|
Author
|
Topic: Did His church or the bible come first?
|
CWO4GUNNER
Advanced Member
Member # 6971
|
posted
I was born and raised a catholic went to catechism and preformed my first confirmation. Ironically I didn't fully understand it at the time because there was no man to guide me, but I was saved and received the holy spirit by reading Gods word from the new testament (good news bible) that was given to me and approve by the Pope to study while attending catechism at the age of 12. My mother concerned by my conversion and questions had me taken before the local priest and after given my testimony the priest incredibly didn't rebuke me but turned me back over to my mother and told her that my belief is based on the bible, could find nothing wrong and that I should be allowed to convert because my conviction. Needless to say my mother (later converted) was not happy with the priests recommendation. From personal experience I can tell you that Gods word is inspired by the Holy Spirit not only for what has been written but to open our eyes which are blind to what it says and means. The Holy Spirit is the key and what gives us the power to discern all thing, otherwise we are always deceived even by the use of Gods word like in the Garden of eden we can be deceived "Yea, hath God said, "Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden". So indeed flesh and blood has not revealed the scriptures to use but the Holey Spirit. As far as those that would argue differently I refer to2 Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.
Posts: 54 | From: Bullhead City, AZ | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged | 
|
|
jiggyfly
Advanced Member
Member # 6972
|
posted
The bible is a compilation of books and scrolls and the earliest date of scripture is the book of Job dating between 2000 and 1800 BC. The earliest date that the bible was compiled is the third century AD.
In reality the Church which Jesus is building was realized almost three centuries before the compilation of the bible and even more before the canonized bible.
Posts: 23 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
|
|
becauseHElives
Advanced Member
Member # 87
|
posted
Did His church or the bible come first?
The scriptures are Yahweh’s Word to men, as Caretaker put so well…
quote:
The Bible is the Word of God. Nearly 4,000 times in the Old Testament alone, we read phrases like 'the Lord spoke', 'the Lord commanded' and 'the Lord said'. The apostle Peter says that the prophetic scriptures 'never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit' (2 Peter 1:21).
Even though “The True Church” was in Him from the foundations of the earth, His Words spoke the earth into existence.
Yahweh’s Word was with Him from the beginning, therefore the only logical answer is the Scripture (the Bible came first.)
--------------------
Strive to enter in at the strait gate:for many, I say unto you will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. ( Luke 13:24 )
Posts: 4578 | From: Southeast Texas | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
|
Caretaker
Advanced Member
Member # 36
|
posted
http://www.justforcatholics.org/a151.htm
2 Timothy 3:16 and Sola Scriptura
Question: Where in the Bible is Sola Scriptura taught? 2 Timothy 3:15-17 is a reference to the Old Testament and does not deal with which books are inspired and how we know which books are inspired. As a former Protestant myself I wrestled with this question and frankly no one ever gave me a satisfactory answer.
Answer: The doctrine of Sola Scriptura, like the doctrine of the Trinity, is not based on one particular proof text. The passage you mentioned is one of the many scriptures that support the sufficiency of the Bible as the only infallible rule of the Christian faith. The apostle Paul writes to Timothy:
“And that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:15-17).
From this passage we can deduce:
Firstly, the Scriptures give us the knowledge necessary to experience salvation – they are “able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” Secondly, the Bible is also useful for doctrine and guidance in the Christian life. Whoever is led by the Scriptures is described as “complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” The Bible is therefore enough to show God's children how to be saved and to live for His glory.
I agree that the primary reference to "scriptures" in this context is the Old Testament because the writing of the New Testament was not yet complete, the canon of the NT was not yet fully known, and the Scripture that Timothy was taught in his infancy was the Old Testament.
But is it possible that Timothy was aware that other inspired books were being added? And that "from infancy" to the time he received Paul’s letter, Timothy came to know of other inspired writings in addition to the Old Testament books? For instance, 2 Peter 3:16 classifies Paul’s epistles with "other scriptures" – implying that the Pauline letters were already being considered in the apostolic churches as divinely inspired and on the same level as the books of the Old Testament.
In his first letter to Timothy, Paul quotes from the Old Testament (Deuteronomy 25:4) and from a New Testament book (Luke 10:7). ‘For the Scripture says, "You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain," and, "The laborer is worthy of his wages"’ (1 Timothy 5:18). It is highly significant that Paul refers to the Gospel of Luke as Scripture on par with the Old Testament. Thus Timothy was fully conscious that the Holy Spirit was adding inspired books to the Holy Scriptures. It is therefore preposterous to limit Paul’s statement in Second Timothy on the value of the Scripture to the Old Testament.
Paul’s statement about the perfections of the Old Testament Scriptures (holy, inspired) is applicable to all Holy Scriptures in general. It's like saying, “All dogs bark.” Barking is not only the characteristic of the dogs that are now living, is it? The dogs that would be born in the future will do the same…because they are dogs. Similarly, what Paul said about the Old Testament books would certainly apply to the New, because like them, they have the same Divine author.
Still, you may say, Paul was referring to the Old Testament and not the completed Bible. This is what I call a felicitous problem! For if the Old Testament books were enough to make us wise unto salvation and equip us for every good work, how much more the whole Bible? If the Old were enough, the whole is overflowing with plenty! Yes, the Bible is able to make you wise for salvation, which is by faith in Christ Jesus. Don’t let anyone take away this blessed truth by claiming that you need some additional source to give you some vital information that is absent from Scripture.
Further, you correctly observe that this passage “does not deal with which books are inspired and how we know which books are inspired.” It’s true, it does not. However I want you to notice an interesting fact. Timothy, his mother, and his grandmother somehow knew which books were inspired, even though there was no infallible magisterium to tell them. Paul did not need to spell out the table of contents because evidently Timothy knew what these books were.
The Holy Scriptures are the property and the inheritance of the people of God and they pass them on from one generation to another. How did you first learn that the book called the “Holy Bible” is the Word of God? Was it not from your parents or from your Sunday School teacher or your pastor or some other Christian? Even though they are not infallible, the Lord used them to place in your hands His book and the doctrines therein.
If you insist on the need of an infallible authority to assure you which books are inspired, well, in that case you should not stop there either. You should then ask, “How do I know for sure that the church magisterium is infallible?” You can’t say, “Because the Bible says so” (since as a Catholic, you cannot be sure that the Bible is inspired apart from the teaching of the infallible church); and you can’t say either, “Because the church says so” (because that is begging the question).
You may wonder how people like Timothy, you and I, could know which books are inspired apart from an infallible church. Could we not trust in God who inspired the Bible in the first place? He gave the Scriptures to His people, and He could use them (weak and fallible as they are) to recognize His Word, and pass it on to future generations. I am convinced that this is exactly what God did.
Copyright Dr Joe Mizzi. Permission to copy and distribute this article without textual changes.
--------------------
A Servant of Christ,
Drew
1 Tim. 3:
16: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh..
Posts: 3978 | From: Council Grove, KS USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Caretaker
Advanced Member
Member # 36
|
posted
http://www.justforcatholics.org/a45.htm
The Bible is the Word of God
Question: Could you tell me please why the Bible is the word of God? Does it say in the Bible that, "This book is from God"? And even if it does, how do we know?
Answer: The Bible is the Word of God. Nearly 4,000 times in the Old Testament alone, we read phrases like 'the Lord spoke', 'the Lord commanded' and 'the Lord said'. The apostle Peter says that the prophetic scriptures 'never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit' (2 Peter 1:21).
Someone has reasoned this way. Who could have written the Bible? One or more of the angels? Impossible, for good angels don't lie, and the Bible repeatedly says, "Thus says the Lord..." Perhaps evil spirits? No, for demons and Satan do not like to be exposed for what they are and they don't command men to "Worship the Lord thy God and him ONLY shalt thou serve." Evil spirits don't want men to repent, as the Bible commands. Was it then evil men? But evil men certainly would not write such scathing denunciations of sin as we regularly find in the Scriptures, or condemn themselves to Hell. Was it then good men? No, for good men, by themselves, cannot write about such sublime things, which eye hath not seen nor ear heard. Besides, good men don't lie; they won't write such things as this, "All scripture is God-breathed..." if it were not the truth.
The only other alternative is that God gave the Bible as it is claimed by Bible itself.
Further evidence comes from fulfilled prophecies. In no other literature can we find scores of clear and detailed prophecies, which were later fulfilled to the letter. The odds against this happening by chance are too vast to be taken seriously.
Then there is the Bible's impact on people's lives. Millions of people over the centuries testify that the teaching of the Bible transformed their lives from darkness to light, from despair to hope, from sin to righteousness and love.
Yet many people remain skeptical. They cannot appreciate the beauty of God's Word because they do not know God. Many heard Jesus speak and teach but most did not recognize that His were the very words of God. Only God can open our sin-blinded eyes to see the beauty of His Word.
I recognize my Father's voice in Scripture because I am His adopted son. Jesus said: 'He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you [who do not believe] do not hear, because you are not of God' (John 8:47).
Copyright Dr Joe Mizzi. Permission to copy and distribute this article without textual changes. < BACK TO Q&A
--------------------
A Servant of Christ,
Drew
1 Tim. 3:
16: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh..
Posts: 3978 | From: Council Grove, KS USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Caretaker
Advanced Member
Member # 36
|
posted
Catholic Catechism
816 "The sole Church of Christ [is that] which our Savior, after his Resurrection, entrusted to Peter's pastoral care, commissioning him and the other apostles to extend and rule it. . . . This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in (subsist it in) the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him."267
The Second Vatican Council's Decree on Ecumenism explains: "For it is through Christ's Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help toward salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained. It was to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, that we believe that our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant, in order to establish on earth the one Body of Christ into which all those should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the People of God."268
824 United with Christ, the Church is sanctified by him; through him and with him she becomes sanctifying. "All the activities of the Church are directed, as toward their end, to the sanctification of men in Christ and the glorification of God."292 It is in the Church that "the fullness of the means of salvation"293 has been deposited. It is in her that "by the grace of God we acquire holiness."294
"Outside the Church there is no salvation"
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336
882 The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter's successor, "is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful."402 "For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered."403
883 "The college or body of bishops has no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter's successor, as its head." As such, this college has "supreme and full authority over the universal Church; but this power cannot be exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff."404
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Greek word used for rock (petra) is played against Peter (petros). Some use this passage to teach that Peter was the foundation stone of the church, that he had a primacy among the apostles, and that he became bishop of Rome. The verse will scarcely bear the first of these propositions, and certainly none of the others. Peter may be meant by the rock, but he was not the exclusive foundation.
The twelve-fold foundation of the apostles of the church:
Ephesians 2:
19
Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20
And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21
In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22
In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.
Rev. 21:
14
And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
This seems borne out by the fact that the words spoken unto Peter in Matt. 16:18, were spoken to all of the disciples in Matt. 18:
Matt. 18:
18
Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
19
Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.
20
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
The rock or foundation of the church is the confession (ultimately the doctrine) of the apostles, which became normative for the true church.
The word church (Greek ekklesia), means literally “ a chosen or called out assembly”. Thus the use of the word as a technical term for an assembly or group of believers in Christ was quite natural. It was not viewed as an external organization, denomination, or hierarchical system. The New Testament Church is a local autonomous congregation or an assembly which is a church in and of itself. John writes to 7 churches, in His Revelation, not to one.
Scofield commentary:
16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Peter
There is the Greek a play upon the words, "thou art Peter petros-- literally 'a little rock', and upon this rock Petra I will build my church." He does not promise to build His church upon Peter, but upon Himself, as Peter is careful to tell us
(1 Peter 2:4-9)
2:4 Coming to Him, a living stone--rejected by men but chosen and valuable to God--
2:5 you yourselves, as living stones, are being built into a spiritual house for a holy priesthood to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
2:6 For it stands in Scripture: Look! I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and valuable cornerstone, and the one who believes in Him will never be put to shame!
2:7 So the honor is for you who believe; but for the unbelieving, The stone that the builders rejected-- this One has become the cornerstone, and
2:8 A stone that causes men to stumble, and a rock that trips them up. They stumble by disobeying the message; they were destined for this.
2:9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His possession, so that you may proclaim the praises of the One who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.
church:
2 (Greek - ajpovllumi (ek=="out of," kaleo =="to call"), an assembly of called out ones). The word is used of any assembly; the word itself implies no more, as, e.g., the town-meeting at Ephesus Acts 19:39 and Israel, called out of Egypt and assembled in the wilderness Acts 7:38. Israel was a true "church," but not in any sense the N.T. church--the only point of similarity being that both were "called out" and by the same God. All else is contrast.
Following are several of the doctrinal statements made on Justification at the council of Trent. After each Canon are scriptures that contradict that Canon.
Finally, you will see the word "anathema" used many times by the Council. This means that those who disagree with the doctrines of this Council are cursed. In Gal. 1:8-9, the word "anathema" is used. The curse must come from God. Therefore, we conclude that according to Roman Catholicism, anyone who disagrees with the following Canons are cursed of God. The Roman Catholic church excommunicates those under anathema. In other words, excommunication means being outside the Christian church. Being outside the church means you are not saved.
In spite of what Catholicism states, the Bible speaks differently. Following each Canon is a list of appropriate scriptures countering the Catholic position.
1. CANON 9: "If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema."
"Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin" (Rom. 3:20).
B. "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 3:24).
C. "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law" (Rom. 3:28).
D. "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness" (Rom. 4:3).
E. "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom. 5:1).
F. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God" (Eph. 2:8).
G. "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost" (Titus 3:5).
2. CANON 12: "If any one shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy pardoning sins for Christ's sake, or that it is that confidence alone by which we are justified ... let him be accursed"
.
"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name" John 1:12).
A. "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law" (Rom. 3:28).
B. "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness" (Rom. 4:3).
C. "Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; 27Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself" (Heb. 7:25-27).
D. For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day" (2 Tim. 1:12).
3. Canon 14: "If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema."
.
"For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness" (Rom. 4:3).
A. "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom. 5:1).
4. Canon 23: "lf any one saith, that a man once justified can sin no more, nor lose grace, and that therefore he that falls and sins was never truly justified; or, on the other hand, that he is able, during his whole life, to avoid all sins, even those that are venial,- except by a special privilege from God, as the Church holds in regard of the Blessed Virgin; let him be anathema."
.
"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him" (John 3:36).
A. "And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day" (John 6:40).
B. "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand" (John 10:28).
C. "That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord" (Rom. 5:21).
D. "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us" (1 John 2:19).
E. "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God" (1 John 5:13).
•
Canon 24: "If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema."
. "O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? 2This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?" (Gal. 3:1-3).
A. "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. 2Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law" (Gal. 5:1-3).
•
Canon 30: "If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema."
. "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom. 5:1).
A. "And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross" (Col. 2:13-14).
• Canon 33: "If any one saith, that, by the Catholic doctrine touching Justification, by this holy Synod inset forth in this present decree, the glory of God, or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ are in any way derogated from, and not rather that the truth of our faith, and the glory in fine of God and of Jesus Christ are rendered (more) illustrious; let him be anathema.
. This council declares that if anyone disagrees with it, they are damned.
--------------------
A Servant of Christ,
Drew
1 Tim. 3:
16: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh..
Posts: 3978 | From: Council Grove, KS USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Aaron
unregistered
|
posted
The following truth tends to get dismissed as heresy fairly quickly but since you asked...
The Bible is not the Word of God as you are applying it in your argument. Jesus is the Word of God. And, the Bible itself concludes that the full authority of God rests with the Holy Spirit.
Plainly, the Bible is neither Jesus or the final authority of God. In fact, if the Bible WERE the final authority of God then the Bible could not have been written...for the men who wrote the gospels and the epistles would have had no authoritative reference from which to form their conclusions. But, the men DID write with the authority from God...this was given to them by the Holy Spirit.
You know, I think the doctrine "The Bible is THE final authority in Christian matters" was promoted as a response to the evils of the Roman church. The Romans sought power from the beginning, they were not as interested in the gospel as they were the power and money that came from a controlled populace. An institution will first establish rules to preserve itself. So, they developed shameful practices and doctrines that promoted THEIR authority, an authority that was not from God. In response the ones who opposed sought first to discredit the Roman institution at its base. "For", they reasoned, "if the Bible is the final authority then the Roman claim to authority apart from the Bible must be false!"
As for the "father" issue consider the following verses:
1Cr 4:14 "I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.
1Cr 4:15 "For though you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet you have not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel..."
Now, this is figurative, of course, but Paul is claiming to be the father of the Corinthian saints in Christ through the gospel. I'm not saying that the Romans are correct in their application of "father" (in fact they're quite wrong) but these verses should give us pause when we see Jesus say "call no one your father" and Paul say "I am your father". Since both are correct the onus is on us to discern what is going on. Don't you think? ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Aaron
IP: Logged |
|
|
afisherofman
Advanced Member
Member # 6899
|
posted
Thank you michael for your help.
I ask you or anyone for your assistance with the below response to me.
Am I in error or is the catholic that responded
any help is appreciated
Thamk you
Catholic #3
quote:
You, sir, make a tragic, and I fear, potentially damning error:
You presume, quite wrongly, that the bible is the literal word of God. It is NOT.
It is men's inherently flawed recording of the Word of God, and of the Actions of God as passed down from the Apostles.
How can you say that. God, His word (bible), Jesus, Holy Spirit are all part of God who is truth and every entity I mentioned I believe to be just as true
For God's word says
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
That is true about God, Holy Spirit, Jesus and the word(bible)
Can you honestly look to the heavens and with in your heart of hearts say to God...
quote:
God, I believe your word the bible is fallible because it was written by man. I do not fully trust the bible even though your inspired God-breathed words were written within the bible.
His response was
yes for what is written is NOT the word of God, the same way these words you read are not my thoughts, but merely a reflection, one which may or may not be seen acurately, and which may or may not transmit my thoughts correctly.
Theologically speaking, if one accepts the bible as unfiltered through human hands, then one should need no translation. How many of us read Aramaic, Greek, and Hebrew? Of those who do, how many can read the surviving 4th century texts pre-canonization without a lexicon handy?
What I read, which is entitled the "Holy Bible" is a translation of the Vulate, which is a translation itself. I know from reading several different translations that each translation is inherently different, and therefore at least one is flawed, if not all.
I know also that, since Adam, no man has been perfect, nor capable of perfection, except Christ.
So, the initial recording must be flawed, however minorly, since the words spoken are written down, not recorded as sound, and thus at least the inflection is lost. The Gospels are first hand accounts, true, but are written down years later. The Letters are the least flawed at inception, since they are the words of the early bishops to either other bishops or to the people of the church.
So we have the loss of information just by writing down the old testament, rather than hearing the Word of God directly.
Then, we have either the Greek consolidation (which translated the Hebrew and Aramaic), or the Latin Vulgate, which translated all three... a translation made by a man, or by a group of men, or even by computer, it is inherently flawed.
Then we have the modern language editions starting with the Douay-Rheims... again, translations with annotations.
King James' edition was quite warped... beautiful, but the message is intentionally shaded by the translators.
So while I know there is truth IN the bible, the bible is not Truth itself.
I know also that the Bible is a tool put together by the heirs to the apostles to keep the faith united, a codified set of what is the new scripture, and what is not. Note that several books rejected for the bible are still used as educational and apologetics references... the Letters of Pope Clement, for example.
The Bible is the work of Mortals, based upon inspiration from the divine. I truly believe this as both a historian and as a Catholic. I know as well that many truths about Christ did not make it into the texts. We know not if he was married. Tradition says no. We know not if Mary was Joseph's first wife. Tradition does not say clearly, but it is Tradition that Joseph's marriage remained chaste, and so the Brothers of Christ must be either step brothers or 1st cousins. (Rejected 'gospels' include that Mary was Joseph's second wife, his first having been deceased.)
And, if by chance, I and the theologians who taught me this are wrong, so be it. But it is the nature of communication that information is lost between mind and voice, voice and hand, mind and hand, and transmission from mind to mind is always imperfect.
Posts: 43 | From: PA | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
afisherofman
Advanced Member
Member # 6899
|
posted
Thank you michael for your help.
I ask you or anyone for your assistance with the below response to me.
Am I in error or is the catholic that responded
any help is appreciated
Thamk you
Catholic #3
quote:
You, sir, make a tragic, and I fear, potentially damning error:
You presume, quite wrongly, that the bible is the literal word of God. It is NOT.
It is men's inherently flawed recording of the Word of God, and of the Actions of God as passed down from the Apostles.
How can you say that. God, His word (bible), Jesus, Holy Spirit are all part of God who is truth and every entity I mentioned I believe to be just as true
For God's word says
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
That is true about God, Holy Spirit, Jesus and the word(bible)
Can you honestly look to the heavens and with in your heart of hearts say to God...
quote:
God, I believe your word the bible is fallible because it was written by man. I do not fully trust the bible even though your inspired God-breathed words were written within the bible.
His response was
yes for what is written is NOT the word of God, the same way these words you read are not my thoughts, but merely a reflection, one which may or may not be seen acurately, and which may or may not transmit my thoughts correctly.
Theologically speaking, if one accepts the bible as unfiltered through human hands, then one should need no translation. How many of us read Aramaic, Greek, and Hebrew? Of those who do, how many can read the surviving 4th century texts pre-canonization without a lexicon handy?
What I read, which is entitled the "Holy Bible" is a translation of the Vulate, which is a translation itself. I know from reading several different translations that each translation is inherently different, and therefore at least one is flawed, if not all.
I know also that, since Adam, no man has been perfect, nor capable of perfection, except Christ.
So, the initial recording must be flawed, however minorly, since the words spoken are written down, not recorded as sound, and thus at least the inflection is lost. The Gospels are first hand accounts, true, but are written down years later. The Letters are the least flawed at inception, since they are the words of the early bishops to either other bishops or to the people of the church.
So we have the loss of information just by writing down the old testament, rather than hearing the Word of God directly.
Then, we have either the Greek consolidation (which translated the Hebrew and Aramaic), or the Latin Vulgate, which translated all three... a translation made by a man, or by a group of men, or even by computer, it is inherently flawed.
Then we have the modern language editions starting with the Douay-Rheims... again, translations with annotations.
King James' edition was quite warped... beautiful, but the message is intentionally shaded by the translators.
So while I know there is truth IN the bible, the bible is not Truth itself.
I know also that the Bible is a tool put together by the heirs to the apostles to keep the faith united, a codified set of what is the new scripture, and what is not. Note that several books rejected for the bible are still used as educational and apologetics references... the Letters of Pope Clement, for example.
The Bible is the work of Mortals, based upon inspiration from the divine. I truly believe this as both a historian and as a Catholic. I know as well that many truths about Christ did not make it into the texts. We know not if he was married. Tradition says no. We know not if Mary was Joseph's first wife. Tradition does not say clearly, but it is Tradition that Joseph's marriage remained chaste, and so the Brothers of Christ must be either step brothers or 1st cousins. (Rejected 'gospels' include that Mary was Joseph's second wife, his first having been deceased.)
And, if by chance, I and the theologians who taught me this are wrong, so be it. But it is the nature of communication that information is lost between mind and voice, voice and hand, mind and hand, and transmission from mind to mind is always imperfect.
Posts: 43 | From: PA | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Michael Harrison
Advanced Member
Member # 6801
|
posted
This may not be in keeping with your question but I have observed that the scriptures say "Call no man on earth your father." Catholics immediately overruled this verse in establishing themselves as a church long, long ago.
Mat 23:9 "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."
Of course, anyone can rationalize this into something palatable enough to fool the masses, wresting the scriptures to their own destruction. At the same time they will be in denial about it. How and why are people drawn to this? This isn't the only example that can be given either. Few people want Jesus. They want the concept of Jesus to fit their purient understanding, and they do fit the scriptures to it, to fit their own satisfaction. It will not save them, but bring greater judgment upon them.
Jud 1:4 "For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ."
It is tragic! Let yourself be changed into His likeness. Live and bless God.
Posts: 3273 | From: Charlotte N.C. | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
afisherofman
Advanced Member
Member # 6899
|
posted
Hi all,
I have been posting on a RC bulletin board.
I wanted to share with you 2 comments by RC's which were made related to the subject and then my comments back.
Your feedback and comments are welcomed
Catholic #1
quote:
God also gave us His Church and that is in the Scripture.
From the follow verse is where you believe that,
Matthew 16:18
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
I believe God was giving Peter and ALL mankind HIS will on how to run HIS church by.
Peter was a fallible human just like you and I and the rest of the world.
Peter, the rock, can build a strong church in his eyes, however if the ground/foundation on which Peter the rock built his church was laid in sand, how strong will that church be???
quote:
We cannot ignore this part of Scripture in which Christ stated that he will build His Church
I Agree but not according to the way RC's believe.
Peter, by the power of God, became a tremendouse leader in the ways of the Lord in building Jesus' church.
quote:
It was His Church that created the Bible. The Bible never created the Church.
Wow, after reading the following how can you believe that
John 1
1In the beginning was the Word (bible), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He(Jesus) was with God in the beginning.
3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made (including His church). 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.
6There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. 7He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. 8He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. 9The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.
10He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11He came to that which was his own,
but his own did not receive him. (this is why I believe one needs to receive Jesus as their personal Lord and saviour)
12Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.
14The Word (bible) became flesh (Jesus) and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
From God's word, everything represented in the Bible, the word, is Jesus is God.
quote:
Scripture says that the Church that Christ built is His body,
If you are referring to Christ's presence in the RC Holy Eucharist, I disagree
quote:
and Scripture also says that Christ is the Head of that church. Because Christ is the Head of the church, we cannot simply ignore the church and only adhere to the Holy Bible, which was created by the church in the first place.
I would agree with you 100% if you said
"and Scripture also says that Christ is the Head of His (God, Jesus, the word) church. Because Christ is the Head of His(God, Jesus, the word) church, we have the God's word Holy Bible, which was inspired by God in the first place, to teach us in the ways of His (God, Jesus, the word) church."
2 Timothy 3
15And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
==============================================
Catholic #2:
quote:
I have never claimed that the Bible is the 'final authority'. I am not bound by the false, man-made 'Bible is final authority' tradition.
_________ are you serious??? How many people reading what you just said believe that.
Is that the way you feel about the word of God???
Doesn't God's word warrant greater respect than what some people give His word?
this is a serious issue at hand.
or did I misunderstand you _____??
please correct me if I did
thank you
If I did read you correctly then I challenge you or anyone else who believes what I quoted you saying to look to the heavens and say...
quote:
God, your word, the bible is a "false, man-made 'Bible is final authority' tradition" and even though when you said in Proverbs 30:6,
"Add not to His words, lest He reprove you, and you be found a liar."
Even though you said that God, I do not believe you. That is why in addition to Your word, I also believe this _________________ to be true
There is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO way I believe that to be true.
God's word, the bible, is truth
thanks for your time
let's pray for the lost Catholics
fish
Posts: 43 | From: PA | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
