No. They list the Traditional Catechetical Formula of the Ten Commandments.
The Ten Commandments as handed down by God to Moses on Mt. Sinai were the beginning of the nation of Israel, when they were leaving Egypt as slaves, for freedom in the promised land. They were considered to be the Law of God for his chosen people. There are, however, some major differences in interpretation. There is a difference in what the Catholic Church uses as the Ten Commandments and what the protestant churches use. In the Catholic Church they are as follows:http://www.catholicbible101.com/thetencommandments.htm
Rule #6
>>In fairness, the website does publish the entire passage from Exodus.”<<
So you’re wasting everyone’s time then by citing the previous thing. Way to go.
No...I was being fair and not trying to mis-represent what the website said. Because some arrogant Roman Catholic would immediately post the rest and claim I was trying to misrepresent the website.
Rule #2
>> “Here again, we have ECFs in disagreement over a fairly basic issue.”<<
It is basic - and yet we see Protestants disagree over basic all the time.
As we see Roman Catholics as well. It illustrates why the ECFs are writers of opinion...not Scripture. It is why Christianity rejects Roman Catholicism's Tradition as it often contradicts Scripture and is based upon contradictory opinions of the ECFs.
>>“However, the question becomes...what are Roman Catholics taught?”<<
Look in the Catechism.
I guess the two websites I posted aren't to be trusted then by Roman Catholics??
That wasn't the question. I'm curious as to what Roman Catholics are taught about the Ten Commandments in their Catechism classes..or whatever classes ya'll go to.
Are they taught the full verses...or just the Formula?
“There is a difference in what the Catholic Church uses as the Ten Commandments and what the protestant churches use. In the Catholic Church they are as follows:http://www.catholicbible101.com/thetencommandments.htm";
False. http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/command.htm What I posted (again) is a link to the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It details the Ten Commandments as they appear in Exodus and Deuteronomy and in the Traditional Catechetical Formula. What is the Formula for? Ease of memorization. To say anything like you have is simply dishonest.
I should point out also - because the chances of you knowing this are almost zero because it would take some study and reading - that The Catechism of the Council of Trent which was written 400 years become the CCC says this in the section on the First Commandment: “Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth: thou shalt not adore them nor serve them.”
And then:
“Some, supposing these words which come next in order to constitute a distinct precept, reduce the ninth and tenth Commandments to one. St. Augustine, on the contrary, considering the last two to be distinct Commandments, makes the words just quoted a part of the first Commandment. His division is much approved in the Church, and hence we willingly adopt it. Furthermore, a very good reason for this arrangement at once suggests itself. It was fitting that to the first Commandment should be added the rewards or punishments entailed by each one of the Commandments.”
And then it goes on to say:
“Let no one think that this Commandment entirely forbids the arts of painting, engraving or sculpture. The Scriptures inform us that God Himself commanded to be made images of Cherubim, and also the brazen serpent. The interpretation, therefore, at which we must arrive, is that images are prohibited only inasmuch as they are used as deities to receive adoration, and so to injure the true worship of God.
“As far as this Commandment is concerned, it is clear that there are two chief ways in which God’s majesty can be seriously outraged. The first way is by worshipping idols and images as God, or believing that they possess any divinity or virtue entitling them to our worship, by praying to, or reposing confidence in them, as the Gentiles did, who placed their hopes in idols, and whose idolatry the Scriptures frequently condemn. The other way is by attempting to form a representation of the Deity, as if He were visible to mortal eyes, or could be reproduced by colours or figures. Who, says Damascene, can represent God, invisible, as He is, incorporeal, uncircumscribed by limits, and incapable of being reproduced under any shape. This subject is treated more at large in the second Council of Nice. Rightly, then, did the Apostles say (of the Gentiles): They changed the glory of the incorruptible God into a likeness of birds, and of fourfooted beasts, and of creeping things; for they worshipped all these things as God, seeing that they made the images of these things to represent Him. Hence the Israelites, when they exclaimed before the image of the calf: These are thy gods, Israel, that have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, are denounced as idolaters, because they changed their glory into the likeness of a calf that eateth grass.
“When, therefore, the Lord had forbidden the worship of strange gods, He also forbade the making of an image of the Deity from brass or other materials, in order thus utterly to do away with idolatry. It is this that Isaias declares when he asks: To whom then have you likened God, or what image will you make for hill? That this is the meaning of the prohibition contained in the Commandment is proved, not only from the writings of the holy Fathers, who, as may be seen in the seventh General Council, give to it this interpretation: but is also clearly declared in these words of Deuteronomy, by which Moses sought to withdraw the people from the worship of idols: You saw not, he says, any similitude in the day that the Lord spoke to you in Horeb, from the midst of the fire. These words this wisest of legislators spoke, lest through error of any sort, they should make an image of the Deity, and transfer to any thing created, the honour due to God.
“To represent the Persons of the Holy Trinity by certain forms under which they appeared in the Old and New Testaments no one should deem contrary to religion or the law of God. For who can be so ignorant as to believe that such forms are representations of the Deity? forms, as the pastor should teach, which only express some attribute or action ascribed to God. Thus when from the description of Daniel God is painted as the Ancient of days, seated on a throne, with the books opened before hint, the eternity of God is represented and also the infinite wisdom, by which He sees and judges all the thoughts and actions of men.’
“Angels, also, are represented under human form and with wings to give us to understand that they are actuated by benevolent feelings towards mankind, and are always prepared to execute the Lord’s commands; for they are all ministering spirits, sent to minister for them who shall receive the inheritance of salvation.
“What attributes of the Holy Ghost are represented under the forms of a dove, and of tongues of fire, in the Gospel and in the Acts of the Apostles, is a matter too well known to require lengthy explanation.”
In other words, it says what I said. in earlier posts.
“It is why Christianity rejects Roman Catholicism’s Tradition as it often contradicts Scripture and is based upon contradictory opinions of the ECFs.”
Christianity is Catholicism and Catholicism is Christianity. Thus, what you said is a logical and theological impossibility.
“I guess the two websites I posted aren’t to be trusted then by Roman Catholics??”
Not when you’re the one presenting from them certainly not. One site you posted from was www.catholicbible101.com and even you, yourself, admitted: “In fairness, the website does publish the entire passage from Exodus.”
Here it is and it shows both the Traditional Catechetical Formula and the full wording right from Exodus: http://www.catholicbible101.com/thetencommandments.htm So the website can be trusted but you can’t be.
You also cited http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/command.htm - and their electronic version of the CCC shows all three forms of the Ten Commandments - just as I linked to a while ago. So it can be trusted and you can’t be.
You also cited Beginningcatholic.com. Look closely at the name: BEGINNING Catholic. BEGINNING. Not surprisingly they give the simple to memorize Traditional Catechetical Formula. And at the end of the article they have this: “The Catechism of the Catholic Church has a detailed description of the Catholic Ten Commandments. Read it!” And the link is to...http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/command.htm
So the website can be trusted and you can’t be.
Same here: https://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/ten_commandments.htm
It can be trusted. You can’t be.
Even a reporter can get it right. You apparently can’t. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resources/apologetics/catholic-doctrines-and-practices/graven-images-altering-the-commandments
The “RadTrads” can get it right. And you apparently can’t. https://www.fisheaters.com/10commandments.html
Apologists get it right, but apparently you can’t: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2016/12/ten-commandments-changed-catholics-uphold-alleged-idolatry.html
A former Baptist gets it right, but you apparently can’t: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8l9NQSV8CzM
And the beat goes on. No matter how much evidence is posted the chances you will come to believe the truth is just about zero.