Catholic Questions

[~Willow~]

I've always wondered about the differences between what Protestant Christians and Catholics believe.

Why does the Catholic Bible have additional books? Did the Roman Catholic Church add these, or did the protestants remove them? Why?

Edited: Too many questions in one thread on different topics. I've made separate threads for the rest. Sorry!

 

[Vanguard PCD]

I've always wondered about the differences between what Protestant Christians and Catholics believe.

Why does the Catholic Bible have additional books? Did the Roman Catholic Church add these, or did the protestants remove them? Why?

The RCC uses the Apocrypha, so it includes 7 extra books over the typical Protestant bibles. It is important to note that the 1611 KJV had 73 books as well. Protestants removed them later. Men decided what made it into the Bible, not God.

To be a Protestant meant that you were in "protest" of the RCC, and sided with the Church of England. Protestants did not like the power and corruption of the RCC at the time. They also did not agree with all of the church's dogma. The Apocrypha contains certain things that give rise to Catholic concepts. Not everyone agrees with those concepts.

Do you know what started the Protestant Reformation? It wasn't a holy call to arms. King Henry VIII wanted the Pope to annul his marriage to Anne. The Pope said no. Henry said to heck with you, England is leaving the RCC and going our own way. Protestantism started because of one king's lust for women.

I've recently realized that the Catholic church doesn't have the same ten commandment that Protestants have. The Catholics do not have this one, from what I can tell:

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6 but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments."

Why did the Catholic church change it?

They still have that commandment. Yes they have statues and all that, but supposedly they do not worship them (anymore). They are for imagery and remembrance. Think of them as a memorial. However, if you are going to go by the OT commandments, there's a lot more than just 10! Protestants don't keep them either. Do you eat bacon, sausage or pork chops?

Do you wear a cross? Is that not a carved image as well? What about a flag? Do you salute it?

It is also important to note that Jesus did away with the old covenant and made a new one. The new one has only 2 commandments in it:

1. Love God.
2. Love your neighbor (people).

Both are to be unconditionally.

Tradition verses scripture: the RCC seems to place a lot of emphasis on tradition. I've noticed some of these traditions are contradictory from what the Bible teaches. How can tradition be followed over scripture?

I have more, but I'm not sure if it's too overwhelming to put them all in the same thread. I'm wondering if these need to be separated.

In their defense, several of their traditions date back almost 2,000 years. They believe, as does Judaism, that there is more to the Bible than words alone. Things have to be interpreted in context and with a certain understanding.

In Judaism, it is not enough just to read the Bible. There is the written Torah, and then there is the oral Torah that explains the written in greater detail. This also dates back 2,000 years.

Protestants also have traditions. Many of them come from the texts of the KJV. Several of those are now being challenged by modern theologians, although they center more on certain terms/phrases rather than ceremony.

Ask away...

 

[~Willow~]

Is this wrong?

Protestant
1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that takes his name in vain.
4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.
5. Honor thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God gives thee.
6. Thou shalt not kill.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8. Thou shalt not steal.
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's.

Jewish
1. I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
2. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me. Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, nor any manner of likeness, of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; Thou shalt not bow down unto them, nor serve them; for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me; And showing mercy unto the thousandth generation of them that love Me and keep My commandments.
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that takes His name in vain.
4. Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work. But the seventh day is the Sabbath in honor of the Lord thy God; on it thou shalt not do any work, neither thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.
5. Honor thy father and thy mother; in order that thy days may be prolonged upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.
6. Thou shalt not kill.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8. Thou shalt not steal.
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house; thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's.

Catholic
1. I am the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
3. Remember thou keep the Sabbath Day.
4. Honor thy father and thy mother.
5. Thou shalt not kill.
6. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
7. Thou shalt not steal.
8. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
9. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods.

 

[~Willow~]

The RCC uses the Apocrypha, so it includes 7 extra books over the typical Protestant bibles. It is important to note that the 1611 KJV had 73 books as well. Protestants removed them later. Men decided what made it into the Bible, not God.

To be a Protestant meant that you were in "protest" of the RCC, and sided with the Church of England. Protestants did not like the power and corruption of the RCC at the time. They also did not agree with all of the church's dogma. The Apocrypha contains certain things that give rise to Catholic concepts. Not everyone agrees with those concepts.

Do you know what started the Protestant Reformation? It wasn't a holy call to arms. King Henry VIII wanted the Pope to anull his marriage to Anne. The Pope said no. Henry said to heck with you, England is leaving the RCC and going our own way. Protestantism started because of one king's lust for women...

I've heard differing accounts of the seven books. Some say the original versions did not have them and that the RCC added them. This is why I get so confused... because different people say different things.

The whole annulment thing is what started these questions... where did they get that practice from?

 

[Vanguard PCD]

Nope, and they all say the same thing: do not have any other gods before me.

People are taking the image/idol thing out of context. When the Bible speaks of those things, it is talking about images of animals that represent other deities, such as an ox, bird or fish. Pagan deities are loaded with symbolism that often involves nature (as are Native Americans deities). God's commandment was not to worship those idols and pagan gods, such as Moloch.

Nothing is mentioned about symbolism of God Himself.

 

[Vanguard PCD]

The whole annulment thing is what started these questions... where did they get that practice from?

It started around 110 AD with St. Ignatius. In his writing of the Letter to Polycarp, the groundwork was set for the bishop to be given power to bless a marriage, as well as annul a marriage (based on certain reasons).

Popes Alexander III and Innocent III concurred some 1,000 years later.

It has been a thing ever since.

 

[~Willow~]

It started around 110 AD with St. Ignatius. In his writing of the Letter to Polycarp, the groundwork was set for the bishop to be given power to bless a marriage, as well as annul a marriage (based on certain reasons).

Popes Alexander III and Innocent III concurred some 1,000 years later.

It has been a thing ever since.

Was it not done before then?

 

[~Willow~]

Nope, and they all say the same thing: do not have any other gods before me.

People are taking the image/idol thing out of context. When the Bible speaks of those things, it is talking about images of animals that represent other deities, such as an ox, bird or fish. Pagan deities are loaded with symbolism that often involves nature (as are Native Americans deities). God's commandment was not to worship those idols and pagan gods, such as Moloch.

Nothing is mentioned about symbolism of God Himself.

What about this?

29 “When the Lord your God cuts off from before you the nations which you go to dispossess, and you displace them and dwell in their land, 30 take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.’ 31 You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way; for every abomination to the Lord which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods.

32 “Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it.

 

[Shane R]

The canon issue is actually quite recent. Until about the time of Westcott and Hort, the late 19th century, even Protestant Bibles contained the Apocrypha. Luther set a precedent for Protestant Bible makers by placing the books between the Testaments. This custom was followed until Higher Textual Criticism came into prominence. Orthodox Bibles may have more books than a Catholic Bible.

This relates to your question about tradition. The oral tradition preceded the New Testament. Thus in the Catholic and Orthodox traditions it is given a high place. That is why the early Church Fathers are read extensively by the scholars of Catholic and Orthodox churches - they give insight into both the text and the oral tradition.

What Protestantism has largely lost is the ability to correlate the Old Testament with its doctrines. The OT was the original 'scripture'. The Protestant obsession with the NT has limited the interest and ability of most to objectively read and perceive the messages - whether literal, figurative, or allegorical - of the OT. The NT is in many respects a needed and proper development of the OT themes - there is not so much that is new. God has not changed.

 

[Vanguard PCD]

What about this?

29 “When the Lord your God cuts off from before you the nations which you go to dispossess, and you displace them and dwell in their land, 30 take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.’ 31 You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way; for every abomination to the Lord which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods.

32 “Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it.

What about it?

That was God's commandment to the Hebrews that as they travelled, not to take up the religion/mythologies of the lands they were going into, or the people they conquered/drove out.

 

[~Willow~]

What about it?

That was God's commandment to the Hebrews that as they travelled, not to take up the religion/mythologies of the lands they were going into, or the people they conquered/drove out.

You mentioned that the pagans made statues of their animal gods and vowed down/worshiped them, so wouldn't that verse apply?

 

[~Willow~]

The canon issue is actually quite recent. Until about the time of Westcott and Hort, the late 19th century, even Protestant Bibles contained the Apocrypha. Luther set a precedent for Protestant Bible makers by placing the books between the Testaments. This custom was followed until Higher Textual Criticism came into prominence. Orthodox Bibles may have more books than a Catholic Bible.

This relates to your question about tradition. The oral tradition preceded the New Testament. Thus in the Catholic and Orthodox traditions it is given a high place. That is why the early Church Fathers are read extensively by the scholars of Catholic and Orthodox churches - they give insight into both the text and the oral tradition.

What Protestantism has largely lost is the ability to correlate the Old Testament with its doctrines. The OT was the original 'scripture'. The Protestant obsession with the NT has limited the interest and ability of most to objectively read and perceive the messages - whether literal, figurative, or allegorical - of the OT. The NT is in many respects a needed and proper development of the OT themes - there is not so much that is new. God has not changed.

So, wouldn't it be wrong to remove those books? I don't understand why they were removed. The verse I quoted earlier said not to add from or take away from... wouldn't that be the Bible?

 

[~Willow~]

I just saw this response on a random website:

"I am not here to say that the Apocrypha does not have truth in it. I am not here to say that there is no benefit in reading it. I am simply saying that it is not on par with the Word of God because:

1. It never claims to be the word of God as far as I know (and even if it does, it is meaningless unless the Jews recognize it as authoritative).
2. The Jews do not, and have never, recognized it as scripture.
3. The Church does not have the authority to determine the OT cannon as I mentioned before.
4. While there are some similarities in thought, the NT never recognizes it by quoting from it or even mentioning any of its stories or people.

Think about it. If God gave authority to the Jews to determine the OT cannon, why would God quote it from the NT unless he first put it on the Jew’s hearts to include it in the cannon? God would be out of order to do such a thing and God is not a God of confusion, but a God of peace. - Russ"

Is any of this accurate?

 

[Vanguard PCD]

You mentioned that the pagans made statues of their animal gods and vowed down/worshiped them, so wouldn't that verse apply?

Well, if you wear or bow before a cross, are you worshipping a pagan god or are you in reverence to the one true God? That is the difference. It is not because of an idol/symbol, but worshipping/paying homage to what that symbol represents.

 

[Vanguard PCD]

I just saw this response on a random website:

"I am not here to say that the Apocrypha does not have truth in it. I am not here to say that there is no benefit in reading it. I am simply saying that it is not on par with the Word of God because:

1. It never claims to be the word of God as far as I know (and even if it does, it is meaningless unless the Jews recognize it as authoritative).
2. The Jews do not, and have never, recognized it as scripture.
3. The Church does not have the authority to determine the OT cannon as I mentioned before.
4. While there are some similarities in thought, the NT never recognizes it by quoting from it or even mentioning any of its stories or people.

Think about it. If God gave authority to the Jews to determine the OT cannon, why would God quote it from the NT unless he first put it on the Jew’s hearts to include it in the cannon? God would be out of order to do such a thing and God is not a God of confusion, but a God of peace. - Russ"

Is any of this accurate?

Yes. Especially if you are a pro-Orthodox Judaism follower.

It also opens up the flood gate toward the messiah. Per Judaism, Jesus was not the messiah, since he failed several prophecies, and since the Jews [Hebrews] have in their hearts the words of God...

Best stay away from this one.

 

[~Willow~]

Well, if you wear or bow before a cross, are you worshipping a pagan god or are you in reverence to the one true God? That is the difference. It is not because of an idol/symbol, but worshipping/paying homage to what that symbol represents.

I don't bow down to anything. Sorry to be so short... I probably should have made separate threads for these topics. Kinda confusing to keep jumping around.

 

[~Willow~]

Yes. Especially if you are a pro-Orthodox Judaism follower.

It also opens up the flood gate toward the messiah. Per Judaism, Jesus was not the messiah, since he failed several prophecies, and since the Jews [Hebrews] have in their hearts the words of God...

Best stay away from this one.

He didn't fail any prophesies.

 

[~Willow~]

Is it okay if I separate the threads?

 

[Shane R]

They were removed because they do not appear in Codex Vaticanus or Codex Sinaiticus, which Westcott and Hort believed were the most dependable primary sources for the Biblical text.

Your question seems to assume that all scripture is equal. I am familiar with the Pauline text 'all scripture is profitable', but this does not mean all scripture is equal. In the Catholic and Orthodox churches scripture has been judged as it pertains to revealing the gospel. Those texts which are most beneficial to that end are incorporated heavily in the lectionary and those texts which are less so are seldom read publicly. Many of the apocryphal books are less pertinent to the gospel message.

Is a 66 book Bible wrong? I don't know. It could well be inadequate. However, the message of the gospel can be conveyed quite simply, and is yet so complex we will not totally fathom it until we transition from earth.

 

[Vanguard PCD]

He didn't fail any prophesies.

Yeah, he did...technically.

Christians say He didnt because they will be fulfilled in the 2nd coming. Jews counter with the OT does not speak of a 2nd coming, only one.

Round and round we go.

Note: these are not my beliefs or statements, just drawing the line between Judaism and Christianity for study purposes.

Like I said, stay away from this one. It does not lead anywhere pleasant.