To My "Bible Only" Christian Brothers and Sisters, From A Catholic Convert [a humble vanity]

[narses]

What translation and what year is that?

[Rashputin]

It's the 1954 Armstrong Bricket Wood revision of the ancient Brooklyn translation.  Here's a group photo of the distinguished scholars who did the actual translation work:   

The crest on the pole behind them is rumored to be the official crest of the Orbital Select Mungus Fungus who those in the know recognize as the Nephilim responsible for developing the refined Lego Block Method of Scripture Interpretation and teaching that method to Martin Luther. Notice how little they've aged since the late sixteenth century.

[cuban leaf]

—Jim Jones was NOT Assembly of God. He founded his own religion.—

I was a member of AG at the time and we were told that he was AG. I’ll have to google.

[cuban leaf]

—Jim Jones was NOT Assembly of God. He founded his own religion.—
I just googled. He started out as AG and then started his own.

http://toddbentleyjimjones.blogspot.com/2008/07/jim-jones-and-todd-bentley.html

[Jvette]

****I know it from reading Origen on how he assembled his codices. The pieces were just about everywhere anybody looked.*****

Really?, lol!!!

I don’t imagine you realized the absolute deliciousness of that statement when you typed it.

[editor-surveyor]

The point was how widely dispersed the epistles were, and how consistent he found them to be.

God took care of spreading his word, and did it quickly.

[D-fendr]

5:00 1/186000 sec.

Why the fraction? Should have noted, your traveling at the speed of light from A to B. Constant speed, no stopping/accelerating.

[D-fendr]

One would need to know clearly what an idol is in order to be taken seriously when accusing others of idolatry.

[Natural Law]

"God took care of spreading his word, and did it quickly."

I think the point you are missing is how God differentiated between His inerrant word and the many, many other errant, inspired and not so inspired works being circulated at the time.

Although a recognized Church Father, Origen himself was never declared inerrant or a saint. In fact, there were a number of areas in which he was at odds with the Orthodoxy of the Church and well into heresy.

There were a lot of other documents with claims to Scripture that were ultimately rejected from Scripture. Among these were the Infancy Gospel of Thomas (the work of an actual Apostle), the Gospel of Philip, the Gospel of Andrew (which is mentioned by Pope Innocent I and St. Augustine) and the Epistle of Barnabas, who is actually mentioned in Acts. Additionally, there were a number of books that many of the time discounted and wanted left out. Not the least of these was the Book of Revelation.

So the issue is that without the Episcopacy (Magisterium) of the Catholic Church, through its councils, there would not be a concise, defined Bible today.

[Hegewisch Dupa]

Ha-ha - excellent!!!

[Absolutely Nobama]

Ummmmm.....

The Catholic Bible outdates the King James version by well over a thousand years. The Canon of the Protestant Church wasn’t settled until the Reformation. The Catholic Canon was decided upon during the Roman era.

-—HOWEVER-—

In my humble opinion, now is NOT the time for doctrinal showdowns for either Church. In case anyone hasn’t noticed, this government of ours has declared war on Christianity and Judaism. If Jews of all denominations and Christians of all denominations don’t put up a united front and DEMAND that the First Amendment is upheld as written (and most definitely NOT the ACLU’s version), the United States will end up like the majority of Europe, a secular hell hole without the backbone to resist Shariah law. (If you don’t believe me, take a trip to “Londonistan”.)

That’s my take on the situation. I’m not saying that there aren’t Doctrinal differences between Jews, Catholics and Protestants, but now is definitely the time for unity. Differences can be settled later, but right now, survival must take precedence.

I now step off my soapbox.

[D-fendr]

Good point and well put. Thanks.

[editor-surveyor]

>> “The Catholic Bible outdates the King James version by well over a thousand years.” <<

.
Really a misconception.

There really never was any movement to even have an official ‘catholic’ Bible until the KJV became available. The Douay Rheims is essentially a slightly modified KJV that was issued because catholics began to demand a Bible when so many Geneva and KJV Bibles began to be printed with the Gutenberg press.

Prior to that Bible codices were rare, and all differed slightly from one another because they were hand copied, sometimes from differing manuscripts that happened to be available to the particular scribe.

Prior to the printed Bible, the chief difference between protestant Bibles and catholic Bibles was the OT. Catholics mostly used the LXX, and Protestants used the Masoretic scrolls, each being translated mostly into latin if they were translated at all.

[editor-surveyor]

Origen, and Clement were kind of squishey, wobbly, almost gnostic turkeys, but they did gather lots of manuscripts in the persuit of trying to support their gnostic leanings.

[editor-surveyor]

An idol is any object that you might kneel before in worship, physically, or emotionally.

[D-fendr]

kneel before in worship, physically, or emotionally.

So if I kneel in worship at home and there's a chair in front of me, the chair is an idol?

[ctdonath2]

If that chair represents that which you are praying to, yes.

[D-fendr]

Is it necessary that I believe the chair is God in order for it to be an idol? And if I do not, then it is not?

[Natural Law]

"There really never was any movement to even have an official ‘catholic’ Bible until the KJV became available."

I'm not sure either of us know the point you are trying to make here. Maybe you are trying to conflate "official" from Nihil Obstat and codex with canon.

Codices predated the Canon of the Bible in most cases and very few are considered anything more than an errant collection if both inerrant and errant works. None that I am aware of precisely reflect the canon as adopted by the Church at the Council of Rome and that has been used by Christendom for the subsequent 1,00 years until the Reformation sought to reduce it. And then, sot even the Reformation relied on any of these codices as a decisive Table of Contents.

If you are trying to rely on these as Scripture then you are on far shakier ground than the Catholics you accuse of elevating Tradition over Scripture. The Magisterial mandate of the Church strived to make every translation of the Bible, into every vernacular language, a true and faithful (orthodox) version and sought to ban those that fell short or advocated any heretical positions.

The purpose of a written Bible was to aid the various and growing Catholic Churches and Dioceses in determining the Traditions to be passed on and the Scripture to be read in the Liturgy.

Until error and heresy were introduced in a way that could affect more than the authors there was really no controversy and no need for anything to be banned.

[editor-surveyor]

You need to learn how to follow a thread back, and you will ask way fewer silly questions.