Since: May 10

Location hidden

#21 Feb 19, 2014
Mike Peterson wrote:
Says a low end, protesting, sola scriptura interpreter of a Catholic book about Jesus' Church that has been here for 2000 years.
Amazing ignorance and blinders.
Of course you have the fullness of the Truth and teach no errors. Been around for 200 years and 1/2 of your members are in Tenn and Texas. Where was Jesus for your 'Church' for 1800 years?
The government only recognized your community in 1900., That was the first time you could check COC on the census.
How can you stand there and lie about your history and accept money for doing that?
And so we are to depend upon the government to tell us when the church of Christ was established. Now that is funny. Really now tell us you dont place the bible above the pope and the RCC. Be bold and state it.
Mike Peterson

Birmingham, AL

#22 Feb 19, 2014
JustChristian wrote:
<quoted text>And so we are to depend upon the government to tell us when the church of Christ was established. Now that is funny. Really now tell us you dont place the bible above the pope and the RCC. Be bold and state it.
The Church was created before the Bible. The Church created the Bible 360 years after Jesus died and rose again.

How many hundreds of thousands of people were saved before the Bible was created.

Now. What is more important, the Church Jesus himself created is the pillar of Truth? Whoever hears his Church hears him? Whatever sins the Church binds or looses, he binds and looses.

Tell where Jesus said anything you will need to know will be in a book.

The Church is more important than the Bible. The Church uses the Bible and Tradition to teach the way to salvation.
William

Anniston, AL

#23 Feb 19, 2014
"The Church is more important than the Bible."

Wow.

I think we are just about done here.
Mike Peterson

United States

#24 Feb 19, 2014
William wrote:
"The Church is more important than the Bible."
Wow.
I think we are just about done here.
Completely done here. You are quite correct. I am glad you finally get it.

The Church owns the Bible. Remember when you say Church you are saying Catholic, the Universal Church

The Church existed before the Bible. For 360 years, people were saved without a Bible. For another 1000 years only 10% could even read the Bible and even less could afford a Bible.

How were these people saved? By listening to the Church, which means you listening to Jesus. Jesus told us to do that, didn't he? Whoever hears you , hears me.

Not whatever you read and whatever you choose to believe hears me.

Since: Jan 10

Royse City

#25 Feb 20, 2014
Mike Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>Completely done here. You are quite correct. I am glad you finally get it.

The Church owns the Bible. Remember when you say Church you are saying Catholic, the Universal Church

The Church existed before the Bible. For 360 years, people were saved without a Bible. For another 1000 years only 10% could even read the Bible and even less could afford a Bible.

How were these people saved? By listening to the Church, which means you listening to Jesus. Jesus told us to do that, didn't he? Whoever hears you , hears me.

Not whatever you read and whatever you choose to believe hears me.
Matthew 23:9-12
9 And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.
10 Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ.
11 The greatest among you shall be your servant.
12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.

Acts 10:25-26
25 When Peter entered, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped him.
26 But Peter lifted him up, saying, "Stand up; I too am a man."

www.roysecitycoc.org

Since: Jan 10

Royse City

#26 Feb 20, 2014
William wrote:
"The Church is more important than the Bible."

Wow.

I think we are just about done here.
Just respond with Scriptures. That's sufficient to defeat their error.
William

Birmingham, AL

#27 Feb 20, 2014
"The Church owns the Bible. Remember when you say Church you are saying Catholic, the Universal Church."

Well, since the RCC "owns" the Bible, which "Bible" does the church own and why are there more than one? You posted some link a while back from a 1910-era Catholic apologist who swore up and down that the 1899 Douhy version was THE approved Bible for the Catholic church.

Now we all know that these translations don't all say the same thing, but here is a link from a Catholic website about the currently approved versions. Sure is a lot to choose from. I better get a Catholic priest to clear up the confusion when I read one approved version and it doesn't even have the same text as another approved version. What could possibly go wrong there?

Approved Translations of the Bible

USCCB Approved Translations of the Sacred Scriptures for Private Use and Study by Catholics

1983 - Present

The 1983 Code of Canon Law entrusts to the Apostolic See and the episcopal conferences the authority to approve translations of the Sacred Scriptures in the Latin Catholic Church (c. 825,1). Prior to 1983, Scriptural translations could be approved by the Apostolic See or by a local ordinary within a diocese.

What follows is a complete list of the translations of the Sacred Scriptures that have received the approval of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops since 1983.

In addition to the translations listed below, any translation of the Sacred Scriptures that has received proper ecclesiastical approval &#8210; namely, by the Apostolic See or a local ordinary prior to 1983, or by the Apostolic See or an episcopal conference following 1983 &#8210; may be used by the Catholic faithful for private prayer and study.

Books of the New Testament, Alba House

Contemporary English Version - New Testament, First Edition, American Bible Society

Contemporary English Version - Book of Psalms, American Bible Society

Contemporary English Version - Book of Proverbs, American Bible Society

The Grail Psalter (Inclusive Language Version), G.I.A. Publications

New American Bible, Revised Edition (NABRE)

New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition, National Council of Churches

The Psalms, Alba House

The Psalms (New International Version)- St. Joseph Catholic Edition, Catholic Book Publishing Company

The Psalms - St. Joseph New Catholic Version, Catholic Book Publishing Company

Revised Psalms of the New American Bible (1991)

So You May Believe, A Translation of the Four Gospels, Alba House

Today's English Version, Second Edition, American Bible Society
Translation for Early Youth, A Translation of the New Testament for Children, Contemporary English Version, American Bible Society
Mike Peterson

Birmingham, AL

#28 Feb 20, 2014
William wrote:
"The Church owns the Bible. Remember when you say Church you are saying Catholic, the Universal Church."
Well, since the RCC "owns" the Bible, which "Bible" does the church own and why are there more than one? You posted some link a while back from a 1910-era Catholic apologist who swore up and down that the 1899 Douhy version was THE approved Bible for the Catholic church.
Now we all know that these translations don't all say the same thing, but here is a link from a Catholic website about the currently approved versions. Sure is a lot to choose from. I better get a Catholic priest to clear up the confusion when I read one approved version and it doesn't even have the same text as another approved version. What could possibly go wrong there?
Approved Translations of the Bible
USCCB Approved Translations of the Sacred Scriptures for Private Use and Study by Catholics
1983 - Present
The 1983 Code of Canon Law entrusts to the Apostolic See and the episcopal conferences the authority to approve translations of the Sacred Scriptures in the Latin Catholic Church (c. 825,1). Prior to 1983, Scriptural translations could be approved by the Apostolic See or by a local ordinary within a diocese.
What follows is a complete list of the translations of the Sacred Scriptures that have received the approval of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops since 1983.
In addition to the translations listed below, any translation of the Sacred Scriptures that has received proper ecclesiastical approval &#8210; namely, by the Apostolic See or a local ordinary prior to 1983, or by the Apostolic See or an episcopal conference following 1983 &#8210; may be used by the Catholic faithful for private prayer and study.
Books of the New Testament, Alba House
Contemporary English Version - New Testament, First Edition, American Bible Society
Contemporary English Version - Book of Psalms, American Bible Society
Contemporary English Version - Book of Proverbs, American Bible Society
The Grail Psalter (Inclusive Language Version), G.I.A. Publications
New American Bible, Revised Edition (NABRE)
New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition, National Council of Churches
The Psalms, Alba House
The Psalms (New International Version)- St. Joseph Catholic Edition, Catholic Book Publishing Company
The Psalms - St. Joseph New Catholic Version, Catholic Book Publishing Company
Revised Psalms of the New American Bible (1991)
So You May Believe, A Translation of the Four Gospels, Alba House
Today's English Version, Second Edition, American Bible Society
Translation for Early Youth, A Translation of the New Testament for Children, Contemporary English Version, American Bible Society
The Latin Vulgate remains the official Bible of the Catholic Church. All others translations that must be approved by the Church who created the Bible.
Perfect translations are impossible. That is why Jesus left us Church and not a book.
That is one of many thorns a protester has to deal with. No perfect translation of the first Bible ever created is available. Also if you read the link about the history of the Bible, you will see even errors could creep in from the original because each one was hand copied and took many years to do. This was done over and over for 1000 years.
Who has the final authority? The Church. The bible tells us that. It also tells us no private interpretation of scriptures.
When you read any Bible, you have to compare it to the CCC. There is no way a man today can privately interpret any Bible the way the Apostles meant it to say with complete infallibility.
So William. Out of all of the 30,0000 translations of Bibles out there, do you think you have the right one, and is your private interpretation right?
If so, you disagree completely with what Jesus set up. His Church has failed and now you worship a book the way you want, created by his Church that failed. You are your own Pope.
bizarre
William

Birmingham, AL

#29 Feb 20, 2014
"So William. Out of all of the 30,0000 translations of Bibles out there, do you think you have the right one, and is your private interpretation right?"

But conversely, the Latin Vulgate is "right?"

Then why did the Catholic church feel the need to approve all of these newer versions, all of which vary between themselves in textual content.

Something ain't right here.
Mike Peterson

Birmingham, AL

#30 Feb 20, 2014
HEATH - 72 wrote:
<quoted text>
Just respond with Scriptures. That's sufficient to defeat their error.
What Bible and whose interpretation? Of course yours. right?
Mike Peterson

United States

#31 Feb 20, 2014
William wrote:
"So William. Out of all of the 30,0000 translations of Bibles out there, do you think you have the right one, and is your private interpretation right?"
But conversely, the Latin Vulgate is "right?"

Then why did the Catholic church feel the need to approve all of these newer versions, all of which vary between themselves in textual content.
Something ain't right here.
The Latin Vulgate was the first. It has to be right., All others are copied and translated
from that one.

Latin is no longer the international language. The Bibles are now translated to the
vernacular.

To learn history is to cease being Protestant.

You hit the nail on head about all the variations and then addi all the millions of interpretations of those variations.

That is why it is so asinine that a book, think about it, a book with tens of thousands of variations and millions of interpretations can be the sole way to salvation.

Jesus started a Church. Never once mentioned a book.

Since: Jan 10

Royse City

#32 Feb 21, 2014
16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
2 Timothy 3:16-17

www.roysecitycoc.org
Mike Peterson

Birmingham, AL

#33 Feb 21, 2014
HEATH - 72 wrote:
16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
2 Timothy 3:16-17
www.roysecitycoc.org
Amen!!!! Now you are getting it.

It sure is profitable. The Catholic Church agrees completely. That is exactly why they created it. To teach, for reproof , for correction and for training in righteousness..

Now, who did Jesus leave to do that? The Church.

The Bible is a tool the Church created. It is the inerrant written word of God. Nowhere in that scripture does is say is the sole rule of faith.

You know why? It would be asinine to create a book , that had to copied by hand for 1000 years , where errors crept in end by mistake and on purpose and translated 30,000 times and interpreted on their own by millions of people.

You must think Jesus is fool if that was his plan?

But it wasnt his plan. His plan was a Church., Whoever hears his Church hears him,
Dave P

Morehead, KY

#34 Feb 21, 2014
Mike Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
The Latin Vulgate was the first. It has to be right., All others are copied and translated
from that one.
Latin is no longer the international language. The Bibles are now translated to the
vernacular.
To learn history is to cease being Protestant.
My understanding is that Jerome took many of the existing latin copies of scripture, and made the best translation he could using them, and the septuagint. Apparently there were many copies and many variations of each one.

Vulgate means the common language, doesn't it?

I don't think many of the posters here truly understand how the book we have now came about. Even our vaunted KJV owes some gratitude to the vulgate. Plus how many realize the KJV was edited to show the Church of England's episcopal system? From my studies there were Latin and Aramaic versions of scripture very early in history. And Jerome was commissioned to produce a common vernacular edition that was as faithful as possible while eliminating all of the variations.

The early Christians were not carrying copies of the Bible to church in the first century.
Mike Peterson

Jackson, MS

#35 Feb 21, 2014
"The early Christians were not carrying copies of the Bible to church in the first century."

Until the 15th Century when the printing press was made.

Plus the Bible was not created until AD 390. There was no complete book of the scriptures that we have now until then.

Remember, I know you find this hard to understand how important this is, in the 1st Century only 5% of the people could read. Until the printing press it had only improved to 10%.

Only Monks in monasteries made Bibles and that was by hand. Took a flock of sheep to make the parchment and 3-5 years of hand printing to make one.

To read History is to cease being protestant
Dave P

Hiawassee, GA

#36 Feb 22, 2014
The church is more important than the Bible.

Here's something for those who disagree with the above statement to think about- did Jesus come to die for a book, or for a people? Is He returning for a book, or for a people?

Which is truly more important?
William

Weaver, AL

#37 Feb 22, 2014
Jesus came to die, shed his blood, and be resurrected by God so that all of us can be saved by trusting in what he did for us, apart from any so-called work of our own doing. This is what Paul was given to preach, and it is not the same thing that Peter, James, and John was given to preach.

You won't find that hugely important piece of information by hanging out in a Catholic church, or for that matter, most any other demominational church including the one that calls itself the Church of Christ.
Mike Peterson

Jackson, MS

#38 Feb 22, 2014
William wrote:
Jesus came to die, shed his blood, and be resurrected by God so that all of us can be saved by trusting in what he did for us, apart from any so-called work of our own doing. This is what Paul was given to preach, and it is not the same thing that Peter, James, and John was given to preach.
You won't find that hugely important piece of information by hanging out in a Catholic church, or for that matter, most any other demominational church including the one that calls itself the Church of Christ.
Where will you find it, if you ever do? Some book you bought in a bookstore? You have no idea where that book came from, how many thousands of errors have crept in it, in the last 1600 years. Add that to your arrogance that most Protesters have, that you know exactly what Jesus was talking about, right? The Holy Spirit told you right? Every man for himself.

The Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. Whoever hears the Church hears Jesus. What the Church binds and loosens on earth , Jesus does the same in the heaven. Whatever sins you forgive or not are forgiven or not in heaven.

No book ever mentioned in that book that you bought in a bookstore that plans on saving you.

Me and you Lord. Right Lord?????? asinine
Mike Peterson

Jackson, MS

#39 Feb 22, 2014
Remember. There is only 1 Church.

All others came from that Church. All took part of the Truth.

The high end Protesters kept more.

The low end prots have the crumbs. They have themselves.
Dave P

Cleveland, GA

#40 Feb 22, 2014
Mike Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
Where will you find it, if you ever do? Some book you bought in a bookstore? You have no idea where that book came from, how many thousands of errors have crept in it, in the last 1600 years. Add that to your arrogance that most Protesters have, that you know exactly what Jesus was talking about, right? The Holy Spirit told you right? Every man for himself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._W._Bullinger

Bullinger is the father of William's belief system. Sounds much like restorationism when he is researched- the ultradispensationalist believes that 4 major facts of Christianity have been "lost" and are just now being recovered.

He apparently also was a flat-earth believer.

No doubt ultradispensationalism didn't begin until the mid to late 1800s.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bassett Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Sola fide? 2 hr Bobby 49
Are You Ready? 5 hr HEATH - 72 125
Why They Left: Listening to Those Who Have Left... (May '12) 6 hr Bobby 41
COC and KJV Bible (Jan '13) Thu _Randy_ 85
Which church is this Thu Bobby 37
What Does Johnny Robertson Say Thu Mitchell_Ferguson 2
Who is Eric Picock Sep 16 Bobby 18
•••
•••
Bassett Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Bassett Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Bassett People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Bassett News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Bassett
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••