H
heiscominginthe
Guest
The Authorized King James bible was known as the Holy Bible for two hundred years before Wescot and Hort brought it under attack.
Protestants: How Do You Know That Your Interpretation of the Bible is the Right one? Part II
- Status
A
Always_For_Him
Guest
Where do you think the Bible came from? WHO had been teaching Jesus’ Deposit of Faith until the Bible was canonized? Even then, it wasn’t “the Bible” yet, so WHO was still orally teaching Jesus’ Truth all the way up to and beyond the invention of the printing press? Jesus didn’t write the Bible. It didn’t fall from the sky. Luther changed it, but didn’t write it. Who do you say produced the Bible?
J
JRKH
Guest
And the Vulgate for 1000 years before that.
The KJV, while a fine translation is a young pup compared to the Catholic Biblical tradition.
Peace
James
H
heiscominginthe
Guest
Acts 10:37 That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;
13:49 And the word of the Lord was published throughout all the region.
H
heiscominginthe
Guest
11 of the Apocryphal books were canonized by the Roman Catholic Church at the Council of Trent in 1546 A.D. Jerome himself did not recognize these books.
The translators of the King James Version said that the Apocrypha was not to be viewed as Holy Scripture because it was not written in Hebrew, nor ever accepted by the Jewish canon or early Christians, nor ever mentioned by Jesus Christ.
The bible was canonized by the Catholic church during the councils of Hippo and Carthage in 382 and 397 A.D.?
Here are some earlier canons.
Marcion, A.D. 140
Muratorian, A.D. 170
Barococcio, A.D. 206
Apostolic, A.D. 300
The canon of Cyril of Jerusalem, A.D. 350
Cheltenham, A.D. 360
The canon approved by the Synod of Laodicea, A.D. 363
Athanasius, A.D. 367
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
Marcion was an anti semtic heretic. Feel free to hold him up as your standard bearer.
The rest of these canons were proposed by respected Christians and each contributed to the final canon.
M
MrS
Guest
Nice. So the protestants not only turned from the One Church, they also turned from the One Bible… hhmmm a sense a pattern here.
Guess it was better for them to choose the same books which the Jews chose in 90AD… you know, the Jews who were irate about those upstart Christians and who sought a way to discredit them.
An any rate, we still have the same NT Books… so that is a good thing. We can agree that all the NT books are inspired… right?
If so, let’s again visit John 6… and think about what IS means. hmmmm…
.
Guess it was better for them to choose the same books which the Jews chose in 90AD… you know, the Jews who were irate about those upstart Christians and who sought a way to discredit them.
An any rate, we still have the same NT Books… so that is a good thing. We can agree that all the NT books are inspired… right?
If so, let’s again visit John 6… and think about what IS means. hmmmm…
.
J
JRKH
Guest
You will note that Jerome submitted his personal views to that of the Church. In other words, he translated the DC’s along with the other books caonized by the Church.
This is the difference between him and Martin Luther. Jerome submitted to proper authority.
The translators of the KJV were wrong as demonstrated to you earlier. The DC’s were known and used by Christ.
I will need to let others deal with the specifics of these canons as I am not well versed in this area.
Peace
James
S
SD_Catholic
Guest
Could you please list the 11 books you claim were canonized at Trent? Then could you show me the books included in the Vulgate Bible?
I have a feeling somebody has been misleading you.
SD
M
MrS
Guest
So how long can you wait for a response? It will depend on whether the poster actually knows the purpose of Trent. There is a continuing tendency for Protestants to point to Trent as the beginning of Catholic beliefs. No rhyme or reason… just cuz.
.
C
ckempston
Guest
Are you claiming they had a printing press in Judea? Are you trying to take the poor KJV translation for the word (Gr: Ginomai) “published” and make it mean “written”? Because it means no such thing. The word implies nothing about writing at all.
S
SteveGC
Guest
Quite correct. “published” in these verses, means “known” or “being spread”
God Bless
J
JRKH
Guest
This reminded me of something that I heard an Apologist (Steve Ray??) say about Matthew 3:5-6
1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, 2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. 3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. 4 And the same John had his raiment of camel’s hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey. 5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, 6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.
If this means exactly this, poor old John was busy indeed.
If ALL Judea and ALL the region round Jordan came out he couldn’t “kerplunk them fast enough”.
I realize that this is a bit off topic, but I got a chuckle out of it when I heard it and thought I’d share.
By the way i used the KJV just for our friend “heiscoming…”
Peace
James
C
ckempston
Guest
Just an observation: I find it interesting that Catholics rale about Protestants not taking John 6 and Matthew 26 literally and constantly making comments about “what the meaning IS is”, but then they don’t take it literally where the Bible says, “All.” Where’s the consistency?This reminded me of something that I heard an Apologist (Steve Ray??) say about Matthew 3:5-6
1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, 2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. 3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. 4 And the same John had his raiment of camel’s hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey. 5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, 6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.
If this means exactly this, poor old John was busy indeed.
If ALL Judea and ALL the region round Jordan came out he couldn’t “kerplunk them fast enough”.
I realize that this is a bit off topic, but I got a chuckle out of it when I heard it and thought I’d share.
By the way i used the KJV just for our friend “heiscoming…”
Peace
James
If the Apostles baptized 3000 in a single day, and John likewise had disciples in his ministry, then what exactly is wrong with “all” meaning “all?”
M
MrS
Guest
I think that the initial question(s) should be : “What was meant at the time it was said?”
For that we rely on the early Church Fathers, their laborous discussions on the topics, and the results of those many years of observation, recollection, and decision.
.
C
ckempston
Guest
I agree, but the implication with the statement above is that in this instance “all” simply does not mean “all” but no support (such as what you suggest with an ECF interpretation) was offered for that position. I find it ironic that this “all doesn’t mean all” argument is a largely evangelical phenomena.
M
MrS
Guest
All the time, I think that all of us could agree on all of the “all” topics and all of what they mean in all ages for all time.:whacky:
Just funnin" wit ya.
.
S
SD_Catholic
Guest
Well for one, it doesn’t say John and his disciples… it says of “him”… and secondly Catholics aren’t the ones saying the Bible should be taken literally everywhere.
I think you’re playing that d advocate thingy again… since you certainly realize also there are places where “all” doesn’t logically make sense if taken to mean literally “all”… don’t ya maybe???
SD
H
heiscominginthe
Guest
Wikipedia encyclopedia
The Catholic deuterocanonical scriptural texts as defined by the Council of Trent are:
Tobit
Judith
Additions to Esther (Vulgate Esther 10:4-16:24, but see also Esther in the NAB)
Wisdom
Sirach, also called Ben Sira or Ecclesiasticus
Baruch, including the Letter of Jeremiah (Additions to Jeremiah in the Septuagint[5])
Additions to Daniel:
Song of the Three Children (Vulgate Daniel 3:24-90)
Story of Susanna (Vulgate Daniel 13, Septuagint prologue)
The Idol Bel and the Dragon (Vulgate Daniel 14, Septuagint epilogue)
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
J
JRKH
Guest
Gee Whiz - yous guys – - - - I didn’t mean to start no broo-haa ‘bout it. Jus thought it was funny. Les’ lightin’ up a bit huh??
The passage also doesn’t say they all came at the same time, so we can take that for what it is worth. I think that the biggest thing relating to the “All” sense is that not “All” of the people are going to put faith in John’s baptism just as not “All” accepted Jesus.
Of course there are times when we must take things literally and others when we should not. For instance should we gouge out our eye because it causes us to sin???
Peace
James
The passage also doesn’t say they all came at the same time, so we can take that for what it is worth. I think that the biggest thing relating to the “All” sense is that not “All” of the people are going to put faith in John’s baptism just as not “All” accepted Jesus.
Of course there are times when we must take things literally and others when we should not. For instance should we gouge out our eye because it causes us to sin???
Peace
James
- Status