Catholic have more than 1 Bible ?
-
Dear friends,
please refrain from pushing this thread to a protestant vs catholic debate.
we have more than enough of this type of discussion which had led us to no where.
Thanks -
If you dunno "many things" .. how dare you act like you know a lot?Originally posted by Raptured:I can only attempt to answer bcos many things I don't know. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable can answer better. -
As I said, I need someone more knowledgeable to answer as I can only answer to the best of my limited knowledge. I can only attempt as I am not a scholar just a lay person speaking in common terms.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:1) MINOR DEVIATION????? U cant even agree the nature of Christ...some reject the Trinity etc. Even some protestants hold on to Once Saved Always Saved, some to Lutherans Faith Alone, others to the Catholic, Faith and Works. A Lutheran believe in the Real Presence while the Pentecostal do not. An Anglican hold fast to Apostolic Succession while the Methodost do not. Each contradict the other. For one denomination to be right, the others have to be wrong.
2) The Church does as Christ gave the Spirit to the Church and the powers of binding and loosing to the Apostles and her successors and the KEYS to Peter. The Church does is the pillar of truth and not Scripture in 1 Tim 3:15. Furthermore, the Church will not hold on to Sola Scriptura as it is not explicitly mentioned in Scripture, it cannot explains the New Testament Canon, it was not held by any Christian till the Reformation. I dont think Christ would have left us in darkness till 1500s.
3) Catholics do not worship mary. We ask mary to intercede for us as u ask ur pastor to pray for you. Those dogmas still exist today. While the wolves in sheep clothings have abused those dogmas, the dogmas in essence is true. To make it clear, indulgence is correct but the man-made doctrine of indlugence being sold (not taught by the Church) was prevalent. you cannot blame the Church for these.
4) The Catholic Church existed since 33AD. I shall prove it to you.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrneans, 8:2 (c. A.D. 110).
St Ignatius was a student of the Apostle Peter and john and lived thru Apostolic Times and was a matry.
"[A]ll the people wondered that there should be such a difference between the unbelievers and the elect, of whom this most admirable Polycarp was one, having in our own times been an apostolic and prophetic teacher, and bishop of the Catholic Church which is in Smyrna. For every word that went out of his mouth either has been or shall yet be accomplished." Martyrdom of Polycarp, 16:2 (A.D. 155).
Polycarp was the favourite student of Apostle John.
“…to be in honour however with the Catholic Church for the ordering of ecclesiastical discipline...one to the Laodicenes, another to the Alexandrians, both forged in Paul's name to suit the heresy of Marcion, and several others, which cannot be received into the Catholic Church; for it is not fitting that gall be mixed with honey. The Epistle of Jude no doubt, and the couple bearing the name of John, are accepted by the Catholic Church...But of Arsinous, called also Valentinus, or of Militiades we receive nothing at all.” The fragment of Muratori (A.D. 177).
The Catholic Church chose which books were Scripture.
"[N]or does it consist in this, that he should again falsely imagine, as being above this [fancied being], a Pleroma at one time supposed to contain thirty, and at another time an innumerable tribe of Aeons, as these teachers who are destitute of truly divine wisdom maintain; while the Catholic Church possesses one and the same faith throughout the whole world, as we have already said." Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1:10,3 (A.D. 180).
St irenaus who the student of Polycarp and the hammer of the gnostics. the CC even then possesed ONE faith.
“For it is evident that those men lived not so long ago,--in the reign of Antoninus for the most part,--and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherus, until on account of their ever restless curiosity, with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled.” Tertullian, On the Prescription Against Heretics, 22,30 (A.D. 200).
We see Church Authority.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And hence it was the Church who selected which books were scripture and which books was heretic and burnt it. This also disproves Sola Scriptura,
5)The Bibles cost nearly 20yrs salary of a peasant. it took 3 yrs to copy it hand by ahnd from the monks. And the Church translated it into the many languages long before the Reformation. Show me an example where u claim the atrocity has happened. And lastly, this proves Sola Scriptura cannot work till the printing press was invented as no one had Bible.
1) You quoted many terms which I don't even understand and so I cannot comment about it. But those with major deviations like rejecting the trinity can sometimes be unbiblical and often cults and sects have major deviations. But the basic doctrine is the same and that is the gospel of Jesus Christ. This much I can only say cos of my limited knowledge.
2) The letters were written by Peter, Paul, Jude, James etc etc and they were the apostles of the church. So they are the scriptures where we depend on to learn about Christ and Christianity. The church is just the fellowship of believers who hold on to the doctrines included in the letters and gospels. The church was kept in darkness purposely by the catholic church by the suppression of scriptures and martyrdom of reformers. Even though the canon is there, nobody outside the clergy has read it. Jesus is not to be blamed for the corruption by priests who kept the bible from the commoners and replaced them with traditions.
3) Indulgence is correct? I don't think so where one can buy one's pardon by giving money. Catholics have elevated Mary to the status of Mother of God which makes her equal to God. I don't blame the church. I blame the priests and clergy.
4) You said 33AD but those documents were written after 100+AD. In contrast, the books of the NT were written very much earlier before 100AD i think according to my limited knowledge. This shows the catholic church existed very much later and the original apostles lived earlier.
5) John Wycliffe. David Huss. William Tyndale. I can only name a few to my limited knowledge. And many others who are burnt as witches or heretics. An estab scholar might be able to name all the crimes of the catholic church better than me. -
I didn't act like i know a lot. I am just answering with what i know. What I don't know I say also.Originally posted by Icemoon:If you dunno "many things" .. how dare you act like you know a lot? -
Ok, we will see how Mr Pope will turn your world upside down.Originally posted by Raptured:I didn't act like i know a lot. I am just answering with what i know. What I don't know I say also.
You will realize everything you know is in fact incorrect. -
Actually credit must be given to the church fathers who established the canon.Originally posted by Raptured:2) The letters were written by Peter, Paul, Jude, James etc etc and they were the apostles of the church. So they are the scriptures where we depend on to learn about Christ and Christianity. The church is just the fellowship of believers who hold on to the doctrines included in the letters and gospels. The church was kept in darkness purposely by the catholic church by the suppression of scriptures and martyrdom of reformers. Even though the canon is there, nobody outside the clergy has read it. Jesus is not to be blamed for the corruption by priests who kept the bible from the commoners and replaced them with traditions.
You said the scriptures were written by the apostles. This is a sweeping statement. I ask you .. who is the author of Hebrews? Furthermore there were many gospels and thanks to this guy called Irenaeus, we have four and only four in the canon.
In short, do not create the impression that Scripture just drop from the sky.
Historically, tradition predates Scripture. -
Some of the books of the NT were written quite early, i.e. works of Paul, estimated 50-60CE. Others like the Apocalypse were written much later.Originally posted by Raptured:4) You said 33AD but those documents were written after 100+AD. In contrast, the books of the NT were written very much earlier before 100AD i think according to my limited knowledge. This shows the catholic church existed very much later and the original apostles lived earlier.
It is safe to say there were "catholic" writings in between. For example, the Didache is earliest estimated to be composed in 70CE - http://www.ntcanon.org/Didache.shtml -
Protestants are equally guilty of atrocities so let's not point fingers at the Catholics. Heard of Michael Servetus? Do you know who killed him?Originally posted by Raptured:5) John Wycliffe. David Huss. William Tyndale. I can only name a few to my limited knowledge. And many others who are burnt as witches or heretics. An estab scholar might be able to name all the crimes of the catholic church better than me.
Not all crimes are commited by the church. For example, the Spanish Inquisition is politically motivated and carried out by the monarchy. -
What about Michael Servetus? tell leh.Originally posted by Icemoon:Protestants are equally guilty of atrocities so let's not point fingers at the Catholics. Heard of Michael Servetus? Do you know who killed him?
Not all crimes are commited by the church. For example, the Spanish Inquisition is politically motivated and carried out by the monarchy. -
Originally posted by Honeybunz:What about Michael Servetus? tell leh.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Servetus
Michael Servetus (also Miguel Servet or Miguel Serveto; 29 September 1511 – 27 October 1553) was a Spanish theologian, physician and humanist.
His interests included many sciences: astronomy and meteorology; geography, jurisprudence, study of the Bible, mathematics, anatomy, and medicine. He is renowned in the history of several of these fields, particularly medicine and theology.
He participated in the Protestant Reformation, and later developed an anti-trinitarian theology. Condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike, he was burnt at the stake by order of the Geneva governing council as a heretic. -
As vince has pointed out, do not turn this thread into a roman catholics vs protestants again.
-
1) Each denomination has a distinct belief which contradicts the others. For example, the doctrine of baptism. SOme hold it as salvific while others as symbolic. A clear contradiction....why???? Each doctrine and denomination contradict the other...there is no such thing as one emphasise aspect of the Gospel more....instead its one's intepretation contradict the other.Originally posted by Raptured:As I said, I need someone more knowledgeable to answer as I can only answer to the best of my limited knowledge. I can only attempt as I am not a scholar just a lay person speaking in common terms.
1) You quoted many terms which I don't even understand and so I cannot comment about it. But those with major deviations like rejecting the trinity can sometimes be unbiblical and often cults and sects have major deviations. But the basic doctrine is the same and that is the gospel of Jesus Christ. This much I can only say cos of my limited knowledge.
2) The letters were written by Peter, Paul, Jude, James etc etc and they were the apostles of the church. So they are the scriptures where we depend on to learn about Christ and Christianity. The church is just the fellowship of believers who hold on to the doctrines included in the letters and gospels. The church was kept in darkness purposely by the catholic church by the suppression of scriptures and martyrdom of reformers. Even though the canon is there, nobody outside the clergy has read it. Jesus is not to be blamed for the corruption by priests who kept the bible from the commoners and replaced them with traditions.
3) Indulgence is correct? I don't think so where one can buy one's pardon by giving money. Catholics have elevated Mary to the status of Mother of God which makes her equal to God. I don't blame the church. I blame the priests and clergy.
4) You said 33AD but those documents were written after 100+AD. In contrast, the books of the NT were written very much earlier before 100AD i think according to my limited knowledge. This shows the catholic church existed very much later and the original apostles lived earlier.
5) John Wycliffe. David Huss. William Tyndale. I can only name a few to my limited knowledge. And many others who are burnt as witches or heretics. An estab scholar might be able to name all the crimes of the catholic church better than me.
2) How do u know those letters were written by the Four Evangelist? No one does. Instead we know those writins were Scripture because the Apostolic Fathers said so. More specifically St Irenaus for the Gospel Canon in 180AD. Furthermore the Church was built on 33AD while Revelations was written at 90AD. This proves the Church (and Tradition) predates Scripture. The Church is a visible and institutionalised gruop in Mat 16:18. Binding and loosing are visible acts. Furthermore the STUDENTS OF THE APOSTLES believe that the Church is visible and Called it the Catholic Church.
3) Indulgence has no money involved. Its penance. Read teh Catechism before u attack a doctrine. And Mary has been regarded as the Mother of God since the 1st century. Jesus = God, Mary = mother of jesus= mother of God. Lastly, ur Protestant Reformers called her the Mother of God and venerated her...especially John Wesley and Martin Luther.
4) The quotes from the STUDENTS of the APOSTLES, MATYRS and CHRISTIANS WHO SAW AND HEARD the GOOD NEWS, shows that they are part of the Catholic Church. If the Catholic Church had existed since Apostolic Times, i can safely conclude it is the church founded by Christ. To quote Martin Luther:"Accordingly, we concede to the papacy that they sit in the true Church, possessing the office instituted by Christ and inherited from the apostles, to teach, baptize, administer the sacrament, absolve, ordain, etc., just as the Jews sat in their synagogues or assemblies and were the regularly established priesthood and authority of the Church. We admit all this and do not attack the office, although they are not willing to admit as much for us; yea, we confess that we have received these things from them, even as Christ by birth descended from the Jews and the apostles obtained the Scriptures from them."
Naturally, if u can prove to me when teh Catholic Church was founded....continue the discussion.
Sermon for the Sunday after ChristÂ’s Ascension; John 15:26-16:4 (2nd sermon), page 265, paragraph 28, 1522.
5) They were heretics. Their crimes were heresy and not 'writing english bibles'. English bibles predates them even. No one read Scripture as they are too expensive. Do peasants own books....it takes 3 years to create a Bible. I do admit there are crimes commited by MEMBERS of the church. But i doubt u can ever find a dogma that caused a crime. Furthermore Protestants too killed many. Judge a church by its doctrines and not the sins of its sheeps.
And Wycliff died saying Mass.....he wasnt killed at all.Although John Wycliff is often credited with the first translation of the Bible into English, there were, in fact, many translations of large parts of the Bible centuries before Wycliff's work. Toward the end of the seventh century, the Venerable Bede began a translation of Scripture into Old English (also called Anglo-Saxon). Aldhelm (AD 640–709), likewise, translated the complete Book of Psalms and large portions of other scriptures into Old English. In the 11th century, Abbot Ælfric translated much of the Old Testament into Old English
It was the Catholic Church who first translated Bible into English....
And lastly, how do you know which books are Scripture? -
" But those with major deviations like rejecting the trinity can sometimes be unbiblical and often cults and sects have major deviations."
So just because they differ from your intepretation of Scripture, they become unbiblical? Are u or your intepretation infallible? -
If I'm not wrong, the Catholics beat Erasmus to it.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:It was the Catholic Church who first translated Bible into English....
You can fill us on the detail.
Edit: I think I made a mistake. Catholics came out with the Complutensian Polyglot Bible but it is not in English. The first time the whole Bible is translated into English, it should be the work of the Protestants? -
Originally posted by Icemoon:If I'm not wrong, the Catholics beat Erasmus to it.
You can fill us on the detail.Although John Wycliff is often credited with the first translation of the Bible into English, there were, in fact, many translations of large parts of the Bible centuries before Wycliff's work. Toward the end of the seventh century, the Venerable Bede began a translation of Scripture into Old English (also called Anglo-Saxon). Aldhelm (AD 640–709), likewise, translated the complete Book of Psalms and large portions of other scriptures into Old English. In the 11th century, Abbot Ælfric translated much of the Old Testament into Old English
-
Mr Pope, Catholics did not translate the *whole* Bible , only large part of the Bible.
-
Lets seeOriginally posted by Icemoon:Mr Pope, Catholics did not translate the *whole* Bible , only large part of the Bible.
The New Testament was translated into Gothic in the 4th century by Ulfilas. In the 5th century, Saint Mesrob translated the bible into Armenian. Also to dating the same period are the Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic and Georgian translations.
During the Middle Ages, translation particularly of the Old Testament was discouraged. Nevertheless, there are some fragmentary Old English Bible translations, notably a lost translation of the Gospel of John into Old English by the Venerable Bede, which he is said to have prepared shortly before his death around the year 735. An Old High German version of the gospel of Matthew dates to 748. Charlemagne in ca. 800 charged Alcuin with a revision of the Latin Vulgate. The translation into Old Church Slavonic dates to the late 9th century.
Alfred the Great had a number of passages of the Bible circulated in the vernacular in around 900. These included passages from the Ten Commandments and the Pentateuch, which he prefixed to a code of laws he promulgated around this time. In approximately 990, a full and freestanding version of the four Gospels in idiomatic Old English appeared, in the West Saxon dialect; these called the Wessex Gospels.
Pope Innocent III in 1199 banned unauthorized versions of the Bible as a reaction to the Cathar and Waldensian heresies. The synods of Toulouse and Tarragona (1234) outlawed possession of such renderings. There is evidence of some vernacular translations permitted while others were being scrutinized.
The most notable Middle English Bible translation, Wyclif's Bible (1383), based on the Vulgate, was banned by the Oxford Synod in 1408. A Hungarian Hussite Bible appeared in the mid 15th century, and in 1478, a Spanish translation in the Catalan dialect of Valencia.
Tyndale's Bible (1526) met with heavy sanctions, and William Tyndale was jailed in 1535 for translating the Old Testament. The Froschauer Bible of 1531 and the Luther Bible of 1534 (both appearing in portions throughout the 1520s) were an important part of the Reformation. The 1530 Catholic translation of Jacques Lefèvre d'Étaples even predates the completion of these Protestant translations.
The missionary activity of the Jesuit order led to a large number of 17th century translation into languages of the New World. -
Show me which one is a translation of the whole bible?
-
I will discount the Latin Veritas, the Latin Vulgate and the original texts.Originally posted by Icemoon:Show me which one is a translation of the whole bible?
1) Ulfilas translated the Bible from Greek into the Gothic language. For this he established a Gothic alphabet writing system. Fragments have survived and are known as the Codex Argenteus, in the University Library of Uppsala.
2) Saint Mesrop is best known for having invented the Armenian alphabet. The first monument of this Armenian literature is the version of the Holy Scriptures. Isaac, says Moses of Chorene, made a translation of the Bible from the Syriac text about 411. This work must have been considered imperfect, for soon afterwards John of Egheghiatz and Joseph of Baghin were sent to Edessa to translate the Scriptures. They journeyed as far as Constantinople, and brought back with them authentic copies of the Greek text. With the help of other copies obtained from Alexandria the Bible was translated again from the Greek according to the text of the Septuagint and Origen's Hexapla. This version, now in use in the Armenian Church, was completed about 434
3) Old Church Slavonic (Old Bulgarian, Old Macedonian, and Old Slavic) is the first literary Slavic language, developed from the Slavic dialect of Thessaloniki (Solun) by the 9th century Byzantine missionaries, Saints Cyril and Methodius. It was used by them for translation of the Bible and other texts from Greek and for some of their own writings. It played a great role in the history of Slavic languages and evolved into Church Slavonic, which is still used as a liturgical language by some Orthodox and Catholic Churches of the Slavic peoples.
4) Jacques Lefèvre d'Étaples (c.1450-1536), also known by his Latinized name Jacobus Faber Stapulensis, was a French theologian and humanist. He was a prolific translator of the Bible. He completed a translation of the Old Testament in 1528, and was famous for his French translation of Psalms and the Pauline epistles, which he finished early in his career. His completed translation of the entire Christian Bible, published in 1530, was the first in the French language. It even predates the completion of the Protestant translations.
I doubt there is a complete Bible Translation besides these 4. Perhaps the entire Bible was not popular as it would have been rather expensive. Furthermore, Christendome spoke 1 language, Latin, so naturally there is only a need for 1 Bible. The Orthodox Churches uses the Septuguaint. -
I mean in English ..
I thought this was the context? Not any language. -
English??? English wasnt even popular till 1300s.....Originally posted by Icemoon:I mean in English ..
I thought this was the context? Not any language. -
Too bad for you then.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:English??? English wasnt even popular till 1300s..... -
HUH???? Major Parts of Scripture was translated 8 centuries before the 1300s already. But an entire Bible for English, im afriad not.Originally posted by Icemoon:Too bad for you then. -
we were discussing about first english translation. scroll up.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:HUH???? -
I believe so. If I am not mistaken the first venecular Bible translation in that period would have been the Catholics though. Jacques Lefèvre d'Étaples translation predated the Protestants own translation but it was in French.Originally posted by Icemoon:If I'm not wrong, the Catholics beat Erasmus to it.
You can fill us on the detail.
Edit: I think I made a mistake. Catholics came out with the Complutensian Polyglot Bible but it is not in English. The first time the whole Bible is translated into English, it should be the work of the Protestants?
But why the interest in English translation?