Proof for the Bible

[planten]

Just to put the question, even as Catholic. Why couldn’t Abraham have been addressing the “leader” of the group, and the others deferring to him as spokesman? But granted, I do see the logic of your argument.

** I do not see any logic in that argument. But thanks for the reply that those three men were God, One God. One God because the word Lord is used in singular. It is a poor argument knowing that there have been many translations and lot of time has passed since first writing and just a letter ‘s’ could not help any one.

There are other problems to the argument. I will post reply later. The present stand of the christian friend seems that those three men were One God. I will try to swallow that. And we yet have to find out what the person wants to prove by that example?**

 

[agangbern]

**
There are other problems to the argument. I will post reply later. The present stand of the christian friend seems that those three men were One God. I will try to swallow that. And we yet have to find out what the person wants to prove by that example?**

This matter of the three persons in one God, if you remember, is in connection with your declaration that you did not find Jesus in Genesis, as follows:

Yes quite right. I was looking for Jesus in Genesis and in the Romans. But I do not see jesus there. You also did not show Jesus in Genesis. Point the word Jesus there please.

It is admitted that the word “Jesus” as referring to one of the three persons of the Holy Trinity could not be found in Genesis for the reason that this person at the time of Genesis had not yet “become man” as we are, born of a woman. The name “Jesus” was given to Him during his circumcision.
What we have established is the fact that even in Genesis, the three divine persons of the Holy Trinity were present. And since it is unquestionable that one of these three Divine Persons is the Son,Jesus Christ, therefore it follows that Jesus was there at the time of Genesis.

 

[agangbern]

** But thanks for the reply that those three men were God, One God. One God because the word Lord is used in singular. It is a poor argument knowing that there have been many translations and lot of time has passed since first writing and just a letter ‘s’ could not help any one.
**

Sure, “there have been many translations and lot of time has passed since first writing…” But God cannot be fooled by translations. He made sure that there would be correct translations. And this He did by vesting in the Church such authority to decide which is correct and which is not.

 

[planten]

Sure, “there have been many translations and lot of time has passed since first writing…” But God cannot be fooled by translations. He made sure that there would be correct translations. And this He did by vesting in the Church such authority to decide which is correct and which is not.

Then I have no authority to say anything about these things. I guess, I should not meddle into bible politics anymore.

 

[agangbern]

Then I have no authority to say anything about these things. I guess, I should not meddle into bible politics anymore.

I wonder what you mean by "bible politics".

 

[Reuben_J]

…

If the three men that appeared to him was not God, they should have objected to his bowing down to the earth before them. He who is not God (only an angel of God) would object to such act that Abraham did. This can be seen in Revelation 19:10. "And I fell down before his feet to worship him. And he said to me, “Thou must not do that. I am a fellow-servant of thine and of thy brethren who give the testimony to Jesus. Worship God!” But in Genesis, the “three men” did not object to Abraham’s act, confirming therefore that the three was ONE GOD.

Just a reminder. There were many occasions in the Bible where men ‘bowing down to the earth’ to angels, kings and masters. That did not mean worship though.

The Genesis verses quoted can be quite contravesial. Some say of the three, two were angels accompanying God. But you have explained it well about Jesus as a human that could not be found in the OT (because he had not been incarnated yet) but he was there for he is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was with God, and the WORD was God. He was with God in the beginning. (Jn1:1-2) And so he was there even in the time of Genesis.

God bless.

 

[agangbern]

Just a reminder. There were many occasions in the Bible where men ‘bowing down to the earth’ to angels, kings and masters. That did not mean worship though.

Would you care to show me an example of it? I would like to see how it would be similar to the circumstance that Abraham was in.

 

[Reuben_J]

Would you care to show me an example of it? I would like to see how it would be similar to the circumstance that Abraham was in.

Hi.

Well bowing down to the ground is quite common in the OT. It’s more to do with culture and custom of the day and does not necessarily mean worship. Even in Genesis there are many such examples:

Genesis 19:1
The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground.

Genesis 23:7
Then Abraham rose and bowed down before the people of the land, the Hittites.

Genesis 33:3
He himself went on ahead and bowed down to the ground seven times as he approached his brother.

Genesis 42:6
Now Joseph was the governor of the land, the one who sold grain to all its people. So when Joseph’s brothers arrived, they bowed down to him with their faces to the ground.

Genesis 43:26
When Joseph came home, they presented to him the gifts they had brought into the house, and they bowed down before him to the ground.

Exodus 11:8
All these officials of yours will come to me, bowing down before me and saying, ‘Go, you and all the people who follow you!’ After that I will leave." Then Moses, hot with anger, left Pharaoh.

Exodus 18:7
So Moses went out to meet his father-in-law and bowed down and kissed him. They greeted each other and then went into the tent.

Ruth 2:10
At this, she bowed down with her face to the ground. She exclaimed, “Why have I found such favor in your eyes that you notice me—a foreigner?”

1 Samuel 24:8
Then David went out of the cave and called out to Saul, “My lord the king!” When Saul looked behind him, David bowed down and prostrated himself with his face to the ground.

1 Samuel 25:23
When Abigail saw David, she quickly got off her donkey and bowed down before David with her face to the ground.

1 Samuel 28:14
“What does he look like?” he asked. “An old man wearing a robe is coming up,” she said. Then Saul knew it was Samuel, and he bowed down and prostrated himself with his face to the ground.

2 Samuel 9:6
When Mephibosheth son of Jonathan, the son of Saul, came to David, he bowed down to pay him honor. David said, “Mephibosheth!” “Your servant,” he replied.

2 Samuel 18:28
Then Ahimaaz called out to the king, “All is well!” He bowed down before the king with his face to the ground and said, “Praise be to the LORD your God! He has delivered up the men who lifted their hands against my lord the king.”

Luke 24:5
In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead?
Bowing down of course can mean worship, especially when worship is mentioned. Examples:

Genesis 24:26
Then the man bowed down and worshiped the LORD, …

Genesis 24:48
and I bowed down and worshiped the LORD. I praised the LORD, the God of my master Abraham, who had led me on the right road to get the granddaughter of my master’s brother for his son.

Exodus 12:27
then tell them, ‘It is the Passover sacrifice to the LORD, who passed over the houses of the Israelites in Egypt and spared our homes when he struck down the Egyptians.’ " Then the people bowed down and worshiped.

Nehemiah 8:6
Ezra praised the LORD, the great God; and all the people lifted their hands and responded, “Amen! Amen!” Then they bowed down and worshiped the LORD with their faces to the ground.

Matthew 2:11
On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold and of incense and of myrrh.

The passage you referred to:

Gen 18:1-2
The LORD appeared to Abraham near the great trees of Mamre while he was sitting at the entrance to his tent in the heat of the day. Abraham looked up and saw three men standing nearby. When he saw them, he hurried from the entrance of his tent to meet them and bowed low to the ground.

The three men were obviously not God except for God himself. The other two were his companions as later in the chapter, Abraham turn to God after the companions went toward Sodom:

Gen 18:22-23
The men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before the LORD. Then Abraham approached him and said, …

There is no mentioning that Abraham bowed down to worship the three men as after he spoke to God he went home:

Gen 18:33
When the LORD had finished speaking with Abraham, he left, and Abraham returned home.

Now I don’t want to take away your discussion with our Muslim posters. We don’t have to prove to them that Jesus was mentioned in the OT to prove that he is the Second Person of the Trinity. Genesis 18 is not generally a reference to demonstrate this though there may be certain Bible commentary which advocates that the other messengers were Jesus. However, this understanding is more of an exception rather than a rule. I would not use this passage to demonstrate that Jesus was represented here.

Hope that helps.

May God bless.

 

[planten]

Sure, “there have been many translations and lot of time has passed since first writing…” But God cannot be fooled by translations. He made sure that there would be correct translations. And this He did by vesting in the Church such authority to decide which is correct and which is not.

** I don’t believe that. Church is formed by men and man is fallible. Every day they are making changes to the bible (The real bible is no where to be seen). Every day an improved version is coming with differing words. These are all the words of men. These are not any words of God. Please see to that.

We have noticed many changes recently which were made to benefit the ideas of the church.**

 

[Dymphna2008]

Matthew 16:18-19; 1 Tim. 3:14-15, 4:3-4. The Church was founded by Christ and is guided in infallible dogma by the Holy Spirit. Paul tells us that we should not reject food, including coffee, hot chocolate (both unknown to the authors of the NT, so how could you pronounce any ban on them?), hot drinks in general; especially when they aid to health and welfare. Mormons contradict these instructions, while at the same time they speak of Christ as their saviour; when in fact, they pay more attention to the “revelation” and mistranslation and misuse of scripture by Joseph Smith.

Joey told people he found a “book” of golden plates; yet, we don’t have these plates to study and verify what they said was in line with what Joey made of them. Biblical translations
are made by people educated in the original tongues of authorship, culture of the time, and the fact they have copies made with attention to detail, by people who lived through those times and cultures. We have something to compare our Church’s teaching with, Mormons don’t. They either take Joey and Briggy at their word–and remember that Brigham Young was not above ordering the massacre at Mountain Meadows, a cold blooded thing, indeed for a so-called Profit of God–as to what is believable, or they get eaten by sharks in their high presidency at Salt Lake City.

The changes made were based on social and cultural, and basic traditional usages. Dogma and Tradition–that teaching laid down in scripture and practice in the first two generations of Christian belief and practise–is not affected. In fact, if anything, it is much more open to the faithful in understanding, since most people can read and write, and don’t need the scriptures explained so minutely when they can simply study and learn the Catholic faith as the scriptures taught it. The Scriptures, in effect, encapsulate the Catholic faith, and anyone who sees anything differently is using their own man made tools of knowledge and not the Holy Spirit in forming their opinion.

A Catholic goes to Mass, and if they attend daily Mass, have the entire scriptures from Genesis to Revelation read and taught in only a matter of three years. And they can have the process start over again once that reading is done. Even Protestants can’t say that. Most Protestants take bits and pieces of scripture, make up a moral story, and they probably haven’t even gotten through a tenth of the Bible in ten years, since they like to go back over and over with the same series of sermons constantly. So a lot gets left out. They may be able to quote Isaiah 7:14, but can you give me Matthew 25:31-46 off the top of your head–never mind. It has something to do with “… the least of my brothers …”

** I don’t believe that. Church is formed by men and man is fallible. Every day they are making changes to the bible (The real bible is no where to be seen). Every day an improved version is coming with differing words. These are all the words of men. These are not any words of God. Please see to that.

We have noticed many changes recently which were made to benefit the ideas of the church.**

 

[Lapell]

** I don’t believe that. Church is formed by men and man is fallible. Every day they are making changes to the bible (The real bible is no where to be seen). Every day an improved version is coming with differing words. These are all the words of men. These are not any words of God. Please see to that.

We have noticed many changes recently which were made to benefit the ideas of the church.**

Which ideas and which “church” are you talking about?

 

[Lapell]

**
We have noticed many changes recently which were made to benefit the ideas of the church.**

I’m curious: who are “we”?

 

[Lapell]

** I don’t believe that. Church is formed by men and man is fallible. **

Man is fallible indeed. But then you must have read Jesus’ reply to Simon Peter’s answer in Matthew 16, 17: “Simon, son of Jonah, you are blessed! Neither flesh nor blood revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven.” How could Jesus say that?
I once read a story about this one particular verse:

Jesus asked people of our time: “And you? Who do you say that I am?”
Somebody answered: “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God!”
Jesus replied: “Good answer indeed! However, as of yet, it hasn"t been revealed to you by my Father in heaven…”
What would be the difference between these two cases, Planten?

 

[agangbern]

** I don’t believe that. Church is formed by men and man is fallible. Every day they are making changes to the bible (The real bible is no where to be seen). Every day an improved version is coming with differing words. These are all the words of men. These are not any words of God. Please see to that.

We have noticed many changes recently which were made to benefit the ideas of the church.**

If. as you said the real bible is nowhere to be seen, where then is the Word of God? And who decides that a certain word is word of God?

 

[agangbern]

Just a reminder. There were many occasions in the Bible where men ‘bowing down to the earth’ to angels, kings and masters. That did not mean worship though.

Thank you, Reuben, for the reminder. I just hope that you are not like **joytobecatholic
**I agree with your above-statement.

Genesis 19:1
The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground.

And the two “angels” did not protest.

Genesis 23:7
Then Abraham rose and bowed down before the people of the land, the Hittites.

Abraham was not worshipping the Hethites as God. In fact, the Hethites, in verse 5 called Abraham “my lord”. Clearly, what Abraham did was a sort of respect to the Hethites.

Genesis 33:3
He himself went on ahead and bowed down to the ground seven times as he approached his brother.

Jacob was not worshipping Esau in that scene. He was not bowing to Esau.

Genesis 42:6
Now Joseph was the governor of the land, the one who sold grain to all its people. So when Joseph’s brothers arrived, they bowed down to him with their faces to the ground.
They were not worshipping Joseph as God. It was an act of respect for Joeseph.

Genesis 43:26
When Joseph came home, they presented to him the gifts they had brought into the house, and they bowed down before him to the ground.

They were not worshipping Joseph as God. It was an act of respect for Joseph.

Exodus 11:8
All these officials of yours will come to me, bowing down before me and saying, ‘Go, you and all the people who follow you!’ After that I will leave." Then Moses, hot with anger, left Pharaoh.

Moses was quoting God. (Pls. See verse 4) The “me” there refers to God. The officials will bow down not to Moses but to God.

Exodus 18:7
So Moses went out to meet his father-in-law and bowed down and kissed him. They greeted each other and then went into the tent.

Moses bowed down not worship his father-in-law but as an expression of respect for him.

Ruth 2:10
At this, she bowed down with her face to the ground. She exclaimed, “Why have I found such favor in your eyes that you notice me—a foreigner?”

Ruth, a “foreigner” in that land was not worshipping God but just giving honor/respect to Booz.

The three men were obviously not God except for God himself. The other two were his companions as later in the chapter, Abraham turn to God after the companions went toward Sodom:

Gen 18:22-23
The men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before the LORD. Then Abraham approached him and said, …

There is no mentioning that Abraham bowed down to worship the three men as after he spoke to God he went home:
Gen 18:33
When the LORD had finished speaking with Abraham, he left, and Abraham returned home.

The fact that “Abraham turned to God after the companions went toward Sodom” would not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the two persons were not God. Just as the fact that the Father is God would not necessarily lead to the conclusion that Jesus is not God.

Now I don’t want to take away your discussion with our Muslim posters. We don’t have to prove to them that Jesus was mentioned in the OT to prove that he is the Second Person of the Trinity. Genesis 18 is not generally a reference to demonstrate this though there may be certain Bible commentary which advocates that the other messengers were Jesus. However, this understanding is more of an exception rather than a rule. I would not use this passage to demonstrate that Jesus was represented here.

You personal opinion is well taken. But for as long as the Church has not officially declared that the three men that appeared to Abraham should not be treated as manisfestation of the three Divine Persons then those who believe that they were manifestations of the three Divine Persons have not as yet gone against the teachings of the Catholic Church. The point is: All Catholics are free to understand passages of the bible up to the point that they would not contradict official Church teachings. Your opinion certainly is your own until you could show that your opinion is also what the Church officially teaches.

God Bless.

 

[planten]

I’m curious: who are “we”?

“We” are all those who care to take notice of things being done, i.e. changes being made in the bible every day in the name of improvement. So the words of God need improvement?? Heh…

 

[planten]

Man is fallible indeed. But then you must have read Jesus’ reply to Simon Peter’s answer in Matthew 16, 17: “Simon, son of Jonah, you are blessed! Neither flesh nor blood revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven.” How could Jesus say that?
I once read a story about this one particular verse:

Jesus asked people of our time: “And you? Who do you say that I am?”
Somebody answered: “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God!”
Jesus replied: “Good answer indeed! However, as of yet, it hasn"t been revealed to you by my Father in heaven…”
What would be the difference between these two cases, Planten?

**I believe there were more than one person there and each one replied differently to Jesus. Only Simon Peter said that he (Jesus) was the son of living God. The others did not say that.
So we have to believe that one man?? Not so, specially if Jesus did not support him directly that he was right.

The revelation by the living God is alright. It is a reality. God talks to his servants even now. That is nothing special for Simon.**

 

[planten]

If. as you said the real bible is nowhere to be seen, where then is the Word of God? And who decides that a certain word is word of God?

** It is God who decides about His words. There is no word of God in any bible now. The meanings of the revelation from God is there. Whatever is in the bible may be describing the will of God but not in actual words of God.

Any one can see that whatever is written in bible NT is not the words of God. People are writing and amending it every day. Those are the words of men. This is not to downplay the christianity or the bible.**

 

[Dymphna2008]

Translation is not emendation. Placing the Bible into the vernacular has been done for centuries, and the manuscripts have retained their integrity over time; very little gets lost in translation, and what does is made up for in most cases by the fact that editorial boards do the work, rather than one or two people with their own agenda’s, as Joseph Smith did when he mistranslated and misconstrued the copy of the Egyptian Book of the Dead, which is really a funerary scroll, and not written by Abraham of the Chaldees.

All Christians accept the integrity of most translations of the Bible, they accept that it is, in fact, a set of manuscripts with a common purpose under the law and intention of God. That it chronicles the history of God’s People is precisely the point, God worked through one people to bring salvation in Jesus as he died, rose again, and manifests himself because he became both Man and God (Philippians 2:6-11), in the Eucharist–literally, unambiguously (John 6). No Protestant or Mormon could claim this, since by the simple fact he cannot appear in any way he pleases they deny that Jesus is God, even in simple elements of bread and wine. A Mormon has a lot more to worry about since they deny that Jesus is truly God, and there is no trinity. The Catholic understanding of what a Christian must believe is the right way, there can be no other.

 

[agangbern]

** It is God who decides about His words. There is no word of God in any bible now. The meanings of the revelation from God is there. Whatever is in the bible may be describing the will of God but not in actual words of God.**

It is not surprising when you say there is no word of God in any bible now. But that statement of yours proves nothing.

Any one can see that whatever is written in bible NT is not the words of God.

“Any one” as in “all”? If you mean “all” then I would guess that you are dreaming.

** People are writing and amending it every day. Those are the words of men. This is not to downplay the christianity or the bible.**

---

Yes, people may be amending it today, specially the “soldiers” of the gates of hell who are scheming to prevail against the Church that Christ built.