I'll read your comment and think about it and see if I have any further thoughts next weekend. I would add just to clarify though that I don't reject tradition off-hand. My position is that any tradition that is not at least founded in the Scriptures, is not in agreement with the whole of the Scriptures, or is contradictory to the Scriptures cannot be considered a core tenet of the Christian faith or a prerequisite for salvation.
And I'd challenge your claim that the Catholic tradition predates the simplicity of the Protestant core as a facet of Christianity. Just so you can think about it too, much of my rejection of many Catholic traditions are because my research indicates they are simply adaptations or re-packaging of the same dialectic system of rebellion and false godhood that was present in the mystery religions of Babylon and is traceable all the way back to the same conversation between the Serpent and Eve we were talking about earlier.
It's a huge topic, and it emphasizes the importance of purity in Bible translations, and I'll probably do all of us a disservice in my presentation of what I believe and have found but I'll do my best. I haven't brushed up on my Protestant vs Catholic literature in a long time so I hope both you and @PS are patient with me.
I agree with you strongly on the need to consider the Old and New Testaments and the separate ways in which they proclaim the person and character of Jesus Christ as two parts of a magnificent whole.
My position is that any tradition that is not at least founded in the Scriptures, is not in agreement with the whole of the Scriptures, or is contradictory to the Scriptures cannot be considered a core tenet of the Christian faith or a prerequisite for salvation.
I would agree that no tradition or doctrine can be at odds with Scripture, and I agree that all doctrines and traditions must be "founded in" Scripture insofar as their principles can be detected within Scripture. This does not require an explicit Scriptural foundation, however, given what Scripture has to say about tradition as such. I've discussed this with @Chiro with respect to the papacy and the Eucharist.
much of my rejection of many Catholic traditions are because my research indicates they are simply adaptations or re-packaging of the same dialectic system of rebellion and false godhood that was present in the mystery religions of Babylon and is traceable all the way back to the same conversation between the Serpent and Eve we were talking about earlier.
Read the Magisterial teachings of the Church, and the writings of the saints, and tell me where you think Catholicism constitutes a "dialectic system of rebellion". It is about submission to the will of God, service of the good, and charity above all. It is the world that rebels against the Church. We all know what Christ had to say about the world andits spirit.
tell me where you think Catholicism constitutes a "dialectic system of rebellion"
Before I spend the week thinking about this, have you read Hislop? I don't want to waste both of our time if you have already read and rejected one of the more important pieces of literature I'd use as a reference.
I've not read Hislop. I've read the Church Fathers and the Saints and reject Protestantism per se.
(post is archived)