|
Hi Geoff,
Let me see if I can assist you with some more counter arguments.
He said:
- Who has the whole Bible or correct Bible?
Both Protestants and Catholics have the whole
Bible, however, the Catholics added seven extra books
to the Old Testament that Protestants do not
count as inspired by God. Since most doctrine
and important teachings on Christ and salvation
come from the New Testament, these seven extra books
don't do much to affect the main thrust
of Christianity.
- The next question then is, why
are they a big deal at all?
The Apocrypha Books (or deuterocanonical books)
were not originally part of the Catholic Cannon.
In fact, they were not added to the Catholic Bible
until the Council of Trent in the mid 1500s.
This is patently untrue.
The books were part of the Septuagint Greek translation of the Old Testament
that predates Christ. They were part of the so-called "Alexandrian
canon" of Scripture used by Greek-speaking Jews.
There is historical proof that they were used in the early Church. There
are even allusions to it in the New Testament. As Protestant Church historian
J.N.D. Kelly writes,
"It should be observed that the Old Testament
thus admitted as authoritative in the Church was somewhat bulkier and more
comprehensive [than the Protestant Bible] . . . It always included, though
with varying degrees of recognition, the so-called apocrypha or deuterocanonical
books."
Early Christian Doctrines, page 53 |
For more information see:
He said:
- Why did the Catholic Church add the seven books
at that time and not earlier?
For two reasons.
- First, no one in the early Church considered
those books to be Scripture of God, and
- Second,
the Protestant reformers had proven that Catholic
teaching on several issues was going against
the Scriptures and against God. The Apocrypha books
have teachings in them that supported what the
Catholic Church wanted to be true so they "all
of a sudden" added them to their Bible
so as to use them as Scripture, when in fact they
are not!
This is so grossly wrong; it is hard to maintain that you are acting in
good faith. Anyone with an even rudimentary understanding of history knows
the deuterocanonical books were used from the beginning.
He said:
When Jesus taught, preached and rebuked, He referenced
Scripture. All those references and quotes were
from the Torah, the Nevi'im or the Ketuvim.
Jesus the Christ never used anything outside
of those Books of Hebrew Scripture. The Jews
have never thought those other seven books were
from God or were part of Scripture.
- Then why did the Greek-speaking Jews use them?
He said:
The Jews did not include those books with their
Scripture, and neither did Christ Jesus.
Allusions to the deuterocanonical books in the Gospels and in the rest of
the New Testament:
The Hebrew bible was fluid until the Council of Jamnia in the late first
century (consider the Sadducees), when they condemned the Christians and
excluded the deuterocanonical books, which up until that point had been
used by Greek-speaking Jews.
He said:
If Jesus the Christ wanted us to know that other
writings were canonical, He would have made it
apparent or quoted from them. He didn't.
So let me get this straight — a book which Jesus does not quote, or otherwise
make apparent is canonical, is it not?
- What if Jesus alludes to a book, as
He does to several deuterocanonical books?
He said:
Furthermore, the Apostles and early Church did
not consider the other books as part of Scripture,
nor did the Catholic Church Herself until the
Council of Trent in the mid 1500s.
This is again patently false — there is abundant evidence that the books were
used by early Christians. See those links I gave above.
He said:
Therefore, Protestants have a very strong claim
to having the whole Bible, and it is the Catholic
Church that has to justify the sudden addition
of other writings, that before,
She had denied!
The Catholic Church was in crisis. Its
own priests and theologians were criticizing
the Pope, Vatican dogmas and teachings on
several points, and they were winning the argument
using solid Scripture! The Pope and the Vatican had
gone outside of Scripture, and at the same time, ignored other Scripture,
as it crafted doctrine to help make money and
manipulate people through:
Funny; you claim it "crafted" doctrine to
help make money, yet even if you deny that 2 Maccabees is inspired, the
fact remains that historically the document was written in the centuries
before Christ. That means that the doctrine originates there, not with
the Catholic Church. Josephus, the Jewish historian, in his Discourse on
Hades, in the first century, also attests to the doctrine of Purgatory.
Relics are a Biblical concept. That's right, you heard me right.
- Dead
bones raised a man from the dead. (2 Kings 13:21), and
- Paul's handkerchief
healed people. (Acts 19:12)
- Jesus used many physical things to heal; remember
the power that came from His robe, the power of His touch, and the mud
He used to heal a blind man.
He said:
Remember, the Protestant reformers were all
Catholic priests and theologians who took a stand
for God and Scripture over a corrupt religious
system. You must examine the history. If the
Catholic Church was wrong over those issues, and
has never admitted guilt or apologized and tried
to make it right, then She is just as guilty today,
as She was then. Don't let them fool you.
Everyone must pursue God and "test" the
doctrine that others send their way. There is
no perfect Church, at least not that I have found, but I pick the lesser of the offenders to attend
at any given time, and I try to be helpful and evangelize my
fellow followers of Jesus the Christ along the
way (the true ones, not the pretenders or fakers), using my knowledge
to help them along, while seeking to learn what
I can from them in the areas that they excel
in. Nevertheless, in all cases,
I always look to the Scriptures alone
to settle a disagreement of doctrine or morals.
If I reach a stalemate with someone, I ask [him
or her] to agree to setting a future date to
discuss the matter, giving us both time
to seek the truth from Scripture and to find out
if perhaps we were mistaken, or if perhaps we missed a
crucial piece of support.
Next time, the Catholic dogmas and traditions that also contradict Scripture.
Whenever people bring up how corrupt the Catholic Church was, I always
point to ancient Israel. There was one corrupt system.
- You even had gross,
overt, and widespread pagan worship but did this negate the election of
Israel?
<Not one bit. >
They remained God's chosen people. They remained His
instrument of truth. No one would have had a right to found a competing
Israel on the basis of Israel's infidelity. Such a thing would never have
crossed their minds. They were a family, and had a mission, even if they
had forgotten it. And God remained faithful to them, as He did to us.
Hope this helps Geoff!
Eric
|
