And who are you? You’ve made quite a judgement about me, resorting to lies and wild accusations to bolster that judgment.
Because to offer a statistic would be impossible as I don’t know what truly is in the heart of all Christians. I go by what I see in my bible classes and who I know. The Catholics who are very holy, and love God. Just because they don’t jump out with John 7:8, doesn’t mean they don’t know their bibles. Catholics need to know their history. Even where the bible comes from as well as Protestants.
Then you don’t know that you’re right, but you know you’re right. ???
My friend it is an HISTORICAL FACT that what you have in your hands, the bible, was GIVEN TO YOU BY THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. Whether you choose to believe it or not.Rightiousone:…you say “So what you are saying is everyone went to hell BEFORE the bible was put into printing presses in the 1500’s? And who is ignorant of Scripture here?”
Ans: Is one saved from going to hell by the Bible or lack of it?
The Scriptures are authentinic and authoritive in their own right all the way back to the days of Moses’ recording of Genesis… they did not and do not require church leaders to collate them into some tomb to make them authentic or authoritive nor do they require church leaders to interpret them and lead us ‘poor ignorant folks into the light’… people have been saved since the dawn of time through their faith in God…others have and sadly are still going to hell due to their unbelief
Looking at your previous posts you appear to be angry with everyone who does not bow the knee to your will beware “a fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions” Proverbs 18: 2 :banghead:
Scriptures of the Old Testament (which was inspired by the word of God) in their own tongue; and this gave use to translations of the bible into Armenian and Syriac and Coptic and Arabic and Ethiopic for the benefit of the Christians in these lands. for the christians in Africa, where Latin was best understood, there was a translation of the bible made into Latin about 150 A.D., and, later, another and better for the Christians in Italy; but these were finally superseded by the grand and most important version made by St. Jerome in Latin called the “Vulgate”—that is the common, or current or accepted version. this was the fourth century of our era. By this time St. Jerome was born, there was great need of securing a correct and uniform text in Latin of Holy Scripture, for there was danger, through the variety and corrupt conditions of many translaions then existing, lest the poor Scripture should be lost.Rightiousone…you are beginning to believe your own properganda…the Bible was written, in 3 different languages, on 4 different continents and by 40 different writers over 1500 years…due to heresy within the growing church it was decided, and not by ‘Rome’, that to help counteract such heresy it would be good to collate all the existing authentic and authoritive writings into one publication referred to as the ‘Canon of Scripture’, it took on the name ‘Bible’ from the town of Biblious where the material for its publication was first taken from.
The ‘protestant’ Bible was translated in part from the Greek Septugant and this accounts for some of the technical differences between those protestant versions and the Jeruselem Bible of the Roman Catholic religion - which was translated in part from the Latin Vulgate (completed in A.D. 404) By Jerome.
It was Jerome that included the books of the Apocrypha in this version of the Bible…even though Jerome himself said they were not ‘books of the canon’ but merely ‘book of the church’ he supported their inclusion believing them to be useful to believers.
The protestants rejected their includion on several grounds, not least that they were were full of errors and contridictions that undermined Scripture itself, but more importantly bore no evidence of being ‘devinely inspired’ or used by the writters and teachers of Scripture in any of the preceeding centuries of Scriptures existence and use.
**Scriptures of the Old Testament (which was inspired by the word of God) in their own tongue; and this gave use to translations of the bible into Armenian and Syriac and Coptic and Arabic and Ethiopic for the benefit of the Christians in these lands. for the christians in Africa, where Latin was best understood, there was a translation of the bible made into Latin about 150 A.D., and, later, another and better for the Christians in Italy; but these were finally superseded by the grand and most important version made by St. Jerome in Latin called the “Vulgate”—that is the common, or current or accepted version. this was the fourth century of our era. By this time St. Jerome was born, there was great need of securing a correct and uniform text in Latin of Holy Scripture, for there was danger, through the variety and corrupt conditions of many translaions then existing, lest the poor Scripture should be lost.
St. Jerome who was a monk, a Catholic monk, and perhaps the most learned scholar of his day, at the command of Pope St. Damascus in 382 A.D., made a fresh Latin version of the New Testament (which by this time was practically settled) correcting the existing versions by the earliest Greek MSS. he could find. Then in his cell at Bethlehem, between approximately the years 392-404, he also translated the OT into Latin directly from Hebrew (and not the Greek Septuagint) This bible was the official text of the Catholic church, the value of which all scholars admit to be simply inestimable, and which continued to influence all other versions, and to hold the chief place among Christians down to the Reformation. I say the “official text” because the Council of Trent in 1546 issued a decree, stamping it as the only recognized and authoritive version allowed to Catholics. “If anyone does not receive the entire Vulgate Edition, as Sacred and Canonical…let him be anathema”.It was revised under pope Sixtus V in 1590, and again under Pope Clement VIII in 1593, Who is responsible for the present standard text. ** It is this Vulgate that the commission under Cardinal Gasquet, By command of the pope.
Don’t you understand that Rome reigned supreme? The Roman Catholic church is the bible’s maker and defender.
… that is why I also have a Douay-Rheims Bible which is based on the Vulgate.
:extrahappy: :extrahappy: :extrahappy:
Curiousone, you are missing the whole point. I am not talking ‘bloodshed’. All non-Catholics think is that Rome was this ‘murderous cult’ from beginning to end. Simply not true and I resent you saying this about my church that Christ started.Rightiousone…Thank you for articulating the rise of the Roman Catholic Bible so well…with the exception of the supremacy of Rome…I am not going to split hairs, I see little to argue about here over the chronology of the events as described, I don’t dispute the origin of the Roman Catholic Bible, I prefer the order and content as described by Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria and Melito Bishop of Sardis. Origen and Eusebius would appear to be in agreement with them…
It’s a whole new argument to claim Roman Catholic dominance of Christendom and the non-Christian world as the reason we who are ‘Christian’ and outside of the Roman Catholic religion should bow the knee.
From Constantine to the 4th century Rome has sought by the blood of the Saints and the power of the state to coerce believers and non-believers to join Rome. By the 12th Century the Roman Catholic Religion steeped in blood became established in the form so easily recognised today, it carried its blood letting on down the centuries, which only really began to cease with the dawn of the enlightenment period of world history.
However much Rome tried to coerce or eliminate the Christian and Non Christian alike, we as Ambassador’s of Christ are still here remaining a ‘thorn in the side which God has refused to remove’ from the flesh of Roman Catholicisim; to borrow a qoute from the Apostle to the Gentiles.
Curious one; your opinon of how the bible came to be only shows pieces of an incomplete history, secondly, you are raising some late protestant arguments against the Septuagint, that have been historically found false. I dont want to change the course of this thread. I can accept criticism of my Catholic faith, but if the criticism deals with falsehood, I believe correction may be in order. So I will leave you with just a few facts:Rightiousone…you are beginning to believe your own properganda…the Bible was written, in 3 different languages, on 4 different continents and by 40 different writers over 1500 years…due to heresy within the growing church it was decided, and not by ‘Rome’, that to help counteract such heresy it would be good to collate all the existing authentic and authoritive writings into one publication referred to as the ‘Canon of Scripture’, it took on the name ‘Bible’ from the town of Biblious where the material for its publication was first taken from.
The ‘protestant’ Bible was translated in part from the Greek Septugant and this accounts for some of the technical differences between those protestant versions and the Jeruselem Bible of the Roman Catholic religion - which was translated in part from the Latin Vulgate (completed in A.D. 404) By Jerome.
It was Jerome that included the books of the Apocrypha in this version of the Bible…even though Jerome himself said they were not ‘books of the canon’ but merely ‘book of the church’ he supported their inclusion believing them to be useful to believers.
The protestants rejected their includion on several grounds, not least that they were were full of errors and contridictions that undermined Scripture itself, but more importantly bore no evidence of being ‘devinely inspired’ or used by the writters and teachers of Scripture in any of the preceeding centuries of Scriptures existence and use.
You are so misled and so misguided it’s sad.Gabriel on of 12…Jesus was not the founder of the Roman Catholic Religion (church), check your own history or better still read your Bible…church history is very clear the church of Rome following the false conversion of Constantine went appostate to the true faith in the words of scripture…“For although they claimed to be wise they became fools and exchanged the glory of God” they combined with paganisim and sowed the seeds that flowered into the Roman Catholic Religion (church), this did not happen until the 4th century, in the 8th century structure of the Roman Catholic Church truely began to emerge and was firmly established by the 12th Century…it is that model of the 12th century that persists to the current day with few refinements…the source material later collated in to one codex, had been in existence for over 1500 years before the codex came into being, right from the onset there was division over the final number of books to be included in this new single format (designed for ease of use by all and for combatting heresy growing within the church), the Roman Catholic Religion (often reffered to as the church) did not approve the content until the 15th Century and did so as a final act of separation from the true faith…
Fortunately for Catholics, there is something called Ante-Nicene fathers, history, and reason that refutes this generic nonsense myth that is used by Protestants, Protestant derivatives, Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, and other religions that people make up while still wanting to involve Jesus.Gabriel on of 12…Jesus was not the founder of the Roman Catholic Religion (church), check your own history or better still read your Bible…church history is very clear the church of Rome following the false conversion of Constantine went appostate to the true faith in the words of scripture…“For although they claimed to be wise they became fools and exchanged the glory of God” they combined with paganisim and sowed the seeds that flowered into the Roman Catholic Religion (church), this did not happen until the 4th century, in the 8th century structure of the Roman Catholic Church truely began to emerge and was firmly established by the 12th Century…it is that model of the 12th century that persists to the current day with few refinements…the source material later collated in to one codex, had been in existence for over 1500 years before the codex came into being, right from the onset there was division over the final number of books to be included in this new single format (designed for ease of use by all and for combatting heresy growing within the church), the Roman Catholic Religion (often reffered to as the church) did not approve the content until the 15th Century and did so as a final act of separation from the true faith…