Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible

Times (UK) ^ | October 05, 2005 | Ruth Gledhill

[MeanWestTexan]

THE hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true. The Catholic bishops of England, Wales and Scotland are warning their five million worshippers, as well as any others drawn to the study of scripture, that they should not expect “total accuracy” from the Bible.

[safisoft]

As many of the disciple's letters directly steer Jewish Christians to avoid the requirements of Jewish law for Gentiles, your concentration on the Old Testament is curious.

How odd. Yeshua [Jesus] quotes more from the book of Deuteronomy than any other book. He does not speak a NEW word, but the SAME word. Maybe you haven't read His words recently. As for the Apostles, they quote so extensively from the Hebrew Scriptures, that fully one third of the 'New Testament' is a direct quote or a direct allusion to the Hebrew Scriputes.

Lastly, if you can find some place where the Apostles tell people to throw their Hebrew Scriptures away, please post it here (people from various orders have been looking for that for a long time, only to be disappointed). But here, I will let Paul speak for himself:

Paul making answer for himself: Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar, have I offended in any thing. Acts 25:8

Having known me from the beginning (if they will give testimony) that according to the most sure sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee. Acts 26:5

And after the third day, he called together the chief of the Jews. And when they were assembled, he said to them: Men, brethren, I, having done nothing against the people, or the custom of our fathers, was delivered prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans; Acts 28:17

All from the Douay-Rheims version.

Paul, Peter, and James were demonstrably OBSERVANT Jews to their end. email the Vatican. You may be surprised to learn that there are Vatican scholars who agree with me on this one.

[editor-surveyor]

Thank God for the Reformation!

[Conservative til I die]

Trolling for attention again? Pathetic.

[Conservative til I die]

I may be a little late to this discussion, but why should I care what a Jewish person thinks about how Christians view the Old Testament law?

[Conservative til I die]

I always thought many protestant churches are devoted to the study of the Bible. What is the study of Bible history called?

In terms of Protestant fixation on the Bible? Bibliolatry is the correct term, I think.

[ColdSteelTalon]

No offense is inteded to toward Catholics but the Catholic Church "leadership" gave up the Gospel long ago. Especially when they got into banking 500 years ago.

[phantomworker]

LOL. I think there is another word.

[phantomworker]

No kidding?

[Free Baptist]

"We are long past the days of believing that the world was created in six 24-hour days."

Friend, you have gone too far past...

[Free Baptist]

"I'll get my teaching form a different source."

We offer free institute/college level Biblical studies. Bible-Literalist Institutes, Edenton, NC

[conservonator]

Rise kill and eat.

[NeoCaveman]

How come Peter was the only "pope" allowed to marry?

He was already married. Or, atleast married at one time as he had a mother in law as we know from scrupture.

How come Paul was able to rebuke Peter who fell into false teaching?

False premis. Paul rebuked Peter for his bad practice. This was not the first time or last time in 2000 a pope has been rebuked for bad practice

If Peter was the head honcho, then why did Paul write most of the N.T. letters?

Great question. All answers would be speculation. I have opinions on it, but they are just opinions

Peter was no pope, he was an equal among the other apostle's of Christ.

He was atleast first among equals, as can be shown by how many times in the gospels he is mentioned first. I was going to go with the gospel of Matthew for a more explicit answer, but you've heard it before, I'm sure, and rejected it. So why bother on that one.

[Conservative til I die]

No offense is inteded to toward Catholics but the Catholic Church "leadership" gave up the Gospel long ago. Especially when they got into banking 500 years ago.

Yeah. We control 90% of the world's gold reserves too. And yes, the Vatican was behind the Lincoln assassination.

Geez, where do people get this stuff from.

[Free Baptist]

"It wasn't until Vatican II in '62 that the nuns had us reading the Bible, and the RC version at that (Douay), not King James."

If we are discussing the Douay Version, yes, many, many mistakes. It was a product of corrupted Alexandrian-type Greek manuscripts (MSS)(corrupted by mystics in the first two centuries). Those manuscripts (some 50 copies) were brought to Constantine by Eusebius from North Africa about 350 A.D. Then Jerome used them for his Latin Vulgate, and later they were used by the Douay translation committee(s). In the 19th Century, Tischendorf found copies of the same type of MSS in a garbage bin at St. Catherine's in the Sinai, and so these are known as MSS Sinaiticus. They were recognized as corrupted, even by the scholars at St. Catherine's. The MSS that Eusebius delivered to Constantine (the same text type as those found in Sinai by Tischendorf) have been kept under lock and key in the Vatican, and are therefore called by the experts in manuscript evidence as MSS Vaticanus. MSS Vaticanus and Sinaticus are terribly inferior to the Antiochan or Byzantine type MSS from Syria. The Syrian type MSS found their way into a Latin Vulgate much superior to Jerome's as early as 160 A.D.

[Free Baptist]

"I don't think the Catholic Church believes in a word for word literal interpretation of the scriptures...certainly you don't get that from augustine, aquinas, francis, etc."

The Roman Catholic Church cannot possibly teach either literal or contextual interpreation of the Scriptures.

[Conservative til I die]

That's rather interesting! How come Peter was the only "pope" allowed to marry?

Why be obnoxious with the quotes around 'pope'? Whether you like it or not, Pope is a legitimate office.

If Peter was the head honcho, then why did Paul write most of the N.T. letters? Peter was no pope, he was an equal among the other apostle's of Christ.

1) We are all called to different purposes. Paul was an evangelist and preacher. Peter was a leader (who did write several books in the New Testament). 2) If you get the idea from reading the Bible that Peter was somehow equal to the other Apostles in prominence, then I'd really have to question your Bible-reading skills.

[Free Baptist]

"Yes, from now on THEY will be the ultimate authority on God's truth."

Right! When religious people from any quarter try to convince you that the Scriptures are in error, it is because they themselves want to be the "ultimate" or final authority.

[Conservative til I die]

The Bible refers to it as "apostasy." The Catholic Church can be defined as and apostate church. It has long ago departed from the faith "once delivered to the saints."

Face it Bubba, without the Catholic Church you wouldn't have a faith to belong to, whichever of the 30 zillion Protestant sects you belong to. You wouldn't have a Bible either to interpret according to your whims.

[Conservative til I die]

You clearly don't know what you are speaking about. I am not surprised. Go back to your mass son, you are absolved.

You sound like such a happy person on the inside.

[Free Baptist]

There are at least 10,000 congregations of independent Baptists which teach, as we do, that the bible is 100% accurate. There would also be thousands of other independent Bible and Christian churches that teach 100% accuracy for the Bible. And there are hundreds and perhaps thousands of Presbyterian congregations that also believe in 100% accuracy for the Bible.