Mary's appearence at fatima

[Guest LadyC]

you're making mincemeat. i give up. :suspect:

[stevehut]

Weren't the scriptures they examined the OT only? I don't see an example of any NT believers examining the NT scriptures (the books that we know as the Bible). Humbly asked...

I have done some research into the history of the Bible, so I happen to know a little about this stuff.

Yes, their "Scripture" was the Old Testament. The NT wasn't written yet. But consider:

2 Peter 3:15-17

Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

Here, Peter compares the written words of Paul to "the other scriptures". In other words, Paul's letters are themselves, Scripture. So the Letter to the Romans (for instance) is equally as authoritative and inspired as (say) Leviticus. This was huge, to say that a living man's words were on a par with the Torah.

But the content of Paul's letters did not originate at the time that he wrote them down. They were a reflection of things that he had been teaching verbally for years. If the words of his pen are important, should we not also give credence to the words of his mouth?

OK, getting carried away now. I can do this all day.

Hope that helps.

[stevehut]

1- also, they checked the OT scriptures

2 1 John speaks of not checking the scriptures, but listening to the apostles and what they are teaching

1- Of course, the NT wasn't written yet

2- See my comments above. The verbal instructions of the apostles did, in time, end up on paper. And we do have access to those writings.

[ServingHim]

you're making mincemeat. i give up. :suspect:

do you throw you hands up for everyone who asks questions which test what you believe?

[ServingHim]

1- also, they checked the OT scriptures

2 1 John speaks of not checking the scriptures, but listening to the apostles and what they are teaching

1- Of course, the NT wasn't written yet

2- See my comments above. The verbal instructions of the apostles did, in time, end up on paper. And we do have access to those writings.

thanks steve for your patience. :il:

[Guest LadyC]

you're making mincemeat. i give up. :suspect:

do you throw you hands up for everyone who asks questions which test what you believe?

that was a challenge? i'm sorry serving him, i don't see it as a legitimate challenge. i never cared much for mincemeat, which is exactly what, IMO, you are making of scripture.

so yes, i am throwing my hands up and walking away. say what you will about it, or about me... i've tried.

[One Way]

The question really is, which is the final authority? Sacred tradition or scripture?

Paul tells the Corinthians, "I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you" (1 Cor. 11:2), and he commands the Thessalonians, "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thess. 2:15). He even goes so far as to order, "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us" (2 Thess. 3:6).

Okay, so please put forth your best evidence that Paul passed the traditinon of praying to Mary on to the Thessalonian and Corinthian believers.

[ServingHim]

I'm sorry you see that I make 'mincemeat' of scriptures, ladyc. I've yet to see you have a resounding discussion all backed up by scripture...only opinion of what you think...but that's okay. I like you, you're a nice enough person, and you're welcome to have your opinions. I truly have never understood that 'berean' concept, and was merely asking, and I thought that my question was legitimate...and apparently steve did as well, as he just answered my question, and with much intelligence and scriptural background as well. So I appreciate that he didn't think my question was unworthy. Have a blessed weekend. I pray you don't dismiss me merely because I am catholic?! :il:

[ServingHim]

Okay, so please put forth your best evidence that Paul passed the traditinon of praying to Mary on to the Thessalonian and Corinthian believers.

I'll do my best, but again, I don't believe that Scripture is the SOLE authority of our faith, so I know you won't like my answer, but here it is anyway, oneway. Our belief that the saints in heaven intercede for us is truly biblical! The Book of Revelation portrays the twenty-four elders as offering our prayers to God like incense (Revelation 5:8). T hose who sleep in Christ are still members of His Body, as are we. So we can ask them to pray for us the same way we would ask a fellow Christian on earth to pray for us. Mary is a saint in heaven, and she, too, is a member of the Body of Christ, so she, too, offers our prayers before the Throne of Grace. That is our belief...take it or leave it. You're not required to believe it nor am I trying to convince you to believe it. Again, our faith is a mystery. I can't prove it...I have faith that I TOO one day will be in heaven very much alive like the saints in heaven now...

[Guest LadyC]

I don't believe that Scripture is the SOLE authority of our faith,

THAT is why i throw my hand up. i can't argue scripture with you, which i HAVE, when you don't consider scripture to be the sole authority. the bible can't win against someone who refuses to believe that the tenets of catholic tradition aren't equally as authorative as God's word.

it has nothing to do with you or your questions being unworthy, nor have i ever dismissed you or claimed you were unworthy, though you don't seem to see it any other way. it simply has to do with the fact that YOU don't see scripture as being the FINAL authority, nor do you see that the catholic church and all its popes and priests are fallible. and against that, there is absolutely no point in my continuing to try and help you understand.

for the record, you accuse me of not backing things up with scripture, which is incorrect, and only voicing my opinions... well SH, you need to acknowledge that you don't back up your opinions with scripture... at least not nearly as often as you defend it with tradition. i've had less time to spend online lately, and so have often given explanation of scripture without posting a quote of the chapter and verse verbatim. but if you'll do as i've asked previously and run a quick search of the board, you will find i've provided scriptural backup for all of these questions repeatedly in other threads.