Kay 17:

Jesus never said a word in the whole of Acts and the rest of the NT.

Kay, you need to study your bible more, I will give you atleast 3 places,

Rev. 22:16
16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Acts 9:4-5
4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? 5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

Acts 1:7-9
7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. 8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judæa, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. 9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

The entire books of the New Testament was all about Jesus.

Show us where scripture says "anything not written is irrelevant!"

"Scripture alone" is UNscriptural!

italo:

What I "chose to believe?" It is what you are making the whole of nairaland believe.

Now you seem to be saying "scripture alone isnt in the bible but 'scripture and tradition' isnt either." You have lost the plot, havent you? You are supposed to be proving "scripture alone" from "scripture alone!"

1. Syncan has shown you that scripture teaches "scripture and tradition."

2. Even if he didnt, we are not bound to prove anything through scripture alone, we are only bound to prove anything through scripture and tradition.

Dont lose your critical thinking skills just yet.

Italo, you are getting quite emotional. Let me spell out what I have said

1. Scriptures are documented inspired words of God
2. To be a scripture, it has to be written, it has to be inspired.
3. If it is not written, it isn't a scripture
4. If it isn't a scripture, it isn't a scripture
5. Apostle Paul said scriptures are the basis of doctrine (tradition), for reproof etc
6. If it isn't in the scriptures, it can't be a Christian doctrine

With that said, let me tell you what should the basis of any Christian tradition and doctrine

1. Christian tradition should have its basis in the scriptures and should not in any way contradict the scriptures
Matthew 15,1-3
1 Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, 2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. 3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

2. It should not man made tradition or doctrine that suits a particular person

2 Timothy 4, 2-4
2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Finally, if your sacred tradition bears no root in sacred scriptures, it is not of God

italo: Show us where scripture says "anything not written is irrelevant!"

"Scripture alone" is UNscriptural!

Un(not)scriptural is what is not(un)in the scripture. If e no b panadol, no b d same with panadol
Tradition not in the scripture is UNSCRIPTURAL

superior1:
Un(not)scriptural is what is not(un)in the scripture. If e no b panadol, no b d same with panadol
Tradition not in the scripture is UNSCRIPTURAL

But tradition is in scripture.

2Thess 2:15:Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

You surely still have your sight, dont you?

And for the umpteenth time, even if tradition weren't in scripture, we Catholics are not bound by scripture alone so we dont have to prove anything by scripture ALONE.

Do you not see that statement or your memory loses it continually?

Even the Bible is a result of Church Tradition, not scripture...because nowhere does scripture instruct anybody to make a collection of books called Bible.

italo:

But tradition is in scripture.

2Thess 2:15:Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

You surely still have your sight, dont you?

And for the umpteenth time, even if tradition weren't in scripture, we Catholics are not bound by scripture alone so we dont have to prove anything by scripture ALONE.

Do you not see that statement or your memory loses it continually?

Even the Bible is a result of Church Tradition, not scripture...because nowhere does scripture instruct anybody to make a collection of books called Bible.

You highlighted what suits you and made a joke of issue relating to your eternity. You are entitled to what you chose to believe and bound you. May God bring you to the knowledge of Him (amen)

Peace

@Superior1,

Can we agree than you cannot show us where scripture says "anything not written is irrelevant?"

The only thing we can find is where scripture says both written and unwritten should be adhered to.

superior1:

You highlighted what suits you and made a joke of issue relating to your eternity. You are entitled to what you chose to believe and bound you. May God bring you to the knowledge of Him (amen)

Peace

Wrong! It suits all of us. It is God's word, not mine.

It is SCRIPTURE! And you are making light of it. You are the one making light of what concerns your eternity.

italo: @Superior1,

Can we agree than you cannot show us where scripture says "anything not written is irrelevant?"

The only thing we can find is where scripture says both written and unwritten should be adhered to.

My final response to you on this issue

You can believe what you chose to believe but the truth of God can never be compromised. The Bible is the inspired word of God. The final and only authority on the doctrine of Christianity.

superior1:
My final response to you on this issue

You can believe what you chose to believe but the truth of God can never be compromised. The Bible is the inspired word of God. The final and only authority on the doctrine of Christianity.

Yet you failed to prove it with the Bible.

superior1:
Kay, you need to study your bible more, I will give you atleast 3 places,

Rev. 22:16
16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Acts 9:4-5
4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? 5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

Acts 1:7-9
7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. 8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judæa, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. 9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

The entire books of the New Testament was all about Jesus.

the verses you selected are merely recollections of a Christian, for the revelations verse, we are drawn into John's subjective world of visions and images. Lots of characters fill it. As to Acts 1:7, it is a prequel to the main events in Acts. A reminder of their foundation and founder of their mission

While Acts 9 is the beginning of the ratification of Paul's mission and journey. I will agree Jesus speaks here, but the verse is an aside considering the main gist of Acts.

And as I said earlier, you can't claim Jesus is the New Testament prior to his death or resurrection. If you exclude these themes, there wld be no New Testament.

it seems i missed everything!
Stryl i heard pp francis wrote an encyclical on july 5 lumen fidel (the light of faith) is the title have you read it?

Ubenedictus: it seems i missed everything!
Stryl i heard pp francis wrote an encyclical on july 5 lumen fidel (the light of faith) is the title have you read it?

Hi Uben,

Not yet but I will get the document and read it.


Edit: I have a copy now and have scanned through http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20130629_enciclica-lumen-fidei_en.html . Would read it in more details over the week.

I have read an official summary of it. It's very illuminating, as expected.

^^^

I am sure I am going to enjoy reading it!

It sure feels like listening to PPs Benedict XVI and Francis at the same time.

striktlymi:

Hi Uben,

Not yet but I will get the document and read it.


Edit: I have a copy now and have scanned through http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20130629_enciclica-lumen-fidei_en.html . Would read it in more details over the week.

hey,
Do not scan through, read that encyclical, it is really beautiful.

italo: I have read an official summary of it. It's very illuminating, as expected.

oga italo, i gat to tell you to drop that official summary and read the encyclical.

Ubenedictus:
hey,
Do not scan through, read that encyclical, it is really beautiful.

Lol!!!

Most definitely!!!

Syncan: It sure feels like listening to PPs Benedict XVI and Francis at the same time.

yeah, i think that was the idea, continuation in cathechisis.