It wasn’t the 27 New Testament Books Timothy was reading, they didn’t exist.
The deposit was the Apostolic Oral Tradition which is guarded by The Holy Spirit and handed on in Truth.
Last edited:
-
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!
Hi. I'm a former Catholic and now non-denominational follower of Christ
- Thread starter Mur
- Start date
It wasn’t the 27 New Testament Books Timothy was reading, they didn’t exist.
The deposit was the Apostolic Oral Tradition which is guarded by The Holy Spirit and handed on in Truth.
Rubbish. Corruption of some Italian clergy is no excuse to break from the Church.
The binding and loosing Authority has been granted by Christ to the Church to forgive and retain sin, let alone adjudicate smaller matters of indulgences.
Unlike Protestant churches which have no power to bind or loose anything, The Catholic Church has real power granted by Christ.
Protestants crowned Luther their new Apostle, with new revelation, but Luther is not an Apostle’s arse, he is the one the Apostles warn about, a wolf that scatters the flock.
We see the priests of the old covenant make sin offerings, and prescribe their indulgences as well.
In the new covenant, we see Christ grant real power to His Apostolic Priesthood.
“Just as in the Old Testament the priest makes the leper clean or unclean, so in the New Testament the bishop and presbyter binds or looses not those who are innocent or guilty, but by reason of their office, when they have heard various kinds of sins, they know who is to be bound and who loosed.” Jerome, Commentary on Matthew, 3:16,19 (A.D. 398).
“Father who knowest the hearts of all grant upon this Thy servant whom Thou hast chosen for the episcopate to feed Thy holy flock and serve as Thine high priest, that he may minister blamelessly by night and day, that he may unceasingly behold and appropriate Thy countenance and offer to Thee the gifts of Thy holy Church. And that by the high priestly Spirit he may have authority to forgive sins…” Hippolytus, Apostolic Tradition, 3 (A.D. 215).
“The Pontifex Maximus–that is, the bishop of bishops–issues an edict: ‘I remit, to such as have discharged (the requirements of) repentance, the sins both of adultery and of fornication.'” Tertullian, Modesty, 1 (A.D. 220).
“Moreover, how much are they both greater in faith and better in their fear, who, although bound by no crime of sacrifice to idols or of certificate, yet, since they have even thought of such things, with grief and simplicity confess this very thing to God’s priests, and make the conscientious avowal, put off from them the load of their minds, and seek out the salutary medicine even for slight and moderate wounds, knowing that it is written, ‘God is not mocked.’ God cannot be mocked, nor deceived, nor deluded by any deceptive cunning. Yea, he sins the more, who, thinking that God is like man, believes that he evades the penalty of his crime if he has not openly admitted his crime…I entreat you, beloved brethren, that each one should confess his own sin, while he who has sinned is still in this world, while his confession may be received, while the satisfaction and remission made by the priests are pleasing to the Lord?” Cyprian, To the Lapsed, 28-29 (A.D. 251).
“It is necessary to confess our sins to those whom the dispensation of God’s mysteries is entrusted.” Basil, Rule Briefly Treated, 288 (A.D. 374).
“The Church holds fast its obedience on either side, by both retaining and remitting sin; heresy is on the one side cruel, and on the other disobedient; wishes to bind what it will not loosen, and will not loosen what it has bound, whereby it condemns itself by its own sentence. For the Lord willed that the power of binding and of loosing should be alike, and sanctioned each by a similar condition…Each is allowed to the Church, neither to heresy, for this power has been entrusted to priests alone. Rightly, therefore, does the Church claim it, which has true priests; heresy, which has not the priests of God, cannot claim it. And by not claiming this power heresy pronounces its own sentence, that not possessing priests it cannot claim priestly power. And so in their shameless obstinacy a shamefaced acknowledgment meets our view. Consider, too, the point that he who has received the Holy Ghost has also received the power of forgiving and of retaining sin. For thus it is written: ‘Receive the Holy Spirit: whosesoever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven unto them, and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained.’ So, then, he who has not received power to forgive sins has not received the Holy Spirit. The office of the priest is a gift of the Holy Spirit, and His right it is specially to forgive and to retain sins. How, then, can they claim His gift who distrust His power and His right?” Ambrose, Concerning Repentance, I:7-8 (A.D. 388).
Last edited:
The greatest preacher of the Early Church John Chrysostom tells us the power a priest possesses. I am talking regarding the forgiveness of sin itself, the lesser consideration is indulgences which is also their judgment.
“Priests have received a power which God has given neither to angels nor to archangels. It was said to them: ‘Whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose, shall be loosed.’ Temporal rulers have indeed the power of binding; but they can only bind the body. Priests, in contrast, can bind with a bond which pertains to the soul itself and transcends the very heavens. Did [God] not give them all the powers of heaven? ‘Whose sins you shall forgive,’ he says, ‘they are forgiven them; whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.’ What greater power is there than this? The Father has given all judgment to the Son. And now I see the Son placing all this power in the hands of men [Matt. 10:40; John 20:21–23]. They are raised to this dignity as if they were already gathered up to heaven” (The Priesthood 3:5 [A.D. 387]). John Chrysostom.
I guess the Catholics don't have access to the Throne of God as we do.
"Truly, I say to you, in the new world, when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
Jesus gave the Apostles Judgement over the people God, and they judge in their successors.
This is why we look to the Apostolic Church Jesus founded, and follow the Apostolic Judgement. Jesus established them as judges
No Cathode, I'm pretty sure the Catholic people are kept in the dark!
Being made dependent on men rather than God!
They're finding the truth and leaving in droves.
The first Bible aloners rejected the Apostolic Judges Jesus established.
They took the Bible and made themselves judges of it, human founded judges interpreting countless human interpretations and conflicting doctrines of scripture.
They preferred the traditions of men over the Apostolic Tradition handed down from the beginning in the Catholic Church.
They could not endure the sound doctrine of the Apostles interpretation of Scripture and scattered into many traditions of men, interpreting every wind of doctrine from scripture.
They rejected the Apostolic Shepherds Jesus appointed and scattered following their own noses.
Last edited:
Well you just go ahead with that Idea, meanwhile it's getting less crowded at Mass for you.
atpollard
Well-Known Member
When the Church tries to assassinate you while under a writ of safe passage, (rather than reform its corruption) it leaves few options. Luther and the Germans broke off from Rome to survive. Historically, we “rebaptizers” were just murdered by the Church for believing that Jesus and the Apostles meant what they said.
Not dying seems a pretty good reason for a schism.
37818
Well-Known Member
And in a time when Paul wasn't yet a Christian believer then either. And hadn't written anything regarding any oral teaching to Timothy either.
The Church didn’t try to assassinate Luther
“The Elector then protected Luther from the Pope's enforcement of the edict by faking a highway attack on Luther's way back to Wittenberg, abducting and then hiding him for several years at Wartburg Castle after the Diet of Worms.
Luther's disappearance during his return to Wittenberg was planned by Frederick III, who had him intercepted on his way home in the forest near Wittenberg by masked horsemen impersonating highway robbers. They escorted Luther to the security of the Wartburg Castle at Eisenach, where he remained desguised as "Junker Jörg". “ Wikipedia
No, Michael Sattler was executed by the Austrian authorities after it was established at a trial that he was a heretic. Heresies were dangerous in those times because societies were not pluralistic like they are today. Civil authorities were rightly terrified of heresies, because of the mass death and destruction they brought. Which is what Luther brought, the deaths of 130,000 Catholic men, women and children in one year, with no nice trial, and destruction of Churches, monasteries and convents.
Spain saw the horror and violence of the Protestant rebellions and established the Inquisition to counter Protestant violence spreading to Spain.
Protestants were the violent ones, like religious antifa.
This is proven true when Anabaptists began a violent theocracy lead by John of Leiden, expelling all Catholics from Münster, who declared himself king of new Jerusalem, and prophet. Killing all those that would not join his cause and doctrines. He took 16 wives one of which he beheaded in the street for not bowing to his authority. Promoting polygamy banning money and ownership of property.
He was the exact kind of evil heretic Catholics and civil authorities tried to prevent rising to power and it was Catholics that ended this evil Anabaptist before more died.
No it’s not. When people find themselves at odds with the Apostolic Church Jesus founded, it’s not the Church that’s wrong. Yes, there are corrupt people in the Church but that has been the same from the beginning.
Saint Francis reformed the Church in his time without violence, rebellion and political plotting. He used personal example.
Luther being proud, vulgar, intemperate, gluttonous and a drunkard, was destitute of virtue and example, and resorted to the tools of man and darkness.
Proves my point, the Word of God was preached, the Spoken Word of God is what Timothy and everyone else was getting. That was the good deposit Timothy was to guard by the help of The Holy Spirit.
Kinda proves “ Sola Scriptura “ wrong doesn’t it. There was no New Testament scripture.
‘For how should it be if the apostles themselves had not left us their writings? Would it not be necessary to follow the course of the tradition which they handed down to those whom they did commit the Churches?’ Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3, 4:1 (inter A.D. 180/199).
Timothy didn’t have 27 New Testament Books but he had the Gospel anyway. How could Timothy have the Gospel when no Gospels existed?
Apostolic Oral Tradition, this was the good deposit guarded by The Holy Spirit.
And Timothy’s preaching by The Holy Spirit brought the Gospel to others.
When Protestants took the Bible alone they rejected the Apostolic Oral Tradition that explains and interprets the Bible, thus they had to resort to human interpretations of the Bible, that’s why they scattered, the bible to them is a matter of each man’s subjective human opinion.
Hence all the conflicted division that is never settled, human opinion nullifies and contaminates the food.
It must have been something they interpreted.