Posted on 08/30/2014 8:36:05 AM PDT by WXRGina
“So why did you engage in it? Or do you defend your fallacious assertion?”
I, in my old age and infirmity, misspoke. I regret my error.
While it is unfortunate, it is still not in a class with the professional liars one encounters.
“I can read it all the way through, all by myself, in far less time.”
Yes. What you can’t do is understand what you read.
There's always time to crack the cover and encounter the remainder, nay the majority, of God's inspired and written word. I encourage you to give it a try.
“There’s always time to crack the cover and encounter the remainder, nay the majority, of God’s inspired and written word. I encourage you to give it a try.”
What arrogance.
What arrogance?
Yes you guys have it right.
The three year cycle includes nearly all of the Gospels and a relatively small portion of other sacred scripture.
That said... Our bible includes 7 books in the Old Testament that were the most cited by Christ in those Gospels... so watch that thing in your eye :)
As a Catholic, I don’t think the tone of the article is grounded in reality.
There are far more Low Info Catholics as a percentage of the ‘faithful’ than LIEs... 50% of Catholics voted for Obama... 70-80% of Catholics deny the reality of the Eucharist and the Church’s teaching on sexual morality.
We have lots of issues... And should be careful to avoid judging our Evanglical brothers and sisters.
Uh...
The LATIN is a ‘translation’.
Specifically; what ‘error’ do you have in mind?
It also allows vague, unsourced claims to be made about unnamed people for unspecified reasons.
Take your pack of pickled peppers and hit the road!
Yer either a Berean; or you ain’t...
"Mighty bold statement for a one-eyed fat man!"
--Ned Pepper
That's good, but you have lot of company it seems.
While it is unfortunate, it is still not in a class with the professional liars one encounters
Be careful throwing rocks at known or anonymous liars, Rome herself made use of the works of such done in the interest of supplying what Scripture does not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donation_of_Constantine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudo-Isidorian_Decretals
http://www.christiantruth.com/articles/forgeries.html
In addition are the often misrepresentations of Luther uncritically parroted by RCs, who strangely seem to think we are like hem and follow men as popes or see him as faultless and determinative of doctrine.
Indeed.
What? Following one error with another is simply another argument against being an RC. Show me (your list) that the apocryphal books were the most cited - not possible allusions or similarities and or the usual RC recourse to extrapolation - by Christ in those Gospels.
, And where merely enlisting a statement from somewhere (versus "thus saith the Lord," "the Scriptures," "the word of God," "it is written," "the law saith," Moses or the prophets...) renders the work as wholly inspired of God.
Or that Luther dissented from an infallible indisputable canon that was settled for centuries.
Rome may presume to declare Truth by fiat, but you are on a forum not controlled by the inquisitors or Catholic Answers mods.
And you know that how?
It’s not like the RCC had written up a commentary of the entire Bible for Catholics to use in reading it so it’s all interpreted for them,
And simply hearing the readings in mass once a week does not equate to any Catholic understanding what they hear and read either.
FWIW, the Bible is not hard to understand. There are some deep spiritual truths that can be gleaned from it, but considering that much of Scripture is narrative, there is not a lot of interpretation or understanding that needs to be done.
Even you could read it and get something out of it. If you weren’t otherwise convinced that you can’t as the Catholic church tells it’s constituents.
The voice of reason.
What are you doing on this thread anyway?
Indeed, I have just checked a number of lists of Jesus’ Scriptural quotes and none come from books any Protestant would consider noncanonical, at least not that I could find. They are all from standard OT canon books, Psalms, Isaiah, Deuteronomy, etc. So I don’t even understand the statement. There do not appear to be any disputed books involved.
rwilson99, could you explain please? Thanks.
Peace,
SR
Hmmm. So said the Gnostics, too. Could they have been right and all the rest of us wrong? We all missed the boat because we lack their secret knowledge? Wow. It's really tough figuring out whose secret knowledge to go with here.
Or maybe God reveals Himself to whosoever He pleases:
Mat 11:25-26 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. (26) Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight.
Peace,
SR
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.