1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured The Mark is coming

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Cathode, Dec 18, 2022.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    16,631
    Likes Received:
    1,276
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I dare say an extra Biblical interpertation.
     
  2. Cathode

    Cathode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2021
    Messages:
    1,616
    Likes Received:
    193
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Not really. What Jesus established was a binding and loosing office on Peter, the other binding and loosing office was the Chair of Moses. Office/Seat/Chair means the same thing.
    In the biblical Greek “Moses kathedras“ , Or “ Chair of Moses “ or “Moses Seat “

    When the pope speaks ex cathedra, it means he is speaking from the Chair of Peter, ie Authoritively for the whole Church by God’s gift.

    Neither of them speak of their own accord when speaking from the Chair.

    Both have the binding and loosing Authority granted by God.
     
    #82 Cathode, Jan 12, 2023
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2023
  3. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    16,631
    Likes Received:
    1,276
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Interpertation. Biblical base - Scripture references. The extra Biblical is what ever is not found in Scripture. And it might even be true. If there is a problem, it is with what is not true.
     
  4. Silverhair

    Silverhair Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2020
    Messages:
    6,719
    Likes Received:
    514
    Faith:
    Baptist
    @Cathode I notice that you still refuse to deal with the glaring errors that are present in your theology [see post # 79]. Why is that? You keep trying to deflect the conversation, why? Could it be because you do not have biblical support for the traditions that your Popes have brought into your church?
     
  5. Cathode

    Cathode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2021
    Messages:
    1,616
    Likes Received:
    193
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    I can talk about those issues all day long, but you haven’t replied to what I explained on the Matthew Scripture you referred to.
    You seemed to be saying that Catholics misunderstanding this scripture, was the heart of the problem.
    Can we deal with this first, since you consider it fundamental.
    What do I misunderstand, honestly, I’d like to know dude.

    “The RCC seems to think that they hold the only authority that allows them to present the truth of scripture. This has been based on a misunderstanding of Mat 16: 18-19”
     
  6. Cathode

    Cathode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2021
    Messages:
    1,616
    Likes Received:
    193
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Try and step out and see it from a Catholic perspective, I totally understand Protestant perspectives as a mental exercise.

    A Catholic doesn’t follow his own interpretations of Scripture, it has always been forbidden, because it is so very dangerous.

    We can not twist the scriptures to our destruction unless we privately interpret them or follow someone else’s private interpretations.

    At first I thought Protestants were insanely brave privately interpreting scripture, but very shortly after I saw it as complete folly, like trying to jump the Grand Canyon on a motorbike.
    I started to think people attracted to private interpretation, may have thrill seeking tendencies. It was just a pet theory of mine for a long time.

    But then it dawned on me. Imagine being brought up a culture that privately interpreted Scripture all the time and every kid and his dog was privately interpreting from a young age.
    You’d think it was normal to have your own or mix and match of others private interpretations and settle into your own doctrinal nook.

    Truth didn’t matter, whatever each man came away with from the Bible is fine, being totally inured to ever having the objective truth of Scripture.
     
    #86 Cathode, Jan 13, 2023
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2023
  7. AustinC

    AustinC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2020
    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    1,458
    Faith:
    Baptist
    First, we "study to show ourselves approved." We read God's Word (a RC needs never read the Bible nor even hear the Mass in English. Just go mindlessly through the motions and trust in your wafer and wine to save you.) We observe, ask questions on our observation, interpret our questions, look at the interpretation of others (this can include RCC interpretation), and then apply what we learned. It's not done in isolation, without checking interpretation against the history of the saints who went before us. Like the Berean Church who questioned and tested the Apostle Paul's teaching against scripture, so we test the words of men against the words of God. (Do you dismiss the Berean Church as being wrong in their actions because they dated to question the Apostle?)

    I don't have a blanket disregard for the RCC. I know some believers in the RCC. They are born again, in spite of obstacles the RCC puts in front of them. In the catechism there is correct understanding. But, there is also very flawed, incorrect, understanding as well. How can I know? I can test the RCC catechism against God's word and see.

    Cathode, do you ever open up a Bible and read it? Are you afraid of reading the primary source and thus confine yourself to one secondary source? (Yes, the commentary's of the RCC are secondary sources, not primary. They are interpretations of the primary source.) Is your faith in Jesus or in the Roman Catholic Church?
     
  8. Cathode

    Cathode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2021
    Messages:
    1,616
    Likes Received:
    193
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    The Bereans accepted Paul’s preached Gospel, there was no written Gospel for them to check and reference only prefigurements in the OT.
    The Bereans accepted Apostolic Tradition preached by Paul.
    They were “ Scripture alone “

    It just seems like everyone is trying to recreate the Christianity from the text, and that’s not the Church talked about in the Bible.
    Jesus established an authoritive Apostolic Church to teach, He didn’t leave a bunch of scriptures and tell people to work it out themselves, that idea hasn’t worked out manifestly.

    Who in bible alone Protestantism has the true interpretation of Scripture? Take your time.

    We are allowed to read the Bible all we like, in fact an indulgence is granted for it.
    What we can’t do is formulate our doctrines from private interpretations of scripture.
     
  9. Silverhair

    Silverhair Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2020
    Messages:
    6,719
    Likes Received:
    514
    Faith:
    Baptist
    That is self explanatory. The RCC has no biblical authority as they want to exercise it.

    The French Roman Catholic llinois surveyed the writings of the church fathers to see what the early church said about Mat_16:18 {Peter the rock} did they say that this made him the Pope he found 17 citations from church fathers who agreed that Matthew when he says the rock it's referring to Peter so 17 citations that make Peter the rock now they did not say that Peter was the Pope most of them don't even talk about that because it historically didn't exist yet but they did say that the phrase the rock referred to Peter he found 16 citations that identify the rock as Christ so those are split 50-50 he found 8 that identified the rock as all of the disciples not just Peter but all the disciples and he found 44 citations that identified the rock as the confession that Jesus is the Christ the Son of the Living God so the favourite interpretation of the Church Fathers is that the rock is the confession of trusting Christ as God so 80% of the time the Church Fathers disagree with the Roman Catholic position.

    Eamon Duffy, a Catholic historian, says there is nothing directly approaching a papal Authority in the pages of the New Testament. Mat_16:18-19 was never interpreted by the 1st century Church in terms of claims to preeminence by a non-existent monarchical Bishop of Rome or even later by the Apostolic fathers.

    The Roman Catholic Church says that Matthew 16 has always been understood to make Peter the Pope.
    In 1870 Vatican 1 made this false claim:
    "We, for the the preservation, safe-keeping, and increase of the Catholic flock, with the approval of the Sacred Council, judge it to be necessary to propose, for the belief and acceptance of all the faithful, in accordance with the ancient and constant faith of the universal Church, the doctrine of the institution, perpetuity, and nature of the sacred Apostolic Primacy"

    So as you can see the foundation your RCC is built upon is at best shaky but more to the point is flat out wrong. What have you provided that supports your view? The RCC say that only they have the authority to rightly interpret the bible because Mat 16:18-19 gives them that authority. That is circular logic and that is aside from the fact it is self-serving to say the least.

    RCC doctrine
    “It is clear therefore that, in the supremely wise arrangement of God, sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church are so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others. Working together, each in its own way, under the action of the one Holy Spirit, they all contribute effectively to the salvation of souls.”

    The Bible
    Gal 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!
    Eph 1:13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise,

    Now which do you think we should believe, the bible or the RCC
     
  10. Silverhair

    Silverhair Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2020
    Messages:
    6,719
    Likes Received:
    514
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Still not will to answer the question are you. Where is the biblical support for the RCC ideas. The fact that you admit that you do not even trust your God given ability to read and understand scripture says a great deal. You are trusting in other men to tell you what to believe but the question becomes how do you know if they are correct as they are only men just like you.
     
  11. AustinC

    AustinC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2020
    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    1,458
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The Bereans had scrolls of the Old Testament. Paul always argued from the scripture of the Old Covenant, and the Bereans constantly checked God's word to verify and debate Paul's comments. They did not take Paul's word for it. God compliments the Bereans.
    Do you dare to be a Berean, Cathode? Do you dare call for the RCC to prove itself from scripture alone?

    No recreation! Reform!!! This is the call whenever leadership strays from God's word and creates myths and adds burdens to the church members. Rome Acts exactly like the scribes and Pharisees that added huge burdens upon Israel that God has not given. You refuse to accept this reality.

    Jesus left us 39 Old Covenant books and 27 New Covenant books for us to read and observe, question, interpret, and apply. God has left us a legacy (Hebrews 11 and Hebrews 12) that are our witnesses to the walk of faith. All whom God has chosen, by grace alone, will persevere in faith to the end.

    God has the true interpretation and God alone. Not any man. Not any institution. Only God. This is why we study God's word rather than the secondary writings of fallible men. Let that sink in.

    Indulgences are not in the Bible. Nowhere does God ever grant an indulgence to reduce time in purgatory by you reading the Bible. Here you make an assertion that is extra-biblical. You place your faith, not in God, but in a man-made institutionary secondary source. You do what the Pharisees did. You take from a commentary and force it up on yourself.

    Are you not listening to me?
    We...
    Observe
    Question
    Interpret
    Check our interpretation with the many number of saints that came before us to see what they said. If none agree with us, we are very likely wrong.
    Apply to our lives

    Cathode, do you do this? Do you labor and wrestle with God's word? Or are you lazy, trusting the secondary commentary of one group of self-proclaimed elites without asking if they got it wrong?
    Cathode, you answer to God, alone. The RCC won't be there to advocate for you before the throne of God. Will you be able to come boldly before the throne of grace, knowing your high priest is eternally advocating for you against the deserved wrath of God the Father because of your sins? Can you stand in confidence before the throne of God, knowing by faith that you are 100% justified by faith in the shed blood of Christ, once and for all, for your sins?
    Can you do that? Or are you desperately trusting in the RCC as your advocate? If it's the RCC, then you are doomed.
     
  12. Cathode

    Cathode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2021
    Messages:
    1,616
    Likes Received:
    193
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian

    Well there’s a problem. Who am I to decide what scripture means, they were preaching the Gospel before it was even written.
    Did you even read the Warning label?
    Read closely.
    Gal 1:8 “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!“

    We are meant to follow the preaching of the Apostolic Church.

    The other glaring problem, is we only receive bible because of the Catholic Church, it’s their book.
    The Catholic Church preserved all the scriptures from the time of the Apostles, and determined the first Bible itself, both old and new testaments.
     
  13. Cathode

    Cathode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2021
    Messages:
    1,616
    Likes Received:
    193
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    It might seem normal for you guys to just interpret the Bible for yourselves, but for me, it’s the most dangerous thing in the universe, more dangerous than a black hole even. Seriously.

    The reason is, I’m fallible, so any interpretation I came up with will have errors in it. If my interpretation is fallible, what parts of it are errors, could be on something essential to salvation, how would I know for sure.

    I think Jesus left his sheep in the hands of Apostolic shepherds to lead them through and read the true pastures. A Sheep merely needs to listen to the shepherd and get fat on the pasture set before it. Not earn a PhD in agriculture before it knows what to do, it’s a Sheep for goodness sake.

    To defy the Apostolic Shepherds, I’d have to become a Hegoat, rebellious, proud , wilful and chest out leading others astray. And there is so much ego in Hegoats.

    I’ve mustered Sheep and wild goats. The first thing we do mustering goats, is to shoot the Billy, because you can’t control the herd with him in there. I use a marlin 44 mag carbine with 180 grn flat soft point hot loads on them, never liked the hegoats, scripture really clicks when you see hegoats behaviour in the wild.

    Hegoats lead into high dangerous rocky cliffs where the thistles grow, all following their own noses.
    There is countless herds of Hegoats out there these days, all following their own noses on strange interpretations of scripture and weird doctrines from them.
    Ever heard the “ Jesus is a spaceman “ interpretation, that’s what private interpretation leads to.

    Jesus said “ My Sheep know my voice “, “ He who listens to you, listens to me “


    “And he says to him again after the resurrection, ‘Feed my sheep.’ It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church’s) oneness. No doubt the others were all that Peter was, but a primacy is given to Peter, and it is (thus) made clear that there is but one flock which is to be fed by all the apostles in common accord. If a man does not hold fast to this oneness of Peter, does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church? This unity firmly should we hold and maintain, especially we bishops, presiding in the Church, in order that we may approve the episcopate itself to be the one and undivided.” Cyprian, The Unity of the Church, 4-5 (A.D. 251-256).
     
    #93 Cathode, Jan 14, 2023
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2023
  14. Cathode

    Cathode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2021
    Messages:
    1,616
    Likes Received:
    193
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    The thing about Sheep is they are just barely smart enough to realise they are stupid.
    It gives them a humility, docility and trust to know that they don’t know anything by themselves. The only things they know are what the Shepherds teach them.

    A great deal has been written and said about the Good Shepherd, but not much emphasis has been given to being the Good and ideal Sheep I reckon.

    I remember one time a windmill broke down and we had to move the sheep to the next mill for water. The day was already very hot but it was going hit over 50 C, all of them would have died if we didn’t move them. We had to desperately push them hard, because they were stopping under any shrub they could for shade, if they stayed there they would have all died.We had to constantly ride up on the bikes and kick them on, even crossing stretch of salt lake.
    I felt the sun’s heat burn through my hat and shirt towards the end there.
    They couldn’t do it on their own.

    This new myth of the self shepherding sheep doesn’t survive scripture or lived experience. Jesus didn’t like the sheep without a shepherd idea, he thought it was a garbage idea.

    The Good Shepherd left His sheep with approved dudes, and the dudes those dudes approved through the laying on of hands. Not just any dude off the street.

    Sheep weren’t meant to interpret the pasture for themselves, that was always the Shepherds job. Sheep’s job was to eat the pasture.
    I’ve been ruminating on this subject for quite some time now, I’m fairly convinced.
     
    #94 Cathode, Jan 14, 2023
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2023
  15. Cathode

    Cathode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2021
    Messages:
    1,616
    Likes Received:
    193
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    We know God has the true interpretation of scripture, but its no good to us if we don’t have the true interpretation of Scripture.
    If the Truth sets us free, then we need the true interpretation of scripture, not fallible opinions of scripture.

    Stop and look at all the conflicted “ bible alone “ denominations out there dude.

    Is there a recurring theme, a giant elephant in the room people are trying to ignore?

    They have made Scripture the source of all their divisions, each interprets their own doctrines from Scripture, they are all “ bible alone “. Studying hard, yet they part company with each other over conflicting interpretation of Scripture forming new denominations on them.

    Is that “ Biblical truth “.

    The Church in the bible didn’t behave like that, the Christians in scripture weren’t “ bible alone “. People certainly could not interpret what they wanted from scripture, they had Apostolic leaders and teachers.

    So I ask where in bible alone Protestantism is the true interpretation of Scripture ?

    Each of these denominations are traditions of men, founded on each’s fallible interpretations of Scripture.

    I could start a new denomination on my interpretation of scripture. The Cathodian Church and I self appointed Elder Cathode could preach my fallible spin on Scripture.
    But because I taught my fallible interpretations, I will at some stage in my illustrious career have deceived people in wrong doctrines and earned hard judgement from God.

    Catholics follow the ancient Apostolic interpretation of scripture, we don’t try to reinvent Christianity from our fallible, modern and ignorant opinion of the text.

    ‘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

    See how following one ancient Apostolic interpretation of scripture avoids the incoherent mess of private interpretation and traditions of men.
     
  16. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,818
    Likes Received:
    2,106
    Faith:
    Baptist
    One thing you can depend on; if there is no pasture in a field, and the dude/shepherd can't be bothered to provide it, it won't be long before the sheep find a way through the hedge and go into the field next door. That's what happened at the Reformation and what is still going on today in Central and South America. It is also going on in Britain today, where the major denominations, including the Church of Rome, are falling off a cliff, but Bible-believing congregations are steadily increasing.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,818
    Likes Received:
    2,106
    Faith:
    Baptist
    there is an elephant in the room which you are trying to ignore; namely that the Roman Catholic Church is itself conflicted. There are different interpretations of RC doctrines all over the place, and most Roman Catholics I have met can't stand Pope Francis.
    In fact, the 1st Century churches were all over the place! Just read Galatians and 1 Corinthians. People were interpreting Scripture for themselves, and the teaching coming out of Jerusalem was very often false (Acts of the Apostles 15:1; 21:20; Galatians 2:11-14. Note the temporary split between Paul and Peter described there). Paul was rushing about fire-fighting for much of his life.
    Wherever the Bible is taught truly, there you will find the true Church. The unity of the churches is not organizational but spiritual. Disagreements on secondary matters do not affect that unity (Romans 14:1-23). I have attended many Christian conferences where I have been blessed by Christian brothers of many different churches and denominations. It is when churches move away from the Bible, as the Church of Rome has done, that problems begin.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Silverhair

    Silverhair Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2020
    Messages:
    6,719
    Likes Received:
    514
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Do you not understand what Gal 1:8 is saying? That verse destroys the RCC.

    Gal 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.

    “It is clear therefore that, in the supremely wise arrangement of God, sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church are so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others. Working together, each in its own way, under the action of the one Holy Spirit, they all contribute effectively to the salvation of souls.” (CCC 95)

    1Co 15:1 Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand,
    1Co 15:2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.
    1Co 15:3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
    1Co 15:4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures,

    Notice what Paul does not add to the gospel message {sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium of the Church}. The RCC is preaching another gospel another means of salvation. They are to be accursed / anathema.

    The object of the person’s faith is not just Christ but also the RCC.
    … faith in the forgiveness of sins not only with faith in the Holy Spirit, but also with faith in the Church. (CCC 976)

    The RCC has assumed authority for itself that it does not have. It has set itself up as having authority over even the word of God as they claim they are the only ones that can correctly interpret it. Sounds like circular reasoning to me.
     
  19. AustinC

    AustinC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2020
    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    1,458
    Faith:
    Baptist
    All humans are fallible, Cathode. That's the point. Your reliance upon fallible men in the RCC should cause you fear.
    I have no problem with reading and observing scripture, then checking my interpretation against the equally fallible saints of old to see how they interpret the passage.
    My point is we should look at more than just one person's view. That means we look at others views, not just the RCC view.
    Martin Luther made observation. He checked it against the official RCC position. He also checked it against other monks within the Augustinian order. Here's a newsflash: Martin Luther was not the first Monk to read scripture and see God teaching justification by grace alone in the letter to the Romans. There were many monks, living south of Rome who also held to justification by faith alone. It wasn't until the Council of Trent that the RCC rulers decided on an official doctrine of justification by faith plus works. Note, however, that the Pope stacked the deck at Trent to keep the voice of the Augustinian monks from being heard. He stacked it so that only he and his cronies had a say. Cathode, God honors our efforts to know what God thinks and to acknowledge that there are wolves in the church we need to be discerning of. Check the RCC interpretation, but also check others to see if there is difference and why there is difference. Here's my personal opinion, which may encourage you: When I check the RCC commentary on various Bible passages, I often find agreement with my observation and the observation of other Protestant scholars. We often agree. Isn't that great! That means the agreement is truly from God. It's the areas of disagreement where we have to work and see how and why there is a difference and what Greek word and phrase makes human interpretation different. We are called to wrestle, not to crawl into a corner and fear that we are somehow going to be smitten by God because we want to know God personally. I encourage you to check the saints as a whole. Ask yourself why anyone would be afraid of you reading the Bible, observing, questioning and interpreting. Why do they want you to remain ignorant and living in fear?
     
  20. Cathode

    Cathode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2021
    Messages:
    1,616
    Likes Received:
    193
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    2 Peter 3:16, “as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.”

    The Apostles were Infallible in their teaching and writings.

    All Catholics did is preserve those writings and the same interpretation of them, in Apostolic Tradition.

    Apostolic Tradition is the Apostles interpretation of Scripture handed down.

    Outside the ancient Apostles understanding of scripture is error, and in many cases spiritually fatal error.

    Read all the Church Fathers, they were pathological about maintaining the same Apostolic understanding of Scripture and rejected any new interpretations of scripture.

    Protestantism didn’t just reject the ancient Apostles interpretation of scripture they quickly rejected each other’s interpretations of scripture.

    Through circumstance, history and heresy, Protestants today have been robbed of the Apostles interpretation of scripture.
    Apostolic Tradition seems foreign, strange and pagan even, because private interpreters have poisoned them against the Fathers, and stolen their inheritance.

    But for all the divine words, there is no need of allegory to grasp the meaning; what is necessary is study and understanding to know the meaning of each statement. We must have recourse to tradition, for all cannot be received from the divine Scriptures. That is why the holy Apostles handed down certain things in writings but others by traditions. As Paul said:” Just as I handed them on to you.”‘ Ephiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 61, 6 (A.D. 377).

    “In answer to the objection that the doxology in the form ‘with the Spirit’ has no written authority, we maintain that if there is not other instance of that which is unwritten, then this must not be received. But if the great number of our mysteries are admitted into our constitution without written authority, then, in company with many others, let us receive this one. For I hold it apostolic to abide by the unwritten traditions. ‘I praise you,’ it is said, ‘that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances as I have delivered them to you;’ and ‘Hold fast the traditions which ye have been taught whether by word, or our Epistle.’ One of these traditions is the practice which is now before us, which they who ordained from the beginning, rooted firmly in the churches, delivering it to their successors, and its use through long custom advances pace by pace with time.” Basil, Holy Spirit 71 (c. A.D. 370).
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...