D
- Status
M
MM_for_LLPH
Guest
I just realized that I should take a step back and ask a question: What version of the Bible do you all use?
M
MM_for_LLPH
Guest
I asked what bible everyone used and I guess its a moot point:
Only the Magisterium of the Church Can Interpret the Bible
“The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the magisterium of the Church, that is, the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him.” #100, p.35
The issue with that is - and this will always be the root issue:
These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
–1 John 2:26-27
“STUDY to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH.”
–2 Tim. 2:
“O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day. Thou through thy commandments hast made me wiser than mine enemies: for they are ever with me. I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation.”
–Ps. 119:97-99
Brothers and sisters its not too late to call solely on Jesus - call on him while he is near.
M
MM_for_LLPH
Guest
You act like you just “get” all that is written as the testimony of Jesus by… doing what then? When Jesus came - he came to write the law in our hearts - the NT provides the testimony of that, the gospel of that, the “good news” - where else is this written ANYWHERE???
E
edjco
Guest
I suppose, then, that I should ask you where you got your New Testament canon. There were many books which did and did not make it into the canon of the New Testament.
The Catholic Church (guided by the Holy Spirit), chose the canon of your New Testament.
So, if the Catholic Church has no authority from God, the Bible you yourself are using is invalid.
Could you touch on this?
By the way, since you asked, personally I use the New American Bible, the Douay-Rheims Bible and I also have the horridly translated King James Bible which I use to refute the ridiculous claims of anti-Catholics. By the way, do you realize that the 1611 KJV included the Deuterocanonical books (what you may call the “Apocrypha”)? In case you don’t know what that is, those are the books removed by the infallible authority of Martin Luther and others over a thousand years after the Catholic Church canonized the Bible. Do you also realize that the 1611 KJV included “graven images” (pictures)?
Also, you may be interested to know, at some point in time, the Deuteros were removed from the KJV. That don’t sound like someone guided by the Holy Spirit, but I’m just an ignorant Catholic.
So please, tell us all, where you got your NT canon of books? Get ready to prove it came from anywhere but the Catholic Church, though, and a bit of advice: Bring your lunch.
The Catholic Church (guided by the Holy Spirit), chose the canon of your New Testament.
So, if the Catholic Church has no authority from God, the Bible you yourself are using is invalid.
Could you touch on this?
By the way, since you asked, personally I use the New American Bible, the Douay-Rheims Bible and I also have the horridly translated King James Bible which I use to refute the ridiculous claims of anti-Catholics. By the way, do you realize that the 1611 KJV included the Deuterocanonical books (what you may call the “Apocrypha”)? In case you don’t know what that is, those are the books removed by the infallible authority of Martin Luther and others over a thousand years after the Catholic Church canonized the Bible. Do you also realize that the 1611 KJV included “graven images” (pictures)?
Also, you may be interested to know, at some point in time, the Deuteros were removed from the KJV. That don’t sound like someone guided by the Holy Spirit, but I’m just an ignorant Catholic.
So please, tell us all, where you got your NT canon of books? Get ready to prove it came from anywhere but the Catholic Church, though, and a bit of advice: Bring your lunch.
M
MM_for_LLPH
Guest
What lies? The NT clearly says the HS is the guide.
When did Mary - the earthly mother of Jesus - become an Angel? She was a person just like you and me.
Great point - when The Lord Jesus called Peter Satan for saying the Lord shouldn’t suffer death and resurrection for our sake. This is why with this New Testament and the Testimony of those who were with him - lead us to understanding.
If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?
Luke 11:13
I have asked for this - have you? It is a free gift from God - not something earned through works. God gives this to whom he pleases - and the NT didnt outline the process for giving this FREE gift from GOD - the traditions of the RCC cant give this.
That is exactly why the framework of men never work. There is only one rock to build a church on - faith in JESUS CHRIST. Men always lust after the flesh - obvious in the churches history. If Jesus is the High Priest - and the RCC claims to represent that office on earth - yet they still sin - why listen to the sinners?! Jesus is the only way to follow - learn about it in the KJB.
Yes: the traditions of man should never be obeyed, such as the tradition invented by Martin Luther than man only needs to obey the Bible, not sacred tradition or apostolic authority, as the Bible itself tells us.
(wow we have different bibles - the scriptures contained in the book called the bible certainly do say that truth is all you need)
It absolutely does - ex{20:5}
Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them:
for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the
iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and
fourth [generation] of them that hate me; {20:6} And
shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and
keep my commandments.
Thats the issue - don’t bow AND dont serve. bowing is specific.
So Catholics hold that the ONE time GOD specifically gave instructions to do something VERY specific - that that lifts the many many times God hates such things when done the way MAN wishes to. That sure is taking some pretty wide liberty with instructions from God
Please demonstrate that Catholics are worshiping these statues or saints in any manner. You can post pictures of people kissing statues, but that’s veneration, not worship. It’s only worship if we think these entities are gods in their own right, which they aren’t.
God bless.
With pleasure will I provide - I want everyone to know the truth.
jesus-is-lord.com/PRAYMARY.HTM
M
MM_for_LLPH
Guest
jesus-is-lord.com/kjvonly.htm
jesus-is-lord.com/nivdelet.htm
jesus-is-lord.com/another2.htm
thats a good start - you have much reading to do.
The differences between the versions, regardless of where they came from - the other “translation” certainly change the meaning - ask yourself in what way? To or from Jesus?
jesus-is-lord.com/nivdelet.htm
jesus-is-lord.com/another2.htm
thats a good start - you have much reading to do.
The differences between the versions, regardless of where they came from - the other “translation” certainly change the meaning - ask yourself in what way? To or from Jesus?
M
MM_for_LLPH
Guest
1 John 5:7
If you don’t believe that these bible editions are dangerous - look at how differently this reads in the KJV - here is the evidence to suggest this is of massive importance - even for Catholics. This verse is not complete in any of your bibles. Earnestly read and search for this. This is right in line with this whole thread - no?
{5:5} Who is he that overcometh the
world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?
{5:6} This is he that came by water and blood, [even] Jesus
Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is
the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.
{5:7} For there are three that bear record in heaven, the
Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are
one. {5:8} And there are three that bear witness in earth, the
spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in
one. {5:9} If we receive the witness of men, the witness of
God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath
testified of his Son. {5:10} He that believeth on the Son of
God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God
hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record
that God gave of his Son. {5:11} And this is the record, that
God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
{5:12} He that hath the Son hath life; [and] he that hath not
the Son of God hath not life. {5:13} These things have I
written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of
God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye
may believe on the name of the Son of God.
If we are to live not by bread alone - but by EVERY word of God - who am I to judge I AM?
jesus-is-lord.com/1john57.htm
This tracks this verse back to 200AD - should it be in your bible? I certainly think it has a profound meaning to it - many share that opinion.
If you don’t believe that these bible editions are dangerous - look at how differently this reads in the KJV - here is the evidence to suggest this is of massive importance - even for Catholics. This verse is not complete in any of your bibles. Earnestly read and search for this. This is right in line with this whole thread - no?
{5:5} Who is he that overcometh the
world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?
{5:6} This is he that came by water and blood, [even] Jesus
Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is
the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.
{5:7} For there are three that bear record in heaven, the
Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are
one. {5:8} And there are three that bear witness in earth, the
spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in
one. {5:9} If we receive the witness of men, the witness of
God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath
testified of his Son. {5:10} He that believeth on the Son of
God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God
hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record
that God gave of his Son. {5:11} And this is the record, that
God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
{5:12} He that hath the Son hath life; [and] he that hath not
the Son of God hath not life. {5:13} These things have I
written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of
God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye
may believe on the name of the Son of God.
If we are to live not by bread alone - but by EVERY word of God - who am I to judge I AM?
jesus-is-lord.com/1john57.htm
This tracks this verse back to 200AD - should it be in your bible? I certainly think it has a profound meaning to it - many share that opinion.
Z
Zooey
Guest
Yes, it is all day; all day Sunday.However, since when is the entire day to be spent doing nothing but sit in a church building and listen to you reading?
Good for you.
I find that I have to eat, drink,& use the bathroom. All of which require me to get up & move around to accomplish them.
Not to mention taking the prescriptions that the doctors write me to keep me alive & eating, drinking, & going to the bathroom…
You don’t have a cat, do you???
Douay-Rheims (Challoner)
RSV
RSV-CE
Orthodox Study Bible (NKJV)
NRSV
KJV
Moffatt
Goodspeed
Confraternity
NIV
Good News
CEV
Lamsa
Living Bible
NLB
NAB
NASV
Vulgate
and my great-grandmother’s Dutch Bible, which I don’t know the version; the front page was missing due to the fact that it had been read every day since 1881 at the time she died in the '50s.
I’ve probably missed a couple.
I’m sure that others here can tell you of still other versions.
:coffeeread: :coffeeread: :coffeeread: :compcoff:
Z
Zooey
Guest
Oh, by the bye, :juggle:“MM for LLPH”?
You may want to read the:nerd: forum rules, which I have linked for you, here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=2
You would appear to be:tsktsk: :tsktsk: in violation of several…:compcoff:
:twocents:
You may want to read the:nerd: forum rules, which I have linked for you, here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=2
You would appear to be:tsktsk: :tsktsk: in violation of several…:compcoff:
:twocents:
D
diggerdomer
Guest
I am sorry. I do not understand your question. Can you rephrase, or restate it? Thank you.
P
PaddyMcGurk
Guest
Actually, she didn’t. At least not in the context that you speak of. The Blessed Virgin was just that – Blessed. How so? She had to be, since she was the Ark of the New and Everlasting Covenant. Also, doesn’t Sacred Scripture state that Elizabeth called Mary “Blessed” among woman? I believe so.
On a side note, why are you so angry, man? I think you might just need a beer.
God Bless and Semper Fidelis.
P
PaddyMcGurk
Guest
MM, I assume you are using the King James Version of the Bible. I could be wrong. Maybe you already stated that you do. Anyway, no matter. For simplicity’s sake, I’ll pretend that you are.
The KJV of the Bible was a great accomplishment when it was written. However, they’ve noticed flaws in it when going back to the original Greek. My point is that it is a “translation”. The bible in any language other than the Greek, CANNOT be completely translated word for word and still be understandable in the host language. It is practically impossible. Some things need to be “interpreted” into another language to understand the meaning. The Roman Church understood this and used the Vulgate to allow for the widest dissemination of the Word of God without losing meaning through a very large amount of translations. Most Catholics at the time knew Latin, or learned it. I think you are looking at this from American eyes. Unfortunately we don’t tend to learn other languages like we should.
Anyway, Luther probably had a point. Linguistics of his time were getting better so it was probably about time to translate the Bible into other languages. Hence the reason that it was translated at that time and disseminated at a rapid rate.
No matter. Sacred Scripture just isn’t complete without Sacred Tradition. Don’t forget that there was a Church and many Christians long before there was an official Bible.
The KJV of the Bible was a great accomplishment when it was written. However, they’ve noticed flaws in it when going back to the original Greek. My point is that it is a “translation”. The bible in any language other than the Greek, CANNOT be completely translated word for word and still be understandable in the host language. It is practically impossible. Some things need to be “interpreted” into another language to understand the meaning. The Roman Church understood this and used the Vulgate to allow for the widest dissemination of the Word of God without losing meaning through a very large amount of translations. Most Catholics at the time knew Latin, or learned it. I think you are looking at this from American eyes. Unfortunately we don’t tend to learn other languages like we should.
Anyway, Luther probably had a point. Linguistics of his time were getting better so it was probably about time to translate the Bible into other languages. Hence the reason that it was translated at that time and disseminated at a rapid rate.
No matter. Sacred Scripture just isn’t complete without Sacred Tradition. Don’t forget that there was a Church and many Christians long before there was an official Bible.
P
patrick457
Guest
Just to chime in a bit.
Personally, I tend to work my way through the original languages (I did dabble in translation: I tried one or two passages but boy, it’s very hard!). I do use translations oftentimes but I’m actually more of an ‘ultra-literal’ type of guy (i.e. if you’re gonna translate it, why not go all the way and preserve the original tenses and, if possible, word order?
) - got tired of dynamic equivalence stuff a while ago.
P
patrick457
Guest
Come to think of it, several of the very ancient liturgies of the Christian Church - take the Liturgy of St. James - would have taken hours to complete when celebrated: I think the maximum limit is around 9 HOURS, or probably even more. Not enough, I guess?
However, since when is the entire day to be spent doing nothing but sit in a church building and listen to you reading?
Z
Zooey
Guest
Apparently not. As far as I can see, he wants us toCome to think of it, several of the very ancient liturgies of the Christian Church - take the Liturgy of St. James - would have taken hours to complete when celebrated: I think the maximum limit is around 9 HOURS, or probably even more. Not enough, I guess?
sit down & listen to 
him.Until he gets from Genesis to Revelation(Apocalypse).
Or dies of terminal talking on & on & on & on &
…
P
patrick457
Guest
The question is, what Biblical canon would he use? Would he use the 66-book (mainly) Protestant canon, the 73-book Catholic canon, the 81-book Ethiopian canon, or any others?Apparently not. As far as I can see, he wants us to
Until he gets from Genesis to Revelation(Apocalypse).
Or dies of terminal talking on & on & on & on &
P
patrick457
Guest
Two words: of course! Whoever gave you the idea that Mary was an angel?
- Status