It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
DISRAELI
reply to post by adjensen
I think you are still missing that user's point
When Colbe says "The Bible is a Catholic book", the intended meaning is that "the Bible is a book created by and belonging to the community now commonly known as the Roman Catholic church, as against other Christian groups", and THAT is the claim which the user is contesting.
LOL LOL LOL..this makes me think of the number of Bibles I've opened and looking at the inside cover...they have a copyright symbol in them.
How do you copyright God's word and then try to declare ones self "Universal??"
lol... so you have never read a book with a critical review? What... if a book has a critic you refuse to read it? wow...
orangetom1999
DISRAELI
reply to post by adjensen
I think you are still missing that user's point
When Colbe says "The Bible is a Catholic book", the intended meaning is that "the Bible is a book created by and belonging to the community now commonly known as the Roman Catholic church, as against other Christian groups", and THAT is the claim which the user is contesting.
LOL LOL LOL..this makes me think of the number of Bibles I've opened and looking at the inside cover...they have a copyright symbol in them.
How do you copyright God's word and then try to declare ones self "Universal??"
It just seems to me that no one has a copyright on God's word. I discovered this when first I opened up a copy of an NIV Bible...a copyright symbol on the inside pages.
On the inside of a King James there is not a copyright symbol. I do not, however, know about the New King James having never read one on the inside cover. Perhaps some of you readers have one and can post if there is a copyright symbol on the inside cover. I would like to know.
I just cannot conceive of the Catholic Church having a monopoly on the Bible against all other users. This particularly once I understood how and why the King James Version came to be and that there were always non Catholic Bibles in existence...from the beginning.
Thanks,
Orangetom
A Bible version, like the English Standard Version, ought to be copyrighted not because you're going to keep paying translators or a committee. That's not the point. The point is that unbelievable care, prayer, and energy goes into a translation's accuracy, and you don't want anybody taking it, saying it's the ESV, and then changing the words to wrong translations.
sad_eyed_lady
reply to post by colbe
Thanks for the link to After the Warning. I have not read St. Faustina's Diary of Divine Mercy. I am bookmarking the website.
nenothtu
colbe
The Petros/Petra ~ masculine/feminine argument to try and disprove Jesus named Peter leader of His Church on earth falls flat. Our Lord spoke Aramaic to Peter. There is no feminine/masculine in Aramaic.
Incorrect. In ALL Semitic languages, including Aramaic, gender is very distinct. Aramaic has masculine gender, feminine gender, but no neuter gender.
Peter was the first Pope.
Incorrect. Peter was a Christian. The early Church had no "Pope", nor was one ever authorized. "Pope" (Latin: papa; from Greek: πάππας pappas, a child's word for father) is specifically prohibited as a title by the Bible, in Matthew 23:9 -
And call none your father upon earth; for one is your father, who is in heaven.
- Douay-Rheims Version
This knowledge was passed down
Which is specifically why "tradition" over "scripture" is such a dangerous heresy.
God desires everyone to become Roman Catholic, I'll keep saying this until God reveals this for all the world in the Great Warning...the "awakening." That we all be one, Our Lord's desire.
It is written "I desire mercy and not sacrifice". That alone gives the lie to the notion that God wants everyone to become Roman Catholic.
blessings,
Thanks, but no thanks. Some of us have no need of your "blessings".
edit on 2014/1/3 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)
nenothtu
colbe
It is a fact, for fifteen years of following prophecy (private revelation), the Catholic, a few Orthodox and the Protestant messages from Heaven, Our Lord states in all three over and over the Remnant IS Roman Catholic. If prophecy said something different, I wouldn't be commenting in this thread. I would be going where God's prophets said to go...
Colbe -
This IS an interesting twist of events! Could you be so kind as to point me to these alleged "prophecies" where God delivered a message to protestants through a Protestant "prophet" that everyone needs to convert Roman Catholic?
It just doesn't work for me to have that message delivered to Protestants through a Catholic "prophet" - I'm sure you can see the conflict of interest and agenda that would be involved there.
Thanks.
adjensen
reply to post by DISRAELI
When Colbe says "The Bible is a Catholic book", the intended meaning is that "the Bible is a book created by and belonging to the community now commonly known as the Roman Catholic church, as against other Christian groups", and THAT is the claim which the user is contesting.
If she didn't say that, is it fair to infer it and then argue the thing to death, when "The Bible is a Catholic book" is a true statement? For a thousand years, the Catholic Church WAS the catholic church, and that is the organization that selected Biblical canon, so to say that the Bible is not a Catholic book is not valid. It is also a Christian book, as well as a catholic book, but if the Catholic Church did not exist, had died out in 70AD, there would be no Bible.
adjensen
That is what I'm arguing, not what you infer about that statement, because that's between you and her.
What is copyrighted is the translation, footnotes or other superfluous bits, not the text.
The reason Roman Catholicism selected the Biblical Canon, because she is the faith. The faith Christ established, the one and only.
adjensen
I don't understand how you make that leap. The church is contiguous, from Peter to today, in four denominations, as well as in the general catholic community of believers. While the church itself did not write any of it, I think it quite the stretch to say that those who did were not members of that contiguous church, and the Catholic Church itself did determine what was canonical and what was not, so it is a "Catholic book" -- if you used Marcion's canon, you would have a "Marcionic book", regardless of the authorship of the texts.
That was the cited reason for ultimately rejecting Apocalypse of Peter, which was in and out of canon for quite a while -- the church believed that Peter wrote it, it was a popular book, but there were bits in it that seemed to imply that Jesus taught a form of Universal Salvation, which was contrary to the rest of scripture.
but there were bits in it that seemed to imply that Jesus taught a form of Universal Salvation, which was contrary to the rest of scripture.
orangetom1999
I never could get into the Apocrypha. It just does not ebb and flow like the rest of the Bible..both Olde and New Testaments. (KJV)
It is the same to me when I try to read certain Occult or Eastern Religious works. I cannot read them for long because something very different flows and ebbs in them. Something disturbing to my soul. Such is the same with the Apocrypha.
Curious if you have ever noted this with certain works??
As to history..yes..I agree. Alot of history in this nation took place right here...in this very area.
Yes...great that you know about St Lukes Church. I go past it often when visiting friends in Surry or closer in Smithfield, Virginia.
About that antiquarian book store...is it this one??
www.rarebookman.com...
While I am somewhat versed in Catholic and Protestant Dogma..I have been spending my time of late looking into areas of the "Whatever " category. I am thinking that this one has been working privily on the other two for awhile now...and accelerating.