I'm not holding my breath.
Not one single Catholics has of yet, provided one shred of evidence stating exactly what those traditions are and how they can be sure they've been passed down faithfully.
Posted on 05/14/2014 10:02:57 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
The original writings from the Apostles themselves (the autographs) no longer exist.
This is due partly to the perishable material (papyrus) used by the writers, and partly the fact that the Roman emperors decreed the destruction of the sacred books of the Christians (Edict of Diocletian, A.D. 303).
Before translating the Bible into Latin, St. Jerome already translated into more common languages enough books to fill a library. (Saint Jerome, Maisie Ward, Sheed & Ward; A Companion to Scripture Studies, Steinmuller.)
In the year 383, he revised the Latin New Testament text in accordance with some Greek manuscripts. Between the years 390 and 406 he translated the Old Testament directly from the Hebrew, and this completed work is known today as the "Old Latin Vulgate". The work had been requested by Pope Damasus, and Copies of St. Jerome's Latin Vulgate appeared uncorrupted as late as the 11th century, with some revisions by St. Peter Damian and Lanfranc. (Catholic Encyclopedia, "Place of the Bible in the Church", C.U.A.)
Pope Benedict XV wrote about St. Jerome's translation in his 1920 encyclical, Spiritus Paraclitus, "Nor was Jerome content merely to gather up this or that teacher's words; he gathered from all quarters whatever might prove of use to him in this task. From the outset he had accumulated the best possible copies of the Bible and the best commentators on it," . . . "he corrected the Latin version of the Old Testament by the Greek; he translated afresh nearly all the books of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Latin; . . . he discussed Biblical questions with the brethren who came to him, and answered letters on Biblical questions which poured in upon him from all sides; besides all this, he was constantly refuting men who assailed Catholic doctrine and unity."
(Excerpt) Read more at cathtruth.com ...
You were talking to EVERYONE reading this thread. Private Messaging is available should you want to talk to someone privately. You've been here long enough to know this, right?
So what?
This is a public forum and an open thread.
If you don’t like those you disagree with commenting on your posts, you have the option of PMing someone or posting on caucus only threads.
Otherwise, live with it.
I'm not holding my breath.
Not one single Catholics has of yet, provided one shred of evidence stating exactly what those traditions are and how they can be sure they've been passed down faithfully.
He also has stated that he's a muslim.
So which is it?
And I'll raise you a Kerry and Biden.
No, that's an opinion.
Show me where Jesus said that we have to become a Catholic to get to heaven.
Chapter and verse.
Hahahahahahaaaaa...
What a pantload of a reply! What a classic FAIL!
When you grow up, let us have an intelligent conversation!
You've just proved you don't bother reading what I post. I've been saying that all along! What you don't seem to be able to get your head around is that what God intended for us to KNOW is contained in the sacred Scripture HE ensured would be written. How else could anyone know what happened to Abraham or Adam and Eve or all the other people and events that coalesce into the whole rule of our faith? How did anyone know what transpired between Jesus and the devil after Jesus' 40 day fast in the desert? How else did they know what Jesus prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane the night he was betrayed? How else the specific words the angels announced to the shepherds the night Christ was born? All these things were because the Holy Spirit TOLD the writers of Scripture TO write them down so that we here, two thousand years later, can be as sure of the truth as they were that first century. No one is rejecting all traditions, just that no tradition is above the Scripture and anything that is deemed necessary to be believed, MUST be validated BY God's word - the Bible.
I can also trace my faith straight back to Jesus. Roman Catholicism teaches, as mandatory to salvation, things that cannot be traced straight back to Jesus nor to the early church established by the Apostles. Everything I believe I CAN show you in Scripture. It is based on what the word of God says.
No, it's your OPINION. Our salvation is based on faith in Christ by the grace of God. Why do you reject what your own Catechism and Vatican II say about non-Catholic Christians being saved outside of the Roman Catholic Church? Do you think you are smarter than your own magesterium? Do you know better than them? Isn't it a sin to reject your church's dogmatic teachings?
As was Paul's apparently.
So again, thanks for that link, as know I don’t have to be charged with taking Luther out of context.
And yet that quote was used out of context. Thanks for playing Mr Clinton.
And the only the thing in the world you know about Christ is through the Catholic Church, the authors of the Bible, whether you want to admit it or not. It didn’t fall out of heaven. The Bible is a Catholic Document that has allowed people for over a thousand years to know Jesus Christ. Written and canonized by Catholics.
Absolutely was.
He said you have to be baptised by water and the Holy Spirit.
Which is just another little part of scripture that you ignore. Catholics are born of water and the Holy Spirit. How many protestants or “Christians” ignore this commandment?
‘Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God’ [John 3:5]
And that “water” was not talking about his physical birth.
The deception runs deep if you really believe that.
The JEWS are responsible for the entire Old Testament.
So in one, brief sentence, your entire belief system about the source of the Bible is shown to be false.
And yeah, in a way the Bible DID fall out of heaven. Men moved along by the HOLY SPIRIT wrote it down. It's not a Catholic document. It's a God document, of which Catholics wrongly claim ownership.
I have been.
Which is just another little part of scripture that you ignore.
Mind reading much? Or just wishful thinking?
Catholics are born of water and the Holy Spirit.
So they are sure of their salvation then?
How many protestants or “Christians” ignore this commandment?
None that I know and every church I know of practices and strongly encourages water baptism.
And that “water” was not talking about his physical birth.
Sure it is.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
OK. Thanks.
“It’s not a Catholic document. It’s a God document, of which Catholics wrongly claim ownership”
Oh.........Okey Dokey. Tell me what was the name of the Church that compiled the scriptures in a book and tell me the name of the Pope that canonized it? Can you do that for me?
No, Luther’s Doctrine of Paul was the novelty.
Thanks for Playing Elmer Gantry
xone:
He was not a Doctor of the Catholic Church. He held a Doctoral Degree in Theology and taught at the Catholic University attached to the Catholic Diocese of his hometown in Germany. A Doctor of the Catholic Church would be Saint Ambrose of Milan, Saint Jerome, Saint Augustine, Saint Thomas Aquinas, etc. In other words, someone the Church recognizes in their writings as being very instrumental in the Church developing its core Doctrine are more formally defining them or making a contribution in the area of Liturgy and Prayer, etc., such as Saint Theresa of Avilla.
Wrong; propaganda. As said with substantiation but ignored, it was generally settled but not definitely, indisputably until after Luther died, and thus doubts continued about some books right into Trent, and which was not unanimous that those who dissent from it should be cut off.
Besides apocryphal books,
On the eve of the Reformation, it was not only Luther who had problems with the extent of the New Testament canon. Doubts were being expressed even by some of the loyal sons of the Church. Luther's opponent at Augsburg, Cardinal Cajetan, following Jerome, expressed doubts concerning the canonicity of Hebrews, James, 2 and 3 John, and Jude. Of the latter three he states, "They are of less authority than those which are certainly Holy Scripture." Erasmus likewise expressed doubts concerning Revelation as well as the apostolicity of James, Hebrews and 2 Peter. - http://bible.org/article/evangelicals-and-canon-new-testament#P136_48836
The Catholic Encyclopedia states that “he seemed more than three centuries in advance of his day in questioning the authenticity of the last chapter of St. Mark, the authorship of several epistles, viz., Hebrews, James, II Peter, II and III John, Jude...”— http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03145c.htm
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.