“Based on the Bible” vs “Based on apostolic tradition”… they are both good arguments, how does one decide which is true??
>>15101690I always go by how fancy the temple is. If you don’t have time to make a nice fancy temple then you must not care much about your god who lives there.
>>15101690>they are both good argumentsProtestants aren't able to infallibly define anything, so they can never solve disputes on matters of doctrine, essentially it all comes down to personal opnion and subjective interpretation. You don't even need to believe me, just look at the hundreds of denominations that appeared after the "reform", some which question basic christian dogmas. Also, because protestants can't interpret the bible in the light of a wider apostolic tradition, their interpretations will always be unlimited in scope but very limited spiritually. And finally, no christian church, anywhere, ever subscribed to sola scriptura. Not even the most rome-byzantium hating schismatics ever had anything like it, and neither did the jews who came before them.
>>15101690are the bible and the apostolic tradition rejects each other? it seeems to me the core problem is how to intepret the bible, not pitting one against the other as if they're always mortal enemies.
protestants should be called bibleists or old testamentist
>>15101775>so they can never solve disputes on matters of doctrineTrue. There can be debate as to what the Bible teaches, but there can be no debate as to what tradition teaches
the bible is not able to self-authorize. The church determined what is canon, the church is the source of authority.
>>15101814There can be, some protestants take tradition into account too, they just don't see it as infallible. Also they don't have a living body that can discern and define infallibly what is to be believed.
>>15101690Well, since the Catholic church can't be trusted, that should be crossed off. This is proven by the fact they are historical mass murderers and torturers, which has nothing to do with Christ. Trusting what they say about his teachings would be extremely foolhardy. Jesus said you will know false teachers by their fruit, in the sermon on the mount. One will have no excuse on judgement day to be Catholic, if they have even a rudimentary understanding of this teaching.
>>15101839Faulty understanding, no church preaches it's members will never err or sin, and the idea that every member of the clergy should be a saint is not only impractible but also a very old heresy. I don't even see the connection you're making between matters of doctrine and temporal decisions.
>>15101870>Faulty understanding, no church preaches it's members will never err or sinThis wasn't a membership issue. It was their institutional policy for centuries.
>>15101872What policy exactly are you referring to?
>>15101891>What policy exactly are you referring to?Their policy to kill and torture with extreme brutality.>It's not written down anywaySo what? Centuries of the institutional practice of it, completely unrepented of, declares it. There are even feast days to celebrate many of the events. For instance, the massacre of the Waldensians. The Waldensians agreed to peace and invited the papal soldiers into their homes as a show of good faith. The papal soldiers had conspired to agree to a different plan tho. At the signal, the soldiers killed all the villages, men woman and children in their homes. Fathers were made to wear the decapitated heads of their children and mocked. The pope was so pleased, he established a feast day to celebrate it.These things are not isolated. It's all over Catholic history. There is no reason anyone should trust what they have to say about Jesus' teachings if they are this misinformed about them.
>>15101690Imo anything but evangelical is a solid choice. Bros I struggle with forgiving my grandmother for warping my family and pulling us away from any tradition. The evangelical "church" is a seminar, a bad joke.
>>15101690When you read the Gospels and the letters of Paul. It's clear that so much of Catholicism, is not needed. Why pray to Mary or dead Saints I have never met when Christ is the only mediator?Why confess my sins to Priest when I can confess to Christ? - Acts is cited as a justification for this, but it says to confess to each other. The Priest does not confess his sins to you.Reformed Christianity most adheres to the bible. Where does it say that Peter is infallible in the bible? Even the Orthodox disagree with the Catholics on the pope
>>15102025>Bros I struggle with forgiving my grandmother for warping my family and pulling us away from any traditionWhat tradition? Catholic? She did you a favor, but was deceived into some other weirdo denomination. Women are easily decieved. It's the husband's responsibility to guide her. Where was her head? Your grandfather? Dead? Why didn't her sons guide he decisions? Too young? What were the circumstances that led to her having no man to guide her on this decision?
>>15101816>The Truth (the correct interpretation of which determines the fate of your eternal soul) is determined by earthy authorities who are influenced by the fallen world they inhabit.This is a major turn-off.
Fuck the Church. Fuck the Pope.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guelphs_and_Ghibellines
>>15102044Her family was Presbyterian, she left the church young when all those crazies were becoming common in mass media. My grandfather married her after that before she became more weird and obsessed about it, but he was into real estate and sales and didn't really give a shit about religion. My dad was episcopal but the same mind virus took him from tradition via his mother and my mother. And when I asked them they would justify it in the most selfish ways, that liturgy and etc "did nothing for them" while the men just shrugged, because they were more career focused. They had a place for weddings and funerals and that was enough for them at the time. But I talked to my grandpa before he passed and he was so full of disgust towards Evangelicals, told me I'll have to find my own path now.
>>15102050the bible was not found, it was created. If you are just looking to make believe, why not choose a more comforting fairy tale?
>>15102125>But he was into real estate and sales and didn't really give a shit about religion.Well, the blame lies with him. Women are easily deceived without a head. Don't blame her too much. Sounds like your grandfather repented for much of that before he died tho. Time to forgive. And get rid of those evangelical weirdos.
>>15102009I don't think the pope ever established a Feast day over Piedmont Easter, although I do know Cromwell was so distraught by it that he encouraged the citizens of the protectorate to fast out of mourning. >>15101690The question comes down to which is really older and more likely to have been taught by Jesus and his Apostles. The irony of catholics defaming Sola Scriptura is that the canon of the New Testament was decided based on which texts were proven to have been held as Scripture by the greatest number of churches for the longest time. Even today, the Miaphysite Syrian churches do not read 5 books of the general epistles and revelation due to their lack of prestige in their communities at the time of Hippo, and the Eastern Orthodox do not read Revelation at all during their liturgy. It's true that Sola Scriptura as a doctrine doesn't appear in the bible, but even the most anti-Christian scholars admit that the earliest Christian writings we have avalible to use are the New Testement writings (with the Didache perhaps being just as old, but never counted as scriptural). Sola Scriptura is the method by which we come to understand and discover the other Solas.
Like anything you have to start with a good understanding of what each one says
>>15101775Anon catholics made up Mariology out of thin air, i dont know how much pf that type of criticism you should throw.
>>15101891Nta anon, but the catholic church has a long history of bloodshed.https://www.npr.org/2023/03/30/1167056438/vatican-doctrine-of-discovery-colonialism-indigenousHere is them apologizing for some decrees. There is also the history of sexual abuse by priest, the abuse of native kids at schools, all the wars in europe, etc.
>>15102009Can you provide me a source for the Waldesian episode and the feast day you're talking about?>There is no reason anyone should trust what they have to say about Jesus' teachings if they are this misinformed about them.I don't see how that follows, we believe the Holy Spirit preserves the church from teaching heresy, not that it preserves church authority from committing atrocities or being corrupt, besides it's not like only Catholics did such things.>>15102257Mary is venerated in every traditional church, even by some protestants. What do you mean?>>15102281I am aware of all the bad things commited by clergy and high authorities, I just don't see how you can connect that to teaching on faith and morals. For example, despite all the murder and deviancy through history, the church never taught infallibly that murder or sexual sin was ok.
>>15102032>Why pray to Mary or dead Saints I have never met when Christ is the only mediator?Christ is the only mediator in Catholicism too, Mary and the saints are not mediators as Christ is, we only ask for their prayers for us.>Why confess my sins to Priest when I can confess to Christ? - Acts is cited as a justification for this, but it says to confess to each other.Confession and penance used to be very public, we just simplified it and made it more private as a mercy. In confession the priests acts "in persona Christi", so it's not the priest forgiving you, it's Christ through the priest. As to why we need this at all, it's because God works thorugh visible signs as the sacraments to confer his grace to us, it doesn't mean he can't do that outside the sacraments, but they are the ordinary means it happens.>Where does it say that Peter is infallible in the bible?We don't believe the bible contains everything about our faith.>>15102050The bible was written by earthly men too.>>15102164Sola Scriptura cannot define infallibly the canon of scripture. I also find it amusing that you made an appeal to Tradition without realizing it.
>>15102413I do admit that i made an appeal to tradition. I again want to state that Sola Scriptura doesn't have to do with scripture being infallible (that's taken as a given, even among Catholics), but rather that scripture is the sole means by which we understand and formulate doctrine. We seek the oldest form of Christianity, which doesn't always mean the oldest church in existence, any more than a glass of milk that's sat on the counter longer than a fresh glass of milk is automatically purer. Indeed, one could say that the NEWER the church formation, the purer it is since man's sinful nature corrupts whatever it touches. We must constantly milk the cow (receive the holy spirit and return to the scriptures) to keep a pure religion.
>>15102469>the sole means by which we understand and formulate doctrineI agree that we should use the scriptures as an extremely important way of understanding and formulating doctrine, but we can't ignore the tradition received orally from the apostles or the need for a teaching authority which, guided by the Holy Spirit, is able to define things definitely. >We seek the oldest form of ChristianityThe oldest form of Christianity was adherence to the oral teaching of the apostles, not to a corpus of scripture that wasn't established yet.
>>15102217>Like anything you have to start with a good understanding of what each one saysWant to share your understanding of what each one says?
>>15102498>The oldest form of Christianity was adherence to the oral teaching of the apostles, not to a corpus of scripture that wasn't established yet.That begs the question then whether what your priest or teacher is telling you is the oral apostolic tradition is really authentic. One only needs a cursory glance at the Nag Hammadi library and other Gnostic texts to see that anyone can use the name of an apostle or the apostolic succession to CLAIM to be representing them, while going against what is outlined in the New Testament and (perhaps this is me eating crow) the most widely held traditions of the church.But, don't forget that if someone gains enough clout in the Church, he can suddenly use his power and prestige to enforce his doctrines as being Apostolic. The Rosary was extremely varied in length and verbage until the time of Pope Pius V. The Sarum Rosary, for instance, had a mystery for each of the 50 Aves, and there are extant rosaries that had 10 decades rather than the 15 one would expect. Does the papal tradition suddenly override the English tradition in this respect (putting aside the fact that England was protestant at the time of the rosary's standardizing)? Why is it that sedevacantists can support being essentially protestants for the opposite reasons as Luther, appealing to tradition the entire time? And, being frank, why is the Catholic Church quick to brand certain priests as schismatics when they're arguably upholding tradition far more strenuously than the Vatican is? Why should we take the Vatican's word over SSPX or the Palmarians?TL;DR: The Bible is, at the very least, a document that is set in paper and has for 2000 years had consistent content outside of a few late Deuterocanonical. An appeal to tradition and human authority has far more risks of being falsified.
>>15102570You can say the same about the authenticity of the books of the bible, some which you admitted are disputed. As to how we define what tradition is valid and authoritative the answer is simple: we have a teaching authority, the magisterium headed by the pope, and the orthodox on the other hand have the consensus of their bishops. The same way you believe the biblical authors were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write the scriptures thus preserving them from error, we believe the same Holy Spirit aids us in preserving tradition through our teaching authority.I don't understand your rosary example because the rosary isn't an apostolic tradition, it's a devotion. As for your other questions, both Catholics and Orthodox have a way of recognizing where teaching authority lies, the existence of schismatics doesn't disprove the church's authority the same way the existence of heretics doesn't disprove biblical truth and inerrancy.
>>15101690>rendercore vs kinosthetic
>>15102633Protties don't spice they walls n ceilings n shiet
>>15102628I appreciate your replies, you seem like you actually care about Catholicism instead of a purely aestheticly driven experience like >>15102633 >>15102772. I admit that my mind may change in the future on the role of tradition in interpreting scripture, but as it stands I understand the scriptural corpus to be sufficient in understanding the teachings of Christ. In the end, the argument boils down to the degree tradition is needed to understand the Bible, since there’s always going to be some tradition inherent in how we read th we scriptures and practice the faith.Again, I appreciate that there can be dialogue that doesn’t just revolve into calling each other regards, and that you challenged me to back up my positions and reconsider.
>but UVVVGGGGHHHH THE TRVDITION........Shut the fuck up you fucking faggots. Go by what the Bible says, follow Christ, be a good Christian, try to live like Christ did. It's that simple. This little trad chud going >UVGHGGGHHHH HOW CAN I FORGIVE MUH GRANDMA FOR NOT FOLLOWING TRVDVTVTION UVVVVVGGGGHHHIs deeply embarrassing. Forgive everyone, as Christ did. So many of you chronically online fatherless children received your religious awakening on Internet forums and it shows. Hence why you are trad caths instead of just being Christian.
>>15102799Thanks, it's refreshing to have a debate that doesn't degenerate into name calling, I agree. I don't mind the troll posts so much because I'm so used to this place being like this. Where my family is from, christians, and catholics in particular, are a very tiny minority, we had to deal with persecution and martyrdom for centuries, this is why I have so much love and respect to the tradition they fought so hard to keep and also why I dislike conflict with other christians. I'm glad we had a nice discussion too, be well and God bless you.
>>15101690>Implying the Bible is not part of tradition
>>15101690I’m not Christian, but left looks 100 times better and kinda comfy in a way. Looks like it would be relaxing to be in while right reeks of extravagance, idolatry, and probably don’t even give to the poor.
>>15102984Catholics have simpler churches too, but we see the extravagance and artistic excellence of some of our churches as a way to represent divine beauty and to honor God. We also emphasize works of mercy, so helping the poor is a big thing in Catholicism. I don't believe the two things must be mutually exclusive.
>>15101690Read The Examination of the Council of Trent by Martin Chemnitz to get an answer.
well you see Protestants got their bible from outside the church, they called upon the rabbis to provide their scriptures because they expressly rejected the recieved text Christians everywhere used for over 1000 yearsmeanwhile actual Christians never had to go outside the bounds of their church to recieve the word, since it was handed down over centuries in the form quoted by the gospels
>>15101690You choose the one which resonates more with you and hope you are doing good, that's if you need an instruction manual to be good.
>>15103509That's a lie.
>>15102350Mariology anon, the extra canon like Mary bodily ascension and a bunch of other stuff.
>>15101690Protip: Vatican II Catholics offer the best of both worlds. V2 renewed more interest in the bible amongst the laity especially. But without dropping sacred tradition. Tradcats are those who aren't just upholding sacred tradition, but think every personal revelation or devotion was a rule of faith. They sacramentalize things that were never sacred in themselves. It's constant hand wringing about latin language, certain rubrics and manners, this or that saint's devotion, thinking people are lax for not going to confession for every venial sin, conspiracies about Fatima, thinking praying the Rosary in Latin gives them more piety, actually thinking all the mistakes of violence in history were good things (i.e. Crusader and Inquisition larping), etc.. These were never set in stone traditions and it was good to move past the grip of people like this.
>>15102257Mary was venerated for 1000+ years before the Reformation.
>>15102257Scripture attests to Mariology too. It's a matter of how much so.She is first greeted with a unique title by Gabriel (Kecharitomene), told by Elizabeth "Blessed are you among women", was there from the start to wait expectantly on the birth of Jesus, then there at the birth of the Church at Pentecost too. She is the center witness at both major events in our faith. She was there at the Crucifixion and told by Jesus that his beloved disciple was her new son, and she his mother. He wasn't merely just relaying "casual" information to John and her. She was symbolically mother of Christ's disciples a whole. In Revelation 12, the woman running from the dragon to give birth to Christ and further children is also symbolic of Mary as both the symbol of Israel by giving birth to Jesus and the Church alike by giving birth to further disciples. Christ is the new Adam, and she is the new Eve who would witness the Seed that would crush the serpent's head. The Even who followed God with pure faith and said "let it be done as you wish".She is symbolic of the ark of the covenant itself, which housed the Staff of Aaron , Manna, and Commandments, and was overshadowed with a great cloud from God. In the same sense Mary housed Jesus - who is the Good Shepherd (staff), Bread from heaven (Manna), and Word (Commandments) in her womb and was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit.If Protestants truly loved scripture, they'd have their own Mariology too, instead of going out of their way to neglect her. I won't say they necessarily need to be Catholic, but by dismissing her, they become something unrecognizable and too dismissive for their own good. Dismissive of her as disciple, as mother, as the new Eve, as Church, as Israel. They just read all of these events I listed and it goes in one ear and out the other, and they have no depth or edifying teaching on Mary. You can't have good Christology and ignore the person who loved and spent time with Jesus more than anyone else.
>>15104763Im talking about things like physical ascension anon.
>>15101690One on the left is not bad for a protestant church. It's got a kind of tasteful, clean, minimalist beauty.
>>15104246too bad for you it is well known that Luther based his version of the OT on the Masoretic text that is not a Christian bible, it is expressly RabbinicalLuther sought a profane (outside the church) authority to source his translation, simple as.
>>15101690As a Catholic, I want to point out that the Catholic Church goes by the Bible, and the Bible is part of the Apostolic Tradition.
>>15105670also, the Geneva Bible used "the original" Hebrew too
>>15104411nostra aetate, and it’s post vat ii “development” is not compatible with Bible or tradition.
>>15101702>your god who lives there.God is omnipresent you absolute fucking idiot. He lives everywhere.
>>15102413>we only ask for their prayers for us.why ask for other people to pray instead of just doing it yourself?Sounds like serious lazybones behavior TBQH
You look at their fruits.And then you discard both because they're hostile to native europeans and white non-muttified americans.
>>15104763The Beloved Disciple was not John the Apostle, the woman in Revelation is just the Church, the first two chapters of Luke were added to Marcion's gospel in the 2nd century by chud Romans, the serpent in Genesis was just a serpent, and the Scriptures clearly say there would never a second Ark of the Covenant (plus, the Mary = Ark thing comes from the shitty and plainly ridiculous Protoevantelium of James).It's plainly horrifying how you just plainly accept the """tradition""" of these heretical pseudepigrapha and pagan Roman virginity-cults.
>>15106466>>15106466>the woman in Revelation is just the ChurchThe Church doesn't give birth to Jesus, silly.>She bore a male Child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron.-Revelation 12:5Nor is the serpent in Genesis merely a serpent. Serpents don't speak and tempt people and blaspheme God. Stop so willfully dimwitted. You're better than that. He's also called a serpent AND a dragon in the very Rev 12 above. And in Rev 20:12, the Dragon is outright called "that ancient serpent". I didn't say anything about the Protoevangelium. I said the Ark had Aaron's Rod, Manna, and the Commandments. All symbols of Christ. Mary is not a "second Ark". She is the real ark. Just as Jesus is the real staff, bread of heaven, and Word of God. >Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and are dead. This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that one may eat of it and not die.-John 6:49-50
>>15106546>The Church doesn't give birth to Jesus, silly.Jesus wasn't born into the people of God?
>>15106549Jesus was born into Israel, as the seed of David. But built the Church himself [Matt 16:18]. It did not exist before him. Mary has a similar inbetween role that defies explanation and makes her fascinating. As the one gives birth to Jesus, she represents expectant Israel. As mother of his disciples, it shifts and she is the Church.
>>15106561This is false. The Church has existed since God reconciled Adam. The old and new covenants are one covenant of grace.
>>15101813>old testamentistaren't those jews?
>>15106546Serpents don't speak anymore - they lost that ability due to a curse from God, just like they lost their four legs.You eisegesis is so poor even top Catholic scholars would cringe when reading your posts.
>>15101690Catholicism is based on scripture and tradition. Protestant is scripture alone and sometimes some traditions.
>>15101690Study the Bible, Study the Church Fathers, Study theology, Use your reason and morality, and then decide on your own.
>>15101702Is this fancy enough for you?