Wrong bible for first 1500 years?

[ESMDHokie77]

No technically, Jesus said there would be false teachers and from that there could certainly be false churches, so even if you conclude that the Protestant Church is not the Church of Christ, you can not declare that there is no Protestant Church.

I can’t help but wonder if you were a protestant or an athiest before you swam the Tiber, but I have no doubt you probably ran across people that were more compassionate and helpful as you searched for answers then you are choosing to be.

Just telling me the same over and over, how I’m wrong and that I’m basically not even a Christian, since in your opinion I don’t belong to Christ’s Church.

Thank goodness for more thoughtful Catholics who are willing to share their faith in a way that leads others to understanding not defense and retreat.

If you’re baptized, you’re a part of the Body of Christ, a Christian. But His Body is torn and divided and not whole. The visible Body of Christ is the Catholic Church, and you’re not in union with it.

 

[mpdmed]

My main point is the success of any objective depends on clear, concise, correct information. The most important objective on earth in my opinion is to spread of the word of God. If the collection of books and the translation of the bible were wrong from the beginning of Christianity, surely someone can explain why. I understand the Orthodox split happened before the protestant split. None the less my question can be addressed to both sects. Why would God allow the Word to be misinterpreted and lumped together with lesser books for the first years of a campaign for which He gave his only Son? It does not seem plausible to me that man could corrupt His mission from the very start. Do you propose that God set a plan in motion only to have it immediacy distorted then clarified 1500 years later? I Just can’t help but believe that God is a better leader than that.
(I do understand that there were problems and divisions in the Catholic Church within the first 1500 years. Substitute the number 1500 above with any number of lesser value and the question remains the same)

“immediacy” in my reply should be replaced by “immediately”

 

[mpdmed]

Are you sure about that? Jesus only refers to the Septuagint which doesn’t contain the New Testament.

Let me rephrase my response…

The answer to the question of which Bible to use seems obvious to me, I want the Old Testament that Jesus used. But am I missing something? There is a world of non-catholic Christians that choose the latter. Why?

 

[vsedriver]

A leader can lead without being in authority. I can lead somebody to the store, but they may choose a different way, and have no requirement to follow me.

A true leader must have authority otherwise there is no guarantee of finding the True Way.

I did use the word obey, and I do agree that there will be times when we will obey and times when we will need to decide for ourselves what we believe. After all the profession of faith does say or will soon say “I believe”

so you believe in conditional obedience and relative Truth? I don’t think that is how Jesus saw things. He told his followers to obey even bad clergy “do as they say but not as they do”.

In a true hierarchy the leaders are ranked one above the other according to status or rank of authority.

Would you agree that Jesus is a King and that it is scriptural? Did not Jesus give the keys to the kingdom to Peter? Isn’t that what a King does when he leaves his Kingdom for a time? Doesn’t he give the keys to his chief steward? This is a clear sign that Jesus gave authority to Peter and his successors. That’s all the authority I need. That’s authority I can put my trust in because it is based on what Jesus did and said.

As for the rest, we are warned often in scripture that we will have to watch out for false teachers, or those who have fallen into error and no longer teach the truth.
2 Peter 2 1-3

Which is why Truth is preserved within the Church Christ founded. And the authority to declare what is and is not Truth is with the Church and Peter’s successor.

Acts 20:29-3)"'I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears".

Luther, Calvin, Joseph Smith etc.

Romans 16:17–18 (NLT)
17 And now I make one more appeal, my dear brothers and sisters. Watch out for people who cause divisions and upset people’s faith by teaching things contrary to what you have been taught. Stay away from them.

So which is the Truth: Real Presence or symbolic act? Is Baptism necessary for Salvation? How do you reconcile all the different beliefs? How far can you go and still be called a ‘Christian’?

Who has the authority to teach what is Truth? Who was told to ‘feed my sheep’? Jesus singled out Peter for this role, even knowing that Peter would sin by denying Him three times. Jesus doesn’t require Peter or Peter’s successors to be perfect and sinless. He promised the Holy Spirit would protect the Church and that includes protecting her from bad clergy. But the Fullness of the Truth still lies with the Catholic Church.

Jesus founded a Church to lead and teach us. Scripture was produced from that leading and teaching. Not the other way around.

 

[Esdra]

Well then you should consider your posts more carefully. You make a statement that many Protestants saw the Catholic Church in error and then want to end discussion, before anyone can respond to what I consider to be a derogatory remark? Sorry, but it is applicable to this discussion since the ‘erroneous’ Church defined the canon and preserved the scriptures for 1500 years for Protestants to take and study and decide they know it better than the keeper of scriptures for the past 1500 years. It’s not only illogical, it’s arrogant. How do you know that the Church was in error for 1500 years? By what standard, authority, are you declaring the errors? How many generations came and went without, what you consider, to be God’s truth? Was Jesus’ prophesy wrong, the one that the gates of hell shall not prevail against His Church, or the one that He would send the Spirit of Truth to it to guide it in all truths, or that He would be with it until the consummation of the world? That’s what it means to say the Church was in error for 1500 years.

I didn’t explicitely say I think so. (that the Church has gone into apostasy like Mormons often say)
The Church has indeed preserved the Holy Bible for 1500 by copying it, there was no printing press at that time.

 

[Esdra]

Oh great unity. You come to a Catholic forum and denounce Catholicism with every post and cover it up by saying we say everyone has to become Catholic. Please tell me why you care on a Catholic forum, espousing ‘unity’ while telling Catholics they are wrong on every point? Just how does that work?

Where does scriptures say, we are united if we can pray together?

Do you believe in the 7 sacraments? Let’s start there to see how we are all one.

I can’t help what my pastor says…

Uh, I think I’ve taken it too far. You are quite angry with me I can read that out from your posts…

I really think it is important to acknowledge the other person also when he/she belongs to another denomination.
And I also think that it is important that we can pray together despite having different traditions, customs and doctrines. Because Jesus Himself said, "For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.”
(Matthew 18:20 ).

No, I don’t believe in the Seven Sacraments in the Catholic sense. And I think you know that. I am pretty sure you know the doctrinal differences between Baptists and Catholics.

 

[1holycatholic]

And I also think that it is important that we can pray together despite having different traditions, customs and doctrines. Because Jesus Himself said, "For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.”
(Matthew 18:20 ).

Since the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth why would you have different doctrines?

 

[Esdra]

Since the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth why would you have different doctrines?

Well, they persist - the differences in doctrine. But this doesn’t mean that I can’t pray with a Pentecostal or a Catholic or an Orthodox etc.
You see, we are all sinners. And the schisms and the reformation certainly came because of sin - from both sides!

I keep saying, “Humans are not satisfied if they have nothing to quarrel about.” - And this is the world, sin. From the devil. And we can’t escape that. Noone can. Therefore it was necessary for God to send himself, His Son to the earth to free us from sin. Also if we believe in Jesus and have enthrusted Him our lives, we will continue sinning, we just can’t help. But we can be sure of our salvation, that we go through heaven, because Jesus has payed for all our sins, past, present and future ones on the cross. We are justified through Jesus before God - through grace. This doesn’t mean we are allowed to sin all the time, but if it happens, and it will, often, we can be sure that our Lord because of Jesus atonement for us will forgive us.

 

[1holycatholic]

Well, they persist - the differences in doctrine. But this doesn’t mean that I can’t pray with a Pentecostal or a Catholic or an Orthodox etc.
You see, we are all sinners. And the schisms and the reformation certainly came because of sin - from both sides!

Sin doesn’t justify schisms or the Protestant rebellion.

 

[ESMDHokie77]

I keep saying, “Humans are not satisfied if they have nothing to quarrel about.” - And this is the world, sin. From the devil. And we can’t escape that. Noone can. Therefore it was necessary for God to send himself, His Son to the earth to free us from sin. Also if we believe in Jesus and have enthrusted Him our lives, we will continue sinning, we just can’t help. But we can be sure of our salvation, that we go through heaven, because Jesus has payed for all our sins, past, present and future ones on the cross. We are justified through Jesus before God - through grace. This doesn’t mean we are allowed to sin all the time, but if it happens, and it will, often, we can be sure that our Lord because of Jesus atonement for us will forgive us.

there’s a lot wrong with your statement here, assurance of salvation is anti-biblical. We also have to repent to properly accept His forgiveness.

 

[Esdra]

Sin doesn’t justify schisms or the Protestant rebellion.

What would you do about it? The Schism and the “protestant rebellion”, as you call it, came from sin. - I can’t change that, and you also can’t change that.
But what we can do is building bridges and tearning walls downs insted of building them up.
And praying together is one option to do so. We can live in peace and “reconciled diversity”.

 

[Esdra]

there’s a lot wrong with your statement here, assurance of salvation is anti-biblical. We also have to repent to properly accept His forgiveness.

Oh, my mistake. Of course we have to repent. Baptists teach (in contrary to the CC) that this can be done to God directly, but you are right, you have to be willing to repent. then you will be forgiven. - But I think if you are not willing to repent, you would also not ask God for forgiveness (or to take a Catholic example, wouldn’t go to confession).

 

[ESMDHokie77]

Anyway… to the topic.
The Catholic Bible: The Whole Written Word of God.
The Protestant Bible: Most of the Written Word of God

 

[Nicea325]

I can’t help what my pastor says…

Uh, I think I’ve taken it too far. You are quite angry with me I can read that out from your posts…

I really think it is important to acknowledge the other person also when he/she belongs to another denomination.
And I also think that it is important that we can pray together despite having different traditions, customs and doctrines. Because Jesus Himself said, "For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.”
(Matthew 18:20 ).

No, I don’t believe in the Seven Sacraments in the Catholic sense. And I think you know that. I am pretty sure you know the doctrinal differences between Baptists and Catholics.

Well the fact you do not believe in the seven sacraments does not deny their reality. Many Christians deny the existence of Hell,but does not change the fact it is a reality.

 

[Esdra]

Anyway… to the topic.
The Catholic Bible: The Whole Written Word of God.
The Protestant Bible: Most of the Written Word of God

Okay back to topic, if you want to!

Are you aware that an Orthodox would say:
“The Orthodox Bible: The Whole Written Word of God.
The Catholic and Protestant Bible: Most of the Written Word of God.” ?
You do know, they have an even larger canon than the Catholics? - And the Oriental Orthodox have an even larger canon than the Eastern Orthodox?

Tell me one thing, what does the larger canon of the CC say that doesn’t also say in the “not complete” Protestant Bible? — Except praying for the Dead in 1 Maccabbees? - Which is in my opinion just as apocryphal as the Gnostic apocryphal gospels.

 

[1holycatholic]

Baptists teach…

http://d26ya5yqg8yyvs.cloudfront.net/Jack.gif

“Baptists” are not a unified group. They “teach” without authority many different and contradictory things.

 

[Esdra]

http://d26ya5yqg8yyvs.cloudfront.net/Jack.gif

“Baptists” are not a unified group. They “teach” without authority many different and contradictory things.

I have written that there are principles, called the Baptist principles in

another thread

, together with a writing “justification of faith”.
If they are so diverse, why are they then joined together in the World Baptist Alliance?

Anyway, I am very well aware that from the Catholic perspective noone has Authority except the Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Churches.

And I even dare to say that these principles above, as well as their “catechism” (=Justification of faith; please see other thread in the link provided above!) is true for ALL “reborn Christian” Churches. - Otherwise, where can you draw the line between “reborn Christian” and cult?

 

[1holycatholic]

I have written that there are principles, called the Baptist principles in , together with a writing “justification of faith”.
If they are so diverse, why are they then joined together in the World Baptist Alliance?

“They” aren’t joined together. The World Baptist Fellowship isn’t a member, nor are the Westboro Baptists, nor are the Wisconsin Fellowship of Baptist Churches.

There are many “Baptist” alliances that aren’t in union with each other and oodles of independent “Baptist” groups that aren’t in alliance with anyone else.

Anyway, I am very well aware that from the Catholic perspective noone has Authority except the Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Churches.

The authority is in the Pope and in the Magisterium (the bishops in union with the Pope).

And I even dare to say that these principles above, as well as their “catechism” (=Justification of faith; please see other thread in the link provided above!) is true for ALL “reborn Christian” Churches. - Otherwise, where can you draw the line between “reborn Christian” and cult?

Cult just means religious practice. What do you mean by cult?

 

[Nicea325]

Okay back to topic, if you want to!

Are you aware that an Orthodox would say:
“The Orthodox Bible: The Whole Written Word of God.
The Catholic and Protestant Bible: Most of the Written Word of God.” ?
You do know, they have an even larger canon than the Catholics? - And the Oriental Orthodox have an even larger canon than the Eastern Orthodox?

Tell me one thing, what does the larger canon of the CC say that doesn’t also say in the “not complete” Protestant Bible? — Except praying for the Dead in 1 Maccabbees? - Which is in my opinion just as apocryphal as the Gnostic apocryphal gospels.

WRONG! Apparently you are not familiar with orthodox Jews. Your opinion is just that…an opinion,because there is nothing apocryphal about praying for the dead. Problem is that as a Protestant (relatively new to Christianity) you have been fed or told a false tradition stating it is apocryphal or wrong.

 

[Esdra]

“They” aren’t joined together. The World Baptist Fellowship isn’t a member, nor are the Westboro Baptists, nor are the Wisconsin Fellowship of Baptist Churches.

There are many “Baptist” alliances that aren’t in union with each other and oodles of independent “Baptist” groups that aren’t in alliance with anyone else.

The authority is in the Pope and in the Magisterium (the bishops in union with the Pope).

Cult just means religious practice. What do you mean by cult?

I was told that cult in contrast to sect means something completely different than denomination.
I.E. Jehovah’s Wittnesses are not only a sect, but also a cult.
LDS are not only a sect, but also a cult. These are called Christian cults.
There are also non-christian cults like Bahai or Hare Krishna.

I was told so here at CAF. In German the word “Sekte” has always a negative connotation. In English the word sect doesn’t have to have a negative connotation.
So I was told that the German word “Sekte” is best translated with cult.

Well that’s pretty much a culture and language thing. You see, in Europe the CC has been for decades the only Church. So when the Reformation started in Germany and Switzerland the Protestants were cults or “Sekte” in German. Actually in rural areas where Catholicism is still very strong, this is still the case!
In the US there have always been other denominations and thus the English word sect has not such a negative connatation than the German word “Sekte”.
I think.