Posted on 03/17/2012 7:26:45 AM PDT by GonzoII
Nobody is forcing you to believe it, but to continue to deny it sure cuts into your credibility.
Not so much, really. They teach the Catechism of the Catholic church to kids and adults.
The answer is completely up to you. The sufficiency will be determined on whether you can answer his challenge or not.
I prefer KJV as well
I remember when the Living Bible came out in late 60s or 1970...easier to read but less character and texture...I think the Revised Standard was already around but we never used it...the Living Bible did make headway
very few churches use KJV anymore except for special verses and usually with Strongs along too if the words have more special than usual signficance...at least in my Southern Baptist church
Willaim Tyndale must feel vindicated after such a brutal execution
You are giving St. Paul too much credit. CCC 105 God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."
"For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and the New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself.
>> “Know-nothing ersatz Christians happen to me often.” <<
.
The only thing that could cause that is if you are dividing every 60 seconds like an amoeba.
.
Tyndale was executed for political, not theological reasons. He was a proponent of Unconditional election, with himself among the elect, and had challenged the Divine right of rule by the established powers of Europe, his own King Henry VIII chief among them. Tyndale's last words were directed to Henry VIII, not the Pope or the Catholic Church.
That said, Tyndale's Bible was full of other errors and heresies too. Simply ask yourself this question; if it were a valid, inerrant production of Scripture why are there no Protestant Churches using it today?
At the link there are some interesting comparisons from other Bibles with the KJV:
http://www.tmbible.com/BWCcitations.htm
. The only thing that could cause that is if you are dividing every 60 seconds like an amoeba. .
I would like you to identify an amoeba that reproduces every 60 seconds. It would seem that biology, much like theology, is a subject beyond your ken.
Would you be able to calculate the percentage of times that Paul went to the Jews instead of Gentiles? Or shall we add simple mathematics to the list as well?
I have no argument with either God or Paul. I have an argument with those who would elevate the words of a bishop of the Church above the words of God. Anyone who follows Paul to the exclusion of Jesus Christ is not Christian. It is exemplified in various heresies identified during the first millennium after Christ.
Nobody is forcing you to believe it, but to continue to deny it sure cuts into your credibility.
Let's look at whose credibility is in question. Anyone who produces prose to the effect that disagreement with them equals disagreement with God has effectively lost the argument.
Actually, you DO seem to have an argument with BOTH God and Paul. It is IMPOSSIBLE to "follow Paul to the exclusion of Jesus Christ", Mark.
"Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in ME FIRST Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, FOR A PATTERN TO THEM WHICH SHOULD HEREAFTER BELIEVE ON HIM TO LIFE EVERLASTING." 1 Tim. 1:1.
So..what do you do with this Scripture? Paul says, through the Holy Spirit, that Paul would be a pattern to those who should believe on Jesus Christ to life everlasting. Not only that, but that in Paul FIRST would Christ shew forth ALL LONGSUFFERING. To those HEREAFTER...HEREAFTER WHAT?? HEREAFTER PAUL.
Can it be any clearer? Jesus Christ had mercy on Paul, Paul is the pattern for us to follow as he followed Christ. Not Peter and the 11. You would be following them and their gospel of the Kingdom, which is to Israel, and which is in abeyance now, until the fullness of the Gentiles be brought in.
Those who are in heresy situations are those who are using PETER and the 11 as patterns to follow to life everlasting. According to Jesus Christ. You may not like what you read, but that doesn't change the truth of God's word. You follow the wrong pattern, you end up in deceit and heresy. Paul is the pattern Jesus Christ set forth during this age of grace, the Church the Body of Christ. Peter is the pattern Jesus Christ set forth during the age of the law, His earthly ministry, and the Millennial Kingdom, the Millenial Church.
It's no wonder some cannot tell others just what the gospel is, if works are part of salvation, if Christ is going to literally return to this earth, if they are "spiritual Israel", what "Upon this rock" means, if there are priests today, whether men can forgive sins, and on and on. They are following a pattern for another: ISRAEL. And NOT the pattern for the Body of Christ.
ANd the only way to grope out of the maze they have created for themselves is to depend on traditions, doctrines of men, fables, and volumes and volumes of man's supposed "brilliance" to shore up their beliefs. Because the pattern Christ gave them to follow during this time is ignored for a pattern that belongs to someone else. It's like your wife making you a suit following the pattern she has for her favorite dress.
I can't imagine where you got that idea. We Catholics, as Christians, more specifically as the first Christians, follow the pattern of Jesus to become more Christ-like as revealed to us by the Tradition and the Scripture by the St. Paul, the Eleven, and the Saints. This is what we mean by "conversion".
No...He was THE apostle to the Gentiles...Peter and the other apostles were commissioned to seek out and preach to the Jews...Why do you guys keep ignoring the scriptures???
Oh, I know why...It's a Peter/pope thing, isn't it...
Surely you are not implying that none of the other Apostles preached the word to any non-Jews are you? There is way too much Scriptural and historical evidence to the contrary.
The point of the ministries of all of the Apostles, St. Paul included, was to eliminate the differences between Jew and Gentile, not to institutionalize and perpetuate them.
Yes you do...
I have an argument with those who would elevate the words of a bishop of the Church above the words of God.
None of the apostles were bishops...Just as no bishops have ever been apostles...
You apparently then figure Jesus was done speaking when he ascended to heaven...You also apparently do not beleive that Jesus continued to reveal his plan to and thru the apostle Paul even tho the scriptures tell us otherwise...And that Peter recognized those new revelations as scripture...
It is exemplified in various heresies identified during the first millennium after Christ.
As it turns out, the only heretical religion in the bunch was the one you are affiliated with; the accuser of the brethren...
I'm surprised that Markbsnr is still saying words to the effect that Paul's Holy Spirit inspired Scriptures are somehow inferior to the words of Jesus Christ that the SAME Holy Spirit inspired the Gospel writers to record. It is especially surprising seeing as Natural Law posted the "official" Roman Catholic doctrine about Holy Scripture that state what we are contending, that ALL Scripture has as its author the same Holy Spirit. To refresh your memory, Mark, here is the content of CCC 105:
God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."
"For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and the New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself.
Can we hope that this is the last time "some" Catholics go against their own Catechism by insisting that "words of a bishop of the Church" should be held as inferior to the words of Jesus Christ? That "bishop", spoke under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and, as such, EVERYTHING he said in those books are EQUAL to the words of Christ because they ARE the words of Christ.
Not initially...Not til after the Jews rejected their Messiah and killed him...It wasn't revealed to Peter by Jesus for some time after Jesus was killed...
Initially in the ministry of Jesus, there was a huge difference between Jew and Gentile...
Eventually the point was to bring all to the knowledge of the saving grace of Jesus Christ, WHERE there is no difference between Jew and Gentile, in Christ...And that was to make the Jews, God's chosen, jealous of the Gentiles, to provoke them (the Jews) to come to him...
Amen...
Drinking while posting again?
Oh? You mean like the pope, the magisterium, and *Holy Tradition* trumping the God-breathed, Holy Spirit inspired word of God?
Yeah, I have a problem with that as well, which is part of the reason I no longer identify as a Catholic.
Anyone who follows Paul to the exclusion of Jesus Christ is not Christian.
No argument there. But seeing as nobody is doing that, I don't see the point in bringing it up; it's certainly not relevant to the discussion.
Anyone who produces prose to the effect that disagreement with them equals disagreement with God has effectively lost the argument.
Is someone making that claim that you bring that red herring up?
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.