Apologetics Paper

Catholicism: A Very Short Introduction written by Gerald O’Collins is a short read that gives an insight to the Catholic church without getting confusing to the reader. It touches on the basics of Catholicism such as the history, practices, and core beliefs. Through each chapter Gerald O’Collins a research professor in the field of Theology at St. Mary’s University College and Twickenham, as well as formally Dean in Gregorian University for the faculty of Theology, shares his knowledge on the Catholic religion one question at a time.

The process by which Scripture has been preserved and compiled is one whose history is worth noting. The early church had many opportunities to share the Good News of Christ via word of mouth, but from the time of Christ’s resurrection until the mid-second century, there had not been a single culmination of writings considered to be essential for the purposes of

The third section dissects the formation of the New Testament with more historical context and views of other writings defined as Gnostic writing. Bruce explains the spoken words of the apostles carried as much authority as their written words and gives an in depth explanation how the Gospels and Pauline writings were viewed by the Church Fathers. The rest of the section demonstrates the Church Fathers and their views of what was to be considered scripture and the councils that affirmed the inspired scripture.

“The Church has always and everywhere maintained, and continues to maintain, the apostolic origin of the four Gospels. The apostles preached, as Christ had charged them to do, and then, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they and others of the apostolic age handed on to us in writing the same message they had preached, the

Atheistic Naturalism an ever growing trend in the United States, and although it is not at a level to be concerned with at this point; it is

5. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Under the doctrine of biblical inerrancy, in what sense is the Bible authoritative? This is a question that has plagued the minds of many as a major element of historic Christian belief about Scripture as well as been a controversial topic of academic discussions. One of the major areas of conflict in the theological arena has been biblical authority as noted in

“It is acknowledged on all hands, says that learned prelate, that the authority, either of the scripture or of tradition, is founded merely

In this paper, I am going to share my ideas of theology. I believe that one of the biggest mistakes I made in the past was that I was afraid of being rejected, so I wrote a theology paper and tried to give the previous COM what I thought they wanted to hear instead of what was truly inside of me. Fortunately for me, even though I was not given a green light in order to see the Eccleastical Council, I was licensed to preach and this gave me time

Scripture and tradition – Trent declared scripture and tradition are both equally necessary and both equally authoratatitve. There is aCannon of Scripture which included Apocrypha, including Tobit, Judith, Macabees and others. Latin Vulgate was approate for sermons and lectures.

Peter and the vicar of Christ was affirmed,Both scripture and tradition are expressions of God's revelation and lastly Human nature is not totally depraved.

Furthermore, your statement that Christ came to this earth with the full understanding of the context of the scripture is profound. I agree with that statement completely. Also, how you defined inerrancy to be not merely about contextual facts but rather, that we believe the scripture is true through Faith. However, I feel the historical argument has some merit, because, it reflects that tradition within the church is evidence that the Bible is accurate. An example is how the church was extraordinary cautious about transcribing and copying the Bible. If just one word was off they would toss the entire copy and burn it. That is one of the reasons why I feel that the historical argument has some validity as a strong argument concerning biblical inerrancy. Thanks again for the insightful

Within Yves Congar’s The Meaning of Tradition, he sets out to define the traditions of the Catholic Church. Congar begins his analysis of the role of Tradition in the Catholic Church by defining it; his definition states that Tradition is a gift from God that is passed down subsequent generations. According to Congar the Church’s tradition involves sharing Christ’s revelation, so that God’s revelation can be passed down throughout space and time. Congar devotes sections of his book to the role of magisterium in the Church. The magisterium has a pivotal role in analyzing the doctrines of the faith and providing the people of God with an explanation of its meaning. By doing this, the magisterium is exercising its role as the successors of Jesus’ apostles in guiding the faithful. The Magisterium is essential to ensuring that the faithful create a personal relationship with God. Congar, attributes the magisterium’s role in the Tradition of the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit. According to Congar argues that the Holy Spirit has inspired the Church throughout history. The Holy Spirit also works through the people, giving them the gifts necessary for understanding the word of God. Congar continues to ascribe the Church’s tradition to its familiar atmosphere that allows faith to grow in believers. Congar goes on to state that the Church’s tradition does not stem from Scripture alone, the uniting force of God’s word. Scripture needs to come from an inspired source, alone it can

Generally, most biblical scholars agree that scripture’s authority is found in the sovereign God Himself; but their doctrinal positions differ from that point. Wisely enough, Wright avoids the “locked suitcase” melee on biblical inerrancy or biblical infallibility. Instead, he focused on God’s purpose for scripture and why it is demonstrably authoritative. Scriptures are not merely human books or collections of human opinion; they are books which contain God 's revelation of

During the early history of the church, there was no such thing as a New Testament “canon.” The selection of books that were to be included or excluded from the texts used by the church was the responsibility of each individual church body, and thus varied greatly from location to location. Because there was no canon – (books considered