Catholic FAQ


We were unable to reach our goal for the summer but we have reached 98%
Please consider donating if you can and keep us in your prayers.


Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Non-Catholic Religions
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #16  
Old Feb 23, '12, 12:51 pm
JustaServant's Avatar
JustaServant JustaServant is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2007
Posts: 6,533
Religion: Catholic (revert)
Default Re: It's NOT in the Bible

Quote:
Originally Posted by TexanKnight View Post
Very poor example. Revelation was NOT the last book written. Several books, including the Gospel of John, were written after this. So, according to you, those books are not valid.

Even worse for your argument, there is a verse in Deuteronomy that says almost the same thing. Should we discard everything after that book?
What is interesting for fundamentalists is thier 'dispensationalist' left behind theology does just that, it adds to the Book of Revelation what is clearly not there.
  #17  
Old Feb 23, '12, 12:56 pm
Nicea325 Nicea325 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 16, 2010
Posts: 7,111
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: It's NOT in the Bible

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luvtosew View Post
You asked me a question, those verses is for the whole Bible.
Where do those verses state its reference to the entire Bible? Second,which Bible is it referring to since Christianity did not have a canonized Bible by the end of the 1st century.
  #18  
Old Feb 23, '12, 1:00 pm
FaithfulAndTrue FaithfulAndTrue is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: November 24, 2010
Posts: 188
Religion: Christian
Default Re: Revelation 22, the whole Bible or just Revelation?

I believe it's a pretty big stretch, to put it nicely, to say it refers to anything outside of Revelation itself. My opinion is that this claim is most often meant to be an uncharitable 'zinger' than one based on truth in love.
  #19  
Old Feb 23, '12, 1:08 pm
pablope pablope is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 29, 2010
Posts: 7,012
Religion: catholic
Default Re: It's NOT in the Bible

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luvtosew View Post
The Church didn't always have the 7 books in their bible, I read the history.

Really? Where did you get that from? Which source? Well, even your protestant grandfather, Martin Luther, will disagree with you...for his Bible had the 7 books.

If the CC added the books, when where they added?


Quote:
What do those books add, purgatory and payment for prayers? I know the CC doesn't like personal interpretation of scripture that is obvious. No reason really for a Catholic to have a Bible, the Church will teach you all you need to know.
The CC has survived the first 300 plus years without a Bible...so yes, there will always be a Church....for it is not founded on the rebellion of men....
  #20  
Old Feb 23, '12, 2:08 pm
Blacksword's Avatar
Blacksword Blacksword is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2011
Posts: 1,460
Religion: Catholic (Latin Rite)
Default Re: It's NOT in the Bible

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luvtosew View Post
The Church didn't always have the 7 books in their bible, I read the history. What do those books add, purgatory and payment for prayers? I know the CC doesn't like personal interpretation of scripture that is obvious. No reason really for a Catholic to have a Bible, the Church will teach you all you need to know.
Please support this contention. Please enlighten me on this as to where you discovered this, seeing as that the first century jewish christians, including the disciples themselves, absolutely used the greek Septuagint in their spiritual life, which include the "extra" books. Thank you.
__________________

Behemoth is my serving man!
Before the conquered hosts of Pan
Riding tamed Leviathan,
Loud I sing for well I can
RESVRGAM and IO PAEAN,
IO, IO, IO PAEAN!!
Now I know the stake I played for,
Now I know what a worm's made for!

TIBER SWIM TEAM 2011
  #21  
Old Feb 23, '12, 2:10 pm
kbachler kbachler is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2010
Posts: 1,557
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: It's NOT in the Bible

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luvtosew View Post
You asked me a question, those verses is for the whole Bible.
Since the "whole Bible" did not exist when those verses were written, how do you support that conclusion?
  #22  
Old Feb 23, '12, 2:28 pm
kbachler kbachler is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2010
Posts: 1,557
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: It's NOT in the Bible

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacksword View Post
Please support this contention. Please enlighten me on this as to where you discovered this, seeing as that the first century jewish christians, including the disciples themselves, absolutely used the greek Septuagint in their spiritual life, which include the "extra" books. Thank you.
I am not trying to defend all his contentions, but the use of the deuterocanonical books was not 100% widespread among the Catholic Church prior to the Council of Trent which affirmed that these books were canonical. Prior canonization was apparently done by regional councils - so that while the use was widespread, it apparently was not 100%.

I wouldn't say that makes him correct about "adding 7 books." But it's also "not quite" correct that they've always been there.

There were early "Jewish Christians" who around 100 AD raised questions about including Old Testament books that were not in the Hebrew Bible.
  #23  
Old Feb 23, '12, 2:42 pm
onemangang's Avatar
onemangang onemangang is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: September 10, 2010
Posts: 715
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: It's NOT in the Bible

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbachler View Post
Since the "whole Bible" did not exist when those verses were written, how do you support that conclusion?
Oops meant for Luvtosew

When do you think the Gospels were written? I don't mean the words that Jesus said, but the written record of the past events?

When were the Pauline Epistles written?

How about Jude, Peter, John, and James Catholic Epistles, when were they written?

Now in regards to Revelation I will link a thread that I posted earlier, that shows Revelation/apocalypse was written before 70 A.D



Quote:
Originally Posted by onemangang View Post
1
Quote:
Originally Posted by onemangang View Post
2
Quote:
Originally Posted by onemangang View Post
3

Last edited by onemangang; Feb 23, '12 at 2:50 pm. Reason: link problem
  #24  
Old Feb 23, '12, 2:45 pm
Publisher Publisher is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: January 31, 2007
Posts: 6,732
Religion: Quaker
Default Re: Revelation 22, the whole Bible or just Revelation?

Since most of the books of the NT were written separately and at different times....and since the writer of Revelation had no idea....barring some magical/revalatory experience.....which books were to be included in our NT....and since most of the books included were not bound together but circulated separately for decades...if not centuries.....I'd think it would just be confined to the Apocalypse itself.....as there is evidence the last book in our NT's was not necessarily the last book written to be included in the NT....I just find it hard to accept the writer of the Apocalypse meant a volume that had not even been compliled at the time it was written.
  #25  
Old Feb 23, '12, 2:59 pm
onemangang's Avatar
onemangang onemangang is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: September 10, 2010
Posts: 715
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Revelation 22, the whole Bible or just Revelation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Publisher View Post
Since most of the books of the NT were written separately and at different times....and since the writer of Revelation had no idea....barring some magical/revalatory experience.....which books were to be included in our NT....and since most of the books included were not bound together but circulated separately for decades...if not centuries.....I'd think it would just be confined to the Apocalypse itself.....as there is evidence the last book in our NT's was not necessarily the last book written to be included in the NT....I just find it hard to accept the writer of the Apocalypse meant a volume that had not even been compliled at the time it was written.
You certainly are not alone, we Catholics agree with you

Hypothetically, lets say the text sighted in Revelation was writing about a complete Canon of Scripture, as Luvtosew claims. How does that benefit Protestantism, and condemn Catholicism? It doesn't. In fact, it does just the opposite, the only difference is that a Catholic wouldn't make such a claim, to do so would be reading into the text.
  #26  
Old Feb 23, '12, 3:10 pm
Publisher Publisher is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: January 31, 2007
Posts: 6,732
Religion: Quaker
Default Re: Revelation 22, the whole Bible or just Revelation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by onemangang View Post
You certainly are not alone, we Catholics agree with you

Hypothetically, lets say the text sighted in Revelation was writing about a complete Canon of Scripture, as Luvtosew claims. How does that benefit Protestantism, and condemn Catholicism? It doesn't. In fact, it does just the opposite, the only difference is that a Catholic wouldn't make such a claim, to do so would be reading into the text.
Since I tend to agree that it would be "reading into the text"....I can't really frame it as "the only difference" since I'm not Catholic and agree with you....even "hypothetically" it makes no sense to me.
  #27  
Old Feb 23, '12, 3:17 pm
onemangang's Avatar
onemangang onemangang is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: September 10, 2010
Posts: 715
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Revelation 22, the whole Bible or just Revelation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Publisher View Post
Since I tend to agree that it would be "reading into the text"....I can't really frame it as "the only difference" since I'm not Catholic and agree with you....even "hypothetically" it makes no sense to me.
even "hypothetically" it makes no sense to me!
  #28  
Old Feb 23, '12, 5:27 pm
Anna Scott's Avatar
Anna Scott Anna Scott is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 23, 2009
Posts: 4,589
Religion: Considering Anglican Church in North America
Default Re: Revelation 22, the whole Bible or just Revelation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luvtosew View Post
Revelation 22:18-19

King James Version (KJV)


18For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

19And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Luvtosew,

This does refer to all of Holy Scripture; but not in the way you are asserting.

It applies to all of Scripture in that we are not to alter God's Word by adding to it or taking away from it, lest we be found a liar:

Proverbs 30:
5 Every word of God proves true;
he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.
6 Do not add to his words,
lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar.


In addition to the verses from Revelation you quoted; you will find a similar warning here:
Deuteronomy Chapter 4: 2
You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you.


After God gave specific instructions to Israel about what they were to do and not to do; He said:
Deuteronomy Chapter 12:
32 Everything that I command you, you shall be careful to do. You shall not add to it or take from it.


If we applied to the words in Deuteronomy, the same assertion you are making with Revelation; we would have to disregard all the teachings and commandments of Christ that did not precisely match Jewish law.

Obeying the Commandments of God, whether under the New Covenant or the Old Covenant is extremely important:
Deuteronomy 28: 45 “All these curses shall come upon you and pursue you and overtake you till you are destroyed, because you did not obey the voice of the Lord your God, to keep his commandments and his statutes that he commanded you.

When you study the transmission of Scripture; you will find that there has always been a problem with man attempting to alter Holy Scripture, whether it be ancient scribes or modern day translators.

God rebukes His people in Jeremiah and speaks of the lying pen of the scribes (scribes were copyists):
Jeremiah 8:
7 Even the stork in the heavens
knows her times,
and the turtledove, swallow, and crane
keep the time of their coming,
but my people know not
the rules of the Lord.

8 “How can you say, ‘We are wise,
and the law of the Lord is with us’?
But behold, the lying pen of the scribes
has made it into a lie.

9 The wise men shall be put to shame;
they shall be dismayed and taken;
behold, they have rejected the word of the Lord,
so what wisdom is in them?.


Some scribes decided to give their theological view a boost and inserted or removed things when copying N.T. autographs and manuscripts. Several of these are found in the KJV, btw.

Most of the obvious intentional changes have been discovered and corrected in many (not all) of the Bible translations we have today.

Keep in mind there are more than 5,000 manuscripts of the New Testament (copies of copies of copies), with more variants than words in the New Testament. Most variants are obvious scribal errors, such as missing a line; or copying into the main body of text, notes that were scribbled in the margins of Holy Scripture.

Some manuscripts contain scathing comments by authors, who found their writing altered by a scribe.

The author of Revelation is making it very clear that not one word of his writing is to be altered.

The whole point is that were are not to alter Holy Scripture, the Divinely inspired Word of God.

Peace,
Anna
__________________
Anna Scott (Pen Name)
“Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words.”
---St. Francis of Assisi
  #29  
Old Feb 23, '12, 5:40 pm
Anna Scott's Avatar
Anna Scott Anna Scott is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 23, 2009
Posts: 4,589
Religion: Considering Anglican Church in North America
Default Re: It's NOT in the Bible

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustaServant View Post
Most PROTESTANT Bible scholars assert the above verses are speaking of the Book of Revelation, not the entire Bible. You're welcome to your opinion, but its in a minority, even on your side of the Tiber.
JustaServant,

Some, but I wouldn't say most.

Remember the CCC uses the RSV and NRSV by permission of the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States. These are ecumenical translations, and Protestant Scholars were among those involved in the translation.

Quote from the CCC:
Quote:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition
"Scripture quotations contained herein are adapted from the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright © 1946, 1952, 1971, and the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright © 1989 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States, and are used by permission. All rights reserved."
The RSV became the Revised Standard Version- Catholic Edition. It has been reissued under the title, The Ignatius Bible (there may be other titles at this point).

There were very few changes made to produce the RSV-Catholic Edition. Most changes involve what is placed in the main body of text and what is placed in the footnotes in the case of variants among early manuscripts. While commentaries reflect Catholic theology, the translation remains essentially unchanged.

Even though the RSV and NRSV are considered "ecumenical" translations, the Catholic Bible Association found the need to explain their use of translations, used primarily by non-Catholics---as reflected in this quote from the Introduction to the Catholic Edition of the Revised Standard Version, found in the The Catholic Comparative New Testament (which I have and use quite often):
Quote:
"For four hundred years, following upon the great upheaval of the Reformation, Catholics and Protestants have gone their separate ways and suspected each other's translations of the Bible of having been in some way manipulated in the interests of doctrinal presuppositions. It must be admitted that these suspicions were not always without foundation. At the present time, however, the sciences of textual criticism and philology, not to mention others, have made such great advances that the Bible text used by translators is substantially the same for all--Protestants and Catholics alike."
With all the resources of the Catholic Church; I'm surprised by the Catholic Bible Association's adoption of the RSV and NRSV, rather than using a translation purely from Catholic sources.

So, I wouldn't say, "Most PROTESTANT Bible scholars assert the above verses are speaking of the Book of Revelation."

Peace,
Anna
__________________
Anna Scott (Pen Name)
“Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words.”
---St. Francis of Assisi
  #30  
Old Feb 23, '12, 8:14 pm
MacroConnectome MacroConnectome is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: December 31, 2010
Posts: 49
Religion: Atheist
Send a message via Yahoo to MacroConnectome
Default Re: Revelation 22, the whole Bible or just Revelation?

I don't mean any disrespect, but I don't see how anyone could logically come to the conclusion that the "book" refers to the entire Bible, which itself is a collection of books that did not exist when the Apocalypse was penned.
Closed Thread

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Non-Catholic Religions

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
8296Meet and talk,talk talk
Last by: Paula Hurworth
5060CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: Vim71
4348Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: Marla Frances
4033OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: 3DOCTORS
3849SOLITUDE
Last by: Prairie Rose
3599Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: RJB
3256Poems and Reflections
Last by: PathWalker
3210Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: 4elise
3180Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: grateful_child
3063For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: ineeda



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 8:59 pm.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.