Jump to content
Join our Facebook Group ×
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Recommended Posts

Posted

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1095665' date='Oct 19 2006, 08:14 AM']
There are three questions I want to pose here:
[size=3][b]
[color="#990000"]ONE - "Is satan a real entity?"[/color]
[color="#000099"]
TWO - "Was Christ sinless?"[/color]

[color="#663366"]THREE - "Is the bible totally accurate?"[/color][/b][/size]
[/quote]

1. Satan is real
2. Christ was sinless (and still is)
3. Bad question. The bible is truth. It is not always total fact.

Posted

hmmm in response to such a wise teacher I will post my own questions

ONE - Do Catholics Sin?

TWO- Are there 'Catholics' who don't believe all the Church teaches?

THREE- Does this diminish the truth in the Church in any way?

And since the title was about Biblical Beliefs....

FOUR- Is the Catholic Church the Church Christ instituted (Matt 16:18)?

Posted (edited)

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1095665' date='Oct 19 2006, 08:14 AM']
I just got a report from BARNA, the premier religious polling firm that was most disturbing.

There are three questions I want to pose here:
[size=3][b]
[color="#990000"]ONE - "Is satan a real entity?"[/color]
[color="#000099"]
TWO - "Was Christ sinless?"[/color]

[color="#663366"]THREE - "Is the bible totally accurate?"[/color][/b][/size]

I will post WHY after some answers are given.
[/quote]

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Which Bible? The Vulgate? The KJV? The NIV? You are too vague. If it is the KJV, the answer is no. If it is the NIV, the answer is no. If it is the Vulgate, the answer is that it is inerrant.

God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."

God inspired the human authors of the sacred books. "To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more." (Dei Verbum 11)

The inspired books teach the truth. "Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures." (DV 11)

Still, the Christian faith is not a "religion of the book." Christianity is the religion of the "Word" of God, a word which is "not a written and mute word, but the Word which is incarnate and living". If the Scriptures are not to remain a dead letter, Christ, the eternal Word of the living God, must, through the Holy Spirit, "open [our] minds to understand the Scriptures." (St. Bernard, S. missus est hom. 4,11:PL 183,86; Cf. Lk 24:45)

Have a nice day.

[color="#FF0000"]"NOW WHY?!?!?!?!?"[/color][mod]Text size increase in debate -Raphael[/mod]
(was that enough of a "code shocker" for ya?)

Edited by Raphael
Posted

[quote name='Budge' post='1095737' date='Oct 19 2006, 11:57 AM']Any Evangelical who rejects any of those is not a true evangelical and more fits an ecumenical liberal neo-evangelist. Sadly liberalism, modernism and Catholic ecumenicalism have snuck their way even into some Baptist churches.[/quote]What is the consequence of fitting into "an ecumenical liberal neo-evangelist"? Does this mean no salvation for them?

Just FYI, according to this website, 45% of so-called born-again Christians deny the existence of Satan. 33% believe that they can earn heaven. 28% believe that Our Lord sinned when he was on earth (maybe he's not divine for them?). 14% believe that the Bible is inaccurate.

Also, some funny number inflation. Depending on the page you visit ([url="http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=Topic&TopicID=8"]link[/url] and [url="http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=Topic&TopicID=15"]link[/url]), the Barna site is pushing up the "Born Again" population by including anywhere from 21% to 30% of all Catholics. According to the website, 9% of us were born again between 2004 and 2006. Wow...

Maybe it's becoming obvious that religious polls aren't terribly helpful. This website made me immediately think of the book "How to Lie With Statistics" ([url="http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728/sr=8-14/qid=1161271478/ref=sr_1_14/102-4973128-6279347?ie=UTF8&s=books"]link[/url]). Sure, statistics are interesting. But, what do we do when someone says that 92% of the Apostles abandoned Our Lord when he was dying on the Cross of Calvary?

Groo the Wanderer
Posted (edited)

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1095665' date='Oct 19 2006, 09:14 AM']
I just got a report from BARNA, the premier religious polling firm that was most disturbing.

There are three questions I want to pose here:
[size=3][b]
[color="#990000"]ONE - "Is satan a real entity?"[/color]
[color="#000099"]
TWO - "Was Christ sinless?"[/color]

[color="#663366"]THREE - "Is the bible totally accurate?"[/color][/b][/size]

I will post WHY after some answers are given.
[/quote]


Hmm...
1. define entity
2. tell me first what hue of blue that is, so that I may better answer the question
3. who's bible? The Holy Bible, the Computer Tech Bible, etc...


thank you for your time :banana:

PS - who the heck declared BARNA to be 'premier'? Is that a membership level in AARP or the AAA, ? Choo gots some splaining to do, loocy... :taco:

Edited by Groo the Wanderer
Posted

It's thanks to Eutychus that I get to read all these great responses...

[quote name='Cam42']If it is the KJV, the answer is no. If it is the NIV, the answer is no. If it is the Vulgate, the answer is that it is inerrant.[/quote]Interestingly, the only really substantial negative description of the KJV's errors was layed out in the preface of my mom's old RSV from 1952. It described the KJV as having "grave defects" and "that these defects are so many and so serious as to call for revision of the English translation" ([url="http://www.ncccusa.org/newbtu/aboutrsv.html"]link[/url]) It took two revisions to get from the KJV to the original RSV.

cmotherofpirl
Posted

The original KJV was not deformed by the removal of books as the present one is. Imagine the amount of sin started by altering the Word of God.

Posted

It all depends on how reliable you think Origen was.

Posted

I can see how Barna got some pretty low percentages from the responses here.

:blink:

Groo the Wanderer
Posted

and I can see that you two have yet to answer my questions about your questions?

*launches into Church Lady mode*

Isn't that special? What could be the problem? What is causing such a non-response? Could it be, oh I don't know....Satan!?

*exits Church Lady mode*


LORF!

Posted

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1095778' date='Oct 19 2006, 11:09 AM']
It all depends on how reliable you think Origen was.
[/quote]
Hey, if you want to be a disciple of Origen, do it. In the mean time, respond to my answers to you topic.

:D:

Posted

I've often wondered why in protestantism it is not considered idolatry to put the name of a king who burned witches on the cover of God's Holy Word?

Posted

OK, watch how you answer questions simply and to the point.

[quote]1. define entity[/quote]

Creation of God.

[quote]2. tell me first what hue of blue that is, so that I may better answer the question[/quote]

Pantone #238

[quote]3. who's bible? The Holy Bible, the Computer Tech Bible, etc...[/quote]

Any bible you recognize as valid.

There, simple, clean, direct.

Posted (edited)

Are we supposed to answer your questions? Or debate them?

[quote] ONE - "Is satan a real entity?"

TWO - "Was Christ sinless?"

THREE - "Is the bible totally accurate?"
[/quote]


One- If Satan wasnt a real entity then, how can he enslave the minds of men to work against Christ? He is very real and of course the Father of All Lies.

Also, if satan wasnt a real enitiy how could have he been thrown from heaven to hell by the hand of St. Micheal?

I guess thats what I think, but these questions also seem to be oppinionated.

two- Was Christ sinless? Christ was God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made.

Three- Is the Bible totally accurate? This is pending on your belifes more than anything, but 1 Timothy says that all scripture is inspired by God for teaching and training. So, its not the source and summit of the Christian faith, but personally, yes I do think its very accurate.

Other than that these are good questions, but they seem to be loaded or oppinionated, in a small way.

Edited by GloriaIesusChristi
Posted

[quote]Any bible you recognize as valid.[/quote]


Ah relativism. Ain't it grand. He asks "is the Bible totally accurate" then says we can use any bible to answer the question. So even if they contradict they can still be accurate it seems.

Posted

Is that a YES, or a NO?

It is amazing to me, the lengths that folks here will go NOT to answer those three simple easy, direct questions.....

EcceNovaFacioOmni
Posted

John Paul II said something about how to deny the existence of Satan is to not believe in the Gospel.

Posted

[quote] I've often wondered why in protestantism it is not considered idolatry to put the name of a king who burned witches on the cover of God's Holy Word?[/quote]

Actually, they didn't.

The proper name for that translation is the "AUTHORIZED VERSION."

It never carried the name JKV for several hundred years .... that is only a later addition to differentiate it from other translations, based upon the Origin revised stream of texts.

Posted

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1095801' date='Oct 19 2006, 01:20 PM']
OK, watch how you answer questions simply and to the point.
Creation of God.
Pantone #238
Any bible you recognize as valid.

There, simple, clean, direct.[/quote]This is pretty silly. "Valid" and "accurate" should be related terms, correct? They certainly are loose terms that could mean almost anything to anybody. Are you looking for a valid-inaccurate Bible? Or an invalid-accurate Bible?

By accurate, do you mean all things contained should be interpreted literally (e.g. Genesis 1's 6-day creation account, John 6's teaching on transsubstantiation)?

I guess the thing that least impressed me about this polling company is the value of polls in which the underlying terms are only sometimes strictly defined. They have a decent idea of how they categorize a "true" evangelical Christian, but it's unclear what someone means when they associate the term "accurate" with the Bible. Apparently, no one is sure what accurate means nor which Bible is "the Bible."

cmotherofpirl
Posted

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1095828' date='Oct 19 2006, 01:40 PM']
Actually, they didn't.

The proper name for that translation is the "AUTHORIZED VERSION."

It never carried the name JKV for several hundred years .... that is only a later addition to differentiate it from other translations, based upon the Origin revised stream of texts.
[/quote]
and who is qualidfied outside the Church to make an "authoriized" version?
authorized by whom?

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...