What is dogma?

[theefaith]

Holy Spirit leads (Jn 16:13) Peter and the apostles and their successors into all truth without error, (Jn 8:32) then they are to teach and instruct the people (matt 28:19 Lk 1:4 Lk 10:16 acts 8:30-31) in obedience to thee faith (rom 1:5 acts 2:42)

 

[Philip James]

I only accept Apostolic tradition, that happened to get written down in its entirety, prior to the 2nd century.

Hello DNB,

What writings are part of this entirety? And how do you know it was all written down in those particular writings?

If you are referring to the New Testament as collated by the Catholic Church, how can it possibly br read, but through the Living Tradition of the Church?

Do you think you can take our notes and reverse engineer the Church?

By what authority would one do such a thing?

Peace be with you!

 

[DNB]

Why does it have to be in the Bible for you? Lk 10:16 hear the apostles
Acts 2:42 apostles doctrine not Bible alone
It is in the Bible rev 12:1

Christian dogma ended after the Apostolic age - 1st century.

 

[DNB]

Hello DNB,

What writings are part of this entirety? And how do you know it was all written down in those particular writings?

If you are referring to the New Testament as collated by the Catholic Church, how can it possibly br read, but through the Living Tradition of the Church?

Do you think you can take our notes and reverse engineer the Church?

By what authority would one do such a thing?

Peace be with you!

Hi PJ, first of all, I don't subscribe to the notion that there is a bona-fide Christian entity, called the Catholic Church (universal or united), by either appellation or principle. Thus, any Bible compilations either assembled, or interpreted, by such a self-regulated committee, holds absolutely no authority in my eyes.

But, what I do adhere to as authoritative, are the vestiges (copies) of the autographs that were written by bona-fide apostles, who had either seen Christ (pre or post resurrection) or who had spoken with those who had (Luke). For, outside of that, I have no quantifiable means to verify what another man might claim to be veritable Christian truth, as far as him speaking under the auspices of God is concerned.

It seems that the only measure of authenticity, would be to compare one's assertion with Scripture and wisdom. And as far as both those parameters are concerned, I feel that most of Roman Catholic dogma is anti-Scriptural, all the ecumenical councils were farcical, in both proceedings and creed. Augustine, Aquinas, Lutheranism, Anglicanism, Reformed Theology, Westminster Confession, Articles of Remonstrance, ...all had their extremely profound shortcomings and heresies, revealing the fact that there have never been a viable and incontestable extension or modification, to what was written by inspired men (proven by miraculous power and authority), prior to the 2nd century.

 

[Philip James]

, I have no quantifiable means to verify what another man might claim to be veritable Christian truth, as far as him speaking under the auspices of God is concerned.

Do you not? Do you not have the 2000 year old living witness of the Church in Rome, the Church in Alexandria and the Church in Constantinople?

Is it so hard to humble onself and submit to the correction of our brethren?

The Truth does not change..

Peace!

 

[DNB]

Do you not? Do you not have the 2000 year old living witness of the Church in Rome, the Church in Alexandria and the Church in Constantinople?

Is it so hard to humble onself and submit to the correction of our brethren?

The Truth does not change..

Peace!

But, I'm sorry PJ, are you prepared to give them that much authority, simply because they have apprehended the authority? By what standard? Do you not test the Spirit, do you not hold every man accountable to scrutiny? I have absolutely no grounds to give these men of antiquity, any credit whatsoever, besides what compares with Scripture, pre 2nd century. Is this some sort of 'blind' faith that you are employing, or is there some rationale behind your unconditional adherence?

 

[Marymog]

You continuously evade the point, continuously. No one is arguing against tradition, per se, but which tradition, and from whom. I only accept Apostolic tradition, that happened to get written down in its entirety, prior to the 2nd century.
You are espousing tradition from elsewhere. I am questioning the guidelines that you use? Who do you know that is divinely inspired, that is a true prophet, that has been given authority to add to the traditions of the 1st century Apostles? You keep evading the critical question.

I answered you already.

Thank you for your time.

 

[Marymog]

We have the true Gospel, Rome does not!

Who is “we”? The adherents to Calvinism? Lutherans? Mormons? Baptists? Methodist? The people who hold church service in their home?

Keeping it real...Mary

 

[Marymog]

Did the thief have the water?

I don’t know. Scripture does not say if he was or was not baptized prior to his crucifixion.

Salvation is obtained by first believing....just like Scripture says....and then baptism....just like Scripture says...and then works....Just like Scripture says.

If one is killed (as in the thief’s case) before he can obtain the last two he is saved by grace.

Bible study Mary

 

[APAK]

There is faith that belongs to the image worshipers suited for their churches or congregation, both made by the hands of men. And then there is faith that belongs to worshipers of Christ and his church, both made by the hands of the Father.

I choose the latter....

 

[Philip James]

But, I'm sorry PJ, are you prepared to give them that much authority, simply because they have apprehended the authority?

Hi DNB,
Those are good questions!
I am prepared to answer as best I can but I wish timi start here..

Authority! Who has it? How is received? How is it given? What has the Church everywhere taught about these things??

I know, that all authority comes from God.

I know, that I have authority (and responsibilty for!) Over my 6 children that God has blessed me with (all fathers are priests) .

I know that all 2000 year old apostolic communities recognize the authority of their bishop who received that authoriry from an apostle who received that authority from Christ..

And that that authority is given, by the Holy Spirit, through the imposition of the hands of other bishops...

Consider Titus, who was made bishop of Crete by the Apostle, St. Paul. His successors are still recognized today..

The apostle John says:

They went out from us, but they were not really of our number; if they had been, they would have remained with us. Their desertion shows that none of them was of our number.

If we are not members of John's community, where are we?

Peace!

 

[DNB]

I know that all 2000 year old apostolic communities recognize the authority of their bishop who received that authority from an apostle who received that authority from Christ..
And that that authority is given, by the Holy Spirit, through the imposition of the hands of other bishops...
Consider Titus, who was made bishop of Crete by the Apostle, St. Paul. His successors are still recognized today..

Yes, these are good points also. But, again, this protocol and transferring of authority was done under the auspices of Spirited men. All of the apostles of the early Church had performed miracles, and were endowed with many gifts of the Spirit. These men proved their approbation from God with signs and wonders, and even used this argument to defend themselves against the Judaizers or false prophets who were slandering their credibility. There were wolves among the sheep, Jesus and Paul warned in advance, and John and Paul spoke of them and their wiles.
PJ, you still haven't defined your criteria for what qualifies a current day, authentic Apostle. Yes, in the past, laying on of hands certified the recipient's authority, as they received the Holy Ghost. Have you seen such an event with the same impact, today?

They went out from us, but they were not really of our number; if they had been, they would have remained with us. Their desertion shows that none of them was of our number.
If we are not members of John's community, where are we?

Not remaining in the Church is not the only sign of a false believer. Even the countless famous theologians throughout the centuries did not claim such authority and power, and were clearly infallible.
If I witnessed today, what Timothy or Titus did in their time, I would believe that such a person was endowed with knowledge and supernatural power in order to gain converts, but not establish new doctrine or revelation. For even Timothy and Titus did not offer new Dogma, Paul exhorted them to hold fast to what they were taught, and to not deviate or let others corrupt or alter the 'tradition' that, at the time, was handed down orally or by letter.

 

[theefaith]

Christian dogma ended after the Apostolic age - 1st century.

Thee faith eph 4:5 Jude 1:3
Thee faith is revealed by Christ in fullness to the apostles dogma is simply declaring this revelation to the people

 

[amadeus]

Who is “we”? The adherents to Calvinism? Lutherans? Mormons? Baptists? Methodist? The people who hold church service in their home?

Keeping it real...Mary

Very good question! Who has it indeed? God does... and to whom then is it available? Perhaps to each one who is really seeking first His kingdom and His righteousness!

"But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you." Matt 6:33

 

[Philip James]

If I witnessed today, what Timothy or Titus did in their time, I would believe that such a person was endowed with knowledge and supernatural power in order to gain converts, but not establish new doctrine or revelation. For even Timothy and Titus did not offer new Dogma, Paul exhorted them to hold fast to what they were taught, and to not deviate or let others corrupt or alter the 'tradition' that, at the time, was handed down orally or by letter.

Hi DNB,

We have both raised a lot of questions, and I pray we have a fruitful discussion addressing these questions,
But, I believe, we have here a point of agreement that we can build on with these discussions..

I beliive and affirm, that the public revelation of God, was finished with the death of the last Apostle. (I know we need to define Apostle, but for now, I mean the 14 identified as such in the NT)

And that the full 'deposit of faith' given to the Apostles, by GOD Himself, is contained therein.

Would you agree?

I ask, because that may make our discussion easier. For there is the Tradition of the Apostles, that we have received aand passsd down..
And there is private revelations and devotions, that whole fuitful, are not binding on the Faithful. (Saying the rosary or the chaplet of Divine Mercy for example)

Peace be with you!

P.s i apologize if my responses are delayed, and if I seem to be brief or have missed a point or question you are making, please feel free to bring my attention back to them!

 

[DNB]

Thee faith eph 4:5 Jude 1:3
Thee faith is revealed by Christ in fullness to the apostles dogma is simply declaring this revelation to the people

Well, well, well, you're own quote indicts you. You are wrong, Dogma are the established and unalterable precepts of the Church. And, they were given 'once, and for all' to the original Apostles. Go ahead, even ask Jude.

 

[DNB]

1. I believe and affirm, that the public revelation of God, was finished with the death of the last Apostle.
2. (I know we need to define Apostle, but for now, I mean the 14 identified as such in the NT)
3. And that the full 'deposit of faith' given to the Apostles, by GOD Himself, is contained therein.

I agree with all the above.

1. For there is the Tradition of the Apostles, that we have received and passed down.
2. And there is private revelations and devotions, that whole fruitful, are not binding on the Faithful.
3. (Saying the rosary or the chaplet of Divine Mercy for example)

I agree with both #1 & #2, but not #3.
Although, like you said, #3 is in the realm of non-salvific, or not a tenet that must be adhered to by all Christians, I frown upon both these practices. For, I feel that they offer no edification, I do not believe in apparitions of Biblical Characters, or the personal need to have a material item in one's hand when praying or fellowshipping with God or man.
But, this was not your point as much, I believe? But merely that there are practices within certain Churches that are permissible, but are not binding on the whole congregation, community, or Christendom, that may have been handed down by tradition?

P.s i apologize if my responses are delayed, and if I seem to be brief or have missed a point or question you are making, please feel free to bring my attention back to them!

No need to apologize at all, I expect that being a global forum, that we are all on different time zones and personal agendas. And, yes, we all overlook certain points in the discussion, so again, no problem whatsoever. Thanks for the consideration!

 

[theefaith]

Well, well, well, you're own quote indicts you. You are wrong, Dogma are the established and unalterable precepts of the Church. And, they were given 'once, and for all' to the original Apostles. Go ahead, even ask Jude.

They still have to be taught to all the nations! Matt 28:19 and Jesus said to His apostles behold I am with you even to the end

 

[DNB]

They still have to be taught to all the nations! Matt 28:19 and Jesus said to His apostles behold I am with you even to the end

Yes, but nothing new after that. No papal infallibility, no Mariology, no intercession of the saints, no purgatory nor indulgences, no assumption into heaven nor immaculate conception, no rosary, ...

 

[tabletalk]

God always establishes order in obedience to hierarchical authority!

The angelic order!
The church order!
The family order!
The civil order!

All require obedience to hierarchical authority!

The church is not a democracy but a kingdom!

"God always establishes order in obedience to hierarchical authority!"

Is that statement a 'dogma'?