Want a little cheese with that whine?
Posted on 03/11/2004 11:48:05 PM PST by Salvation
R. Sungenis: Now, why might Catholic Answers take such a liberal position on the question of evangelism? Because that is what inevitably happens when one begins to water down the doctrine of “no salvation outside the church.” Inevitably, “invincible ignorance” is made into the rule rather than the exception. Despite the fact that “no salvation outside the Church” was elevated to Catholic dogma by at least three popes and confirmed by about a dozen others, in addition to being upheld by a consensus of Fathers, saints and doctors of the Church, Catholic Answers, and similar apostolates today, have found themselves in the unending quest to find the least common denominator in the downward spiral of modern ecumenical Catholicism. Rather than preaching the time-honored truth of salvation only within the Catholic Church, they go out of their way to invent excuses for those who are the slightest bit offended by Catholicism, teaching that they can also find salvation in their own religions. Sadly, the “invincible ignorance” addendum of Pius IX has been turned into the wax nose of modern Catholics like Keating who, along with a number of liberal clerics, have gone way beyond Pius IX’s intentions, and they do so to their own peril.
Makes sense, since the common language of the day was Greek. But how many of those quotes are from the Apocrypha?
Note the difference in the number of books in second and third divisions and since he did not name them one by one, one can only speculate whether they are condensed form of 24 Hebrew books or not.
The Hebrews most certainly did combine books. Their total was/is 24 but the content is the same. The fact is, as stated in a previous post, the Jews always considered what eventually became their canon to be inspired of God. The other books were held in high regard but were not considered inspired.
Darn. I guess we have to remove Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 2nd Kings, 1st and 2nd Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Obadiah, Nahum, and Zephaniah. I guess it will be a lot easier to memorize the books of the OT (I always stumble on Nahum).
I never said they quoted from it in the NT. But the Septuagint WAS the book they quoted from and was therefore the "Scriptures" Christ referred to.
First of all, because the first Christians were ALL JEWS. We got our Old Testament straight from them!
Umm, yeah. And once they Christians stopped associating with their former brothers because of obvious differences with the Jews who did not accept Christ, they stopped allowing them to define doctrine or Scripture. That is, until fifteen hundred or so years later when some schismatic Christians decide (I guess) that the Jews were more reliable than the people who had canonized the rest of Scripture.
And even though the Jews didn't officially close their canon until about the end of the first century AD, they never considered the Apocrypha inspired.
Really? There's no evidence that I've seen supporting that. The KJV included them (largely) for historical reasons, but again, they were part of the Scriptures used at the time - with no mention that they were any different from other books of the OT. The DSS didn't have the Apocrypha in a separate blue jar or anything.
As previously stated, they weren't "in there" in the beginning.
Previously "stated" perhaps, but not previously "demonstrated". It's a convenient denial on the part of some revisionist historians, but there haven't been any copies of scripture from prior to that point demonstrating a canon without those books.
Therefore the Jews never "stopped using them" - the fact is, they never considered them as inspired from day one. It's not that they changed their minds.
Interesting. Paul was certainly the best OT scholar credited with writing our NT Scriptures. Did you know that better than 94% of Paul's OT quotations come from the Septuagint? That every quotation in Acts does (thus is was the version the Apostles evangelized with)?
Interesting that you put such weight on Isaiah ("Jesus Himself quoted from Isaiah numerous times, and it is one of the most prophetic books in the entire OT.")- and I agree. Did you know that the NT quotes from Isaiah more times than any other book of the OT (Except Psalms of course). About 65 quotations of and better than 90% of them match up with the NT authors if you use the Septuagint, but only a third of them agree if you use the MT and only one verse from Proverbs is quoted in the NT in a way that could use the MT as the source while 100% of them fit the Greek. Maybe those NT authors didn't really know their Scripture? I guess it's possible, but I wouldn't go telling Gamaliel's greatest student that.
And I have no idea to what implied doctrinal texts you refer.
I don't happen to agree that any particular doctrine rests soley on verses found in the Apocrypha, but most protestants see support there for purgatory and prayers for the dead (among others) in there.
You're average Baptist service WILL certainly include some time of praise and worship, perhaps a baptism or testimony (or both), but will be largely a sermon by the pastor (usually well over half of the service time-wise). There is no question that (if he's any good - and not all are) the sermon will be based on (or at least supported by) one or more Scriptures. Though I have heard whole sermons with only a single verse quoted (we once did 45min on "needs must go through", you can expect several.
A Catholic liturgy, on the other hand (or Anglican,Lutheran, or Orthodox) will include quite a bit more Scripture reading than the Baptist service. The 10-15 minute sermon probably (but not always) includes a focus on one or more of the readings, but may be quite tangential.
So I wasn't a Baptist "admitting" the Catholics read more Scripture during services (even the daily mass), but an honest Baptist attending both would admit that.
In fact, I learned more Scripture in one month at a Congregational Church than I learned in almost 12 years in the RCC.
The honest Baptist knows that "Sunday Service" is not the time to learn Scripture. That is why they have Bible Study at different times, different days.
The honest Catholic would not pretend they learn Scripture from a pre-programmed three year cycle which partially covers Scripture.
My understanding is that the Septuagint contained the deuterocanonical books.
Here's a listing of NT allusions to the deuterocanonical books specifically.
The most compelling parallel is found below:
In Hebrews 11:35 [It's worth reading this in the context of the entire chapter] we are encouraged to emulate Old Testament heros in these words,
Hebrews 11:35"Women received their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, that they might rise again to a better life"
This is a reference to the seven sons of the Jewish mother whose martyrdom and that of her sons is recorded in 2 Maccabees, one of the books dropped out by Protestants. There is no story like this in the Protestant Bible, so the author of Hebrews was clearly referring to 2 Maccabees 7 and anyone who reads the story of their torture and death will remember it always. It records, how one by one the seven sons died a tortuous, cruel death, proclaiming that they would be vindicated in the resurrection.
2 Macc. 7:9, 20-23, 29"At the point of death he said: 'You accursed fiend, you are depriving us of this present life, but the King of the world will raise us up to live again forever. It is for his laws that we are dying'... The mother was especially admirable and worthy of honorable memory. Though she saw her seven sons perish within a single day, she bore it with good courage because of her hope in the Lord. She encouraged each of them . . . [saying], 'I do not know how you came into being in my womb. It was not I who gave you life and breath, nor I who set in order the elements within each of you. Therefore the Creator of the world, who shaped the beginning of man and devised the origin of all things, will in his mercy give life and breath back to you again, since you now forget yourselves for the sake of his laws,'" telling the last one, "Do not fear this butcher, but prove worthy of your brothers. Accept death, so that in God's mercy I may get you back again with your brothers" .
Actually, I was putting words into IMRight's mouth and he knew I was talking to him.
Your reply baffled me so much I just gave up trying to determine exactly what you were saying.
Yes, there is more Catholic Bible Study than there was in my day. Of course in my day there was none. We were actively discouraged from reading the Bible because we could become "confused". You know the old story "Mother knows best". I don't know how much and how far the RCC will go with this Bible Study program. Time will tell.
Are you serious?
Where were you when this was posted?
To: Salvation
I think the best point was there might be millions of people who hate what they mistakenly believe the Catholic Church to be and to teach
Many Protestants are brainwashed in the same way asMuslims -- with the same false rumours potrayed as facts.
posted on 03/12/2004 5:23:02 AM EST by Cronos (W2K4!)
No complaints from you here. I must assume you agree with this blatant "Protestant bashing".
Or here:
Because he's changed his mind you now consider him suspect? After all, the two greatest heretics of all time, Luther and Calvin, changed their minds.
posted on 03/12/2004 9:25:25 AM EST by autopsy
Personal attacks against Luther and Calvin and no complaints from you.
And a classic "Protestant bash" from, of all people, you:
BTW, just where did your "protestant" Bible come from anyway?
From the Catholic version preserved through the ages. (But changed by Luther.)
27 posted on 03/12/2004 12:58:59 PM EST by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
Pot and kettle? There must be no mirrors in your house.
I'm not sure that's true. They certainly place more emphasis on it, but your "average" Baptist knows a couple/few dozen verses by heart but may not have actually read much Scripture. The average Catholic is unlikely to quote many verses, but is likely to have been exposed to more of it.
I certainly "know more Scripture" than the vast majority of Baptists I run into and I'm not even a very good Catholic.
I guess it all depends on what you mean by "average". Or, more precisely, what you mean by "know". If rote memorization was the measurement, the JWs would be the standard for comparison.
Perhaps there is also a measurement to be made on vocation. Just like most of the world's cooks are female but most of the chef's are male, most of the true Scripture scholars belong to liturgical churches. Most Baptist scripture scholars rarely go beyond what is "Authorized".
The honest Baptist knows that "Sunday Service" is not the time to learn Scripture.
That's an interesting statement. The vast majority throughout history would have only heard Scripture read (in large chunks) during services. Taking the Bible out of the order of worship is a very modern thing. I'm not sure (again) that "knows" is used correctly here. If they "know" that church services are not the time to hear Scripture read then they "know" wrong.
BTW - Jen read that one over my shoulder and said "I hope you're going to pulverize him on that one" But I'm sure she meant that in a nice way. :-)
The honest Catholic would not pretend they learn Scripture from a pre-programmed three year cycle which partially covers Scripture.
I would consider it preferable to hearing the same six verses (exageration, but not gross) over and over and over again to the exclusion of so much of Scripture. Romans, Corrinthians, Hebrews and Acts are certainly keys to Scripture... but they are not the totality of it. I once sat through three (or more) months of Baptist sermons that always ended with "the Gospel", but we never once turned to an actual verse in a Gospel.
The last I knew the question of Salvation outside the (RC) Church is doctrine. Isn't it?
Now if you'll just explain if Unum Sanctum is doctrine or not.
Which came first, the Gospels or the Septuagint? Remember, "tradition" doesn't count. What is the earliest hard copy of the Septuagint?
Want a little cheese with that whine?
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.