Why would the Catholic Church put together a Book that disproves thier own doctrine?

[JustaServant]

Asked this question today to a fundamentalist up in the apologetics playground. He is trying to disprove a Catholic teaching by using the "neutral source" of the Bible.
I thought I would ask both Catholics and non-Catholics this simple quesion.
It begins with the premise of course that the Catholic Church put together the Bible we have.
Why would the Catholic Church put together a Book that disproves thier own doctrine?

[BcuzISaidSo]

Originally Posted by JustaServant

Asked this question today to a fundamentalist up in the apologetics playground. He is trying to disprove a Catholic teaching by using the "neutral source" of the Bible.
I thought I would ask both Catholics and non-Catholics this simple quesion.
It begins with the premise of course that the Catholic Church put together the Bible we have.
Why would the Catholic Church put together a Book that disproves thier own doctrine?

What doctrine are you/they suggesting it disproves?

[57Bill]

I really don't know exactly what the question is, but is this a Deposit of Faith argument? It would seem to me that would be the basis. Like the ongoing sola vs Sacred Scripture, Tradition and Magisterial debates?

Sorry if I am way off base here...

[mark a]

Originally Posted by JustaServant

Asked this question today to a fundamentalist up in the apologetics playground. He is trying to disprove a Catholic teaching by using the "neutral source" of the Bible.
I thought I would ask both Catholics and non-Catholics this simple quesion.
It begins with the premise of course that the Catholic Church put together the Bible we have.
Why would the Catholic Church put together a Book that disproves thier own doctrine?

I never cease to be amazed at the presumptuous nature of some of these folks. I honestly think it is caused by spiritual immaturity.

Of the former Catholics I personally know that have that zealous anti-Catholic attitude, every one of them has a marriage or similar moral issue underlying it all.

[FabiusMaximus]

Originally Posted by JustaServant

Asked this question today to a fundamentalist up in the apologetics playground. He is trying to disprove a Catholic teaching by using the "neutral source" of the Bible.
I thought I would ask both Catholics and non-Catholics this simple quesion.
It begins with the premise of course that the Catholic Church put together the Bible we have.
Why would the Catholic Church put together a Book that disproves thier own doctrine?

Did you both come to an agreement that it was the Catholic Church that compiled the Bible? If so, how could he possibly argue that it contradicts Catholic doctrine? It would be silly, at the very least.

The problem anyway would be the assumption that the Bible simply fell from the sky. Clearly, the faith must have preexisted the Bible, because otherwise how do we decide what is proper scripture and what is Gnostic nonsense? And if the faith preexisted the Bible, wouldn't it make logical sense that there would be elements of the faith not possibly written down in the New Testament? After all, the Bible isn't an instruction manual on how the faith works. Most of the New Testament is composed of letters by apostles to other apostles or churches, regarding specific issues. Wouldn't make sense that they'd cover everything there is to know about Christianity in them.

[George Stegmeir]

I think that part of the reason we see so many "sola" arguments on this site during May and June is that its graduation time for the Evangelical Bible College diploma mills, and the new graduates "filled with the Holy Spirit" are going to demolish Catholicism and the 'Whore of Rome".

[maltmom]

Originally Posted by JustaServant

Asked this question today to a fundamentalist up in the apologetics playground. He is trying to disprove a Catholic teaching by using the "neutral source" of the Bible.
I thought I would ask both Catholics and non-Catholics this simple quesion.
It begins with the premise of course that the Catholic Church put together the Bible we have.
Why would the Catholic Church put together a Book that disproves thier own doctrine?

Good point!!! I hadn't thought about it that way. I've posted in that thread. If I was a betting woman I would bet that he will never answer that question.

We can only pray that one day he will come back to his Catholic roots. That's our family tree.

[Nicea325]

Originally Posted by mark a

I never cease to be amazed at the presumptuous nature of some of these folks. I honestly think it is caused by spiritual immaturity.

Of the former Catholics I personally know that have that zealous anti-Catholic attitude, every one of them has a marriage or similar moral issue underlying it all.

Spiritual immaturity or spiritual pride?

[Nicea325]

Originally Posted by JustaServant

Asked this question today to a fundamentalist up in the apologetics playground. He is trying to disprove a Catholic teaching by using the "neutral source" of the Bible.
I thought I would ask both Catholics and non-Catholics this simple quesion.
It begins with the premise of course that the Catholic Church put together the Bible we have.
Why would the Catholic Church put together a Book that disproves thier own doctrine?

What I first would like to know is where oes the Bible teach everything must be said and taught from the Bible? Still waiting to read that important piece of information.

[maltmom]

Originally Posted by Nicea325

Spiritual immaturity or spiritual pride?

Probably both.

[PeterJohn]

John 21:25

But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.

1 Corinthians 11:2

I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you.

The Catholic church holds the right in this argument to ask questions first due to it being of apostolic origin and the place where mostly all Protestant denominations came from. In laymens terms, catholics are not the ones needing to defend our faitas because we inherited it from the apostles, in contrast to a denomination who "fabricated by means of particular personal interpritation" their doctorins. Never the less we must remain christians and be charitable to our protestant brothers. The question to be posed to this person is, "why aren't you Catholic?" A lot of times the "misunderstandings" that most have can be addressed after asking this question. It allows you to converse in a way that debunks the persons false ideas of what Catholicism teaches. If anything, it allows you to steer someone away from hating Catholics.

[exoflare]

Originally Posted by FabiusMaximus

The problem anyway would be the assumption that the Bible simply fell from the sky.

Not only that, but that it fell from the sky during the time of Jesus, who would read the Bible (KJV 1611 in English of course ) to the apostles and this is how Jesus taught them everything they knew.

[LegoGE1947]

Originally Posted by Nicea325

What I first would like to know is where oes the Bible teach everything must be said and taught from the Bible? Still waiting to read that important piece of information.

Actually, the Bible says quite the opposite in several places, such as the end of John's gospel where we read that " if everything Jesus said or did were written down, the whole world couldn't contain all the books that would be written." Also we have in the Acts where Phillip comes upon the eunuch reading the book of Isaiah and the eunuch says he is unable to understand what is written unless someone explains it to him. If the Bible taught everything why would the eunuch need someone to teach him?

[Cavaradossi]

Originally Posted by maltmom

Probably both.

Really folks? Are we really fit to make judgments like that?

[Nicea325]

Originally Posted by Cavaradossi

Really folks? Are we really fit to make judgments like that?

Judgments or observations?