Need Help proving the Rightful Bible

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tyler_Smedley

Guest
I had another discussion with my protestant friend and this time we talked about the bible and it’s origin. He maintains that somehow that we got the bible…but what the Catholics got was not all right the new testament was infalible but the old testament was…not…basicly that whole argument again and I am really tired of trying to come up with new explinations of the Truth so if you guys would take over that would be awesome. Thanks,
 
First of all, protestants wouldnt even HAVE a bible to rewrite, if it wasnt for Catholics… WE were the ones that passed on the oral traditions, the writings, etc and composed them into BOOK FORM. 😉
 
Tyler Smedley,
He maintains that somehow that we got the bible…
Don’t let him get away with that. 😉 Hold him to his own statements and ask him to tell you exactly how we got the Bible or more specifically how we decided the Canon of Scripture (i.e. the Gospel of Matthew as opposed to that of the gospel of Thomas).

He might find the answer surprising. 🙂

Miguel.
 
Check out the book Where We Got The Bible, Our Debt To The Catholic Church by Henry G Graham, a convert to Catholocism
 
40.png
turkey2:
Check out the book Where We Got The Bible, Our Debt To The Catholic Church by Henry G Graham, a convert to Catholocism
This book is published by Catholic Answers. Go the the store at www.catholic.com.
 
Karl Keating:
This book is published by Catholic Answers. Go the the store at www.catholic.com.
Trust me buy more than one copy you will save shipping charges, because you will give copies away. I cant seem to keep my own copy of this book.

2nd question is this if it was not right what we had why did the God that promised he would never leave us and also that the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church allow error to be taught for about 1100 years???

Lets see if we have this right He said he would never leave us, but He took a long nap He woke up and said no no no you have it all wrong I will send Martin along to lead a Schism?? Does not sound like God to me.

Maybe it was this way satan tricked God and while God was tricked he allowed error to be taught to all those people for all those years??? Does not sound like the God who will never break a promise ya know the whole gates of hell thing!

God Bless my friend hope I have not confused the issue for ya.
 
I’ve had to answer questions similar to this, so I finally typed up a summary of what I’ve read from many different sources. Here’s a paragraph from a letter I wrote:

Maccabees is one of the seven books that is in all Catholic Bibles and left out of Protestant Bibles. When the Catholic Church made the official canon of the Bible at the Council of Trent in 1546 (althought the New Testament canon was established in the 4th century), they said that it was an inspired book. At one time the Jews in Palestine were reading their Hebrew version of the Bible which did not include the seven books. The Jews in Alexandria, Egypt read the Greek version of the Bible which does include those seven books. The Palestinians didn’t accept the seven books possibly because of the late date of when they were written. The Protestant Reformers chose to go with the Hebrew Palestinian version of the Bible because they wanted to have the spirit of the early church, and they didn’t agree with what was in the seven books–like praying for the dead. What Protestants didn’t realize at the time was that the longer version of the Bible which included the seven books was the Bible most used in the early Christian churches. These days the seven books are usually included in Protestant Bibles under the term “apocryphal.” Protestants now realize that they’re worthy of reading, even though they don’t consider them inspired. Martin Luther wanted to leave the book of St. James out of the Bible because it didn’t agree with HIS philosophy. He called it an “epistle of straw.” So that’s why we have different versions of the Bible.

Please feel free to correct me if I have wrong information. I wouldn’t want to spread error.
 
Luther’s intent was to remove a few more books even more than the 7 (Revelations,for instance) not to mention PARTS of other books: 3 chapters of Daniel and 6 chapters of Esther, leaving Protestants with 66 incomplete books while Catholic Bibles have 73 books.

As the above post says, the ‘mission’ was to end up with a bible that would absolutely support his premises.
 
Is it possible to ask this person if they know why there is a Bible? Part of the reason the cannon was set by the Catholic Church is because too many people were starting to claim what was and what was not inspired.

I would also like to ask about the people for the first 400 years of the Christian faith?

They had no Bible to follow how did they get the truth?
 
40.png
srkbdk:
Trust me buy more than one copy you will save shipping charges, because you will give copies away. I cant seem to keep my own copy of this book.

2nd question is this if it was not right what we had why did the God that promised he would never leave us and also that the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church allow error to be taught for about 1100 years???

Lets see if we have this right He said he would never leave us, but He took a long nap He woke up and said no no no you have it all wrong I will send Martin along to lead a Schism?? Does not sound like God to me.

Maybe it was this way satan tricked God and while God was tricked he allowed error to be taught to all those people for all those years??? Does not sound like the God who will never break a promise ya know the whole gates of hell thing!

God Bless my friend hope I have not confused the issue for ya.
There can be no God because how could he allow all such atrocities to occur.”

This is an argument that I get from agnostics and others from time to time. The thing is is that God does not intervene at all times and in all instances. He allows man to make mistakes and sometime go the wrong direction. He let the human race go down this road so far at one point that his only option was to destroy everyone on the planet with the exception of Noah’s family. He allowed the Tower of Babel to be built before he destroyed it even though it was against his wishes.

Likewise, the scripture is not immune to the fallibility of man. We as humans can incorrectly translate things and misinterpret words. God will intervene with his church but not at all times and not in all instances.
 
Tyler,

Check out chapters 3 and 4 in “Why do Catholics do That?” by Kevin Orlin Johnson, Ph.D. It talks about the establishment of the Old and New testaments.

Peace out, Catholic Brother.
 
40.png
Shibboleth:
There can be no God because how could he allow all such atrocities to occur.”

This is an argument that I get from agnostics and others from time to time. The thing is is that God does not intervene at all times and in all instances. He allows man to make mistakes and sometime go the wrong direction. He let the human race go down this road so far at one point that his only option was to destroy everyone on the planet with the exception of Noah’s family. He allowed the Tower of Babel to be built before he destroyed it even though it was against his wishes.

Likewise, the scripture is not immune to the fallibility of man. We as humans can incorrectly translate things and misinterpret words. God will intervene with his church but not at all times and not in all instances.
If you want to talk about the proofs for God outside of scripture that is fine but this is not the thread for it. It is fun to look at the Giants like St. Thomas Aquinas and his Summa Theologiae. To use what is contianed there first to see there is a God and there can be only one. The next step is to determine if he has given us any direct revelation. He has and the fullness of that can only be found in the Holy Catholic Church, not because of men like me, but because of his promise in regards to the Church.

Another thing to look at when it comes to God allowing the human race to do things is that it proves many things I will list a few I like but there are others:
  1. Prove he loves us enough to allow us to chose other than him.
  2. In the case of things like the tower of Babel, he shows no matter how strong and smart we think we are He is still God and we are not.
  3. His mercy is beyond us and never ending.
  4. While his mercy is there so is Justice.
There are other things to talk about in this area, however I think that would need to be a new thread also as you have raised some very important points.

Last but not least I agree that we can make mistakes, however I am not aware of where the Holy Catholic Church (not because of the men in the Church but the promise Christ made to us he knew we would mess it up that is why the Holy Spirit guides the Church), has allowed the meaning of Scripture to be changed. I know there are times when there has been mispellings and other things like that, however I am unaware of any time She has allowed the intent of the word to be changed. Since Martin Luther, Calvin, Wycliff, and some others around that time there have been changes to the meaning of the text, but only to my knowldge outside the protection of the Catholic Church. In addition we have to look as Scripture as only one part of the teaching on salvation. The remainder and essistinal is within the full teaching of the Catholic Church and can not be found outside Her protection. Man I am too long winded but I leave you with a question show me a case where the Bible under the protection of the Catholic Church has changed its intent or meaning (not misspelled word or the like but real changed meanings)? I know many that have changed outside Her protection, but inside dont think so.

thanks for the discussion:) In it you are helping me.
 
Yes The Catholic Church has protected the Vulgate so that its translation has remained for the most part intact, but it is still on the premise that the original vulgate is infallible. I don’t think that this is the case. If I remember correctly it is based off of the Septuagint, which has had a few changes, and in light of new archeological discoveries has some errors.

Another problem comes from the Douay-Reims version, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate. So now you have a translation, of a translation, of a translation. Then finally you have to deal with the fact that there were some revisions done by Bishop Challoner. ← I hope I got all of the names correct.

So let us look at meaning. The Greek work “malakoi” is currently translated in 1 Cor 6:9 of many bibles as “effeminate” but this is probably not the correct translation. The Greek word “malakoi” means ‘soft’ or ‘vulnerable’ as in Matthew 11:18 and Luke 7:25. In addition we can see that the Greek word “arsenokoites” in 1 Cor 6:9 might also be mistranslated as homosexual. “Arsenokoites” is a combination of two words that mean “male” and “bed” and might just as likely mean male prostitute and not a homosexual.

So how do we know what “Arsenokoites” really means? Well, when early Greek Christian speakers condemned homosexuality they did not use these words. John Chrysostom preached on homosexuality but he never used “arsenokotes” when referring to homosexuals, and when he preached on 1 Cor 6:9 and 1 Tim 1:10 he never mentioned homosexuality. Funny considering his first language was Greek.

Sorry about the long windedness, but it goes to show that translations are subject to man’s fallibility.
 
40.png
Shibboleth:
Yes The Catholic Church has protected the Vulgate so that its translation has remained for the most part intact, but it is still on the premise that the original vulgate is infallible. I don’t think that this is the case. If I remember correctly it is based off of the Septuagint, which has had a few changes, and in light of new archeological discoveries has some errors.

Another problem comes from the Douay-Reims version, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate. So now you have a translation, of a translation, of a translation. Then finally you have to deal with the fact that there were some revisions done by Bishop Challoner. ← I hope I got all of the names correct.

So let us look at meaning. The Greek work “malakoi” is currently translated in 1 Cor 6:9 of many bibles as “effeminate” but this is probably not the correct translation. The Greek word “malakoi” means ‘soft’ or ‘vulnerable’ as in Matthew 11:18 and Luke 7:25. In addition we can see that the Greek word “arsenokoites” in 1 Cor 6:9 might also be mistranslated as homosexual. “Arsenokoites” is a combination of two words that mean “male” and “bed” and might just as likely mean male prostitute and not a homosexual.

So how do we know what “Arsenokoites” really means? Well, when early Greek Christian speakers condemned homosexuality they did not use these words. John Chrysostom preached on homosexuality but he never used “arsenokotes” when referring to homosexuals, and when he preached on 1 Cor 6:9 and 1 Tim 1:10 he never mentioned homosexuality. Funny considering his first language was Greek.

Sorry about the long windedness, but it goes to show that translations are subject to man’s fallibility.
I pray some day to meet you in person as I would love to have a cup of coffee with you. I think some how I have confused my question with you. This is what I am asking you. Under the protection of the Catholic Church (and only within her protection) there are no errors in the Bible when it comes to matters of faith and morals. This is different outside of the Church where people have added and subtracted words to make the meaning change. Like the word “alone” (simple harmless word), add it in scripture after the word Faith (as Martin Luther did ) and you have a problem, because we are now changing the intent of scripture. God knew things like this would happen that is why he left us a authoritative Church to guide us through these problems.

In addition your post which I quote also helps explain why the Church is so careful and slow when there is a new translation required, because she is preventing error. This is another concern I have of our seperated brothers and sisters. They have so many choices and when I lay them side by side you see changes from one year to the next, compounding the very error you speak of. Thank God for the Grace of his protection on the Church.

One final point here is you bring up the Septuagint which was around at the time of Christ you would think if there were errors he would have said something, but he did not. He was more interested in helping people understand His and the Fathers love for them. Now we never know if he used the Septuagint but we do know that upwords of 70% of the quotations in the new testment were from the Septuagint. Why did Christ or the writers talk about the problems with the Septuagint. They were not setting up a Bible only Church. They knew the Holy Spirit was going to protect the whole teaching until the day Our Lord comes again. Look at how our Lord talks to them who try to trap him with “bible rules”, he with Love shows them the intent of the rules, and he knew that he would be passing this ablity on to the man Peter and his successors, not in them men though but in the office, and not by the power of the men, but by the power of the Holy Spirit. With out the Magisterium of the Church there is no real sence having a Bible because there is no real way to know for certian we are following God’s will.
 
I was speaking to a friend about the canon of scripture. He told me that we have no way of knowing that the septuagint included the deuterocanonical books, because the earliest manuscript we have of the septuagint is from around 400 a.d. Is this true? Can anyone help me out with this one?
 
40.png
turkey2:
Check out the book Where We Got The Bible, Our Debt To The Catholic Church by Henry G Graham, a convert to Catholocism
This book is also published by TAN, who publishes another one of Graham’s books, What Faith Really Means. It is an excellent refutation of ‘faith alone’ and is an excellent companion piece to Where We Got The Bible.
 
40.png
Shibboleth:
Yes The Catholic Church has protected the Vulgate so that its translation has remained for the most part intact, but it is still on the premise that the original vulgate is infallible. …Another problem comes from the Douay-Reims version, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate. So now you have a translation, of a translation, of a translation…

Sorry about the long windedness, but it goes to show that translations are subject to man’s fallibility.
  1. May I know which version(s) of the Bible you use, with or without the deuteros?
  2. If the scriptures are fallible, what have you got to hold on to the faith as no original Septuagint/Hebrew/NT bible exist exists?
  3. Does it mean that our faith is based on other men’s fallible translations?
  4. In short What is the Truth?
:confused:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top