God wrote the Bible not the Catholic Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sixtus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Many things that Jesus did and said were not written down and did not become a part of written Scripture. The Catholic Church has both the authority of Scripture AND Sacred Tradition. It also has the witness of the early Church Fathers, some of whom were contemporaries of the Apostles.
"Most Protestants claim that Mary bore children other than Jesus. To support their claim, these Protestants refer to the biblical passages which mention the “brethren of the Lord.” As explained in the Catholic Answers tract Brethren of the Lord, neither the Gospel accounts nor the early Christians attest to the notion that Mary bore other children besides Jesus. The faithful knew, through the witness of Scripture and Tradition, that Jesus was Mary’s only child and that she remained a lifelong virgin.

An important historical document which supports the teaching of Mary’s perpetual virginity is the Protoevangelium of James, which was written probably less than sixty years after the conclusion of Mary’s earthly life (around A.D. 120), when memories of her life were still vivid in the minds of many.

According to the world-renowned patristics scholar, Johannes Quasten: “The principal aim of the whole writing [Protoevangelium of James] is to prove the perpetual and inviolate virginity of Mary before, in, and after the birth of Christ” (Patrology, 1:120–1).

To begin with, the Protoevangelium records that when Mary’s birth was prophesied, her mother, St. Anne, vowed that she would devote the child to the service of the Lord, as Samuel had been by his mother (1 Sam. 1:11). Mary would thus serve the Lord at the Temple, as women had for centuries (1 Sam. 2:22), and as Anna the prophetess did at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:36–37). A life of continual, devoted service to the Lord at the Temple meant that Mary would not be able to live the ordinary life of a child-rearing mother. Rather, she was vowed to a life of perpetual virginity.

However, due to considerations of ceremonial cleanliness, it was eventually necessary for Mary, a consecrated “virgin of the Lord,” to have a guardian or protector who would respect her vow of virginity. Thus, according to the Protoevangelium, Joseph, an elderly widower who already had children, was chosen to be her spouse. (This would also explain why Joseph was apparently dead by the time of Jesus’ adult ministry, since he does not appear during it in the gospels, and since Mary is entrusted to John, rather than to her husband Joseph, at the crucifixion).

According to the Protoevangelium, Joseph was required to regard Mary’s vow of virginity with the utmost respect. The gravity of his responsibility as the guardian of a virgin was indicated by the fact that, when she was discovered to be with child, he had to answer to the Temple authorities, who thought him guilty of defiling a virgin of the Lord. Mary was also accused of having forsaken the Lord by breaking her vow. Keeping this in mind, it is an incredible insult to the Blessed Virgin to say that she broke her vow by bearing children other than her Lord and God, who was conceived through the power of the Holy Spirit."

Read the early Church Fathers Arcadia. They may be foreign to you, but their authority on the early days of the Church is irrefutable.
 
Arcadia,

Sixtus said,
Please tell us any catholic teaching which is not grounded on the Scriptures.
Note that “grounded on” is NOT equal to “stated verbatim in.”
 
Have you ever read the book Martin Luther The Great Reformer by Edwin Booth?

I bet that you would find him to be more Catholic than the many of the Popes of his day.
Then why was he not elected Pope, instead of excommunicated? :confused:
 
Provide the scriptural cites please?

Exact wording please from scripture?

Again, exact wording?

The wording from scripture please? Thank you. And could you provide links please? Thank you.
Mathew 1:24-25 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her first born son: and he called his name JESUS.

The references of Jesus’ brothers and sister are:
Mathew 13 : 55-56
Mathew 12 : 46
Mark 6:3

arcadia
 
Then why was he not elected Pope, instead of excommunicated? :confused:
If I told you, we might argue and disagree etc. Why not read it? I spent 21 years in the Catholic church. Why not spent about 3 hours in Luther? You would probably enjoy it.

sincerely,
arcadia

PS I just finished it this hour and was surprised at his Catholicism.
 
If I told you, we might argue and disagree etc. Why not read it? I spent 21 years in the Catholic church. Why not spent about 3 hours in Luther? You would probably enjoy it.
There were lots of other people who were upset by how things were going in the Catholic Church. They followed proper channels, and today, we remember them as Saints. There was no good reason why Luther could not have done the same thing, other than his pride getting in the way.
PS I just finished it this hour and was surprised at his Catholicism.
Why? He was, after all, raised in the Catholic Church, there being no other alternatives in Western Europe until he himself came along and founded Protestantism (which instantaneously exploded into Lutheranism, Mennonism, and Calvinism).
 
If I told you, we might argue and disagree etc. Why not read it? I spent 21 years in the Catholic church. Why not spent about 3 hours in Luther? You would probably enjoy it.

sincerely,
arcadia

PS I just finished it this hour and was surprised at his Catholicism.
You spent 21 years in the Catholic Church and you are just now finding out that it’s all wrong? Not too sharp eh? So how did you receive this epiphany?
 
Your response is unclear. Do you believe that logos is Jesus? Or do you believe that logos is Scripture? Which is it please? Thank you.
Logos is an appropriate designation of Christ, since all the treasures of the divine wisdom are embodied in Him (Col. 2:2,3). Logos is a Greek word which means “a thought” or “the expression or utterance of a thought.”

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

Do you mean when He said something like:

“You search the scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life” (John 5:39)

Oh wait, that seems to contradict your beloved doctrine of Sola Scriptura - how clumsy of me.
John 5:39 is frequently misunderstood. It is not an imperative but is an indicative. “You search the scriptures,” He’s making a statement; He is not urging them to do something. He tells them that they search the scriptures thinking in them they will find eternal life, but they don’t understand that the scriptures testify of Jesus. They knew the scriptures but failed to see the Messiah to whom the scriptures pointed. Don’t become so involved in religion that you miss Christ, I think was the point.
And it doesn’t contradict Sola Scriptura if interpreted correctly.
Please don’t be so sarcastic, as it serves no constructive purpose.

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

Did I say magic button? Or did I say invisible button? Please do not equivocate. Thank you.

Being born again interprets scripture in exactly what way? We are talking about interpreting scripture.
Interpret; 1 to give or provide the meaning of; explain; elucidate; to interpret a parable. 2 To construe or understand in a particular way. From Websters Universal College Dictionary.
According to this the word interpret can mean to understand. And The Apostle Paul said that the natural mind cannot understand spiritual things 1 Cor. 2:14. “My sheep hear my voice” John 10:3-16. If you aren’t one of God’s sheep according to these scriptures although you can read the words, you won’t be able to understand them. The meaning or interpretation as you put it, would be “invisible”.
Being born again, means that you are a new creation and all things become new. You would now be able to understand spiritual things, like God’s word. But you have to be born again. That’s what Jesus told Nicodemus.

God Bless,
Robert
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Eph. 5:20-21 “Test all things, hold fast what is good.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 
God inspired the writers (40 of them) to write down His infallible Word (66 books) for our use.

It is a story of God (all of Him) creating, dealing with, loving and forgiving us… His greatest creation.

It is the only authority we need, and we can interperet it through prayer and wisdom gained via the Holy Spirit.

Tradition is folly.

Jesus never followed tradition, He did His Father’s will, and cited scripture.

Jesus rebuked traditionalists to their face using scripture.

Scripture is above the pope.

Follow Jesus not the pope.
Since Apostolic times, traditional Christianity has posed a serious threat to the authentic Biblical Gospel. This type of Church becomes a surrogate Christ, displacing the real Christ. People connect only to the institution through the mechanical works rather than to the living Christ. External ceremonies take the place of internal worship. The sacrament or ritual becomes the means of grace instead of symbols of grace. Ministers become exalted intermediaries between the people and God, performing rituals for salvation, instead of humble servants who bring grace to save, sanctify and equip the saints for the work of the ministry. Eph. 4:12.

God Bless,
Robert
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Eph 5:20-21 “Test all things, hold fast what is good.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 
Since Apostolic times, traditional Christianity has posed a serious threat to the authentic Biblical Gospel. This type of Church becomes a surrogate Christ, displacing the real Christ. People connect only to the institution through the mechanical works rather than to the living Christ. External ceremonies take the place of internal worship. The sacrament or ritual becomes the means of grace instead of symbols of grace. Ministers become exalted intermediaries between the people and God, performing rituals for salvation, instead of humble servants who bring grace to save, sanctify and equip the saints for the work of the ministry. Eph. 4:12.

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

What on earth is that cite (Eph 4:12) at the end of your private interpretation supposed to mean? That you did some research? I don’t think so. It doesn’t refer to your private doctrine at all. Here is Eph 4:11-12 which actually demonstrates the opposite of your private doctrine:
Eph 4:11. Here it is plainly expressed, that Christ has left in his church a perpetual succession of orthodox pastors and teachers, to preserve the faithful in unity and truth.

Eph 4:12. For the perfecting of the saints, for the word of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Where did Christ leave the pastors? In his church.

Did He wait 1400 years to do that in order to establish 33000 denominations, thus abandonning us and leaving us orphans or in the Greek leaving us comfortless for a millenium and a half? Um… no.

Do the 33000 denominations represent unity? Um… no.

The Church to which he refers is the Catholic Church. And then He continues to clarify:
Eph 4:14. That henceforth we be no more children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness by which they lie in wait to deceive.
Tossed to and fro means that the every wind of doctrine to which He refers are multiple doctrines-- not one – and ephemeral or constantly **changing **doctrines – not unchanging. That refers to the 33 000 denominations whose doctrines change among each other and even within themselves; denominations which have rebelled against the Church which Jesus Himself established for us.

It is the One Magisterium of the Catholic Church which does not change.

And here He warns against private doctrines:
Eph 4:17. This then I say and testify in the Lord: That henceforward you walk not as also the Gentiles walk in the vanity of their mind:

Eph 4:18. Having their understanding darkened: being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their hearts.
Your private doctrine is so grasping at straws and your gratuitous cite is so transparently off the mark that I am surprised you were willing to expose yourself so readily.

Your post demonstrates a profound lack of insight as to what purpose the rites of the Catholic Church which Jesus established serve. Your private opinion is nowhere in the vicinity of what you are attempting to target. Nowhere near.

Don’t you think it’s time you hit the books? I mean if you are going to comment on Catholic ‘rites,’ it is only reasonable to know what they are first. Don’t you think?

Well, let’s see: do you know what the Catholic rites are? Please do not ignore this question as you have ignored others. This is afterall a discussion board – not a lecture board.

Here is a link to a hefty list on Sacraments and the Mass to start you off. Please read it before commenting further. There is much more to be said on these subjects, but let’s not overload you since you give us the impression that you are not terribly practised in study at this point in time.

If you stick around CA long enough, you will be though. Have a good day.

:tiphat:
 
Have you ever read the book Martin Luther The Great Reformer by Edwin Booth?

I bet that you would find him to be more Catholic than the many of the Popes of his day.
Martin Luther, by the way, firmly believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary.

As to the “proof” you posted above, those instances have, I believe, already been explained in this thread.
 
40.png
Robert902:
Interpret; 1 to give or provide the meaning of; explain; elucidate; to interpret a parable. 2 To construe or understand in a particular way. From Websters Universal College Dictionary.
Do you have a definition for private interpretation? You might find that at vatican.va. Actually you might find a lot of information for which you are looking there, specifically in the Catechism. Then you would no longer be grasping at straws. You would know what it is exactly you are trying to dismantle – thus far unsuccessfully – in your posts.
40.png
Robert902:
According to this the word interpret can mean to understand. And The Apostle Paul said that the natural mind cannot understand spiritual things 1 Cor. 2:14.
Well let’s see what 1Cor2:14 says, shall we?
2:14. But the sensual man perceiveth not these things that are of the Spirit of God. For it is foolishness to him: and he cannot understand, because it is spiritually examined. The sensual man–the spiritual man. . .The sensual man is either he who is taken up with sensual pleasures, with carnal and worldly affections; or he who measureth divine mysteries by natural reason, sense, and human wisdom only. Now such a man has little or no notion of the things of God. Whereas the spiritual man is he who, in the mysteries of religion, takes not human sense for his guide: but submits his judgment to the decisions of the church, which he is commanded to hear and obey. For Christ hath promised to remain to the end of the world with his church, and to direct her in all things by the Spirit of truth. (DRC)
So once again: to which church is Paul referring?

The 33000 denominations with doctrines which change among each other and even within themselves? Truth cannot contradict truth. If doctrines change, then divergent doctrines set forth as ‘truth’ in two or more denominations cannot all be true.

To claim that they can be all true simply defies reason. And Faith cannot be unreasonable.

At the very least 32999 denominations must be in error. The problem is in determining which one. This problem does not exist in the Catholic Church. Because the Magisterium of the Catholic Church is protected against error by the Holy Spirit.

Moreover, why would Jesus have waited for 1400 years – and thus going against His promise to leave us abandonned and as orphans in the interim – to establish 33000 denominations?

It is obvious that the Church to which Paul refers is the Catholic Church and the truth to which Paul refers is contained in the Magisterium of the Catholic Church which is protected from error by the Holy Spirit.

So why do you rely on your natural mind which is capable only of private interpretation? Why do you not rely on the Catholic Church – the Church which Jesus established – to which Jesus gave authority to interpret and which is guided by the Holy Spirit in Her interpretation?

Robert902 said:
“My sheep hear my voice” John 10:3-16. If you aren’t one of God’s sheep according to these scriptures although you can read the words, you won’t be able to understand them. The meaning or interpretation as you put it, would be “invisible”.

You are putting words in my mouth. :tsktsk:
40.png
Robert902:
Being born again, means that you are a new creation and all things become new. You would now be able to understand spiritual things, like God’s word. But you have to be born again. That’s what Jesus told Nicodemus.
I am born again. All Catholics are born again. Humans understand things because God gives us the gifts of observation and of reason and of faith. But we can still make errors because our observation, reason, and faith are fallen.

The Magisterium of the Catholic is not fallen. It is incapable of teaching error. Why? Because the Holy Spirit protects it from error.
 
OK, then what does grounded on mean then?

arcadia
“Gounded on” means “has a basis in” or “built on the foundation of.”

Another doctrine that is grounded on Scripture but not stated verbatim in Scripture is the doctrine of the Holy Trinity (note that the word “Trinity” never appears in the Bible). Do you believe in the Trinity? If so, why, if the word “Trinity” never appears verbatim in the Bible?
 
Have you ever read the book Martin Luther The Great Reformer by Edwin Booth?

I bet that you would find him to be more Catholic than the many of the Popes of his day.
Luther rejected the consolation, care, and advice of his ecclesial community during a time when his thinking was disordered by illness. That rejection of community and – preference for self-instruction which he knew to be wrong – was the root of all the other errors which followed close on one another from that point onward.

That rejection and that preference was not Catholic.

And as for the Popes of his day, Martin Luther had no problem with them when he visited Rome. The problems started with his illness and with his rejection of community. He then constructed justifications for eschewing help for his illness. The Popes of his day rectified the corruption among those of clergy who were at fault. Hence the Counter-reformation. The Counter-reformation was Catholic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top