Differences between Catholic Teaching and the Bible

  • Thread starter Thread starter ricko
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
sbanks said:
how about verse 16Do not be excessively righteous and do not be overly wise. Why should you ruin yourself?
Click to expand...
This would appear to be off the topic of the question as to the differences between Catholic Teaching and the Bible? Please explain your point here and how it trelates to the topic of the thread.
 
sbanks said:
stick with the topic of how you were relating this to the mass.
Click to expand...
A joyful Mass was but one example of where laughter was emphasised more than sorrow. I gave another example of where the Pope is meeting with a clown. I don’t see how public exhibitions such as these support the Biblical teaching that sorrow is better than laughter.
 
bobzills said:
This would appear to be off the topic of the question as to the differences between Catholic Teaching and the Bible? Please explain your point here and how it trelates to the topic of the thread.
Click to expand...
Yes that is what you are referring to with sorrow and laughter - OFF TOPIC. Sorrow and laughter verse have nothing to do with the mass. as this verse has nothing to do with the mass itself. So what else? Let’s keep moving on to the next topic.
 
sbanks said:
Again you are judging from afar.
Click to expand...
How would you know for sure that I am judging from afar?
Also, this does not answer the objection raised above concerning the fact that a couple is required to obtain a divorce even before any annulment proceedings have begun. But the Bible commands us not to divorce.
 
sbanks said:
Yes that is what you are referring to with sorrow and laughter - OFF TOPIC. Sorrow and laughter verse have nothing to do with the mass. as this verse has nothing to do with the mass itself. So what else? Let’s keep moving on to the next topic.
Click to expand...
I disagree with your analysis of it. The Bible says sorrow is better than laughter. I have given serval examples of where the Catholic practices are contrary to this.
 
bobzills said:
How would you know for sure that I am judging from afar?
Also, this does not answer the objection raised above concerning the fact that a couple is required to obtain a divorce even before any annulment proceedings have begun. But the Bible commands us not to divorce.
Click to expand...
Well the Bible tells us not to agrue with one another too!!
 
moving along, Let me ask you a question.
Which came first - the church or the Bible? (this should be a one word response)
 
bobzills said:
Here’s another Biblical teaching: “. . . whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her” (Mk 10:1-12; Lk.16:18; 1 Cor.7:10-11). Popes Leo XIII and Pius XI spoke on the evils of divorce in their encyclicals “Arcanum,” and “Casti Connubii,” respectively. Vatican II condemns divorce in “Gaudium et Spes,” and the Catechism of the Catholic Church calls divorce “a grave offense against the natural law,” and “immoral.” But the Catholic Church in the USA promotes divorce by requiring those seeking a marriage annulment to first obtain a divorce, whereas canon 1060 stipulates, “in doubt the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.” Therefore, a tribunal must prejudge the marriage to be invalid prior to judging its validity, in order to justify a divorce preceding an annulment.
And these marriage annulments today are given for the most trivial of reasons.
Click to expand...
An annulment is not a divorce. An annulment means that a marriage never took place because the disposition of one or both parties precluded it from happening.
 
peary said:
An annulment is not a divorce. An annulment means that a marriage never took place because the disposition of one or both parties precluded it from happening.
Click to expand...
However, the point is that before any consideration of the annulment can take place, the Catholic marriage tribunal requires the couple to get a divorce. This is contrary to the Scripture, since: . “. . . whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her” (Mk 10:1-12; Lk.16:18; 1 Cor.7:10-11).
 
If the marriage was valid, getting a divorce does not necessarily mean that someone sins. It is the “marrying another” that constitutes the sin.
 
bobzills said:
However, the point is that before any consideration of the annulment can take place, the Catholic marriage tribunal requires the couple to get a divorce. This is contrary to the Scripture, since: . “. . . whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her” (Mk 10:1-12; Lk.16:18; 1 Cor.7:10-11).
Click to expand...
Really? An annulment can take place whether the couple are divorced or not, from my understanding (i.e., separated but not yet divorced). And, just because a couple are divorced does not mean that they are committing adultery. They can each be living singly in which case it is not adultery. It is separation.
 
bobzills said:
The question is off the topic of the thread.
Click to expand...
Incorrect Bobzills, completely relevent. you are asking are there differences in catholic teaching and the Bible. But it is very important to understand your history… which came first the church or the Bible?
 
sbanks said:
Incorrect Bobzills, completely relevent. you are asking are there differences in catholic teaching and the Bible. But it is very important to understand your history… which came first the church or the Bible?
Click to expand...
the Church…then the bible as we know it today,but then again may it was the bible(the word of God)or is the church(the body of Christ who is enternal) but so is the word of God.hey i could keep this up all night NOT…😃
 
fbl9 - Thank You!!
yes the church!! Yes the word of God!!!
You see Bobzills, in the beginning was God…in the beginning was Christ…in the beginning was the church…the word of God (both Old (Torah) and New) was/is and will be forever the reflections and inspired words of God that He instilled in the church!!
The point is that the Bible is a direct reflection, inspired by God, of the church teachings before the internet, before the printing press, before Luther, and before the Bible was put together. These writings from various authors are reflections on what took place during those growing times of the church!!! Now you can not believe in the Bible without believing in the church’s teachings, because it is from the teachings of the church!! And this is the point of this thread.
 
bobzilla is of the catholic religion so is sbanks as is i am too are we disagreening here or what??:confused:
 
fbl9 said:
bobzilla is of the catholic religion so is sbanks as is i am too are we disagreening here or what??:confused:
Click to expand...
you gotta go back to the start of this fb. bobzills asks questions about everything then when we give him the truth he keeps going back and ignores what we say. He just wants to argue with everyone and try to make the church wrong. He even knows all about annulments, again he feels that he can judge if a marriage is true or not. he knows everything. IF he is CATHOLIC he sure isnt Roman Catholic and if he is he sure doesnt act like it. Eating a hotdog on friday is a mortal sin, why because HE says so even though we showed him how the church says no. If a Bishop says the marriage can be annuled the bishop is wrong because boz says so. Just read from the beginning you will see. I washed my hand of him. If he is Catholic it goes back to the saying with friends like him who needs enemys. He plays dumb but no one is that dumb. He knows what hes doing and he thinks hes funny.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top