Missing pages from one's bible

[bbbbbbb]

No, I mean "lacking direct doctrinal content", like the book of Ruth.

I see your point. I would agree with you and I would also include all of the historical books in the Old Testament - I and II Samuel, I and II Kings, I and II Chronicles, Judges, Ruth, Job, and Esther. These are historical narratives, not books of the Law (the Pentateuch).

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

None of these doctrines are declared as commandments in the deutercanonical books.

Are you so sure?

They are derived by inferences in the text. For example, prayers were offered for dead people in the books of the Maccabees. However, we have no idea as to the exact purpose of these prayers.

But we do know why the prayers were offered because the book tells us why.

It is absurd to believe that the Maccabees had any notion of a place of temporal torture known as Purgatory, although the doctrine of Purgatory has been developed over the centuries based on these few inferences.

What you say is ridiculous is relied upon by numerous ancient theologians. Nevertheless, not every doctrine is derived from sacred scripture alone. After all, Catholics do not adhere to "sola scriptura".

 

[bbbbbbb]

Are you so sure?

But we do know why the prayers were offered because the book tells us why.

What you say is ridiculous is relied upon by numerous ancient theologians. Nevertheless, not every doctrine is derived from sacred scripture alone. After all, Catholics do not adhere to "sola scriptura".

I never intended to say or imply that the Catholic Church adheres to sola sciptura. That is one reason that all the argumentation regarding the deutercanonical books is relatively meaningless. The Catholic Church can, and has, declared doctrines and dogmas which have either a very marginal basis in the Bible or none at all. Therefore, it ultimately does not rest its faith on the Bible alone, but on its Tradition enhanced by the Bible.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Therefore, it ultimately does not rest its faith on the Bible alone, but on its Tradition enhanced by the Bible.

Essentially correct but only if amended to say "on Sacred Scripture and sacred Tradition, of which sacred Scripture is a component".

 

[bbbbbbb]

Essentially correct but only if amended to say "on Sacred Scripture and sacred Tradition, of which sacred Scripture is a component".

I can definitely agree with that. Thank you.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I can definitely agree with that. Thank you.

I like my bible to have all the pages that the Catholic Church approved as canonical. It's comforting. What I make of the content on the pages and how that content affects my way of life is up to me and God; I earnestly hope God teaches me to use scripture wisely in the process of conversion leading to eternal life with him.

 

[BBAS 64]

I like my bible to have all the pages that the Catholic Church approved as canonical. It's comforting. What I make of the content on the pages and how that content affects my way of life is up to me and God; I earnestly hope God teaches me to use scripture wisely in the process of conversion leading to eternal life with him.

Good Day,

I really like this...

That would be why you are a member and that is great they have defined for you a canon, you believe that authority is required and you further believe they have it (authority) great.

I do agree that they have the authority for the members of their denomination, not being a member it is meaningless to me.

Thanks for that unambiguous statement from your view.

In Him,

Bill

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I remember my mum telling me that her cousin, a Catholic, had been told that it was medically dangerous for her to have any more children. So she used contraception and confessed every time she went to church - which I don't think was that often.

If it is medically dangerous then confessing that one has used contraception does not seem to be a necessity any more than staying away from Sunday mass because you are sick would need to be confessed - it doesn't need to be confessed.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Which means NO, it does not apply to the entire Catholic Church because even the Catholic Church can not agree on how many books are in the bible the Catholic Church include more than Roman Catholics.

Is "Roman Catholic" being used equivocally here? What exactly does it mean when you use it?

I can tell you what Roman Catholic means if I use it. It means

• Catholics who use the Roman Missal for mass, or
• Catholics who live in Rome

While Catholic means

• Catholics in communion with the Holy See in Rome

Orthodox Christians use the name Catholic at times, and some Lutherans and some Anglicans do too. They are free to use it; the word is not trade marked. But common usage in English is that Catholic means people who attend a Catholic Church that is in communion with Rome.

 

[Strong in Him]

If it is medically dangerous then confessing that one has used contraception does not seem to be a necessity any more than staying away from Sunday mass because you are sick would need to be confessed - it doesn't need to be confessed.

I didn't know that, thank you.
This was years ago.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I am not shocked that Judaism does not include the New Testament since Judaism does not accept the Gospel, come on now that is a very weak response, point in fact that Judaism should be considered the expert on what should should and should not be in the Old Testament which after all is the Jewish Bible.

What you've written here is hard to follow. Why ought a Christian consider Jewish Rabbis to be the experts on what is included in a Christian Bible? Jewish Rabbis do not claim to be Christians, nor do they claim to have control over what a Christian ought to consider canonical scripture, so, if the Rabbis do not want to job that you have assigned to them then it seems like assigning it to them is a waste of time and effort.

Muslim Imams may want to define a canon for the Quran, and possibly have views about the old testament and the new testament but I do not know many Christians who would ask an Imam to decide the canon for a Christian's bible.

The canon really is a matter for Christians to decide for Christians. Catholics decided the matter for Catholics long ago. That is why Catholic bibles all have 73 books listed as canonical scripture.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I didn't know that, thank you.
This was years ago.

I am sorry that it took so long for me to notice the post and give a reply. I was reading through the thread and when I saw it I decided to reply.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Not at all do you not accept that there other rites of the Catholic Church other than Roman?

I believe that in the Catholic Church there are 23 rites, several are in Latin, many are in other languages. The Church is Catholic, the largest rite (in numbers of adherents) is Roman. But we do not call the Church "Roman" it is "Catholic" just as Orthodox Christians call their Church "Orthodox" and its jurisdictions receive names like "Serbian Orthodox" and "Greek Orthodox". These are names that they use of themselves just as Catholic Christians use "Catholic" of themselves and may add "Roman rite" if asked for more precision.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

St. Jerome distinguished

Saint Jerome was a holy man who had opinions on matters that the Catholic Church had not yet dogmatically defined, his opinions on those matters sometimes coincide with the dogmas that were decided later, after his time, and sometimes do not coincide with them. All that one can say is that his views are interesting but now that the Catholic Church has dogmatically defined the matter of the canon we need not be concerned by his opinions when they differ from dogma.

 

[Strong in Him]

I am sorry that it took so long for me to notice the post and give a reply. I was reading through the thread and when I saw it I decided to reply.

No problem.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I believe that in the Catholic Church there are 23 rites, several are in Latin, many are in other languages. The Church is Catholic, the largest rite (in numbers of adherents) is Roman. But we do not call the Church "Roman" it is "Catholic" just as Orthodox Christians call their Church "Orthodox" and its jurisdictions receive names like "Serbian Orthodox" and "Greek Orthodox". These are names that they use of themselves just as Catholic Christians use "Catholic" of themselves and may add "Roman rite" if asked for more precision.

I am curious about this Catholic Church. I just looked in my telephone book (the arbiter of all things) and discovered that there is a Catholic church in my area and no less than 27 Roman Catholic churches, including one Roman Catholic cathedral. I am familiar with the Roman Catholic churches here, but am unfamiliar with the Catholic church here. Is it like the Apostolic Catholic Church in England?

 

[Erose]

The curious thing is that after all the smoke clears on this issue, nobody is able to point to any doctrine that is taught in the apocrypha (i.e. deutercanonical books) that is not found in all of the other books. These additional writings are primarily narratives lacking direct doctrinal content.

As Xeno pointed out, prayer for the dead, prayer to angels, the heroic virtue of martyrdom, institution of Hannukah, God created the universe ex nihilo, power of the intercession of the Saints, off the top of my head. The Books of Wisdom and Sirach are much like Proverbs in teaching precepts for living a just life, Wisdom also has a very powerful prophecy of Jesus’ Passion.

 

[Erose]

I see your point. I would agree with you and I would also include all of the historical books in the Old Testament - I and II Samuel, I and II Kings, I and II Chronicles, Judges, Ruth, Job, and Esther. These are historical narratives, not books of the Law (the Pentateuch).

Yeah but those writings have a lot of teachings in them, as well as those that are called Deuterocanonical, that apply even today. That IMO is what was so great about Hebrew writers, even their historical books are about God, and His place within their history.

 

[Erose]

I am curious about this Catholic Church. I just looked in my telephone book (the arbiter of all things) and discovered that there is a Catholic church in my area and no less than 27 Roman Catholic churches, including one Roman Catholic cathedral. I am familiar with the Roman Catholic churches here, but am unfamiliar with the Catholic church here. Is it like the Apostolic Catholic Church in England?

Usually non Latin rite Catholic Churches will have on their signs what particular Church they are part of, i.e. Melkite Catholic, Byzantine Catholic, Ukrainian Catholic, etc.

 

[Valletta]

I am curious about this Catholic Church. I just looked in my telephone book (the arbiter of all things) and discovered that there is a Catholic church in my area and no less than 27 Roman Catholic churches, including one Roman Catholic cathedral. I am familiar with the Roman Catholic churches here, but am unfamiliar with the Catholic church here. Is it like the Apostolic Catholic Church in England?

This has been explained to you before, and quite recently. So why in the world would you be curious about something that has been explained to you before? I must say your fake story about propaganda and the Catholic Church was outrageous, why do you put out false information about the Catholic Church and why repeat a question that has been answered?