Posted on 01/04/2009 8:07:31 PM PST by Stourme
THE CATHOLIC BIBLE
Holding the "Douay" Roman Catholic Version of the Bible aloft in my hand, I ask, "Do YOU accept THIS Bible as the Word of God?" For reasons best known to themselves, the Catholic Truth Society have published their Version of the Bible in a very short, stumpy form. This Version is a very odd proportion of the numerous Versions in the market today. The Christian questioner is taken aback. "What Bible is that?" he asks. "Why, I thought you said that there was only ONE Bible!" I remind him. "Y-e-s," he murmurs hesitantly, "but what Version is that?" "Why, would that make any difference?" I enquire. Of course it does, and the professional preacher knows that it does. He is only bluffing with his "ONE Bible" claim.
The Roman Catholic Bible was published at Rheims in 1582, from Jerome's Latin Vulgate and reproduced at Douay in 1609. As such the RCV (Roman Catholic Version) is the oldest Version that one can still buy today. Despite its antiquity, the whole of the Protestant world, including the "cults"* condemn the RCV because it contains seven extra "books" which they contemptuously refer to as the "apocrypha" i.e. of DOUBTFUL AUTHORITY. Notwithstanding the dire warning contained in the Apocalypse, which is the last book in the RCV (renamed as "Revelation" by the Protestants), it is "revealed":
". . . If any man shall add to these things (or delete) God shall add unto him the plagues written in this Book." (Revelation 22:18-19)
But who cares! They do not really believe! The Protestants have bravely expunged seven whole books from their Book of God! The outcasts are:
The Book of Judith
The Book of Tobias
The Book of Baruch
The Buck of Esther, etc.
* This disparaging title is given by the orthodox to Jehovah's Witnesses, the Seventh Day Adventists and a thousand other sects and denominations with whom they do not see eye to eye.
Who cares!!??
HE relented with ME!
The first question you never asked me in the first place...the secnd wuestion I alread answered as I saw fit and I am not currently interested in expanding any further.
Why Do I believe the Bible to be...the only word of G_d?
I never asserted that I so believed, but as we have already seen here, there is an amount of parsing words - Clinton-esque sometimes, in nature (”that depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is...”)
I will pose such a question in return: “To what are we referring when we speak of ‘the Word of G_d’.
In other words: how does one define “the Word of G_d”?
“in the Beginning was the Word, and the word was with G_d and the word was G_d”,
and “The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld the glory of the Father”...
Jesus Christ Himself said, “I tell you the truth, before Moses was, EGO EIMI” {literally, “I AM ME” - He was identifying himself as coming from, and as THE ‘I AM’.}
Christ was the “word” that G_d spoke in the beginning when He spoke the earth into existence. Now He sits - the Word made flesh, enthroned at the right hand of the Father - all power and authority under heaven and earth is given unto Him.
What will become of our printed Bibles when Christ returns in glory to judge the living and the dead, and usher in his Kingdom which shall have no end? WIll we need them, in order to flip through and find the correct chapter and verse to correspond with the events unfolding before our eyes?
Perhaps not, but at the same time...
I doubt we will be judged for having printed Bibles, either.
The difference between the bom and the bible or even just the NT is significant. One is a work which finds ready historical backing as to the existence of the historical person of Jesus in the land of Palestine.
You may find correlating reference in the writings of historian Flavius Josephus. and Pliny the Younger’s summations of other historians’ works.
No such backing exists for the b.o.m., nor is any forthcoming - even though I seem to recall that there were at least two or three “prophecies” issued by Smith or Cowdery as to the golden plates being brought forth within a specific timeline.
All have expired, unfulfilled - although I am sure church historians are hard at work scrubbing and revising and vigorously reinterpreting. It will go for naught, because the plates never existed. If they had, it would have bought far more validity and reknown to the church to have brought them into public light for scrutiny and age/language verification by now.
It is insulting to the entirety of the world of Christendom, and to G_d Himself to refer to these vipers’ writings as “the restored gospels” as if through some intentional deception, or accidental carelessness of G_d Himself, they were destroyed, stolen, hidden, or lost.
That leads to the whole fraudulent notion of the “apostasy”...
Never happened. No such thing.
Any fool can fabricate a story (like the “lamanite’s” history, and claim that because nobody has been teaching his tale, or living by it until he brought it into being, that all those over the intervening years were living in ignorance and the whole thing (the biblical Gospels) were incomplete, and everybody over the whole world was lost in denial and apostasy.
But that does not validate the concept. In this case let us look at it briefly as if it were a case brought before a court. The burden of proof here is on the accuser, to back up their claims.
There is no evidence to support the apostasy notion, however -
We have evidence that there WAS a living and active church throughout Judea and Samaria, spreading into Greece, the Roman empire, Africa, and Asia minor almost immediately from the time of Christ’s death, and oppression and persecution only spurred the growth of the early Christian church.
The role of Constantine the Great in mediating he canonization of sacred scriptures, and of separating truth from heresies {as occurred in the case of Arius} and designating who was and who was not to be a bishop in the early church - was invaluable - as was his mother’s role as one of the earliest patrons of biblical archaeology and finding/preservation of artifacts.
The role of Christianity in improving the lives of people living in a darkened Europe was equally inarguable and of inestimable value.
This influence continued through various churches guided and protected by His hand into Colonial American daily living. It extended throughout nearly every significant document relating to the founding of America as a free and independent country.
To blindly assert (as Smith did) a raison d’etre for the mormon church to come into being (especially at a time when godly revivals led by the Holy Spirit were erupting spontaneously all over the fledgling country) as being grounded in the existence of a longstanding apostasy and no church anywhere in the world at the time that was right in G_d’s eyes - is a travesty of common sense, and a slap in the face of several active and vibrant churches of the day that were preaching Christ’s redeeming truth.
Smith as a young boy was much more likely deceived than caught up in the personal arrogance (which later overtook him) at the time of his initial “revelations” in the woods.
It is ultimately Smith’s stature - or lack thereof - as a prophet which most undermines the b.o.m. and all subsequent “scriptures” supposedly revealed to the mormon church. Smith advocated and militated for polygamy far too long, and held to many other untenable positions too long - retreating only when it was obviously more advantageous for him and his church to “adjust” or compromis and modify their views and practices.
Smith was no prophet, the b.o.m. was not of divine revelation, does not belong in canonical literature (other than those many parts which were lifted outright from the original Bible, and I say again, unreservedly - when it comes to a difference between or a dispute about a principle - I accept the BIble as G_d’s word, and the bom/DC/Pearl as amounting to useless scribblings.
Smith and his cohorts were simply unreliable witnesses, and their subsequent followers untrained and unqualified to offer accurate findings of fact on theological matters.
A.A.C.
Ah, very good question.
Imagine...
(1)...that I gave acknowledgement to the Book of Mormon as "scripture"...
(2)...but added the caveat, "Yes, it's God's Word in so far as correctly translated..."
(3)...but then, I went a step further -- and "re-translated" a number of its passages (in order to ensure it indeed was properly "translated" and would ne'er more need to add such a caveat)...
(4)...yet, still, whenever you furthermore contacted me to follow up on my commercials for a free Book of Mormon, you would strangely only receive the un-re-constituted BoM.
Would not you not thereby automatically doubt my avowed claim to "prophetic" status?
I mean...here I would claim to be a "prophet" of God...
...who called me to correct the original Book of Mormon errors...
...and to "finish" such a "translation"...
...yet when I "finish" it...
...what do you get?
...REVELATION AS FOOTNOTES!!!
Ah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah!!! :))))))
(Why Mormons haven't been laughed out of every venue they speak is a mystery to me)
So...when you contact "Bible translator" Joseph Smith's personal organization, what version do you get? Why, you get a version that was published almost 200 years before its "Bible-'translating'" founder was born!!! (I guess if this was the "true restoration" it apostatized almost right away)
"Who cares!!??"
Well, that's a little cold isn't it?? lol I care! My heart aches for all who will suffer eternal separation from God.
What would you do if, in seeking the Lord He leads you to the truth that Joseph Smith was a false prophet?
Would you follow the Lord or would you follow Joseph Smith?
>>>>Are you going to admit that, YES, modern religions disagree over the basic doctrines of the faith. Or are you going to find another dead horse to beat?
Yes. It is self-evident that modern religions, like
mormonism, scientology, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Christian
Science (All 100% American Cults), will disagree!
How could they ALL be the truth, as they ALL claim??
Christians agree on the central doctrines of Christianity -
which cults like mormonism disagree with.
I would follow the Lord, of course. We don’t worship Joseph Smith. He was founder of a church but the church is based on Christ and if Christ leads me another direction, I would follow it. So far He hasn’t done so. I am satisfied that I have found the true church upon the earth, regardless of how many people disagree. It would take probably an angelic visitation to make me renounce my faith. I have sought for and received assurance of the truthfulness contained in the Book of Mormon. It truly is another testament of Christ.
Rampy,
>>>Your post though tries to have it both ways. First you say Jude didn’t quote Enoch directly. Then you allow that the prophecy could be true but the book is false. Which is it?
No, I don’t have it both ways. I presented the possibilities
that exist as a result of Jude paraphrasing the material
from Enoch. Something can be true and be quoted. Or something
can serve as a point of commonality, like Paul’s use of
the poet below:
“Acts 17: 22: “Then Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, “Men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are very religious; 23 for as I was passing through and considering the objects of your worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Therefore, the One whom you worship without knowing, Him I proclaim to you: 24 God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands. 25 Nor is He worshiped with men’s hands, as though He needed anything, since He gives to all life, breath, and all things. 26 And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their pre-appointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, 27 so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also His offspring.’”
Now, Rampy, Paul’s use of the quote, ‘For we are also His
offspring’, does not mean that everything that poet wrote
is inspired and should be in the canon.
>>>Is Enoch “God Breathed” (to borrow a Protestant term)
Actually, it is a CHRISTIAN term, since it is in the
scripture...
“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,” II Tim 3:16 (it literally says this in Greek).
This passage is also a strong reason why I rebuke the
falsehood of mormonism on FR. GOD says scripture is useful
to teach and rebuke.
>>>And if only parts of it are “God breathed”, who gets to decide which parts?
I made no claim that any portion of Enoch is God-breathed.
“Justin Matryr, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus and Tertullian all thought it was scripture, as do some Catholics I assume. “
That is interesting, but unimportant, since God did not use
them to reveal the canon of scripture. Mormonism, in an
attempt to find some legitimacy somewhere for its positions
of heresy, often trots out quotes from the Early Church
fathers. Same thing applies. I recommend you get a good
volume on the history of theology. You would like it and
it would inform your thought process about the development
of Christian doctrine.
>>>IMO, The books of the Bible are witnesses of the divinity of Christ but do not contain all the revelation that has been given by God about him.
That is so wrong on several levels. I am not surprised that
you write you think this - given that it opens the door to
justifying the mormonite use of non-biblical writings in
order to legitimize itself.
“IOW, The book of Enoch appears to contain “God breathed” prophecy.”
Something can appear to be a horse and still be a pony.
best,
ampu
Put your question in context, please.
The Lord Jesus was the founder of my Church.
It would take probably an angelic visitation to make me renounce my faith.
Renounce your faith?
Do you mean your faith in Christ or your faith in The LDS Church?
The Deseret Sunday School Union prepared them on the Bible, Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants (Abraham Cannon was the author of the BoM edition).
What is the key of knowledge?
It is the spirit of prophecy and revelation.
THE MORMON CREED.
Let every body mind their own business.
What is man?
The offspring of God.
What is God?
The father of man.
Who is Jesus Christ?
He is our brother.
What is man in Embrio?
He is a helpless babe.
What is man in progress?
He is a man.
What is man perfected?
He is as Christ; and Christ is as the Father: and they all are one.
How many states of existence has man?
He has three.
What is the first?
It is spiritual.
What is the second?
It is temporal.
What is the third?
It is immortal and eternal.
How did he begin to exist in the first?
He was begotten and born of God.
How did he begin to exist in the second?
He was begotten and born of the flesh.
How did he beqjn to exist in the third?
By the Resurrection of the dead.
What is his final destiny?
To be like God.
What has God been?
Like man.
What is man without revelation?
A vessel in a fog without a compass.
What will man be with the aid of revelation?
He will be filled with light; and know and comprehend all things.
What is man’s spirit?
The candle of the Lord.
How shall it be lighted?
By the Spirit of God.
How many Gods are there?
"There are lords many, and gods many: but to us there is but one God."
How many heavens are there?
They are innumerable.
Where will heaven be?
On the earth; and on all other glorified worlds.
What is Mormonism?
It is all truth.
How old is it?
Without beginning of days or end of years.
What is its destiny?
To fill earth arid the heavens with light and love.
Who is Joseph Smith?
He is Jesus Christ’s brother.
From whence is his authority?
From heaven.
What is he sent to do?
To let the oppressed go free, and break every yoke.
What kind of success will he meet with?
Universal; over the whole world.
Suppose the people try to hinder him?
They cannot do it; but will perish.
Why?
Because God has sent him.
What are the present forms of political governments?
They are the image seen by Nebuchadnezzar.
What are the present forms of Church Government?
Spiritual Babylon, or the image of mystery and names of blasphemy seen by John on the Isles of Patmos.
When will the present forms of political and religious government come to an end?
In this present age.
By what means?
By the kingdom of God, and by the appearance of the Son of God; and a great destruction.
What is the kingdom of God?
A theocracy; or, in other words, a kingdom governed by direct revelation from God.
Source: Orson Pratt, Prophetic Almanac For 1845. Apostle Orson Pratt prepared this almanac and notes in Washington during the spring of 1844 (Millennial Star 27:88). It was advertised for sale in the Prophet (N.Y.) in the June 27, 1844 issue. It was endorsed by Brigham Young at October Conference 1844 (Times and Seasons 5:693).
(That's what happens when MD tries to take FULL control!!)
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.