Thessalonian said:
JM, you make me laugh. Shall we talk about circular reasoning of Sola Scriptura. We have multiple witnesses throughout history. We have scripture and we have the Oral Traditions which can be traced back far into history. We cannot identify the origins of Catholic teachings. Yet with Protestant teaching we can easily identify who started Sola Scriptura for instance.
Red Herring, this doesn't deal with the circularing reasoning found withing your arguement.
Further as witness against Catholicism you put those who hate the Church and have an axe to grind on the stand and take everything they say hook line and sinker. It's like the democrats in congress being the supreme authorities and judges of george bush and likewise I hate to say saying that republicans were completely fair to bill clinton.
Once again, nothing to add. Why do you think so many have an axe to grind?
It's because the Roman Catholic Church wasn’t around in the first century and for this reason it can’t be the ONE TRUE CHURCH FOUNDED BY CHRIST. This is a lie. With the RCC and the extra Biblical traditions, this proves beyond a doubt that it has departed from the apostolic faith. It further pronounces that the church never changes its dogmatic teachings. With this in mind we, once again, can examine the teachings of the Catholic Church today and prove they do not resemble the first century church. Nowhere in the New Testament do we see:
Priests offering sacrifices for sins
Indulgences remitting punishment for sins
Prayers for souls in purgatory
Church leaders forbidden to marry
Infallible men
Salvation dispensed through sacraments
Rosaries, scapulars, holy water, crucifixes & statues
Have you taken a hard look at those references to tradition in the NT they're warnings against using them to nullify the word of God or to hold people captive (Mark 7:7-13; Col. 2:8-9). The evidence you speak of comes down to three verses and they exhortat Christians to follow APOSTOLIC TRADITIONS. When you read, please pay attention to the tense, which is past: the tradition which you were taught, (2 Thes. 2:15); which you have heard (2 Tim. 2:2); and, as I delivered them to you (1 Cor. 11:2) RC tradition is NOT Apostolic it's mans tradition, which crept into the church after the apostles.
As a born again follower of Jesus Christ I'm set to the task, " earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." The only assurance to genuine faith is from the objective, infallible Word of God (John 17:17).
The answer is quite simply from two sources. The scriptures tell us that we have apostolic succession. For instance Peter was given the keys to the kingdom. Keys indicate both succession and authority. Keys are to be passed on. In Paul's letters he speaks about the laying on of hands and establishing Churches with leaders in various communities. 2 Tim 2:2 he speaks about handing on the teachings of Christ from one to another. Things are passed on.
You made a huge leap here, how did the faith that was written down and became the Bible also remain as "Sacred Tradition?" The only reason you make that leap is because you're told so by you church, but where's the proof?
Sacred oral tradition and history veryify these things. We can show succession all the way back for 2000 years in scripture and the handing on of it, in Church leadership (not just the list of popes) and in teaching. Catholic teaching can be found in 100, 200, 400, 800, 1000, ect. . The gates of hell can be shown to have not prevailed. That's the short answer. Not sure your really interested in the long one. Of which I could easily write a book.
Where is Tradition?
How do you know what you're being taught is proper Tradition?
Who told you which Traditions are traditional, are you taking that on faith?
