The Bible is Catholic -

[JRKH]

Even taking your side of the argument, the Lord revealed it to His church, which is the pillar and foundation of truth. Catholics believe that Jesus alone is the Word. He existed before creation. The Catholic church is Christ centered, whereas many churches are bible-centered.

History is history and early writings clearly show that shortly after the year 100, the church of Christ was known as the universal, or “catholic” church, since there was but One Church of Christ. Some of the earliest members of that church wrote the revealed truth down for posterity. They did not base their beliefs and practices on the bible, because it did not yet exist.

We are blessed and joyous to have Sacred Scripture, but Christianity was not founded on a bible and certainly relies on it, but is not 100% dependent upon it. To argue otherwise is to assert that early Christians did not have, and could not know the truth, because they had no bible.

Christ’s peace.

Well Said po18guy.

You are correct about the issue of some protestants being “Bible Centered” instead of Christ centered. It always troubles me when I hear the argument that the Bible is “Gods Inerrant Word”. Not because the Bible does not contain God’s Truth, but rather because it has the effect of limiting God in peoples minds. God sent us His Son, The Living Word, and followed that up with the Holy Spirit, the very Spirit of God plus The Church. That Church produced the Bible under the inspiration and guidence of the Holy Spirit.

I had posted this some time back which fits well here.

In order for one to accept the authority of the Bible, one must accept the authority of those who assembled it. If you don’t accept the inerrant authority of those who assembled the Bible, you cannot accept the inerrancy of their product.
It follows then that if the HS was present and working through the disciples to record the Inerrant Word of God and then later working through the Church in assembling the Inerrant Word of God into the Bible, then that same Spirit would work to protect that organization in order to protect the product.
If you reject the authority of the Church, how then you can sure she chose the correct books to be included in the Bible?

Before the canon of scripture was determined, there were literally hundreds of documents being circulated as true inspired and inerrant. Some of the documents were blatantly false, some were only partial copies, and some were miscopied or misinterpreted. It became more and more apparent that there had to be a central core set of documents, and a core set of authoritative interpretations. The Holy Spirit then led the Church to Create the Bible and, through the Magesterium, it gave a way to assure a common and correct method for the proper interpretation of God’s revealed word.

If we look at the situation before the canon was decided upon, we can see similarities to the non-catholic denominations of today. They have a Bible, an “accepted word”, But not everyone uses the same translation, or even the same number of books. They have no way to authoritatively interpret it because they rely on a personal interpretation.
In this way they are not unlike the early church. Each holding to some core beliefs but, without an authority to turn to, becoming more and more fractured. If the HS is working with each individual, then why are the same passages interpreted so differently by the different denominations? Why are some denominations not even considered Christian by others and yet base their beliefs on “The Bible”.

So, in way, we can say that Protestantism is a return to the early Christian Church. Fractured, using different interpretations or different Bibles just like the early churches had different letters and documents, unable to unify due to doctrinal differences just like the early churches couldn’t get together due to distance.

The difference between then and now is that the early church understood that this was one Church, and that those in authority, the Bishops, The successors to the Apostles, needed to get together and straighten things out. They had the understanding of Authority. Protestants reject that authority and like the people after the Tower of Babel they are paying the price.

Peace
James

 

[Lilyflower]

I have always believed the Bible to be Catholic but to be fair, I think it is Orthodox also

 

[brkn1]

Well Said po18guy.

You are correct about the issue of some protestants being “Bible Centered” instead of Christ centered. It always troubles me when I hear the argument that the Bible is “Gods Inerrant Word”. Not because the Bible does not contain God’s Truth, but rather because it has the effect of limiting God in peoples minds. God sent us His Son, The Living Word, and followed that up with the Holy Spirit, the very Spirit of God plus The Church. That Church produced the Bible under the inspiration and guidence of the Holy Spirit.

I had posted this some time back which fits well here.

In order for one to accept the authority of the Bible, one must accept the authority of those who assembled it. If you don’t accept the inerrant authority of those who assembled the Bible, you cannot accept the inerrancy of their product.
It follows then that if the HS was present and working through the disciples to record the Inerrant Word of God and then later working through the Church in assembling the Inerrant Word of God into the Bible, then that same Spirit would work to protect that organization in order to protect the product.
If you reject the authority of the Church, how then you can sure she chose the correct books to be included in the Bible?

Before the canon of scripture was determined, there were literally hundreds of documents being circulated as true inspired and inerrant. Some of the documents were blatantly false, some were only partial copies, and some were miscopied or misinterpreted. It became more and more apparent that there had to be a central core set of documents, and a core set of authoritative interpretations. The Holy Spirit then led the Church to Create the Bible and, through the Magesterium, it gave a way to assure a common and correct method for the proper interpretation of God’s revealed word.

If we look at the situation before the canon was decided upon, we can see similarities to the non-catholic denominations of today. They have a Bible, an “accepted word”, But not everyone uses the same translation, or even the same number of books. They have no way to authoritatively interpret it because they rely on a personal interpretation.
In this way they are not unlike the early church. Each holding to some core beliefs but, without an authority to turn to, becoming more and more fractured. If the HS is working with each individual, then why are the same passages interpreted so differently by the different denominations? Why are some denominations not even considered Christian by others and yet base their beliefs on “The Bible”.

So, in way, we can say that Protestantism is a return to the early Christian Church. Fractured, using different interpretations or different Bibles just like the early churches had different letters and documents, unable to unify due to doctrinal differences just like the early churches couldn’t get together due to distance.

The difference between then and now is that the early church understood that this was one Church, and that those in authority, the Bishops, The successors to the Apostles, needed to get together and straighten things out. They had the understanding of Authority. Protestants reject that authority and like the people after the Tower of Babel they are paying the price.

Peace
James

The Bible is the book revealing the Wisdom of God as compared to the world’s wisdom.
Those who claim that man’s traditions and wisdom have a necessary role for our understanding the Truth of the Bible are denying the Holy Spirit’s role.
There is the assumption here that God needed men to protect His Word. This reminds me of the ark of the Lord, which was taken over by the enemy. God made sure that the ark was returned to its rightful place all by Himself.

The Holy Spirit was sent to testify of Jesus and to call to remembrance of the things Jesus told us. The HS is meant to guide us into all truth and glorify God the Father and Jesus Christ.
It seems the magisterium is more interested in limiting the HS role by adding tons of unnecessary stuff about Mary and saints and images and rituals etc.
The thread about Mary being sinless a a great example of wasted dwelling on unnecessary stuff. What more about Mary do we need to know, other than she was the virgin mother of Jesus? The Bible is clear about Jesus being sinless, but it is none of our business about Mary being sinless. She is not the focus of the Holy Spirit; JESUS is!

Roman Catholics are all over the map about what is supposed to be the truth, which seems to make it difficult for them to focus on the the child-like simplicity of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Christ crucified might be foolishness by the world’s standard of wisdom, but it is the Wisdom of God revealed in the Bible, so I will focus on that in my faith and worship. Man’s extraneous wisdom and traditions are a hindrance to the gospel’s simplicity.
All necessary parts of man’s traditions are already included in Scripture. Why muck it up with more of man’s wisdom?

 

[JRKH]

Your reply, coming as it does in reply to my post, contains much information yet avoids the central question of proving the authority of the Bible outside of the Church that assembled it. Nevertheless, I would like to directly address some of the points you raise.

The Bible is the book revealing the Wisdom of God as compared to the world’s wisdom.

This is very true. The bible does contain the Wisdom of God, the question is does it contain The Complete Wisdom of God. Is it your belief that God’s Wisdom and Fullness of Revelation can be contained in one book written in the poor and foolish language of man?

Those who claim that man’s traditions and wisdom have a necessary role for our understanding the Truth of the Bible are denying the Holy Spirit’s role.

If this is so then you are one of those you speak of because you accept the Tradition that the Bible contains the Truth of God. You believe that all teaching must be subjugated to the content of the Bible rather than to the promptings of the Spirit.
In fact your statement here seems to place the Spirit in an inferior position to the Bible by saying that the Spirit is necessary to understand the Truth of the Bible rather than the Bible merely confirming the Truth of the Spirit.
As it is however, the Church has always understood the true relationship between the Spirit, the Living Church, and Scripture. That the Church, the Body of Christ on Earth is in constant communion with, and being taught by the Spirit and produces writings as a result. Those writngs considered to be the most important and inerrant were collected into the Bible, but they remain subservient to the Spirit and the Living Body of Christ in His Church.

**There is the assumption here that God needed men to protect His Word. **This reminds me of the ark of the Lord, which was taken over by the enemy. God made sure that the ark was returned to its rightful place all by Himself.

Needed Men? No. Chose Men? Yes. He instituted a Church for the purpose of teaching and spreading the Good News. He continues to work through that Church.
As to the specific point of needing men to protect the Bible, well I suggest you read a JW Bible and see if that book, with the title of “HOLY BIBLE” and containing all the same books as your KJV, lives up to what you believe is the true and innerant Word of God.

The Holy Spirit was sent to testify of Jesus and to call to remembrance of the things Jesus told us. The HS is meant to guide us into all truth and glorify God the Father and Jesus Christ.

Well then, since you believe this I suggest you can close your Bible and just be guided by the Spirit. No need for going to Church or listening to a preacher either. Just listen to the Holy Spirit in your heart. He will Guide you into all Truth. No need for this book at all.

It seems the magisterium is more interested in limiting the HS role by adding tons of unnecessary stuff about Mary and saints and images and rituals etc.
The thread about Mary being sinless a a great example of wasted dwelling on unnecessary stuff. What more about Mary do we need to know, other than she was the virgin mother of Jesus? The Bible is clear about Jesus being sinless, but it is none of our business about Mary being sinless. She is not the focus of the Holy Spirit; JESUS is!

It is interesting that, in the first sentence here you accuse the magesterium of limiting the HS because of “Mary and Saints and images…” but then in the last sentence you define and limit the Spirit by declaring that JESUS is the focus of the Holy Spirit. If, as you said earlier, the Holy Spirit is to lead us in all truth, why does that preclude the Holy Mother? Why does it Only Include Jesus?
You see on the one hand your saying that the Church limits the Holy Spirit and then on the other you do the same thing by Limiting the Holy Spirit to the Bible.

(continued below…)

 

[JRKH]

Roman Catholics are all over the map about what is supposed to be the truth, which seems to make it difficult for them to focus on the the child-like simplicity of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

I won’t disagree with this. Sometimes it can be confusing, even for catholics, but 2000 years of Faith history and being led by the Wonderful Wisdom of the Holy Spirit and our Glorious Lord Jesus has prduced a rich and wonderful faith life.
Being Catholic can be as simple or as deep and complex as an individual wishes. One can live a life of simple devotion and Love of God as my parents did or study all their lives in the Church and still not uncover all the rich blessings avialable through her.
From the outside the Church can look very confusing and daunting, but so does the Bible to anyone who simply picks it up and begins reading. There is so much there that it takes time and effort to understand.

Christ crucified might be foolishness by the world’s standard of wisdom, but it is the Wisdom of God revealed in the Bible, so I will focus on that in my faith and worship. Man’s extraneous wisdom and traditions are a hindrance to the gospel’s simplicity.
All necessary parts of man’s traditions are already included in Scripture. Why muck it up with more of man’s wisdom?

I guess we sort of come to the point here.
You believe that the Church is full of “mans wisdom”, whereas we believe that the Church has more fully revealed “God’s Wisdom”.
You apparently believe that the Church is not Guided by the Holy Spirit and thus is full of “man’s wisdom”.
If this is so then the book you place so much store in is nothing more than one more part of that “man’s wisdom” from the Catholic Church.
For the NT is merely a group of selected writings from the first century assembled by the teaching authority of the church who is, as you say, “more interested in limiting the HS role”.
For our part, we believe that the Holy Spirit is limited only by God’s desire to reveal Himself to us. That the Holy Spirit works through the Fullness of His Church, the Scriptures, and in each individual. Therefore the Catholic Church sees the Holy Spirit’s Role as far more liberal and far reaching than you do since you limit Him only to the Bible.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

I have always believed the Bible to be Catholic but to be fair, I think it is Orthodox also

To be fair, I have always considered the Orthodox as being Catholic. :hug3:

 

[po18guy]

LDS, 7th Dayers and JW’s are not Christian.

Just a minor correction: the SDA church is indeed Christian. They believe in the Trinity, have a valid baptism and share many other beliefs with Catholicism. On the other hand, they have some beliefs that are absolutely unique and unprecedented in all of Christendom. For all of our differences, they are brothers and sisters in Christ. You are 100% correct on the other two small “a” adventist faiths (LDS, JW).

Christ’s peace.

 

[brkn1]

Well then, since you believe this I suggest you can close your Bible and just be guided by the Spirit. No need for going to Church or listening to a preacher either. Just listen to the Holy Spirit in your heart. He will Guide you into all Truth. No need for this book at all.

It is interesting that, in the first sentence here you accuse the magesterium of limiting the HS because of “Mary and Saints and images…” but then in the last sentence you define and limit the Spirit by declaring that JESUS is the focus of the Holy Spirit. If, as you said earlier, the Holy Spirit is to lead us in all truth, why does that preclude the Holy Mother? Why does it Only Include Jesus?
You see on the one hand your saying that the Church limits the Holy Spirit and then on the other you do the same thing by Limiting the Holy Spirit to the Bible.

(continued below…)

Your suggestion that I close the Bible and “just be guided by the Holy Spirit” reflects the dishonest “straw man” approach of proving an argument. It is not in the Bible that we are supposed to do that and I never said so. You are making that up the way a lawyer would to convince a jury using a lie.

Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would come “to reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgement”.
Jesus also explained what these things meant in the next verses of (John16:9,10,11):
9." Of sin, because they believe not on me;"
This is not talking about believing on the “church” or Mary or other unnecessary traditions that the RCC puts so much emphasis on for “required faith” in.
It is rebuking those who do not put their faith completely in Jesus Christ and His simple gospel.
10. “Of righteousness, because I go to the Father, and ye see me no more;”
The Holy Spirit rebukes the unbelieving world and guides God’s children into all righteousness, which can only be found by God’s gift of true faith in Jesus Christ and in no other(s).
This happens as result of the one and only sacrificial death and resurrection of Jesus. It happens at the Ascension of Christ described in Luke.
This verse, incidentally speaks against the “Real Presence” that you claim “happens” in the “breaking of bread” communion of the members of the church described in (Acts 2:42):
42.“And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.”
Notice that “breaking of bread” is used to describe what the RCC would call “eating of the body of Jesus”. I find it odd that the Bible would not present it the RCC way, if that were true. It would be just too important to describe any other way in that case.
The fact that Jesus said “ye see me no more” also proves there is no “Real Presence”, since the piece of bread is supposed to be a visual object “being Jesus Himself”. They hold it up for everyone to SEE! But Jesus says otherwise: “ye see me no more;”. We know we will all see Jesus after we die, but not on this earth, unless Jesus returns in the second coming before we die. That is why Jesus had the Holy Spirit sent to take His place.
11. “Of judgement, because the prince of this world is judged.”
The Holy Spirit reproves all those who reject Jesus and protects God’s own against such evil influences of the world. Without the protection and guidance of the Holy Spirit, there would be far worse apostacy and evil than there is now.

You ask < Why does it Only Include Jesus?> and not Mary?

Why the answer to that silly question is so clear in the Bible, that I wonder why you would dare ask it?:

Because:

(Acts 4:12)
“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is NONE OTHER NAME under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”

 

[mercygate]

You ask < Why does it Only Include Jesus?> and not Mary?

Why the answer to that silly question is so clear in the Bible, that I wonder why you would dare ask it?:

Because:

(Acts 4:12)
“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is NONE OTHER NAME under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”

Talk about “silly.” Catholics do not believe that anyone other than Jesus saves.

But this thread is about the origin of the Bible, particularly the Christian Scriptures. This is both a theological question and also a plain historical question.

The New Testament was written by the Holy Spirit acting through members of the early Church, who were united in the One Apostolic faith received from Jesus Christ himself. Even the most contumacious detractor would not deny that.

The definitive identification of those writings that constitute the New Testament canon was made by councils of the same Church that produced them and that stands in historical, doctrinal, spiritual and Apostolic continuity with the Catholic Church of today. Ergo: the Bible is a Catholic book.

One may resent this fact, but one cannot, in good conscience, deny it.

 

[JRKH]

Your suggestion that I close the Bible and “just be guided by the Holy Spirit” reflects the dishonest “straw man” approach of proving an argument. It is not in the Bible that we are supposed to do that and I never said so. You are making that up the way a lawyer would to convince a jury using a lie.

My friend, I see that I have hit a nerve here since you and I have never before accused the other of being dishonest in our arguments.
As for you, I would ask that you reread my post once your indignation dies down and recognize what I am trying to point out. The response above was to your statement thus:

*The Holy Spirit was sent to testify of Jesus and to call to remembrance of the things Jesus told us. The HS is meant to guide us into all truth and glorify God the Father and Jesus Christ. *

There is no requirement in your statement for a specific book, but only for the guidence of the Holy Spirit to testify to us and to guide us. This testimony can come through any source if our heart and mind are guided by the Spirit. Yet it is you who keep insisting on limiting the Spirit to the Bible while you avoid answering the legitimate questions as to the historical origions of the Book we call the Holy Bible.

Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would come “to reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgement”.
Jesus also explained what these things meant in the next verses of (John16:9,10,11):
9." Of sin, because they believe not on me;"
This is not talking about believing on the “church” or Mary or other unnecessary traditions that the RCC puts so much emphasis on for “required faith” in.
It is rebuking those who do not put their faith completely in Jesus Christ and His simple gospel.

And yet you put your faith in a Volume produced by that very Church.

1. “Of righteousness, because I go to the Father, and ye see me no more;”
   The Holy Spirit rebukes the unbelieving world and guides God’s children into all righteousness, which can only be found by God’s gift of true faith in Jesus Christ and in no other(s).

Which can be had whether one has a Book or not, since the Holy Spirit cannot be contained with the covers of a Book.

This happens as result of the one and only sacrificial death and resurrection of Jesus. It happens at the Ascension of Christ described in Luke.
This verse, incidentally speaks against the “Real Presence” that you claim “happens” in the “breaking of bread” communion of the members of the church described in (Acts 2:42):
42.“And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.”
Notice that “breaking of bread” is used to describe what the RCC would call “eating of the body of Jesus”. I find it odd that the Bible would not present it the RCC way, if that were true. It would be just too important to describe any other way in that case.
The fact that Jesus said “ye see me no more” also proves there is no “Real Presence”, since the piece of bread is supposed to be a visual object “being Jesus Himself”. They hold it up for everyone to SEE! But Jesus says otherwise: “ye see me no more;”. We know we will all see Jesus after we die, but not on this earth, unless Jesus returns in the second coming before we die. That is why Jesus had the Holy Spirit sent to take His place.

I wish I were knowledgable enough in the ECF to post a refutation to this because I know it is there. The Early Church, composed of the apostles and those directly trained by the Apostles firmly believed in the Real Presence. Perhasps someone here who is more knowledgable than I could address this.
As to the you will see me no more statement I offer:
“A little while, and you will no longer see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me.” (John 16:16)
You’ll no doubt declare this means something else, but not to me.

1. “Of judgement, because the prince of this world is judged.”
   The Holy Spirit reproves all those who reject Jesus and protects God’s own against such evil influences of the world. Without the protection and guidance of the Holy Spirit, there would be far worse apostacy and evil than there is now.

Amen to this my friend, and I praise God for the Holy spirit in the steadfastness of the Church through the ages in protecting the Truth.

You ask < Why does it Only Include Jesus?> and not Mary?
Why the answer to that silly question is so clear in the Bible, that I wonder why you would dare ask it?:
Because:
(Acts 4:12)
“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is NONE OTHER NAME under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”

Mercygate has pretty well addressed this so there is little for me to say.
God is our Savior through Jesus Christ. Period.

As to the actual context of my question though, the point was that you are limiting the HS to ONLY the Bible.
But God gave us the Holy Spirit 400 years BEFORE the Bible. He Gave us the Living, Breathing, Preaching, Martyred Church 400 years BEFORE the Bible. The Church then gave us the Bible.

Peace
James

 

[teancum79]

JW is a breakaway from the Roman Catholic Tradition. I say this because it arose from the “Bible Students movement”, which was a Protestant religious movement that was founded in 1871. Protestant is a schism from the Roman Church in Northern Europe in the 1500’s
Both JW’s and 7th Day Adventists trace their origions to the Millerite movement in the Mid 1800’s

Actually this idea came from the Arian Heresies.
Arianism (4th Century)
**Arius taught that Christ was a creature made by God. **By disguising his heresy using orthodox or near-orthodox terminology, he was able to sow great confusion in the Church. He was able to muster the support of many bishops, while others excommunicated him.

Arianism was solemnly condemned in 325 at the First Council of Nicaea, which defined the divinity of Christ, and in 381 at the First Council of Constantinople, which defined the divinity of the Holy Spirit. These two councils gave us the Nicene creed, which Catholics recite at Mass every Sunday.

I’m not sure what you are asking here? Could you be more specific?

That would be sources, not source. As someone else already pointed out most historians agree with the antiquity of the Catholic Church and it’s rightful place as the fount of Christian teaching through the Holy Spirit.

Peace
James

So a farm boy in the Americas finds out about a teaching of a guy in the 300’s ad and tweaks it to use for himself. Having hard time buying that one. Granted there is hardly an original thought in the world, but to assume that the LDS doctrines came from Catholic or Catholic breakaways alone is far fetched.

On the issue of modern prophets its my understanding that most Christian churchs forbid such a thing (the fact that the bible never says there won’t be aside) if LDS where a breakaway group the idea should have been in or at least considered by the group it broke from.

Just for clarify I’m not saying that most churches have not been breakaways, but there are important exceptions to that rule.

 

[MissionMike]

You hurt my heart when you make such ignorant claims. I wouldn’t even know where to begin. Open your eyes to the Light, my brother. The more I read and learn about catholic tradition, the less and less I feel I can call you my brothers and sisters in Christ.

 

[Linda_Marie]

Just a minor correction: the SDA church is indeed Christian. They believe in the Trinity, have a valid baptism and share many other beliefs with Catholicism. On the other hand, they have some beliefs that are absolutely unique and unprecedented in all of Christendom. For all of our differences, they are brothers and sisters in Christ. You are 100% correct on the other two small “a” adventist faiths (LDS, JW).

Christ’s peace.

Thank you for that. I had understood from others on this forum that the SDA church held some tenets at odds with Christianity. It is good to know that they have a valid baptism.

 

[Ronald_E]

The RCC does not follow what Paul preached in (2 Corinthians 4:5):

“For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus’ sake.”

We all are given those same keys of understanding the Truth once the Holy Spirit permanently indwells us, after we are born from above. Only God does the dispensing of those keys, not any man or group of men. We have no business preaching ourselves as a necessary ingredient of the simple gospel. We are told to preach the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ alone.

The apostles were given the keys and told what they bind on earth would also be bound in heaven. In forming the structure of the church which became known as the Catholic {universal} church it was then approved of by God Himself. The fullness of the Truth comes through that structure. How deeply we as Catholics participate in the faith determines how open we are to the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit dwells in us but we are not open fully to Him then we cannot begin to know the depth of our faith and create friction with a limited understanding of Christ’s teachings. Non-catholics will attack the Sacraments that Jesus created because they do not see what we have been privileged to see through the participation in the sacraments.
Now it is not the fault of the non-catholic nor the catholic who leaves the faith because something outside of their control has influenced them to believe or not believe. The only way is to pray to the Holy Spirit for a deeper understanding of what is being opposed in the Catholic faith.
If the non-catholic does not pray for a deeper understanding then he seems to remain in the understanding of the “old man” which is in the flesh and in opposition to the spirit. Humility is required for participation with the Holy Spirit. Understanding what we Catholics have not deserved but have received through Grace can only come about through our being humble in our faith and constantly confessing the sins of the “old man”. I do not confess for salvation I confess so I am more open to know God more deeply and to receive Him more innocently in Communion.

 

[teancum79]

You hurt my heart when you make such ignorant claims. I wouldn’t even know where to begin. Open your eyes to the Light, my brother. The more I read and learn about catholic tradition, the less and less I feel I can call you my brothers and sisters in Christ.

Well I suppose thats your choice.

 

[JRKH]

You hurt my heart when you make such ignorant claims. I wouldn’t even know where to begin. Open your eyes to the Light, my brother. The more I read and learn about catholic tradition, the less and less I feel I can call you my brothers and sisters in Christ.

Mike,
Would you clarify just who is hurting your heart since there are two sides in this issue?

Peace
James

 

[guanophore]

The Bible is the book revealing the Wisdom of God as compared to the world’s wisdom.
Those who claim that man’s traditions and wisdom have a necessary role for our understanding the Truth of the Bible are denying the Holy Spirit’s role.

This is a misrepresentation of the Teachings. Catholics believe that the wisdom of God,and the Sacred Traditions handed on by the Apostles are what is necessary to understand the Holy writings. All come from the same Source, which is God.

There is the assumption here that God needed men to protect His Word. This reminds me of the ark of the Lord, which was taken over by the enemy. God made sure that the ark was returned to its rightful place all by Himself.

No, such an assumption does not exist. God does not need man. God CHOOSES to use man. God chose to use men to return the ark to it’s rightful place. God chose to work thorugh people to pen, preserve, and gather the holy writings.

The Holy Spirit was sent to testify of Jesus and to call to remembrance of the things Jesus told us. The HS is meant to guide us into all truth and glorify God the Father and Jesus Christ.

Yes, and He works through people.
This is what was meant by Jesus breathing upon the Apostles.

It seems the magisterium is more interested in limiting the HS role by adding tons of unnecessary stuff about Mary and saints and images and rituals etc.

God is the one who added Mary to His plan of salvation. We see this prophesied in Genesis, long before any Catholic Magesterium existed. God is the one who calls, sanctifies, and glorifies the Saints. God is the Source of all the images and rituals that are involved in the worship of Himself. He chose to reflect Himself physically in the things that are made. God chose to create man with an inner desire for ritual.

The thread about Mary being sinless a a great example of wasted dwelling on unnecessary stuff. What more about Mary do we need to know, other than she was the virgin mother of Jesus? The Bible is clear about Jesus being sinless, but it is none of our business about Mary being sinless. She is not the focus of the Holy Spirit; JESUS is!

To say that the HS had no focus from the HS is to deny Scripture also.

And the angel said to her,

“The Holy Spirit will come upon you,
and the power of the Most High will overshadow you;
therefore the child to be born will be called holy,
the Son of God.” Luke 1:35

Catholics cherish the experience of Mary because we all want to share it. Jesus has made the promise that we will all likewise bear fruit if we are filled with the Spirit.

Roman Catholics are all over the map about what is supposed to be the truth, which seems to make it difficult for them to focus on the the child-like simplicity of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

What individual persons believe or fail to believe is not what defines the Truth of Christ. There is one Divine deposit of faith, that was given to us once for all time. Those who embrace this Truth will be in unity with one another. How is that complicated?

Christ crucified might be foolishness by the world’s standard of wisdom, but it is the Wisdom of God revealed in the Bible, so I will focus on that in my faith and worship. Man’s extraneous wisdom and traditions are a hindrance to the gospel’s simplicity.

I agree with you about man’s traditions and human wisdom. Clearly you fail to see the HS at work in the Catholic church, so you mistake the Source of the worship that exists.

All necessary parts of man’s traditions are already included in Scripture. Why muck it up with more of man’s wisdom?

What you have written here is an example of man’s wisdom. A statement of this kind is not found it the Bible, and in fact, contradicts the Divine Revelation that we have received from God. So, I think you must answer your own question. Apparently people cling to human wisdom from fear of trusting what God has put in place.

 

[guanophore]

Your suggestion that I close the Bible and “just be guided by the Holy Spirit” reflects the dishonest “straw man” approach of proving an argument. It is not in the Bible that we are supposed to do that and I never said so. You are making that up the way a lawyer would to convince a jury using a lie.

No, because you cannot establish that the NT is actually the Bible without the Church. Therefore, if you don’t believe the HS was guiding the Church, then you need to throw it out. However, you do believe that God leads you from your own heart, so you can rely upon that without trusting the Church, right?

Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would come “to reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgement”.
Jesus also explained what these things meant in the next verses of (John16:9,10,11):
9." Of sin, because they believe not on me;"
This is not talking about believing on the “church” or Mary or other unnecessary traditions that the RCC puts so much emphasis on for “required faith” in.

Jesus was quite clear that the Church was the vehicle through which He intended to manifest Himself to the world.

"I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. …that they may be one even as we are one, 23 I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me…John 17:20-23

The Church accepts whatever Christ found necessary. He is the one who instituted the Sacraments, and who chose Mary to be His mother. What God has chosen, let no man put asunder!

It is rebuking those who do not put their faith completely in Jesus Christ and His simple gospel.
10. “Of righteousness, because I go to the Father, and ye see me no more;”
The Holy Spirit rebukes the unbelieving world and guides God’s children into all righteousness, which can only be found by God’s gift of true faith in Jesus Christ and in no other(s).

It is very Catholic for you to say this! Yes, righteousness can only be found by truth faith in Christ, who does not separate Himself from His Church on earth.

This happens as result of the one and only sacrificial death and resurrection of Jesus. It happens at the Ascension of Christ described in Luke.

Yes, becoming right with God is dependent upon the death and resurrection of Christ. However, not all people avail themselves of the benefits of His sacrifice, do they?

This verse, incidentally speaks against the “Real Presence” that you claim “happens” in the “breaking of bread” communion of the members of the church described in (Acts 2:42):
42.“And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.”
Notice that “breaking of bread” is used to describe what the RCC would call “eating of the body of Jesus”. I find it odd that the Bible would not present it the RCC way, if that were true.

There are no verses in the Bible that “speak against the Real Presence” This is the case because all the NT was written by those who believed and practiced the Real Presence. The reason it is not “Roman” is because the whole Church was Palestinian at the time. The Roman Rite would not develop as a separate entity for centuries. However, all of the Apostolic Faiths that grew out of this early community understand the “breaking of the bread” in the same way that the “RCC” does, because this is the teaching we have all received from the Apostles.

It would be just too important to describe any other way in that case.

Who are you to decide such things? The writers never imagined that the Sacred Writings would be separated from the Sacred Traditions which produced them.

The fact that Jesus said “ye see me no more” also proves there is no “Real Presence”, since the piece of bread is supposed to be a visual object “being Jesus Himself”. They hold it up for everyone to SEE! But Jesus says otherwise: “ye see me no more;”. We know we will all see Jesus after we die, but not on this earth, unless Jesus returns in the second coming before we die. That is why Jesus had the Holy Spirit sent to take His place.

One can only see Him now with the eyes of faith, in the soul of those He made, and under the appearances of Bread and Wine. The denial of this is one of the earliest heresies on record.

1. “Of judgement, because the prince of this world is judged.”
   The Holy Spirit reproves all those who reject Jesus and protects God’s own against such evil influences of the world. Without the protection and guidance of the Holy Spirit, there would be far worse apostacy and evil than there is now.

A very Catholic precept!

You ask < Why does it Only Include Jesus?> and not Mary?

Why the answer to that silly question is so clear in the Bible, that I wonder why you would dare ask it?:

Because:

(Acts 4:12)
“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is NONE OTHER NAME under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”

The point is that you are creating illusions of separation that don’t exist. Mary was the first Christian. She was the very first to hear His name, and be saved by her faith in Him. God chose her to be part of His great plan to bring His name and salvation into the world. Why do you need to separate her from Christ? It is like the eye saying to the hand “I have no need of you”, or the mouth, saying to the womb, “I have no need of you”.

 

[Ronald_E]

Not at all! I just wish to serve by way of reminder to my Western brethren.

Guanophore, Just a little aside. I went to my Byzantine Mass about two months ago and I was overwhelmed by the reverence and the beauty. The priests were preparing in prayer at the altar about 20 minutes before Mass. The readings of Scripture were sung. Communion and the prayers after Communion were sung for another 20 minutes as we offered prayer for it seemed all of humanity.
I must admit I was overcome and shed man tears.

 

[guanophore]

Guanophore, Just a little aside. I went to my Byzantine Mass about two months ago and I was overwhelmed by the reverence and the beauty. The priests were preparing in prayer at the altar about 20 minutes before Mass. The readings of Scripture were sung. Communion and the prayers after Communion were sung for another 20 minutes as we offered prayer for it seemed all of humanity.
I must admit I was overcome and shed man tears.

It is my fervent prayer that all of my Roman brethren might be similarly illuminated by the Light of the East.