Posts
Infallibility & How The Apostles Taught the Study of Sacred Tradition.
Quote:
Originally Asserted by a Non-Catholic:
Any church arrogant enough to claim infallibility is elevating it's self above God and is blasphemy! There are other "churches" that claim to be infallible, how shall I know which one is lying and which one is telling the truth?
I will answer this for you, by reading the bible for myself and letting the Holy Ghost interpret it for me as He does. BTW any church claiming infallability is a false church.
A rant without any support from the Word of God.
And yet Christ Himself promised that assurance of infallibility to His church when He said. 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.Matthew 16.
So then you claim this infallibility for yourself? That is precisely what this statement does, while denying what Our Lord promised to His church and actually attempting to usurp that authority and promise of assurance for yourself. I wouldn't do that. So then you are telling us that you are never wrong? Yet I have already proved you wrong several times in this discussion alone.
By this statement you have logically condemned yourself.
Quote:
Originally Asserted by non-Catholic
2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
I love this verse! I don't suppose that you've noticed here that St. Paul does not say to St. Timothy. "Study the Bible", or "Study the scriptures", and so based on what this verse says (and the context nowhere changes this...) then sacred Tradition is included in what Paul is telling Timothy to study. In this he would be following the apostles.
Example: (I asked you to look all this up and apparently you dismissed my request, so now I'm going to show you why that was so important.)
Look at these verses from the letter of St. Jude, the next to last book in the New Testament. (You do accept Jude as inspired canon of scripture, right?)
Jude Chapter 1:9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."
Where is that found in the Old Testament? Please show me chapter and verse.
Jude Chapter 1:14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, 15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
Where is that in the Old Testament please? Again, I need chapter and verse?
Jude Chapter 1:9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."....Jude Chapter 1:14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, 15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
2nd Timothy Chapter 3:8: As Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of corrupt mind and counterfeit faith;
The first 1st is quoting *****The Assumption of Moses. Not the Old Testament, yet the apostle Jude quotes it as a fact of belief.
*****
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assumption_of_Moses#Relation_with_the_Epistle_of_Jude
Relation with the Epistle of JudeSome ancient writers, including Gelasius (verse 2,21,17) and Origen (De principiis, III,2,1), cite the Assumption of Moses with reference to the dispute over the body of Moses, referred to in the Epistle of Jude 1:9, between the archangel Michael and Satan.
This dispute does not appear in Ceriani's manuscript; this could lend support to the identification of the manuscript with the Testament of Moses, but could also be explained by the text's incompleteness (it is believed that about a third of the text is missing).
An alternative explanation is that Jude is compounding material from three sources:
general Jewish traditions about Michael as gravedigger for the just as Apocalypse of Moses
contrast with the accusation by Michael of Azazel in the Book of Enoch
contrast with the angel of the Lord not rebuking Satan over the body of Jeshua in Zechariah 3.
This explanation has in its favour three arguments: (1) Jude quotes from both 1 Enoch 1:9 and Zechariah 3 (2) Jeshua in Zechariah 3 is dead - his grandson is serving as high priest. The change from "body of Jesus" (Greek spelling of Jeshua) to "body of Moses" would be required to avoid confusion with Jesus, and also to reflect the historical context of Zechariah 3 in Nehemiah concerning intermarriage and corruption in the "body" of the priesthood. (3) The example of Zech.3 provides an argument against the "slandering of heavenly beings", since the Angel of the Lord does not do in Zechariah 3 what Michael is reported to do in 1En1.[4][5]
The 2nd is quoting *****The Book of Enoch. Not the Old Testament, yet the apostle Jude quotes it as a fact of belief.
*****ContentThe first part of the Book of Enoch describes the fall of the Watchers, the angels who fathered the Nephilim. The remainder of the book describes Enoch's visits to heaven in the form of travels, visions and dreams, and his revelations.
The book consists of five quite distinct major sections (see each section for details):
The Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1 – 36)
The Book of Parables of Enoch (1 Enoch 37 – 71) (Also called the Similitudes of Enoch)
The Astronomical Book (1 Enoch 72 – 82) (Also called the Book of the Heavenly Luminaries or Book of Luminaries)
The Book of Dream Visions (1 Enoch 83 – 90) (Also called the Book of Dreams)
The Epistle of Enoch (1 Enoch 91 – 108)
Among most scholars is the shared view[5] that these five sections were originally independent works (with different dates of composition), themselves a product of much editorial arrangement, and were only later redacted into what we now call 1 Enoch.
Józef Milik has suggested that the Book of Giants found among the Dead Sea Scrolls should be part of the collection, appearing after the Book of Watchers in place of the Book of Parables, but for various reasons, Milik's theory has not been widely accepted.
[edit] Canonicity This section contains Ethiopic text. Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols instead of Ethiopic characters.
[edit] JudaismAlthough evidently widely known at the time of the Development of the Hebrew Bible canon, 1 Enoch was excluded from both the formal canon of the Tanakh and the typical canon of the Septuagint and therefore, also the writings known today as the Apocrypha.[6][7] One possible reason for Jewish rejection of the book might be the textual nature of several early sections of the book that make use of material from the Torah; for example, 1 En 1 is a midrash of Deuteronomy 33.[8][9] The content, particularly detailed descriptions of fallen angels, would also be a reason for rejection from the Hebrew canon at this period - as illustrated by the comments of Trypho the Jew when debating with Justin Martyr on this subject. Trypho: "The utterances of God are holy, but your expositions are mere contrivances, as is plain from what has been explained by you; nay, even blasphemies, for you assert that angels sinned and revolted from God." (Dialogue 79) [10]
[edit] ChristianityThe book is referred to, and quoted, in Jude 14-15:
"And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these [men], saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
The 3rd is quoting the *****Book of Jannes and Jambres and not the Old Testament. (Go ahead and look...their names are nowhere found in the OT!), yet here again...St. Paul refers to something as fact that is not stated in the inspired canon. So then... he is clearly telling Timothy to study both scripture and traditional sources, since that is clearly shown here as apostolic practice.
*****Information on Jannes and Jambres
Emil Schürer writes: "But among the books referring both to himself [Moses] and his time there is still another work to be mentioned, the theme of which was a single episode in the lawgiver's life, we mean the Book of Jannes and Jambres, the two Egyptian magicians who, according to Ex. vii. 8 sqq., wrought miracles before Pharaoh equal to those of Moses and Aaron, but were nevertheless beaten in the end. The names are not mentioned in the Old Testament, but they occur at a comparatively early date in the legends, and they were known not only in Jewish, but in Gentile and Christian circles as well, as the names of the two famous Egyptian magicians in question. . . . The book written about the magicians in question is mentioned by Origen, and in the Decretum Gelasii. As the name of Jannes was known even to so early a writer as Pliny, and as it is probable that those anonymous personages owed their name and individuality first of all to the apocryphal book itself, we may perhaps venture to refer the date of the composition of this work to pre-Christian times." (The Literature of the Jews in the Time of Jesus, p. 149)
A. Pietersma and R. T. Lutz write: "Possible evidence for Jannes and Jambres as a Christian book is as follows: (1) In fragment B of the Vienna papyrus (1. 8), the word chiazein occurs, the basic meaning of which is 'to form (the Greek letter) chi.' It need mean no more than 'to cross out' or 'to mark with an X' but could possibly be a reference to the cross. Unfortunately the context is no aid to interpretation, hence the evidential value of the word is slight. Furthermore, only the Vienna text but not the basically parallel text of Chester Beatty has the reading in question. (2) Chester Beatty 23e recto, line 2, reads apparently 'this one having descended to Ha[des . . .],' which may be a reference to the descent of Christ. The remainder of the sentence might run '[did not] die,' but again we cannot go beyond the realm of the possible. Other interpretations can be adduced. (3) Perhaps the best argument for Jannes and Jambres, in its present form, as a Christian book lies in its apparent literary form. If our ordering of the material is even approximately correct and if the Gelasian Decree has reference to our book, Jannes and Jambres is essentially a confession (poenitentia), a genre of literature that was manifestly Christian but not Jewish." (The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2, p. 433)
So much for the idea that the apostles taught Sola Scriptura.
Quote:
Originally Asserted by non-Catholic
You see it all the time. People don't agree on everything, even within any church, including your catholic church. At the same time, if you go to the same source of truth (the bible) and study it though the Holy Spirit, you can understand no matter who you are.
If this were actually true then all faithful believers would hold the exact same doctrines and beliefs...but that is not so among n-Cs, though with in the Catholic Church one single authority is acknowledged and there is indeed one authoritative and knowledgeable source of doctrinal interpretation.
Your comments that some Catholics might dissent or disagree does not indict that infallible authority in faith and morals but instead indicts the consciences of those who dissent or oppose those teachings.
No comments:
Post a Comment