Universal Scriptures

[spedteacherita]

Hi, all!

I’ve seen this stated many times here on CAF and I understand that, as a Catholic forum, that this is understood this way but, can we not agree that the Bible is not “just a Catholic book?” This compilation of God’s Scriptures is universal in that it is important to many Christian faiths and has brought many to faith in Christ the world over. The way I see it is that the Holy Spirit led the early Christian Fathers to discern the letters and books that were to be included and I value that which I am able to read and study online, with audio books and with the “old-fashion” paper pages.

I know this might raise some hackles but I thought this might be a good topic for discussion.

God bless, all!

Rita

 

[TonyBS]

Hi, all!

I’ve seen this stated many times here on CAF and I understand that, as a Catholic forum, that this is understood this way but, can we not agree that the Bible is not “just a Catholic book?” This compilation of God’s Scriptures is universal in that it is important to many Christian faiths and has brought many to faith in Christ the world over. The way I see it is that the Holy Spirit led the early Christian Fathers to discern the letters and books that were to be included and I value that which I am able to read and study online, with audio books and with the “old-fashion” paper pages.

I know this might raise some hackles but I thought this might be a good topic for discussion.

God bless, all! Rita

Rita - There is no doubt Gods Word is for all.

It would be food to have all the books that were not included easy available as well.

Regards Tony

 

[adf417]

Hi, all!

I’ve seen this stated many times here on CAF and I understand that, as a Catholic forum, that this is understood this way but, can we not agree that the Bible is not “just a Catholic book?” This compilation of God’s Scriptures is universal in that it is important to many Christian faiths and has brought many to faith in Christ the world over. The way I see it is that the Holy Spirit led the early Christian Fathers to discern the letters and books that were to be included and I value that which I am able to read and study online, with audio books and with the “old-fashion” paper pages.

I know this might raise some hackles but I thought this might be a good topic for discussion.

God bless, all!

Rita

As Tony said, God’s word is for all, and I would add - equally. This does not mean all the differing interpretations of the word are from God. The discerning you speak of from the father’s is a discernment of one interpretation.

Peace!!!

 

[Duane1966]

Hi, all!

I’ve seen this stated many times here on CAF and I understand that, as a Catholic forum, that this is understood this way but, can we not agree that the Bible is not “just a Catholic book?” This compilation of God’s Scriptures is universal in that it is important to many Christian faiths and has brought many to faith in Christ the world over. The way I see it is that the Holy Spirit led the early Christian Fathers to discern the letters and books that were to be included and I value that which I am able to read and study online, with audio books and with the “old-fashion” paper pages.

I know this might raise some hackles but I thought this might be a good topic for discussion.

God bless, all!

Rita

So then is the Declaration of Independence not an American document, since many people from other countries read and revere the words stated in it?

The fact of the matter is, and is acknowledged by most historians, that the only reason you have a bible in the form you know it today is because of the Catholic Church, who gathered and kept, and painstakingly copied the letters that were written to the Church in distant places. To bring you that book, the bishops argued amongst themselves in council as to what was scripture, and what was not. The only reason you do not have the letter of Clement in your bible is because the Catholic Church said that it was not scripture. Or the reason you have Revelation, because the Catholic Church said it was. And make no doubt about it, those early Fathers that the Spirit led, were Catholic, and proud of it.

Can we just agree to call it what it is? A product of the Catholic Church.

 

[TonyBS]

So then is the Declaration of Independence not an American document, since many people from other countries read and revere the words stated in it?

The fact of the matter is, and is acknowledged by most historians, that the only reason you have a bible in the form you know it today is because of the Catholic Church, who gathered and kept, and painstakingly copied the letters that were written to the Church in distant places. To bring you that book, the bishops argued amongst themselves in council as to what was scripture, and what was not. The only reason you do not have the letter of Clement in your bible is because the Catholic Church said that it was not scripture. Or the reason you have Revelation, because the Catholic Church said it was. And make no doubt about it, those early Fathers that the Spirit led, were Catholic, and proud of it.

Can we just agree to call it what it is? A product of the Catholic Church.

Really God had no part in this

Regards Tony

 

[Duane1966]

Really God had no part in this

Regards Tony

Are you stating God had no part in this?

Of course He did. After all, the Catholic Church, is His church.

 

[MartinJordan]

So then is the Declaration of Independence not an American document, since many people from other countries read and revere the words stated in it?

The fact of the matter is, and is acknowledged by most historians, that the only reason you have a bible in the form you know it today is because of the Catholic Church, who gathered and kept, and painstakingly copied the letters that were written to the Church in distant places. To bring you that book, the bishops argued amongst themselves in council as to what was scripture, and what was not. The only reason you do not have the letter of Clement in your bible is because the Catholic Church said that it was not scripture. Or the reason you have Revelation, because the Catholic Church said it was. And make no doubt about it, those early Fathers that the Spirit led, were Catholic, and proud of it.

Can we just agree to call it what it is? A product of the Catholic Church.

Beautiful. Yes and Amen.

For the Church by the Church. The world can read it too. That is the Church sharing the Good News of Our Lord Jesus Christ .

That being said. One needs to Listen to the Church and not hand the Scriptures to make do what an individual believes about it. The Church is the Bride and only with the Bridegroom (Jesus) we give our thanks. The Word being God not just by Scripture alone.

MJ

 

[jschwartz]

The beauty, wisdom, and inspiration of God speaking to us is not limited to the pages and interpretations of Scripture, but is found also in the history and traditions of the Church, in Reason and the freedom and liberty of the human heart, spirit, conscience, and mind, and in continued wisdom and inspiration from a variety of sources, including the arts, literature, other faiths, poetry, nature, and the sciences and other areas, too.

 

[gazelam]

Hi, all!

I’ve seen this stated many times here on CAF and I understand that, as a Catholic forum, that this is understood this way but, can we not agree that the Bible is not “just a Catholic book?” This compilation of God’s Scriptures is universal in that it is important to many Christian faiths and has brought many to faith in Christ the world over. The way I see it is that the Holy Spirit led the early Christian Fathers to discern the letters and books that were to be included and I value that which I am able to read and study online, with audio books and with the “old-fashion” paper pages.

I know this might raise some hackles but I thought this might be a good topic for discussion.

God bless, all!

Rita

Don’t the Eastern Orthodox feel they can make the same claims as the Catholics regarding the Bible?

 

[SyroMalankara]

They can and should, however most, if not all protestant Bibles came from the Western Catholic Tradition. If they want to give credit to the Eastern Catholics, Eastern Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox, feel free, but do accept those additional Books that they consider canonical

 

[total_Catholic]

So then is the Declaration of Independence not an American document, since many people from other countries read and revere the words stated in it?

The fact of the matter is, and is acknowledged by most historians, that the only reason you have a bible in the form you know it today is because of the Catholic Church, who gathered and kept, and painstakingly copied the letters that were written to the Church in distant places. To bring you that book, the bishops argued amongst themselves in council as to what was scripture, and what was not. The only reason you do not have the letter of Clement in your bible is because the Catholic Church said that it was not scripture. Or the reason you have Revelation, because the Catholic Church said it was. And make no doubt about it, those early Fathers that the Spirit led, were Catholic, and proud of it.

Can we just agree to call it what it is? A product of the Catholic Church.

THIS!!!

 

[Duane1966]

Don’t the Eastern Orthodox feel they can make the same claims as the Catholics regarding the Bible?

Were not the Eastern Orthodox known as Catholics when the bible was compiled? If yes, and they were, then nothing I stated is in error.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

The problem is that sort of view point doesn’t require the church, the original context in which the scriptures were written by, for and codified into a canon. Yes the scripture is universal but the scripture belongs within the universal church and not outside it. So question is really about Church and whether or not all the various protestant, Catholic and Orthodox churches are the universal church. Orthodox would have to deny the scriptures having such a character.

This doesn’t mean the scripture can’t be used or be beneficial towards those outside the Church (it has), it only means you miss the full dimension and power of the scripture outside of that context.

 

[spedteacherita]

The problem is that sort of view point doesn’t require the church, the original context in which the scriptures were written by, for and codified into a canon. Yes the scripture is universal but the scripture belongs within the universal church and not outside it. So question is really about Church and whether or not all the various protestant, Catholic and Orthodox churches are the universal church. Orthodox would have to deny the scriptures having such a character.

This doesn’t mean the scripture can’t be used or be beneficial towards those outside the Church (it has),** it only means you miss the full dimension and power of the scripture outside of that context.**

Just curious, how do we miss this? My Christian history is the same as the Catholics just had to make a split because of the issues brewing in the Catholic Church in the 16th century. We understand the universal Church to include the “invisible” church. We’re one family and the sooner we understand that the better it will be in regards to bring others into the Christian fold.

Somebody mentioned the Tradition of the Church - is that written down somewhere? How do you know what is tradition and what has not been added by popes who didn’t have the Church’s best interest in mind?

Just questions that continue to go through my mind.

God bless all!

Rita

 

[Duane1966]

Just curious, how do we miss this? My Christian history is the same as the Catholics just had to make a split because of the issues brewing in the Catholic Church in the 16th century. We understand the universal Church to include the “invisible” church. We’re one family and the sooner we understand that the better it will be in regards to bring others into the Christian fold.

Somebody mentioned the Tradition of the Church - is that written down somewhere? How do you know what is tradition and what has not been added by popes who didn’t have the Church’s best interest in mind?

Just questions that continue to go through my mind.

God bless all!

Rita

Since we don’t have any of the originals, how do we know the bible hasn’t been added to or subtracted by some monk who didn’t have the best interest of the Church in mind?

 

[Starwarsfan2]

Since we don’t have any of the originals, how do we know the bible hasn’t been added to or subtracted by some monk who didn’t have the best interest of the Church in mind?

Ever heard of the preservation of the Scriptures, the Providence of God , the fact the the vast majority of Scriptureal variance is spelling or grammatical and does not change the meaning of the text , and that the earliest copies are a mere 30 years after the original.

 

[Abu]

Spedteacherita #14
My Christian history is the same as the Catholics just had to make a split because of the issues brewing in the Catholic Church in the 16th century. We understand the universal Church to include the “invisible” church. We’re one family and the sooner we understand that the better it will be in regards to bring others into the Christian fold.

False.

The designed “split” lost infallibility, dogma and doctrine, lost the priesthood and therefore many sacraments, and allowed contraception, divorce and remarriage, abortion, euthanasia etc. No real follower of Christ would want to encourage others to deny Him thus.

Christs’ Church has always been, and will always be, very visible, authoritative and definitive.

Somebody mentioned the Tradition of the Church - is that written down somewhere? How do you know what is tradition and what has not been added by popes who didn’t have the Church’s best interest in mind?
Just questions that continue to go through my mind.

When you refer to “popes”, you are wrong to assume that they can “add” any error to what Christ has decreed – their mandate from Christ following St Peter was declared unequivocally for what He declared as “MY CHURCH” which is explicit in His teaching.

To Peter alone:
“You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church.” (Mt 16:18)
“The gates of hell will not prevail against it.”(Mt 16:18)
“I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven." ( Mt 16:19)
“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:19) [Later to the Twelve, also].

Sole authority:
“Strengthen your brethren.” (Lk 22:32)
“Feed My sheep.”(Jn 21:17).

Thus their infallibility is in their definitions on faith and morals to the whole Church in dogma and doctrine, even if they are publicly sinful.

The Bible has been authorised only by the Catholic Church.

SCRIPTURES. (Etym. Latin scriptural, act of writing.).
Modern Catholic Dictionary
by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.

The only way that we know that any writing is “Scripture” – is the Word of God – is precisely because the Catholic Church specifically founded by Christ “to teach all nations” declared certain writings, and no others, to be inspired by God, and teach no error. She gave the world the Sacred Scriptures by defining which books (writings), no more no less, are the Sacred Scriptures.

The books that actually are declared the inspired Word of God were authorized by Pope Damasus at a Council of Rome in 382, confirmed at the Councils of Hippo, 393, Carthage III 397, Carthage IV in 419 and canonised at the Council of Trent (1545-1563) – 46 books in the Old Testament, 27 books in the New Testament – clearly showing the authority of Christ’s Church, and culminating in the defined Canon of Sacred Scriptures at the Council of Trent.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Just curious, how do we miss this? My Christian history is the same as the Catholics just had to make a split because of the issues brewing in the Catholic Church in the 16th century. We understand the universal Church to include the “invisible” church. We’re one family and the sooner we understand that the better it will be in regards to bring others into the Christian fold.

Somebody mentioned the Tradition of the Church - is that written down somewhere? How do you know what is tradition and what has not been added by popes who didn’t have the Church’s best interest in mind?

Just questions that continue to go through my mind.

God bless all!

Rita

You miss it by not being in the Church which the scripture was written for, namely the Orthodox Church.

As so far as regards tradition, that tradition is reflected in the Church’s liturgy, it’s practice (moral life) and the theologians it recognises as having a place of authority. There are other aspects and nuances but it isn’t some just in some book, the tradition of the Church is seen in it’s reflection on scripture, in being in the line of theologians building upon one another to a clarity of the faith. We cannot do away with that building as much as we can’t do away with the foundation which is the apostolic deposit.

To universalise the scriptures is to set the scripture outside of that context. The scripture becomes a book from which everything can be questioned and must be overthrown if the individual finds something he doesn’t see reflecting what scripture teaches and that is the ultimate end of Sola scriptura (though you no doubt disagree with that end I maintain it is where Sola scriptura finishes).

 

[TonyBS]

False.

The designed “split” lost infallibility, dogma and doctrine, lost the priesthood and therefore many sacraments, and allowed contraception, divorce and remarriage, abortion, euthanasia etc. No real follower of Christ would want to encourage others to deny Him thus.

Christs’ Church has always been, and will always be, very visible, authoritative and definitive.
When you refer to “popes”, you are wrong to assume that they can “add” any error to what Christ has decreed – their mandate from Christ following St Peter was declared unequivocally for what He declared as “MY CHURCH” which is explicit in His teaching.

To Peter alone:
“You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church.” (Mt 16:18)
“The gates of hell will not prevail against it.”(Mt 16:18)
“I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven." ( Mt 16:19)
“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:19) [Later to the Twelve, also].

Sole authority:
“Strengthen your brethren.” (Lk 22:32)
“Feed My sheep.”(Jn 21:17).

Thus their infallibility is in their definitions on faith and morals to the whole Church in dogma and doctrine, even if they are publicly sinful.

The Bible has been authorised only by the Catholic Church.

SCRIPTURES. (Etym. Latin scriptural, act of writing.).
Modern Catholic Dictionary
by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.

The only way that we know that any writing is “Scripture” – is the Word of God – is precisely because the Catholic Church specifically founded by Christ “to teach all nations” declared certain writings, and no others, to be inspired by God, and teach no error. She gave the world the Sacred Scriptures by defining which books (writings), no more no less, are the Sacred Scriptures.

The books that actually are declared the inspired Word of God were authorized by Pope Damasus at a Council of Rome in 382, confirmed at the Councils of Hippo, 393, Carthage III 397, Carthage IV in 419 and canonised at the Council of Trent (1545-1563) – 46 books in the Old Testament, 27 books in the New Testament – clearly showing the authority of Christ’s Church, and culminating in the defined Canon of Sacred Scriptures at the Council of Trent.

 

[Duane1966]

Ever heard of the preservation of the Scriptures, the Providence of God , the fact the the vast majority of Scriptureal variance is spelling or grammatical and does not change the meaning of the text , and that the earliest copies are a mere 30 years after the original.

I’ve heard of all those. Only one copy of one book of the bible (John) is dated 30 years after the original. But the dating of that copy is itself a problem. Since we do not have the original, we cannot say what the date of the original is. How do we know that whomever copied the origina,l did not add to the scripture, because they did not have the best interests of the Church in mind? You say God protects His holy scripture? I emphatically agree. BUT He protected it through His holy Catholic Church, the Church which the scriptures were written by, and for. And He protects her Traditions. Providence of God can be used for multiple arguments.