Protestant interpretations...

  • Thread starter Thread starter BrooklynBoy200
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ginger2 said:
lol…you better go back and read the related posts.

The argument was that Solomon lived before Isaiah and therefore, the New Testament is quoting Solomon, not Isaiah.

My response is in reference to that claim. Solomon did live before Isaiah, but Solomon is not the author of Wisdom.

It is so easy to lose track of the original idea. I do that all the time. I have to keep going back to the OP just to remember what the tread is about. 😛

Ginger
Click to expand...
Sorry bout that Ginger… I hate coming in late!
 
Ginger2 said:
While both contain Apocrypha, Trent did not adopt the same Apocryphal books as contained in Jerome’s Vulgate.
Click to expand...
“A Chronology of Scripture”: listing the events in the history of the canon and ancient versions of Scripture, and of the place of Scripture in the church and in society.

This is worth reading for everyone and I believe it will enlighten all of us; as it did me.
Seems like the old saying the “truth lies somewhere in the middle” may be true.

bible-researcher.com/history1.html

PS Nice to see a Protestant - Are there more around?
 
teak421 said:
You’ve moved the ball… Did Trent agree with the earlier councils… NOT with Jerome.
Click to expand...
lol. Oh, I see what you are saying.

Catholics always tell me the pope commissioned Jerome to translate the Bible into Latin according to the council of Hippo. And that Jerome submitted to the Pope’s authority! So, I assume Jerome’s Vulgate is identical to the list created at Hippo, but to be honest, I can’t remember if they are identical or not.

I will have to go back and review my notes.

However, I would comment that since the Catholic claim was that the correct canon was listed at Hippo and Pope Damascus commission Jerome to translate the correct canon from Hippo into Latin. It stands to reason Jerome’s Vulgate is the same as Hippo and subsequently Trent’s canon differs from Hippo.

Unless Catholics have used the Jerome/Damascus argument to prove their point and since it fails, they are now changing their line of reasoning.

Think about this: The canon used by the RC for about 1200 years was Jerome’s Vulgate. If the Vulgate was not correct, then the RC has followed a false canon for 1200 years until it was "corrected at Trent!!!

In which case, the RC argument that they have had the correct canon of Scripture for 2000 is false no matter how you look at it.

I’ll check on whether the Hippo and Carthage canons were identical and whether or not they match Trent’s decision, However, either way I think you lose on this one.

Ginger
 
Ginger2 said:
lol. Oh, I see what you are saying.

Catholics always tell me the pope commissioned Jerome to translate the Bible into Latin according to the council of Hippo. And that Jerome submitted to the Pope’s authority! So, I assume Jerome’s Vulgate is identical to the list created at Hippo, but to be honest, I can’t remember if they are identical or not.

I will have to go back and review my notes.

However, I would comment that since the Catholic claim was that the correct canon was listed at Hippo and Pope Damascus commission Jerome to translate the correct canon from Hippo into Latin. It stands to reason Jerome’s Vulgate is the same as Hippo and subsequently Trent’s canon differs from Hippo.

Unless Catholics have used the Jerome/Damascus argument to prove their point and since it fails, they are now changing their line of reasoning.

Think about this: The canon used by the RC for about 1200 years was Jerome’s Vulgate. If the Vulgate was not correct, then the RC has followed a false canon for 1200 years until it was "corrected at Trent!!!

In which case, the RC argument that they have had the correct canon of Scripture for 2000 is false no matter how you look at it.

I’ll check on whether the Hippo and Carthage canons were identical and whether or not they match Trent’s decision, However, either way I think you lose on this one.

Ginger
Click to expand...
Help me understand something… What exactly are different between Trent and Jerome? Which books were added at Trent that Jerome did not have???
  • Michael
PS: I’ve looked it up, just want to see if you have.
 
teak421 said:
Help me understand something… What exactly are different between Trent and Jerome? Which books were added at Trent that Jerome did not have???
  • Michael
PS: I’ve looked it up, just want to see if you have.
Click to expand...
I need to find the information again. I did not say Trent added books, I believe they rejected some.

In the meantime, why don’t you post what you have?
 
It just occurred to me I have won this canon debate, hands down.

The RC has claimed it used Jerome’s Vulgate as the official Bible until Trent and since Trent adopted a different canon from the Vulgate, it shows the RC has only had what they consider a correct canon for about five hundred years! 😃

There is no need for me to work myself ragged - I’m quitting while I’m waaaaay ahead!!!

BTW, The Protestant canon agrees with the oldest canon list from before Carthage III as well as the Hebrew Old Testament canon which predates the RC canon by about 2000 years!!!

Ginger
 
JohnnyBeth said:
PS Nice to see a Protestant - Are there more around?
Click to expand...
There are a few Protestants here, but this is a Catholic forum so we’re out numbered - big time. :D.
It’s nice to have you join us, as well.

Thanks for that link. Do you have any thoughts to share on it?

Ginger
 
Ginger2 said:
There are a few Protestants here, but this is a Catholic forum so we’re out numbered - big time. :D.
It’s nice to have you join us, as well.

Thanks for that link. Do you have any thoughts to share on it?

Ginger
Click to expand...
I’m not sure really what I am doing to be honest, this is why I was looking for some Protestants. I want to know more about this Catholic faith, but I’m not sure this is the best place and since Protestants are obviously outnumbered; if I can follow a few and see how Catholics respond; I believe it will give me an idea. I did start a thread inviting Catholics to share their faith, but not many seem interested in sharing, but it has only been there a couple of days.

Sorry for the side conversation; back to the topic. Some Protestants follow the interpretations given by the Holy Spirit, which is what Scripture says. I say some because everyone talking about heaven ain’t going. That is an old spiritual from plantation days.
 
Ginger2 said:
It just occurred to me I have won this canon debate, hands down.

The RC has claimed it used Jerome’s Vulgate as the official Bible until Trent and since Trent adopted a different canon from the Vulgate, it shows the RC has only had what they consider a correct canon for about five hundred years! 😃

There is no need for me to work myself ragged - I’m quitting while I’m waaaaay ahead!!!

BTW, The Protestant canon agrees with the oldest canon list from before Carthage III as well as the Hebrew Old Testament canon which predates the RC canon by about 2000 years!!!

Ginger
Click to expand...
Ginger, you do know that the books had different names? Right? For example Sirach was also called Ecclesiasticus.
  • Michael
 
JohnnyBeth said:
I’m not sure really what I am doing to be honest, this is why I was looking for some Protestants. I want to know more about this Catholic faith, but I’m not sure this is the best place and since Protestants are obviously outnumbered; if I can follow a few and see how Catholics respond; I believe it will give me an idea. I did start a thread inviting Catholics to share their faith, but not many seem interested in sharing, but it has only been there a couple of days.

Sorry for the side conversation; back to the topic. Some Protestants follow the interpretations given by the Holy Spirit, which is what Scripture says. I say some because everyone talking about heaven ain’t going. That is an old spiritual from plantation days.
Click to expand...
This is a very good forum to share things with our Catholic brothers and sisters. In the end we are all children of the Father with a mission to spread the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. From my experience, the Catholics don’t go after people to spread the gospel through aggressive evangelism. It is something that works very well for them. I currently consider myself Baptist. I like the Baptist approach that if it isn’t in the Holy Scriptures, then why use it. A very no non-sense approach that is effective if employed properly. On the other hand, churches that shove it down your throat to the threat of hell and brimstone don’t help the Baptist approach. I’m also a member of a Lutheran Church. More tradition with the bible still being the main focus (Missouri Synod). Both approaches are different and effective. I think my biggest issues with the Catholic church are how the Holy Mother Mary is revered, confession to a priest (and calling a priest father, when the bible states our Father in heaven is only to be called Father), and purgatory. Besides these issues of biblical accuracy, our beliefs seem to be shared with our fellow Catholic Christians. In the end, do we all agree that Jesus Christ is the Savior of this world who died for our sins? Yes, we do. See, who said we couldn’t agree on anything?

Take Care and May God Bless!

Ed:)
 
teak421 said:
Ginger, you do know that the books had different names? Right? For example Sirach was also called Ecclesiasticus.
  • Michael
Click to expand...
Yes.

Did you know, that there is no record of what was included in the canon list of Hippo? It is mere speculation that Carthage adopted the exact same list.

handsonapologetics.com/first_response_white_webster.htm
Excerpt:
“On March 29, 1546 the Council Fathers took up the fourth of fourteen questions (Capita Dubitationum) on Scripture and Tradition. At issue was whether those books that were not included in the official list, but were included in the Latin Vulgate (e.g. The Book of Esdras, Fourth Ezra, and Third Maccabees), should be rejected by a Conciliar decree, or be passed over in silence. Only three Fathers voted for an explicit rejection. Forty-two voted that the status of these books should be passed over in silence.”

No matter how you look at it. The RC adopted a new canon at Trent.
 
JohnnyBeth said:
I’m not sure really what I am doing to be honest, this is why I was looking for some Protestants. I want to know more about this Catholic faith, but I’m not sure this is the best place and since Protestants are obviously outnumbered; if I can follow a few and see how Catholics respond; I believe it will give me an idea. I did start a thread inviting Catholics to share their faith, but not many seem interested in sharing, but it has only been there a couple of days.

Sorry for the side conversation; back to the topic. Some Protestants follow the interpretations given by the Holy Spirit, which is what Scripture says. I say some because everyone talking about heaven ain’t going. That is an old spiritual from plantation days.
Click to expand...
Scripture is great, but again, there was a church 1500 years before a printing press was invented, and even so, BARELY anyone knew how to read. It was the churches duty to teach. Today almost anyone can read a bible & easily access one, so it’s convenient to say, yes, all you need is the bible, because yeah, it’s easy to obtain & pretty much everyone knows how to read, so the dependence on the church isnt what it used to be. People have a hard time with that for some reason. ~Respectfully, Jason
 
By the way, I was raised Episcopalian. I wasnt raised catholic. I can understand the protestant frame of mind & how they reason, but once I learned more & more, catholicism wasnt what I thought it was. Everyone has this image in their mind or idea of what it is, and a lot of people come to these forums and people duke it out using scripture as weapons, (which in my mind is the same as using something good for the wrong reasons if used that way) In the end, Protestants & Catholics are more alike than they are different. They’re all believers, but for some protestants, there’s a deep hatred for the church & I think it has to do with how old it is, the values they hold dear & the moral fiber of the church itself. There are anti-catholic rallies in san francisco every year, and one year MILLER beer company SPONSORED this little demonstration. The police actually allowed public fornication in the street right in front of a church. The last time I heard of any sort of desicration like that would be when the civil rights movement was taking place & people were throwing rocks through the windows of black churches, burning them down or what have you. Granted it’s 2009, but the same hatred of morality & the decay of our culture in society is more & more showing its teeth & it kind of makes me wonder what tomorrow will bring.~Respectfully, Jason
 
teak421 said:
Ginger, you do know that the books had different names? Right? For example Sirach was also called Ecclesiasticus.
  • Michael
Click to expand...
That would be great for the protestant arguement if there were protestants then. The Church of England only existed the duration of a wink when the council of trent convened.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top