The Bible

[trophy33]

What Bible did I claim to author?

Please, stop these games. You claimed that Bible is inerrant in all detail. I am asking which one and you are trying this?

 

[concretecamper]

Actually, I acknowledge the ability of early Christians to recognize Holy Spirit-authored writing, just as they can do today.

And one of the objective criteria for Holy Spirit authored text, is that it all be in agreement with itself.

So whatever text is purported to be God-breathed Scripture must be in agreement with itself, understood in the light of all itself.

That would exclude some of the NT writings which some may accept.

and since protestantism removed books, I guess the early Christians didn't get it right.

 

[Clare73]

Please, stop these games. You claimed that Bible is inerrant in all detail. I am asking which one and you are trying this?

Strawman. . .

 

[concretecamper]

Please, stop these games. You claimed that Bible is inerrant in all detail. I am asking which one and you are trying this?

Ome plays games when they are backed into a corner. Just like what is happening to me.

 

[trophy33]

Strawman. . .

OK, this leads nowhere. You just repeated a dogma you believe in, but when you get uncomfortable, you kick the ball to the corner.

 

[Clare73]

and since protestantism removed books, I guess the early Christians didn't get it right.

It seems that some of the apocrypha are not in complete agreement.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Jesus said to the paralytic, “Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven.” (Mt 9:2)
Jesus seeing their faith said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” (Mk 2:5)
Seeing their faith, He said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven you.” (Lk 5:20)

How do you deal with this? We have three different versions of what Jesus said. Which version is inerrant and inspired?

Genesis 1 says that humans were created after animals while Genesis 2 says humans then animals.

1 Samuel 17:50 says David killed Goliath
2 Samuel 21:19 says Elhanan Killed Goliath

Matthew 2:23 quotes a prophesy that is not found in the Old Testament

1 Samuel 21:1-6 says that Ahimelech was the high priest when David entered the temple. Mark 2:25-26 says it was Abiathar.

2 Chronicles 24:20-21 says Zechariah, son of Jehoiada was murdered.
Matthew 23:35 says it was Zechariah son of Barachiah.

Leviticus 11:4 says camels do not have divided hoofs.

"Brain" is not found in the Bible. According to the Bible we think with our hearts. Proverbs 23:7, Isaiah 10:7 Matthew 9:4.

 

[concretecamper]

It seems that some of the apocrypha are not in complete agreement.

Not according to those early Christians you put so much faith in.

 

[trophy33]

Genesis 1 says that humans were created after animals while Genesis 2 says humans then animals.

1 Samuel 17:50 says David killed Goliath
2 Samuel 21:19 says Elhanan Killed Goliath

Matthew 2:23 quotes a prophesy that is not found in the Old Testament

1 Samuel 21:1-6 says that Ahimelech was the high priest when David entered the temple. Mark 2:25-26 says it was Abiathar.

2 Chronicles 24:20-21 says Zechariah, son of Jehoiada was murdered.
Matthew 23:35 says it was Zechariah son of Barachiah.

Leviticus 11:4 says camels do not have divided hoofs.

"Brain" is not found in the Bible. According to the Bible we think with our hearts. Proverbs 23:7, Isaiah 10:7 Matthew 9:4.

Yeah, there are basically hundreds of similar problems. Not to mention different readings, even whole chapters different or missing between textual families, inconsistencies between the Hebrew text and the New Testament etc.

But whenever one wants to get some practical answers from the "inerrancy camp", it leads nowhere. Something something about originals and thats it.

 

[Clare73]

Not according to those early Christians you put so much faith in.

For example, if any writing states the dead are to be prayed for, it is in error.

For eternal destiny, with Jesus or apart from Jesus, is a closed matter at one's death.

 

[concretecamper]

For example, if any writing states the dead are to be prayed for, it is in error.

Ah, throw out the books you don't agree with.

 

[Clare73]

Ah, throw out the books you don't agree with.

Eternal life is only by faith in Jesus Christ (Jn 3:18).

Jesus made it pretty clear in Lk 16:19-31 that there is no altering of eternal destiny after physical death.

Prayer for the dead does not change anything.

Anything not in agreement with that is not the word of God.

 

[concretecamper]

Eternal life is only by faith in Jesus Christ (Jn 3:18).

Jesus made it pretty clear in Lk 16:19-31 that there is no altering of eternal destiny after physical death.

Prayer for the dead does not change anything.

Anything not in agreement with that is not the word of God.

Listen, I get it, you don't agree with prayers for the dead, so just jettison any book that doesn't agree with you.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Listen, I get it, you don't agree with prayers for the dead, so just jettison any book that doesn't agree with you.

This is the reason Protestant Bibles typically contain only 66 books and have certain sections of Daniel and Esther omitted. However, this thread is designed to elucidate Catholic perspectives on the Bible and celebrate those beliefs. Our Protestant counterparts may have differing objectives, which is where these debates originate.

 

[trophy33]

That'd be why Protestant bibles nowadays usually have only 66 books in them and also have deleted parts of Daniel and Esther.

Its rather because the protestant European translators since the 16th century began to prefer the Hebrew text (over Vulgate or Septuagint) and with it also the Judaistic canon.

For quite a time (several centuries) both coexisted - the Judaistic canon books being translated from Hebrew and the wider canon books being translated from Greek. The most prominent protestant/reformation translations contained all the books.

The books were dropped from the English Bibles in the 19th because of economic and theological reasons. It actually caused quite a division in the British Bible Society. For various reasons, Bible societies worldwide followed one by one, but many protestant Bible prints still include wider canon, even today.

 

[Clare73]

Listen, I get it, you don't agree with prayers for the dead, so just jettison any book that doesn't agree with you.

It's not about agreeing with me, it's about agreeing with the rest of the NT.

Eternal life is only by faith in Jesus Christ (Jn 3:18).

Jesus made it pretty clear in Lk 16:19-31 that there is no altering of eternal destiny after physical death.

 

[Clare73]

Its rather because the protestant European translators since the 16th century began to prefer the Hebrew text (over Vulgate or Septuagint) and with it also the Judaistic canon.

Because the Septuagint and the Vulgate have errors of translation.

 

[concretecamper]

It's not about agreeing with me, it's about agreeing with the rest of the NT.

It definitely is about agreeing with you. You may claim that it isn't, but your post scream it loud and clear.

Eternal life is only by faith in Jesus Christ (Jn 3:18).

Jesus made it pretty clear in Lk 16:19-31 that there is no altering of eternal destiny after physical death.

None of this has to do with praying to the Saints. Jesus saves, no argument from anyone. Your Like passage isn't about praying for the dead, it is about someone who is in hell not being able to get out

 

[Clare73]

It definitely is about agreeing with you. You may claim that it isn't, but your post scream it loud and clear.

None of this has to do with praying to the Saints. Jesus saves, no argument from anyone.

Strawman. . .

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Yeah, there are basically hundreds of similar problems. Not to mention different readings, even whole chapters different or missing between textual families, inconsistencies between the Hebrew text and the New Testament etc.

But whenever one wants to get some practical answers from the "inerrancy camp", it leads nowhere. Something something about originals and thats it.

Well, there is a need to have some certainty or safety. Thus there is this unshakable faith in "The Bible" without nay sort of critical consciousness that might shake, challenge or threaten that illusion of certainty. Any objective review is just Intolerable.