How many pages from the Bible do you use or need to use to support your beliefs?

[guanophore]

It may or may not be true that I don't know as much about RCC theology as you do but the above statement reveals that you don't know the state of affairs within evangelical/conservative/findamental protestantism either.

Hence, the purpose of this forum.

Our definitions of mass confusion are not the same.

Clearly not!

I am still interested in hearing yours, and what those lists and categories posted have to do with it.

Your belief systems requires that there be no mass confusion within the ranks

Can you please show where this is taught in the Catholic documents?

I think there is plenty of confusion. Your own experience is a good example. You apparently do not understand the difference between a doctrine and a discipline.

On the contrary our doctrine requires that the One Faith handed on to us be held inviolate and integrated. The whole and complete nature of the faith does not mean that every individual will grasp it.

so you change the definition as it applies to your system to safeguard your faith. Freedom of religion allows for this my friend.

I am curious about your definition of “mass confusion”. I could not connect it from some of the “examples” you gave.

 

[Jimmy_B]

Hence, the purpose of this forum.
.

 

[Jimmy_B]

All of them.

Good post and I agree.

I would just add -

Read, understand and know the Bible, in context. The context of Ancient languages, metaphors, allegories, parables and typology and so on. … Also, in the context of Christian History and Christian Tradition, through the guidance of God, working through His Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and the servants of His Church, all guided by the Holy Spirit, in unity with God the Father, God the Son, our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ and God the Holy Spirit.

 

[freedomwriter]

You know how the Calvary Chapels do it in church. They start with “In the Beginning” and methodically work their way to “The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God’s people. Amen”. Most others read outside of church services.

I love Calvary Chapel and the way we go through the WHOLE Bible. This is where the Lord led me to go when we left the catholic church. I learned more about the bible in 6 months than the 33 yrs i was at the catholic church.

 

[freedomwriter]

Is this the case, with every Calvary Chapel Church? On which day of the year, do they start at the beginning of the Bible and when is their “liturgical” year over? I asked this because I have friends who belong to the Calvary Chapel Church and I have never heard of any systematic structure in place, in that church, where they go through the entire Bible … I’ve also attended a service, many years ago, at the Calvary Chapel and it involve a rock band, a few Bible verses and a sermon, followed by people coming forward to be “Saved”. This was a long time ago, so, please correct me if I’m wrong… Thank you for your post.

There is no set time to start going through God’s Word. We are going through the whole bible on Wednesdays and study one whole book on Sunday’s. We just finished the book of Revelation. As far as the rock band lol you heard, it is usually a mixture of contempary music mixed with a hymn. The Lord said to play Him a new song so thats what we do. As far as people going forward the Lord said “Today is the day of Salvation.”

 

[Jimmy_B]

There is no set time to start going through God’s Word. We are going through the whole bible on Wednesdays and study one whole book on Sunday’s. We just finished the book of Revelation. As far as the rock band lol you heard, it is usually a mixture of contempary music mixed with a hymn. The Lord said to play Him a new song so thats what we do. As far as people going forward the Lord said “Today is the day of Salvation.”

Lol… I’m sure you are correct…When I wrote about the Calvary Chapel “rock band”, I was referring to late 70’s or the very early 80"s… .

 

[4Squarebaby]

Lol… I’m sure you are correct…When I wrote about the Calvary Chapel “rock band”, I was referring to late 70’s or the very early 80"s… .

Remember they are independent, the “rock band”, country/pop band, traditional quartet gospel band etc is an individual church decision

 

[Jim_Dandy]

“How many pages from the Bible do you use or need to support your beliefs?”

I don’t NEED the Bible to know my faith, but I USE all of it to strengthen my faith and apply the Word to my life.

The Catholic Church would teach what she teaches if there were no New Testament. The Church’s teachings are confirmed in the Scriptures, which she declared to be the Word of God, but she didn’t read the NT and then decide what to teach. Rather, some of what she was teaching was written down. The NT is based on the Catholic Church, not the other way around.

Original, authentic Christianity wasn’t based on the written word, but on the oral teaching of Christ and His Apostles. Christ commanded His Apostles to teach, not write, and promised to be with them (and their successors) ALWAYS, UNTIL THE END OF TIME (Mt 28:20 KJV). The Christian Scriptures are that part of Sacred Apostolic Tradition that got written down by the Catholic Church. The Church preserved all of the other Apostolic Traditions in other ways; they, too, are the “Word of God.” Divine Revelation is contained in both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

Peace, Jim Dandy

 

[Diddy_Gong]

How many pages from the Bible do you use or need to use to support your beliefs?

As many as I can get my hands on

 

[guanophore]

“How many pages from the Bible do you use or need to support your beliefs?”

I don’t NEED the Bible to know my faith, but I USE all of it to strengthen my faith and apply the Word to my life.

The Catholic Church would teach what she teaches if there were no New Testament. The Church’s teachings are confirmed in the Scriptures, which she declared to be the Word of God, but she didn’t read the NT and then decide what to teach. Rather, some of what she was teaching was written down. The NT is based on the Catholic Church, not the other way around.

Original, authentic Christianity wasn’t based on the written word, but on the oral teaching of Christ and His Apostles. Christ commanded His Apostles to teach, not write, and promised to be with them (and their successors) ALWAYS, UNTIL THE END OF TIME (Mt 28:20 KJV). The Christian Scriptures are that part of Sacred Apostolic Tradition that got written down by the Catholic Church. The Church preserved all of the other Apostolic Traditions in other ways; they, too, are the “Word of God.” Divine Revelation is contained in both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

Peace, Jim Dandy

Great post Jim Dandy! Kudos.

 

[guanophore]

As many as I can get my hands on

Is your faith extrapolated from it’s pages?

 

[JonNC]

"
Original, authentic Christianity wasn’t based on the written word, but on the oral teaching of Christ and His Apostles. Christ commanded His Apostles to teach, not write, and promised to be with them (and their successors) ALWAYS, UNTIL THE END OF TIME (Mt 28:20 KJV). The Christian Scriptures are that part of Sacred Apostolic Tradition that got written down by the Catholic Church. The Church preserved all of the other Apostolic Traditions in other ways; they, too, are the “Word of God.” Divine Revelation is contained in both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

Peace, Jim Dandy

Jim,
Not being contrary, but just trying to understand this. You referenced Matthew 28:20. Here is Matt. 28:19-20

19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. - Douay-Rheims Bible

Three questions:

1. Your contention is the CC would teach this even without scripture. Without this scriptural reference, how do you know this to be true?
2. Is it implicit or explicit when you say “(and their successors)”?
3. Are their successors in communion with the Bishop of Rome, or in communion with the other patriarchs, and how do we know?

Guanophore, I would appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut, as well.

Jon

 

[davec66]

How many pages thick, would the Bible be, if we limited it to Protestant, or “Born-again” verses? I know that the Catholic Bible would remain the same, because we don’t reject anything in the Bible and we don’t believe that there exists, any true conflict in the Bible when viewed, and understood in context. The Catholic Church also has a Liturgical Calendar, in which, nearly the entire Bible is read aloud during Mass. I also know that some of the early Protestant Churches accept and use, most of the King James Version (KJV) Bible, although the KJV, at least the older ones, have many books that have been removed…
How many pages from the Bible do you use or need to use to support your beliefs?

At the Church I attend we study the whole bible. We study different parts of the old and new testament over time at bible study and Sunday school. The thing is we only study the bible. The question is not what parts of the bible to use but, to only use the bible in your defense and do not to use the edicts of man that supersede the bible as the Catholic Church does. Jesus condemned that.

 

[Jimmy_B]

At the Church I attend we study the whole bible. We study different parts of the old and new testament over time at bible study and Sunday school. The thing is we only study the bible. The question is not what parts of the bible to use but, to only use the bible in your defense and do not to use the edicts of man that supersede the bible as the Catholic Church does. Jesus condemned that.

Men collected, translated, put into order and approved the Bible…Catholic men…The Bible is a Catholic book, a book, which cannot be truly understood if Christian history, Christian traditions and early Christians are ignored and/or rejected. The Bible didn’t magically appear. Context is everything and early Christianity should not be ignore or rejected.

Your Thoughts?

 

[guanophore]

Jim,
Not being contrary, but just trying to understand this. You referenced Matthew 28:20. Here is Matt. 28:19-20

Three questions:

1. Your contention is the CC would teach this even without scripture. Without this scriptural reference, how do you know this to be true?
2. Is it implicit or explicit when you say “(and their successors)”?
3. Are their successors in communion with the Bishop of Rome, or in communion with the other patriarchs, and how do we know?

Guanophore, I would appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut, as well.

Jon

We know that the Church taught this prior to the creation of the NT, and those are the Teachings preserved in the church. The Scriptures are “useful” for the faith, but the Church is not dependent upon them. God committed His Word to the Church, and preserves it within Her. His Word does not go out void, but accomplishes that for which it is sent (evangelization and instruction in the doctrine of the faith).

The HS led the Apostles to ordain and train their own successors. Jesus promised that He would remain with the Church “until the end of the age”

Yes, their successors are in communion with the successor of Peter, however the Church recognizes the authentic succession also among those who hold the Apostolic faith, but between us there has been wounding to the unity (as in the case of the Orthodox),

The Church also affirms that the HS uses ecclesial communities who are separated from unity to draw people to Himself.

 

[guanophore]

At the Church I attend we study the whole bible. We study different parts of the old and new testament over time at bible study and Sunday school. The thing is we only study the bible. The question is not what parts of the bible to use but, to only use the bible in your defense and do not to use the edicts of man that supersede the bible as the Catholic Church does. Jesus condemned that.

My misinformed brother,

The Catholic Church does not use the edicts of man to supercede the bible. You have been misled.

However, we do not read the bible in a vacuum, either. we study it in the light of the faith espoused by those who wrote it, which has been preserved infallibly in the Catholic Church.

 

[Jimmy_B]

My misinformed brother,

The Catholic Church does not use the edicts of man to supercede the bible. You have been misled.

However, we do not read the bible in a vacuum, either. we study it in the light of the faith espoused by those who wrote it, which has been preserved infallibly in the Catholic Church.

 

[JonNC]

=guanophore;6943878]We know that the Church taught this prior to the creation of the NT, and those are the Teachings preserved in the church.

The Scriptures are “useful” for the faith, but the Church is not dependent upon them.

God committed His Word to the Church, and preserves it within Her. His Word does not go out void, but accomplishes that for which it is sent (evangelization and instruction in the doctrine of the faith).

Can you give me an example of what teachings of the CC are not dependent on scripture, that cannot be confirmed in scripture?

The HS led the Apostles to ordain and train their own successors. Jesus promised that He would remain with the Church “until the end of the age”

Even if the Church Militant went astray, would you agree with me that He still would remain with the Church, as in the Church Triumphant? In other words, even if men mess things up here (schism, separation, etc) His promise remains constant.

Yes, their successors are in communion with the successor of Peter, however the Church recognizes the authentic succession also among those who hold the Apostolic faith, but between us there has been wounding to the unity (as in the case of the Orthodox),

The Church also affirms that the HS uses ecclesial communities who are separated from unity to draw people to Himself.

Good answer, as usual, guano. Even though we may disagree as to the extent of the authority and jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome.

Jon

 

[estesbob]

At the Church I attend we study the whole bible. We study different parts of the old and new testament over time at bible study and Sunday school. The thing is we only study the bible. The question is not what parts of the bible to use but, to only use the bible in your defense and do not to use the edicts of man that supersede the bible as the Catholic Church does. Jesus condemned that.

Problem is that the Bible church next door is studying the same Bible and coming up with totally different and often contradictory opinions on what it says. And evew if you could resolve your difference with then there would still be the problem with the three Bible churchs down the street just convinced you and everyone else in interprating scripture wrong.

You are correct that Catholics follow the edicts of man-and that mans name is Jesus Christ. .

 

[davec66]

Men collected, translated, put into order and approved the Bible…Catholic men…The Bible is a Catholic book, a book, which cannot be truly understood if Christian history, Christian traditions and early Christians are ignored and/or rejected. The Bible didn’t magically appear. Context is everything and early Christianity should not be ignore or rejected.

Your Thoughts?

Yes, the Bible was compiled by the Church. The writers of the books though were not Catholic. They were Jews and Christians. The Church using traditions over God’s Word is what I have a problem with. And who’s history are you using? You are right. I too believe in Early Christianity should not be ignored or rejected. Too bad the Catholic Church has.