God wrote the Bible not the Catholic Church

[colliric]

If and when irrational people did write the BIBLE then why is there a coherent theme within. God dictated the BIBLE thru the hand of men. The BIBLE must be interperted using the scripture within.

Well why did he use the Catholic Church to declare the final New testament canon in 385AD? and then at the same time he allowed that Church to be the one that formally declared the NT to have been written by him. He did that you know! Also the original and perfect biblical canon of God included Tobit, Maccabees, and the other so called “Apocrypha”. They were only “reconfirmed” and given the title of “Deuterocanon” when Luther questioned them.

Why did he use the Catholic Church to put the final touches on it? and to be the first church to put the books into one “official” bible?

The book of God, written by God… through the Catholic Church, The church of God and the church he has charged with protecting his book, the original canon and the book’s correct interpretation.

There is a coherant theme in the bible… why?

Because God appointed a compiler to finalise and harmonise his book, to throw out what didn’t deserve to be there and correctly order what is supposed to be there, and that compiler was the Magesterium of the Church… His church.

Without this church your protestant old testament would be exactly in structure the same as the “good book” of the hebrews, The Catholic Church changed that and reordered it for Christians, and without this church you wouldn’t even have the New testament that is compleatly as the Catholic Church decided it should be.

God wrote the book… through his holy Church, the Catholic Church.

 

[GregoryPalamas]

Sixtus,

Your title kept me from reading it. But now that I have I must say I hope we meet someday. You have a great sense of humor. Non-Catholics don’t really believe in the Church as a Church. It’s a nice social club but they really have no need for the Church. The Bible is all they seem to need.

God defined freedom as intimacy with and obedience to the author of life. The serpent said freedom was “do your own thing”. Non-Catholics think they are “Free thinkers” as did the “Free masons”. Gee, I wonder if the non-Catholics. Freemasons, and the other fellow are right?

CDL

 

[Publisher]

I assure you, it’s taking the piss at protestant “bible worship”…

Ahhh! Catholic “insult” and sarcasm again…I see. It makes sense now.

 

[Robert902]

My boyfriend, a history expert as well as a Protestant, has confirmed that the Catholic Church put the Bible together. He’s used that to back me up when I’d get attacked with anti-Catholic sentiments.

The Catholic Church put which Bible together? KJV?

God Bless,
Robert
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Eph. 5:20-21 ‘Test all things, hold fast what is good.’
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

[jmcrae]

The Catholic Church put which Bible together? KJV?

Latin Vulgate, which is still the template from which all others (including the KJV, and even the New World Translation) are made, even until today.

It was the Catholic Church that discerned, through the working of the Holy Spirit, which books belong in the New Testament, and which ones belong in the Old Testament. It was also the Catholic Church that set about the work of translating them into a common language, and distributing copies to the whole world.

 

[Robert902]

Sixtus,

Your title kept me from reading it. But now that I have I must say I hope we meet someday. You have a great sense of humor. Non-Catholics don’t really believe in the Church as a Church. It’s a nice social club but they really have no need for the Church. The Bible is all they seem to need.

God defined freedom as intimacy with and obedience to the author of life. The serpent said freedom was “do your own thing”. Non-Catholics think they are “Free thinkers” as did the “Free masons”. Gee, I wonder if the non-Catholics. Freemasons, and the other fellow are right?

CDL

‘Non-Catholics don’t really believe in the Church as a churçh.’ What you should have said is that many non-Catholics don’t really believe the Catholic church is the true church.
I think many non-Catholics think that they are free thinkers, in that they aren’t “bound up” in all the traditions. For many Catholics, external ceremonial and sacramental rituals take the place of internal worship. The sacrament or ritual becomes the means of grace, instead of symbols of grace.

God Bless,
Robert
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Eph 5:20-21 “Test all things, hold fast what is good.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

[Robert902]

Latin Vulgate, which is still the template from which all others (including the KJV, and even the New World Translation) are made, even until today.

It was the Catholic Church that discerned, through the working of the Holy Spirit, which books belong in the New Testament, and which ones belong in the Old Testament. It was also the Catholic Church that set about the work of translating them into a common language, and distributing copies to the whole world.

If this is true, why does my Catholic Bible differ from my KJV?

God Bless,
Robert
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Eph. 5:20-21 “test all things, hold fast what is good.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

[jmcrae]

‘Non-Catholics don’t really believe in the Church as a churçh.’ What you should have said is that many non-Catholics don’t really believe the Catholic church is the true church.

Yes, but they also don’t believe that their own churches are the True Church, either.

They speak of a vague, unidentifiable “invisible Church,” and the very concept of a Church that has authority over their belief system meets with a shocked and horrified reaction - how dare anybody tell them what to believe!! Even their own leadership is prohibited from doing anything more than make suggestions - the historic Protestant Articles of Faith, Creeds, and Catechisms are of historical interest, but not binding upon the faithful and God help the poor zealot who gets up in a pulpit and proclaims that he’s got the Truth, and you poor sinners better repent - he’ll be hung, drawn, and quartered for a lack of love, being code for, didn’t support my choice to abort/divorce/shoplift/have sex out of wedlock/etc.

Each Protestant is his or her very own Pope, General Council, Bishop, priest, and litugy coordinator - a church of one. And God help anybody who suggests to them that they might not have their own personal Holy Spirit.

 

[jmcrae]

If this is true, why does my Catholic Bible differ from my KJV?

For the same reason it differs from the New World Translation. The Protestants and the Jehovah’s Witnesses each had their own concept of what should be in the Bible, and what should not be in the Bible, so they removed stuff and added stuff to make it conform to their idea. But the original from which they both began was the Latin Vulgate. They didn’t “discover” anything new that the Catholic Church hadn’t already dealt with in the early 400s AD.

 

[obadiah]

For the same reason it differs from the New World Translation. The Protestants and the Jehovah’s Witnesses each had their own concept of what should be in the Bible, and what should not be in the Bible, so they removed stuff and added stuff to make it conform to their idea. But the original from which they both began was the Latin Vulgate. They didn’t “discover” anything new that the Catholic Church hadn’t already dealt with in the early 400s AD.

I’m sorry, but I thought the original Scriptures were written in Greek and Hebrew.
The Hebrew Scriptures were first translated into Greek about
250 B.C.E.
After the Church was born in Jerusalem ( NOT ROME) The Holy God inspired Apostles used the Greek version of the Bible.

This can be proven by comparing the Greek New Testament quotes of the Old Testament with the current Hebrew version and the Greek Septuagint.

During the time of St. Jerome, He compared the Greek version(s) with the Hebrew, and made the Latin Vulgate after comparing what he had with the old Latin versions.

Going forward in time, The Jehovah’s Witnesses and other Protestant denominations usually use the HEBREW version, NOT the LATIN version. They always make a big point about saying how they go back to the original Greek N.T. and Hebrew O.T. They reject the Latin Vulgate because it is Roman Catholic.

 

[Mannyfit75]

I’m sorry, but I thought the original Scriptures were written in Greek and Hebrew.
The Hebrew Scriptures were first translated into Greek about
250 B.C.E.
After the Church was born in Jerusalem ( NOT ROME) The Holy God inspired Apostles used the Greek version of the Bible.

This can be proven by comparing the Greek New Testament quotes of the Old Testament with the current Hebrew version and the Greek Septuagint.

During the time of St. Jerome, He compared the Greek version(s) with the Hebrew, and made the Latin Vulgate after comparing what he had with the old Latin versions.

Going forward in time, The Jehovah’s Witnesses and other Protestant denominations usually use the HEBREW version, NOT the LATIN version. They always make a big point about saying how they go back to the original Greek N.T. and Hebrew O.T. They reject the Latin Vulgate because it is Roman Catholic.

Of course the original manuscript were Greek and Hebrew. They didn’t even have period, stopping points, chapters or verses. The original were written in parchments, or scrolls made from animal skin.

The original manuscripts of were destroyed and the only ones we have are copies preserved by the monks, and libraries during the medieval ages. The copies in the Latin rite used them for the Missal for the Liturgical worship for Sunday service.

Protestant reformers reject the Latin Vulgate and remove the 7 OT from the original 73 down to 66 OT text. The 73 OT have always been used by the Christians in both W. and E. Christian Churches.

They reject it mainly because it contradicted their theology. They find themselves at odds with the Early Christians…

 

[GregoryPalamas]

‘Non-Catholics don’t really believe in the Church as a churçh.’ What you should have said is that many non-Catholics don’t really believe the Catholic church is the true church.
I think many non-Catholics think that they are free thinkers, in that they aren’t “bound up” in all the traditions. For many Catholics, external ceremonial and sacramental rituals take the place of internal worship. The sacrament or ritual becomes the means of grace, instead of symbols of grace.

God Bless,
Robert
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Eph 5:20-21 “Test all things, hold fast what is good.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You change the words a bit but said the same thing. You have no need for any Church and as a former Protestant I recognize that. You can try to kid us if you wish but I know the truth of the matter.

CDL

 

[GregoryPalamas]

Yes, but they also don’t believe that their own churches are the True Church, either.

They speak of a vague, unidentifiable “invisible Church,” and the very concept of a Church that has authority over their belief system meets with a shocked and horrified reaction - how dare anybody tell them what to believe!! Even their own leadership is prohibited from doing anything more than make suggestions - the historic Protestant Articles of Faith, Creeds, and Catechisms are of historical interest, but not binding upon the faithful and God help the poor zealot who gets up in a pulpit and proclaims that he’s got the Truth, and you poor sinners better repent - he’ll be hung, drawn, and quartered for a lack of love, being code for, didn’t support my choice to abort/divorce/shoplift/have sex out of wedlock/etc.

Each Protestant is his or her very own Pope, General Council, Bishop, priest, and litugy coordinator - a church of one. And God help anybody who suggests to them that they might not have their own personal Holy Spirit.

Right you are!! I could not have said it better. This nonsensicl humanistic beliefs make them almost immune to the Gospel. Unless a tragedy besets them it is almost impossible to reach them with Christ.

CDL

 

[Robert902]

You change the words a bit but said the same thing. You have no need for any Church and as a former Protestant I recognize that. You can try to kid us if you wish but I know the truth of the matter.

CDL

You stated that I have no need for any Church, and I can try and kid you, but you know the truth of the matter. I don’t want to be disrespectful, but you haven’t the faintest idea of who I am and what I want.
I guess maybe a defintion of The Church is appropriate. The aggregate of all regenerated believers who have lived at any time during the period between Pentecost and the Rapture. All such are united to Christ and to one another by the baptism of the Spirit. (1 Cor. 12:12, 13; Rom. 6:3, 4; Col. 2:12; Gal. 3:27). The Church is also pictured as Christ’s “body,” with Christ personally as the “head” (Eph. 1:22, 23). It is also described as a holy “temple” for God to live in by the spirit (Eph. 2:21, 22). The Church is also seen espoused to Christ as a pure virgin to one husband (2 Cor. 11:2); she will be glorified at Christ’s return in the air.
The Church is being formed by the crucified risen, and ascended Lord Jesus Christ. He is exalted at God’s right hand and is made “head over all things to the Church” (Eph. 1:20-23). The new age of the Church was foretold by our Lord Himself (Matt. 16:18) and was ushered in at Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit was given, received, and deposited in the new people of God (Acts 2:1-47; cf. John 14:16,26;16:12-15). The age will end when the Church is completed at the Rapture. (1 Thess. 4:13-18; 1 Cor. 15:53, 54).
This is the Church that I belong to. Praise God.

God Bless,
Robert
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Eph. 5:20-21 “Test all things, hold fast what is good”.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

[cestusdei]

A church that no one can identify, know who belongs to, know if they belong to, and which is impossible to find. That’s the body of Christ?

Another reason I left Protestantism.

 

[obadiah]

Of course the original manuscript were Greek and Hebrew. They didn’t even have period, stopping points, chapters or verses. The original were written in parchments, or scrolls made from animal skin.

The original manuscripts of were destroyed and the only ones we have are copies preserved by the monks, and libraries during the medieval ages. The copies in the Latin rite used them for the Missal for the Liturgical worship for Sunday service.

Protestant reformers reject the Latin Vulgate and remove the 7 OT from the original 73 down to 66 OT text. The 73 OT have always been used by the Christians in both W. and E. Christian Churches.

They reject it mainly because it contradicted their theology. They find themselves at odds with the Early Christians…

I just found out an interesting thing. There are ancient 1st century texts of the Hebrew Bible, Old and New Testaments called the Hebrew Peshitta. An Orthodox Church related to the original Jewish Christians is in the process of publishing them. I have been in touch with them, and they claim that their Patriarch is a blood relation of St. James. Do a Google search for the Peshitta Foundation, connected with the Church of Jerusalem.
I don’t agree with a lot of their teaching because they seperated from the Church about 135 AD. They went into exile, and moved their Patriarcate finally to BURMA of all places.
CHRISTOS ANESTI

 

[GregoryPalamas]

A church that no one can identify, know who belongs to, know if they belong to, and which is impossible to find. That’s the body of Christ?

Another reason I left Protestantism.

Yup. Same here.

 

[GregoryPalamas]

I just found out an interesting thing. There are ancient 1st century texts of the Hebrew Bible, Old and New Testaments called the Hebrew Peshitta. An Orthodox Church related to the original Jewish Christians is in the process of publishing them. I have been in touch with them, and they claim that their Patriarch is a blood relation of St. James. Do a Google search for the Peshitta Foundation, connected with the Church of Jerusalem.
I don’t agree with a lot of their teaching because they seperated from the Church about 135 AD. They went into exile, and moved their Patriarcate finally to BURMA of all places.
CHRISTOS ANESTI

On the face of it don’t you think this seems a bit fishy?

CDL

 

[obadiah]

On the face of it don’t you think this seems a bit fishy?

CDL

Did you look at their website? VERY INTERESTING. I would never join them, but their history… they claim to be descendants of the original Jerusalem Church. Their Patriarch is a blood descendant of St. James!!!

 

[Grace_Angel]

How dare you. You tell me to buy a bible, I’ll let you know I have over 6 bibles in my house, and also its very imature to say “it is because it is” thats grade school stuff. don’t you dare put yourself on a pedastool, your rant is a case of “faith not fact” so remember the higher you are, the more you have to fall

Reborn pagan, the fact that you have six bibles in the class doesnt mean much if your charity is as little as you show it to be.
The Bible is written by human authors under the Inspiration og the Holy Spirit. Human authors held the pen, quill, or whatever.
I believe that the OT was originally written because of the Monarchy of israel. Before the Monarchy the tribes used to gather at Shechem annually, retell their story, offer sacrifice and then go off and fight more battles. When rule became centralised in the monarchy (David, Solomon etc) then it became necessary to record their story so it would not be lost. It makes good sense to me.
So dear reborn pagan hyou dont need 6 bibles just one good one and a gopod concordance and some real time in meditation over the word of God. and maybe less angst.
God Bless
GraceAngel.