2
2nd_Adam
Guest
Protestants have a hard time taking Catholics seriously wiith postings like this. In addition, there really isn’t much discussion about the actual contents of the Bible. I wonder why? Consider the thread tiitle.
- Status
E
elvisman
Guest
The Old Testament was revealed to the Jews. The Hebrew texts were then translated into Greek some 200 years B.C by seventy scholars – hence the name the Septuagint. Many Jews, known as “Diaspora”, because they were dispersed throughout the Roman empire relied on the Septuagint, Greek being the lingua franca. Jesus and his Apostles studied and learned from the Septuagint – as can be illustrated in dozens of New Testament references to the Septuagint.
Some 40 years after the death, resurrection and ascension of our Lord Jesus, the Romans sacked Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple – just as Jesus prophesied (Luke 19:44). A few years later, a group of Rabbinic scholars asked the Romans for permission to convene in Jabneh (also called Jamnia). There, they decided to throw out 7 books of the Old Testament.
The problem was – these post-Temple Jews no longer had the authority over the Scriptures. They had rejected the very fulfillment of the Scriptures and put him to death. The New wine (Christianity) had replaced the Old Wine and wineskins (Judaism).
The Catholic Church has retained the Old Testament – the ENTIRE Old Testament, including those 7 books that Jesus studied from, as well as writing the New Testament. Most Protestant sects sided with the post-Temple Jews who rejected Jesus and have accepted their “authority” instead of the Authority Jesus established and gave to his Church.
Ummm – did you wanna know anything else?
Stephen168
New member
There has been quite a bit of discussion on the contents of the Bible. Mainly, the Table of Contents which you have not addressed.
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
I don’t understand your post. The Catholic Catechism defines the table of contents of Sacred Scripture.
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
When you guys are ready to discuss the actual contents of the Bible, please let me know.
C
Canto
Guest
Scripture is composed by God via human authors
The Catholic Church decided which books should be considered Scripture (in the canon) at the Council of Rome in 382 AD. There was no definitive list before that time.
27 NT books and 46 OT books decreed the Bishop of Rome (Pope).
Now as for the OT there was no Jewish canon at the time of Christ. The Sadducees for example only accepted the first five books. Some Jews to this day include the deuterocanon books, though most do not. Protestants follow the Catholic order, not the Jewish order, but do not included certain books and parts of other books decreed scripture by the Church.
A few points to make…
1- the Jews rejected the entire NT - doesn’t bode well, with all due respect, for recognising what constitues Sacred Scripture
2- if the Church got the NT right, why not the OT?
3- Jesus never told the apostles to write (most didn’t) he never told us what constitues the canon of Scripture
C
Canto
Guest
How do you know what constitutes the contents?
God never told anyone - if he did, what was his/her/their name(s)?
People seem to take the Bible, in a sense, for granted, without being aware of how or by whom it was compiled
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
According to the Catholic Catechism, here is the Catholic cannon. When you are ready to discuss the actual contents in Sacred Scripture, please let me know.
IV. THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE
120 It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the sacred books.90 This complete list is called the canon of Scripture. It includes 46 books for the Old Testament (45 if we count Jeremiah and Lamentations as one) and 27 for the New.91
The Old Testament: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Baruch, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zachariah and Malachi.
The New Testament: the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the Acts of the Apostles, the Letters of St. Paul to the Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, the Letter to the Hebrews, the Letters of James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2 and 3 John, and Jude, and Revelation (the Apocalypse).
C
Canto
Guest
So are you saying the Catholic Church gave us the canon, if not whom?
If so, if she was right about the canon, why not about the Eucharist or any other myriad of things?
One cannot discuss the contents unless one knows what they are and who decided what they are. For example in debates on purgatory Protestants will not consider Maccabees as Scripture. With what authority do they make such a claim?
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
If a Catholic truly does know Scripture, he also needs to demonstrate that in conversation: “Walk the walk,” don’t just “talk the talk.” The more we show that Bible and Catholicism are not contradictory terms, the more we appeal to Protestants with the truth of our overall message. A Catholic who is properly prepared can easily go head-to-head with a Protestant exegete… (see OP link for Catholic source)
Don’t be afraid to challenge your Protestant brothers with the contents of Scripture. Until you start to discuss and debate the actual contents of Scriptures, Protestants will never take you very seriously.
R
racing59
Guest
Hi 2nd Adam, you called me on the carpet so here goes.Church in the Bible is refering to the Bride of Jesus Christ.By 155 Ad. it was called Catholic(Universal) by most of the early Christian communities.The Bishops of this very Church put the Bible together, many original manuscrips had been lost Old and New Testament and were saved by Oral Tradition. The Vulgate is the oldest New Testament put toether by Council of Bishops. Do you claim Calvin put the Bible together and it’s contents? To reject that the Catholic Church (all 27 rites) put the Bible together is to reject the Bible itself. FACT: Revelation 22:1-5 where add to the Bible by the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages (Salvation History.com) is not this text in the Bible translation you use??? My point is this than why is the New Testamen, Word of God (Bible) you use not a different text than what Catholics use??? Why don’t we have a different Gosple Text than Catholics if they did not put the Bible together??? The Bible came about through the Catholic Church, it did not fall from the sky and was not written in Tablets of Stone like the 10 Commandments. It came about through the Bishops of the Church who were disciples of the original Apostles.
2
2nd_Adam
Guest
Thanks for your Catholic posting.
When you are ready to discuss the actual contents of the Sacred Scriptures, I would enjoy it very much. However, your posting is not really about what God has revealed in the Scriptures.
G
guanophore
Guest
No, I don’t think I can. I don’t understand what you are asking. There is only one Sacred Tradition. I am not sure what “forms” you might be referring to. The NT was produced out of the Sacred Tradition (Word of God) present in the teaching of the Apostles.
I am not sure how you came up with this. The Catholic Church teaches that there is One Divine Deposit of Truth. It is in the form of two equal strands, Sacred Scripture, and Sacred Tradition. If the Sacred Tradition were “inferior”, how could it produce the NT? Or the canon of Scripture?
I am not sure what the “other forms” are. Perhaps you are not distinguishing between Sacred Tradition, and tradition with a small “t” (customs), also referred to as “traditions of men”?
**
97 “Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture make up a single sacred deposit of the Word of God” (DV 10) in which, as in a mirror, the pilgrim Church contemplates God, the source of all her riches.
Protestants and Catholic agree that Sacred Scripture is the Word of God and is God-breathed. Do Catholics believe that Sacred Tradition is God-Breathed and the Word of God just like Sacred Scripture? Does the Catholic Church really see Sacred Tradition to be equal wih Sacred Scripture?
Yes. The Church is also God-breathed. That is what makes her infallible. That is how she can create infallble acts, such as writing scripture.
II. INSPIRATION AND TRUTH OF SACRED SCRIPTURE
105 God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."69
The men, who were inspired by the HS, and spoke from God, were Catholic. They wrote to and for Catholics. What they wrote was the Catholic faith.
The better question is, why do you disobey the Scripture?
"…stand fast and hold the traditions which you have learned whether by word OR by our epistle - 2 Thess 2:15
Why do you degrade what was delivered to the Church by the Apostles, not the word of men, but the Word of God? Why do you doubt that He is able to preserve His word, whether it is by letter, or by Word of Mouth?
If you are saying that the writing of the early Church Fathers is considered Sacred Tradition, then are you saying that there writings are equivlent to Sacred Scripture and inspired by God too?
This is a good question. No, only the inspired inerrant Scriptures have their entire contents completely consistent with Sacred Tradition. however, we can see the unbroken thread of the infallible Apostolic teaching contained within the writings of the Fathers. Some of that is included in those quotes above. They all value the Teachings of the Apostles (Sacred Tradition) as equal to the Scriptures, and they testify that the two should not be separated.
Only those parts that are consistent with the Word of God contained in the Teaching of the Apostles.**
R
racing59
Guest
Brother in Christ, I’m ready to discuss Sacred Scripture any time with any one as long as it is done in Jesus Christ Love.Once again I’m not Catholic in the sense you mean. I conceed certain realities though in order to discuss Sacred Scripture. How can we discuss the Word of God if we don’t except how it was originated and manifested? What interpretation shall we use? Calvin,Joseph Smith,ect… I interperate by prayer and the Holy Spirit and see the Sacred Scriptures through Covenant eyes. You probably do simular,but yet you will tell me my interperation is wrong. So on who’s authority are the perameters of the Sacred Sciptures being discuss? Yours?Thanks for your Catholic posting.
B
benidict
Guest
hi adam. didnt have time to respond earlier because i was working all night. just woke up so here is my response to your proof text stateing james was a calvinist. james 2 vs 14-26 What shall it profit, my brethren , if a man says he hath faith but hath not works? shall faith be able to save him? 15 and if a brother or sister be naked and want daily food: 16 and one of You say to them: go in peace, be ye warmed and filled; yet give them not those things that are necessary for the body, what shall it profit? 17 so faith also, IF IT HAVE NOT WORKS, IS DEAD IN ITSELF. 18 but some man will say: thou hast faith and i have works; shew me thy faith without works; and i will shew thee, by works,my faith. 19 thou believest that there is one God. thou dost well: THE DEVILS ALSO BELIEVE AND TREMBLE. 20 but wilt thou know, oh vain man, THAT FAITH WITHOUT WORKS IS DEAD? 21 was not abraham our father justified by works, offering up issac his son upon the alter? 22 seest thou, THAT FAITH DID COOPERATE WITH HIS WORKS; ANDE BY WORKS FAITH IS MADE PERFECT? 23 and the scripture was fulfilled, saying: abraham believed God and it was reputed to him to justice, and he was called the friend of God. 24 DO YOU SEE THAT BY WORKS A MAN IS JUSTIFIED; AND NOT BY FAITH ONLY? 25 and in like manner also rahab the harlot, was not she justified by works, receiving the messengers, and sending them the other way? 26 FOR EVEN AS THE BODY WITHOUT THE SPIRIT IS DEAD; SO ALSO FAITH WITHOUT WORKS IS DEAD…doesnt sound very calvinistic to me. also calvin and luther had problems with james if im not mistaken. luther even wanted it out of the bible.
B
benidict
Guest
hi racing 59. nope not his. nope nope nope:dts: we are going by the authority of john calvin. apparently the Lord himself was subject to calvins authority according to 2nd adam, just kidding.
G
guanophore
Guest
The NT was written by, for, and about Catholics. There is nothing in it that is not Catholic. Sacred Scripture reveals and complements the Sacred Tradition. there are no conflicts.So, the door is open to practice your Catholic apologetics and compare the Catholic Faith with Sacred Scripture.:coffeeread::juggle:
Perhaps you are unaware of just how many divisions exist in Christendom?
No, 2nd. If we do progress to the discussion of TULIP, I think you will find that the differences are much broader.
No, 2nd. the Catholic church has always taught justification by faith. what Pope Benedict has written is what the Church has always believed and taught.
Yes.
The declaration of righteousness occurs because we have actually been MADE righteous before God. The Apostles did not teach that God “doctors the books” by crediting accounts with assets that do not really exist.
Yes, the strength of the Catholic faith resides in the whole gospel. We have not sliced out part of it, and abrogated it into a “not from God” pile.You don’t want to take the Catholic challenge as stated by the Catholic article in debating with Protestants in the Scriptures, correct?
If I did not enjoy debating the Scriptures with Protestants, I would not be here.
I am amazed that you would use this scripture to support Calvanism. It is one of the strongest refutations against OSAS.
It is this deficient understanding of the Church that prevents you from receiving the whole gospel.
Eph 1:17-23
17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:
18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,
19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to usward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,
21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:
22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,
23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.
The Church is the recipient of the exceeding greatness of His power, according to the working of His great might. God has put all things under His feet, and gave Him to be Head over all things to the Church, which is His Body. The Church is the fullness of Him who fills all in all.
What you have done is decapitated the Church, to defend the errant doctrine of Sola Scriptura. To say that the church is imperfect you must decaptitate her, and expel her Soul, which is the HS. The reason the church is infallible are these divine elements of her, not the sinful men attached to her.
G
guanophore
Guest
Can you please explain this statement? How are you defining doctrine, and how do you see that there is more of it in John’s gospel?
Is this your evidence that James rejected the free will of man?Actually, James rejected the free will of man; therefore, he is more of a Calvinist than you think.
Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit”— yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.” As it is, you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil. So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin. - James 4
I guess I am just mind boggled about this. Peter makes it clear that they should “make every effort”. Why bother, if they cannot fail?More Calvinisn from Peter…
Make Your Calling and Election Sure
3 His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to [3] his own glory and excellence, [4] 4 by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire. 5 For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, [5] and virtue with knowledge, 6 and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, 7 and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love. 8 For if these qualities [6] are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 For whoever lacks these qualities is so nearsighted that he is blind, having forgotten that he was cleansed from his former sins. 10 Therefore, brothers, [7] be all the more diligent to make your calling and election sure, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall. 11 For in this way there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
12 Therefore I intend always to remind you of these qualities, though you know them and are established in the truth that you have. 13 I think it right, as long as I am in this body, [8] to stir you up by way of reminder, 14 since I know that the putting off of my body will be soon, as our Lord Jesus Christ made clear to me. 15 And I will make every effort so that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things.
Why “be all the more diligent” to make a calling and election sure if it is already sure?
Why worry about practicing spiritual virtues if it is not possible to fall? Why does the Apostle seem to indicate that it is possible to fall?
This is really amazing. I have been shown many scriptures used by Calvanists, but not these. The Apostles taught that receiving Christ is the choice of each individual,and that belieiving upon Him is a work - something that man does, though the power of the HS. It is the act of mixing our faith with His grace that produces salvation.The Apostle John tells us that we were not saved by our own free will.
John 1
1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life, [1] and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.
6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light.
9 The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. 11 He came to his own, [2] and his own people [3] did not receive him.** But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.**
B
benidict
Guest
actually my friend you cant answere racing 59. because it would open up a discussion that would destroy your premis that the scriptures are to be read in the light of calvin and not in the light of what the Lord and his apostles taught. you still have not answered my qestion either, ( unless i missed it) was calvin infalible and are you reading the bible in the light of calvins teachings? if you are then the only difference is you accept calvin as your authority, where we accept the Lord Jesus Christ authority and The apostles Authority whom he gave it to " whoever listens to you listens to me" hmm sound familiar? and that same authority was given to His church as is evidenced in the letter to the corinthians by clement a desciple of st. peter and his successor. according to clement there was to be an unbroken line of succession down thru the ages that the apostles set up. it is still with us today. “I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” hmm sound familiar? who am i quoting?Thanks for your Catholic posting.
G
guanophore
Guest
This is a good example of one of the reasoning errors that emanates from the Reformation. The construction “this and not” that is black and white thinking. On the contrary, most of the time it is both.
Sacred scriptures are from God, and are given through the Church. and you are in error. Mary was the very first Catholic, from the time the angel Gabriel came to her. Peter, James, and all the Apostles were Catholic.
Of course they were not from your perspective! that is why we keep telling you that you have inherited a perspective that departs from the Apsostolic perspective!
This is good. You may be able to one day accept that God was able to preserve that deposit as He promised.
I agree that this was the original intent of the Reformers. Unfortunately, they did not understand that the doctrine of the faith did not need to be reformed. there was nothing wrong with it. It was the men responsible for it that were in need of Reform. Men are always in need of Reform. When they started to reform the doctrine, they inadvertantly departed from what the Apostles believed and taught. This separation and division has continued and multiplied to the current day.
No, those who are in unity with Jesus will never rejoice in the separation and division within His Body.
Is that your goal here, 2nd? Do you believe that, if you can get Catholics to “search the scriptures” with you, that we will all convert to Calvanism?
Catholics have already received what God has revealed to mankind - Himself! It is the scriptures that testify and bear witness to Him.
This is wise, actually. Given the lack of familiarity that many have with the Scripture, they are in a very vulnerable position, and can be easily led astray by the ignorant who twist them to their own destruction. I can testify. I was one of them!
- Status