Here is a pic of Kent Hovind, aka Dr. Dino.
Posted on 02/22/2010 6:48:33 AM PST by bogusname
The argument is often made that the Catholic Church gave us the Bible, but this could not be further from the truth. Only God could give us the Bible. It was originally authored by Him (II Tim. 3:16) and then preserved by Him (Psalm 12:6-7). The confusion, however, comes from the two streams of Scripture that came out of the Middle East after the time of Christ. The Christians were first called Christians at Antioch, where they diligently copied the Scriptures, and spread them throughout the world. However, Alexandria was the home of “scholars” who gloried in their knowledge (Jer. 9:24) rather than in Christ, and took copies of the perfect, preserved Word of God and changed them. One in particular, Origen, was extremely proactive in his aggressive revision of God’s Holy Words. His version combined his own works known as the Apocrypha with the Hebrew New Testament in a Greek version (the language of the proud intellectuals of Alexandria). But the Baptist sect known as the Vaudois, were speaking a new language – Latin. They translated the pure Hebrew Scriptures into Latin, which became the world language, and carried them across the world. Rome, however, slaughtered the Christians in blatant persecution of these diligent carriers of God’s Holy Word.
(Excerpt) Read more at drdino.com ...
No.
SnakeDoc
Yeah and the Greek Orthodox, Copt and Chaldean churches are Johnny-come-lately. Sure, ok.
Yes, Dr. Dino renounced his citizenship, filed bankruptcy and was convicted of tax evasion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind
Not exactly the most credible person to give us an accurate account of the history of the bible.
Just looked it up; he's in jail until 2015.
From Catholic Answers:
“Catholics are often accused of arguing in a “vicious circle,” proving the Bible by the Church, and the Church by the Bible. We must be careful to avoid this by explaining that we put the Church before the Bible because the Church existed first and wrote and compiled the Bible. The authority of the Bible depends on that of the Church. Then we use the Bible to prove the Church; we use it not as an inspired volume, but merely as a historical document. From the Gospels as historical documents we learn that Christ founded a Church, but the authority of the Gospels as inspired writings rests on the word of the Church.
We can define the Bible as “a collection of writings, which the Church of God has solemnly recognized as inspired” (Catholic Encyclopedia). What is the non-Catholic’s definition? Paul says, indeed: “All Scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, that the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16, 17). But he gives no list of Scriptures nor any method for discerning which they are.
The Scriptures themselves assert that they are incomplete and send us to the Church. “Many other signs also did Jesus . . . which are not written.” (John 20:30). “Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest ?” . . . . “How can I, unless some man show me” (Acts 8:30, 31).
It is impossible to get unanimity of impression in different ages and countries. Books appeal to one date and country, not to another: The Epistle of Clement, the Shepherd of Hermas, and several gospels at first thought inspired were rejected by the Church. On the other hand, the Books of Kings, Chronicles, and Ecclesiastes are disputed by modern critics as not containing “ heavenly matter,” yet are accepted by the Church as part of the organic whole—for the Bible is an organic whole, and many parts lose their meaning if severed. Each age and nation and temperament, by their interpretation, would (and in Protestantism do) practically make a different Bible, when, leaving ancient authority, they test each part by their subjective feelings.
No internal evidence could prove inspiration, because inspiration is essentially a supernatural fact. It is objective, not subjective. It is simply that God said this thing in this way. It may not appeal to me personally—parts of it may not be meant especially for me—but God wished to say it for some person or time. Therefore the inspiration can only be known upon some authority sent from God. The only possible competent authority would be either Christ or his apostles or the successors of the apostles—that is to say, Christ’s Church. All Christians appeal in fact to some authority behind the Bible (e.g., Luther claimed to alter the canon of Scripture, and Lutherans accepted this on his authority). Christ nowhere told men to go to a book to learn his doctrine. He himself wrote nothing down. But he did say to Peter: “Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church” (Matt. 16:18); and to Peter and the rest of the apostles: “Go ye teaching therefore all nations” (Matt. 28:19). “He that hears you, hears me, he that despises you, despises me, he that despises me despises him that sent me” (Luke 10:16). The apostles went forth and taught according to Christ’s command. They ordained others to succeed them. Much of his teaching they handed down in their tradition only—that divinely protected living memory of the Church. Much they committed to writing and collected together by degrees.
Though collections of sacred writings, varying in extent, existed in the various local Churches of Christendom, the canon or official list of Scripture was only compiled by the Church toward the end of the fourth century—at Hippo in 393, Carthage in 397, whence it was sent to Rome for confirmation in 419. The Bible may be called the notebook of the Church, and she has always claimed to be the guardian, exponent, and interpreter of it. . . .
As then, so today, private judgment leads to wild chaos in interpretation. But further, the rejection of the Bible has come directly from the claim of heretics to make it the sole rule of faith. The Bible is often obscure—a daily rule of faith and action must be clear —hence arose impatience of delays and obscurities.
Two schools came from Protestantism: Believers in an almost wooden theory of verbal inspiration making no allowance for the human instrument (e.g., various translations, slight discrepancies in different accounts of the same scene, texts from the Old Testament quoted with slight verbal inaccuracies in the New Testament); believers in absolutely unchecked freedom of criticism, neglecting the divine inspiration.
The Church insists on both the divine and human: “In interpreting the Bible scientifically, its twofold character must always be kept in view: It is a divine book, in so far as it has God for its author, it is a human book, in so far as it is written by men for men. In its human character the Bible is subject to the same rules of interpretation as profane books but in its Divine character it is given into the custody of the Church to be kept and explained, so that it needs special rules of hermeneutics” (Catholic Encyclopedia 5:696).
The Church maintains absolutely the inspiration of Scripture. The [First] Vatican Council thus defines it: “These books are held by the Church as sacred and canonical, not as having been composed by merely human labor, and afterwards approved by her authority, nor merely because they contain revelation without error, but because written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author and have been transmitted to the Church as such.”
She maintains also the sovereignty of truth in every sphere: “All truth is orthodox.” Truths cannot be contradictory. But time and patience are sometimes needed to bring home their full bearing and mutual harmony. W e must remember that the Church is often asked to accept as truth theories which are only imperfectly worked out or are full of errors. She rightly insists on waiting until the chaff and wheat have been sifted. She will not accept hypotheses as proved facts.
For a Christian face to face with a Bible passage the question “Is it true?” does not arise; God wrote it, and he cannot lie. The question in every instance is only, “What does it mean, what did the biblical author, inspired by, God, wish to convey and teach?” Now to ascertain this the guidance of the Church is essential, and time and patience are often needed...”
More here:
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9709clas.asp
I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to direct that last post to you.
How does trafficing in fairy tales serve Christ? Furthermore, how can you have his life in you without eating his flesh and drinking his blood as he commanded?
If it's true that the Catholic Church can trace itself back to the group that met to decide which books were to be canonical, then it can claim to have validated the books of the Bible.
That is not the same as "giving us" the Bible.
The various lists of received books, though, are many and are from all points of the early patriarchal cities. Does a list from Antioch, for example, get counted as an Antiochan entry?
Haha. I like that. That's actually kinda clever.
Your position is ridiculous ... but at least your presentation made me laugh.
SnakeDoc
And soon it will include an ordinariate for some of our previously sundered brethren in the Anglican church. It's a big Church.
at least we can agree on humor
While playing the market during the day, which at times can be tense, these types of messages provide for good comic relief. They can also be used by many of us who teach RCIA to understand and present positions made by those with different belief systems.I am waiting for the conjunction of Sola Scriptura thought and the thoughts of Joseph Smith. I believe it will explain how both groups cooperated in the formulation of the modern day version of the Koran and guide us in our interpretation of it. This will be beneficial when and if the religion of peace becomes dominant.But you probably will not appreciate that message when it arrives.
Must you always talk of cannibalism?!
So, you’re “just trying” to get people to ignore the teachings of their own churches and and instead follow you and your nutcase friends (who have no respect for the deeply held beliefs of hundreds of millions of people). Sorry, not buying it. This is a case of who-do-you-trust and I trust the Church. Peace.
that is what I say..........like your bible, thank a Catholic dude..
**Did the Catholic Church Give Us the Bible?**
Short answer — YES!!!
More information will be posted in a bit!
Of course the Catholic church gave us the Bible, at least the New Testament, ahile the Old Testament was given to us by the Jews.
Even if you take the leap of faith and claim it was written by God through man, you still had a council of man choose what passages of what books were to be included in the text.
You are mistaken. Here are the facts:
The Smiting Is Still Implied (God of the OT vs the NT)
Where Is That Taught in the Bible?
Friday Fast Fact: The Bible in English
Bible Reading is Central in Conversions to Catholicism in Shangai, Reports Organization
Verses (in Scripture) I Never Saw
5 Myths about 7 Books
Lectionary Statistics - How much of the Bible is included in the Lectionary for Mass? (Popquiz!)
Pope calls Catholics to daily meditation on the Bible
What Are the "Apocrypha?"
The Accuracy of Scripture
US Conference of Catholic Bishops recommendations for Bible study
CNA unveils resource to help Catholics understand the Scriptures
The Dos and Don’ts of Reading the Bible [Ecumenical]
Pope to lead marathon Bible reading on Italian TV
The Complete Bible: Why Catholics Have Seven More Books [Ecumenical]
Beginning Catholic: Books of the Catholic Bible: The Complete Scriptures [Ecumenical]
Beginning Catholic: When Was The Bible Written? [Ecumenical]
The Complete Bible: Why Catholics Have Seven More Books [Ecumenical]
U.S. among most Bible-literate nations: poll
Bible Lovers Not Defined by Denomination, Politics
Dei Verbum (Catholics and the Bible)
Vatican Offers Rich Online Source of Bible Commentary
Clergy Congregation Takes Bible Online
Knowing Mary Through the Bible: Mary's Last Words
A Bible Teaser For You... (for everyone :-)
Knowing Mary Through the Bible: New Wine, New Eve
Return of Devil's Bible to Prague draws crowds
Doctrinal Concordance of the Bible [What Catholics Believe from the Bible] Catholic Caucus
Should We Take the Bible Literally or Figuratively?
Glimpsing Words, Practices, or Beliefs Unique to Catholicism [Bible Trivia]
Catholic and Protestant Bibles: What is the Difference?
Church and the Bible(Caatholic Caucus)
Pope Urges Prayerful Reading of Bible
Catholic Caucus: It's the Church's Bible
How Tradition Gave Us the Bible
The Church or the Bible
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.