Aug. 4, 2007
The Deuterocanonical Books, part 2
This post is a continuation of The Deuterocanonical Books, part 1. It may be helpful to read that before continuing.
The early Christians used the LXX and used it right along with the rest of the Scriptures.
"You shall not waver with regard to your decisions [Sirach 1:28]. Do not be someone who stretches out his hands but withdraws them when it comes to giving [Sirach 4:31]. ~ Didache [4:5, 70 AD]
"Since, therefore, [Christ] was about to be manifested and to suffer in the flesh, his suffering was foreshown. For the prophet speaks against evil, 'Woe to their soul because they have counseled an evil counsel against themselves' [Isaiah 3:9], saying, 'Let us bind the righteous man because he is displeasing to us.' [Wisdom 2:12]" ~ Letter of Barnabas 6:7 [74 AD]"Stand fast, therefore, in these things, and follow the example of the LORD, being firm and unchangeable in the faith, loving the brotherhood [1 Peter 2:17]...When you can do good, defer it not, because 'alms deliver from death' [Tobit 4:10, 12:9]. Be all of you subject to one another [1 Peter 5:5], having your conduct blamless among the Gentiles [1 Peter 2:12], and the LORD may not be blasphemed through you. But woe to him by whom the name of the LORD is blasphemed! [Isaiah 52:5] ~ Polycarp [Letter to the Philadelphians 10, 135 AD]
There is a good collection of quotes from the Early Church Fathers using the deuterocanonicals at Catholic Answers: The Old Testament Canon and The Fathers and the Deuterocanonicals
The Scriptures were canonized in 382 at the Council of Rome. They included the deuterocanonical books in the Old Testament. This decision was ratified at the councils of Hippo in 393, Carthage in 397 and 419, II Nicea in 787, Florence in 1442, and Trent in 1546. Christians used this canon all the way up to the Protestant Reformation. The deuterocanonicals were included in all of the early editions and translations of the Bible (including Wycliffe and Luther). The Guttenberg Bible, the first book ever printed, also had the deuterocanonicals.
So, what changed? Why did Protestants suddenly decide that they were faulty Scriptures after 1000 years of using them? What authority did they have to decide what was divinely inspired and what was not?
Jon left a really great comment that summed it up very well. He said:
"This topic is especially of interest to me, since many Protestant family and friends ask me why Catholics 'added' extra books to the Bible. I always ask them in return how a church in the Protestant model (fragmented, no central magisterium) could possibly come to agree on which books were inspired by God. Only if there is an infallible magisterium with a promise from our Lord that she will teach no error can we be sure that our canon is correct."
He hit the nail right on the head. Protestants don't even claim to have infallible authority. How could they claim to have the correct canon? And why would God wait 1000 years to give the world the revelation that they had the wrong Scriptures?
Sophia asked:
"How can the Catholic Church prove that God actually meant these documents to be a part of the Bible?"
My answer to Sophia is: I believe that these documents are divinely inspired for the same reason that I believe that Hebrews, Esther, & Revelation are inspired. The Catholic Church canonized them and declared them to be infallible. Why do you believe in Hebrews and not Tobit? On what authority do you depend upon to know what is really Scripture and what is not?
Christians used the same Bible for nearly 1500 years. Christians still use that Bible today. I would challenge Protestants, if you believe in Sola Scriptura, that the Bible alone is your total authority, you had better be very sure that you have the correct Bible. If it is really that important to you, you had better be sure that you aren't missing something.
Pax Christi,
~the Catholic apologist
• Post A Comment!
Posted by Anonymous
Posted by rjdjohn316
Posted by Anonymous
Posted by Jon
Posted by thecatholicapologist
Posted by Kingfisher
Posted by thecatholicapologist
Posted by Inkling
Comments
Aug. 10, 2007 - From Arwengirl
Posted by Anonymous Hello! I loved the post! Keep up the good work!
God Bless!
_Arwengirl
God Bless!
_Arwengirl
Aug. 13, 2007 - i added you
Posted by rjdjohn316 Ok, I added the blog!
Love,
Rachel
Love,
Rachel
Aug. 15, 2007 - What would your response to this be? - Nerdanel
Posted by Anonymous In principle, Christianity is built solely on the Holy Scriptures, the written Word of God. The Bible is our only infallible rule of faith, being sufficient to give us the sure knowledge of the Gospel for our salvation and holiness.
Roman Catholicism demands submission of the intellect and will to the doctrines taught by the Roman magisterium (the Pope and bishops). It is claimed that the Catholic Church derives its doctrines from the "sacred deposit" found in Scriptures and Sacred Tradition. However the faithful cannot verify these doctrines by referring to the original sources. The Scriptures are inaccessible because only the magisterium is able to establish the authentic meaning. Similarly the contents of Sacred Tradition can only be known through the magisterium. Roman Catholicism is mental and spiritual slavery to the Vatican.
As expected, since the foundations are different, so also are the edifices built upon them. Christianity stands on the Gospel of God's sovereign grace. In love, God predestines His chosen ones to be adopted as sons through Jesus Christ, their sole mediator. The Son became man and gave His life as a ransom to secure their freedom from sin. Being dead in sin, they are completely unable to convert ourselves or merit God's favour. Therefore God graciously grants His people repentance and faith to turn to Him and trust in Christ Jesus for salvation. Believers are accepted in Christ, solely on the merit of His righteousness and blood, and not because of any goodness or human merit. God also resides in His people by the Holy Spirit, enabling them to obey and glorify the Father, and to guarantee their inheritance in heaven forever.
Rome's "gospel" is not good news at all. The Roman institution, calling itself "The Church", usurps Christ's mediatorial office, proclaiming herself as the "sacrament of salvation." The "Church" dispenses salvation to her faithful in small portions, starting at baptism and continuing throughout life. Forgiveness can only be obtained through the sacrament of penance. The benefits of Christ's sacrifice are accessible through the sacrifice of the Mass. Instead of teaching the faithful to rest in Christ by faith, Catholics are taught to perform religious works to "merit grace" and to do penance to make satisfaction. Even after death, Catholics remains dependent on the "Church" to relieve their suffering in Purgatory by masses and indulgences.
The Roman Catholic Church is a mighty obstacle to anyone seeking salvation, enslaving millions of people to a religious system and preventing them from coming directly to Christ.
The choice is between the Bible and the Roman magisterium; the choice is between salvation by grace through faith in Christ, or through human merit and effort in the Roman religion.
Roman Catholicism demands submission of the intellect and will to the doctrines taught by the Roman magisterium (the Pope and bishops). It is claimed that the Catholic Church derives its doctrines from the "sacred deposit" found in Scriptures and Sacred Tradition. However the faithful cannot verify these doctrines by referring to the original sources. The Scriptures are inaccessible because only the magisterium is able to establish the authentic meaning. Similarly the contents of Sacred Tradition can only be known through the magisterium. Roman Catholicism is mental and spiritual slavery to the Vatican.
As expected, since the foundations are different, so also are the edifices built upon them. Christianity stands on the Gospel of God's sovereign grace. In love, God predestines His chosen ones to be adopted as sons through Jesus Christ, their sole mediator. The Son became man and gave His life as a ransom to secure their freedom from sin. Being dead in sin, they are completely unable to convert ourselves or merit God's favour. Therefore God graciously grants His people repentance and faith to turn to Him and trust in Christ Jesus for salvation. Believers are accepted in Christ, solely on the merit of His righteousness and blood, and not because of any goodness or human merit. God also resides in His people by the Holy Spirit, enabling them to obey and glorify the Father, and to guarantee their inheritance in heaven forever.
Rome's "gospel" is not good news at all. The Roman institution, calling itself "The Church", usurps Christ's mediatorial office, proclaiming herself as the "sacrament of salvation." The "Church" dispenses salvation to her faithful in small portions, starting at baptism and continuing throughout life. Forgiveness can only be obtained through the sacrament of penance. The benefits of Christ's sacrifice are accessible through the sacrifice of the Mass. Instead of teaching the faithful to rest in Christ by faith, Catholics are taught to perform religious works to "merit grace" and to do penance to make satisfaction. Even after death, Catholics remains dependent on the "Church" to relieve their suffering in Purgatory by masses and indulgences.
The Roman Catholic Church is a mighty obstacle to anyone seeking salvation, enslaving millions of people to a religious system and preventing them from coming directly to Christ.
The choice is between the Bible and the Roman magisterium; the choice is between salvation by grace through faith in Christ, or through human merit and effort in the Roman religion.
Aug. 23, 2007 - My 2 cents in reply to Nerdanel
Posted by Jon I would have to take issue with your first assumption, Nerdanel. It seems that you distinguish Catholicism from Christianity, although Catholics are most definitely Christians. The opening statement here: that Christianity is based solely on the Holy Scriptures, is not quite true for either Protestant Christians or Catholics. All Protestant reading of the Bible is filtered through the reader's own intelligence, understanding, and beliefs. A five year old Baptist, for example would read Revelation very differently than a 30 year old Reformed theologian would. Catholics have the benefit of the Magisterium to guide us by the Holy Spirit.
To say that Christianity in the apostolic era was based solely on the Scriptures would be wrong as well. 1 Timothy 3:15 says that it is "the Church of the living God [that is] the pillar and bulwark of the truth." Indeed, one cannot say that early believers were deprived of the Truth if they did not have a set of all the writings of the apostles and the evangelists. New believers in India, for example, most likely did not have the letters of Saint Paul to the churches in Asia.
As for the concerns about the Church acting as a mediator... this is clearly Scriptural and traditional, and it does not belittle the role of Christ as sole mediator. Also, the Church does not dispense salvation bit by bit. At baptism, one is marked a child of God forever. If they commit no mortal sins between baptism and death, they will be saved. The sacraments do have saving efficacy, but think of them as channels of grace flowing from the wounds of Christ crucified.
"Catholics are taught to perform religious works to 'merit grace.'" When a Protestant brings me this charge, I ask them how they receive grace. Of course all grace comes from the Lord, but again, there are several channels of grace that require our intervention. A Protestant will say that they pray for grace, or they are graced through the reading of the Bible. These two actions are acts of the will. Grace is a free gift, but one must extend their arms to receive the gift.
To say that Christianity in the apostolic era was based solely on the Scriptures would be wrong as well. 1 Timothy 3:15 says that it is "the Church of the living God [that is] the pillar and bulwark of the truth." Indeed, one cannot say that early believers were deprived of the Truth if they did not have a set of all the writings of the apostles and the evangelists. New believers in India, for example, most likely did not have the letters of Saint Paul to the churches in Asia.
As for the concerns about the Church acting as a mediator... this is clearly Scriptural and traditional, and it does not belittle the role of Christ as sole mediator. Also, the Church does not dispense salvation bit by bit. At baptism, one is marked a child of God forever. If they commit no mortal sins between baptism and death, they will be saved. The sacraments do have saving efficacy, but think of them as channels of grace flowing from the wounds of Christ crucified.
"Catholics are taught to perform religious works to 'merit grace.'" When a Protestant brings me this charge, I ask them how they receive grace. Of course all grace comes from the Lord, but again, there are several channels of grace that require our intervention. A Protestant will say that they pray for grace, or they are graced through the reading of the Bible. These two actions are acts of the will. Grace is a free gift, but one must extend their arms to receive the gift.
Aug. 28, 2007 - In response to Nerdanel:
Posted by thecatholicapologist Nerdanel,
I believe I’ve read this article before; is it from justforcatholics.com?
Regardless, I’ll be glad to give you my response. I want to thank Jon giving such a well thought out reply as well.
The first point made in the article is: “Christianity is built solely on the Holy Scriptures.” I would ask: if the Scriptures are the sole rule of faith, then where does it say that in the Scriptures? Is there any Biblical basis for sola scriptura? The author of the article seems to simply assume that his point is true without backing it up with any reference whatsoever.
Secondly, Roman Catholicism does not “demand submission of the intellect”. It simply presents the truth. Whether someone chooses to accept the truth or not is their decision. Anyone is free to analyze and question what the Church claims to be infallible. It should be through the intellect that one accepts the authority of the Church in the first place.
The author says, “The Scriptures are inaccessible because only the magisterium is able to establish the authentic meaning.” It’s not that only the magisterium can establish the authentic meaning of the Scriptures, it’s that the magisterium always does establish the authentic meaning through the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This doesn’t make the Scriptures inaccessible. It actually makes them more accessible because we don’t have to second-guess our own personal interpretations. Whenever we have questions about the Scriptures, we can find answers.
~~~~~
“Roman Catholic Church is a mighty obstacle to anyone seeking salvation”
~~~~~
Here are a couple of quotes from the Catechism of the Catholic Church that help to define what the Church teaches is the Gospel:
“But when time had fully come, God sent forth his son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.” [Gal 4:4-5 NAB] This is “the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” [Mk 1:1]: God has visited his people. He has fulfilled the promise he made to Abraham and his descendants. He acted far beyond all expectation - he has sent his own “beloved Son.” [Mk 1:11; cf. Lk 1:5, 68] ~ CCC #422
Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” [Mt 16:16] On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church. [cf. Mt 16:18]
“To preach…the unsearchable riches of Christ.” [Eph 3:8] ~ CCC #424
The Paschal mystery of Christ’s cross and Resurrection stands at the center of the Good News that the apostles, and the Church following them, are to proclaim to the world. God’s saving plan was accomplished “once for all” [Heb 9:26] by the redemptive death of his son Jesus Christ. ~ CCC #571
~~~~~
“The ‘Church’ dispenses salvation to her faithful in small portions, starting at baptism and continuing throughout life.”
~~~~~
The Church doesn’t hand out salvation piece by piece throughout one’s lifetime. Salvation is Jesus Christ. It is only by Him and through Him. The Church brings us to Jesus through each of the sacraments: Baptism, Reconciliation, Confirmation, and most especially the Eucharist. It’s not dispensing salvation in small portions, it’s drawing one close to Jesus over and over again, partaking in His endless treasury of grace.
~~~~~
“Forgiveness can only be obtained through the sacrament of penance.”
~~~~~
God is not bound by His sacraments (“instruments of His grace”). One can be forgiven by God without confessing their sins to a priest. However, God gives us the Sacrament of Reconciliation for our own healing.
~~~~~
“The benefits of Christ's sacrifice are accessible through the sacrifice of the Mass.”
~~~~~
The Catechism is such a valuable tool. If you really want to know what the Church teaches, read what she has given to us through the Catechism. What I write is only a weak representation.
“In the New Testament, the memorial takes on a new meaning. When the Church celebrates the Eucharist, she commemorates Christ Passover, and it is made present: the sacrifice Christ offered once for all on the cross remains ever present. [cf. Heb 7:25-27] As often as the sacrifice of the Cross by which ‘Christ our Pasch has been sacrificed’ is celebrated on the altar, the work of our redemption is carried out. [cf. 1 Cor 5:7]
Because it is the memorial of Christ’s Passover, the Eucharist is also a sacrifice. The sacrificial character of the Eucharist is manifested in the very words of institution: ‘This is my body which is given for you’ and ‘This cup which is poured out for you is the New Covenant in my blood.’ [Lk 22:19-20] In the Eucharist Christ gives us the very body which he gave up for us on the cross, the very blood which he ‘poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.’ [Mt 26:28]
The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit:
[Christ], our Lord and God, was once and for all to offer himself to God the Father by his death on the altar of the cross, to accomplish there an everlasting redemption. But
because his priesthood was not to end with his death, at the Last Supper "on the night when he was betrayed," [he wanted] to leave to his beloved spouse the Church a visible
sacrifice (as the nature of man demands) by which the bloody sacrifice which he was to accomplish once for all on the cross would be re-presented, its memory perpetuated
until the end of the world, and its salutary power be applied to the forgiveness of the sins we daily commit.” [Council of Trent 1562: DS 1740; cf. 1 Cor 11:23; Heb 7:24, 27] ~ 1364-66
~~~~~
“The choice is between the Bible and the Roman magisterium”
~~~~~
Ironically, we wouldn’t have the Bible were it not for the magisterium. I choose the Bible and the authority which God has placed on earth to guard and protect it. But ultimately, I choose Christ Jesus. If I cling to Him I can be assured of life.
Pax Christi,
~the Catholic apologist
I believe I’ve read this article before; is it from justforcatholics.com?
Regardless, I’ll be glad to give you my response. I want to thank Jon giving such a well thought out reply as well.
The first point made in the article is: “Christianity is built solely on the Holy Scriptures.” I would ask: if the Scriptures are the sole rule of faith, then where does it say that in the Scriptures? Is there any Biblical basis for sola scriptura? The author of the article seems to simply assume that his point is true without backing it up with any reference whatsoever.
Secondly, Roman Catholicism does not “demand submission of the intellect”. It simply presents the truth. Whether someone chooses to accept the truth or not is their decision. Anyone is free to analyze and question what the Church claims to be infallible. It should be through the intellect that one accepts the authority of the Church in the first place.
The author says, “The Scriptures are inaccessible because only the magisterium is able to establish the authentic meaning.” It’s not that only the magisterium can establish the authentic meaning of the Scriptures, it’s that the magisterium always does establish the authentic meaning through the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This doesn’t make the Scriptures inaccessible. It actually makes them more accessible because we don’t have to second-guess our own personal interpretations. Whenever we have questions about the Scriptures, we can find answers.
~~~~~
“Roman Catholic Church is a mighty obstacle to anyone seeking salvation”
~~~~~
Here are a couple of quotes from the Catechism of the Catholic Church that help to define what the Church teaches is the Gospel:
“But when time had fully come, God sent forth his son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.” [Gal 4:4-5 NAB] This is “the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” [Mk 1:1]: God has visited his people. He has fulfilled the promise he made to Abraham and his descendants. He acted far beyond all expectation - he has sent his own “beloved Son.” [Mk 1:11; cf. Lk 1:5, 68] ~ CCC #422
Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” [Mt 16:16] On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church. [cf. Mt 16:18]
“To preach…the unsearchable riches of Christ.” [Eph 3:8] ~ CCC #424
The Paschal mystery of Christ’s cross and Resurrection stands at the center of the Good News that the apostles, and the Church following them, are to proclaim to the world. God’s saving plan was accomplished “once for all” [Heb 9:26] by the redemptive death of his son Jesus Christ. ~ CCC #571
~~~~~
“The ‘Church’ dispenses salvation to her faithful in small portions, starting at baptism and continuing throughout life.”
~~~~~
The Church doesn’t hand out salvation piece by piece throughout one’s lifetime. Salvation is Jesus Christ. It is only by Him and through Him. The Church brings us to Jesus through each of the sacraments: Baptism, Reconciliation, Confirmation, and most especially the Eucharist. It’s not dispensing salvation in small portions, it’s drawing one close to Jesus over and over again, partaking in His endless treasury of grace.
~~~~~
“Forgiveness can only be obtained through the sacrament of penance.”
~~~~~
God is not bound by His sacraments (“instruments of His grace”). One can be forgiven by God without confessing their sins to a priest. However, God gives us the Sacrament of Reconciliation for our own healing.
~~~~~
“The benefits of Christ's sacrifice are accessible through the sacrifice of the Mass.”
~~~~~
The Catechism is such a valuable tool. If you really want to know what the Church teaches, read what she has given to us through the Catechism. What I write is only a weak representation.
“In the New Testament, the memorial takes on a new meaning. When the Church celebrates the Eucharist, she commemorates Christ Passover, and it is made present: the sacrifice Christ offered once for all on the cross remains ever present. [cf. Heb 7:25-27] As often as the sacrifice of the Cross by which ‘Christ our Pasch has been sacrificed’ is celebrated on the altar, the work of our redemption is carried out. [cf. 1 Cor 5:7]
Because it is the memorial of Christ’s Passover, the Eucharist is also a sacrifice. The sacrificial character of the Eucharist is manifested in the very words of institution: ‘This is my body which is given for you’ and ‘This cup which is poured out for you is the New Covenant in my blood.’ [Lk 22:19-20] In the Eucharist Christ gives us the very body which he gave up for us on the cross, the very blood which he ‘poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.’ [Mt 26:28]
The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit:
[Christ], our Lord and God, was once and for all to offer himself to God the Father by his death on the altar of the cross, to accomplish there an everlasting redemption. But
because his priesthood was not to end with his death, at the Last Supper "on the night when he was betrayed," [he wanted] to leave to his beloved spouse the Church a visible
sacrifice (as the nature of man demands) by which the bloody sacrifice which he was to accomplish once for all on the cross would be re-presented, its memory perpetuated
until the end of the world, and its salutary power be applied to the forgiveness of the sins we daily commit.” [Council of Trent 1562: DS 1740; cf. 1 Cor 11:23; Heb 7:24, 27] ~ 1364-66
~~~~~
“The choice is between the Bible and the Roman magisterium”
~~~~~
Ironically, we wouldn’t have the Bible were it not for the magisterium. I choose the Bible and the authority which God has placed on earth to guard and protect it. But ultimately, I choose Christ Jesus. If I cling to Him I can be assured of life.
Pax Christi,
~the Catholic apologist
Sep. 4, 2007 - <i>Untitled Comment</i>
Posted by Kingfisher Quote: "So, what changed? Why did Protestants suddenly decide that they were faulty Scriptures after 1000 years of using them? What authority did they have to decide what was divinely inspired and what was not?"
Answer: If you were reading a book, and found something to be faulty in it, would you not cut out that which is faulty? Or would you go: "Well, they've been used this for 1000 years so it must be true."? What authority has the catholic church to decide such things?
....
Quote: "Protestants don't even claim to have infallible authority. How could they claim to have the correct canon? And why would God wait 1000 years to give the world the revelation that they had the wrong Scriptures?"
Answer: How can you Catholics claim to have the 'correct canon'? Who are you (or we) to question God's ways? And of course Protestants don't claim to have infallible authority. Do Catholics?
....
Quote: "The Catholic Church canonized them and declared them to be infallible."
Answer: Ah. So that means they MUST be true, since the Catholic Church is all-knowing.
....
It just seems like you're coming into this topic already biased against Protestants. If you've already decided that the Catholics must be right, everything you see is filtered through that lens.
....
On the other hand, I am also biased.
....
I hope to see you in heaven someday. :)
Edited by Kingfisher on Sep. 4, 2007 at 8:31 PM
Answer: If you were reading a book, and found something to be faulty in it, would you not cut out that which is faulty? Or would you go: "Well, they've been used this for 1000 years so it must be true."? What authority has the catholic church to decide such things?
....
Quote: "Protestants don't even claim to have infallible authority. How could they claim to have the correct canon? And why would God wait 1000 years to give the world the revelation that they had the wrong Scriptures?"
Answer: How can you Catholics claim to have the 'correct canon'? Who are you (or we) to question God's ways? And of course Protestants don't claim to have infallible authority. Do Catholics?
....
Quote: "The Catholic Church canonized them and declared them to be infallible."
Answer: Ah. So that means they MUST be true, since the Catholic Church is all-knowing.
....
It just seems like you're coming into this topic already biased against Protestants. If you've already decided that the Catholics must be right, everything you see is filtered through that lens.
....
On the other hand, I am also biased.
....
I hope to see you in heaven someday. :)
Edited by Kingfisher on Sep. 4, 2007 at 8:31 PM
Sep. 10, 2007 - In response to Kingfisher:
Posted by thecatholicapologist Hi Kingfisher,
Thanks for your comment; I’ll try to answer your questions as best I can.
~~~~~
“How can you Catholics claim to have the ‘correct canon’? Who are you (or we) to question God’s ways?”
~~~~~
First of all, we need to ask: what are God’s ways? Only then can we question them.
Think about it. What are God’s ways regarding the Bible? Which canon did He inspire? How can we know for certain which one is correct?
The plain truth is: we can’t know for certain which canon is correct unless we believe in an infallible authority. (And yes, we believe that the Catholic Church has infallible authority - you can read a little more about that at this link: <http://homeschoolblogger.com/thecatholicapologist/268913/>)
~~~~~
“If you were reading a book, and found (or thought you found) something to be faulty in it, would you not cut out that which is faulty? Or would you go: ‘Well, they’ve been used this for 1000 years so it must be true.’?”
~~~~~
Good question. If I were reading a book and found something that I thought might possibly be faulty, I would be VERY cautious in cutting it out if centuries of great intellects, teachers, and theologians believed that it was true before me. (especially if those people believed that it was the inspired Word of God).
If in another 1000 years, somebody picks up the Bible and supposedly “finds something faulty” in the Book of Hebrews for example, would they have valid reason to remove it?
I hope you don’t mind if I ask you a question. I’m sure that you have a Bible and doubtless spend a good amount of time reading it. Why do you believe that your Bible is inspired by God?
Thanks again. :-) God bless!
Pax Christi,
~the Catholic apologist
-----EDIT-----
Aha...sorry, I didn't notice your edit. ;-)
~~~~~
"It just seems like you're coming into this topic already biased against Protestants. If you've already decided that the Catholics must be right, everything you see is filtered through that lens."
~~~~~
Well, think of it this way: if the Catholic Church isn't right, then the Bible that they canonized isn't right either. That means that all of the deuterocanonical books are not inspired by God as well as all the books accepted by Protestants. Since you believe that those books are inspired, you must believe that the Church was at least right on that point. Why would she be wrong in canonizing the other books? Why is half of the canonization correct and the other half wrong?
I look forward to hopefully meeting you in heaven someday, too. ;-) Stay strong and cling to Christ!
-TCA
Edited by thecatholicapologist on Sep. 10, 2007 at 8:44 PM
Thanks for your comment; I’ll try to answer your questions as best I can.
~~~~~
“How can you Catholics claim to have the ‘correct canon’? Who are you (or we) to question God’s ways?”
~~~~~
First of all, we need to ask: what are God’s ways? Only then can we question them.
Think about it. What are God’s ways regarding the Bible? Which canon did He inspire? How can we know for certain which one is correct?
The plain truth is: we can’t know for certain which canon is correct unless we believe in an infallible authority. (And yes, we believe that the Catholic Church has infallible authority - you can read a little more about that at this link: <http://homeschoolblogger.com/thecatholicapologist/268913/>)
~~~~~
“If you were reading a book, and found (or thought you found) something to be faulty in it, would you not cut out that which is faulty? Or would you go: ‘Well, they’ve been used this for 1000 years so it must be true.’?”
~~~~~
Good question. If I were reading a book and found something that I thought might possibly be faulty, I would be VERY cautious in cutting it out if centuries of great intellects, teachers, and theologians believed that it was true before me. (especially if those people believed that it was the inspired Word of God).
If in another 1000 years, somebody picks up the Bible and supposedly “finds something faulty” in the Book of Hebrews for example, would they have valid reason to remove it?
I hope you don’t mind if I ask you a question. I’m sure that you have a Bible and doubtless spend a good amount of time reading it. Why do you believe that your Bible is inspired by God?
Thanks again. :-) God bless!
Pax Christi,
~the Catholic apologist
-----EDIT-----
Aha...sorry, I didn't notice your edit. ;-)
~~~~~
"It just seems like you're coming into this topic already biased against Protestants. If you've already decided that the Catholics must be right, everything you see is filtered through that lens."
~~~~~
Well, think of it this way: if the Catholic Church isn't right, then the Bible that they canonized isn't right either. That means that all of the deuterocanonical books are not inspired by God as well as all the books accepted by Protestants. Since you believe that those books are inspired, you must believe that the Church was at least right on that point. Why would she be wrong in canonizing the other books? Why is half of the canonization correct and the other half wrong?
I look forward to hopefully meeting you in heaven someday, too. ;-) Stay strong and cling to Christ!
-TCA
Edited by thecatholicapologist on Sep. 10, 2007 at 8:44 PM
Sep. 17, 2007 - in love
Posted by Inkling I absolutely love the way you respond to each other! I have witnessed discussions between christians that believe differently on certain things and sometimes it can get rather rude and faith bashing. I love how you and the other people that comment don't try to bash your beliefs at each other, but address them with a lot of intelligence in your responses and in love. I find it very encouraging and refreshing to read a intelligent and kind discussion between christian with different views!
I also am glad to read this blog because it helps me to understand what the Catholics believe, seeing as how half of my family is Catholic I feel I can better understand where they are coming form now. Thank you!
-Emsley
I also am glad to read this blog because it helps me to understand what the Catholics believe, seeing as how half of my family is Catholic I feel I can better understand where they are coming form now. Thank you!
-Emsley
