GREAT QUESTION! Ask these folks:
St Anthony's Roman Catholic Church, Waldport, Oregon
Posted on 01/25/2014 6:51:38 AM PST by GonzoII
That’s a keeper.
One that doesn't reference how our works are like "filthy rags", presumably.
Would Catholics like to show another source that proves what the apostles taught?
Another term that Catholics don’t like.
Well, there's no surprise there. Catholicism is the church of the Perpetually Offended.
Why can’t the term “Catholic” suffice for all?
You tell us. It's your church that distinguishes between different factions. Or rites ad the Church calls them in a bid to present a unified front to the rest of the world which isn't fooled by the semantics.
You must first know how to read, then how to interpret in context. You do not demonstrate that ability, as Protestants, with 30,000 different interpretations!
I have my disagreements with some Catholic “authorities” but I think most Protestant objections to the RCC are silly.
S:Correct.
Good, then there's no problem identifying Babylon in the Book of Revelation as the Catholic church.
I’m not even sure that’s a comprehensive list of Catholic versions either.
Now it's 30,000 interpretations? Do tell. Where did you get that list?
Could you provide some substantiation for that claim while you're looking for the one about the 30,000 different versions of the Bible?
That’s not what we said. Are you trying to mind-read again?
The Church teaches us, because it is "the pillar and foundation of truth." "If he will not listen to the church, treat him as a pagan or tax collector."
Do you doubt Jesus? Do you doubt His Church?
This is what the Church teaches about Sacred Tradition.
How do you know if the Letters of St. Paul were written by St. Paul? Were you there when he wrote them? Or do you trust the Church that preserved and canonized them? How do you know that they were faithfully re-copied? Why do you trust Luther's canon of Scripture? Was he around when the books of the Bible were written?
If you reject the Authority of the Church, you reject Scripture, because the Church wrote, preserved and canonized Scripture. If the Church is fallible, then the Bible can be errant.
R.C. Sproul recognized this dilemma, to some degree, when he called the Bible "a fallible collection of infallible books."
Revelation was written in that same time frame.
Too bad. Own it.
I doubt the claims made by the Roman Catholic church, or ANY organization that sets itself up as the only way to God.
No, I don’t doubt after all. I completely disbelieeve those spurious claims.
Martin Luther was a racist who hated Jews.
Every faith has its problems with individuals in that faith.
GREAT QUESTION! Ask these folks:
St Anthony's Roman Catholic Church, Waldport, Oregon
Who TRANSLATED every single version of the earliest Bibles?
CATHOLICS that is who! And they did so based on TRADITION.
“For Thine is the Kingdom the Power and the Glory” for instance is NOT in the original “Lord’s Prayer” -— it was added as a note, “gloss” on the margins of ancient manuscripts by a CATHOLIC MONK!
Yet, Protestants use this CATHOLIC inspiration all the time as part of the ORIGINAL Lord’s Prayer.
You folks can be amusing.
BiPolarBob:
I got the information as provided by the blog that was used to start this exposition:
Quote from one off the first paragraphs above:
According to Scripture, the Church—not the Bible alone—is the final court of appeal for the people of God in matters of faith and discipline. But isn’t it also telling that since the Reformation of just ca. 480 years ago—a reformation claiming sola scriptura as its formal principle—there are now over 33,000 denominations that have derived from it?
Unquote.
Are these 30,000+ “denominations” not based on an interpretation of scripture? Or was sola scriptura not used for determining a difference great enough to start a new denomination? Who within those denominations determined just what writings are included as sacred scripture?
How did some of the writers know of the activities of Jesus when they did not observe them personally but from word of mouth from the folks that did observe them?
And then you go ad hominem about pedophilia (though not about pederasty) within the clergy - the sinful actions of humans. And the obvious cover-ups. You win that argument. No excuse. It’s a tough one to understand. But you used “Nazi” first, so you do not win - were this a formal debate.
Try a bit of logic would you?
Why the need for over 30,000 “Protestant” faiths, if all of those faiths are based ONLY on the direct interpretation of the Bible?
THE BIBLE THAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH PRODUCED as the very first PUBLISHER!
That should be a chilling prospect and a wake up call for those who follow that cult.
The BIBLE is a document created by the Catholic Church, PERIOD!
Yes, divinely inspired but PUBLISHED FIRST by the Roman Catholic Church!
This Presbyterian author tried to prove otherwise, but later CONVERTED to the Catholic Church:
http://www.amazon.com/Where-Bible-Debt-Catholic-Church/dp/0895551373
Prior to Catholic Church publication of the entire “Bible” only separate manuscripts existed.
The Catholic Church decided what would be included and not included in the first formal Bible.
The Bible never refers to the Bible. Not once. For the first 200+ years of Christian history THERE WAS NO COMPLETE BIBLE ANYWHERE!
There is NO reasonable debate on this issue. The Catholic Church was divinely inspired to CREATE the first Bible.
None at all.
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.