Secondly, we have not been told what it was exactly which Paul or John taught their respective hearers.
… we can know what they told their hearers, because the Lord promised to keep this oral Word of the New Covenant (cf. Is 59:21, Jn 14:26) … which is why the Scriptures talk about this oral Tradition:
“I have much to write you, but I do not want to do so with pen and ink.” (3 Jn 13) … cf. Acts 16:4, 2 Cor 3:2-3
now the Fathers (cf. 1 Cor 4:15), such as St. Athanasius, kept this Word … yet none of them held to views approximating any of the false reformers: Luther, Calvin, Zwingli … though their views were very close to true reformers, like St. Francis or St. Carlo Borromeo …
However, what we DO know is what Paul and John and the other inspired authors wrote by the inspiration of the Spirit. They alone are self-attesting to their origin, i.e., God.
The Scriptures alone cannot attest to themselves, nor do they claim to … since even the Word of God did not testify to Himself (Jn 5:30-31) … For example, 2 Timothy of itself does not claim inerrancy, though God attests its inerrancy through the Spirit which indwells the Church (cf. Col 2:9-10)… to which we should listen … Cf. Mt 18:17 …
God is the author of the Scripture
Amen!
and [God] has in His infinite wisdom determined to preserve them and nothing else.
… where is this idea in Scripture? …
Your argument holds no water as it has no bottom. The same argument is used by every sect and cult in regard to their epistemological sources.
… I think the historical Church cannot be compared to sects, because her attributes—including continuity--have no parallel … and indicate a Divine origin …
[pat wrote:] ... in the context of 2 Tim 3:15-17, we should remember that Paul was referring to the O.T., and that nobody understood the Gospel from the O.T. alone, but only through the Magisterium (i.e. through the presence of word Jesus and His Apostles, those they appointed (cf. Acts 14:23), those their appointees appointed (cf. Titus 1:5) etc ... and of course all the good sheep ...[PILGRIM WROTE:]Really? Now that's revelatory, but clearly in direct contradiction to what the Scriptures teach concerning the saints that lived prior to the coming of Christ. They may not have known the details of what the types and shadows pointed to
… the Word was present to the O.T. believers, in the Cloud (cf. Num 12:5), and in the Tabernacle (Cf Ex 25:8, 22) … so they were not going by the Scriptures alone, but required the teaching authority of the Old Covenant (cf. 2 Chron 35:3, Neh 8:8), which Christ upheld (Mt 23:1-3) … even though it was enacted on lesser promises than those (cf. Is 27:2-3, Mt 16:18-19) of the New Covenant … (cf. Is 27:2-3, Mt 16:18-19)
Lastly, your use of the word "Magisterium" to refer to the Lord Christ and His apostles is offensive, never mind unwarranted
I mean no offence … I believe that the authority of the Catholic Bishops (cf. 1 Tim 4:11, Titus 1:7,9; 2:15)) is the authority Jesus Christ given through the original Apostles of Jesus Christ, by His grace alone (cf. 1 Tim 2:5) … Paul himself having passed on Apostolic authority to Timothy and Silvanus (1 Thes 1:1, 2:6-7) … while the Bible describes those “appointed” (Mk 3:14) to “offices” (cf. Acts 1:20) within a “Kingdom” of “Apostles”(cf. 1 Cor 12:28, Eph 4:11) … with offices being always filled in the Old Covenant (e.g. Is 22:19-22) … so that we should compare our Biblical interpretations with the Apostolic teachings (cf. Acts 2:42) …
The idea that Apostolic Authority ended with the death of the last Apostle is false and un-Biblical , except in the sense that everything had been passed on by then … which is a correct oral Tradition …
as if the Roman State Church's "Magisterium" is to be equated with them.
… I know that the Roman Church before and after Constantine believed the same … as evidenced by the testimony of even Eastern Fathers like Theodoret, Sts. Maximus, Sophronius (560-638 A.D) or Cyril and Methodius , the Apostles to Russia… who testify about the constant fidelity of the Roman Church … as St. Irenaeus does in the 100s … and likewise, the authorities before Constantine teach the distinctively Catholic or Papist doctrines … like the great fathers of the 3 and 400s … and did not adhere to the protestant idea of the Church nor the S.S. principle …
http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/contents.htmhttp://www.catholic.com/library/fathers_know_best.asp… but if you are not willing to debate this with someone sincere, perhaps someone else can or I can go elsewhere …
