Posted on 02/22/2013 5:43:18 PM PST by NYer
Where is your proof?
How about getting on that before making other stupid comments.
The authority of the scriptures IS the scriptures which was given by God...That authority however was never passed on to any institution...It is the 'words' (of God) which are authoritative...
The Hebrew scriptures were NOT passed on thru your religion...The King James Bible which comes from the Hebrew scriptures never passed thru your religion...So your religion has nothing to offer me in the way of a bible...
I don't know where you get your original language but my original language says yours is wrong...I'll stick with my original language...
G3670 homologeo
From a compound of the base of G3674 and G3056; to assent, that is, covenant, acknowledge: - con- (pro-) fess, confession is made, give thanks, promise.
G3056 logos
From G3004; something said (including the thought); by implication a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive; by extension a computation; specifically (with the article in John) the Divine Expression (that is, Christ): - account, cause, communication, X concerning, doctrine, fame, X have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say (-ing), shew, X speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work.
You should have saved your money and studied the Bible instead...
It was so I could study the New testament in the original Koine Greek. You do realize it was written in Greek.
And I am still waiting for you to prove that it was Simon Magus, but I know why you are avoiding it.
Bless you, Boogie, my thoughts as well.
Have a good day and I will leave you with this toast from Blessed John Henry Newman:
"If I am obliged to bring religion into after-dinner toasts, (which indeed does not seem quite the thing) I shall drink,—to the Pope, if you please,—still, to conscience first, and to the Pope afterwards."
It has already been translated into English by experts in well over 200 English bibles...What are you going to do to improve on it???
Have someone explain this to you.
The way you learn Greek is by Studying the New Testament in Greek.You do a word by word translation. You start with John, then move to mark Matthew then Luke. By that time you are ready for the complexities of Paul.
BTW I realize that this is you just stalling since you have no proof that it was Simon Magus in Rome.
Biblical views.A> Elevating of a “POPE” is against the 2nd Commandment.
B> Salvation is by faith that Jesus was sent to be our Savior from our sins and if believe this, we are saved.
Following a “POPE” does not help our Salvation.
C> The Bible says that we are all equal. So, we don’t need Popes or Cardinals to worship and kiss.
D> The thief on the cross was not a Catholic. Yet Jesus said he was going to Paradise.
E> Job was not Catholic yet he said he would see the Redeemer in the flesh one day.
F> Jesus was not Catholic yet he was perfect.
Protestant views.
Does calling them "Protestant views" mean you don't agree with them?
Salvation is by faith that Jesus was sent to be our Savior from our sins and if believe this, we are saved?
The Bible says that we are all equal?
Jesus said he (the thief on the cross) was going to Paradise?
(Job said) he would see the Redeemer in the flesh one day?
Jesus...was perfect?
Elevating of a "POPE" is against the 2nd Commandment?
*****************************************
You may disagree with some of them but it's inconceivable that you would disagree with all of them just because Protestants believe them, as you seem to be a Christian.
It's quite impressive your study of Greek, I saw the other post showing how well you did in it at school.To: IscoolIt has already been translated into English by experts in well over 200 English bibles...What are you going to do to improve on it???Have someone explain this to you.
The way you learn Greek is by Studying the New Testament in Greek.You do a word by word translation. You start with John, then move to mark Matthew then Luke. By that time you are ready for the complexities of Paul.
Please bear in mind though, verga, that no matter how well trained one is in learning the Greek language, the way to understand the scriptures (no matter what language you read it in) is for the Holy Spirit to reveal the meanings.
That is His job and He is very good at it.
Some times education can get in the way of understanding scriptures with God given wisdom.
Understanding the complexities of Paul should give a good lesson to anyone about Simon Peter Magus and his role in the Catholic belief system.
This suffers from two internal contradictions.
Let’s look at that first point, that the words of Scripture explicitly pass on authority to a divine institution, namely to the Church instituted by our divine Lord Jesus Christ. The authority of the Church to "bind and loose," the authority to determine "whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; whose sins you shall retain, they are retained"; the authority inherent in the possession to "the keys of the kingdom of heaven," whose significance is foretold in Isaiah, the power to "open and shut" the kingdom, with the one who holds the keys clothed in "all the glory of his father's house." (Isaiah 22:20-24)--- all of these bequests of authority are found in the very words of Scripture.
They are found both in their Biblical foretelling and foreshadowing (prophets and kings), their Biblical institution (Gospels) and in their earliest subsequent development (Epistles).
In order to minimize or extinguish the authority of the Church, you would have to minimize or extinguish these Scriptures; and this you cannot do, because these Scriptures are "the Word" which you and we revere.
The second contradiction is that the preservation and canonization of Scripture itself was passed on through the Church.
The King James Bible, first published in 1611, contained the full Bible as defined by the earliest Christian canons of the 3 rd-5 th centuries. That is, the 1611 KJV included, not just 66 books, but the entire un-cut Bible, including the "books called Apocrypha.” This “whole” canon approved by Catholic councils and popes in the 3 rd-5 th centuries, is found in print in the Tyndale-Matthew Bible (1537) , the Great Bible (1539) , the Bishops Bible (1568) , the Protestant Geneva Bible (1560) , and the original King James Bible (1611) until parts of it were intentionally deleted by a series of subsequent Bible revisers from 1640-1880.
This leads to the vey natural question, where did they get their new, several-books- smaller Biblical canon, and who authorized that?
Ah, there’s the interesting part. Having rejected the traditional 1500-year-old Christian (Catholic-Orthodox) canon, the revisers had to seek a different OT canon, namely the Jewish Masoretic (Hebrew), derived ultimately from the work of Rabbi Akiva, the father of Rabbinical Judaism.
Rabbi Akiva and his circle (the School of Jamnia) developed their own list of OT canonical books for reasons that were non-Christian, and in fact, theologically anti-Christian.
Rabbi Akiva and the other Rabbis associated with his school, notably Rabbi Meir, Judah ben Ilai, Simeon bar Yohai, Jose ben Halafta, Eleazar ben Shammai, and Rabbi Nehemiah, wished to “purify” the Jewish OT canon from the influences of the early Christian Church. The Christians used the LXX OT canon very effectively throughout the Hellenic Mediterranean world to gain converts; Rabbi Akiva and his pupil and translator, Aquila of Sinope, wished to curb that by delegitimizing the LXX and promoting a shortened and revised, de-Christianized text for use in Jewish synagogues.
Thus, to the extent that all the early Protestant Bibles, including the KJV, retained the book-list of the Catholic Scriptures for more than a century, from 1537-1640, you do owe a debt to the Catholic Church for the preservation and transmission of the Biblical canon.
To the extent that most Protestant Bibles after 1640, and especially after 1880, rejected the LXX books and the Septuagint translation generally, you owe a debt to Akiva and Aquila, and the systematically anti-Christian faction of Rabbinical Judaism.
I based my comment on numerous sources. Here's a nonCatholic one citing "to confess, i.e. to admit or declare one's self guilty of what one is accused of" as a definition.
Peace be with you. And to all my Catholic brethren on this difficult day. In a spirit of endings and looking toward the future I'm done with this thread and the sad lack of charity it generated.
Naw, those things weren't passed on to an institution...They were intended for the people they were presented to...Nothing in the scriptures says they were to be passed on...They also are for a specific Kingdom...
Rabbi Akiva and the other Rabbis associated with his school, notably Rabbi Meir, Judah ben Ilai, Simeon bar Yohai, Jose ben Halafta, Eleazar ben Shammai, and Rabbi Nehemiah, wished to “purify” the Jewish OT canon from the influences of the early Christian Church. The Christians used the LXX OT canon very effectively throughout the Hellenic Mediterranean world to gain converts; Rabbi Akiva and his pupil and translator, Aquila of Sinope, wished to curb that by delegitimizing the LXX and promoting a shortened and revised, de-Christianized text for use in Jewish synagogues.
Most of your earliest church fathers used language which was consistent with Masoretic Texts which the KJV is derived from...
There is no evidence incidentally that a mysterious LXX existed before Origen showed up...Even then, you have to take the word of Eusebius who was likely the author of the LXX...
God said he (not the Catholic religion) would preserve his words forever...There aren't enough Catholic manuscripts to fulfill the task...And what few there are disagree with each other in over 3000 places...And there are zero texts that reference the origin of all of the Catholic traditions...I'll stick with the Masoretic Texts and it derivatives...
Ask and Ethiopian Jew about that, Go ahead I dare you to tell him that his canon didn't exist before Jesus.
BTW how is that evidence coming about Simon Magus? Still scrambling for it.
And i still have that CD I offered you from Tim Staples on how reading the Bible made him Catholic. Why have you refused to tell me where to send it to you?
Thank you. This proves what I was saying before. We needed Christ to come down on earth and complete the process of salvation and have His Church survive through the end of time. Hence all His words, written and unwritten, as well as all His deeds, recorded and unrecorded, were not redundant. This is why the Apostolic traditions carried out by the early Church Fathers to this day explaining the sacraments and the institution of the Holy Eucharist is central to the Great Commission given by Christ to Peter and His apostles to “Go forth and teach all nations....” One unerring truth to all nations through the end of time.
humbug....I speak the truth, the fact that you don't understand the truth is of no concern to me.(Ihave a couple of thousand years of history on my side)
you are right....if you can show that in the last 2013 years the Catholic Church has erred in one of its statements or declarations....go fo it, you could get rich!!!(it didn't happen)
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
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.