T
TrueLight
Guest
It’s one thing to say they “act like” the Bible is the fourth person of the trinity or “they act like” the Bible created the world, but to spread such rampant misinformation is not good at all.
- Status
It’s one thing to say they “act like” the Bible is the fourth person of the trinity or “they act like” the Bible created the world, but to spread such rampant misinformation is not good at all.
J
JustaServant
Guest
All one needs to do is look up KJV-only fundamentalists, and you will find that they come close to, some to the very door of worshiping the Bible. Many a KJV, IFB has actually said “Jesus IS the Bible”, using John 1:1. Or “The KJV’ was purified seven times”. I heard it myself many years ago.
When I was a pastor I remember a Baptist who attended one of Jack Hyles services. In completer horror he described a liturgical-like procession to the pulpit holding the KJV high in the air while someone loudly proclaimed “Behold the the stone cut out without hands” (citing Daniel).
He never went back to that church again.
Let’s not slander all Protestants by using these examples.
But they are examples of where extreme fundamentalism (which obviously not all Protestants are) leads.
When I was a pastor I remember a Baptist who attended one of Jack Hyles services. In completer horror he described a liturgical-like procession to the pulpit holding the KJV high in the air while someone loudly proclaimed “Behold the the stone cut out without hands” (citing Daniel).
He never went back to that church again.
Let’s not slander all Protestants by using these examples.
But they are examples of where extreme fundamentalism (which obviously not all Protestants are) leads.
P
PJM
Guest
There are at least FOUR problems with there position. [IMO]
- They have usurped the authority. No where in the Bible has God even once permitted belief in more than Him alone, or ONLY the Faith he taught; the truth of which rest with the RCC.
- John chapters 20 AND 21 in the final verses of the chapters explains that Everything is NOT in the bible. In fact Christianity would not be here if the bible ALONE was necessary for ones salvation as the BIBLE never existed for about 70 years AFTER Christ death. And was not fully formulated for another 200 years!
- They mock there own position by NOT accepting and NOT DOING what Christ Himself commands
Eph. 4: 1-7 ] **"John.10: 16 **“And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd”
And Christ gave the keys to the Kingdom ONLY to Peter and Christ CC!
- Psalms 127:1 "“Unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it labor in vain. Unless the Lord watches over the city, the watchman stays awake in vain.”…** NOW READ Jn.14:1617 and Jn.17:15-19, 20: 19-23**
God Bless,
Pat
M
Marie_Gregg
Guest
I’d appreciate it if you’d not accuse me of lying or of being slanderous before I’ve answered your question. That’s a bit presumptuous.
I won’t be able to provide you with a link because no church or organization is going to be that blatant. This discussion hinges on attitude. How does the individual perceive the Bible, how it was transmitted and its role in the life of a Christian? I know more than a handful of people who hold the Bible as something apart from God; they do not subordinate the Bible to God but rather, as I said, elevate it into a fourth member of the Trinity. (This is a phrase I used to describe what I observe, by the way). They do not see that the Spirit must infuse the words with life. The words stand by themselves.
That’s the best I can give you, but, based on the attitude you have exhibited, I’m guessing that this answer isn’t going to be good enough.
F
fred_conty
Guest
Jesus died around 30 AD.
For 20 years, there was no New Testiment because the first book written was by
St. Paul around the year 50 AD.
For the space of 20 years between Jesus’ death and the first book being written by Paul,
how were they saved if the bible is necessary for salvation? Only thing that was
available was mouth teaching or tradition about ONLY what Jesus had SPOKEN and done. There was absolutely NOTHING else written about what Jesus had said
and done from any other source other than speaking tradition or passing it on verbally
thru the mouths of those who had first hand seen and heard Jesus. There was no book.
20 years where nothing was written. Verbally the information and teaching was
passed around for 20 years without any book. If salvation and AUTHORITY were that
important, then why?
In addition, the last book written was around 90 Ad. This would mean that the complete
salvation plan and AUTHORITY was missing for 60 years after the death of Jesus.
And there were other books called ACTS “of this” and ACTS “of that”, and the Gospel
“of this” and the Gospel “of that”, and well as “this” letter and “that” letter mixed in with
the all the books that we honor as the New Testiment today. The real books of the N.T. were not defined until a century or two later depending on one’s point of view. But nevertheless, how was one to know what was the REAL Bible? And if the Bible is necessary of salvation and AUTHORITY, then who had the authority and salvation during this time of confusion and doubt about the authentic books of the Bible?
Mathew - Nobody knows when but best estimate is 70 - 80 AD. Authur not known either for sure. Book has material taken from Mark and other early sources of oral tradition.
Mark - Traditionally, written shortly before 70 AD in Rome.
Luke - Most say written after 70 AD because Luke used the material in Mark’s writting.
John - probably 90 - 100 AD.
Acts - Same author as Luke’s gospel, so this would be written after 70 AD.
Letters of Paul - early 50’s AD and later.
James - about 90 - 100 AD.
Peter - 70 - 90 AD
John - 90 AD
Jude - 90 AD or later.
Revelation - 81 AD - 96 AD
Just a thought.
For 20 years, there was no New Testiment because the first book written was by
St. Paul around the year 50 AD.
For the space of 20 years between Jesus’ death and the first book being written by Paul,
how were they saved if the bible is necessary for salvation? Only thing that was
available was mouth teaching or tradition about ONLY what Jesus had SPOKEN and done. There was absolutely NOTHING else written about what Jesus had said
and done from any other source other than speaking tradition or passing it on verbally
thru the mouths of those who had first hand seen and heard Jesus. There was no book.
20 years where nothing was written. Verbally the information and teaching was
passed around for 20 years without any book. If salvation and AUTHORITY were that
important, then why?
In addition, the last book written was around 90 Ad. This would mean that the complete
salvation plan and AUTHORITY was missing for 60 years after the death of Jesus.
And there were other books called ACTS “of this” and ACTS “of that”, and the Gospel
“of this” and the Gospel “of that”, and well as “this” letter and “that” letter mixed in with
the all the books that we honor as the New Testiment today. The real books of the N.T. were not defined until a century or two later depending on one’s point of view. But nevertheless, how was one to know what was the REAL Bible? And if the Bible is necessary of salvation and AUTHORITY, then who had the authority and salvation during this time of confusion and doubt about the authentic books of the Bible?
The authority and authenticity of salvation remained with those who Jesus gave it to.
New Testiment dates when the books were written are approximate.Mathew - Nobody knows when but best estimate is 70 - 80 AD. Authur not known either for sure. Book has material taken from Mark and other early sources of oral tradition.
Mark - Traditionally, written shortly before 70 AD in Rome.
Luke - Most say written after 70 AD because Luke used the material in Mark’s writting.
John - probably 90 - 100 AD.
Acts - Same author as Luke’s gospel, so this would be written after 70 AD.
Letters of Paul - early 50’s AD and later.
James - about 90 - 100 AD.
Peter - 70 - 90 AD
John - 90 AD
Jude - 90 AD or later.
Revelation - 81 AD - 96 AD
Just a thought.
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
They look but cannot see, they listen but cannot understand.
They read that there a Church built by Christ whose mission is to teach all yet they cannot see this. they believe that the Bible is what gives them authority to go around teaching without knowing what they are teaching or what to believe.
They read that there a Church built by Christ whose mission is to teach all yet they cannot see this. they believe that the Bible is what gives them authority to go around teaching without knowing what they are teaching or what to believe.
S
simspt
Guest
Many Christians find comforting the unchanging element the NT writings (I think we all do at least I do) present when compared to the ever changing church. They equate change in the church as antithetical to the unchanging Scriptures. The different insights the individual authors of the NT give us is an example of diversity within the NT itself. It is the Scriptures themselves that tell us Jesus is the same today, yesterday and forever and not once do they make that claim for the church. Many Protestants are not aware that the Catholic Church venerates the Scripture as it does the Body of Christ.
P
PJM
Guest
Marie;
PLEASE allow me to appologize on behalf of this FORUM. Not all of us are caustic and unchairatable.
I would caution you though on your position
Eph.3: 9 to 12 ** “And to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things; that through the church [SINGULAR: meaning THE CATHOLIC Church] the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places.* This was according to the eternal purpose which he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord, in whom we have boldness and confidence of access through our faith in him***
**2nd. Peter 1: 16-21 ** “we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. And we have the prophetic word made more sure. You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”
**Matt.13:9-12 **“He who has ears, let him hear." Then the disciples came and said to him, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” And he answered them, "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.” [Jesus is speaking here to the Apostles and todays RCC] For to him who has will more be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away. “
** 2nd. Tim. 3:16-17 **All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work
1Cor2: 6-7 “Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
2 Peter 3: 14 –17 “Therefore, beloved, since you wait for these, be zealous to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures”
God BLESS YOU, know that we ARE delighted that you joined us.
Pat
M
Marie_Gregg
Guest
@PJM:
Thanks.
I’m kinda confused, though. I love the verses you posted, but what are you trying to tell me with them? Forgive me if I’m slow today, I’m not feeling too well.
Thanks.
I’m kinda confused, though. I love the verses you posted, but what are you trying to tell me with them? Forgive me if I’m slow today, I’m not feeling too well.
A
AmateurPianist
Guest
No it is not good enough.
You said that
But you have not entered one shred of objective evidence to substantiate this claim. I assume you have none.
Why do you feel the need to do this? Why? I don’t get it.
Sorry if this seems harsh…but I have just about had my fill of statements here that I really consider to be slanderous. (your church is a harlot that I was told once as an example). I just don’t get the need for this type of behaviour.
I probably need another long break from this place. Stuff like this just drives me nuts. I think I will take it as I just need to cool down.
A
AmateurPianist
Guest
Thank you. You are a voice of sanity.
It’s one thing to say they “act like” the Bible is the fourth person of the trinity or “they act like” the Bible created the world, but to spread such rampant misinformation is not good at all.
Seeing that not all Catholics seem to feel the need to slander to make their point, I will retire from this thread.
S
sallybutler
Guest
I think one might get the impression that the OP has when you go to the various websites to check out their beliefs.
For example, Southern Baptists put their belief in the Scriptures first in their list.
Bob Jones University also lists the Bible first in their “Who We Are” page.
Presbyterian Church in America also lists the bible first.
Assemblies of God is the same.
For example, Southern Baptists put their belief in the Scriptures first in their list.
Bob Jones University also lists the Bible first in their “Who We Are” page.
Presbyterian Church in America also lists the bible first.
Assemblies of God is the same.
M
Marie_Gregg
Guest
I’m sorry that you have had negative experiences here on this forum. I haven’t been around that long. So, may I be so bold as to say that I think you are reading far more into what I have said than is there?
I said that many elevate the Bible to a fourth member of the Trinity. Perhaps I should have been clearer and said that “many I know” elevate the Bible to a fourth member of the Trinity. That’s my bad. I said this because I have experienced it firsthand. I’m not going to post a church name or names of individuals because I don’t think that’s right. These people aren’t on the board to defend themselves.
JMcrae wrote:
“They honestly believe that the Bible created the world and then became “flesh” (a book that you can hold and pick up) and dwelled among us.”
I know people like that. I honestly do.
In my experience, the Bible is elevated to a position it should not hold when it is not subordinated to God. It is God who gives the words meaning and power. Without His involvement, the words are just words. For example, I am acquainted with some who are uncomfortable with the use of instruments in worship services because the New Testament doesn’t talk about the earliest believers using instruments. Therefore, God must not want instruments used. The Bible’s silence must mean God’s silence.
A + B does not = C there, but there are some who think it does. Am I being any clearer?
EDIT: “elevate to a” and “act like” are nearly synonymous in my mind. I don’t think that anyone believes that the Bible is a part of the Trinity. I just think they “act like” it is when the “elevate it to a” position where it does not belong. It was not my intention to “spread rampant misinformation.”
B
Bklynguy
Guest
I wouldn’t say they took authority away from Jesus Christ per se; however, they did take away the keys that Christ gave to Peter. Christ gave us a Church, not a book. I am always amused how protestants trump “sola scriptura” when the man who started it all, Martin Luther, ripped 7 books out of the Old Testament. He also wanted to tear out the book of James and Revelation.
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
Well said.
P
PJM
Guest
THE REPLY
I’d appreciate it if you’d not accuse me of lying or of being slanderous before I’ve answered your question. That’s a bit presumptuous.
I won’t be able to provide you with a link because no church or organization is going to be that blatant. This discussion hinges on attitude. How does the individual perceive the Bible, how it was transmitted and its role in the life of a Christian? I know more than a handful of people who hold the Bible as something apart from God; they do not subordinate the Bible to God but rather, as I said, elevate it into a fourth member of the Trinity. (This is a phrase I used to describe what I observe, by the way). They do not see that the Spirit must infuse the words with life. The words stand by themselves.
That’s the best I can give you, but, based on the attitude you have exhibited, I’m guessing that this answer isn’t going to be good enough.
Not sure how much my comments will help, but please allow me to try.
First an assumption:
I recently signed on to a couple of other public forums that have religious debate sections.
I noticed immediately that by and large the posters tend to be far more caustic and unchairitable then we here at the CAF need to be, or as Christians OUGHT to be
. So maybe our “newbe” is just not used to our way of doing things? let’s pray that is the case.The Bible is either as you imply, inspired by God [2nd. Tim.3:16-17] or it is useless as a tool to teach or learn what is necessary for our salvation. Because of the sheer numbers of Catholics and Christians World wide it obviously is an effectivr tool.
While God did not directly author the Bible; it is clear that MOST of what He desires we know, learn and live is included in the Bible. This is evident by it’s now 2,000 years of continuing existence; the fulfillment of prophisies, and all of the good that it has wronght. No book has wider readership, or more authority, or more followers.
Both the HS and Christ Himself reside within the CC to govern, protect, guide and warrant Her teaching truths on ALL matters to be believed on Faith issues and all matters relating to Morals. John 14:16-17; John 17:17-19 and John 20:19-22, support Mt. 16:18-19, where Christ gave the very keys to heavens gate and entrust them to Peter and His CC.
So our skepital friend; look up these verses; and you will find the evidence that you seek.
***God Bless, the key to effective communication is CHARITY! ***
God Bless,
Pat
L
LoyalViews
Guest
I never said all Protestants.
But, there are that select few groups of them who are so enthused with Bible this, Bibly only-that, Bible over there. They have their own interpretation of the Scriptures, which alone is very dangerous, but on top of that it seems they’re so obsessed with the Bible that they see it not as the Word of God, but as God himself.
It is a wee bit different from Protestants saying that we worship the Blessed Virgin Mary, and the Saints. They say ALL Catholics do so. I only said that a select group of Protestants worship the book.
God Bless
:byzsoc:
C
Cristiano
Guest
I would be very careful in accusing protestants of treating the Bible as a fourth divine person, because in our own house we had the same problem in relation to Mary. There are some small elements in the Catholic Church that worship Mary because they do not really understand what is going on, and the Church has been very careful in modifying some veneration practices to reemphasize the proper teaching. Once I even found (I was playing with Google) some Catholics that were proclaiming Mary as the fourth person of the Trinity. While the Catholic Church has always consistent with Her teachings we also had some Catholics that went their own heretic ways and we say that they cannot speak for the Church. Using the same logic we cannot use some absurd “protestant” theology held by few as representative of the largest majority of the protestant confessions. They already have their own different theological views that we can discuss about without us nitpicking and generalizing what a few people might say or think. If we are so bent out of shape with weird theological ideas from a few people, why don’t we address first the ones that are in our own house?
A
AmateurPianist
Guest
You know I think you are right. I rushed to judgement. I took something that was poorly worded and assumed the worst.
That is a better because it is more subjective. That is the difference between saying “Catholics Worship Mary” and "Many Catholics I know worship Mary.
Yet if I were to say on these boards “Many Catholics I know worship Mary”, they would rightly ask me how I would know that. And I don’t know that. I am not God.
So I would ask you how you know that.
Better statements would be “Many Catholics that I know come across to me like they are worshiping Mary.” or “Many Protestants that I know come across to me like they are worshiping the Bible”. And end both with “…of course I don’t know the heart”
Now that is a statement I can’t argue with. Except ask “…did they really say the Bible created the world…”
That just seems so wrong. I have never in 57 years heard anything like that. And I have never encountered an organization that believes that. But I suppose there are all types.
…act like…to me…is much more subjective. I would never have gone off like I did worded like that.
I go off like that because that is a common technique around here…make outrageous claims against the other guy that are unprovable and only serve to mischaracterize the other guy. “…worship the Bible…and/or worship Mary…” are two of the common ones. I would strongly suggest against using either phrase.
A
AmateurPianist
Guest
Ok…you said only a select group worship the book.I never said all Protestants.
But, there are that select few groups of them who are so enthused with Bible this, Bibly only-that, Bible over there. They have their own interpretation of the Scriptures, which alone is very dangerous, but on top of that it seems they’re so obsessed with the Bible that they see it not as the Word of God, but as God himself.
It is a wee bit different from Protestants saying that we worship the Blessed Virgin Mary, and the Saints. They say ALL Catholics do so. I only said that a select group of Protestants worship the book.
God Bless
You are the one making the assertion. The burden of proof falls on you.
So prove it.
Remember that you are not God. You are in no position to know somebody’s heart.
Gimme a like where one set of Protestants say they worship the book.
If you are making a statement that you can’t prove…may I please ask why you are making it.
The best you can say if you want to go down this road is “They act to me like they are worshiping the book…but of course I don’t know the heart”.
Anything beyond that is at best a poorly worded statement. And for a poorly worded statement all that is needed is just a correction to a better wording.
So might I expect a correction of this poorly worded staqtement?
- Status