How Do You Know Your Interpretation Is Correct?

[Cinette]

*Guanophore - always the patient one!

*

 

[joe370]

Hi Dave…

Originally Posted by david ruiz View Post
Furthermore where does it say, “The Holy Roman Church is the way, the truth, and the life. No man goes to the Father except through it.” ? Any denomination that says Jesus is the way ,the truth and the life is correct and acting as a pillar of truth. As soon as that denomination draws attention and claims interchangeability with church and Jesus, in this context, is carnal (as in "I am of Peter " or “Lo, I am of Paul”)

Dave, are you suggesting that God’s temple, the house of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth, the mystical body of Christ of which Jesus is the head and savior, is not necessary; all we need is Jesus, who, of course is the only way the truth and the life - not the church He established on Pentecost? Dave, to be a pillar of truth shouldn’t we, as Christians and members of Christ’s Mystical Body, the church, aspire to belong to this church ( community) - of united brothers and sisters in Christ founded by Jesus the Christ, **where the pillar and foundation of truth can be found thanks to the never ending involvement of the Holy spirit, Who is forever guiding Jesus’ Mystical Body, the church into all truth as opposed to partial truth? **

Dave, the CC does not claim that the Jesus’ church is the way, the truth and the life. The CC merely claims that Jesus is the head and savior of His Mystical Body, the CHURCH. Logically, we must belong to Jesus’ church in order to approach the Father through His Son - right? Jesus is the only savior of mankind, as taught by the CC, however, that salvation is found within His church according to sacred scripture, or, are you suggesting that one can follow Jesus without any affiliation with the church founded by Jesus? If that’s the case then why did Jesus build (still building) - His church? Perhaps to join together the new members of His Mystical Body, so that together all members (Christians) - can become a dwelling in which God can live by His spirit:

Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit. Eph. 2

Jesus wants His community united not divided, as per sacred scripture - right? That is the best way to ensure that doctrinal truth is safeguarded and properly disseminated, wouldn’t you agree? Step outside Jesus’ church, the pillar and foundation of truth, thanks to the perpetual guidance of the spirit of truth,* (regardless of the chaff mixed with the wheat)* - and division ensues, as can be attested/confirmed by what has happened to Christianity since the inception of sola scriptura via individual interpretation.

The CC is comprised of nothing but sinners, attempting to draw closer to the way the truth and the life, and the CC never claims interchangeability with Jesus the Christ. The CC simply claims what scripture claims: The church is Jesus, in so far as the church is His Body of which Jesus is the head and SAVIOR; Jesus died for His established church so we should really want to be a member of His church, wouldn’t you agree:

“Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body… Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it…”

To separate ourselves from Jesus’ Mystical Body, the church of which Jesus is the savior, is to separate ourselves from the way, the truth and the life; wouldn’t you agree?

Peace brother…

 

[Nicea325]

Originally Posted by david ruiz
Furthermore where does it say, “The Holy Roman Church is the way, the truth, and the life. No man goes to the Father except through it.” ? Any denomination that says Jesus is the way ,the truth and the life is correct and acting as a pillar of truth. As soon as that denomination draws attention and claims interchangeability with church and Jesus, in this context, is carnal (as in "I am of Peter " or “Lo, I am of Paul”)

The above comment does display a great amount of misunderstandings. First,scripture was not written to tell us every single denomination and churches.And why? Because in scripture Christ Church is ONE and UNIVERSAL,regardless of region or location. Second, the term ‘Roman’ is one Rite of Catholicism and not the only one.

Any denomination that says Jesus is the way ,the truth and the life is correct and acting as a pillar of truth

Which begs the question:

If many denominations claim the above,then why the need to have separate denominations? Apparently they are not all in accord,therefore cannot be acting as a pillar of truth.

 

[Pitcharan]

I do love your quote , “Salvation is of the Jews”.

DO NOT distort my quote. Our Lord said Salvation is from the Jews

But which sect ? Sadducees, Pharisees Zionist, Hasidism etc.etc. ? What did Jesus mean ? Were there many Jewish factions ,yet an invisible ,visible main spiritual stream between them ,a basic premise uniting them ? Children of the promise ?

Why do you unnecessarily complicate what our Lord said so plainly? ***Salvation for all mankind ***will come from the Jews who are God’s chosen people for saving the whole world. Sects and schisms are Satan’s mischief and cannot thwart God’s plan.

So which church today ? Orthodox, Roman ,protestant etc.etc. ? Are there not many factions ,with a basic premise between them uniting them ? Bride of Christ ? Why do you talk of "church in a general scriptural sense then switch to your preferred sect ,denomination , within that “church”.It was not always so .The first 3 centuries of "church"was a spiritually knit group of churches allowing some variation,not all ,but some.It is an enigma ,but as soon as Rome started ascerting itself after 3-4 th century ,indeed trying to unify and codify, you had the beginnings of separation and institutionalized division.As soon as Germans said they were Germans and French French and Italians Italians, you make division. Mind you ,I am not talking about accepting false doctrine ( Jesus was not flesh etc.). But anyone not in tow with Rome on minor issues was heretical , such as when to celebrate Easter ,or was Mary ever-virgin or indeed is Peter the Vicar of Christ or the Holy Spirit…"Let them be “anathema” is used how many times in papal decrees ?

Our Lord founded just ONE church. The first Pope He appointed was Peter and you can trace his successors without any confusion and know which is the church founded by our Lord.

 

[Anna_Scott]

I find this comment quite curious, given that in all of the posts I’ve read, not once have I seen this tolerant, broad-minded, open-minded Roy say: “Good point, Conservative Catholic. I’ve never thought about that in that way before. And I will ponder it, since I am so open minded.”

or

“You know, Fundamentalist Christian, since I am so broad minded, I will consider your point. In fact, you have convinced me you are correct!”

Nope.

In fact, I read only his mini-encyclicals professing his own dogma. Ah, the irony!

Roy5 won’t actually engage in discussion on any specific issue; and he seems to equate disagreement with him, with being close minded.

Hi, Anna,

When people go out in the National Parks there are signs posted that say, “Don’t Feed the Bears”. Now, there are several reasons for this - but, all of them revolve around the safety of the visitor - the bears have no problem on making a meal our of anyone who gets within their reach.

 

[Roy5]

Gosh, now I’m criticized for (1) not saying to this person or that what a wise point he/she has made and for (2) not engaging in debate on any particular issue.

 As for (1), I have spoken highly of those who are civil in their postings but have not found it necessary - or is that, possible? - to say what a good point someone has made. I think this may be because we're in different worlds. I don't find that quoting some Church Father or some Pope or some encyclical or some Bible passage is a sufficient proof and/or response. The basic problem seems to be one of authority. I don't let some institution or book or ecclesiastical leader tell me what I must believe.

 But along with this - and I have made the point over and over and over - is that if you can believe such doctrines as the Immaculate Conception and transubstantiation or if you accept that God deliberately drowned all those people in the Great Flood and ordered Joshua to murder all the inhabitants of Jericho, Ai, and elsewhere, fine with me!  I am simply saying that I have serious trouble with such claims. Nothing said by anybody on CAF has changed my mind as yet, and to be told that I must obey the one true church or accept the ierrancy of the Bible, or to be accused of egotism, stubbornness or putting myself above God -whatever - well, I don't consider that debating. It's ad hominem and it gets us no where.

 Now, as for (2): what issues do you want to debate? I have been setting forth a total outlook, of you will. I am arguing for a 'big tent' Christianity which allows the independent thinker who may not be able to accept all the teachings of the church to join orthodox true believers as part of the same church. Half of all US Catholics, at least, according to polls, already reject such basic beliefs as transubstantiation. I've discovered that at leaat half seem to mix up Immaculate Conception with Virgin Birth. Maybe I simply have greater respect for independent thinking and/or the human brain than many others do??? 

  I don't believe that some posters will accept different beliefs until skeptics like me change ours and yield to all the doctrines and practices as handed down by the magisterium. Sorry, I guess I'm not made that way. Or, is it that US democracy has tinkered with my brain and made me a person who reserves the right to think for himself. "Think and let think" is one of my slogans. I believe John Wesley may have suggested that expression about 250 years ago. At many points I disagree with Wesley, too, but you'll note that I'm quoting him. The literature and teachings of nearly all faiths can teach and enrich us. Its spiritual arrogance that can turn me off.

  God bless his children of every creed, color and country. Religion should be a bridge and not a barrier.

 

[schaick]

Am I getting this correct?:

Catholics can be denied receiving the Wine and STILL experience the full Eucharist, but alcoholics and non-wine drinkers can not because it is not wine that they are drinking but simply non-fermemnted fruit of the vine.

Catholics believe that it was the Catholic Church alone that put together the Bible, GOD did not inspire all the early Church Fathers to use the scripture HE wanted in HIS Holy Bible as references in their writings.

Catholic believe that GOD’s Word is reliable, as merely a historical document but not infallible. GOD’s Word is not the final rule but the Church’s is.

[What I am trying to get my head around is GOD having to say to man “My Word is the final rule”. That seems like a given to me. Are not the 10 Commandments the final rule on those specific issues?]

Catholics say that all trinitarian Christians do not have the same basic tenants of faith, but hundreds of different interpretations and of course all are wrong except for theirs because only they have a Pope who is infallible.

Catholics often think we want them to leave their Church.

Catholics are Jewish.

 

[joe370]

Hey Roy, you said:

Quote:
God bless his children of every creed, color and country. May religion become a bridge instead of a barrier.

Amen brother. That is the hope of everyone here at CAF, but certainly not at the expense of truth; wouldn’t you agree? How does one even go about finding truth in your opinion? I was just wondering: what would be a good reason in your mind for trusting any one particular church, regarding the correct interpretation of sacred scripture; what would the criteria be for you? How does one go about finding the one church founded by Jesus on Pentecost in Jerusalem circa AD 33 and should that even matter anymore? I mean, is the holy spirit still guiding that one church into all truth or is he guiding all churches (regardless of church affiliation) - into some similar truths and some opposing truths? Why would the HS do that? Do you believe that God is able to do what the bible says regarding the preservation of doctrinal truth in Jesus’ established church, until the end of time?

Also, do you believe that God chose a particular people, from before time immemorial, from which the Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace, suffering servant, Davidic king humbly riding on a donkey, would come?

Your brother in Christ, Joe…

 

[shaky]

Fair enough.

But I don’t find taking up my cross daily to be something very comfortable. And, it’s hard to do as well!

Living in sin should make all of us uncomfortable.

We are called to admonish the sinner and instruct the uninformed. That’s uncomfortable for me (although, for some reason, it’s quite easy to do with my husband! )

And I would say that we are commanded to judge. But to judge rightly. (John 7:24)

Jesus said.

That’s what I’m saying. Sometimes Jesus made some hard sayings. But we must follow them nevertheless.

There are those who dismiss certain hard teachings (such as on divorce/remarriage, the existence of hell, no salvation outside of Christ and His Church) by saying, “God wouldn’t ____”. In my opinion, they are creating a god in their own image. A god who fits their own comfortable designs.

That was very Catholic of you to admonish the sinner!

Hi PRmerger

Taking up your Cross is suffering for righteousness: 1 of the Fruits of the spirit is Long suffering:
I Know Jesus says to deny your self and take your cross up daily and Follow him.
From my experience here you are not exactly in control of the situation circumstances beyond you control is taking place. when you are having every aspect of your life being nailed to that cross suffering and dieing to ‘‘SELF’’ but i would rather have that then the Other.
Can you Explain what do you mean by hard. what is it that you find hard about it

Living in Known Sin certainly makes me very uncomfortable. But does it make every body who do live in Know Sin uncomfortable?
I Know Sin has a effect on ourselves and others.
What about Sins that we don’t know about?
What about Sins that we are deceived about?

It should not make you uncomfortable to admonish the Sinner or instruct the uninformed.
Unless of Course you are worried about what people think of you. That is the ‘‘SELF’’ Once this part of ‘‘self’’ dies it should be fine.

I Agree about Judging Rightly:thumbsup:

Yes Jesus has made some hard sayings that with man some things can be impossible


But then you say nevertheless you should follow them.
What about the things that are impossible?

what do you exactly mean by dismissing certain hard teachings. The devil can transform himself into a angel of light and be behind organised Religion

I have come across a few cults and false teachers who come up with very hard sayings
and teachings useing scripture with it.
Example: If you own houses sell them and give all the money to our church
sell everything you own and empty bank account and give it us so we can use it for the
poor: Then come live with us 15 people in 1 house.
You are not allowed to own a TV. You are not allowed to own a computer; etc:shrug:

 

[Nicea325]

Am I getting this correct?:

Catholics can be denied receiving the Wine and STILL experience the full Eucharist, but alcoholics and non-wine drinkers can not because it is not wine that they are drinking but simply non-fermemnted fruit of the vine

.

Denied? Why would a Catholic be denied the Precious Blood and yet allowed the Eucharist? I can go to Mass and not receive the Precious Blood and consume the Eucahrist and still have a valid communion. Both have been consecrated,plus Christ Body is One.

Catholics believe that it was the Catholic Church alone that put together the Bible, GOD did not inspire all the early Church Fathers to use the scripture HE wanted in HIS Holy Bible as references in their writings.

Care to show us from historical evidence what other church put the Bible together? When did the CC teach God did not inspire the early Church Fathers regarding scripture?

Catholic believe that GOD’s Word is reliable, as merely a historical document but not infallible. GOD’s Word is not the final rule but the Church’s is.

Wrong! The CC long before any non-Catholic church existed has taught and believed Scripture is the infallible Word of God. Wrong again! The CC has never taught God’s Word is not the final rule;moreover, God’s Word is not pitted against His Church,which evidently Christ founded and promised the Holy Spirit.

[What I am trying to get my head around is GOD having to say to man “My Word is the final rule”. That seems like a given to me. Are not the 10 Commandments the final rule on those specific issues?]

Exactly! Which begs the question: Where did God give mere men the authority to create thousands of different sects,denominations,non-denom’s,etc,etc? Where is that in the 10 Commandments?

Catholics say that all trinitarian Christians do not have the same basic tenants of faith, but hundreds of different interpretations and of course all are wrong except for theirs because only they have a Pope who is infallible.

Well if all did have the same basic tenants,then why have thousands upon thousands of different churches,sects,etc? The Pope who is a bishop is infallible in matters of faith and morals just as the Apostles were during their earthly lives. The pope is not impeccable,do not confuse it with infallibility.

Catholics often think we want them to leave their Church.

Some do because they believe they have the fullness of truth,which makes me wonder something? Why go and start another church? What was wrong with the one Church Jesus Christ founded and written all over the NT?

Catholics are Jewish.

And some Jews are Catholic.

 

[PRmerger]

I didn’t mention Scripture.

That’s what* I’m* talking about as far as “private interpretation.”

Let’s say I’m hosting a party of 40 guests and am worried about not having enough food. I go to Adoration, open up my Bible and come upon the passage about the Multiplication of the Loaves.

I am certainly free to “privately interpret” that passage as God telling me, “Relax, PR! Your party will be a smashing success with plenty of food and lots of full stomachs!”

We are just not free to “privately interpret” that passage to mean, “God is a woman who magically cooks up fish and serves it on angels’ wings.”

So you’re saying that if I don’t like NFP and privately think it’s absurd I can start using birth control with my wife?

Nope. Didn’t say that. Not even close.

 

[PRmerger]

Dear PRM, there is no denial that every geunine seeker of truth is rewarded by the HS who reveals and explains. I have personally received intepretation and explanation of so many complex things in the Bible. However, I have also experienced dangerous delusions of the Evil one. We can never be sure whether our quest is genuine or alloyed with self-interest or a mere sinful curiosity. The HS responds only to genuine quest from humble souls. Therefore, it is extremely important to verify and reconfirm our inspirations. In this regard I am reproducing below an excellent teaching which is an excerpt from THE SINNER’S GUIDE by Louis of Granada:
“Notwithstanding the power and efficacy of this wisdom with which God fills the souls of the just, no man, however great the light he has received, should refuse to submit his judgment to his lawful superiors, especially the authorized teachers and doctors of the Church. Who ever received greater light than St. Paul, who was raised to the third heaven; or than Moses, who spoke face to face with God? Yet St. Paul went to Jerusalem to confer with the Apostles upon the Gospel which he had received from Christ Himself; and Moses did not disdain to accept the advice of his father-in-law, Jethro, who was a Gentile. For the interior aids of grace do not exclude the exterior succors of the Church. Divine Providence has willed to make them both an aid to our salvation. As the natural heat of our body is stimulated by that of the sun, and the healing powers of nature are aided by exterior remedies, so the light of grace is strengthened by the teaching and direction of the Church. Whoever refuses, therefore, to humble himself and submit to her authority will render himself unworthy of any favor from God.”

Beautiful, Pitcharan! Thanks for sharing.

 

[PRmerger]

Furthermore where does it say, “The Holy Roman Church is the way, the truth, and the life. No man goes to the Father except through it.” ? Any denomination that says Jesus is the way ,the truth and the life is correct and acting as a pillar of truth. As soon as that denomination draws attention and claims interchangeability with church and Jesus, in this context, is carnal (as in "I am of Peter " or “Lo, I am of Paul”)

Jesus is the Head. His Catholic Church is His Body.

Without the Body, the CC, you are serving a decapitated Christ.

You only know of Jesus because the Catholic Church has presented Him to you.

Which is why, without the CC there is no salvation.

 

[PRmerger]

Hi PRmerger

GOOD POINTS: I was going to say do you have a bible verse that says that you do admonish a unbelievers: But i found one: {Colossians 1-28} So i have learnt Something
I don’t claim to Know every thing and i have not read everything in the bible.
I was being presumptuous on my previous Answer. Thanks for pointing this out.

And thanks for your humble response.

How do you go about admonishing unbelieves. because the way i talk to unbelievers. I Just tell them about Jesus christ so they get to know a bit about him.

There are as many ways to admonish unbelievers as there are unbelievers, shaky. It just depends upon the situation.

Well i sort of agree and disagree. Demons believe in the sense were they believe in the existence of Christ. But they don’t believe in him and they dont obey any of his teachings.

Exactly. Clearly, then, belief is NOT enough.

 

[PRmerger]

Hi PRmerger.

I sort of agree that that you have to Judge: Could you show me the scriptures were we are commanded to Judge. Because Jesus said do not Judge. I can show you loads of scriptures. saying who are we to Judge etc. Also Jesus said i have not come to Judge the world.

Your comment above is an excellent example of why we can’t take isolated verses of Scripture. One must understand its meaning through the lens of those who gave us the Scriptures–that is, through the Church.

Here is the quote in which we are commanded to judge, but to use good discernment when judging.
[BIBLEDRB]John 7:24[/BIBLEDRB]

What do you mean a mistranslation I am not going on about. somebody can Just leave his wife and commit adultery as a valid reason. what i mean: When your partner
commits Adultery and goes off with another person and abandons you. You a free to divorce that person and re-marry.

That seems to be adding to Scripture. That’s most certainly NOT what the verse says, is it? You have added that part about your partner being the adulterer and abandoning you. It says no such thing.

Can you expand on this Greek word porneia

See this article:
Did Jesus Say Adultery Is Grounds for Divorce? By Jimmy Akin

The Orthodox church do agree that Adultery is a valid Reason for divorce i have checked. Also they are not in conformity with the CCs teachings on this.
In fact they will allow you to be Re-married up to 3 times but they will not allow a fourth marriage.

Please cite your source.

 

[Pitcharan]

Hi Shaky and PR,

…Here is the quote in which we are commanded to judge, but to use good discernment when judging.
[BIBLEDRB]John 7:24[/BIBLEDRB]

In this Bible verse, judge means discern.You may see my this post elsewhere forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6863374

That seems to be adding to Scripture. That’s most certainly NOT what the verse says, is it? You have added that part about your partner being the adulterer and abandoning you. It says no such thing. See this article:
Did Jesus Say Adultery Is Grounds for Divorce? By Jimmy Akin

In this very context I had posted something for the two of you a few days back. Both of you probably missed it. Here’s the link: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6962795

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I’m not sure what your examples are trying to illustrate LOL but I’ll keep it simple. You said that the Church allows private interpretation. I say it doesn’t. The Magisterium carefully regulates morality, theology, and interpretation. You cannot privately interpret most things of faith, bible, and Church. I don’t know why you got mad at the bottom of your post. I’m simply saying that, based on your statement that Catholics can privately judge and interpret, then I can use birth control. Obviously that’s not the case. NFP is the only option for a Catholic. Your statement that private interpretation is ok is just not accurate. I mean no hostility or by my statement.

That’s what* I’m* talking about as far as “private interpretation.”

Let’s say I’m hosting a party of 40 guests and am worried about not having enough food. I go to Adoration, open up my Bible and come upon the passage about the Multiplication of the Loaves.

I am certainly free to “privately interpret” that passage as God telling me, “Relax, PR! Your party will be a smashing success with plenty of food and lots of full stomachs!”

We are just not free to “privately interpret” that passage to mean, “God is a woman who magically cooks up fish and serves it on angels’ wings.”

Nope. Didn’t say that. Not even close.

 

[PRmerger]

Gosh, now I’m criticized for (1) not saying to this person or that what a wise point he/she has made and for

Actually, I am pointing out hypocrisy.

Intolerance is especially egregious in a person who professes to hold tolerance so dear.
Narrow mindedness is especially egregious in a person who esteems broad-mindedness.

“Think and let think” is one of my slogans.

“Think and let think” is one of your -]slogans/-] dogmas.

Especially egregious in someone who disdains dogmas.

See what I mean?

 

[tqualey]

Hi, David Ruiz,

I think you need to look at this from a historic perspecitve. Let me explain…

Furthermore where does it say, “The Holy Roman Church is the way, the truth, and the life. No man goes to the Father except through it.” ? Any denomination that says Jesus is the way ,the truth and the life is correct and acting as a pillar of truth. As soon as that denomination draws attention and claims interchangeability with church and Jesus, in this context, is carnal (as in "I am of Peter " or “Lo, I am of Paul”)

Let’s take a look at that verse (John 14:6) you misquoted and then place it in context…

Jesus said to him, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Now, Christ said this in about 32-33AD. At that time there were only three religions: Pagans (from Greek to Roman to everything in-between), Jewish (various sects) and The Way (that is the group that was following Christ and were persecuted by Saul of Tarsus - and later about 130AD changed their name to Catholic). There were no ‘denominations’ back then as there are today.

In fact, if you read Matt 16:18, you will find that Christ did not found multiple denominations on Peter - but, rather Christ founded His Church on the man who He knew would deny Him three times on Holy Thursday Night after the Last Supper.

Reading a little further, you find that many have cried out “Lord! Lord!..” but Christ did not recognize them. Others cried out, “Did we not work miracles in Your Name?..” and Christ condemns them by saying He never knew them (Matt 7:22)

And, if you are still reading along … 1Tim 3:15 we find Paul calling the Church the pillar of truth - and that Church is the Catholic Church - teaching the same doctrine it taught from that First Pentecost Sunday forward. And, what are those doctrines? Well…here are three that you will undoubtedly differe with:

1.) Baptism is necessary for salvation - it is not an option or something replaced with an Altar Call
2.) The Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Human Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ - it is not a memorial service done with grape juice
3.) God delegated the Power of God to men to forgive sin - and those that say we go straight to God are not using the method that God gave to us for forgiveness.

Your idea of ‘carnal’ sounds like another mis-quote. You can not call the Church founded by Christ ‘carnal’. Just who founded your church? This is the heart of the issue, at least as I see it. Either you are following the teachings of Christ who established Peter and his successors, as the Head of the Church - with Benedict XVI being the current Pope - or - you are following the traditions of men by someone in the 16th century or thereafter decided that his way was a better way to God than The Way of Christ.

Just who do you think is carnal?

God bless

 

[PRmerger]

Am I getting this correct?:

Catholics can be denied receiving the Wine and STILL experience the full Eucharist, but alcoholics and non-wine drinkers can not because it is not wine that they are drinking but simply non-fermemnted fruit of the vine.

No, not a single thing you have said above is correct.

Catholics believe that it was the Catholic Church alone that put together the Bible, GOD did not inspire all the early Church Fathers to use the scripture HE wanted in HIS Holy Bible as references in their writings.

Ditto.

Catholic believe that GOD’s Word is reliable, as merely a historical document but not infallible.

So not correct.

GOD’s Word is not the final rule but the Church’s is.

Again, incorrect.

God’s Word is the person of Jesus Christ.

What I am trying to get my head around is GOD having to say to man “My Word is the final rule”. That seems like a given to me.

It’s not a Scriptural given.

However, if you’re ok with “seems like a given”, then you ought to be ok with Mary’s Assumption, purgatory, infallibility, etc etc etc

Are not the 10 Commandments the final rule on those specific issues?

Indeed, they are.

Catholics say that all trinitarian Christians do not have the same basic tenants of faith, but hundreds of different interpretations and of course all are wrong except for theirs because only they have a Pope who is infallible.

Nope. I’ve already stated that we don’t use circular reasoning but spiral reasoning.

Catholics often think we want them to leave their Church.

LOL!

Catholics are Jewish.

To be fully Jewish is to become Catholic.