(November 15, 2016 at 11:22 am)pocaracas Wrote: So you're saying that the Latin bible, used by the Catholic Church, had been changed to suit some purpose?Actually no.
Isn't that very very similar to the bible you use?
apples and oranges. Some changes are simple as word phrases and minor deletions to the additions of whole books whole's lineage is questionable to say the least. the following is a comparison of the Geneva bible/the first protestant and the R/C vulgate.
https://www.thisisyourbible.com/index.ph...diaid=3013
Ironically the Vulgate coincides with papal decree where as the Geneva simply trys to reproduce the available greek texts that can be vetted to that time period.
Quote:Is the issue of "sola scriptura" addressed by that monk who managed to read both the Greek and Latin versions of the text?The monk is martian Luther, the Doctrine of Sola scripture is another religious effort to try and trump the idea of paple decree.
Jesus himself discourages the following of blind or 'new' traditions to the written word.
Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus. They came from Jerusalem and asked him, 2 “Why do your followers not obey the traditions we have from our great leaders who lived long ago? Your followers don’t wash their hands before they eat!”
3 Jesus answered, “And why do you refuse to obey God’s command so that you can follow those traditions you have? 4 God said, ‘You must respect your father and mother.’[a] And God also said, ‘Whoever says anything bad to their father or mother must be killed.’[b] 5 But you teach that a person can say to their father or mother, ‘I have something I could use to help you. But I will not use it for you. I will give it to God.’ 6 You are teaching them not to respect their father. So you are teaching that it is not important to do what God said. You think it is more important to follow those traditions you have. 7 You are hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he spoke for God about you:
8
‘These people honor me with their words,
but I am not really important to them.
9
Their worship of me is worthless.
The things they teach are only human rules.’”
The 'pope' when they introduce doctrines of indulgences, or purgatory, forbidding priests to be married ect, or really anything not written in the original Greek manuscript are guilty of what Jesus is charging the pharisees in doing here!
For instance The bible tells use our deacons/elders should be married with a well behaved family. The R/C church says those in service of God can not marry. Jesus used 'scripture' to refute the oral traditions of the pharisees. Then called them fools for following their traditions over what was written.
What more authority do you need to scrap a 'church tradition' over that of a command given in scripture?
Quote:Hey, weren't some of those texts written in Hebrew? Did he read Hebrew, too?The Vulgate was translated from the Greek.. Except for the Latin only texts that had no provenance that was included in the R/C bible.
(November 15, 2016 at 10:48 am)Drich Wrote:(my hide tags to bring out the bit I want)
The God of the bible is indeed the God of Abraham, but not the God of religion.
The 'God of Abraham' is a omni-max
The God of the bible is an Alpha and Omega.
Aren't you contradicting yourself a bit?
I think you want to say the "god of religion" (catholic religion... who knows about the Orthodox, huh?) is a omni-max.
The thing, as I see it is that the God of Abraham is the big guy. And you want to follow that big guy, but with all the caveats introduced by Jesus and the subsequent traditions, like the trinity and stuff like that. That's why you call it the "god of the bible".
Calling it "God of Abraham" feels incomplete, to you, huh? It's like you're just mentioning "God , the Father"... and leaving the other 2 out.
[/quote]
more or less if I understand you correctly.
