Did the Catholic Church write the NT?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Katholikos
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

Katholikos

Guest
I tried to post this on the Scripture forum but was unsuccessful. Only the title posted.

DID THE CATHOLIC CHURCH WRITE THE NEW TESTAMENT?

The New Testament (NT) is not a continuous book with a beginning, a middle, and an ending. Rather, it is a collection of individual writings – written by different people, at different times and places, for different audiences and purposes. The Catholic Church collected 27 of her own writings, canonized them, and named them the New Testament when she was nearly 400 years old.

Q. Who authored the NT? A. Members of the Catholic Church.

Q. To whom were the writings addressed? A. To already established, functioning, believing local churches, to personal friends, and sometimes to no one specifically.

Matthew – anonymous – no salutation

Mark – anonymous – no salutation

Luke – anonymous – written to the author’s friend, Theophilus

John – anonymous – no salutation

Acts – anonymous – a continuation of Luke’s Gospel, also addressed to Theophilus

Romans – written by St. Paul – addressed “To all God’s beloved in Rome, who are called to be saints” (v. 7).

First Corinthians – written by St. Paul (and Sosthenes?) “To the church of God which is at Corinth” (v. 2).

Second Corinthians – written by St. Paul (and Timothy?) “To the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints who are in the whole of Achaia” (v. 1). (Achaia was the Roman province in which Corinth was located.)

**Galatians **– writtenby St. Paul “to the churches of Galatia” (v. 2). (Galatia was a Roman province including the regions of Pisidia, Pamphylia, and part of Lycaonia.) – Note that Galatians was addressed to more than one church.

Ephesians – written by St. Paul “to the saints who are also faithful in Christ Jesus.” Why is it named for the Church at Ephesus? Probably because when Paul’s letters were collected into a corpus, Ephesus had a copy of this one.

Philippians – written by St. Paul (and Timothy?) “To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi with the bishops and deacons” (v. 1).

Colossians – written by St. Paul (and Timothy?) “To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ at Colosssae” (v. 2).

1 and 2 Thessalonians – both written by St. Paul (and Silvanus and Timothy?) “To the church of the Thessalonians,” (v. 1).

1 and 2 Timothy – both written by St. Paul “to Timothy, my true child in faith” (1 Tm, v. 2) and “to Timothy, my beloved child” (2 Tm, v. 2).

**Titus – **written by St. Paul “To Titus my true child in a common faith” (v. 4)

Continued

 
Part 2

Philemon
– written by St. Paul “To Philemon, our beloved fellow worker, and Apphia our sister, and Archippus our fellow soldier, and the church in your house.”

Hebrews – written by St. Paul (?), not specifically addressed. Why called “Hebrews” – the Catholic Church named it because it was written to Jews (Hebrews) who were on the point of giving up their Christian faith and returning to the practices of Judaism.

James – written by “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes [of Israel] in the Dispersion.”

1 Peter – written by “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To the exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia” (v. 1, 2).

2 Peter – written by “Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ [or one of Peter’s disciples writing in his name] “To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours in the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ” (v. 1).

1 John – anonymous – not specifically addressed.

2 John – anonymous - written by “The Elder (or Presbyter) To the Elect Lady and her children” – i.e., to the Church and her members.

**3 John – **anonymous – “The Elder (or Presbyter) to the beloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth.”

Revelation – “The revelation of Jesus Christ . . . to his servant John . . .”

 
Saying that the Catholic Church AUTHORED OR WROTE the New Testament isn’t really accurate in my opinion. I think it is better to say that the Catholic Church decided which books were inspired and fit the criteria for becomin books in the New Testament. I think many Protestants should be thankful to the Church for this, but they don’t realize they owe it gratitude. Without the Catholic Church, the original Christian Church, then I suppose we would not have a Bible with the New Testament.
 
40.png
WhatIf:
Saying that the Catholic Church AUTHORED OR WROTE the New Testament isn’t really accurate in my opinion. I think it is better to say that the Catholic Church decided which books were inspired and fit the criteria for becomin books in the New Testament. I think many Protestants should be thankful to the Church for this, but they don’t realize they owe it gratitude. Without the Catholic Church, the original Christian Church, then I suppose we would not have a Bible with the New Testament.
You’re right…It wasn’t the Catholic Church that authored the NT, it was members of the Catholic Church that authored the NT under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Then the Catholic Church (again under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) decided which books were Canon.
 
40.png
tkdnick:
You’re right…It wasn’t the Catholic Church that authored the NT, it was members of the Catholic Church that authored the NT under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Then the Catholic Church (again under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) decided which books were Canon.
The Catholic Church *is *its members. The Church is the People of God, not a building.
Were the sacred writers of the NT the People of God?
 
40.png
WhatIf:
Saying that the Catholic Church AUTHORED OR WROTE the New Testament isn’t really accurate in my opinion. I think it is better to say that the Catholic Church decided which books were inspired and fit the criteria for becomin books in the New Testament. I think many Protestants should be thankful to the Church for this, but they don’t realize they owe it gratitude. Without the Catholic Church, the original Christian Church, then I suppose we would not have a Bible with the New Testament.
See my reply to tkdnick.
 
40.png
Katholikos:
The Catholic Church is its members. The Church is the People of God, not a building.
Were the sacred writers of the NT the People of God?
Yes, the Catholic Church is its members. And it is so much more too! My point wasn’t to say you were wrong because I agree with you. But it doesn’t sound like WhatIf does, so I thought I would come at from a different angle.
 
40.png
tkdnick:
Yes, the Catholic Church is its members. And it is so much more too! My point wasn’t to say you were wrong because I agree with you. But it doesn’t sound like WhatIf does, so I thought I would come at from a different angle.
😃 The Church is the spotless Body of Christ and His Bride - without spot or wrinkle, as St. Paul says in Ephesians 5:21-30.

It amazes me that Protestants, who are noted for their Bible reading, (the 66-book version, that is), never seem to notice that the NT was written to believers.
 
Of course they did.
Jesus set up the Catholic church. His disciples were Catholic. The Papacy was established and was Catholic. There was no other form of Christianity at that time.
The New Testament (NT) is not a continuous book with a beginning, a middle, and an ending.
So what? For example, many textbooks have no end as such, they are merely a collection of articles.
Rather, it is a collection of individual writings – written by different people
Written by different people who, if they were Christians, were Catholics.

Jo
 
40.png
Katholikos:
It amazes me that Protestants, who are noted for their Bible reading, (the 66-book version, that is), never seem to notice that the NT was written to believers.
It’s not just Protestants who miss this! It’s A LOT of people. But once you realize who the Bible is specifically written too, I don’t think you can deny the Catholic interpretations and doctrines.
 
The New Testament IS Catholic. 👍

It amazes me when Protestants & Fundamentalists use the Bible as a weapon against Catholics.

:amen:
Shannin
 
This thread was started at the request of a fellow poster, Xenos. I enumerated some characteristics by which the True Church can be known on another thread. He asked me to give him more information on my following statement.

“[4] that the Church pre-dates the New Testament and is its author (see all the writings of the NT and the Encyclopedia of Early Christianity).”

I’ve now posted all the names of the books of the NT, the authors, and to whom they were written. There is no doubt that the NT was written to existing, functioning, believing communities who had learned their faith not from a book, but from the lips of their founders, the Apostles. Paul was writing to local churches that he himself had founded. He had lived among the members, ordained bishops and priests (presbyters), taught them the Faith, and then moved on. He wrote in response to problems which had arisen in those communities after he had left them. He was their spiritual father, as he said. Paul’s letters are the oldest writings in the NT – they were written long before the Gospels.

Here’s the quote from the Encyclopedia of Early Christianity:

"The church spread the Septuagint, together with its own writings contained in the New Testament, throughout the world in its missionary activities. Encyclopedia of Early Christianity, Second Edition, Everett Ferguson, Editor, Garland Publishing, Inc., New York and London, 1998, article Septuagint, p. 1049. (This is a Protestant publication.)

The Catholic Church canonized the 46 writings of the Greek Septuagint she inherited from Jesus and the Apostles and named them the Old Testament at the same time she canonized the NT. She then put her collections of writings together and named them ta Biblia – meaning the Books – the Bible.

JMJ Jay
 
40.png
jojojojo:
So what? For example, many textbooks have no end as such, they are merely a collection of articles.

Written by different people who, if they were Christians, were Catholics.Jo
The New Testament is not a textbook. That’s my point. Protestants think it’s an instruction book in Christianity. It isn’t.

The NT is the literary record of the spiritual life of the newborn Catholic Church – the New Isreal (Gal 6:16), the new House of Jacob (Lk 1:32-33) during the first 100 years or so of her existence.

JMJ Jay
 
40.png
Katholikos:
The New Testament is not a textbook. That’s my point. Protestants think it’s an instruction book in Christianity. It isn’t.

The NT is the literary record of the spiritual life of the newborn Catholic Church – the New Isreal (Gal 6:16), the new House of Jacob (Lk 1:32-33) during the first 100 years or so of her existence.

JMJ Jay
I may be misunderstanding you, in which case sorry, but I did not mean to infer that the NT WAS a textbook. I was merely providing an example of a book that need not have a beginning, middle and end.
Actually, I think we ARE on the same wavelength 🙂

Jo
 
Yes, and King James wrote a letter to The Baptists and Jack T Chick to use the KJV to cause separation.

Trelow, I wonder if God knew that King James was a homosexual, I can give a source for that.
jesus-is-lord.com/kinginde.htm
 
My first bible study was with a Protestant Group. They ruled out Catholic Tradition by vote. Then they tried to study the book of Romans.

We had to inform them that the New Testiment is Catholic Tradition, but we would be glad to study the Old Testiment.

Some how they do not understand these books were written by Catholics for Catholics.
 
40.png
Katholikos:
It amazes me that Protestants, who are noted for their Bible reading, (the 66-book version, that is), never seem to notice that the NT was written to believers.
First of all im not sure how to do that quote thing that gets the yellow box around it.
Code:
 Maybe this inst the right forum, but the 66 book thing is VERY important. I did some research on the Apocryphal books and I found that almost every Bible had it in them at least as an appendix to every Bible up to around 1830! One source even had a quote from LUTHER where he said some thing like “the Apocryphal books should not be used to teach doctrine, but are worth reading” . They say the Church added them after wards! 


 When I first read through them (apocryphal books) it was like I was back in middle school getting a review before a test. All that history and wisdom, they are very helpful in understanding the first parts of the Old testament. One other thing that many protestants don’t realize is that books like 1&2 Mac tell what happened during that gap BETWEEN the return from Babylon and Jesus, very important struggles.
 
Catholic Dude:
When I first read through them (apocryphal books) it was like I was back in middle school getting a review before a test. All that history and wisdom, they are very helpful in understanding the first parts of the Old testament. One other thing that many protestants don’t realize is that books like 1&2 Mac tell what happened during that gap BETWEEN the return from Babylon and Jesus, very important struggles.
I am on my first run through the “Apocryphal” books. I’ve only made it through a couple of them, but so far for me they seem to be disjointed and not fit with the rest. Now I haven’t read the entire OT, so maybe they fit better with some of the later books. Guess I’ll have to wait and see.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top