|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 7:28:42 PM
|
|
|
ToolmanUF
Posts: 119
Joined: 4/14/2005
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
By the way, the reason most "Christian" communities do not teach their members about Church history and the writings of the ancient fathers and their views on scriptures is because they all go contrary to their faith, be they Mormons, Protestants, or Jehovah's Witnesses. If these people actually investigated the writings of the Christians in the early Church they would see the errors in there faiths.
I have met many Catholics and Orthodox who know quite a bit about Christian history and the early Church fathers, but very few Mormons, Protestants, and Jehovah's Witnesses know anything about them. The thing about the Catholics and the Orthodox that they can do and the other groups cannot is reconcile Scripture with the Traditions of the Christians throughout history. Sure, a Mormon, Prot., or JW can give you their interpretation of the Bible, but the Catholic can say "this is the interpretation of the Bible as it has been since St. Ignatious, St. John Crystosom, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, and all the way up to the present day."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 7:30:08 PM
|
|
|
ToolmanUF
Posts: 119
Joined: 4/14/2005
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
quote:
Wow, was Christ in Rome?
No, but the man to whom he gave "the keys to the kingdom of heaven" was. The Catholic Church doesn't teach that Christ was ever in Rome.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 7:39:29 PM
|
|
|
lss44
Posts: 96
Joined: 5/3/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ToolmanUF
quote:
Wow, was Christ in Rome?
No, but the man to whom he gave "the keys to the kingdom of heaven" was. The Catholic Church doesn't teach that Christ was ever in Rome.
Ah...are you referring to Peter? He was in Rome?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 7:54:12 PM
|
|
|
ToolmanUF
Posts: 119
Joined: 4/14/2005
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
quote:
Ah...are you referring to Peter? He was in Rome?
Absolutely, and most historians agree (be they secular or religious). Christian tradition is certain that St. Peter founded the Church of Rome and was martyred there on Vatican Hill.
(BTW, I have been to his grave and seen the chains that bound him. It is a most mystical experience.)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 8:01:54 PM
|
|
|
lss44
Posts: 96
Joined: 5/3/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ToolmanUF
quote:
Ah...are you referring to Peter? He was in Rome?
Absolutely, and most historians agree (be they secular or religious). Christian tradition is certain that St. Peter founded the Church of Rome and was martyred there on Vatican Hill.
(BTW, I have been to his grave and seen the chains that bound him. It is a most mystical experience.)
Well, I think we digress from the thread topic...but the former is a quite controversial subject.
Interesting, revealing and quite mind boggling at the depths of the Catholic Church that is not in the Scriptures. If we compared apples to apples that would be one thing, but as a friend says...it's like playing Monopoly with Parcheesi rules.
Thanks for the convo and vast references. Confirms my desire to remain Sola Scriptura.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 8:10:25 PM
|
|
|
ToolmanUF
Posts: 119
Joined: 4/14/2005
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
quote:
Interesting, revealing and quite mind boggling at the depths of the Catholic Church that is not in the Scriptures. If we compared apples to apples that would be one thing, but as a friend says...it's like playing Monopoly with Parcheesi rules.
Thanks for the convo and vast references. Confirms my desire to remain Sola Scriptura.
I find stuff like this quite offensive, but I know that you are probally very ill informed about Christian history so I can't let it botther me.
I have read the Bible many times, especially the New Testament, and I find nothing contradictory in the Catholic faith. Even most Protestant scholars would agree that Catholics agree with Protestants on the most important issues of the Christian faith (the God of Israel, the trinity, the virgin birth, the encarnation, the crucifixion, the resurrection, the ascension, the descent of the Holy Spirit). How anybody could say that the Catholic faith isn't Christian is beyond me.
Besides, it isn't offensive only to me but it's offensive to the billions of Christians who came before us when Catholicism and Orthodoxy were the only branches of Christianity in existence. It's offensive to say that people like St. Ignatious, St. Polycarp, St. john Crystosom, St. Basil, St. Augustine, St. Patrick, St. Francis of Assisi, St. Anthony, St. Thomas Aquinas, and millions of other amazing Christians weren't "real Christians".
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 8:13:51 PM
|
|
|
lss44
Posts: 96
Joined: 5/3/2005
Status: offline
|
Absolutely no offense intended.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 8:15:22 PM
|
|
|
ToolmanUF
Posts: 119
Joined: 4/14/2005
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lss44
Absolutely no offense intended.
Then please list how Catholicism diverges so much from what you consider to be Biblical Christianity.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 8:17:18 PM
|
|
|
lss44
Posts: 96
Joined: 5/3/2005
Status: offline
|
Those questions will continue to be discussed until our Lord returns. From my heart I tell you I did not mean to offend you.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 8:20:09 PM
|
|
|
ToolmanUF
Posts: 119
Joined: 4/14/2005
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lss44
Those questions will continue to be discussed until our Lord returns. From my heart I tell you I did not mean to offend you.
Very well, then I appreciate your concern.
Personally, while I disagree wholeheartedly with many people, I consider anybody who beleives in the Nicene Creed to have grasped the main points of the scriptures. Even if somebody disagrees greatly with the Catholic Church, I fail to see how they could deny that she has the basis of the Christian faith.
< Message edited by ToolmanUF -- 7/14/2005 8:56:23 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 8:22:03 PM
|
|
|
lss44
Posts: 96
Joined: 5/3/2005
Status: offline
|
Christ is the basis of the Christian faith...His birth, life, death, ressurection and glorious reappearing in the flesh and then asended to the right hand of the Father.
Blessings, my friend...may we both worship Him in Spirit and in Truth.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 8:29:13 PM
|
|
|
sdaw
Posts: 877
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lss44
Christ is the basis of the Christian faith...His birth, life, death, ressurection and glorious reappearing in the flesh and then asended to the right hand of the Father.
Blessings, my friend...may we both worship Him in Spirit and in Truth.
Dear Iss44,
Christ is the very center of Catholicism.
BTW, you left out His coming again in glory to judge the living and the dead.
On the Feast of Blessed Kateri Tekakwitha
Blessed be God in His Angels and in His Saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 8:41:20 PM
|
|
|
sdaw
Posts: 877
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lss44
quote:
ORIGINAL: ToolmanUF
quote:
ORIGINAL: lss44
So,
CCC is to Catholicism and the Catholic Bible
as
Book of Mormon is to Mormonism and the Protestant Bible??
Absolutely not. The Catholic Church doesn't consider the Catechism to be inspired in the sense that Mormons do the book of Mormon. It is simply a reference book which can be used to see what the Catholic Church teaches. All devout Catholics should agree with the Catechism 100%, as it is the Catholic faith in a nutshell. (Of course, how can a religion with 1.2 billion followers and a 2,000 year history be compiled into one little book?)
quote:
"The Bible and Tradition are two streams of one revelation." sdaw
But these two streams of one revelation, wouldn't that be the same as the Mormon's claim?
Dear Iss44,
Unworthyseraphim raised a good point in the Sinlessness of Mary thread. Scripture and Tradition do no function as two independent means of revelation. Tradition, in the larger sense, includes the Scriptures. Tradition is the Faith handed down, and the Scripture are at the very center of our understanding of that Faith. Scripture and Traditionn intertwine and intersect. Either one alone is a pole that one can shinny up only with difficulty, but together, with the Magisterium as the rungs, they form a ladder that one can climb readily.
On the Feast of Blessed Kateri Tekakwitha
Blessed be God in His Angels and in His Saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/14/2005 9:14:22 PM
|
|
|
lss44
Posts: 96
Joined: 5/3/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
BTW, you left out His coming again in glory to judge the living and the dead.
Ooops...and Amen...even so, Lord Jesus come!!!
|
|
|
|
|
[Deleted] - 7/15/2005 2:08:37 AM
|
|
|
Deleted User
|
[Deleted by Admins]
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/15/2005 3:24:26 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 3860
Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL: ToolmanUF
quote:
Sure, a Mormon, Prot., or JW can give you their interpretation of the Bible, but the Catholic can say "this is the interpretation of the Bible as it has been since St. Ignatious, St. John Crystosom, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, and all the way up to the present day." Thanks for lumping us "Prots" with Mormon and JW! Yikes!!!And "you" took offense at something another poster said after this??
Anyway, to the topic at hand. What a RCC "can" say is that there is a "wide" gulf of opinion among many of the early church fathers. Would you be surprised to learn that Augustine believed in predestination and election? Or that the earliest church fathers had NO concept of the papacy?
And that Jerome categorically denied any inspiration for the Apocrypha? In fact all the evidence indicates that the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures was closed by NT times and closed “without” containing the Apocrypha.
kelman
_____________________________
“beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow”
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/15/2005 8:40:50 AM
|
|
|
sdaw
Posts: 877
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
ORIGINAL: ToolmanUF
quote:
Sure, a Mormon, Prot., or JW can give you their interpretation of the Bible, but the Catholic can say "this is the interpretation of the Bible as it has been since St. Ignatious, St. John Crystosom, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, and all the way up to the present day." Thanks for lumping us "Prots" with Mormon and JW! Yikes!!!And "you" took offense at something another poster said after this??
Anyway, to the topic at hand. What a RCC "can" say is that there is a "wide" gulf of opinion among many of the early church fathers. Would you be surprised to learn that Augustine believed in predestination and election? Or that the earliest church fathers had NO concept of the papacy?
And that Jerome categorically denied any inspiration for the Apocrypha? In fact all the evidence indicates that the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures was closed by NT times and closed “without” containing the Apocrypha.
kelman
Dear kelman,
Shoot, the Bible uses words like "predestination" and "election." That doesn't mean that everyone who uses them means the same thing.
Some of the earliest Church Fathers" did have a concept of the authority and role of the Bishop of Rome.
The fact that Jerome denied any inspiration for the Aprocrypha has no bearing on his opinion concerning the Deuterocanonical books.
In fact, all evidence indicates that the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures, as a whole, was not closed by NT times.
On the Feast of St. Bonaventure
Blessed be God in His Angels and in His Saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/15/2005 10:31:02 AM
|
|
|
unworthyseraphim
Posts: 1084
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Mississippi
Status: offline
|
ummmm what wide gulf between many of the Church Fathers?
If the gulfs are wide indeed on anything substantial one side or other would not be named among the Church Fathers.
So what gulf? Which Fathers? And what makes you say "many"? And do remember whatever their value otherwise neither Origen or Tertullian are numbered among the Church Fathers.
So tell me of the great gulf you speak of?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/15/2005 4:35:18 PM
|
|
|
ToolmanUF
Posts: 119
Joined: 4/14/2005
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
quote:
Thanks for lumping us "Prots" with Mormon and JW! Yikes!!!And "you" took offense at something another poster said after this??
I will be the first to admit that most Protestant Christians contain an orthodoxy that is acceptable by Catholic standards, and indeed, the Catholic Church accepts Protestant baptism as a valid sacrament. She doesn't require Protestant converts to be re-baptized. Also, because Protestants share so much with Catholics, they are considered to have some part in the Church and Catholics consider them "separated brothers and sisters". (CCC)
However, the point I was trying to make is that Protestants, Mormons, and JW's do share something in common, mainly that they all beleive that the apostolic Church is wrong. As such, they believe in separation from it and usually do not study the history of the Church or read the writings from the earliest Christians. People who were disciples of St. Peter and St. Paul (such as St. Polycarp or St. Ignatious) are often never even mentioned in these churches.
And I would know, I grew up in the Southern Baptist faith. I have many friends who I consider devout Christians, but they know NOTHING about Church history and have never heard of people such as St. Jerome, St. Augustine, St. Basil, St. John Crystosom, or any of the ancient fathers.
So, coming from a Catholic view, I would say that while Protestants still possess enough truth to be considered valid Christians, they are part of a man-made religion. Protestantism wasn't invented until the 16th century, and Mormonism and JW weren't invented until the 19th. All groups deny the importance of the apostolic Christian community with bishops traced back to the apostles (most importantly St. Peter) and so with that regard, there is some in common.
Of course, the Church teaches that much truth is found in Protestant Churches and that since they have some copy of the Word of God (although it is missing some books) Christ can indeed use these Christian communties to dispense the graces of eternal salvation.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/15/2005 6:22:47 PM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 3860
Status: offline
|
Toolman
quote:
However, the point I was trying to make is that Protestants, Mormons, and JW's do share something in common, mainly that they all beleive that the apostolic Church is wrong. Not exactly, the Catholics and LDS have very much in common. LDS absolutely believes that Catholic's had apostolic succession. LDS, along with RCC believes in a universal authority. LDS, along with RCC believe in "infallible" utterances. LDS, along with RCC believes in additional inspired books.
So where there is commonality it seems most conspicuous between LDS and Catholism.
kelman
_____________________________
“beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow”
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/15/2005 6:42:04 PM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 3860
Status: offline
|
unworthyseraphim
quote:
ummmm what wide gulf between many of the Church Fathers? The wide gulf concerning RCC doctrines such as the papacy or the apocrypha to name but two. The point I made was in response to Toolman where he implied there was no disagreement among church fathers concerning the Bible. And frankly I inferred from his posts that there was no disagreement over important RCC doctrines. RCC’s councils have a tendency to use phrases such as “ever understood” “known from all ages” and “none can doubt” when it fact many doctrines were not “ever understood”. Not to mention their decided proclivity toward damning all who disagree, my all time favorite “let him be anathema”…lol
quote:
And do remember whatever their value otherwise neither Origen or Tertullian are numbered among the Church Fathers. They are numbered among church fathers when they “agree” with current RCC doctrine. I believe Augustine is still numbered among church fathers, is he not? My understanding is that from his writings it can be determined he had no concept of the papacy nor did Clement of Alexandria or Cyprian, Irenaeus nor if I remember correctly, when read in context, did Ignatious.
kelman
_____________________________
“beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow”
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/15/2005 6:58:11 PM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 3860
Status: offline
|
sdaw
quote:
Shoot, the Bible uses words like "predestination" and "election." That doesn't mean that everyone who uses them means the same thing. True, but Augustine and Calvin apparently were in agreement as to their meaning.
quote:
Some of the earliest Church Fathers" did have a concept of the authority and role of the Bishop of Rome. I agree some did, only that some very definitely did not. So the claims Rome makes for itself that it is a doctrine that was “unanimous” and “ever taught” simply is not so.
quote:
The fact that Jerome denied any inspiration for the Apocrypha has no bearing on his opinion concerning the Deuterocanonical books.
Assuming we’re both speaking of the additional 7 books included in the Catholic Bible, I would think it would matter greatly if Jerome attributed no inspiration to these 7 books.
quote:
In fact, all evidence indicates that the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures, as a whole, was not closed by NT times. Sorry, but there is much evidence to dispute your claim. As I’ve already said Jerome didn’t think so neither did Rufinus, Athanasius, Hilary of Poitiers or the Jewish historian Josephus.
kelman
_____________________________
“beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow”
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/15/2005 7:02:04 PM
|
|
|
ToolmanUF
Posts: 119
Joined: 4/14/2005
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
quote:
I believe Augustine is still numbered among church fathers, is he not? My understanding is that from his writings it can be determined he had no concept of the papacy
St. Augustine most certainly did know about the papacy. By his time, the Roman bishop held a powerful position in the Catholic Church. Here are two quotes by him to show that:
"If all men throughout the world were such as you most vainly accuse them of having been, what has the chair of the Roman church done to you, in which Peter sat, and in which Anastasius sits today?" (Against the Letters of Petilani 2:118 [A.D. 402]).
"If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly, and safely do we number them from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, ‘Upon this rock I will build my Church’ . . . [Matt. 16:18]. Peter was succeeded by Linus, Linus by Clement, Clement by Anacletus, Anacletus by Evaristus . . . " (Letters 53:1:2 [A.D. 412]).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/15/2005 8:22:53 PM
|
|
|
sdaw
Posts: 877
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ToolmanUF
quote:
I believe Augustine is still numbered among church fathers, is he not? My understanding is that from his writings it can be determined he had no concept of the papacy
St. Augustine most certainly did know about the papacy. By his time, the Roman bishop held a powerful position in the Catholic Church. Here are two quotes by him to show that:
"If all men throughout the world were such as you most vainly accuse them of having been, what has the chair of the Roman church done to you, in which Peter sat, and in which Anastasius sits today?" (Against the Letters of Petilani 2:118 [A.D. 402]).
"If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly, and safely do we number them from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, ‘Upon this rock I will build my Church’ . . . [Matt. 16:18]. Peter was succeeded by Linus, Linus by Clement, Clement by Anacletus, Anacletus by Evaristus . . . " (Letters 53:1:2 [A.D. 412]).
Dear Tim,
My favorite quote attributed to St. Augustine is, "'Roma locuta est, causa finita est." "Rome has spoken, the case is closed."
On the Feast of St. Bonaventure
Blessed be God in His Angels and in His Saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible - 7/15/2005 8:48:56 PM
|
|
|
sdaw
Posts: 877
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
Dear Kelman,
During the period of Jerome, Athanasius, et al, the OT books under discussion can be divided into three groups: those of undisputed inspired status; those whose status was disputed; and those rejected as uninspired/heretical. J, A, et al put the 7 Deuterocanonical books in the second group, considering them useful for edification, even for use in the liturgy, but not to be used in support of doctrine. These Fathers deferred however to the decision of the Church over their personal opinion.
On the Feast of St. Bonaventure
Blessed be God in His Angels and in His Saints!
|
|
|
|
| |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
