What's the deal with Catholics?

Are you a sincere seeker who has questions about Christianity, or a Christian with doubts about your faith? Post them here to receive a thoughtful response.
Jbuza
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1213
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 5:26 pm

Post by Jbuza »

Byblos wrote:
I asked the following question in a different post but never got a reply: Who would you consider an authority on scripture in cases of disputes? When 2 Protestants interpret the Bible differently, who determines who is right? I pose these questions in an effort to learn as I do not know the answer. In Catholisim, the answer is the supreme court (i.e. the church).

God bless you all.
I guess I must be convinced by my own investiagtion and I don't need men telling me what I should believe. The catholic church is no more the church than the christians in my church, and I think it is clear that their may be members of each that are not walking in the spirit. I must interpret the scripture by my omnw conscience, and by the leading of the Holy SPirit. I believe that God is revealed to me, and that I don't need to have a group of men interpret it for me, if I interpret things as I understand them I don't feel right asking the church if I am right or wrong, if someone challenges my beleif I can pray for clearance on the issue.

I do agree with you that christians should be like minded and follow the same things, but I don't happen to agree with some of the traditions within the Catholic Church that seem to have little Biblical support, but that is so with pentecostals, and baptists as well, so I think there is the problem of false teachings creeping in, that the Bible warns about, so I must test for myself and interpret as best I can with the guidence of the Soirit
User avatar
Byblos
Old School
Posts: 6024
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 12:21 pm
Christian: Yes
Location: NY

Post by Byblos »

Jbuza wrote:
Byblos wrote:
I asked the following question in a different post but never got a reply: Who would you consider an authority on scripture in cases of disputes? When 2 Protestants interpret the Bible differently, who determines who is right? I pose these questions in an effort to learn as I do not know the answer. In Catholisim, the answer is the supreme court (i.e. the church).

God bless you all.


I guess I must be convinced by my own investiagtion and I don't need men telling me what I should believe. The catholic church is no more the church than the christians in my church, and I think it is clear that their may be members of each that are not walking in the spirit. I must interpret the scripture by my omnw conscience, and by the leading of the Holy SPirit. I believe that God is revealed to me, and that I don't need to have a group of men interpret it for me, if I interpret things as I understand them I don't feel right asking the church if I am right or wrong, if someone challenges my beleif I can pray for clearance on the issue.

I do agree with you that christians should be like minded and follow the same things, but I don't happen to agree with some of the traditions within the Catholic Church that seem to have little Biblical support, but that is so with pentecostals, and baptists as well, so I think there is the problem of false teachings creeping in, that the Bible warns about, so I must test for myself and interpret as best I can with the guidence of the Soirit


That is great that you are able to do that. But what if there were fundamental differences of opinion? Take for example Genesis 1. If one person interprets it as the creation in 6 literal earth days and another person interprets it as day-age creation. Each one is adamant in their belief that they are correct. Are they both correct in so much as this is what they truly believe or is one correct and not the other? And again, this is truly an effort on my part to understand, not to highlight differences.
User avatar
August
Old School
Posts: 2402
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 7:22 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by August »

Hi, as an intro, let me state that I don't believe in debating other Christians too much, as I believe the central message of Christianity to be consistently believed among Christians of all denominations. However, when it comes to the Roman Catholic Church, there are a few things I disagree with in their doctrine, and we can have some hopefully friendly discussions about it in future. For now, this appeared today in the Times of UK, and I would like some of our RCC friends to comment as to where they stand on this:

Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 32,00.html)
By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent

THE hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true.

The Catholic bishops of England, Wales and Scotland are warning their five million worshippers, as well as any others drawn to the study of scripture, that they should not expect “total accuracy” from the Bible.

“We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision,” they say in The Gift of Scripture.

The document is timely, coming as it does amid the rise of the religious Right, in particular in the US.

Some Christians want a literal interpretation of the story of creation, as told in Genesis, taught alongside Darwin's theory of evolution in schools, believing “intelligent design” to be an equally plausible theory of how the world began.

But the first 11 chapters of Genesis, in which two different and at times conflicting stories of creation are told, are among those that this country's Catholic bishops insist cannot be “historical”. At most, they say, they may contain “historical traces”.

The document shows how far the Catholic Church has come since the 17th century, when Galileo was condemned as a heretic for flouting a near-universal belief in the divine inspiration of the Bible by advocating the Copernican view of the solar system. Only a century ago, Pope Pius X condemned Modernist Catholic scholars who adapted historical-critical methods of analysing ancient literature to the Bible.

In the document, the bishops acknowledge their debt to biblical scholars. They say the Bible must be approached in the knowledge that it is “God's word expressed in human language” and that proper acknowledgement should be given both to the word of God and its human dimensions.

They say the Church must offer the gospel in ways “appropriate to changing times, intelligible and attractive to our contemporaries”.

The Bible is true in passages relating to human salvation, they say, but continue: “We should not expect total accuracy from the Bible in other, secular matters.”

They go on to condemn fundamentalism for its “intransigent intolerance” and to warn of “significant dangers” involved in a fundamentalist approach.

“Such an approach is dangerous, for example, when people of one nation or group see in the Bible a mandate for their own superiority, and even consider themselves permitted by the Bible to use violence against others.”

Of the notorious anti-Jewish curse in Matthew 27:25, “His blood be on us and on our children”, a passage used to justify centuries of anti-Semitism, the bishops say these and other words must never be used again as a pretext to treat Jewish people with contempt. Describing this passage as an example of dramatic exaggeration, the bishops say they have had “tragic consequences” in encouraging hatred and persecution. “The attitudes and language of first-century quarrels between Jews and Jewish Christians should never again be emulated in relations between Jews and Christians.”

As examples of passages not to be taken literally, the bishops cite the early chapters of Genesis, comparing them with early creation legends from other cultures, especially from the ancient East. The bishops say it is clear that the primary purpose of these chapters was to provide religious teaching and that they could not be described as historical writing.

Similarly, they refute the apocalyptic prophecies of Revelation, the last book of the Christian Bible, in which the writer describes the work of the risen Jesus, the death of the Beast and the wedding feast of Christ the Lamb.

The bishops say: “Such symbolic language must be respected for what it is, and is not to be interpreted literally. We should not expect to discover in this book details about the end of the world, about how many will be saved and about when the end will come.”

In their foreword to the teaching document, the two most senior Catholics of the land, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, Archbishop of Westminster, and Cardinal Keith O'Brien, Archbishop of St Andrew's and Edinburgh, explain its context.

They say people today are searching for what is worthwhile, what has real value, what can be trusted and what is really true.

The new teaching has been issued as part of the 40th anniversary celebrations of Dei Verbum, the Second Vatican Council document explaining the place of Scripture in revelation. In the past 40 years, Catholics have learnt more than ever before to cherish the Bible. “We have rediscovered the Bible as a precious treasure, both ancient and ever new.”

A Christian charity is sending a film about the Christmas story to every primary school in Britain after hearing of a young boy who asked his teacher why Mary and Joseph had named their baby after a swear word. The Breakout Trust raised £200,000 to make the 30-minute animated film, It's a Boy. Steve Legg, head of the charity, said: “There are over 12 million children in the UK and only 756,000 of them go to church regularly.

That leaves a staggering number who are probably not receiving basic Christian teaching.”

BELIEVE IT OR NOT

UNTRUE

Genesis ii, 21-22

So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept he took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man

Genesis iii, 16

God said to the woman [after she was beguiled by the serpent]: “I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.”

Matthew xxvii, 25

The words of the crowd: “His blood be on us and on our children.”

Revelation xix,20

And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who in its presence had worked the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshipped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with brimstone.”

TRUE

Exodus iii, 14

God reveals himself to Moses as: “I am who I am.”

Leviticus xxvi,12

“I will be your God, and you shall be my people.”

Exodus xx,1-17

The Ten Commandments

Matthew v,7

The Sermon on the Mount

Mark viii,29

Peter declares Jesus to be the Christ

Luke i

The Virgin Birth

John xx,28

Proof of bodily resurrection
Acts 17:24-25 (NIV)
"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. [25] And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else."

//www.omnipotentgrace.org
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com
Jbuza
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1213
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 5:26 pm

Post by Jbuza »

Byblos wrote:
Jbuza wrote:
Byblos wrote:
I asked the following question in a different post but never got a reply: Who would you consider an authority on scripture in cases of disputes? When 2 Protestants interpret the Bible differently, who determines who is right? I pose these questions in an effort to learn as I do not know the answer. In Catholisim, the answer is the supreme court (i.e. the church).

God bless you all.


I guess I must be convinced by my own investiagtion and I don't need men telling me what I should believe. The catholic church is no more the church than the christians in my church, and I think it is clear that their may be members of each that are not walking in the spirit. I must interpret the scripture by my omnw conscience, and by the leading of the Holy SPirit. I believe that God is revealed to me, and that I don't need to have a group of men interpret it for me, if I interpret things as I understand them I don't feel right asking the church if I am right or wrong, if someone challenges my beleif I can pray for clearance on the issue.

I do agree with you that christians should be like minded and follow the same things, but I don't happen to agree with some of the traditions within the Catholic Church that seem to have little Biblical support, but that is so with pentecostals, and baptists as well, so I think there is the problem of false teachings creeping in, that the Bible warns about, so I must test for myself and interpret as best I can with the guidence of the Soirit


That is great that you are able to do that. But what if there were fundamental differences of opinion? Take for example Genesis 1. If one person interprets it as the creation in 6 literal earth days and another person interprets it as day-age creation. Each one is adamant in their belief that they are correct. Are they both correct in so much as this is what they truly believe or is one correct and not the other? And again, this is truly an effort on my part to understand, not to highlight differences.
I understand your wish to have uniformity among christianity, and I find solid Biblical evidence for it, but there are warnings in the Bible that tell us that false teachings will come into the church, and I find traditions and teachings in the catholic church that are not in accordance with scripture, as I do with other denominations. I can get more specific if you would like.

Of course they can't both be right, and I can get past a lot of differences in interpretation in some obscure areas. I guess my problem is that I find no teaching that says that a man appointed head of the church should make this decision. Christ is the head of the church. I find teaching that to me means be careful of appointing someone like a pope and saying they have power to interpret doctrine. I find no evidence for a pope, I think the papal power is open to and has been abused.

1 Corinthians 6:4 - If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.
Veronica
Recognized Member
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 8:40 am
Christian: No
Location: Canada

Post by Veronica »

August wrote:and I would like some of our RCC friends to comment as to where they stand on this
First of all, I'd like to read over that document. ;)
Second, and I'm not saying this is the case, but people often hear or read only what they want to hear or read. Thus, they may interpet that which they read and hear incorrectly. Which, in some cases, explains the many different interpretations of the Bible. But I really can't say much until I read the document.
Jbuza wrote:and I find traditions and teachings in the catholic church that are not in accordance with scripture, as I do with other denominations. I can get more specific if you would like.
Please do.
Jbuza wrote:I guess my problem is that I find no teaching that says that a man appointed head of the church should make this decision. Christ is the head of the church. I find teaching that to me means be careful of appointing someone like a pope and saying they have power to interpret doctrine. I find no evidence for a pope, I think the papal power is open to and has been abused.
First, this man, the pope, is appointed by Christ. ;) Second, Yes the Papal power has been abused. The Pope can make mistakes, and there are only certain circumstances that a Pope is infallible.
I urge you to read the article I posted before for more information.--> http://www.catholic-pages.com/pope/hahn.asp :)

Or/and we can start a new discussion and discuss the pope there. ;)

Blessings and Prayers,
Veronica
User avatar
Byblos
Old School
Posts: 6024
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 12:21 pm
Christian: Yes
Location: NY

Post by Byblos »

[quote="August"]this appeared today in the Times of UK, and I would like some of our RCC friends to comment as to where they stand on this:

Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 32,00.html)
By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent[quote]

August, the URL you posted is not working, could you repost as a hyperlink?

Before I read the article, just one comment regarding the title. You could already tell the article is somehow suggesting the Catholic church no longer believes in the Bible when clearly the message is not to take the Bible literally (something the Catholic church has always professed, at least the last few hundred years).
User avatar
August
Old School
Posts: 2402
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 7:22 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by August »

Acts 17:24-25 (NIV)
"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. [25] And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else."

//www.omnipotentgrace.org
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com
User avatar
Byblos
Old School
Posts: 6024
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 12:21 pm
Christian: Yes
Location: NY

Post by Byblos »


Several attempts, can't get to it. Don't know why I'm timing out. Anyone else is having this problem?
User avatar
August
Old School
Posts: 2402
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 7:22 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by August »

Don't know why, I'm getting to it fine.
Acts 17:24-25 (NIV)
"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. [25] And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else."

//www.omnipotentgrace.org
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com
kateliz
Advanced Senior Member
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:07 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Female
Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota, US

Post by kateliz »

I for one read the startling article. And I think it's startling not because of what it reports, (which really wouldn't surprise me seeing as how I contantly see evidence of the RCC afraid to tell the media what they really think because they want everyone to like them so badly,) but because it reeked of misinterpretation. I'll have to read this paper the article wrote on for myself because the article appears to have been written by a very ignorant atheist who couldn't understand what it was reading. What it reports and what it quotes doesn't add up. I don't believe it, to be frank! I'll try the link and try to read the thing for myself a little later, (if I will get around to it at all!)
kateliz
Advanced Senior Member
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:07 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Female
Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota, US

Post by kateliz »

Don't you hate it when reporters make stories over just so they can use it as a story?
kateliz
Advanced Senior Member
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:07 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Female
Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota, US

Post by kateliz »

The link worked for me, but I can't find the book! Darn search engines! Darn sites that pop up as a result for every search! The author of the article didn't even say who the "author" of the book was, nor was there a link provided on the site to where I could buy the book. Wrong, wrong, wrong! I don't think we should get all worked up over this until we can verify what's reported in the article.

Although, discussing the general concept isn't a bad idea. There are many Christians who believe you can pick and choose which things to believe in the Bible. I've met many who believe that the Bible does contain serious errors but is an overall revelation from God. Most of the time they pick out the verses condemning homosexuality and male headship. And where do they get this special insight into what can and can't be trusted in this unbreakable book? From their own superior minds. It's revolting and makes my head spin at how illogical it is!
User avatar
Byblos
Old School
Posts: 6024
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 12:21 pm
Christian: Yes
Location: NY

Post by Byblos »

kateliz wrote:The link worked for me
Could I impose on someone to cut & paste the article and PM it to me? Not sure why I keep timing out, even to the site's main page.

Thx & Rgds,

Byblos.
User avatar
bizzt
Prestigious Senior Member
Posts: 1654
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:11 pm
Christian: No
Location: Calgary

Post by bizzt »

Byblos wrote:
kateliz wrote:The link worked for me
Could I impose on someone to cut & paste the article and PM it to me? Not sure why I keep timing out, even to the site's main page.

Thx & Rgds,

Byblos.
August has already pasted the Story...
User avatar
Believer
Advanced Senior Member
Posts: 780
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 7:44 pm
Christian: No
Location: Oregon

Post by Believer »

NOOO!!!! More lies from the RCC. This isn't good news at all! NOW they are telling the truth. Hope they don't say the whole Bible is fabricated!
Post Reply