I did not say that. You are not hearing me on this point. I said that neither Jesus nor his disciples recognized the Apocrypha contained within the Septuagint. Obviously Jesus quoted from the Greek text. Obviously this was the prevailing language of His day.You are making an incorrect assumption that Jesus and the Apostles did not use the Gk. version.
When you say “these books” to which are you referring?.. Are we not talking about the Septuagint translated into Greek from the Hebrew? Are we not talking about the narrow split between the Apocrypha=12 books and (again) the O.T. books translated into Greek? …and the evidence is clear that Jesus and the Apostles referred to these books, without making any distinction that they were not on par with the rest of the Scripture.
Let me remind you of something guanophore, I am on the defense here to a web site that paints protestants in a very bad light. I am not the aggressor but the defender. I do not have a problem with the CC functioning as the CC. I am okay with that. But “functioning” as the Church the way you do it, is not all that you do. You also tell me that my understanding and my way of functioning as the Church is wrong and I must function like you with the threat of hell behind each demand. I cannot speak, or represent other protestants who may throw it right back in your face, I don’t care how you worship that is your business. But I feel it is my duty to respond to the misrepresentations found here about all protestants and our doctrine.No worries, tgG, if the CC is not of God, it will amount to nothing.
Yes. I now see my error in my above statement. The Septuagint contained the 39 books (or in the case of the Hebrew cannon 24 books based on how they were combined) and was all translation to Greek. My apology for such a poorly written sentence. But my point still stands. Let Jesus by His quotes found in the N.T. tell us what is the word of God and what isn’t. This He did.You are making an incorrect assumption that Jesus and the Apostles did not use the Gk. version
We too believe that baptism seals a believer and makes that person a member of Christ and his One body, the church. We too believe that a person who has thus been saved can reject their gift and spurn the grace of God. The “falling away from grace” is also believed possible in our camp! but the phrase is taken out of Galatians 5 where Paul made it clear what he meant by that.That person cannot be “unadopted”, but leaves he Father’s house, so that he cannot inherit what was promised at his adoption.
But the "Peter-petra " that He found the Church on, was in a feminine gender and the word means large rock. Since Jesus could not have meant a physical rock, the feminine rendering shows that He was in a metaphor. In it’s context Jesus was referring to the truth that He had just uttered in the larger context. The notion that Christ was going to found His Church on Peter, the man, flies right in the face of every scripture we know where Christ is the only founder and chief shepherd over His flock. Our command is to walk by faith and not by sight. Therefore we learn how to follow our invisible savior in the power of the holy Spirit.No, tgG, only an uniformed Catholic would assert such a thing. On the contrary, Jesus founded His Church upon Peter
I agree. They considered the whole Septuagint to contain inspired Scripture, including the Deuterocanonical Books. DEUTEROCANONICAL BOOKS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT - Scripture CatholicI said that neither Jesus nor his disciples recognized the Apocrypha contained within the Septuagint.
I am sure this position would support your argument that it was right to exclude these books. Unfortunately, the evidence does not support your assertion.This distinction was made by Jesus Himself who never quoted from the Apocrypha books, even though they were contained within the Septuagint.
Indeed, you do get swarmed by a lot of rabid Catholics. It happens to all Reformed Christians who come here. But to say that you are not an aggressor is not entirely accurate. You have made repeated, hostile, and calumnous remarks here. You bear false witness against the Catholic faith, which we find aggressive.I am not the aggressor but the defender.
I did not realize that you were functioning as an entire Church tgG! But I would not characterize it as “wrong” in any case, just inadequate/partial. That being said, it should also be noted that Protestants, who have less than the fullness of faith, often do more with that part they have than the majority of Catholics.You also tell me that my understanding and my way of functioning as the Church is wrong
This is just another false witness, tgG. I have never told you that you must function “like me” or even like the CC. I have certainly not threatened you with hell, or made any kind of demands of you. I have asked you repeatedly to stop spreading lies about what Catholics believe. These requests were not made in a demanding manner or accompanied by any threats.I must function like you with the threat of hell behind each demand.
Indeed, we value this very much here at CAF.But I feel it is my duty to respond to the misrepresentations found here about all protestants and our doctrine.
Such a concept would seem to imply that the person was attached to His grace at some point, would it not?“You are severed from Christ, you would be justified by the law, you are fallen away from grace.” Ga. 5:4
People who seek to be justified (made righteous) by keeping the strict code of the law will inevitably sever themselves from Christ and His grace.
Catholics believe that we must be in a state of grace to be able to enter heaven, as nothing unclean can enter heaven. If you think a person can remain pure who is severed from grace…well, I don’t know what to say about that.The question is: severed to what capacity: eternally, or temporally? We do know that Paul was talking to people already “in Christ.” Yet someone bewitched them into believing they could be justified by keeping the law. Their own willingness to go along with the deception kept them from enjoying all that God had for them. In that sense they were severed.
This is a common argument without any foundation. Matthew was written first in Aramaic, and translated into Greek. In Aramaic, rock is Cephas, and there are no male or female genders to the words. In Greek, “rock” is a feminine gender word, so it is translated Petra. It is an argument without any foundation.But the "Peter-petra " that He found the Church on, was in a feminine gender and the word means large rock.
On the contrary, he was standing next to a HUGE rock when he made this statement. He could have chosen to make the statement anywhere they travelled. Here is a pic of that huge rock wallSince Jesus could not have meant a physical rock
There you go, saying that Catholic beliefs “fly in the face of Scripture” again tgG! Then you wonder why I keep having to remind you that the NT was written by, for, and about Catholics, and that is why there is nothing in it that is not Catholic.The notion that Christ was going to found His Church on Peter, the man, flies right in the face of every scripture we know where Christ is the only founder and chief shepherd over His flock.
I agree. The successor of Peter and the teachings of Holy Mother Church help us do this.Therefore we learn how to follow our invisible savior in the power of the holy Spirit.
Uhhh. This is very cleaver but you did not make your point here. Why bother correlating between the N.T. writings with a book from the Apocrypha, contained in the Septuagint?..I agree. They considered the whole Septuagint to contain inspired Scripture, including the Deuterocanonical Books
The evidence is Jesus’ testimony Himself. Is not His actions and declarations enough for you?I am sure this position would support your argument that it was right to exclude these books. Unfortunately, the evidence does not support your assertion.
If I find testimony or my conclusions about something to be contrary to the word of God, I usually capitulate and apologize for my actions, including words that may be inappropriate.Indeed, you do get swarmed by a lot of rabid Catholics. It happens to all Reformed Christians who come here. But to say that you are not an aggressor is not entirely accurate. You have made repeated, hostile, and calumnous remarks here. You bear false witness against the Catholic faith, which we find aggressive.
Well, you are generous to say this, but it has a back-hand in the end.I did not realize that you were functioning as an entire Church tgG! But I would not characterize it as “wrong” in any case, just inadequate/partial. That being said, it should also be noted that Protestants, who have less than the fullness of faith, often do more with that part they have than the majority of Catholics.
no. no I wasn’t speaking about you personally. But surely many people on this site.This is just another false witness, tgG. I have never told you that you must function “like me” or even like the CC. I have certainly not threatened you with hell, or made any kind of demands of you.
Honestly, how can you ask this? There was no need to correlate these prior to the Reformation. The whole church, both East and West, accepted the Alexandrian Septuagint as inspired Scripture because that was the collection of Sacred Writings used by Jesus and the Apostles.Why bother correlating between the N.T. writings with a book from the Apocrypha, contained in the Septuagint?..
For Jesus and the Apostles, as for all the Church prior to the Reformation, they are not “apocryphal”. On the contrary, they are considered inspired, along with the rest of the Septuagint.Why not just go straight to the Apocrypha itself and quote it.
I agree. The ante-Nicean Fathers are full of such quotes, but we don’t consider them on the same level as Scripture.books may contain some of the same answers or the same conclusions as, for instance, Matthew’s gospel, but this is not the same thing as Jesus actually considering those books to be the word of God.
Don’t you think boycotting the Festival of Lights would also be a better testimony that this feast was not “valid” or coming from Divine inspiration?But He never once took that opportunity
Yes. His references to the Deuterocanon, and the HS leading the Apostles to reference them, along with His participation in the Holy Festival of Lights is sufficient for me!The evidence is Jesus’ testimony Himself. Is not His actions and declarations enough for you?
It seems you are faulting the CC for a gift that was given to her by Christ (the fulness of Him). You are right, any individual person’s “answers” may not “line up” with the revelation of God in Christ. It is not appropriate for us to seek “my answers” over and above what God has revealed about Himself. It is our obligation to learn, instead, what He has disclosed and commanded for us.Only you (the CC) discern my faith as inferior because you come from the position that the CC is infallible and my answers to not line up with you. This in of itself is a self-deception and probably the CC’s greatest weakness.
It is regrettable that you have been so contaminated by anti-Catholic dietary portions that you cannot forgive people who have died centuries ago. For the last 100 years we have enjoyed holy popes. It would be difficult to find such a succession of humble leaders anywhere. What can you find in Pope Frances that is at all lacking in humility? You are hating something that no longer exists!Humility at the highest level is lacking and has been for centuries.
You mean infallibility? Yes. Except that you haven’t been able to prove it scripturally only repeat yourself over and over as if it is true. The only thing infallible is God’s word alone.It seems you are faulting the CC for a gift that was given to her by Christ (the fulness of Him).