“The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the LORD.” (Jeremiah 23:28)
What is the chaff (tradition of men) to the wheat (word of God)?
I’ll take the wheat, you can have the chaff if you like…
You are assuming the word of God refers only to the written word. The Bible, generally, does not use "word of God" that way. Do a search in any version you like. Here are the results in biblegateway for the phrase "word of God", ESV:
BibleGateway - Keyword Search: "word of God"
"word of God" appears 51 times in the ESV. From that massive stack of Scripture citations, I can't find one where "word of God" refers to the written word alone. How about you look over the list, and be the first to find one.
This proves 2 things:
1) you read into "word of God" what isn't there. It is rarely, if ever, used to mean the written word alone. Until you prove otherwise, you are (unkowingly) abusing Scripture by forcing it to fit a "Bible-alone" agenda.
2) bad mouthing the traditions St. Paul instructs us to keep does violence to the Scriptures. They are not "traditions of men". We know there are bad traditions we must avoid, and good ones we must follow, as Paul repeatedly tells us. Labelling all tradition as chaff or traditions of men is an insult to Paul's teaching.
Heresy springs forth from “indirect” doctrines not found expressly taught in scripture. The Hail Mary prayer is one of those superfluous indirect false doctrines.
Heresy is defined as a post-baptismal denial of a revealed truth.
Every authentic belief and practice must be expressed in Scripture to be trustworthy is not found anywhere in Scripture. It's a man made tradition. There is not one verse in the Bible that declares such a thing. It's an ideology that damages Scripture. Abuse of the phrase "word of God" is an example, as explained in detail above.
A detailed scriptural defense of the Hail Mary prayer was given to you by @Marymog
pg. 29, post# 571 and you ran from it. A prayer is not a doctrine. This proves you have no business correcting Catholicism when you don't know the difference between a prayer and a doctrine. "superfluous indirect false doctrines" is a stupid unChristian vile insult, unbecoming of anyone claiming to be a Christian. You ignored post #571, don't think you can dismiss it with such an emotional, baseless flaming zinger.
Furthermore, anti-Mary Christians like you are busy covering up what your own reformers taught about Mary, using fad theology of the 18th century, as if you had a valid argument.
When the church began in Paul’s day there was not a complete New Testament. So naturally Apostles and Teachers were more necessary then. Now we have the complete teaching in our Holy Bibles.
If that were true, there would be only one Protestant denomination. For example, Bible-alone Christians can't agree amongst themselves whether or not Baptism is a foundational, essential doctrine. So much for your "complete teaching". The Bible does not give explicit details on how baptism is performed. We know, because we don't reject 1st century post-biblical documents describing it.
“Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. That good thing which was committed unto thee keep by the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us.” (2 Timothy 1:13-14)
which thou hast
heard of me, not what thou hast
read of me. You can't see the forest for the trees.
Everything Paul spoke was written in his epistles.
No, it is not. That's as dumb as claiming Paul read from a New Testament.
1 Cor. 5:9-11 – this verse shows that a prior letter written to Corinth is equally authoritative but not part of the New Testament canon. Paul is again appealing to a source outside of Scripture to teach the Corinthians. This disproves Scripture alone.
1 Cor. 11:2 – Paul commends the faithful to obey apostolic tradition, and not Scripture alone.
Phil. 4:9 – Paul says that what you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, do. There is nothing ever about obeying Scripture alone.
Col. 4:16 – this verse shows that a prior letter written to Laodicea is equally authoritative but not part of the New Testament canon. Paul once again appeals to a source outside of the Bible to teach about the Word of God.
1 Thess. 2:13 – Paul says, “when you received the word of God, which you
heard from us..” How can the Bible be teaching first century Christians that only the Bible is their infallible source of teaching if, at the same time, oral revelation was being given to them as well? Protestants can’t claim that there is one authority (Bible) while allowing two sources of authority (Bible and oral revelation).
2 Thess 3:6 – Paul instructs us to obey apostolic tradition. There is no instruction in the Scriptures about obeying the Bible alone (the word “Bible” is not even in the Bible).
The doctrines are complete in the New Testament. No more Pastors and Teachers are needed. And when they are needed (were access to the written word is obstructed), their service ends at some point, it’s not perpetual:
“And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.” (Ephesians 4:11-14)
No …the Christian believer is equipped, built up, brought into unity and mature manhood, and even preserved from doctrinal confusion by means of the word of God and those who preach it!
Really? Ephesians 4 makes no mention of Scripture alone or the word of God. It clearly says the Church +Scripture is necessary for sound teaching. Do you bother to read your own scripture quotes?
Wow, what power that must be! To teach extra biblical doctrines and to train the people to think that their “church” organization is equal to the Bible in authority!
A fear mongering myth. The historic Church has never claimed that it is teachings are equal to the bible in authority, and there is no such thing as an extra-biblical doctrine. You never name them to begin with. The BIBLICAL rule of faith is the Teaching authority of the Church, Scripture and Tradition, all working in harmony. In fact, the authority of Scripture is a Sacred Tradition.
And I am not a Protestant.
You sure do a lot of
protesting for a non-Protestant.
I am a Bible believing Christian!
In other words, you believe the Church came from the Bible, and not the other way around.
