[quote:1h26lu6s]while Ron will fight it tooth and nail.
Common Ron, admit it, you believe in tradition?
Do you really want us to prove it to [/quote:1h26lu6s]
Well you seem to have plenty of ammo and friends but you are right
about me fighing it = because I know the deceptions tha you guys will learn much to late to be of any good, how sad for you
as far as the traditions – you have nothing to prove to anyone as weathers said below – eveeryone here has that closed mind – come to think of it – the Bible tells me that you guys wouldn’t understand long before today….
benedict looking at your replies, well they are the usual type of answers that I expected, nothing new.
[quote:1h26lu6s]If you have no rebuttal, you have conceded my point. Sola Scriptura only stands when it is presumed. When one’s conclusion is one’s premise, the argument is a circle and invalid. [/quote:1h26lu6s]
What kind of reply is that? More rhetoric then substance. You nor has any Catholic been able to tell me what Isn’t covered sufficientlly by Scriptures. If there was then they’d have to be the one that could debate with God Himself the answers to the questions in the last three chapters of Job – and we know there isn’t one other person that can do that!
[quote:1h26lu6s]The Bible itself tells you what is missing: oral tradition. [/quote:1h26lu6s]
And whatever orally spoken was eventually written down or wasn’t necessary, or do you forget who is the real writers of Scriptures? (Hint – it isn’t any human)
[quote:1h26lu6s]Christians did not have a single word of New Testament for 20 years and did not have a Bible for nearly 400 years. They knew what was what because they listened to the Church. And as I mentioned before, it was through their knowledge of tradition that they discerned the books of the New Testament[/quote:1h26lu6s]
obviously you give man to much credit for doing what God did through the Holy Spirit
[quote:1h26lu6s]You take this completely out of context if you believe St. Paul is teaching the Corinthians to look only to Scripture. St. Paul is reproaching them for their pride and reminding them that God is Judge. [/quote:1h26lu6s]
It still applies regardless of your denials that Scriptures aren’t sufficent. Funny how you know about God being able to judge yet you don’t swallow your own pride. :rolleyes:
[quote:1h26lu6s] The word of God is not Scripture alone. The word of God is all of God’s revelation through the words of the prophets. Scripture consists of the portion of the word of God that was written down, not the entirety of it. [/quote:1h26lu6s]
Yes that is so soothing to listen to until you think about all of the deceptive “prophets” in business, seems like the Mormans and Jw’s claim the same thing today
[quote:1h26lu6s]Ron, you have demonstrated a very deficient understanding of Catholic doctrine since you have been here. You have also shown a wooden, literalistic understanding of Scripture that time and again has wrested Scripture from its proper context. Your website only shows contradiction between your faulty hermeneutic and your faulty understanding of tradition and Catholic teaching.[/quote:1h26lu6s]
Have you ever looked at my articles to know? Obviously not by his kind of rhetoric!
[quote:1h26lu6s]Tradition is profuse throughout the early Church Fathers and their writings. They are unmistakeably Catholic, not Protestant. [/quote:1h26lu6s]
I can definitely agree with you here and that ispart of your problem!
[quote:1h26lu6s] Catechism is no closer to the Book of Mormon than a Sunday school lesson. The Catechism is a compilation of the Church’s teaching provided for reference and catechesis (instruction in the faith). It is a textbook of the faith and not a source of addition. [/quote:1h26lu6s]
Excuse the pun but This “traditionally” is also correct and part of the problem – it contradicts much of Scriptures.
[quote:1h26lu6s]The succession of the Catholic Church from St. Peter and the Apostles to the bishops of today is unbroken and historical fact. Every Catholic bishop in the world can trace his ordination to an Apostle. These are the very men St. Paul charged Timothy to instruct and pass on the faith. [/quote:1h26lu6s]
Even through all of the prostitues and illegitiment popes! Yes that would be something to announce to the world – I’d run from that for sure! It isn’t something that I’d shout about. Are you bragging or complaining? Somehow it doesn’t seem to fit Paul’s instuctions very well.
then you go on a tipical “he said” “she said” tangent which doen’t prove a thing as Paul would point out in Galatians 1:6-9 or as I’d say “who cares?”
Are we to believe them over God’s word? Not hardly. And we get to this:
[quote:1h26lu6s]I can show all of the above in the Bible as well. But we are discussing oral tradition right now. [/quote:1h26lu6s]
You mean what your church says is Biblical doen’t you? A little twist here and there for good measure. I’ve seen enought to know that those aren’t Biblical evidences if the truth was known.
[quote:1h26lu6s] Just because they are absent from the Scriptures does not mean they were added. And just because they are absent from the Scriptures does not mean they contradict Scripture.
But the point is moot as the Church has not added any tradition. She has passed down only what she has received, which I have already started showing above. [/quote:1h26lu6s]
Nice sounding but so is the thought of ocean-front properties in Arizona
and about that realistic as well.
[quote:1h26lu6s]Every Catholic doctrine can be found in the Bible, be it explicitly, implicitly, or deductively. Scripture is materially sufficient for that reason. But Scripture is not formally sufficient and it states so explicitly several times, such as the admonishment to follow oral tradition in addition to Scripture or the acknowledgement that there is much Christ said and taught that was not recorded. [/quote:1h26lu6s]
1 -again you claim what isn’t truthful, only what your church claims.
2 – Scriptures are sufficient without your church’s okay, thank you, and
3 – Scriptures do tell us that not everything was written but don’t quit there because if you contine it tells us “what is written down is enough to KNOW how to believe and what we should know” No maybes about it!
[quote:1h26lu6s]You then go on to, I believe, argue against transubstantiation by citing verses dealing with ritual washing before a meal. That just makes no sense and it further shows me that you do not understand Catholic teaching nor do you interpret the Bible in context with a sound hermeneutic[/quote:1h26lu6s]
Funny it is very clear to anyone that KNOWS Scriptures what those verses say. read them over, I bet you can too!
I doubt it though…..
Bernardine says: [quote:1h26lu6s]
Wow, this is good stuff. Ron is getting picked apart here.[/quote:1h26lu6s]
Have a good laugh, but I don’t think so! I read the last chapter and I know who wins ” title=”Wink” />
Weathers — to you I just think that I luck out as well. Praise God!