Catholic Church Refutes the Bible!

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]haney wrote:
steveo5801 wrote:
This next one is for our Catholic friends as well as the Eastern Orthodox poster who spoke about the different “pillars” – in other words things are added to the Bible to have a right relationship with God.

Given the above verses that I already shared, if you add to the Bible, this is what the Bible says:

(4) Revelation 22:18-19 – “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”

Faith alone!

Sola Scriptura!

That verse is taken way out of context…

other wise you would apply that same rule to all the other places in the BIble where is says don’t add anymore to this book. We would have a bible that didn’t go any further than the books of Moses.

[/quote]

Not really, but I do see your point. The verse can be applied to adding to the entire Bible, since clearly, whatever your position on the Bible might be, the cannon is closed. Therefore anyone adding or taking away from the Book of Revelation (the final book of the Bible) would be under that warning.

Please also understand that I didn’t even need to use that verse. Paul clearly wrote over and over in his writings that it is by FAITH in Christ ALONE!

22

[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
If you wish to stake your eternal destiny, my friend, on an analogy with toothpaste, then go right ahead. Hell fire awaits those who would go to the grave scoffing at God.
[/quote]

I guess I should thank you for proving my point. Your use of the brand is impeccable.

If you go back and re-read my posts, you would see that I don’t scoff at god, only at what man has done and written in the name of God.

There is the way of man, and the way of god. The trouble is telling which is which. By definition, the way of man is always wrong, but we must always strive to make the way of man align with the way of god as best we can.

23

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
yorik wrote:
So let me jump in the fray too and have my flesh rendered by flames…

Let me ask…Does God make use of quill and ink? Does God own a printing press? God might have inspired the works, but once they were placed into man’s hearts, and hands, the works fell victim to the fallibility of mankind. And after 2000 and more years, that’s a lot of fallibility to pile up.

To consider the Bible to be the word of God is, at best, naive. The Bible is a work of man.

Sacrilege!

Man heard the words, wrote them down, translated them, again, and again, and again. Errors upon errors. Biases and personal agendas piled on top of one another.

And to top it all off, at the Council of Nicea in the 4th Century, a group of men got together and decided not just what to put into the Bible, but what to throw away! Over 300 years after Jesus the Annointed One walked the earth, they decided what was official doctrine and what wasn’t. Today we don’t even have very good records from the 1700’s. What could they have had on the 300’s from the 00’s?

Think about it.

Now let’s suppose that you’re watching TV and you see a commercial that says Brand X toothpaste is a formula handed down from God, blessed by God himself and you will be damned for all eternity if you use any other brand. You’d call that a crock of shit, right?

Now some guy comes along and says he’s got a set of writings that are handed down from God, are blessed by God himself and you will be damned for all eternity if you read any other writings. What do you think of that? Personally, I think he’s selling some toothpaste.

Come on people. Use that great big brain God gave you as a gift. Thre’s nothing special about the Bible. It’s not history, it has a dubious literary heritage. It’s just a collection of stories to illustrate points of morality.

Beutifilly put and well stated.

I’m not aying that the bible isn’t a great book, I’m just agreeing that the bible is ABSOLUTELY the work of men, inspired by god.

I refuse to allow religion to get in the way of my faith.

-Bigflamer
[/quote]

Nice post Flamer.

I think as long as we don’t talk economic policies, we get along fine :wink:

By the way, I watched that squat video. Nice lift, but you were leaning forward a bit. 400’s easier to do with the legs than the back, brother!

24

[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
Not really, but I do see your point. The verse can be applied to adding to the entire Bible, since clearly, whatever your position on the Bible might be, the cannon is closed. Therefore anyone adding or taking away from the Book of Revelation (the final book of the Bible) would be under that warning.

Please also understand that I didn’t even need to use that verse. Paul clearly wrote over and over in his writings that it is by FAITH in Christ ALONE!
[/quote]

Faith in Christ alone isn’t the point you were making. It was one for sola scriptura with the common modern day thinking on it.

I am not totally against that idea, but I am against the use of that verse for being applied to anything other than the book of Revelations.

25

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Nice post Flamer.

I think as long as we don’t talk economic policies, we get along fine ;)[/quote]

Yea no doubt!

And just to add, the bible thumping sect of the republican party is what really makes me want for a third party that better reflects my flavor of conservatism. Something along the lines of Teddy Roosevelt.

My aproach to religion does not normally sit well with my very catholic mother and family.

[quote]
By the way, I watched that squat video. Nice lift, but you were leaning forward a bit. 400’s easier to do with the legs than the back, brother![/quote]

Thanks for checking it out and taking a look. I didn’t realize how far I was leaning forward until I checked it out too, I gotta work on that. Almost looked like a good morning/squat combo!

My back was sore as hell the next day.

26

[quote]silencer wrote:

See the diaologue between James and Paul, James defending the doctrines of Jesus and Paul reversing them:

[/quote]

The quoting of bible verses OUT of context in that article was breathtaking, but what else would you expect from what appears to be an islamic website of some kind?

I probably wouldn’t get time until this weekend to go through and address each of the claims made in this article (I’ll try to do so!), however I would like to quickly discuss the faith and works “argument” that Paul and James supposedly had.

The way the passage in James was used in this article was totally out of context.

James was actually urging his readers to “live out” their faith. After all, if they had faith in something it should show in the way they live their lives, correct? He makes the point in another verse in that chapter:

“So you believe in God? Good! Even the demons believe this, and shudder!”

His point is that even demons acknowledge that God exists, however demons are, of course, not going to live in the way that God wants them to live, so if James’ readers were claiming to be Christians, then they had better start living up to their claims! He is in no way implying that we are “saved by works alone”.

A useful thing to think about is the word “faith”. Below is a useful acronym commonly taught in Christian circles:

Forsaking
All
I
Trust
Him

What does this mean? Basically as a Christian I remove any hope of salvation through any works that I can do myself (Forsaking All) and must put all of my trust in Christ’s death and resurrection as the only way to salvation. And is there anything else that I have to trust? Well, if I am going to trust in God alone for my salvation, then I had better trust in the way of living that He thinks is best for me, and THIS is what James was on about, “if you believe in God you had better show your belief has had an effect on your life.”

Paul also mentions this in various places, especially when he talks about “working out our salvation” or “striving towards the goal of heaven”. However there is NO WHERE in Paul’s writings that he advocates salvation by works, there is none in James either…

27

[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
haney wrote:
steveo5801 wrote:
This next one is for our Catholic friends as well as the Eastern Orthodox poster who spoke about the different “pillars” – in other words things are added to the Bible to have a right relationship with God.

Given the above verses that I already shared, if you add to the Bible, this is what the Bible says:

(4) Revelation 22:18-19 – “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”

Faith alone!

Sola Scriptura!

That verse is taken way out of context…

other wise you would apply that same rule to all the other places in the BIble where is says don’t add anymore to this book. We would have a bible that didn’t go any further than the books of Moses.

Not really, but I do see your point. The verse can be applied to adding to the entire Bible, since clearly, whatever your position on the Bible might be, the cannon is closed. Therefore anyone adding or taking away from the Book of Revelation (the final book of the Bible) would be under that warning.

Please also understand that I didn’t even need to use that verse. Paul clearly wrote over and over in his writings that it is by FAITH in Christ ALONE!
[/quote]

Saint Paul said:
2 Thessalonians 2:15
paraphrased - follow church traditions, both those transmitted by word [b]and[/b] by epistle…

Verbal tradition holds equal weight/value with written tradition like that which is furnished in the Bible.

Likewise, Saint James reports that faith without works is dead faith. You can believe but if you do not act accordingly, that faith is nill and will not lead to eternal life. To simplify the Orthodox Christian perspective on the matter, sacraments are viewed as acts of faith.

Peace be with you.

28

[quote]yorik wrote:
steveo5801 wrote:
If you wish to stake your eternal destiny, my friend, on an analogy with toothpaste, then go right ahead. Hell fire awaits those who would go to the grave scoffing at God.

I guess I should thank you for proving my point. Your use of the brand is impeccable.

If you go back and re-read my posts, you would see that I don’t scoff at god, only at what man has done and written in the name of God.

There is the way of man, and the way of god. The trouble is telling which is which. By definition, the way of man is always wrong, but we must always strive to make the way of man align with the way of god as best we can. [/quote]

Yes, but then this begs the question: How do you know what the way of God is?

In other words, how do YOU discern objective Truth?

Please answer this question.

29

[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
Beutifilly put and well stated.

I’m not aying that the bible isn’t a great book, I’m just agreeing that the bible is ABSOLUTELY the work of men, inspired by god.

I refuse to allow religion to get in the way of my faith.

-Bigflamer

Faith in what?

Surely it cannot be in a god that cannot even preserve his word after he promised to do so.

Your faith is in what then?
[/quote]

I place my faith in a loving god, not the bible.

I have faith that the bible is simply a piece of the puzzle, not a one stop shopping trip for answers.

I have faith that gods word is everywhere, not simply in whatever version of the bible someone subscribes to.

I have faith that we must seek god. It’s kinda lazy to think that his word is only in the bible, or in church on sunday.

I have faith that there is no one true religion; they all get it right, and they all get it wrong. And somehow that’s the way it’s supposed to be.

I have faith that god isn’t gonna send everyone except for the followers of my religion to eternal damnation. That’s just laughable.

I have faith that god doesn’t hate homosexuals, or anyone for that matter.

I have faith that while gods purpose for us is sometimes not clear, he still has a purpose for all men, women, and children. My faith that god has a purpose for me helps me to accept wherever I’m at or whatever I might have to endure.

I have faith that god works in mysterious ways (see above).

I have faith that god will not send anyone to eternal damnation and burn in a firey pit of hell. Think about it, is love and forgiveness not two of gods greatest gifts?

I have faith that god not only has a plan for each man, woman, and child; he also has a plan for humanity that somehow includes war, pestilence, drought, crime, and all the other horrible things in life that humanity must endure.

To summarize, my faith lies in a loving god who is not interested in damning me forever to a firey pit of hell for having masturbated to porn. I have faith that there are many pieces of the puzzle, and that the bible is only one of them. I believe that god has and does preserve his word. It’s everywhere and not just limited to the bible. As a matter of fact I’ve seen on a cute little asian stripper once, a tattoo that read “gos loves you”. Yes he does :-}

I have faith that everything, and I mean everything, happens for a reason and has gods blessing. The bad stuff and the good stuff.

30

Ummm…That’s, like, never been the case anyway. Glad you had your epiphany finally. The Bible is a book of truth, not fact. Which are not the same thing. Bible facts = Archeology, Bible truths = philosophy.

The main problem with literal translations is when the archeological facts do not add up with the text of the Bible, which is pretty common, people lose faith and say the Bible isn’t true. The message from stories of the Bible try to get through are always true. I think literal translations get people in to trouble and force people to a corner they have to fight out of. The you add to that the perversions cause the multiple translations, it really becomes a pain in the ass. But, through the multiple translations, eliminations of books and what not, the messages remain the same.

31

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

I have faith that there is no one true religion; they all get it right, and they all get it wrong. And somehow that’s the way it’s supposed to be.

[/quote]

Isn’t this just a little bit illogical? How can religions all be right and yet all get it wrong? There are only two possibilities:

  1. ALL religions are wrong.

  2. One religion is right and all others are wrong.

For example, the 3 major religions all differ on who Christ was:

  1. Christianity believes Christ was(is) God, was crucified and then resurrected from the dead.

  2. Judaism believes that Jesus was NOT the Christ (or Messiah), not God and that he died but stayed dead.

  3. Islam believes that Jesus was a prophet, not God and that he was taken directly to heaven without dying.

As you can see, they cannot ALL be right! They can definitely all be wrong.

If you want to prove Christianity worng you have to disprove the resurrection. If the resurrection did not happen then all of us Christians are just living a big lie.

But be warned, people have set out to do this and ended up being converted, LOL!

32

[quote]steveo5801 wrote:

In other words, how do YOU discern objective Truth?

Please answer this question.

[/quote]

Main Entry: 1ob?jec?tive
Pronunciation: &b-'jek-tiv, ?b-
Function: adjective
1 a : relating to or existing as an object of thought without consideration of independent existence – used chiefly in medieval philosophy b : of, relating to, or being an object , phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind

also…

Main Entry: dis?cern
Pronunciation: di-'s&rn, -'z&rn
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French discerner, from Latin discernere to separate, distinguish between, from dis- apart + cernere to sift – more at DIS-, CERTAIN
transitive senses
1 a : to detect with the eyes b : to detect with senses other than vision
2 : to recognize or identify as separate and distinct : DISCRIMINATE
3 : to come to know or recognize mentally

How do I discern objective truth? I observe reality. I interpret what I can understand, and realize what I cannot understand. But beyond reality…

I choose values, including ones taught to me by Catholic education if I deem meaningful. I theorize explanations for what I don’t understand, based upon education, observation, and philosophy. I attempt to live my life based upon my understanding of what I observe, my theories of what I do not, and my chosen values.

Wow, that is surprisingly hard to explain.

33

[quote]bg100 wrote:

If you want to prove Christianity worng you have to disprove the resurrection. If the resurrection did not happen then all of us Christians are just living a big lie.

[/quote]

Why don’t the Christians have to prove the resurrection DID happen?

34

[quote]miniross wrote:
steveo5801 wrote:
Interesting thread – the OP has it correct. Traditonal Catholic doctrine regards the Bible as only part of the story. Tradition and church teaching [the pope’s “infallable” pronoucements] are regarded equally (if not more) than the Word of God.

Lately, Catholic teaching has been diminishing the Bible and the Biblical record.

I have no problem with someone inventing a religion and then following it. Everyone has the right to be wrong.

The problem that I have is when a religion purports to have its basis in the Bible and to follow Christ. Then, if this is so, that religion must, by definition, be in accord with the Bible and what Jesus and the Apostles taught.

Well, here is the “knockout punch” to following Church tradition and pronoucements of the pope:

(1) Ephesians 2:8-9 – salvation is not of works [sacraments].

(2) Romans 4:1-3 – Abraham is the example of a person being saved through faith alone.

(3) Romans 3:28 – “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified [saved] by faith without the deeds of the law.”

This next one is for our Catholic friends as well as the Eastern Orthodox poster who spoke about the different “pillars” – in other words things are added to the Bible to have a right relationship with God.

Given the above verses that I already shared, if you add to the Bible, this is what the Bible says:

(4) Revelation 22:18-19 – “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”

Faith alone!

Sola Scriptura!

is it possible to live for more than 24 hours without a quotation of the bible appearing.

Just a thought.[/quote]

He’s got me at it.

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."
[Jesus, Luke 19:27]

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I came not to send peace, but a sword."
[Jesus, Matthew 10:34]

Then the LORD said to Moses, “Tell Aaron that in all future generations, his descendants who have physical defects will not qualify to offer food to their God. No one who has a defect may come near to me, whether he is blind or lame, stunted or deformed, or has a broken foot or hand, or has a humped back or is a dwarf, or has a defective eye, or has oozing sores or scabs on his skin, or has damaged testicles. Even though he is a descendant of Aaron, his physical defects disqualify him from presenting offerings to the LORD by fire. Since he has a blemish, he may not offer food to his God. However, he may eat from the food offered to God, including the holy offerings and the most holy offerings. Yet because of his physical defect, he must never go behind the inner curtain or come near the altar, for this would desecrate my holy places. I am the LORD who makes them holy.” (Leviticus 21:16-23 NLT)

If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

As in all the churches of the holy ones, women should keep silent in the churches, for they are not allowed to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. But if they want to learn anything, they should ask their husbands at home. For it is improper for a woman to speak in the church. (1 Corinthians 14:33-35 NAB)

If two Israelite men are fighting and the wife of one tries to rescue her husband by grabbing the testicles of the other man, her hand must be cut off without pity. (Deuteronomy 25:11-12 NLT)

If a man lies in sexual intercourse with a woman during her menstrual period, both of them shall be cut off from their people, because they have laid bare the flowing fountain of her blood. (Leviticus 20:18NAB)

But as for these enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them?bring them here and slaughter them in my presence. [spoken by Jesus as a parable] (Luke 19:27 NRS)

35

[quote]haney wrote:
other wise you would apply that same rule to all the other places in the BIble where is says don’t add anymore to this book. We would have a bible that didn’t go any further than the books of Moses.
[/quote]

Then you’d be Jews.

36

[quote]yorik wrote:
steveo5801 wrote:

In other words, how do YOU discern objective Truth?

Please answer this question.

Main Entry: 1ob?jec?tive
Pronunciation: &b-'jek-tiv, ?b-
Function: adjective
1 a : relating to or existing as an object of thought without consideration of independent existence – used chiefly in medieval philosophy b : of, relating to, or being an object , phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind

also…

Main Entry: dis?cern
Pronunciation: di-'s&rn, -'z&rn
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French discerner, from Latin discernere to separate, distinguish between, from dis- apart + cernere to sift – more at DIS-, CERTAIN
transitive senses
1 a : to detect with the eyes b : to detect with senses other than vision
2 : to recognize or identify as separate and distinct : DISCRIMINATE
3 : to come to know or recognize mentally

How do I discern objective truth? I observe reality. I interpret what I can understand, and realize what I cannot understand. But beyond reality…

I choose values, including ones taught to me by Catholic education if I deem meaningful. I theorize explanations for what I don’t understand, based upon education, observation, and philosophy. I attempt to live my life based upon my understanding of what I observe, my theories of what I do not, and my chosen values.

Wow, that is surprisingly hard to explain.

[/quote]

Thus, you have invented a god of your own imagination. The fact that the Bible says that we can never trust our mind to comprehend God’s Truths (I have posted references to these on other threads), that our own hearts are despirately wicked, and that we must come to God “as a little child,” in other words have the faith like a kid does toward his parents – you CHOOSE another path. Well, that is your right, but the Bible says that there are only two paths:

(1) Bible Way = Narrow Road = Heaven

(2) Every Other “Way” = Broad Road = Destruction

Paul said in Galatians that if anyone (Catholic church included) brings you another doctrine from that which Paul brought (i.e. Faith alone, Bible alone, etc.) let that man (or institution) be accursed. That is God’s Word on the subject and that, my friend, is all I need to know the truth.

37

[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
Paul said in Galatians that if anyone (Catholic church included) brings you another doctrine from that which Paul brought (i.e. Faith alone, Bible alone, etc.) let that man (or institution) be accursed. That is God’s Word on the subject and that, my friend, is all I need to know the truth.
[/quote]

So Paul said that anyone who disagreed with him would go to be accursed. What gave Paul this authority? Mohammed, Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddie and David Koresh were just a few of those who came after Jesus who claimed to have revealed more “truth” that Jesus forgot to mention. I’m curious why Paul has authority and those that follow don’t.

And please don’t quote Paul to justify Paul.

38

[quote]futuredave wrote:

So Paul said that anyone who disagreed with him would go to be accursed. What gave Paul this authority? Mohammed, Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddie and David Koresh were just a few of those who came after Jesus who claimed to have revealed more “truth” that Jesus forgot to mention. I’m curious why Paul has authority and those that follow don’t.

And please don’t quote Paul to justify Paul.

[/quote]

Great question!

altho i dont think that the Muhammad (pbuh) analogy works, cause he said he came with the same message that Jesus brought, after it had been corrupted with the passage of time (by people such as Paul).

as for paul, he has no excuse :stuck_out_tongue:

39

[quote]futuredave wrote:

So Paul said that anyone who disagreed with him would go to be accursed. What gave Paul this authority?

[/quote]

According to the book of Acts (written by Luke, not Paul!) it was God who gave Paul the authority after his conversion on the road to Damascus. He was appointed to be the “apostle to the Gentiles”.

Blaming Paul is the equivalent of “shooting the messenger”, he just told people what God wanted him too.

[quote]futuredave wrote:

Mohammed, Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddie and David Koresh were just a few of those who came after Jesus who claimed to have revealed more “truth” that Jesus forgot to mention. I’m curious why Paul has authority and those that follow don’t.

[/quote]

Well, for starters you might want to consider that Paul was doing his ministry only years after Jesus died, and whilst most of the disciples were still around. Mohammed came about 600 years later, the others in the last 200 years. There’s more than a bit of a time gap there between Paul and the others, who do you want to bet on who is the most accurate in telling the people what Jesus did and said?

40

[quote]silencer wrote:
futuredave wrote:

So Paul said that anyone who disagreed with him would go to be accursed. What gave Paul this authority? Mohammed, Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddie and David Koresh were just a few of those who came after Jesus who claimed to have revealed more “truth” that Jesus forgot to mention. I’m curious why Paul has authority and those that follow don’t.

And please don’t quote Paul to justify Paul.
[/quote]

Jesus (i.e. God) gave Paul this authority (see Acts 9:1-16, 18:9-10).

Mohammed, Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddie, David Koresh, any and all Popes, Billy Graham, and all who believe that Jesus Christ died for everyone without exception are among those of whom Christ warned against (see Mathew 24:23-26). All of the aformentioned false religionists are under God’s curse. They believe in a false christ.

True Christians believe that Jesus is fully God and fully man (sinless man) whose death on the cross demanded and ensured the salvation of all whom He represented–not one sinner for whom Christ died will end up in hell–and thus true Christians will NOT believe that Jesus Christ died for everyone without exception (as does world famous heretic Billy Graham); nor will true Christians believe that Jesus Christ is not sole Mediator (as do the God-hating Mariolaters).