Katholikos Posted July 12, 2003 Posted July 12, 2003 QUOTE: DIABOLICAL HERETIC MARTIN LUTHER and BIBLE In 397 A.D., the Catholic Church gave a definitive decision as to which writings and books should be admitted into the Bible and which should be rejected, and every book which is in the Protestant New Testament today, was put there by Pope Siricus and the Catholic Bishops in the year 397 A.D. If Christ had intended that men should learn Christianity from the New Testament, what about the hundreds who lived before the first Bible was given to the world by the Catholic Church? Luther's Protestant Bible came out 1520 and before his Bible the Catholic Bible had been translated into Spanish, Italian, Danish, French, Norwegian, Polish, Bohemian, Hungarian and English, there was exactly 104 editions in Latin; 38 editions in German language, 25 editions in Italian language, 18 in French. In all 626 editions of the Bible with 198 in the language of the laity, had been edited before the fist Protestant Bible was sent forth into the world. What books are not found in Protestant Bible? They are Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch and the two Books of Machabees, together with fragments of Esther (x.4; xvi, 24), and Daniel (iii, 24-90; xii., xiv). These books were contained in the Alexandrian list or Canon of Books which was used by Greek-speaking Jewsof Alexandria, Asia Minor, Greece and Italy. Why did Luther reject 7 books from the Bible? Because they did not suit his new doctrines. He had arrived at the principle of private judgment - of picking and choosing religious doctrines; and whenever any book, such as the book of Machabees, taught a doctrine contrary to his taste he rejected it overboard and overboard that book went because it says: 2 Mach. xii 46, "it is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from sins." He not only cast out certain books, but he mutilated some that were left. For example, not pleased with St. Paul's doctrine, "we are justified by faith," Luther added the word "ALONE" to make the sentence read: "We are justified by faith alone." His explanation of this insertion is found in his own words, "I know very well that the word 'alone' is not in the Latin and Greek texts; but Dr. Martin Luther will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough. " St. Paul writes under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. Luther creates a Lutheran Bible under his own audacity. He shows little respect for the Bible when he calls the Epistle of St. James "an Epistle of straw with no character of the Gospel in it." He spoke disparagingly about the Epistle of St. Jude, the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the beautiful Apocalipse of St. John. The Lord's Prayer or the Our Father is in the Bible, but Catholic prayer differs from the Protestant. Protestants use a conclusion which was not in the original Greek copies of the New Testament, namely, "For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, forever. Amen." Catholics say the Lord's Prayer properly. Before the last book in the New Testament was written the Catholic Church celebrated her golden jubilee; 11 of the Apostles had died. Hence, THE BIBLE CAME FROM THE CHURCH. THE CHURCH DID NOT COME FROM THE BIBLE. Christianity existed over 300 years without one single Bible Christian. http://www.marianland.com/truech03.html UNQUOTE Hmmmm. This showed up in my mailbox today. Very timely, with the false Martin Luther Bio being shown on PBS. Was there anything about Luther's desecration of the Bible in the bio? If so, I slept through that part. I could have written this myself. Those who've been around phatmass very long have read something like this many times before. Same song, different words. But I never thought to call Luther a diabolical heretic -- darn it! JMJ Jay (Likos) Katholikos Ex-Southern Baptist, ex-agnostic, ex-atheist, ecstatic to be Catholic!
Anna Posted July 13, 2003 Posted July 13, 2003 Oh my gosh, Likos, I truly thought that you had written that yourself, until you provided the link! A very informative piece, to be sure. Imagine, the first three centuries of Christians weren't "Bible Christians!" And how many times have you reminded us that "the Bible came from the Church; the Church didn't 'come from' the Bible!" Likos has a twin somewhere...or...a clone.....?
Katholikos Posted July 14, 2003 Author Posted July 14, 2003 Oh my gosh, Likos, I truly thought that you had written that yourself, until you provided the link! A very informative piece, to be sure. Imagine, the first three centuries of Christians weren't "Bible Christians!" And how many times have you reminded us that "the Bible came from the Church; the Church didn't 'come from' the Bible!" Likos has a twin somewhere...or...a clone.....? Anna, I think the similarity illustrates that there is only one TRUTH. And that both I and the other writer from Marianland have read these facts numerous times before in numerous unremembered sources, written by numerous defenders of the faith whose names we can't recall. We all stand on the shoulders of those who got there first!
Joyful Posted July 17, 2003 Posted July 17, 2003 So many protestants quote Romans when defending their faith alone doctrine, but, correct me if I'm wrong, Romans treats faith and works as if they're mutually exclusive. In example: Romans 9:32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the "stumbling stone." In this verse it is inferred that the Israelites tried to achieve salvation through works alone which cannot be done, but it doesn't say that faith and works hand in hand is incorrect. On the other hand, Faith alone is point blank denied: James 2:24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. Right?
Anna Posted July 17, 2003 Posted July 17, 2003 I'd agree with that, Joyful. James 2:26 says, "Faith without works is dead."
hyperdulia again Posted July 17, 2003 Posted July 17, 2003 I don't get why Protestants can't plainly and simply see what those words say. "Faith without works is dead." dead---not alive, lacking life, asleep.
Brother Adam Posted July 17, 2003 Posted July 17, 2003 (edited) yeah, but it doesn't say your going to hell. Why can't Catholics see that the Bible says what John 3:16 says! so Edited July 17, 2003 by Brother Adam
hyperdulia again Posted July 17, 2003 Posted July 17, 2003 what has john 3:16 to do with this conversation?
Joyful Posted July 17, 2003 Posted July 17, 2003 Matthew 25:31-46 31"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, 32 and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. 34 Then the king will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.' 37 Then the righteous will answer him and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?' 40 And the king will say to them in reply, 'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.' 41 Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.' 44 Then they will answer and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?' 45 He will answer them, 'Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.' 46 And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life." This is another confirmation of salvation through faith AND works. The sheep inherited the kingdom of God because they performed good works. The goats did nothing and went off to eternal punishment. Just a thought.
musturde Posted July 18, 2003 Posted July 18, 2003 I asked a priest why the 7 books of the Old Testament were taken out, he replied with something like "They were not found in Hebrew.".
nippy316 Posted July 18, 2003 Posted July 18, 2003 (edited) Why don't Protestants get John 6:51-56? True Hyper...and John 20:23 is on my mind as well. But, that's a different thread. However, if there are any protestants out there who can explain it on this one, be my guest. nippy316/Justine Edited July 18, 2003 by nippy316
dUSt Posted July 18, 2003 Posted July 18, 2003 yeah, but it doesn't say your going to hell. Why can't Catholics see that the Bible says what John 3:16 says! so So you can be saved if you have dead faith?
cmotherofpirl Posted July 18, 2003 Posted July 18, 2003 I asked a priest why the 7 books of the Old Testament were taken out, he replied with something like "They were not found in Hebrew.". First Luther didn't want them. They did not agree with his heresies. Second there were two different groups of jews in OT-NT times. The ones outside of Isreal did not speak the same languages anymore as the ones in Jersusalem. So two separate canons developed. The Catholic Church has used the OT list it always has. The protestants chose the other because it excluded the ones they didn't approve of. Luther also The ultimate authority for the Bible is the Catholic Church.
IcePrincessKRS Posted July 18, 2003 Posted July 18, 2003 ok so you can be saved by dead faith? what has john 3:16 to do with this conversation? Why don't Protestants get John 6:51-56? ***Wonders if dUSt will suspend her for encouraging Hyper.... ***
ironmonk Posted July 19, 2003 Posted July 19, 2003 (edited) The Jews of 90 AD took out books of the OT. They did not like the fact that the Christians and the Jews used the same Canon. "The Massorah" - Is the book luther used for the kjv because it was from the Jews, and it was something the Church didn't use... He built a lie saying that the Church added the books, when it was the other way around, it was the Jews that took the books out in 90 AD. I think that is what the Priest meant without going into great detail. Anytime a anti-Catholic wants to argue the books of the Bible... this quote always shuts them up... "We are compelled to concede to the Papists that they have the Word of God, that we received it from them, and that without them we should have no knowledge of it at all." ~ Martin Luther, Commentary on St. John It's a fact that the man said it, we even give the exact writing it can be found in. Unlike the anti-Catholics with their fruitcake. Every time I have defended against the anti-Catholic onslaught, and this topic came up, after posting that quote, one of two things happened... 1.) I never heard another word from them. 2.) The subject was immediatly changed. It boggles my mind how clueless anti-Catholics are. If they don't find an answer or they see the Church is right, then they move right on to the next topic. I do not understand how anyone can claim to love Christ and have such overwhelming pride. They try everything they can to say the Church is wrong, then when they see they are wrong, they ignore it. You would think a light bulb would go off in their head... "hello McFly?!" When someone attacks the Church, and I don't know an answer, I keep digging until I find one... I'm tenacious. I think the longest time I've ever had to hunt for one was maybe an hour or two. This is how I learned so much on the Church the past 3 years. I already knew the bible so I had a good foundation. Everything the Catholic Church teaches is justified by the Bible, but that's besides the point because it was the Catholic Church that justified the Canon of the New Testament. This is a fact of history... If people really loved Christ, they would be in His Church(of course they need to know what it is). Some say "yes, the Catholic Church gave us the New Testament, but 'I don't believe it's the Church built by Christ'"... and I say "Then why do you even believe the bible is the inspired Word of God?! For if it truly is the inspired Word of God, then the Catholic Church IS the Church built by Christ. For if one knows that the Catholic Church gave us the New Testament as Canon, and is not Catholic, I not only call them fool, but stupid as well. For by no authority on earth other than that given by God can declare what is Scripture. How do you think so many books made it into the Old Testament?! By the authority of the Jewish high priests. Jesus took their authority away and gave that authority to Peter and the Apostles, authority to carry on the Holy Priesthood of God... The Church of the Living God. The Pillar and Foundation of Truth. 1 Tim 3:15. The Holy Catholic Church, lead by the successor of Peter in Rome. His Holiness Pope John Paul II." Of course those that have no way to get to a Catholic Church but desire to be Catholic are a different story... things such as parents can get in the way of physically joining the Truth. Every dialog that I have ever been in with a protestant on Christianity, they have lost... but the reason they loose is not because of me... It's because they are going up against the Catholic Church, not little max brackett. Friends of ian paisley, preachers from baptist churches in NJ, people from chick publications, etc... none of them have prevailed in an argument against the Church. The Church is never wrong. The Catholic Church has 2000 years of wisdom, and God on it's side. All attacks fail against the Church. CMTA - Catholic Minds Think Alike... that is why when we defend her, we all say the same thing... there is only one truth, not 34,000 and growing. God, It's GREAT to be Catholic!!!! Amen! B) *If you're not Catholic, you can be. If a non-Catholic would like a one to one dialog about anything Catholic, I have a section on my message board just for that. I don't want anyone to think I'm blowing smoke about my history of dialog... I would gladly prove it with any doubting Thomas. - Brotherly Dialog. http://www.MoralTruth.com/MTBBS/ God Bless, Love in Christ & Mary ironmonk Edited July 19, 2003 by ironmonk
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now