Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: The authority of scripture

Expand Messages
  • Matt_8_17_70
    Hello there, Cross Bearer! Thank you for your very thorough responses to my questions. But there are a few things about what you wrote that I would like
    Message 1 of 13348 , Oct 1 6:55 AM
      Hello there, Cross Bearer!<br><br>Thank you for
      your very thorough responses to my questions. But
      there are a few things about what you wrote that I
      would like to make comments on, if you don't mind.
      :-)<br><br>First, I agree with you that God holds the Scriptures in
      very high esteem. So does the Catholic Church. We
      believe, like you, that the Scriptures are the inspired
      Word of God. So I think that both of us can agree that
      the Scriptures are very important in the life of a
      Christian and the life of the Church. But where we disagree
      is the question of whether or not the Scriptures are
      our only authority.<br><br>You wrote that "it is
      easier to twist something that is spoken and taught
      verbally than something that is written down for all to
      see." I disagree with that. Even Peter said that
      "untaught and unstable people twist [the Scriptures] to
      their own destruction" (2 Peter 3:18). In other words,
      people can twist ANYTHING (either written or verbal) to
      their own desires. And besides, Tradition is out there
      for all to see also, for it has be entrusted to the
      bishops.<br><br>You also said that "it is easier for us to apply the
      truth that lies within scripture to our hearts and
      lives if we can read it for ourselves rather than have
      someone tell it to us (ex. hearsay)." I also disagree
      with this. Does it matter HOW a person receives God's
      Word? Does it matter whether they read it themselves or
      hear it? Doesn't the Bible say that faith comes by
      HEARING the word of God? I'm just saying just having
      something written down doesn't mean that a person will
      apply it better to thier lives. Whether a person
      applies God's Word to their lives depends on their heart,
      and not on whether or not they read it or heard
      it.<br><br>And finally, you said, "it is easier to transmit with
      accuracy from one written manuscript to another rather
      than it is for a person to repeat with complete
      accuracy something he/she was taught orally." I also
      disagree with that (Are you surprised? LOL). We believe
      that the oral teachings of the Apostles have been
      protected and guarded by the Holy Spirit, in the same way
      that the written teachings of the Apostles (the NT
      Scriptures) have been. So for us, there is no doubt about the
      complete accuracy of Apostolic Tradition (both wirtten and
      oral), for we believe in a God who is powerful and
      faithful enough to guard His truth, and to protect His
      Church from going into error.<br><br>I will let the
      others in this club answer your comments concerning the
      OT & NT canons. I have read and studied some about
      how the canons were formed, etc., and I disagree with
      some of what you said, but there are others in tis
      club that are much more knowledgable about that area
      than I am. So I will let them answer, if you don't
      mind.<br><br>With His Love,<br>Matt
    • ehlsmith@worldnet.att.net
      I will. Thanks.
      Message 13348 of 13348 , Aug 6, 2011
        I will. Thanks.

        --- In catholicquestions@yahoogroups.com, Cecilieaux <cecilieaux@...> wrote:
        >
        > Check it out further. The work is part of a three-volume series (he's
        > working on the fourth).
        >
        > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 6:08 PM, <ehlsmith@...> wrote:
        >
        > > Thanks for asking, Cecilieaux. I don't think I have read Meier, or if I did
        > > it must have been back in the '90s when his first edition came out, and I
        > > wasn't keeping track of what I read. But your question made me re-read my
        > > source notes a little clearer the second time, and I see I made a very
        > > serious error. The book which impressed me most about non-biblical sources
        > > for the historic Jesus was not Bock's, but
        > > "Jesus Outside the New Testament : an introduction to the ancient evidence"
        > > / Robert E. Van Voorst. Grand Rapids, Mich. : W.B. Eerdmans, c2000.
        > >
        > > I apologize for my careless mistake.
        > >
        > > Peace,
        > > Ned
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In catholicquestions@yahoogroups.com, Cecilieaux <cecilieaux@>
        > > wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Thanks for your thoughts, Ned. Have you tried John Meier's "A Marginal
        > > Jew"?
        > > >
        > > > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:12 PM, <ehlsmith@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > > Dear Cecilieaux, Michael, and Nathan,
        > > > >
        > > > > Josephus's work not only mentioned Jesus, but also James, the brother
        > > of
        > > > > Jesus, who would have been a contemporary of Josephus when both
        > > supposedly
        > > > > lived in Jerusalem. The question about Josephus's work though, is
        > > whether
        > > > > parts were added by later Christian scribes. All copies existing today
        > > were
        > > > > produced by monks who made their copies after Christianity had spread
        > > > > throughout the Empire.
        > > > >
        > > > > One argument for the historical existence of an actual Jesus of
        > > Nazareth is
        > > > > based on the Nativity story. Many scholars consider the allegation that
        > > > > Joseph and Mary had to travel to Joseph's ancestral home an absurdity.
        > > Who
        > > > > would run a census that way? It would not only be extremely disruptive
        > > to
        > > > > the economy but would defeat some of the purposes of holding a census.
        > > > > Censuses are held to find out how many are living where, not primarily
        > > where
        > > > > did they come from?
        > > > >
        > > > > They see that story as just a plot device, to provide a Bethlehem birth
        > > to
        > > > > someone the public knew was from Galilee, since some scripture stated
        > > the
        > > > > messiah would come from Bethlehem. If Jesus was just a fiction there
        > > would
        > > > > be no need for such a plot device- just have him come from Bethlehem.
        > > It
        > > > > suggests that instead they were trying to tailor facts around an actual
        > > > > person who was from Nazareth.
        > > > >
        > > > > A book I recommend on the issue of non-biblical sources for Jesus is:
        > > > >
        > > > > Studying the historical Jesus : a guide to sources and methods /
        > > Darrell L.
        > > > > Bock.
        > > > > Bock, Darrell L.
        > > > > Grand Rapids, MI : Baker Academic ; Leicester, England : Apollos,
        > > c2002.
        > > > >
        > > > > Peace,
        > > > > Ned
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > --- In catholicquestions@yahoogroups.com, Cecilieaux <cecilieaux@>
        > > > > wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Oy,vey, M! That's a load of questions ... one by one, below.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 10:00 AM, michael quinlan <mpquin@> wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Dear C,
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Wasn't Jesus mentioned by a contemporary historian?
        > > The
        > > > > name
        > > > > > > escapes me.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > You're thinking of Josephus. That's second (or third) hand. There's
        > > ample
        > > > > > evidence that there was a movement that told the story of Jesus, from
        > > > > which
        > > > > > Josephus gets his opinion. What there isn't is independent
        > > > > (non-Christian)
        > > > > > first-hand evidence of Jesus himself.
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > > Also, wasn't he mentioned in conjunction with Pontius Pilate?
        > > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > There's evidence of Pontius Pilate, who apparently go his comeuppance
        > > a
        > > > > few
        > > > > > years after the crucifixion. Imperial auditors found he was pocketing
        > > > > more
        > > > > > than he should and he was removed. But, again, there is no evidence
        > > of PP
        > > > > > and Jesus.
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > > I vaguely recall that his place in history was verified outside the
        > > > > Bible.
        > > > > > > Within the Bible, wouldn't elements of the divine be expressed by
        > > > > miracles,
        > > > > > > or were miracles also associated with those that were chosen by
        > > God?
        > > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Moses and a whole rafter of prophets performed miracles, without ever
        > > > > > claiming divinity. I'll leave Mary for a separate message as it could
        > > > > start
        > > > > > a whole argu ... um gentlemanly debate.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > C
        > > > > >
        > > > > > On Aug 5, 2011, *Cecilieaux* <cecilieaux@> wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > That's the teaching, from post-apostolic times on and, yes, who
        > > knows. If
        > > > > > you say the creed with belief, as I do, I believe in the God from
        > > God,
        > > > > > Begotten not Made, etc., without necessarily knowing how this is
        > > > > possible.
        > > > > > That's why it's called faith.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > It's important to understand that Nicea-Constantinople defined these
        > > > > things
        > > > > > in the way that became the norm in the development of doctrine: the
        > > via
        > > > > > negativa. The councils didn't add something that was not there (the
        > > > > trinity
        > > > > > is implied, by name, in the command to baptize in Matthew). They
        > > merely
        > > > > shot
        > > > > > down theories that were, in their view, not consonant with apostolic
        > > > > > teaching.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Now if you want to debate what we know about the natures of Jesus the
        > > > > > Christ, I would begin by arguing that he wasn't human since he wasn't
        > > an
        > > > > > actual historical figure, which is sustained by the absence of
        > > > > independent
        > > > > > evidence that the man ever existed. So there goes the human Jesus, or
        > > > > Yeshua
        > > > > > bar Yosif. Arguably, also, that Jesus (per the gospels) did not
        > > affirm
        > > > > his
        > > > > > divinity in an indisputable way. The full idea began to be expressed
        > > in a
        > > > > > developed way sometime between the Pentecost event and the conversion
        > > of
        > > > > > Paul, the man who arguably invented Christianity as a religion
        > > separate
        > > > > from
        > > > > > Judaism.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Of course, neither the divine or human natures of Jesus the Christ
        > > were
        > > > > at
        > > > > > issue before post-apostolic times, when the Christians began to rub
        > > > > against
        > > > > > the Greek mystery religions and the Church became definitively and
        > > > > > irrevocably Gentilized, losing many Judaic understandings that might
        > > have
        > > > > > been helpful to keep in mind later.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Cheerio,
        > > > > > C
        > > > > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 7:36 PM, michael quinlan <mpquin@> wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Dear Nathan,
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > As it was explained to me as a child, "Jesus
        > > is
        > > > > 100%
        > > > > > > God, AND 100% Man." But, this adds up to 200% in my book. How can
        > > > > > > something be 100% one thing, and yet 100% something else?? I think
        > > > > this
        > > > > > > falls into the storage bin called "it's a mystery." Do I believe
        > > it?
        > > > > Of
        > > > > > > course! What is the harm in believing it? It does not affect our
        > > > > society.
        > > > > > > There are no 200% beings wandering around that I know of.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > God Bless
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > On Aug 4, 2011, *Nathan* <rdnuclearmed@> wrote:
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Very funny.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > I was asking if Jesus was divine? Is Jesus Christ, God?
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > God Bless
        > > > > > > Nathan
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Cecilieaux <cecilieaux@> wrote:
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >>
        > > > > > >>
        > > > > > >> How would we be able to tell between truly divine and falsely
        > > divine?
        > > > > > >>
        > > > > > >>
        > > > > > >> On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Nathan <rdnuclearmed@> wrote:
        > > > > > >>
        > > > > > >>>
        > > > > > >>>
        > > > > > >>> Just trying to stimulate conversation, I thought I'd ask: "Is
        > > Jesus
        > > > > > >>> Christ truly divine?"
        > > > > > >>>
        > > > > > >>>
        > > > > > >>> God Bless
        > > > > > >>> Nathan
        > > > > > >>>
        > > > > > >>>
        > > > > > >>>
        > > > > > >>>
        > > > > > >>
        > > > > > >>
        > > > > > >> --
        > > > > > >> Cecilieaux -- blogging at:
        > > > > > >> Cecilieaux! -- musings of a contrarian <
        > > > > http://cecilieaux.blogspot.com/>
        > > > > > >> Desde Yanquilandia <http://desdeyanquilandia.blogspot.com/>
        > > > > > >> Headline du Jour <http://headlinedujour.wordpress.com/>
        > > > > > >>
        > > > > > >>
        > > > > > >>
        > > > > > >>
        > > > > > >>
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > --
        > > > > > Cecilieaux -- blogging at:
        > > > > > Cecilieaux! -- musings of a contrarian <
        > > http://cecilieaux.blogspot.com/>
        > > > > > Desde Yanquilandia <http://desdeyanquilandia.blogspot.com/>
        > > > > > Headline du Jour <http://headlinedujour.wordpress.com/>
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > --
        > > > > > Cecilieaux -- blogging at:
        > > > > > Cecilieaux! -- musings of a contrarian <
        > > http://cecilieaux.blogspot.com/>
        > > > > > Desde Yanquilandia <http://desdeyanquilandia.blogspot.com/>
        > > > > > Headline du Jour <http://headlinedujour.wordpress.com/>
        > > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > ------------------------------------
        > > > >
        > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > --
        > > > Cecilieaux -- blogging at:
        > > > Cecilieaux! -- musings of a contrarian <http://cecilieaux.blogspot.com/>
        > > > Desde Yanquilandia <http://desdeyanquilandia.blogspot.com/>
        > > > Headline du Jour <http://headlinedujour.wordpress.com/>
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > ------------------------------------
        > >
        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        > --
        > Cecilieaux -- blogging at:
        > Cecilieaux! -- musings of a contrarian <http://cecilieaux.blogspot.com/>
        > Desde Yanquilandia <http://desdeyanquilandia.blogspot.com/>
        > Headline du Jour <http://headlinedujour.wordpress.com/>
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.