I wonder if non-Catholics realize that without the Catholic Church there would not be a Bible (nm)

  • Thread starter Thread starter psychiatrist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mosacked said:
Oh, my statement is ambiguous but yours is not? Hic ~

muslimsopenyoureyes.blogspot.com

.
Click to expand...
I should consider my audience. Muslims teach that Judas was crucified in place of Jesus. You sentence was structured in such a way that it could have 2 different meanings, that which you may have meant and the Muslim belief. At first I thought you might be Muslim so I followed the hint of your signature. But then I read just enough of your blog link and realized another possibility. As you can see so far your sentence is ambiguous implies that it was not only vague but has multiple meanings.

Without the Church the bible would not exist. The only Christian Church in existence in the first 1000 years of Christendom was the Catholic Church. Then for the following 500 years we have a broken Church with the Great Schism. Then Martin Luther tried to get rid of many books in the bible. He tried to get rid of James and Revelations but failed. Thus the first KJV that was printed included the deuterocanonical books under the false name apocrypha. 3 years ago I bought a copy of the 1611 edition of the KJV and use it as an example to show Protestants that Catholic bibles do include books originally present when the canon was developed. The bible exists because of sacred tradition.
 
Missing from this enlightning discussion is mention and significance of the Alexandrian greek new testament used in the NA 27 and USB 4 (and earlier revisions) greek manuscripts and the hebrew old testament texts- Kittel’s Biblia Hebraica (and for that matter the dead sea scrolls) which underlie the modern translations.

Also missing from this discussion is the fact that none of the officials at the Council of Trent knew greek or hebrew and yet proclaimed a flawed Vulgate to be the true Bible. And thanks be to V2 for finally after 500 years giving the world a translation in the vulgar language using those same NT texts (NA/USB).
 
Jon_Hus said:
Missing from this enlightning discussion is mention and significance of the Alexandrian greek new testament used in the NA 27 and USB 4 (and earlier revisions) greek manuscripts and the hebrew old testament texts- Kittel’s Biblia Hebraica (and for that matter the dead sea scrolls) which underlie the modern translations.

Also missing from this discussion is the fact that none of the officials at the Council of Trent knew greek or hebrew and yet proclaimed a flawed Vulgate to be the true Bible. And thanks be to V2 for finally after 500 years giving the world a translation in the vulgar language using those same NT texts (NA/USB).
Click to expand...
I do believe you are very misguided. Whatever you read must not be correct because the Easter Orthodox were in fact one with the Latin Church. The best Greek scholars in the world are Orthodox. The Vulgate was blessed to be the “official” book for a particular reason, the liturgy mainly. It was the legal language of the time so it was translated by Jerome for the purpose of the Church. Jerome wanted to exclude the deuterocanon but he was the only one and was not a theologian. He was obedient and resigned his will to the universal church. I do believe there were in fact Greek speaking orthodox at the time. They too teach sacred tradition as well as magisterial. The differences are really minute, thought many on both sides love to split hairs while acting like their moving mountains.

I’d like to add that one of the initial strains between the east and the west church was the language barrier. I think this is an interesting thing to think about. The conflicts have their roots in political control of the regions involve. Even today you’ll find peoples all over the region to be possessed with a certain abundance of near arrogance if not just that. Many are consumed with their national religious pride. It will be a wonderful day when the 2 become one again. Once this happens I do believe the Protestant world will begin to fall apart again as the 2 lungs of the east and west will breath fully and the excitement will motivate people to study real history rather than anti-Catholic/Orthodox rhetoric. We only have 1 and 2 Maccabees. The Orthodox have 3 and 4 as well. Why? Not quite sure, but the protestant view of these texts is really bazaar to me considering that they removed 7 old testament books that really do not change the deposit of faith but rather tries to redefine it.
 
Nine_Two said:
In the words of Fr. Thomas Hopko… “Don’t use our book against us.”
Click to expand...
Very good Nine_Two. Sadly, it happens.
blazerdave said:
Those Catholics…always copying ancient texts and preserving them in monasteries! Yep…we owe you guys! 👍
Click to expand...
Yes, I know–those determined Catholics working to preserve the word of God. What self-respecting Protestant wouldn’t condemn them for it? 😉

Actually, we owe the Catholic Church a great debt for our Bible—oral tradition to written page to Biblical Canon.

Anna
 
blazerdave said:
And without the Anglican Church, we would not have the 1611 KJV - Baptist Edition! 😃
Click to expand...
You’re on a roll today, blazerdave. :rotfl:

I just posted this on a similar thread:
Anna_Scott said:
. . . . .The rather ironic issue about the KJV, is that many Protestants claiming the KJV is the only inspired version, are unaware that the KJV contained the Deuterocanonical Books for nearly 300 years. If my memory serves me correctly, The King James Bible was originally printed with 80 Books in 1611. The Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical Books were not “officially” removed until 1885.
Click to expand...
Anna
 
You obviously do not have a clue as to what I’m talking about but that is your right I suppose.

Have a great day,
Jon
eucharisteo said:
I do believe you are very misguided. Whatever you read must not be correct because the Easter Orthodox were in fact one with the Latin Church. The best Greek scholars in the world are Orthodox. The Vulgate was blessed to be the “official” book for a particular reason, the liturgy mainly. It was the legal language of the time so it was translated by Jerome for the purpose of the Church. Jerome wanted to exclude the deuterocanon but he was the only one and was not a theologian. He was obedient and resigned his will to the universal church. I do believe there were in fact Greek speaking orthodox at the time. They too teach sacred tradition as well as magisterial. The differences are really minute, thought many on both sides love to split hairs while acting like their moving mountains.

I’d like to add that one of the initial strains between the east and the west church was the language barrier. I think this is an interesting thing to think about. The conflicts have their roots in political control of the regions involve. Even today you’ll find peoples all over the region to be possessed with a certain abundance of near arrogance if not just that. Many are consumed with their national religious pride. It will be a wonderful day when the 2 become one again. Once this happens I do believe the Protestant world will begin to fall apart again as the 2 lungs of the east and west will breath fully and the excitement will motivate people to study real history rather than anti-Catholic/Orthodox rhetoric. We only have 1 and 2 Maccabees. The Orthodox have 3 and 4 as well. Why? Not quite sure, but the protestant view of these texts is really bazaar to me considering that they removed 7 old testament books that really do not change the deposit of faith but rather tries to redefine it.
Click to expand...
 
Jon_Hus said:
You obviously do not have a clue as to what I’m talking about but that is your right I suppose.

Have a great day,
Jon
Click to expand...
:confused:
Guess not… explain it for my edification please. And you don’t have to be snotty about it. I was being charitable.

If you’re speaking of other canons, I know about them. But I’m Latin Rite and am not that familiar with the other canons. Why do they exist? Not sure yet. Still studying up on this aspect. But that is of no concern to me, without the Church there would be no canon of scripture and Protestants would really be lost then. Show up, for what? No offense but it is funny to think about. I find if humorous.
 
BrianH said:
I wonder if Catholics understand how completely useless and meaningless the term non-Catholics is?
But yes I do:D
I am not however the spokesperson for my church or any other church:mad:🤷😃
Click to expand...
Catholics are trying to be nice. There are a lot of other terms we use but Protestant doesn’t cover all of you guys. That term is all inclusive. Now don’t you feel special.😉

Your last sentence reads like the fine print blurped out loud at the end of a cheap knife commercial.😃
 
No representation is made that the quality of liturgical services to be performed is greater than the quality of liturgical services performed by other churches. 😃
 
Um…for the first 1000 years there was the Church. Eastern and Western. They together codified the bible. Then the Church split. Are you saying that the Orthodox Churches were not a part of deciding Canon?

The Orthodox Church has the least change in 2000 years. Be careful what you ask. 🙂
 
psychiatrist said:
Click to expand...
Yes and…your point being…

God has from the beginning of the church age up to today has called people to join Him in the work that He was doing. And as far as I can observe, God does not have a favourite organization that He prefers to call humans from to join Him in His work.

And all the praise and credit goes back to God anyway.

I for one am equally not ok with (1) Christians lifting the positive accomplishments of their own organizations as talking points to their claims of organizational superiority (2) Christians pointing fingers to the negative accomplishments of other organizations as talking points to claiming the other organizations as inferior. But I guess that is just me.
 
eucharisteo said:
I should consider my audience. Muslims teach that Judas was crucified in place of Jesus. You sentence was structured in such a way that it could have 2 different meanings, that which you may have meant and the Muslim belief. At first I thought you might be Muslim so I followed the hint of your signature. But then I read just enough of your blog link and realized another possibility. As you can see so far your sentence is ambiguous implies that it was not only vague but has multiple meanings.

Without the Church the bible would not exist. The only Christian Church in existence in the first 1000 years of Christendom was the Catholic Church. Then for the following 500 years we have a broken Church with the Great Schism. Then Martin Luther tried to get rid of many books in the bible. He tried to get rid of James and Revelations but failed. Thus the first KJV that was printed included the deuterocanonical books under the false name apocrypha. 3 years ago I bought a copy of the 1611 edition of the KJV and use it as an example to show Protestants that Catholic bibles do include books originally present when the canon was developed. The bible exists because of sacred tradition.
Click to expand...
There’s nothing ambiguous about my statement. You failed to understand that’s all.

Saying the catholic church is responsible for the bible is the SAME as saying Judas Iscariot was responsible for Jesus’ crucifixion. Without which, there would be no bible and no crucifixion for Jesus. God would be defunct. The bible will fail to exist and Jesus would have to commit suicide.

That’s how dumb this whole thing is. I seriously hope you fellas see how ridiculous some of you guys/gals are.

muslimsopenyoureyes.blogspot.com
 
Mosacked said:
There’s nothing ambiguous about my statement. You failed to understand that’s all.
Saying the catholic church is responsible for the bible is the SAME as saying Judas Iscariot was responsible for Jesus’ crucifixion. Without which, there would be no bible and no crucifixion for Jesus. God would be defunct. The bible will fail to exist and Jesus would have to commit suicide.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Gabriel_of_12 said:
There was no official canonized New testament for the first four hundred years of Christianity, the Only thing Jesus Christ left us in existence since his ascension, is the Catholic Church which was under persecution, celebrating her Liturgy underground from Oral Apostolic Traditions and Written Letters copied and handed down to other Catholic communities.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
AmateurPianist said:
Yes and…your point being…

God has from the beginning of the church age up to today has called people to join Him in the work that He was doing. And as far as I can observe, God does not have a favourite organization that He prefers to call humans from to join Him in His work.

And all the praise and credit goes back to God anyway.

I for one am equally not ok with (1) Christians lifting the positive accomplishments of their own organizations as talking points to their claims of organizational superiority (2) Christians pointing fingers to the negative accomplishments of other organizations as talking points to claiming the other organizations as inferior. But I guess that is just me.
Click to expand...
Most religious organisations are members only God Clubs, none members are treated as evil,

Throughout history they have been killing each other, doing Gods work. I am not going to detail the great wrongs done in the Name of God, IT WOULD TAKE A ETERNITY tens of millions butchered ,

God gave us a paradise and we have turned into a :Hell on Earth"

The Bible can be used in many ways,

What if the majority of words of Christ were Censored out, the Bible does tend to support those from the top end of town, the Martin Luther version supports governments,
 
Mosacked said:
There’s nothing ambiguous about my statement. You failed to understand that’s all.

Saying the catholic church is responsible for the bible is the SAME as saying Judas Iscariot was responsible for Jesus’ crucifixion. Without which, there would be no bible and no crucifixion for Jesus. God would be defunct. The bible will fail to exist and Jesus would have to commit suicide.

That’s how dumb this whole thing is. I seriously hope you fellas see how ridiculous some of you guys/gals are.

muslimsopenyoureyes.blogspot.com
Click to expand...
You OBVIOUSLY :rolleyes: don’t understand the English language. But good luck with not reading. I’m sorry you don’t understand, though you do not see it. Go to an English professor and ask if your sentence could be construed in 2 different ways. I tried to explain to you how it was ambiguous, but rather than jumping on board and being charitable you chose to be very snarky. Good luck with that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top