What other book is the inspired word of God?

[biblecatholic]

So I can interpret the bible any way iI want and say it's true.

this is what you do anyways.

 

[biblecatholic]

So I can interpret the bible any way iI want and say it's true. Is that correct? If so, then I'll do what the catholics do and start with Matthew 1:25 and change the words to say that Joseph had no union with Mary forever. Next I'll strike out the passages in Matthew 23:5-12 and say that Jesus tells us to call our religious leaders "father" because we have more than one Father."

Boy this is fun. It;s like playing God. No wonder the catholics love doing this! It's an ego trip.

Now on to the idols. I'll change the 2nd commandment to say that we are supposed to erect statues and carved images of any figure in heaven and below heaven, pray to them and bow down to them like the pagans do. Boy, I don't even need the bible. I can make up my own beliefs all in the name of interpretation...so say the catholics. :x They don't have a leg to stand on. There can hardly be anything more blasphemous than changing God's word all in the name of Christ. :x

I can change any passage I want to all in the name of interpretation. I can make the bible say the opposite of what it says. Why, I can even make John the Baptist into a sinless person because Jesus said no one was greater than him. So I can say that he was born sinless also. Afterall, the Catholics do that with Mary, so the bible is fair game to make it say anything we want. So I can add to the bible also. My aren't I powerful. Power and lies are what the catholic church is all about. It's disgusting. :x

just to let you know there are some who say john the baptist was born into original sin but never committed any actual sin..

about the 10 commandments they were never numbered fyi, you seperate 1&2 eventhough they are the same and combine 9 and 10 when they are different ........ is a graven image a god befofe Him .......well...hmm.... YES. its the same thing.
do you know that there are many times that God asked His believers to build statues. ex 25:18-19
num 21:8-9, 1 kings 6:23-29, 1 kings 7:25-45. but as usual you pick and choose what you believe you treat Gods word like a cafeteria you pick and choose what you like

sola scriptura has lead many astray in believeing in doctrines of men. thats why you make your self pope but you give yourself the same power as God. cause you change meanings

 

[stranger]

re earlier comment by Biblecatholic:

answer to #1 please tell me your not serious, which interpretation do you lead them to? there are so many, whats more like traditions of men something that stays the same or something that constantly changes and ends up being broken by men into 55000 denominations.

While the figures below may not be accurate - they give some indication of the composition of Protestantism. There are of course more 'denominations' than those listed but what parameters are used to arive at 55,000 denominations? After all a house divided against itself cannot stand. That is the unstated assertion of the 55,000 Protestant denominations when compared with the asserted one Catholic Church.


Summary worldwide:

Catholic 968,000,000
Protestant 395,867,000
Other 275,583,000
Orthodox 217,948,000
Anglicans 70,530,000

---------------------------------------------------
Main Stream Protestant adherents (shown in green)
---------------------------------------------------
Pentecostal 105,000,000
Reformed/Presbyterian/Congregational 75,000,000
Baptist 70,000,000
Methodist 70,000,000
Adventist 12,000,000
Apostolic/New Apostolic 10,000,000
---------------------------------------------------

Anglican 73,000,000
Lutheran 64,000,000

from: http://www.godweb.org/Christianfamilies.htm

Note: Lutheran and Anglican churches are sometimes listed separately from Protestant ones.

Based on the above figures one could say that about 85% of the world's Protestants are found in eight mainstream denominations, which also divide into smaller streams as you go upstream. . . But to arrive at 55,000 denominations (?) surely this gives a distorted view of the Protestant movement.

Now to address the Catholic denominations:

A religious denomination (also simply denomination) is a subgroup within a religion that operates under a common name, tradition, and identity. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_denomination

As lifestyle reflects our 'interpretation' of doctrine it does so at the level of doctrine to which we are committed. Doctrine to which we are not committed has not this affect. The outworking of this can be seen amongst Catholics in the following way. To use an illustration: the monastic orders of the Catholic church and their interpretation of the Gospel are drastically different to the way the Gospel is understood in a downtown Catholic church in New York! Yet monastic orders exist in the US do they not? If these are not examples of 'denominations' what are they? So the questions can be asked:

How many denominations are there in the Catholic church?

By what name are these 'denominations' known in Catholic vernacular?

 

[Heidi]

OK, let's look at those Scriptures.

IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God

I agree wholeheartedly with that. But where does it talk about the Bible? This passage talks about the Word made flesh, Jesus Christ, not the Word made into print...

For if he that cometh preacheth another Christ, whom we have not preached; or if you receive another Spirit, whom you have not received; or another gospel which you have not received; you might well bear with him.

Maam, this can be applied to YOU! Yours is NOT the Gospel received because NOWHERE does the Gospel speak of Sola Scriptura or ANYTHING remotely like it. Thus, you are preaching a false gospel. Paul condemns such people in Galatians 1. I don't see how this proves anything about the Bible being the sole source of Christian faith.

Now, back to the OP. There is no other book that is inspired by God except for the Sacred Scriptures. Where did you get the idea that Catholics think something else? Apostolic Tradition (the correct READING of the Scriptures) is ALSO part of the Word of God at work, but it is not "inspired" as the Scriptures are.

Regards

Ther term "Solascripture" was coined way after the Ot and NT were written and was coined precisely because of John 1:1-2. So if I were you, I'd pay attention to 1 Timothy 6:3-5 so that you understand why quibbling about words is a desperate attempt to try to justify changing the words in the bible. The bible is clear as written. But when people don't like what it says, that's when they try to change it around and argue about word definitions that only cause trouble.

So I have no more interest is seeing catolics trying to butcher scripture. If they can't understand the simple words in Matthew 1:25, Matthew 23:5-12, etc. then I'm afraid that not even God can help them. I for one am tired of listening to them trying to change the words in those passages and others, "under the guise of interpretation" thinking they're fooling us by redefining words as simple as "is" "Father" "Until", etc. It fools no one but themselves. :x

 

[Heidi]

this is what you do anyways.

Oh really? Please provide a verse that I have changed. Otherwise, your comment is nothing more than a blatant falsehood. :x

 

[Heidi]

just to let you know there are some who say john the baptist was born into original sin but never committed any actual sin..

about the 10 commandments they were never numbered fyi, you seperate 1&2 eventhough they are the same and combine 9 and 10 when they are different ........ is a graven image a god befofe Him .......well...hmm.... YES. its the same thing.
do you know that there are many times that God asked His believers to build statues. ex 25:18-19
num 21:8-9, 1 kings 6:23-29, 1 kings 7:25-45. but as usual you pick and choose what you believe you treat Gods word like a cafeteria you pick and choose what you like

sola scriptura has lead many astray in believeing in doctrines of men. thats why you make your self pope but you give yourself the same power as God. cause you change meanings

Again, quibbling about words but missing the meaning of them. If the Catholics would focus more on the meaning of the words rather than where they're placed, they might understand them better. What you did is no different than telling someone they pronounced the word "accident" wrong after they informed you that your son was in a car accident. :roll: Who cares what number commandment Exodus 20:4 is? If you don't follow it, then the number is completely irrelevant. :roll:

 

[francisdesales]

Ther term "Solascripture" was coined way after the Ot and NT were written and was coined precisely because of John 1:1-2.

Forgive me, but I don't understand the connection between John 1:1-2 and Sola Scriptura. Could you explain that to me? I see the Logos taking on the form of flesh, not pages of a book.

So if I were you, I'd pay attention to 1 Timothy 6:3-5 so that you understand why quibbling about words is a desperate attempt to try to justify changing the words in the bible. The bible is clear as written.

That opinion is not proven by the very existence of hundreds of different Protestant denominations. If the Bible was clearly written, there would be no disagreement. The fact remains that the bible is not a systematic catechism or theology book. You don't find "Chapter One, the Trinity", and so forth.

But when people don't like what it says, that's when they try to change it around and argue about word definitions that only cause trouble.

Well, that DOES explain Sola Scriptura. People like you, while not the inventor of it, continue to propagate the false teaching of Sola Scriptura, a doctrine found nowhere in the Bible. You'd think that if this was God's desire, that everyone come to Him by reading a book, He would have made that more clear with at least ONE VERSE, Heidi.

So I have no more interest is seeing catolics trying to butcher scripture. If they can't understand the simple words in Matthew 1:25, Matthew 23:5-12, etc. then I'm afraid that not even God can help them.

We believe we are interpreting the Bible correctly. You disagree. That again proves the Bible is not crystal clear on many issues. We do this in good faith. Our opinions of interpretation differ. We don't do this because we like to argue. We passionately believe that we are correct and that YOU are butchering Scriptures.

Now, if you can explain how the Prologue of John proves Sola Scriptura, be my guest.

I for one am tired of listening to them trying to change the words in those passages and others, "under the guise of interpretation" thinking they're fooling us by redefining words

Ditto.

 

[RobertMazar]

No other book but the Holy Bible is the inspired Word Of God. The Book Of Mormon is a total joke written by a totally mentally deranged man(Joseph Smith). Health And Science With Keys To The Scriptures is also a total joke written by a totally mentally deranged woman(Mary Baker Eddy). Every other religious holy book of Hinduism, Confucianism and so forth is also a total joke. 8-)

 

[Heidi]

Ditto.

John :1-2 says the "Word was God." Now if you're confused about what the Word is, then I can see why you don't understand that sentence. Perhaps Christ's words abot the law of Moses will help you. Again, Jesus is not talking about the Code of Hamurabi or the Egyptian Book of the dead when he uses the word "scripture". So you have a lot to learn first before you can know where to find the word of God.

Secondly, if I interpret your first statement to say: "I do understand the connection between John 1:1-2 and Solascripture" and then claim that you said those words, then would that be a fair representation of what you said? :o If not, then why do the catholics think they can change the words around in the bible and claim that the bible says those new words, all in the name of interpretation? :o

 

[Solo]

No other book but the Holy Bible is the inspired Word Of God. The Book Of Mormon is a total joke written by a totally mentally deranged man(Joseph Smith). Health And Science With Keys To The Scriptures is also a total joke written by a totally mentally deranged woman(Mary Baker Eddy). Every other religious holy book of Hinduism, Confucianism and so forth is also a total joke. 8-)

Don't forget the Roman Catholic Catechism authorized by the heretic popes.

 

[Heidi]

Don't forget the Roman Catholic Catechism authorized by the heretic popes.

Amen. There is no reason for a catechism if the catholics believed the bible.

 

[RobertMazar]

Don't forget the Roman Catholic Catechism authorized by the heretic popes.

Oh knock off that insanity. The RCC Catechism is not considered to be inspired. And I do not own or read the RCC Catechism. :x

 

[RobertMazar]

Amen. There is no reason for a catechism if the catholics believed the bible.

Oh knock off that insanity. Naturally the RCC acknowledges that the Holy Bible is the only inspired Word Of God. And Luther was Born Again by reason of having received Christ as his Savior and yet Luther wrote the Small And Large Lutheran Catechisms. Also The Reformed Church In America has the Heidelberg Catechism. :x

 

[francisdesales]

John :1-2 says the "Word was God." Now if you're confused about what the Word is, then I can see why you don't understand that sentence. Perhaps Christ's words abot the law of Moses will help you. Again, Jesus is not talking about the Code of Hamurabi or the Egyptian Book of the dead when he uses the word "scripture". So you have a lot to learn first before you can know where to find the word of God.

First of all, calm down. I am not attacking you. I honestly do not understand where you are connecting John 1 with Sola Scriptura. I am baffled on how the Logos, the Son of God in Divine Form, who became incarnate - flesh - has anything to do with the Bible. Flesh and paper is NOT the same thing. The Son of God became flesh, not paper. So how on earth do you connect the Son of God becoming flesh with Sola Scriptura? I have been discussing these sort of things for many years and have never heard this one before. I would appreciate if you could explain it without the condescension.

Secondly, if I interpret your first statement to say: "I do understand the connection between John 1:1-2 and Solascripture" and then claim that you said those words, then would that be a fair representation of what you said? :o If not, then why do the catholics think they can change the words around in the bible and claim that the bible says those new words, all in the name of interpretation? :o

What on earth are you talking about? Speak plainly. I said what I said. I didn't say "I do" understand. I don't have a clue what your connection between John and Sola Scriptura is.


Regards

 

[Heidi]

Oh knock off that insanity. Naturally the RCC acknowledges that the Holy Bible is the only inspired Word Of God. And Luther was Born Again by reason of having received Christ as his Savior and yet Luther wrote the Small And Large Lutheran Catechisms. Also The Reformed Church In America has the Heidelberg Catechism. :x

Then Luther was wrong too. This isn't a debate between protestants and Catholics. This is simply what is in the bible and what isn't, period. The bible should be our only source as Jesus tells us when he said we have one teacher and that is the Christ. What part of that phrase do the Catholics not believe? :o

 

[Solo]

Oh knock off that insanity. Naturally the RCC acknowledges that the Holy Bible is the only inspired Word Of God. And Luther was Born Again by reason of having received Christ as his Savior and yet Luther wrote the Small And Large Lutheran Catechisms. Also The Reformed Church In America has the Heidelberg Catechism. :x

NO. The Roman Catholic "church" teaches that the Word of God is whatever it determines the Word of God to be. Check out the following proof of this statement from the Roman Catholic Catechism:

• The Roman Catholic church teaches that three final authorities exist, and all three are equal.[list:93e6a]
• Tradition
• Scripture[/*:m:93e6a]
• Magisterium of the Roman Catholic church[/*:m:93e6a]

According to the current Roman Catholic Catechism:

• 95 "It is clear therefore that, in the supremely wise arrangement of God, sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church are so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others. Working together, each in its own way, under the action of the one Holy Spirit, they all contribute effectively to the salvation of souls."
  
  81 "Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."
  
  "And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."
  
  82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honoured with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."

Who determines the interpretation of the Tradition, Scripture, and Magisterium?

• 85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."[47] This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

The Roman Catholic church teaches that it is the only true church, and it alone can interpret the Word of God. In fact, the Roman Catholic Catechism teaches that the Word of God exists within the Roman Catholic church apart from documents and records, for it is written in the Roman Catholic church's heart, and the Holy Spirit gives only the Roman Catholic church the correct interpretation of God's Word.

• 113 2. Read the Scripture within "the living Tradition of the whole Church". According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church's heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God's Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (". . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church"[81]).
  
  119 "It is the task of exegetes to work, according to these rules, towards a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture in order that their research may help the Church to form a firmer judgement. For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God."[88]
  
  But I would not believe in the Gospel, had not the authority of the Catholic Church already moved me.

[/*:m:93e6a][/list:u:93e6a]

 

[aj830]

Quick hypothetical situation for everyone:I have 100 books. 50 are fallible merely written by men and 50 are infallible inspired by God. The only problem is I don't know which is which. Do I need a infallible being or institution to sort these books or can I simply decide on my own and pick 50? I must have 50 to get the whole truth, no more no less. What do you suggest would be the best option in this situation. Is it worth it to have a fallible collection of possibly infallible books?

 

[Solo]

The mistruths are listed in the Roman Catholic Cult Catechism. Yes I am an AntiCatholic, as they are the religion of the antichrist. The individuals caught up in the paganist liturgy of this cult are no more guilty of their practices than any other unbeliever, but the warning must be given so that those who can see and hear the Spirit of God can come out of her.

And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. Revelation 18:4

 

[MarkT]

Isa 29:18 - Show Context
In that day the deaf shall hear the words of a book, and out of their gloom and darkness the eyes of the blind shall see.

Francis

The Lord said the day would come when the deaf would hear the words of a book and the blind would see. Is that enough evidence for you? He said the meek would obtain fresh joy in the LORD and the poor among men would exult in the Holy One of Israel. Now whether the Catholic church put the Bible together wittingly, knowing the words of the prophecy, or unwittingly, I don't know. I suspect unwittingly because they wouldn't let the poor hear the words for a long time; only the rich and educated could read. But nevertheless, the Catholic church did preserve the words of God and the knowledge of his Son. Certainly it was God's will. And the poor are no longer illiterate. So to them to whom the promise was made, the prophecy is fulfilled in this 'day'. The ones who couldn't hear have now heard and the ones who couldn't see have now seen. By this 'day', I am referring to the 'period of light' which followed the invention of the printing press.

 

[MarkT]

The Lord said, 'The meek shall obtain fresh joy in the LORD'; the LORD being the Word of God. How did they obtain joy in the Word of God? By hearing. How do they obtain fresh joy? Was their joy not fresh before the day? No. I guess it wasn't. They grew tired of hearing. But it is fresh by hearing and reading the words of the book. Whereas it was not fresh before the day, in that day when we read the book, our joy is fresh in the LORD.