R
Reformed
Guest
Let’s discuss the contents of the Bible as compared to these side issues.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=273731&page=10
- Status
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=273731&page=10
W
wanner47
Guest
No, I disagree with that assertion entirely. See Tantum ergo’s post above; also see here.
If all the splits are caused by people “leaving” Scripture, who, then, can determine what Scripture really means?
Are they infallible when it comes to the interpretation of Scripture?
Truly bizarre, because i believe that the Holy Scriptures contain the Word of God, and BECAUSE of that fact, I am Catholic.
No, the Roman Catholic faith is dependent on the authority granted to it BY CHRIST.
In fact, it is the opposite.
No, the Holy Spirit tells me (and the Church) what to believe as Truth.
So why should I listen to you?
R
ralphinal
Guest
Actually, no. My question is not about theology. It is about the Bible and history.
Do you discount science when it disagrees with your faith?
Do you throw out history when it disagrees with your faith?
Setting aside all theological differences, history records a course of events along these lines.
Jesus lived, died, rose again. While he was on the earth, he formed a church.
After he ascended into heaven, he sent the Holy Spirit to lead the Church.
Filled with the Holy Spirit, these men founded other branches of the same Church, and likewise, the leaders there were filled with the Holy Spirit.
The Apostles and their first generation followers wrote the Gosples for reference of Christ’s life, Acts for the works of the Early Church, and the Epistles to correct and encourage, as well as teach, these branches.
As time went by, the Church delt with heresies and growth, eventually forming what is today called the Bible. All of this was done through Councils.
Time went on, eventually, pollitical and minor theological issues developed into the Great Scisim, spliting the Church into East (Orthodox) and West (Catholic).
Again, time went on and you had the Reformation and the Split between Catholicism and the Church of England.
Now, show me where Biblical Christianty was not either the Catholic Church or Orthodoxy.
Show me why I should trust any denomination that developed later as being the correct one. The only logical choice is that either the Catholic CHurch or the Orthodox church is the Church founded by Christ. God is not illogical. Why would the faith vanish for a time?
I beleive that the Bible is the Word of God because the Holy Spirit, working through the Catholic CHurch, says it is. I trust that the Catholic Church is the one founded by Christ because I accept their claims more than that of the EO, because logically one of those two MUST be the Church founded by Christ, and because the Holy Spirit has both led me to that conclusion and the Holy Spirit continues to lead the Catholic CHurch today.
How can the Holy Spirit lead you down one path and me another?
R
Reformed
Guest
That is a great question. So, how do we know if God’s remnant was the Protestant Reformers or those who remain with the Roman Catholic Church? Did God give us His guiding truth which the Spirit works through? My answer, God the Holy Spirit works through the Holy Scriptures as authoritative truth. Religious insititutions always consist of both sheep and goat, wheat and tares, under-shepherds and wolves. How do we determine if a teacher is from God or is a wolf in sheep’s clothing? Scripture must remain the authoritative source of truth if we are able to discern spiritual truth.
So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace. - Rom 11
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
Both. God revealed this truth personally through His Spirit and the teachings of his Church.
R
Reformed
Guest
That’s an ecumenical answer. So, consider which came first before you cast your vote.
T
thirdn6
Guest
Abide with the teachings of the Church. Don’t you know that if one teacher (priest) persists upon an erratic teaching other members expose the error and then admonish him? If he remains obstinate he gets excommunicated until the time he repents!
You have a protestant bible that has 66 books. I have a Catholic bible that has 73 books. Which one holds the authority?
C
cfrancis
Guest
How sad Reformed cannot allow the Holy Spirit to open his eyes to the Truth.
How truly sad to see him chained to his own opinions and interpretations of Scripture, so often having to weave and wind between verses to connect the disjointed dots of his own personal theology.
We all should pray that he allows the Holy Spirit to set him free from his chains; that the Holy Spirit cause the scales to fall from his eyes; that the Holy Spirit reveal lead him to recognize he is a slave to his ego.
How truly sad to see him chained to his own opinions and interpretations of Scripture, so often having to weave and wind between verses to connect the disjointed dots of his own personal theology.
We all should pray that he allows the Holy Spirit to set him free from his chains; that the Holy Spirit cause the scales to fall from his eyes; that the Holy Spirit reveal lead him to recognize he is a slave to his ego.
C
cfrancis
Guest
The issue isn’t are the books in the Bible inspired by God; they are.
You continue to ignore the question that holds the key to your freedom:
As the Scriptures do not self-identify, how was the canon determined?
Unless you can produce a Bible verse containing the canon, we need an extra-Biblical source.
R
ralphinal
Guest
Scripture cannot be the authoritative Truth.
Neither can the Church.
Jesus is the Truth.
Now, is Jesus is Scriptures? Yes, but Scriptures require interpretation.
Is Jesus in the Church? Yes, but the Church needs the Scriptures to help teach.
And I still see no logical reason to accept a church born some 1600 years or more after Jesus as being the Church of the first century. Can someone help me with that?
Neither can the Church.
Jesus is the Truth.
Now, is Jesus is Scriptures? Yes, but Scriptures require interpretation.
Is Jesus in the Church? Yes, but the Church needs the Scriptures to help teach.
And I still see no logical reason to accept a church born some 1600 years or more after Jesus as being the Church of the first century. Can someone help me with that?
G
guanophore
Guest
No. The split occurred becuase of many reasons, one of them being the reprehensible behavior of persons claiming to hold the Teachings of the Church, and were not.
Such a statement reveals a vast ignorance of one’s own family history in the faith, and of history in general. Deplorable.
The Scriptures are the Word of God, and in this manner were they penned, preserved, canonized and propogated by the Catholic Church.
No. Sacred Tradition is what produced the Scripture, and that is why those who keep the Apostle’s command to hold fast to the teachings, whether they are in word or in writing, have a high view of scripture.
The contents of the NT are completely distillied from Catholic Sacred Tradition.
They both do, don’t you think?
I am glad to see you admit this, because in other places you have claimed the opposite.
G
guanophore
Guest
I think you might want to consider taking actual history into account in understanding the Scripture.
Sorry, Reformed. Catholics know that our preconceived notions in studying scripture are not “side issues”. We understand what we read through the lens that we use. When you study the scripture, you do so from the perspective that Catholics are not Christian. This influences how you understand what you read. It is not a side issue, but one of the foundations of exegesis.
No, but I was not talking about being informed by history from any one “perspective”. There are historical records that fall into neither.
Only if there is a serious flaw in your research methods. If one wishes to apply oneself to understand history, then one will read and understand from the various perspectives, finding what is valid in each. To assert, without study, that they nullify each other reveals a very shallow approach to scholarship.
I notice that, although you have admitted that all of us wear filters, you do not seem to realize what constitutes the ones you are wearing.
It is an apologetics forum. We are here to answer sincere questions about the Catholic faith, not engage in phony exercises proposed by detractors such as yourself.
I posted on your so called “seeking humbly” thread why I think this is a bunch of hooey.
I certainly find your disingenuous “humble sincerity” and thinly veiled contempt for our faith frightening.
No one said that it was. What was suggested is that you take history into account when studying the scriptures.
Instead, you seem to think that the different perspectives of history “nullify” one another.
This is your prejudice, your filter, through which you examine the scriptures. It colors everything you read,a nd think about Scripture.
As a result of this perspective, it will not be possible for you to read the scriptures objectively, since anything you read has to pass through the filter.
P
Podo2005
Guest
Uhhh both? I can’t vote on this poll…
Oh and by the way, God works through people to get His work done
thats why it’s possible for the Roman Catholic Church to teach people that the Bible is the Word of God
G
guanophore
Guest
I did not vote because there are too many problems with the options. First of all, the HS can easily reveal personal truth through the Church, and has done so for two millenia.
Second, the Catholic Church is not “Roman”.
I fell in love with Scripture by studying Greek.
You will notice, if you let yourself, that they “received the word of God, which you heard from us” in non-written form. It did not become less the Word of God because some of it was later written. It has bee at work in believers since Jesus began to teach and to preach, and this living word, received by preaching, and living in the heart, is as much the Word of God as the Holy Scriputre.
R
Reformed
Guest
It makes no difference. We can debate with either canon. The Roman Catholic Bibles have the exact same 27 books in the New Testament. Do you think any of the 7 OT books in your canon changes essential doctrines?
G
guanophore
Guest
No, because none of Catholic doctrine comes out of the Bible. On the contrary, it is the Bible that comes out of Catholic doctrine.
R
Reformed
Guest
You sound just like LDS Christians when I’m able to discuss and debate with them too. We can post all kinds of subjective prayers and statements which changes nothing in regards to the truth. Our common source of the truth is the Holy Scriptures. Until you are open to search the Scriptures for yourself, I’m afraid you will find great difficulty to see things with greater clarity.
R
Reformed
Guest
I’m always telling you not to listen to me. Trust in the Spirit of God through the authoritative Word of God (Holy Scriptures).
R
Reformed
Guest
I believe in the one catholic church as stated in the Apostle’s creed.
R
Reformed
Guest
These are subjective postings. Please join me on our bible study to see if what you claim is true.No, because none of Catholic doctrine comes out of the Bible. On the contrary, it is the Bible that comes out of Catholic doctrine.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=273731
- Status