Do Catholic Priests ever say read your Bible?

Oh..a couple more things....

Yet these groups never come to an agreement which involves a fundamental understanding of the character of God. One position is true, the other is necessarily false and therefore heresy. There are not two "sides" to the truth. (Where did you learn that, RELATIVISM101?)

Where do you get this "just me and my bible" nonsense? Millions on both sides of your example have Gods scriptures, and the Holy Spirit is also actively involved on both sides of the issue being discussed. </font>[/QUOTE]So the Holy Spirit is active on "both sides" of the issue perpetually supporting contradictory versions of the truth and maintaining schism in (or from) the body? "I don't think so, Tim."

I find it stunning that you have such a low view of the Holy Spirit. What do you think He...the Holy Spirit...is? A bumbling incompetant?</font>[/QUOTE]To the contrary, you have the low view of the Holy Spirit since you suggest that he continues to inspire contradictory versions of the truth keeping the Christians divided into numerous competing groups rather than united in the one body observing the one faith.

Okay...that's all.

 

Doubting Thomas,

Oh really?

I saw it. Millions see it. During my years as a lost person, and particularly during the years when I was under Holy Spirit conviction, God sent many many christians my way. He caused me to cross paths with them in many ways. Some of these brothers and sisters...in Christs one body...were baptists, some were pentecostals, some were fundamentalists, some were charismatics, some were non-denominationals, some leaned more towards the "conservative" side of things, some leaned more towards the "liberal" side of things. Some were calvinists, some were arminians.

And yet it was abundantly clear to this lost person that these beautiful and caring people were all part of one body...the body of Christ. There was the same discernable *something* that they all had, that I knew I didnt have. Although they sometimes used different terminology at times, the love was the same, and the message was the same. I was a sinner and would stand before God one day as a sinner.. The Lord Jesus Christ was my only hope. He died for my sins and was offering new life to me, if I would only repent and recieve Him through the indwelling Holy Spirit. I could be made new and justified in Gods eyes through faith alone. And the result would be that God would give me new wants and desires and revolutionise my life by recreating me from the inside out.

There came a point where...23 years ago...I did that, and I discovered that what they told me was true. My life was revolutionised from the inside out. The Lord Jesus Christ has been "more than enough" through all these years.

How could those born again people, from this...supposedly...fractured, broken apart mess of confusion and quarelling groups all present such a unified brotherhood...and such a clear message of truth... to me?

Because the "fractured, broken apart mess of confusion and quarelling groups" is nothing but a satanic lie that is fostered upon the world by the deciever, and sometimes propagated by false "christian" religious groups who must keep their people in their clutches. Passive, compliant, and under their control.

The Jehovahs Witnesses do it. The Mormons do it. David Koresh and Jim Jones did it. And the Catholic Church does it.

Sorry friend. Its not "kum-bah-ya". Its the body of Christ. Christs ONE body. But with many flavors and areas of emphasis. But with truth found in all of them. Its a beautiful thing. Can we do better regarding HOW we contend with each other for the truth? Sometimes. But the problem certainly isnt the contending. The contending is a very good and profitable thing. All one has to do is look at evagelicalsim...and compare it to the JW's, Mormons, or Catholicism.

Its like the difference between light and darkness.

And I mean that literally as well as figurativly.

God bless,

Mike

 

Actually it's an unfortunate reality brought about by lone-ranger schismatic christians and their followers. The Mormons, JWs, Jim Jones, and Koresh are just extreme apostate examples of the same schismatic tendencies. (And yeah...the pretentions and abuses of Rome share some of the blame as well). Or else we wouldn't have all these denominations that don't worship together because they can't agree exactly on what the one faith is.

(Mike in his ostrich position once again).
"Flavors and areas of emphasis"...nice euphemism for contradictions and confusion and for schisms and heresies. But again that's coming from one who thinks relativism is "a beautiful thing".

Indeed.

 

Pricilla Ann,

No, unfortunetly they havent.

Although some Catholic apologists are trained well to "spin" things in a way that makes it sound like the average Catholic holds the scriptures in as high a regard as evangelicals do, they do not.

They are completly forbidden to go to the scriptures themselves...as God wants them to do...trusting only the Holy Spirit to guide them. As has always been the case, they are obligated to believe precisely as "The Hierarchy" commands them to believe.

Just like the Jehovahs Witnesses and Mormons, they are told that the *magical* and all knowing "Hierarchy" of the Catholic Church...through its "Teaching Majesterium"...are the only ones on earth capable of interpreting the scriptures...and they interpret them without error.

PRECISELY as the JW's believe concerning the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society interpretations found in their literature.

And as a result, as one would expect, false teaching, superstition, heresy, idolatry and the like run rampant through the Catholic Church in a rushing current of chaos amd confusion.

There is no "checks and balances" system in place to keep the overflow of error in check, because "The Hierarchy" has cunningly eliminated it.

Very sadly,

Mike

 

d28guy:

It is very sad. Catholics are taught to trust the Catholic Church for their salvation, not Jesus Christ. My grandmother died 3 years ago this summer; and while my grandmother was a very good, kind person, I can't help but wonder about her salvation. If one could get to heaven by simply being a good person, Grandma certainly would be in heaven. That, however, is not the gospel. The Catholic members of my family continue to have masses said for her to shorten her time in purgatory. (How many masses will be enough?)

How do you make clear to Catholics the difference between trusting in Jesus Christ and trusting in the traditions of men?

PA

 

They are in the Canon of Scripture because God inspired them and put them there. It is obvious that they are the inspired Word of God, and that the Apocrypha is not. Can you answer each and every objection put forth above, and not just pick out this one. However to give you an answer to this one, here it is:

Song of Solomon:
The Song of Solomon falls into the category of the poetical books. It was written by Solomon, and indeed Solomon himself is mentioned many times in the New Testament, unlike many of the Apocryphal books where the author is not even known.
The Song of Solomon is a love story when taken literally, as it should be. But it is also an allegory of Christ and his Church, and thus is very much found in the New Testament. Here is what some commentaries say about it:

(Unger’s Commentary on the Old Testament, Vol. I. Merrill F. Unger. )

The entire poem speaks of Christ coming for his bride or church. There are many verses that point out these things. It speaks allegorically of these things. But as Matthew Henry says, those that are not spiritually minded will never understand these things.
Thus is the Song of Solomon.

Ecclesiastes:
Ecclesiastes is also written by Solomon, the same Solomon who is mentioned many times in the New Testament.

(Wycliffe Bible Encyclopaedia.)

Esther:
“Esther is not quoted in the NT directly, however, the book has wonderful lessons on the faithfulness of God even when His people are disobedient.” (Wycliffe)
The book itself is a reminder that “God hath not cast away his people whom he foreknew” (Rom.11:2) but will preserve a remnant of them to realize His covenant and promises made to them (cf. Rom. 9:4-5). As such, the book is a powerful attestation of God’s sovereignty as well as His covenant faithfulness to His own in all ages. (Unger)

Obadiah:
Verses 5-9 describe the destruction of Edom. In the NT, Edom is known as Idumea. Ruined economically by the Arabs, and later conquered by the Romans, the Edomites disappeared from the pages of history about A.D. 70. Thus the NT and history shows the prophecy of this book to be accurate and true. It is the inspired Word of God. Apocryphal books are not so.

Zephaniah:
Being a book of judgement as well as a book of promise of restoration, there is much in the New Testament about the contents of Zephaniah. One just has to look for it. For example:
In chapter 1:14-18, “The warning given to Judah and Jerusalem of the approaching destruction by the Chaldeans. It is the ‘great day of the Lord,’ a kind of doom’s-day, as the last destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans is represented to be in our Saviour’s prediction concerning it, Mat.24:27.” (Matthew Henry)

Judges:
Haven’t you read Hebrews chapter 11?
Hebrews 11:32 And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets:

I Chronicles:
Surely you jest. This book is a record, a genealogy from Adam to the reign of David, and many of the people and events are mentioned in the New Testament. Here are a couple of the more specific ones:
1. God’s promise to David (17:14)……..Luke 1:33
2. Pilgrims and sojourners on the earth (29:15)…………….Heb.11:13

Ezra:
Ezra is a continuation of the second book of Chronicles, and the opening statements are a repetition of the closing announcement of that book.
Ezra 10:11 Now therefore make confession unto the LORD God of your fathers, and do his pleasure: and separate yourselves from the people of the land, and from the strange wives.
--This action corresponds to the command given by Paul in 2Cor.6:14-18, “Be not unequally yoked together with unbelievers.”
In chapter 3, the Hebrew name Yeshua, is translated as Jesus.

Nehemiah:
The Book of Nehemiah is the sequel to the narrative begun in the Book of Ezra. The two books are properly considered as one. It is Volume II.
Nehemiah was a man of God, a reformer of his day.

(Dixon Analytical Bible). And they certainly don’t learn it in the Catholic churches.

Lamentations:
This is an addition by Jeremiah.
“In addition to being the words of Jeremiah, the book may also be thought of as expressing:
1. The sorrow of the Jewish remnant, for whom Jeremiah was a spokesman, as they witnessed the Babylonian invasion.
2. The anguish of the Messiah when He came to suffer, bleed, and die on the cross of Calvary (ex. 1:12)
3. The sorrow of the Jewish remnant in a future day when they will be called upon to go through the Great Tribulation, the Time of Jacob’s Trouble.” (William MacDonald).

Nahum:
Matthew 12:41 The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.
--Jonah had been to Nineveh over 100 years before. This is the second time God had sent a prophet to this heathen nation telling it to repent.

Nahum 1:15 Behold upon the mountains the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace! O Judah, keep thy solemn feasts, perform thy vows: for the wicked shall no more pass through thee; he is utterly cut off.
--Paul quotes from this passage in Romans 10:15

Here are the facts to consider. Every one of these books speak of Christ in one way or another. They are all written before 400 B.C. They are all written in the Hebrew language. They differ greatly from the fairy tale books of the Apocrypha, such as “Bel and the Dragon.” The Apocrypha and its fairy-tales have no place among the 66 inspired books that make up the canon of Scripture that we now have. These truths are self-evident.
DHK

 

Why are you using a commentary?

 

The Bible is the inspired Word of God and it is to teach the truths needed for our salvation.

The contexual approach of interpreting the Bible, will enable us to go back to the original intent of its authors by analyzing their times, culture, languages, and other circumstances.

The contextual approach to the Bible does not deny the truth of the Bible. God is the author of the Bible. Since God is the author of the Bible, the books of Scripture teach without error the truths that God intends to reveal for the sake of our salvation.

But truth is expressed in different ways in various literary forms, such as history, prophecy, poetry, law, proverbs (wise sayings), myths (stories or descriptions of actual events that explain ultimate reality), legends (popular unverifiable stories handed down from the past, often conveying a moral), fables (fictitious stories, often with animal characters, that teach a lesson), and parables (simple stories that illustrate a moral or a religious lesson).

All these literary forms are capable of communicating truth in dramatic fashiion. They express truths in ways that a mere dictionary cannot.

Worth noting, is the distinction between truth and historical actuality. A story which is not historical can convey truth, as the parables of Jesus show.

At times historical persons become the focal point for stories that are not historical but teach lessons that are true. For example, George Washington cutting down the cherry tree and admitting his guilt, "I cannot tell a lie" may not be historical. However, the story does teach a moral that is true: Honesty is the best policy.

 

Pricilla Ann,

Its very very difficult. In some cases the Holy Spirit simply is not there to open their understanding. They are as lost as Satan, yet they are "good Catholics". Other times, they might have somehow stumbled upon saving faith in spite of the Catholic Church.

In either case it seems that there is almost a brainwashing that takes place. I dont mean that literally, but its almost that severe regarding how blinded to simple biblical truth Catholics can be. Just reading posts on forums like this serves as great examples.

I was that way. I was a "good Catholic" my whole life until age 24. 8 years of parochial grade school, mass every sunday, religion class for 8 years, CCD classes, and altar boy, confessional booths, doing lots of "penance" prescribed by the so called "priest", etc etc etc.

And yet I was completly lost. No more saved that Satan Himself. When I heard the gospel for the 1st time in my early 20's it was something completly new. I had never heard it before.

I had heard a convoluted mess of requirments, ways to appease God, punishments, ways to increase my chances, lots of "hope so, think so, maybe so's", lots of works, works, works, works, and more works, with only a chance that I MIGHT go to heaven...but probably would go to purgatory for some unknown period of torment to burn for some extended period of time to somehow finally become "worthy" of heaven.

When christians...actual born again people...shared the gospel of Jesus Christ with me in my early 20's it was like cool water to a very thirsty man.

I thought to myself..."You mean I can be totally reconciled to God, through faith in Jesus Christ alone? I can embrace Christ through faith alone, with my works...neither good nor bad...having no part whatsoever??? And God Himself will indwell me through the Holy Spirit, and give my new life? A truly meaningful and fruitfull life...with God Himself producing new life in and through me?"

"Yep. That right Mike." ...I was told.

I resisted for a while...smoking reefer and drinking can be fun you know...but it was just a matter of time before I came to my senses. Praise God I did!

Anyway, having never heard the true gospel as a Catholic, I can sympathise with them. The mess of falsehood is so overwhelming its just about impossible. But not impossible. With my family I just kept living out the fruitfull christian life in front of them, sharing truth as God opened doors, praying for them, and asking God to bring them to their senses. Both of my parents and my younger sister have since passed away.

The results?

My mother was born again on her deathbed, primarily through the final witness of a nurse who was taking care of her at the end.

I shared the gospel with my sister on her deathbed and she recieved.

And my father was born again on his deathbed.

And now they are in heaven...and here I am still down here! lol! Of course, the scriptures tell us that many times "the 1st will be last, and the last 1st"

Regarding your question...

Its difficult due to the indoctrination that takes place. But just live out the "Spirit filled" life in front of them, love them, and present truth as God opens door. Dont force it...unless you are VERY certain that God is opening a door.

And above all...present the simplicity of the gospel, the truth that justification is through faith alone, and the certainty of salvation for the born again person.

Because...as you know...to the Catholic, "salvation" is very convoluted and complex, the Catholic must "work work work!" their way into heaven, and there is no certainty.

I believe its impossible for the glorious, wonderful, and liberating truths of the true gospel to not wet the appetite of the ever working and ever uncertain Catholic. The Holy Spirit will move in and begin to plant seeds of truth in their heart.

Concerning your grandmother, I see you live in the midwest (here in the USA), so she surely heard to true gospel in her lifetime. In addition, I'll bet she saw the fruit and joy of true salvation through you, and probably others as well. I wouldnt be surprised if during her last conscience moments before passing she entered into true saving faith. Why not take this to God and ask Him to confirm to you in some way that she did in fact enter into saving faith?

I'll bet God will get word to you somehow.

God bless you,

Mike

 

I use commentaries, because I don't bother wasting my time reading through the books of the Apocrypha myself. It is a waste of time. That is one reason.

As far as the particular books of Scripture that were mentioned, a specific question was asked about them. It takes research from others who have done the work before you to quote what New Testament references are used in specific books of the Old Testament.

A similar question would be is how many times is the phrase "the Day of the Lord" used in the Book of Zephaniah, and is often repeated in the New Testament. The answer is five. But how would you know that if you didn't do some research first without using other peoples commentaries and research?
DHK

 

And so what value does the Book of Tobit have for us when it teaches us all about the practice of magic?

Or what value does the Book of Judith teach us when it is good for a woman to deceitfully offer sexual favors to a man in order to get what she wants. Is this good morality to teach to your children. I am glad I don't (or didn't) have you as a parent.

Or tell me all the valuable worth you got out of "Bel and the Dragon," how inspiring it was as the "Word of God."

Was the Book of Sussanna on the same par as the Book of Isaiah, and what exactly did it teach that was of any benefit.

Why were these books fabricated all between the 2nd cetury B.C. and the 1st century A.D., and written in Greek, when the canon of the Old Testament was closed by 400 A.D., and all the books had to be written in Hebrew, and had to be written before 450 B.C. in order to be admitted into the canon?

Your Apocrypha is discredited immediately on those grounds alone.
DHK

 

But then why do you get upset when a priest suggests that one of his parishoners use one?

 

The Book of Judith has a dramatic setting that appealed to Jewish patriotism, and it warned of the urgency of adhering to Mosaic law, generally speaking, but what accounted for its enduring appeal was the drama of its narrative.

The subject: a daring and beautiful woman in her full maturity, dressed as for the feast with all her spectacular jewels, accompanied by an apprehensive maid, succeeds in decapitating the invading general, Holofernes. The moral is as much about the dangers of a beautiful woman, as had been told of Dalilah and Samson, but here the woman was a culture-hero to the listeners.

The book tells the story of a righteous Jew of the Tribe of Naphtali named Tobit living in Nineveh after the deportation of the northern tribes of Israel to Assyria. He was particularly noted for his diligence in attempting to provide proper burials for fallen Jews who had been slain. After Sennecharib's death, he was allowed to return to Nineveh, but again buried a dead man who had been murdered on the street. That night, he slept in the open and was blinded by bird droppings that fell in his eyes. This puts a strain on his marriage, and ultimately, he prays for death.

Meanwhile, in faraway Media, a young woman named Sarah prays for death in despair, because she has lost seven husbands to the demon Ashmodai
with each husband killed on the wedding night, before the marriage could be consummated. God sends the angel Raphael, disguised as a human, to heal Tobit and to free Sarah from the demon.

The main narrative is dedicated to Tobit's son, Tobiah or Tobijah (Greek: Tobias), of the Tribe of Naphtali, who is sent by his blind father to collect a sum of money that the latter had deposited some time previously in the far off land of Media. Raphael represents himself as Tobit's kinsman Azariah, and offers to aid and protect Tobijah on his journey. Under the guidance of Raphael, Tobiah makes the journey to Media. Along the way, he is attacked by a giant fish, whose heart, liver and gall bladder are removed to make medicines.

Upon arriving in Media, Raphael tells Tobiah of the beautiful Sarah, whom Tobijah has the right to marry, because she is in his family. He instructs the young man to burn the fish's liver and heart to drive away the demon when he attacks on the wedding night. The two are married, and the fumes of the burning organs drive the demon away to Upper Egypt, while Raphael follows him and binds him. Meanwhile, Sarah's father has been digging a grave to secretly bury Tobiah (whom he assumes will be dead). Surprised to find his son-in-law alive and well, he orders a double-length wedding feast (and has the grave secretly filled). Since he cannot leave because of the feast, Tobiah sends Raphael to recover his father's money. After the feast, Tobiah and Sarah return to Nineveh.

There, Raphael tells the youth to use the fish's gall to cure his father's blindness. Raphael then reveals his true identity and returns to heaven. Tobit sings a hymn of praise, and tells his son to leave Nineveh before God destroys it according to the prophecy of Nahum. After burying his father, Tobiah returns to Media with his family, where he later learns that the destruction of Nineveh took place as his father predicted.

It is a religious novel with certain historical elements. The value of prayer, fasting and almsgiving is particularly praised in this instruction. Doctrinally, the book is cited for its teaching on the intercession of angels, filial piety, reverence for the dead and purity in marriage.

The tale of Bel and the Dragon forms chapter 14 of the Book of Daniel. The chapter is formed of three independent narratives, which place the culture-hero Daniel at the court Cyrus, king of the Persians.

The narrative of Bel (14:1 - 22) is a folk tale ridiculing pagan worship. In it, the king asks Daniel "Do you not think that Bel is a living god? Do you not see how much he eats and drinks every day?" Daniel proves through a ruse that the sacred meal of Bel is actually consumed at night by the seventy priests and their wives and children, who entered through a secret door when the temple's doors were sealed. The priests and their wives and children are killed, and Daniel is permitted to destroy the idol of Bel and the temple.

In the brief companion narrative of the Dragon 14:23 - 30), "there was a great dragon, which the Babylonians revered." In this case the supposed god is no idol, but not all that eats is divine: Daniel slew the dragon by making cakes of pitch, fat and hair. The dragon ate them and burst open. Now the Babylonians were indignant. "The king has become a Jew; he has destroyed Bel, and killed the dragon, and slaughtered the priests," they said, and demanded that Daniel be handed over to them.

The third narrative (14:31 - 42), Daniel in the Lions' Den, is a variant of the tale told in Daniel 6. It has been made into a consequence of the preceding episode. Daniel remained unharmed in the den with seven lions, fed by the miraculous transportation of the prophet Habakkuk. "On the seventh day the king came to mourn for Daniel. When he came to the den he looked in, and there sat Daniel! The king shouted with a loud voice, "You are great, O Lord, the God of Daniel, and there is no other besides you!" Then he pulled Daniel out, and threw into the den those who had attempted his destruction, and they were instantly eaten before his eyes."

Susanna is a narrative about a beautiful Jewish wife living in Babylon who becomes the object of the lustful schemes of two perverse Jewish elders. Because she refuses their advances, they falsely accuse her of an adulterous affair. She is condemned to death. But in answer to her prayer, God sends the young Daniel to defend her. His cross-examination exposes their deceit; Susanna is spared; and they are executed. The moral: God vindicates virtue.

 

Perhaps you are confusing me with someone else. I have always advocated the use of extra-Biblical sources such as commentaries.
BTW, you are a Catholic aren't you?
DHK

 

Susanna is a narrative about a beautiful Jewish wife living in Babylon who becomes the object of the lustful schemes of two perverse Jewish elders. Because she refuses their advances, they falsely accuse her of an adulterous affair. She is condemned to death. But in answer to her prayer, God sends the young Daniel to defend her. His cross-examination exposes their deceit; Susanna is spared; and they are executed. The moral: God vindicates virtue. [/QUOTE]
Yeah, "The moral of the story," It is a story that has a moral. Oh goody, goody. I have a copy of "Aesop's Fables" too. I think that will do just as well, and it is just as inspired, in fact it may be even more inspired than the books mentioned above. The issue is inspiration, not does the story have a moral. There are lots of good stories in this world. But there is only one Book that is the inspired Word of God, and that Book contains 66 separate books, written over a period of about 1500 years, composed of about 40 different authors all writing on the same theme: the redemption of mankind through faith in the blood of Christ.
DHK

 

DHK,

You asked about what one could learn from reading these books, so I gave you a summary.

Now, you are going back to them not being inspired.

Several posts have showed the history of the deuterocanonicals.

The fact is, while Anglo-American fundamentalists today reject their canonicity, they were translated and included in the original King James Bible of 1611. Why after so many years of Christianity are these books thrown out?

So those who completed the original canon of Scriptures that contained these books weren't lead by the Holy Spirit? I guess everyone was reading the "false Bible" until the deuterocanonicals were taken out?

 

The original KJV did not have 14 chapters in Daniel.
All of the Apocrypha was placed in the middle of the Bible, between the two Testaments and noted as the Apocrypha. It was placed there as reading material only (kind of like my concordance or dictionary). The translators knew that they were not inspired. You can buy bibles published from Protestant sources today that have the Apocrypha included in them. That doesn't make them any more inspired than the concordance or the maps at the back of the Bible. They are there simply for reading or reference. They were never considered inspired by any Protestant.
DHK

 

I have a neighbor who was planning on becoming a Nun, but then got married and had a family. She did teach in a Catholic School for 26 years before she retired. I gave her a Gideon New Testament... she told 'me what nice stories' that little book I gave her had in it.

 

I think you should throw away your false Catholic revisionist history. You are far too gullible, or have been fed a pack of lies and believe it.

Fact 1. The Apocrypha itself was never officially recognized as Scripture even by the Catholic Church until 1534, at the Council of Trent.

Fact 2. The Catholics themselves have been the only ones ever to accept the Apocrypha as inspired.

Fact 3 Not Jesus, not the Apostles, not the early believers, not any group outside the Catholic Church at all has ever accepted the Apocrypha as Scripture. You are a total minority on this issue.

Fact 4. Since the Apocrypha is placed in the Old Testament, and the Jews have never accepted them, this ought to be proof enough that they are spurious uninspired books.
But it seemss like the motto of the Catholic Church is: Where nonsense makes perfect nonsense then always believe the nonsense.
DHK