Are catholics Christian?

[Quickfire]

The picture is a secular interpretation. It's not accurate regarding reality.

i disagree you carnt argue with scripture , let no man add or take away, you know that right

 

[jimmydiggs]

i disagree you carnt argue with scripture , let no man add or take away, you know that right

Martin Luther wasn't taking away from scripture. Thoe apocrypha isn't scripture.

If you remove cancer from a patient, have you taken something that belongs in the patient out? No.

 

[Quickfire]

Martin Luther wasn't taking away from scripture. Thoe apocrypha isn't scripture.

If you remove cancer from a patient, have you taken something that belongs in the patient out? No.

yup to the patient nope to removing something from scripture an thats a fact ,, you talkng books that had stood for 2000 centuries

 

[jimmydiggs]

yup to the patient

Maybe you misread my question. Are you saying the cancer belongs in the patient?

nope to removing something from scripture an thats a fact

Nothing was removed from scripture.


These are the books of scripture.

,, you talkng books that had stood for 2000 centuries

Um, no.

A century is 100 years.

So 2000 x 100 = 200000 years

 

[Quickfire]

Maybe you misread my question. Are you saying the cancer belongs in the patient?



Nothing was removed from scripture.


These are the books of scripture.

Um, no.

A century is 100 years.

So 2000 x 100 = 200000 years

The Catholic Bible contains more books than the Protestant. If your looking at a bible with 66 books, its Protestant.

catholic bibles have extra 6 books plus chapters of daniel and esther the 6 are tobit judith maccabees 1&2

 

[jimmydiggs]

The Catholic Bible contains more books than the Protestant. If your looking at a bible with 66 books, its Protestant.

catholic bibles have extra 6 books plus chapters of daniel and esther the 6 are tobit judith maccabees 1&2

You're right, they are extra. They're not part of scripture but rather additional books.

 

[Quickfire]

if there not part of scripture then what are they doing in catholic bibles, ????

 

[jimmydiggs]

if there not part of scripture then what are they doing in catholic bibles, ????

You have asked a good question, and it will lead to many more good questions about why the Catholics disobey scripture.

 

[Quickfire]

You have asked a good question, and it will lead to many more good questions about why the Catholics disobey scripture.

is that just catholics though ????

 

[jimmydiggs]

is that just catholics though ????

Nope, it includes Eastern Orthodox, the Copts, Mormons, and many other groups that claim to be Christian

 

[Praus]

yup to the patient nope to removing something from scripture an thats a fact ,, you talkng books that had stood for 2000 centuries

I don't know about the math of 2000 centuries.

The Luther Bibel, the King James 1611, etc. all include apocrypha, as an appendix.

The KJV 1611 includes -> 1611 KING JAMES BIBLE (1611 BIBLE)
1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Additions to Esther, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah, Prayer of Azariah, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasseh, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees

The Luther Bibel includes -> Lutherbibel.net - Biblia 1545 Ausgabe Letzter Hand
Judith, Weisheit Salomonis, Tobie, Jesus Syrach, Prophet Baruch, Das erste Buch Maccabeorum, Das ander Buch Maccabeorum, Stücke in Esther, Stücke in Daniel

Certain books have always been deuterocanonical or apocryphal, see Athanasius' Easter letter of A.D. 367. He included Baruch as canonical and Esther as deuterocanonical, so this letter wasn't the last word on the subject.

NPNF2-04. Athanasius: Select Works and Letters - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

7. But for greater exactness I add this also, writing of necessity; that there are other books besides these not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the word of godliness. The Wisdom of Solomon, and the Wisdom of Sirach, and Esther, and Judith, and Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the Canon, the latter being [merely] read; nor is there in any place a mention of apocryphal writings. But they are an invention of heretics, who write them when they choose, bestowing upon them their approbation, and assigning to them a date, that so, using them as ancient writings, they may find occasion to lead astray the simple.

 

[Quickfire]

Nope, it includes Eastern Orthodox, the Copts, Mormons, and many other groups that claim to be Christian

yup and also baptists too

 

[Praus]

if there not part of scripture then what are they doing in catholic bibles, ????

The Counter-Reformation I think. In the Fourth Session on the Council of Trent, the Catholics decided in 1546 that the books in question were canonical, basically because they were in Jerome's Latin Vulgate.

CT04can

The Council of Trent
The Fourth Session
The canons and decrees of the sacred
and oecumenical Council of Trent,
Trans. J. Waterworth (London: Dolman, 1848), 17-21.

SESSION THE FOURTH
Celebrated on the eighth day of the month of April, in the year MDXLVI.

DECREE CONCERNING THE CANONICAL SCRIPTURES
The sacred and holy, ecumenical, and general Synod of Trent, --lawfully assembled in the Holy Ghost, the Same three legates of the Apostolic Sec presiding therein,--keeping this always in view, that, errors being removed, the purity itself of the Gospel be preserved in the Church; which (Gospel), before promised through the prophets in the holy Scriptures, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, first promulgated with His own mouth, and then commanded to be preached by His Apostles to every creature, as the fountain of all, both saving truth, and moral discipline; and seeing clearly that this truth and discipline are contained in the written books, and the unwritten traditions which, received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ himself, or from the Apostles themselves, the Holy Ghost dictating, have come down even unto us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand; (the Synod) following the examples of the orthodox Fathers, receives and venerates with an equal affection of piety, and reverence, all the books both of the Old and of the New Testament--seeing that one God is the author of both --as also the said traditions, as well those appertaining to faith as to morals, as having been dictated, either by Christ's own word of mouth, or by the Holy Ghost, and preserved in the Catholic Church by a continuous succession. And it has thought it meet that a list of the sacred books be inserted in this decree, lest a doubt may arise in any one's mind, which are the books that are received by this Synod. They are as set down here below: of the Old Testament: the five books of Moses, to wit, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Josue, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, the first book of Esdras, and the second which is entitled Nehemias; Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidical Psalter, consisting of a hundred and fifty psalms; the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias, with Baruch; Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, to wit, Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micheas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggaeus, Zacharias, Malachias; two books of the Machabees, the first and the second. Of the New Testament: the four Gospels, according [Page 19] to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; the Acts of the Apostles written by Luke the Evangelist; fourteen epistles of Paul the apostle, (one) to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, (one) to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, two to Timothy, (one) to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews; two of Peter the apostle, three of John the apostle, one of the apostle James, one of Jude the apostle, and the Apocalypse of John the apostle. But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema.

 

[jimmydiggs]

yup and also baptists too

Some of them, yes.

 

[Quickfire]

Some of them, yes.

does some make a right, ??

 

[chestertonrules]

Look the meaning is important but if it's written the way it's written, leave it alone! What you're saying is like saying let's delete the gospels and writing a book with the conclusion of what was taught as the theme of Jesus's life.

You are mistaken. There are no numbers on the commandments in the bible. How they are listed is not important. The meaning is important.

 

[Bryancampbell]

You are mistaken. There are no numbers on the commandments in the bible. How they are listed is not important. The meaning is important.

Both meaning and description of important. But if it's called the ten commandments, then leave it as the ten with its meaning. I'll take my opinion and you yours.

 

[chestertonrules]

Both meaning and description of important. But if it's called the ten commandments, then leave it as the ten with its meaning. I'll take my opinion and you yours.

There are ten commandments. I didn't start this debate. There are those who claimed that Catholic changed the 10 commandments. That is false.

 

[Praus]

There are ten commandments. I didn't start this debate. There are those who claimed that Catholic changed the 10 commandments. That is false.

I agree. The Catholics count differently and changed Sabbath to Lord's Day, but I don't see that as any substantial change.

 

[Reformedjason]

Are Protestants Christian ? Some are some aren't. The same goes for Catholics. I am sure less Catholics are saved than Protestant , because of all the false doctrine they are taught.