Thomas the apostle ,went on to India, without any OT or NT, but being a apostle was taught verbal and Thomas preached verbally to the pagans and converted many and who are still Catholic to this day. Apostolic Teaching prevailed over the teaching method of sola scriptura for 1500 years.Jesus promised us not a Church with perfect members but a Church founded on the Teachings of His Apostles and that Apostolic/Catholic Church would always be protected from error within its Teachings/ Doctrine.
The promise by Jesus ' Matt 16: 15-19
Authority of His Apostolic, Universal/ Catholic Church is found here in Luke 10 v 16
"He who hears you , hears me; and he who rejects you, rejects me; and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me" { Luke 10 v 16 }
Why do you reject the Authoritative Teaching of Christ's Apostolic, Catholic/ Universal Church ? Please show me from the Holy Bible a verse that replaced the verse of Luke 10 v 16 ?
Sola scriptura or prima scriptura
Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Anastasia, Oct 24, 2011.
Page 15 of 15
-
This is not only a matter of common sense but demonstratable in regard to the oral traditions of the elders that came down from Nehemiah to the times of Jesus. Neither Christ or the Apostles EVER said, "rabbi....said" but always spoke either directly by inspiration or quoted Old Testament scriptures as their basis for authority for faith and practice. Why? Oral traditions corrupt quickly and that is precisely while Peter was STILL LIVING he told his readers that scriptures are "MORE SURE" than apostolic oral traditions.
-
--God desires his word be taught; but the RCC ignores the Word and teaches the commandments of men instead. -
WM -
Dr. Walter, In your example using 2nd Peter 1: 16-19 this is how that verse is to be understood; -" coming: "; in Greek 'parousia," used at 2nd Pt.3,-4:12 of the second coming of Christ. The word was used in the extrabiblical writings for the visitations of someone in authority;in Greek cult and Hellenistic Judaism it was used for the manifestation of the divine presence. What the apostles " made known" has been interpreted to refer to Jesus'transfiguation [ 17 ] or to His entire first coming or to His future coming in power.
2nd Pt. 1:17; - The author assures the readers of the reliability of the apostolic message[ including Jesus' power , glory, and coming; cf the note on 2 Pt. 1 , 16 ] by appeal to the transfiguration of Jesus in glory [ Mt. 17: 1-8 and parallels ] and by appeal to the prophetic message[ 2 Pt. 1: 19; perhaps Nm. 24,17] ; Here, as elsewhere , the NT insists on continued reminders as necessary to preserve the historical facts about Jesus and the truths of the faith; cf2 Pt3, 1-2; 1 Cor.11:2; 15:1-3. "My Son, my beloved : or , "my beloved Son"
2 Pt. 1: 12- 19, - The purpose in writing is to call to mind the Apostle's witness to the truth, even as he faces the end of his life [ 12-15 ] his eyewitness testimoney to Christ [ 16- 18 ], and the true prophetic message [ 19 ] through the Spirit in scripture [ 20- 21 ], in contrast to what false teachers are setting forth.
2 Pt. 1 v 18 : We: at Jesus' transfiguation , referring to Peter , James, and John [ Mt. 17 v 1 ]
2nd Pt. 1: 20-21 , Often cited, along with 2 Tim. 3 v 16 , on the " inspiration of Scripture or against private interpretation , these verses in context are directed against the false teachers of ch 2 and clever tales [ 16 ] , The prophetic word in scripture comes admittedly " through human beings [ 21 ] , but " moved by the holy Spirit", not from their own interpretation , and is a matter of what the author and Spirit intended, not " the false interpretation of false teachers . Instead of " under the influence of God " , some manuscripts read " holy ones of God " -
Matt Black Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
WM -
-
Scriptures are "MORE SURE" than Apostolic oral traditions EVEN WHILE THE APOSTLE IS ALIVE (vv. 15-19). The Greek term translated "more sure" conveys the idea of STABILITY. They supersede the less stable. There is no need for oral traditions that can be easily corrupted and perverted in two or three generations.
It does not take too much common sense to realize that anything that depends upon oral transmission from one person to another person become more unstable and less dependable and more corrupted. This is exactly what happened to the oral "traditions of the elders" and why Christ corrected them and NEVER quoted them as a source of authority for doctrine or practice and neither did the apostles. The primary mention of them in the gospels and in the epistles is condemnatory not commendatory of them.
The fact is that scriptures are "MORE SURE" because they are not corrupted by "private interpretations" by those who pass them down. The scriptures do not represent "private interpretations" but are the direct expression of God's revealed will. -
Thinkingstuff Active Member
-
There is no evidence that Peter or Paul constituted any congregation at Rome but plenty of evidence that neither did. Paul admits he never had yet been there and would not go to a place and preach the gospel that built upon the foundation of another apostle (Rom. 15).
Peter was never there and had not yet been there at the writing of Romans by Paul or else Paul would have greeted him, mentioned him or attributed to him laying the foundations in Rome. The elephant in the room that RC ignores is the complete silence by Paul about Peter when writing to these congregations which is not only unthinkable if Peter had started any of these congregations or was presently there as it would have been extremely rude and inconsiderate of Paul to say nothing of such a prominent apostle. -
To add to what Eric said, Peter wrote to the Asian churches. Note it specifically says Asia in the above verse. Was Peter also a heretic? Here Peter is directly connecting himself to those churches outside Rome which you say are heretical.
James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting. My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations; (James 1:1-2)
--James writes to Jewish believers that are scattered abroad--no doubt in Asia as well. Here is the half-brother Jesus. Is he writing to heretical churches? -
Who started the church. Many say it was Aquilla and Priscilla, though we can't be sure. But it wasn't Peter; and it wasn't Paul--that we know. They weren't there. -
Page 15 of 15