What Divides Catholics and Protestants?

Oxbow wrote:

184
<quoted text>
Scripture: A sacred writing or book. A passage from such a writing or book. The sacred writings of the Bible. Often used in the plural. Also called Holy Scriptures.A statement regarded as authoritative.
My pleasure....

The Bible is a Catholic document.
MY pleasure.

Nettiebelle wrote:

<quoted text>The Bible is a Catholic document.
MY pleasure.

Good morning, Nettie.

Today is the feast of Saint James, known as James the Great or James, son of Zebedee. As you know, I was raised in St. James Church. Father M said he would bring a relic to Mass this morning but I spaced it out.

Today's Gospel:

Matthew 20:20-28
Then came to him the mother of Zebedees children with her sons, worshipping him, and desiring a certain thing of him. And he said unto her, What wilt thou? She saith unto him, Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom. But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able. And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Nijoni wrote:

<quoted text>
You wish you could throw believers there, but in the end, it will be anti-Christs as yourself there. Bingo, Bulldog!

Just because I know you're full of shít does not make me an anti-Christ.

179

ITB wrote:

<quoted text>
She's another supposed "Christian" who believes Jesus and God are "two separate entities" even though Scripture repeatedly says they are One and there is only One God....not "two separate entities".

The Catholic encyclopedia teaches Jesus Christ is the Son of God:
Excerpt:
Jesus is the Son of God

According to the testimony of the Evangelists, Jesus Himself bore witness to His Divine Sonship. As Divine Ambassador He can not have borne false witness. Firstly, He asked the disciples, at Caesarea Philippi, "Whom do men say that the Son of man is?" (Matthew 16:13). This name Son of man was commonly used by the Saviour in regard to Himself; it bore testimony to His human nature and oneness with us. The disciples made answer that others said He was one of the prophets. Christ pressed them. "But whom do you say that I am? "(ibid., 15). Peter, as spokesman, replied: "Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God" (ibid., 16). Jesus was satisfied with this answer; it set Him above all the prophets who were the adopted sons of God; it made Him the natural Son of God. The adopted Divine sonship of all the prophets Peter had no need of special revelation to know. This natural Divine Sonship was made known to the leader of the Apostles only by a special revelation. "Flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven" (ibid., 17). Jesus clearly assumes this important title in the specially revealed and altogether new sense. He admits that He is the Son of God in the real sense of the word.

186

Nettiebelle wrote:

<quoted text>The Bible is a Catholic document.
MY pleasure.

No matter how often you tell this lie...it will still be a lie.."The Bible is a Catholic document."

Oxbow wrote:

186
<quoted text>
No matter how often you tell this lie...it will still be a lie.."The Bible is a Catholic document."

Is the Pope Catholic?

-Seen-Is-Awesome- wrote:

<quoted text>
So how come YOU were not given a "magic spirit" thingy like all the other Christians?

They weren't, the entity,(moelcular configuration of the Holy SPirit hosts Zillions plus molecules more then the human body), to enter the Human Body it would blow you up alive in less then 10 minutes flat.

Try using your own common sense, and research laws and laws of condcut and ethics pertinent to public or work, and practice the laws in yoru home as well and be a good person while you research yoru own dreams in your own journal and only travel to make research confirmations.

Oxbow wrote:

186
<quoted text>
No matter how often you tell this lie...it will still be a lie.."The Bible is a Catholic document."

Did you know that, in determining which books were inspired and were to make up the New Testament, the Catholic Church also took into consideration that these books would not contradict the present teachings/beliefs of the Catholic Church AT THAT TIME?

Nettiebelle wrote:

<quoted text>Did you know that, in determining which books were inspired and were to make up the New Testament, the Catholic Church also took into consideration that these books would not contradict the present teachings/beliefs of the Catholic Church AT THAT TIME?

That honor goes to Saint Irenaeus at Rome.

15th Dalai Lama wrote:

<quoted text>
Just because I know you're full of shít does not make me an anti-Christ.

A phony like you-Catholic Lama saying anyoone else is full of it is a hoot! You don't even understand the Buddha you wish to trick under. Nice to know my arrow hit the mark.

1286 193

Nettiebelle wrote:

<quoted text>Did you know that, in determining which books were inspired and were to make up the New Testament, the Catholic Church also took into consideration that these books would not contradict the present teachings/beliefs of the Catholic Church AT THAT TIME?

When you find "The Catholic church in determining which books were inspired and were to make up the New Testament, the Catholic Church also took into consideration that these books would not contradict the present teachings/beliefs of the Catholic Church AT THAT TIME."

in determining which books were inspired and were to make up the New Testament, the Catholic Church also took into consideration that these books would not contradict the present teachings/beliefs of the Catholic Church AT THAT TIME

186 193

Nettiebelle wrote:

<quoted text>Did you know that, in determining which books were inspired and were to make up the New Testament, the Catholic Church also took into consideration that these books would not contradict the present teachings/beliefs of the Catholic Church AT THAT TIME?

Sec try:
When you find "The Catholic church in determining which books were inspired and were to make up the New Testament, the Catholic Church also took into consideration that these books would not contradict the present teachings/beliefs of the Catholic Church AT THAT TIME." Let me know..

History of the King James Version of the Bible:
Throughout the Middle Ages literacy rates were extremely low in Europe, and hand copied manuscripts were expensive. The bible and many legal documents were written in Latin or Greek, which were becoming increasingly dead languages used only by the church. Moreover, the statute of Valencia and other statutes had made it illegal for anyone not authorized by the church to have even the Latin and Greek versions of the of the Bible.

The laity therefore had to rely on the church, government and powers that be for understanding and interpreting these documents. With the invention of the printing press, one of the first books to be printed was the bible, which was soon translated into several languages, often badly. The errors were due in part to ignorance and in part by attempts to use the Bible to further sectarian political or theological goals.

A few small parts of the Bible had been translated into vernacular at different times. King Alfred translated the ten commandments, and Bede had translated the gospel of St John into Saxon language, but the translation was lost. In the fourteenth century.

Wyclif had translated parts of the Bible and this work was completed after his death. Many copies of this "Lollard" bible in middle English were distributed before the invention of printing. The Genesis narrative opened:

History of the KJV
The Wyclif (or Wycliffe) bible was completed in 1388, four years after Wycliffe's death. Wycliffe himself had translated the New Testament , relegating the Old Testament translations to assistants with the necessary language skills. These Wycliffe bibles were laboriously copied out and distributed at great risk. The Catholic Church was horrified at the possibility that everyone would be able to read the Bible.

In 1399, alarmed at the spread of Lollardy, the convocation of Oxford passed the statute De Heretico Comburendum, "Of the burning of heretics." This law was passed in Parliament by King Henry IV in 1401. It provided for burning of all those who held Lollard opinions, or possessed illegal books, including the translated Bible apparently, though it is a common misconception that it was directed only against the Bible.

The De Heretico Comburendo statute stated:

...that none...presume to preach openly or privily, without the license of the diocesan of the same place first required and obtained, curates in their own churches and persons hitherto privileged, and other of the Canon Law granted, only except; nor that none from henceforth anything preach, hold, teach, or instruct openly or privily, or make or write any book contrary to the catholic faith or determination of the Holy Church, nor of such sect and wicked doctrines and opinions shall make any conventicles, or in any wise hold or exercise schools; and also that none from henceforth in any wise favor such preacher or maker of any such and like conventicles, or persons holding or exercising schools, or making or writing such books, or so teaching, informing, or exciting the people, nor any of them maintain or in any wise sustain, and that all and singular having such books or any writings of such wicked doctrine and opinions, shall really with effect deliver or cause to be delivered all such books and writings to the diocesan of the same place within forty days from the time of the proclamation of this ordinance and statute.

Oxbow wrote:

1286 193
<quoted text>
When you find "The Catholic church in determining which books were inspired and were to make up the New Testament, the Catholic Church also took into consideration that these books would not contradict the present teachings/beliefs of the Catholic Church AT THAT TIME."
in determining which books were inspired and were to make up the New Testament, the Catholic Church also took into consideration that these books would not contradict the present teachings/beliefs of the Catholic Church AT THAT TIME

The same scripture backs up the same teachings of the Catholic Church now as they did when the Bible was first put into print.

199

Nettiebelle wrote:

<quoted text>The same scripture backs up the same teachings of the Catholic Church now as they did when the Bible was first put into print.

See sec try....

Oxbow wrote:

199
<quoted text>
See sec try....

OxCartBolt,
I don't need to see any of your 'tries'.
What I posted is true.

Nettiebelle wrote:

<quoted text>The same scripture backs up the same teachings of the Catholic Church now as they did when the Bible was first put into print.

Good morning, Nettie.

Grandma passed away at 3:30 this morning.

Point of information:

The Bible was meticulously transcribed by hand by Catholic Monks for fifteen hundred years before Johannes Gutenberg put Saint Jerome's Latin Vulgate Bible into print.

199

Nettiebelle wrote:

<quoted text>The same scripture backs up the same teachings of the Catholic Church now as they did when the Bible was first put into print.

When you find "The Catholic church in determining which books were inspired and were to make up the New Testament, the Catholic Church also took into consideration that these books would not contradict the present teachings/beliefs of the Catholic Church AT THAT TIME."
Let me know....

KJV history
The Lollards did not believe that the wine and wafer of the communion were transsubstantiated into the blood and body of Jesus, they refused to worship the cross as an object, and held many other such "dangerous" doctrines in addition to translating the Bible.

The first person to be executed under the law was Sir William Sautre, who refused to abjure, among other heresies, the following:

1. he will not worship the cross on which Christ suffered, but only Christ that suffered upon the cross.

2. he would sooner worship a temporal king, than the aforesaid wooden cross.

3. he would rather worship the bodies of the saints, than the very cross of Christ on which he hung, if it were before him.

4. he would rather worship a man truly contrite, than the cross of Christ.

5. he is bound rather to worship a man that is predestinate, than an angel of God.

6. if any man would visit the monuments of Peter and Paul, or go on pilgrimage to the tomb of St. Thomas, or any whither else, to obtain any temporal benefit; he is not bound to keep his vow, but he may distribute the expenses of his vow upon the alms of the poor.

7. every priest and deacon is more bound to preach the word of God, than to say the canonical hours.

Wyclif himself had been executed in 1388. The Catholic authorities later desecrated his grave.

While the new statute was not exclusively aimed at translated bibles, it was used to suppress them. Quite a few of these bibles, used by Lollard preachers, nevertheless remained.

In the 1490’s the personal physician to King Henry the VII and VIII, Thomas Linacre, an Oxford professor, studied Greek. After reading the Gospels in the original Greek, and comparing it to the Latin Vulgate, he wrote in his diary,“Either this (the original Greek) is not the Gospel… or we are not Christians.” In the same period, John Colet, another Oxford professor, translated the New Testament into English for his students, and later it was read for the public at Saint Paul’s Cathedral in London. He escaped prosecution owing to his friends in high places.
Presently, the vernacular Bible became a political weapon against temporal rulers too, because it could be used to show that the claims of kings to "divine right" were a fiction. William Tyndale was the main translator of the English Bible, in the early sixteenth century. He did not use Wyclif's version, but started anew. Wyclif had written in Middle English, which was rapidly being transformed. Printing was standardizing and altering spelling. Wyclif had translated the Latin Vulgate. Tyndale knew Hebrew and Greek, and translated from the original. The Tyndale bibles were printed in Europe and smuggled into Britain. There, they were bought up eagerly by the Lord Bishop of London, to prevent their distribution. In this way, the church subsidized the work of Tyndale and it prospered. Tyndale boasted to learned Catholics:

"I wyl cause a boy that driveth ye plough shall know more of scripture than thou doest."

This idea was surely terrifying both for churchmen and for the crown, for the notes in many editions of these bibles, published by Calvinists, repudiated the divine right of kings.

The work was continued after his death. Based on these translations, Miles Coverdale printed the first complete Bible in English in 1535. John Rogers published a revision called Matthew's Bible in 1537. A revision of the Matthew's Bible, printed in 1539, was known as The Great Bible. A later revision reflected the participation of eight Anglican Bishops and was called The Bishop's Bible. It was printed in 1568. The frontispiece of this bible is shown at right.

King James version precursor - Front Page - Bishop's Bible.

An elegant and well written Bible, correcting Tyndale and incorporating a translation of the Old Testament, had been produced in Geneva by expatriate Protestants fleeing the reign of Catholic Queen Mary. This came to be known as the Geneva Bible. It was not satisfactory to the English monarchy because it included extensive marginal notes that, among other things, challenged the divine right of kings.