God's Interpretation

[Thursday]

I have read the article and I don't agree with you on it so I ask again can you please tell us which ones were done by the Catholic Church?

Apparently you didn't read the article. It is quite clear.

 

[keltoi]

Apparently you didn't read the article. It is quite clear.

Actually I did read it and I disagree with it, so again I ask you what one were done by the Catholic Church? The article isn't peer reviewed it offers nothing to prove what it says.

 

[keltoi]

Please offer my apologies, I am new to the forum.

I'm not offering apologies for you, you can do that yourself.

 

[Kenneth Redden]

I'm not offering apologies for you, you can do that yourself.

Okay, this is what I sent to, "Contact Us:"

I apologize for posting irrelevant content on various threads. Please forgive me.
Thx,
Ken

 

[Kenneth Redden]

Okay, this is what I sent to, "Contact Us:"

I apologize for posting irrelevant content on various threads. Please forgive me.
Thx,
Ken

Thank you, keltoi. I feel better now.

 

[Kenneth Redden]

Actually I did read it and I disagree with it, so again I ask you what one were done by the Catholic Church? The article isn't peer reviewed it offers nothing to prove what it says.

keltoi, tell us how you would refute the article. Examples of where proof is needed but not given and what not.

 

[keltoi]

keltoi, tell us how you would refute the article. Examples of where proof is needed but not given and what not.

There are a few things to think about and keep in mind.
1. When was the Catholic church as we know it started? It most certainly wasn't during the apostolic era.
2. When was Rome officially Christian?
3. What translations were done before this?
4. Were any written by groups who deemed themselves to be outside of the Catholic church's control?

For e.g. the Torah section of the Septuagint was written before the Apostolic era (started 2nd century BCc under the authority of Ptolemy II of Egypt) and the rest was likely finished well before the death of the last apostle, and well before the Catholic church become something that people recognised and well before Rome was officially Christian.

For the others you would need to go through each one and find a history for it.

 

[Kenneth Redden]

There are a few things to think about and keep in mind.
1. When was the Catholic church as we know it started? It most certainly wasn't during the apostolic era.
2. When was Rome officially Christian?
3. What translations were done before this?
4. Were any written by groups who deemed themselves to be outside of the Catholic church's control?

For e.g. the Torah section of the Septuagint was written before the Apostolic era (started 2nd century BCc under the authority of Ptolemy II of Egypt) and the rest was likely finished well before the death of the last apostle, and well before the Catholic church become something that people recognised and well before Rome was officially Christian.

For the others you would need to go through each one and find a history for it.

How does that refute the article?

 

[keltoi]

How does that refute the article?

Let's look at the example I gave again. The article has the Septuagint at the top of the list. It was started in 2nd century BC and completed before the end of the Apostolic era, before the RC church was even formed, and before Rome was officially Christian, so the Catholic church was not involved in its translation. There's one refutation right there.

 

[Kenneth Redden]

Let's look at the example I gave again. The article has the Septuagint at the top of the list. It was started in 2nd century BC and completed before the end of the Apostolic era, before the RC church was even formed, and before Rome was officially Christian, so the Catholic church was not involved in its translation. There's one refutation right there.

But it can be said that the history of the RC Church began with the teachings of Jesus Christ in the 1st century AD, in the province of Judea of the Roman Empire.

 

[keltoi]

But it can be said that the history of the RC Church began with the teachings of Jesus Christ in the 1st century AD, in the province of Judea of the Roman Empire.

It can be said that I was born on Mars, just because something is said doesn't make it true. Also by your line of logic all churches can be said to have begun with the teachings of Jesus in the Roman province of Judea in the 1st Century AD.

 

[Kenneth Redden]

It can be said that I was born on Mars, just because something is said doesn't make it true. Also by your line of logic all churches can be said to have begun with the teachings of Jesus in the Roman province of Judea in the 1st Century AD.

The contemporary Catholic Church says that it is the continuation of the early Christian community established by Jesus. Its bishops are the successors to the Apostles of Jesus, and the Bishop of Rome, also known as the Pope, is the sole successor to Saint Peter, who was appointed by Jesus Christ to be the head of the church in the New Testament who ministered in Rome.
Do you have anything else?

 

[Kenneth Redden]

The contemporary Catholic Church says that it is the continuation of the early Christian community established by Jesus. Its bishops are the successors to the Apostles of Jesus, and the Bishop of Rome, also known as the Pope, is the sole successor to Saint Peter, who was appointed by Jesus Christ to be the head of the church in the New Testament who ministered in Rome.
Do you have anything else?

And what are you saying is the problem with the article?

 

[keltoi]

The contemporary Catholic Church says that it is the continuation of the early Christian community established by Jesus. Its bishops are the successors to the Apostles of Jesus, and the Bishop of Rome, also known as the Pope, is the sole successor to Saint Peter, who was appointed by Jesus Christ to be the head of the church in the New Testament who ministered in Rome.
Do you have anything else?

Check your history, Paul ministered to the Romans. Peter was never made head of the church despite what Roman Catholicism says.

 

[Kenneth Redden]

It's ruled inconclusive. Do you have anything else?

 

[keltoi]

It's ruled inconclusive. Do you have anything else?

By whom?
Why do you keep asking if I have anything else? Do you want to get back to quoting yourself again?

 

[Kenneth Redden]

By whom?
Why do you keep asking if I have anything else? Do you want to get back to quoting yourself again?

Well, the contemporary Catholic Church for one, they believe it. I just want to know if you have hung your whole argument on one flimsy, inconclusive point. What if your wrong, do you have anything else to support your claims?

 

[Kenneth Redden]

Well, the contemporary Catholic Church for one, they believe it. I just want to know if you have hung your whole argument on one flimsy, inconclusive point. What if your wrong, do you have anything else to support your claims?

Surely you can't expect me to take you seriously, if you can't provide any more evidence than that.

 

[keltoi]

Well, the contemporary Catholic Church for one, they believe it. I just want to know if you have hung your whole argument on one flimsy, inconclusive point. What if your wrong, do you have anything else to support your claims?

What argument are you referring to Ken?
The one where the pope is the successor of Peter because he allegedly ministered in Rome and was allegedly given control over the entire church? or
The one about the list of Bibles that the other posters claims were translated by the RC church? or
The one where you claim the RC church is the church that began with the teachings of Jesus in the 1st century AD Roman Province of Judea?
What particular argument do you want me to start with, or better yet what particular argument do you have evidence to support.

Give me a verse, from your KJV if you must, that shows without a doubt that Peter was the first to minister to the Romans and the position of pope started with him. Then show me that without a doubt the RC church initiated the translation of the Septuagint in the 2nd century BC. Then show me any recognised church didn't begin because of the teachings of Jesus in the 1st century AD.

What is flimsy Ken is your ability to show you are correct. The evidence you provide is not evidence but mere speculation. The evidence you supply is not evidence but your own opinion. You say I have hung an argument on 1 flimsy, inconclusive point. I say you have no points to hang any argument. Go and check your KJV, go and check the history books that are not biased, go and check who translated the Septuagint. Once you have done that come back and discuss this with a modicum of knowledge on the subject.

 

[keltoi]

Surely you can't expect me to take you seriously, if you can't provide any more evidence than that.

Are you talking to yourself?