Catholic Church Refutes the Bible!

bg100 · May 29, 2006, 11:30pm

[quote]silencer wrote:

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 :P[/quote]

Paul lived at the same time as Jesus. All of the New Testament was written by about 100 AD, less than 70 years after Jesus’s death, most of it written by eyewitnesses to Jesus’s ministry.

And yet we have Muhammed coming along 600 years later and claiming that he is “correcting” the mistakes of people who were alive at the time of Christ! I know who’d I’d rather believe from purely a historical point of view.

steveo5801 · May 29, 2006, 11:43pm

[quote]futuredave wrote:
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.

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. [/quote]

First of all, please don’t tell me how to respond. That is not an accepted debating tactic that I am aware.

Who gave Paul his authority = Jesus Christ! Read the Book of Acts, chapter 9 then Galatians. This is the Word of God. God gave Paul the authority. If you disagree with God’s Word, then you just proved that Catholics are not born-again and if you are not born-again, Jesus (John 3) clearly states that you CANNOT SEE THE KINGDOM OF GOD. In other words, Hell awaits since you are believing a false Gospel.

Listen, I don’t mean to come off this way, but it is difficult to convey love and concern for people when you post.

God loves all people – Catholics included – He wants to save them! The bottom line is that the Bible says for example:

(1) You must be born again – ask a priest. Do you think he would say he is born-again?

(2) Call no man your Father, except that which is in Heaven. Why do you call your pastors “Father” then, in contradiction to the Word of God.

(3) Purgatory – not in the Bible.
(4) Praying to “saints” – not in the Bible.
(5) Praying to and worshipping Mary – Not in the Bible. In fact Mary, in John 2 told others to listen to Jesus!
(6) Immaculate conception of Mary – not in the Bible.
(7) Infant baptism – Not in the Bible
(8) The Mass – not in the Bible.
(9) The wafer and wine actually becomes the body and blood of Jesus – Not in the Bible.
(10) The Pope – Not in the Bible

Shall we go on?

This is a false gospel, which is not the gospel of the New Testament.

“For by grace ye are saved through faith, and not of yourselves. It is the gift of God, lest any man should boast.”

And please don’t quote Paul to justify Paul.

[/quote]

futuredave · May 30, 2006, 3:44am

[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
futuredave wrote:
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.

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.

Who gave Paul his authority = Jesus Christ! Read the Book of Acts, chapter 9 then Galatians. This is the Word of God. God gave Paul the authority. [/quote]

So, Paul’s “companion” Luke, who wrote Acts, claims that God gave his friend Paul authority.

[quote]If you disagree with God’s Word, then you just proved that Catholics are not born-again and if you are not born-again, Jesus (John 3) clearly states that you CANNOT SEE THE KINGDOM OF GOD. In other words, Hell awaits since you are believing a false Gospel.
[/quote]

You are sooo incredibly tiresome, Steveo. Every goddamn thread, every time anyone disagrees with you on any point… HELL AWAITS!

Give it a fucking break. Either answer the question as posed or keep your self-righteous mouth shut. It’s pricks like you that drive people with sincere questions like me (and countless others) away from the church.

Oh, and by the way, I’m not Catholic. But thanks for the diatribe.

silencer · May 30, 2006, 5:02am

[quote]bg100 wrote:
silencer wrote:

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

Paul lived at the same time as Jesus. All of the New Testament was written by about 100 AD, less than 70 years after Jesus’s death, most of it written by eyewitnesses to Jesus’s ministry.

And yet we have Muhammed coming along 600 years later and claiming that he is “correcting” the mistakes of people who were alive at the time of Christ! I know who’d I’d rather believe from purely a historical point of view.[/quote]

bg, I have yet to see your refutation of the link i posted.

anyway, Paul was an enemy of the followers of Christ, persecuting them, etc. Then when he sees how popular they get, all of a sudden God is speaking through Paul:

“For in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the Gospel. Therefore I beseech you, be imitators of me.” 1 Corinthians 4:15-16

he sees that the laws of the Torah are a threat to the Romans, and Jesus said that he was upholding the law of the Torah… so Paul comes along and says “no no, faith alone is enough, you dont have to follow the laws of the torah”… and thus the Romans can make christianity their official religion, use it for their purposes, and carry on their lives as before.

then Paul’s disciple luke confirms what Paul is saying.

Matthew 7:15-20 is warning about people like Paul.

As for the Prophet Muhammad, Jesus (pbuh) spoke of his coming.

“And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: O Children of Israel! I am the apostle of God sent to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of an Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad. But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, this is evident sorcery!” (Qur’an 61:6)

John 16:7-14

“Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Paraclete will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on me; Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged. I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew [it] unto you.”

In the famous “Anchor Bible” we find the following quote:

“The word parakletos is peculiar in the NT to the Johnannine literature. In John ii Jesus is a parakletos (not a title), serving as a heavenly intercessor with the Father … Christian tradition has identified this figure (Paraclete) as the Holy Spirit, but scholars like Spitta, Delafosse, Windisch, Sasse, Bultmann, and Betz have doubted whether this identification is true to the original picture and have suggested that the Paraclete was once an independent salvific figure, later confused with the Holy Spirit.”

The Anchor Bible, Doubleday & Company, Inc, Garden City, N.Y. 1970, Volume 29A, p. 1135

The Paraclete is an INDEPENDANT SALVIFIC FIGURE, not the Holy Ghost.

In the above verses we read “if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.” The comforter can not be the Holy Ghost because the Holy Ghost (according to the Bible) was “with” them already (and even quite active) long before the coming of Jesus (pbuh) himself and then throughout his ministry. Read for example.

Genesis 1:2 “And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.”

1 Samuel 10:10 “And when they came thither to the hill, behold, a company of prophets met him; and the Spirit of God came upon him, and he prophesied among them.”

“And the Spirit of God came upon Saul when he heard those tidings, and his anger was kindled greatly.”

1 Samuel 11:6

“Then he remembered the days of old, moses, and his people, saying, Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? where is he that put his holy Spirit within him?”

Isaiah 63:11

“For he (John the Baptist) shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb.”

Luke 1:15

“And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee.”

Luke 1:35

“And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost”

Luke 1:41

“And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying,”

Luke 1:67

“And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.”

Luke 2:25

“And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost (Simeon), that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord’s Christ.”

Luke 2:26

“And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him (Jesus), and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.”

Luke 3:22

“Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost.”

John 20:21-22

Did they or did they not already receive the Holy Ghost? Was Jesus (pbuh) not still with them when they received the Holy Ghost? Was the Holy Ghost not with Simeon, Mary, Elisabeth and Zacharias before the birth of Jesus (pbuh)? Was the Holy Ghost not with Moses (pbuh) when he parted the seas? There are many more similar verses to be found in the Bible. In the above verses, we are told that if Jesus (pbuh) does not depart then the “parakletos” will not come. Thus, the “Holy Ghost” cannot be the one originally intended since it was already with them. The contradiction is quite obvious.

“My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate(parakletos) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.”

1 John 2:1

Thus Jesus himself is a Paraclete, and the Paraclete that comes later would be like Jesus (another Messenger from God).

There is a lot of argument over the meaning of this word ‘Paraclete’. For now we can leave that aside. What is a ‘Paraclete’? It does not matter. The first letter of John shows that Jesus was a ‘Paraclete’. He is called a ‘Paraclete’ and we have Jesus promising another ‘Paraclete’ is going to be sent. We lose a lot by this word ‘another’ in English because it is ambiguous. If someone’s car breaks down, and it is a Toyota, and I say, '" I’ll go get you another car," maybe I mean, “I’ll go and get you another Toyota because this one you have is broken,” or maybe I mean, “Forget Toyota, they’re no good; I’ll go and get you a Datsun.” It is an ambiguous word. But the Greeks had a word for it. When they meant ‘another’ of the same kind, they said aloes. When they meant another of a different kind, they said heteroes. The important thing there is that when Jesus, who was himself a Paraclete, said “God will send you another Paraclete” he used the word aloes, not heteroes.

Christians want to say that this other ‘Paraclete’ that has been sent was different from Jesus. It was not a man, it was a spirit. What Jesus said was: God will send you another one like me, another man." Muslims believe that Muhammad is the fulfillment of this prophecy by Jesus. The Qur’an says that this man is mentioned in the scriptures of the Jews and the Christians.

Christians came to expect that the return of Jesus because of a Jewish misunderstanding. ‘Messiah’ and ‘Son of Man’ have been given special significance by the Jews, even though may people were called by this same name as in the Bible. The Jews came to expect a victorious leader. When Jesus did not turn out to be quite what many expected, they hatched the idea that he would return some day and fulfill all these prophecies. (http://www.themodernreligion.com/essays_Gary_Miller.htm)

The greek word periklutos can be translated into “Ahmad”, one of the names of the Prophet. (Paraclete - Wikipedia)
thetruereligion.org

silencer · May 30, 2006, 5:35am

by the way, i’m not here trying to save anyone’s soul, like stevo… and i prefer NOT to get sucked into these internet debates…

so please, next time you want to give examples of false prophets, just leave out the name “Muhammad”… that’s all im asking… and then i wouldnt have to come here and defend him and have the debates rage on.

the only reason i posted what i posted above is to defend him from what you’re saying. so simply ignore that name, and we can all leave each other, each to his own beliefs.

steveo5801 · May 30, 2006, 6:53am

[quote]silencer wrote:
bg100 wrote:
silencer wrote:

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

Paul lived at the same time as Jesus. All of the New Testament was written by about 100 AD, less than 70 years after Jesus’s death, most of it written by eyewitnesses to Jesus’s ministry.

And yet we have Muhammed coming along 600 years later and claiming that he is “correcting” the mistakes of people who were alive at the time of Christ! I know who’d I’d rather believe from purely a historical point of view.

bg, I have yet to see your refutation of the link i posted.

anyway, Paul was an enemy of the followers of Christ, persecuting them, etc. Then when he sees how popular they get, all of a sudden God is speaking through Paul:

“For in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the Gospel. Therefore I beseech you, be imitators of me.” 1 Corinthians 4:15-16

he sees that the laws of the Torah are a threat to the Romans, and Jesus said that he was upholding the law of the Torah… so Paul comes along and says “no no, faith alone is enough, you dont have to follow the laws of the torah”… and thus the Romans can make christianity their official religion, use it for their purposes, and carry on their lives as before.

then Paul’s disciple luke confirms what Paul is saying.

Matthew 7:15-20 is warning about people like Paul.

As for the Prophet Muhammad, Jesus (pbuh) spoke of his coming.

“And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: O Children of Israel! I am the apostle of God sent to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of an Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad. But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, this is evident sorcery!” (Qur’an 61:6)

John 16:7-14

“Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Paraclete will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on me; Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged. I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew [it] unto you.”

In the famous “Anchor Bible” we find the following quote:

“The word parakletos is peculiar in the NT to the Johnannine literature. In John ii Jesus is a parakletos (not a title), serving as a heavenly intercessor with the Father … Christian tradition has identified this figure (Paraclete) as the Holy Spirit, but scholars like Spitta, Delafosse, Windisch, Sasse, Bultmann, and Betz have doubted whether this identification is true to the original picture and have suggested that the Paraclete was once an independent salvific figure, later confused with the Holy Spirit.”

The Anchor Bible, Doubleday & Company, Inc, Garden City, N.Y. 1970, Volume 29A, p. 1135

The Paraclete is an INDEPENDANT SALVIFIC FIGURE, not the Holy Ghost.

In the above verses we read “if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.” The comforter can not be the Holy Ghost because the Holy Ghost (according to the Bible) was “with” them already (and even quite active) long before the coming of Jesus (pbuh) himself and then throughout his ministry. Read for example.

Genesis 1:2 “And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.”

1 Samuel 10:10 “And when they came thither to the hill, behold, a company of prophets met him; and the Spirit of God came upon him, and he prophesied among them.”

“And the Spirit of God came upon Saul when he heard those tidings, and his anger was kindled greatly.”

1 Samuel 11:6

“Then he remembered the days of old, moses, and his people, saying, Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? where is he that put his holy Spirit within him?”

Isaiah 63:11

“For he (John the Baptist) shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb.”

Luke 1:15

“And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee.”

Luke 1:35

“And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost”

Luke 1:41

“And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying,”

Luke 1:67

“And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.”

Luke 2:25

“And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost (Simeon), that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord’s Christ.”

Luke 2:26

“And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him (Jesus), and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.”

Luke 3:22

“Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost.”

John 20:21-22

Did they or did they not already receive the Holy Ghost? Was Jesus (pbuh) not still with them when they received the Holy Ghost? Was the Holy Ghost not with Simeon, Mary, Elisabeth and Zacharias before the birth of Jesus (pbuh)? Was the Holy Ghost not with Moses (pbuh) when he parted the seas? There are many more similar verses to be found in the Bible. In the above verses, we are told that if Jesus (pbuh) does not depart then the “parakletos” will not come. Thus, the “Holy Ghost” cannot be the one originally intended since it was already with them. The contradiction is quite obvious.

“My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate(parakletos) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.”

1 John 2:1

Thus Jesus himself is a Paraclete, and the Paraclete that comes later would be like Jesus (another Messenger from God).

There is a lot of argument over the meaning of this word ‘Paraclete’. For now we can leave that aside. What is a ‘Paraclete’? It does not matter. The first letter of John shows that Jesus was a ‘Paraclete’. He is called a ‘Paraclete’ and we have Jesus promising another ‘Paraclete’ is going to be sent. We lose a lot by this word ‘another’ in English because it is ambiguous. If someone’s car breaks down, and it is a Toyota, and I say, '" I’ll go get you another car," maybe I mean, “I’ll go and get you another Toyota because this one you have is broken,” or maybe I mean, “Forget Toyota, they’re no good; I’ll go and get you a Datsun.” It is an ambiguous word. But the Greeks had a word for it. When they meant ‘another’ of the same kind, they said aloes. When they meant another of a different kind, they said heteroes. The important thing there is that when Jesus, who was himself a Paraclete, said “God will send you another Paraclete” he used the word aloes, not heteroes.

Christians want to say that this other ‘Paraclete’ that has been sent was different from Jesus. It was not a man, it was a spirit. What Jesus said was: God will send you another one like me, another man." Muslims believe that Muhammad is the fulfillment of this prophecy by Jesus. The Qur’an says that this man is mentioned in the scriptures of the Jews and the Christians.

Christians came to expect that the return of Jesus because of a Jewish misunderstanding. ‘Messiah’ and ‘Son of Man’ have been given special significance by the Jews, even though may people were called by this same name as in the Bible. The Jews came to expect a victorious leader. When Jesus did not turn out to be quite what many expected, they hatched the idea that he would return some day and fulfill all these prophecies. (http://www.themodernreligion.com/essays_Gary_Miller.htm)

The greek word periklutos can be translated into “Ahmad”, one of the names of the Prophet. (Paraclete - Wikipedia)
thetruereligion.org
[/quote]

"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning." John 15:26-27

How convenient that you leave this verse out in your “theological analysis,” Silencer.

This verse shows that Jesus told us who the ‘paraklete’ – the helper or comfortor – will be. The comforter:

a) Is the Holy Spirit – not a man. The fact that He is “another of the same kind,” speaks to His Divinity, not humanity.

b) The Spirit will come to dwell in believers to “teach us all things…whatsoever I [Jesus] have said unto you” John 14:26

Did Mohammed simply bring to rememberance the things that Jesus taught? Of course not – the Koran teaches something completely different from that of Jesus, for Jesus said “I am THE WAY…”

c) The Spirit will testify of Jesus!

Has Mohammed testified of Jesus – that He is God’s Son and the only way to salvation?

The final ‘nail’ in your argument, is that the Hebrew Scriptures fortell the coming of Jesus (Isa. 53; Psalm 2; Psalm 110, and many others). They DO NOT FORTELL anything about a person named Mohammed.

silencer · May 30, 2006, 10:42am

[quote]steveo5801 wrote:

"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning." John 15:26-27

How convenient that you leave this verse out in your “theological analysis,” Silencer.

This verse shows that Jesus told us who the ‘paraklete’ – the helper or comfortor – will be. The comforter:

a) Is the Holy Spirit – not a man. The fact that He is “another of the same kind,” speaks to His Divinity, not humanity.

b) The Spirit will come to dwell in believers to “teach us all things…whatsoever I [Jesus] have said unto you” John 14:26

Did Mohammed simply bring to rememberance the things that Jesus taught? Of course not – the Koran teaches something completely different from that of Jesus, for Jesus said “I am THE WAY…”

c) The Spirit will testify of Jesus!

Has Mohammed testified of Jesus – that He is God’s Son and the only way to salvation?

The final ‘nail’ in your argument, is that the Hebrew Scriptures fortell the coming of Jesus (Isa. 53; Psalm 2; Psalm 110, and many others). They DO NOT FORTELL anything about a person named Mohammed.

[/quote]

a) the spirit of truth (who said it has to be capitalized) is the Prophet Muhammad. Your little answer doesnt solve any of the points i made.

b) The whole idea is that the teachings of Jesus were distorted, and the Prophet came to renew them, thereby giving us the same teachings that Jesus brought in the beginning. Therefore you can’t tell me that the fact that the messages are different means this is false. That’s the whole point, that the original teachings of Jesus have changed.

plus “I am the way” refers to the people of that time and place, not to all people at all times. Again, what about the tens of millions of people who lived before the coming of Jesus, and the millions of people who lived before the Torah?

c) “I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and I will put My words in his mouth; and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him” Deuteronomy 18:18

anyway, i tihnk this will be my last post.

preacher_saved · May 31, 2006, 8:22pm

[quote]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![/quote]

I fear your limited knowledge of the Catholic church has led you misunderstand the role of the bible my child.

You see misinterpretation is a very dominat problem in all religions. So Catholic’s are encouraged to study and absorb the holy book and pose any questions they have about it to the father of their church.

However as you may know not all Bible’s have the Dueterocanon and others. Unlike Protestant’s the Catholic church does see these these as added passges which are not needed.

More so, these passages ommited from many Protestant bible’s were in fact part of Scripture’s for an extremely long length of time. Actually much much longer than Protestantism has been around.

So the question would be, not why is the Catholic church choosing to eschew the bible, but why individual’s such as yourself have chosen to alter the bible as it was.

May god go with you.

haney · May 31, 2006, 10:22pm

[quote]futuredave wrote:
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.

Then you’d be Jews.[/quote]

As long as I can still hate the french all is well.

steveo5801 · June 1, 2006, 12:14am

[quote]silencer wrote:
steveo5801 wrote:

"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning." John 15:26-27

How convenient that you leave this verse out in your “theological analysis,” Silencer.

This verse shows that Jesus told us who the ‘paraklete’ – the helper or comfortor – will be. The comforter:

a) Is the Holy Spirit – not a man. The fact that He is “another of the same kind,” speaks to His Divinity, not humanity.

b) The Spirit will come to dwell in believers to “teach us all things…whatsoever I [Jesus] have said unto you” John 14:26

Did Mohammed simply bring to rememberance the things that Jesus taught? Of course not – the Koran teaches something completely different from that of Jesus, for Jesus said “I am THE WAY…”

c) The Spirit will testify of Jesus!

Has Mohammed testified of Jesus – that He is God’s Son and the only way to salvation?

The final ‘nail’ in your argument, is that the Hebrew Scriptures fortell the coming of Jesus (Isa. 53; Psalm 2; Psalm 110, and many others). They DO NOT FORTELL anything about a person named Mohammed.

a) the spirit of truth (who said it has to be capitalized) is the Prophet Muhammad. Your little answer doesnt solve any of the points i made.

b) The whole idea is that the teachings of Jesus were distorted, and the Prophet came to renew them, thereby giving us the same teachings that Jesus brought in the beginning. Therefore you can’t tell me that the fact that the messages are different means this is false. That’s the whole point, that the original teachings of Jesus have changed.

plus “I am the way” refers to the people of that time and place, not to all people at all times. Again, what about the tens of millions of people who lived before the coming of Jesus, and the millions of people who lived before the Torah?

c) “I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and I will put My words in his mouth; and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him” Deuteronomy 18:18

anyway, i tihnk this will be my last post. [/quote]

Your Biblical interpretation leaves much to be desired. Do you possibly think that the Christian Bible, when it speaks about the Holy Spirit of God is really speaking about a man named Mohammed? The next thing that you are going to tell us is that when, in Genesis 1:2, where it says the “Spirit of God moved upon the waters…,” I suppose that is Mohammed flying around the waters, right?

Jesus Christ, God’s Son, was foretold in the Hebrew Scriptures and came as promised to save the world – everyone included.

Islam is a later day invented religion – like Mormonism – I put as much credence in Mohammed as I do in Joseph Smith or the “angel” Meroni!

“Ye must be born again in order to see the Kingdom of God!”

steveo5801 · June 1, 2006, 12:17am

[quote]preacher saved 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.