Posted on 07/23/2009 9:03:49 AM PDT by kevinrbranson
” am certain that Jesus is not pleased when a man condemns that Church which Christ has mandated”
Jesus mandated a Roman church? He mandated a Pope?
How are things in Branson, Kevin R? Does Bobby Vinton still appear there?
What about the verses that weren’t in the originals, but were added later?
Once you've bought into the idea of personal interpretation of Scripture, you essentially become your own Pope and the successor of Peter therefore becomes irrelevant at best and at worst, an obstacle on the road to salvation who's doing Satan's work by trying to mislead you. The Church likewise then becomes a sinister conspiracy rather than our guide which is designed to light the path to salvation.
Go easy with the self-righteous indignation. The trolls love it when Catholics get bent out of shape.
Neither your post here nor your blog (which your link points to) provides any evdience to back up your statement that "Most believers say that the Pope is 'not a true Christian leader'".
I happen to be a Protestant.
I think the Pope is a Christian leader. (He is, after all, the Head of the Roman Catholic Church -- and is, I think, the leader of many, many people).
And I think the Pope is a Christian.
I (and, I would guess, most other Protestants) do not consider the Pope to be THE Christian leader.
I don’t want to lead this thread off topic, but since you mentioned errant translations I’d like to point out one verse that has significantly affected the modern church’s idea of whether or not one’s soul is present with God immediately after death.
Luke 23:43 I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.
The placement of punctuation in this verse has led many to believe that Christ meant “absent from the body, present with God.” Punctuation is man’s doing. Consider the verse punctuated this way.
I tell you the truth today, you will be with me in Paradise.
Later verses in the Bible say the dead are asleep in Christ and that upon his return those asleep in Christ will rise first. Christ also said that he goes to prepare a place for us. If Christ went prepare, would he take those two thieves with him?
Man’s interpretation of the scriptures has caused much difference of opinion.
There wasn’t any capitalization either, and there was NO ‘J’ until around the 16th century. I’ll wait now for your reply to my #43.
Yes, men inspired by God wrote the Hebrew and Greek texts. Those texts are inerrant. It is man’s translation into other languages that is errant. See my comment above about Luke 23:43.
I asked: Do you believe that the Canon of Scripture fell out of heaven?
kingpins10 wrote: No one believes Scripture fell from heaven. It was written by Godly men who were led by inspiration of the Holy Ghost, preserved by God’s protection through the ages. If the Bible just ‘appeared’, who would believe it ?
I asked, relevant to both men's comments: Who decided what books were inspired, inerrant, and infallible and deemed them, therefore, the Word of God and worthy to be included in the Canon of Scripture?
kingpins10 answered: There are many Godly men responsible for the Scriptural Canon. Peter and Paul were 2 of the originators. I’m interested in who you think decided Scriptural Canon.
Okay. There is no thinking about who decided Scriptural Canon. It is a matter of historical record. Councils comprised of the Bishops of the Catholic Church established the Canon of Scripture. It is not a secret. Even Protestant theologians acknowledge this fact, although they are unwilling or unable to grasp the implications of the fact that Protestantism has to rely on the authority of the Catholic Church councils (and the Papacy) as regards what books comprise the Canon of Scripture.
Of course, at the time of the Reformation, Luther et al were compelled to throw out seven of the Old Testament Books. And if Luther had his way, the NT book of James would have been excluded as well, as Luther cared not for what James had to say about faith being dead apart from good works, and stated that "I almost feel like throwing Jimmy into the stove". He was overruled by others, however, so he begrudgingly had to put James back in "his Bible".
Here is an excerpt from Catholic.com:
"Look, the fact is, the only reason you and I have the New Testament canon is because of the trustworthy teaching authority of the Catholic Church. As Augustine put it, ‘I would not believe in the Gospels were it not for the authority of the Catholic Church’ (Against the Letter of Mani Called "The Foundation" 5:6). Any Christian accepting the authority of the New Testament does so, whether or not he admits it, because he has implicit trust that the Catholic Church made the right decision in determining the canon.""The fact is that the Holy Spirit guided the Catholic Church over time to recognize and determine the canon of the New and Old Testaments in the year 382 at the synod of Rome, under Pope Damasus I. This decision was ratified again at the councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397 and 419). You, my friend, accept exactly the same books of the New Testament that Pope Damasus decreed were canonical, and no others."
"Furthermore, the reason you accept the books you do is that they were in the Bible someone gave you when you first became a Christian. You accept them because they were handed on to you. This means you accept the canon of the New Testament that you do because of tradition, because tradition is simply what is handed on to us from those who were in the faith before us. So your knowledge of the exact books that belong in the Bible, such as Philemon and 3 John, rests on tradition rather than on Scripture itself!"
One other question. From whence came the declared, authoritative and final doctrine on the Trinity?
Not bent out of shape at all. Not offended by the disdain that Protestantism has for the Catholic Church. Heck, I used to be one of 'em. And I hope I'm not self-righteous, even if I came across that way. Sorry about that. I didn't make this stuff up, so what is there to be self-righteous about. I didn't even believe the Catholic Church to be true for the first 47 years of my life, so again, nothing for me to be self-righteous about. I drag my sorry backside into the confessional on a regular basis...so definitely nothing for me to be self-righteous about. :)
But, the truth is what it is.
And, I just like to get all the Brothers talking, and thinking...well, maybe hoping for real thinking is a stretch. Most minds are made up. And that is why we are a fractured "body" of believers.
Oh well. I'll shut up now.
Blessings and Peace. KB
I thought you wanted to know who decided Scriptural Canon before the Catholic church. My apologies.
bookmarking while I wait
Did you actually read the blog post? The headline was pulled directly from the article that appeared at Catholic Herald and was linked to directly in the body of the blog post. They said it, well, actually the survey they reported on said it...not me.
Blessings and Peace. KB
I find it hard to believe that you were once a “Protestant” and are now catholic.
I have met many catholics in my life and they were all born and raised in that church and are raised believing that you can sin on Friday night and “just go to confessional to be forgiven.”
That is called trampling on the precious blood of Christ, which is a.k.a.: willful sin.
No Protestant I have ever talked to could ever accept that the pope is infallible. The pope is a man who sins. To say he doesn’t is blasphemy, plain and simple.
I actually found your OP to be very misleading and was not surprised when many thought it would be zotted.
1) As someone noted above, you give no proof of why the title makes that statement.
2)Not only that but the title is very misleading and instead of the title being a summary of the article, the article is a rebuttal of sorts to the title.
3)Although this is your first “day” at FR, you seem to know enough of the ropes to know how to put it in Mainline Protestant topics and protestant keyword. Eyebrows should be raised a tad bit here I think. It is very annoying and very misleading to look at the titles on the sidebar under Protestant headings and find one labeled this way, only to open up a thread and find it to be RC propaganda in an obvious effort to win converts.
4) And then it turns out that this is just a vanity post, not a real article, but just one of your blogs.
5) In this post, you more or less admit that you are trying to convert or at least stir up the pot by saying “And, I just like to get all the Brothers talking, and thinking...well, maybe hoping for real thinking is a stretch.” To me that translates as saying those who do not believe you, or who would refute you as not being able to really think.
Annoying and misleading. No wonder some have called for it to be zotted. It has many earmarks of a troll, although the RM does not deem it so, which is fine. T’were I you, though, I would rethink things a tad on your approach. Deception just doesn’t go over well in religious discussion. :)
From the Preface of my Zondervan NIV Bible:
The Greek text used in translating the NT was an eclectic one. No other piece of ancient literature has such an abundance of manuscript witnesses as does the NT. Where existing manuscripts differ, the translators made their choise of readings according to accepted principles of NT textual critism. Footnotes call attention to places where there was uncertainty about what the original text was. The best current texts of the Greek NT were used.
(Whew! Typing from my phone.)
At Luke 23:34 My NIV has a footnote that says: Some early manuscripts do not have this verse.
When I encounter these things, I refer to my Interlinear Bible (Hebrew, Greek, English) for a literal word by word translation immediately below each Greek word. I am usually able to work it out.
Not sure what "personal interpretation" is but no Protestant believes in a private interpretation of Scripture.
Scripture interprets Scripture, as our understanding of it is led by the Holy Spirit.
Sadly the RCC usurps the work of the Holy Spirit in the heart of every believer and says instead that the ecclesiocracy is the sword of the spirit whereas we know that office to be held by Scripture.
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." -- 2 Peter 1:20-21"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
There is a HUGE difference between 'differences in translation' and outright fabrication and adding additional verses, many years later. Who is responsible for these fabricated/additional verses being added?
The following comprises a very small sampling of words, phrases, and verses that were not in the original Greek texts of the New Testament:
Mat 18:11 (NASB)
[a](A)For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.]
Footnotes:
Footnotes:
Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) Example of the authors trying to force the fulfillment of prophecy.
35 After crucifying Him they divided His clothes by casting lots. (A) [a]
Footnotes:
Footnotes:
Footnotes:
Mar 15:28 (NASB) (another example of trying to force the fulfillment of prophecy)
28[[a]And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "And He was numbered with transgressors."]
Footnotes:
Mar 16:9-20 Amplified Bible (AMP)
9[a]Now Jesus, having risen [[b]from death] early on the first day of the week, appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom He had driven out seven demons.
10 She went and reported it to those who had been with Him, as they grieved and wept.
11 And when they heard that He was alive and that she had seen Him, they did not believe it.
12 After this, He appeared in a different form to two of them as they were walking [along the way] into the country.
13 And they returned [to Jerusalem] and told the others, but they did not believe them either.
14 Afterward He appeared to the Eleven [apostles themselves] as they reclined at table; and He reproved and reproached them for their unbelief (their lack of faith) and their hardness of heart, because they had refused to believe those who had seen Him and looked at Him attentively after He had risen [[c]from death].
15 And He said to them, Go into all the world and preach and publish openly the good news (the Gospel) to every creature [of the whole [d]human race].
16 He who believes [who adheres to and trusts in and relies on the Gospel and Him Whom it sets forth] and is baptized will be saved [[e]from the penalty of eternal death]; but he who does not believe [who does not adhere to and trust in and rely on the Gospel and Him Whom it sets forth] will be condemned.
17 And these attesting signs will accompany those who believe: in My name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new languages;
18 They will pick up serpents; and [even] if they drink anything deadly, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will get well.
19 So then the Lord Jesus, after He had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven and He sat down at the right hand of God.(A)
20 And they went out and preached everywhere, while the Lord kept working with them and confirming the message by the attesting signs and miracles that closely accompanied [it]. Amen (so be it).
Footnotes:
Luk 9:55-56 (NASB)
55 But He turned and rebuked them, [and said, "You do not know what kind of spirit you are of;
56 for the Son of Man did not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them."] And they went on to another village.
Footnotes:
Luk 17:36 (NASB)
36["[a](A)Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other will be left."]
Footnotes:
Luk 23:17 (NASB)
17[[a]Now he was obliged to release to them at the feast one prisoner.]
Footnotes:
John 5:4 (NASB)
3 In these lay a multitude of those who were sick, blind, lame, and withered, [[a]waiting for the moving of the waters;
4 for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool and stirred up the water; whoever then first, after the stirring up of the water, stepped in was made well from whatever disease with which he was afflicted.]
Footnotes:
53[a]And they went [back], each to his own house.
John 8 1BUT JESUS went to the Mount of Olives.
2 Early in the morning (at dawn), He came back into the temple [[b]court], and the people came to Him in crowds. He sat down and was teaching them,
3 When the scribes and Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery. They made her stand in the middle of the court and put the case before Him.
4 Teacher, they said, This woman has been caught in the very act of adultery.
5 Now Moses in the Law commanded us that such [women--offenders] shall be stoned to death. But what do You say [to do with her--what is Your sentence]?(A)
6 This they said to try (test) Him, hoping they might find a charge on which to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger.
7 However, when they persisted with their question, He raised Himself up and said, Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.
8 Then He bent down and went on writing on the ground with His finger.
9 They listened to Him, and then they began going out, conscience-stricken, one by one, from the oldest down to the last one of them, till Jesus was left alone, with the woman standing there before Him in the center of the court.
10 When Jesus raised Himself up, He said to her, Woman, where are your accusers? Has no man condemned you?
11 She answered, No one, Lord! And Jesus said, I do not condemn you either. Go on your way and from now on sin no more.
Footnotes:John 7:53 John 7:53 to 8:11 is absent from most of the older manuscripts.
(A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition, by Bruce Metzger, 1993, page 187-189 - [United Bible Societies]) writes that there is overwhelming and conclusive evidence that the text from John 7:53 to John 8:11 was not part of the original text of John. It was absent from important early and diverse New Testament manuscripts.
Act 8:37 (NASB)
37[[a]And Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."]
Footnotes:
Footnotes:
Footnotes:
Act 24:6-8 (NASB)
6 "And he even tried to (A)desecrate the temple; and then we arrested him. [[a]We wanted to judge him according to our own Law.
7 "But Lysias the commander came along, and with much violence took him out of our hands,
8 ordering his accusers to come before you.] By examining him yourself concerning all these matters you will be able to ascertain the things of which we accuse him."
Footnotes:
Footnotes:
Footnotes:
Blessings and Peace. KB
Your appraisal of this thread and the possible reasons for its posting are excellent.
As Protestants, let's exit, leaving the thread to die by its own deception.
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.