi CA:
I have read all of this thread, and esentially you are saying, that when Jesus stated that “upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it”, he was referring to the Catholic church whose doctrines and practices have been recieved either by scripture that is written, interpretation of written scripture, and oral tradition which does not appear in the canon of the church(the bible), but is regarded as authoritative because it was believed or practiced by the successors of the Apostles, the early church Fathers.
Is this correct?
Quote (Not3in1 @ Aug. 24 2009,12:38) CA, You will find that many threads go off track (a bit, or a truckload!). That seems to be the nature of this real-time board, so don't let it frustrate you too much. There are threads dedicated to the Trinity, as you will notice. Two of my favorite topics are: Conception, and Preexistence.
Okay, I have some catching up to do. Looks like you've been busy. It also looks like you have been introduced to our former Catholics on this board (Nick, Irene and her husband Georg *they share the same log in name, “Cindy”).
My husband was raised Catholic – went to a private Catholic school and is the last of eight children. This topic is very interesting to me!! I'm glad that you are here!
Love,
Mandy
Mandy You surprise me, because I thought that you said you don't believe in the Trinity Doctrine,and now you act like ypu like this guy. Some times I don't understand you. Still I will always love you. Sorry but I don't like that He is here, at all.
IreneQuote (942767 @ Sep. 03 2009,12:13) Hi CA: You say:
Quote In Galatians 1:18, we learn that St. Paul, before beginning his public ministry, spent 15 days with Peter. St. Paul gave as proof of his orthodoxy and veracity of his revelation from Christ that Peter “added nothing to me”….clearly stating the necessity of agreeing with this apostle doctrinally. This is what the scripture states:
Quote Gal 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called [me] by his grace, Gal 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:
Gal 1:17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.
Gal 1:18 ¶ Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.
But the Apostle Paul did spend 15 days with the Apostle Peter, but he says this:
Quote Gal 1:10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. Gal 1:11 ¶ But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
Gal 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
And did not the Apostle Paul correct the Apostle Peter here?
Quote Gal 2:11 ¶ But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. Gal 2:12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
Gal 2:13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
Gal 2:14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before [them] all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
Gal 2:15 We [who are] Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
The Apostle Peter may have been given the office of the Chief Apostle over the 12, but we see he was not infallible, and he was not the rock upon which the church was founded.
The Apostle Paul addressing the divisions in the church states the following:
Quote 1Cr 3:5 ¶ Who then is Paul, and who [is] Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? (I would say that this would apply to the Apostle Peter and to the Popes as well.) 1Cr 3:6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
1Cr 3:7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
1Cr 3:8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
1Cr 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, [ye are] God's building.
1Cr 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
1Cr 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Great points. All legitimate. I think there is a lack of understanding of what we mean when we say infallible. Remember that the pope is only infallible when he teaches under very clearly defined and limited circumstances.We are NOT saying that the pope cannot sin or make personal mistakes. We are NOT saying that the pope cannot misspeak. He can. But just as Baalam was prevented from cursing the people of God, so the popes and councils are prevented by God from binding erroneous doctrine upon the faithful.
So the pope is NOT infallible in the sense that he is completely and entirely prevented from error or sin. We have always confessed otherwise. Papal infallibility is one of the most misunderstood doctrines of the faith. And I think a lot of people (not saying you) really do not care to ask us what we mean when we say this.
If Jesus gave Peter the promise “whatsoever” you bind on earth is bound in heaven. It necessarily follows that he (Peter) MUST be prevented from contradicting the will of heaven when he binds anything for belief on the people of God.
There is much more to be said about this. But I hope I am clear on what Papal Infalliblity isn't.
Let's get through Sola Scriptura first. But I must say that the doctrine of Papal infallibility is one of the most fun topics to discuss.
Quote (Cindy @ Sep. 03 2009,13:00) Quote (Not3in1 @ Aug. 24 2009,12:38) CA, You will find that many threads go off track (a bit, or a truckload!). That seems to be the nature of this real-time board, so don't let it frustrate you too much. There are threads dedicated to the Trinity, as you will notice. Two of my favorite topics are: Conception, and Preexistence.
Okay, I have some catching up to do. Looks like you've been busy. It also looks like you have been introduced to our former Catholics on this board (Nick, Irene and her husband Georg *they share the same log in name, “Cindy”).
My husband was raised Catholic – went to a private Catholic school and is the last of eight children. This topic is very interesting to me!! I'm glad that you are here!
Love,
Mandy
Mandy You surprise me, because I thought that you said you don't believe in the Trinity Doctrine,and now you act like ypu like this guy. Some times I don't understand you. Still I will always love you. Sorry but I don't like that He is here, at all.
Irene
Hi Mrs.,Do we not want his salvation, and do we not want that he teach the Word of God in truth?
And so, why not welcome him so that we can teach him?
Love in Christ,
MartyHi CA,
You have to join the body of Christ at least before any responsibility can follow .
You must repent and be born again of water and the Spirit.Entry into the catholic organisation demands no such thing so who is this man you follow?
Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 03 2009,11:42) Quote (david @ Sep. 03 2009,11:31) Quote We honor Scripture and esteem it so highly that, yes, we destroyed erroneous translations much like your NWT. Truth is eternally important. If I found a NWT today, I'd probably burn it.
And if you found one five hundred years ago, you'd burn it, along with me, the one holding it.
Neither I, nor the church would. But maybe the government you were under would have…unfortunately. But…this is not dogma but human error. Not part of infallible teaching. God gives us all free will.God love you
“Silence gives consent”–Pope Boniface VIII (Italian Pope. 1235-1303)It's called “community responsibility.”
If a mob of a hundred Catholics are watching one Catholic burn someone to death, that is called “consent.”More than that….when it is the Catholic who turns this person into the government for the crime of owning a Bible, it is not even a case of “silence gives consent.” It's a case of using the government for your evil means.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
