The Roman Catholic Church~ Questions

[Boyen]

---

ang mga katoliko naay panahon nga magpuasa or fasting... naa bay nasulat sa bibliya nga nagpuasa ang mga apostoles?

ug naa bay masulat sa bibliya nga nagsugo ang DIOS o ang mga apostoles nga magpuasa ang mga tawo?

[SioDenz]

ang mga katoliko naay panahon nga magpuasa or fasting... naa bay nasulat sa bibliya nga nagpuasa ang mga apostoles?

ug naa bay masulat sa bibliya nga nagsugo ang DIOS o ang mga apostoles nga magpuasa ang mga tawo?

ang unang pangutana ana dapt is: Sa RC naa bay teachings about sa PUASA.

[Boyen]

ang unang pangutana ana dapt is: Sa RC naa bay teachings about sa PUASA.

panahon sa mahal na araw bro naa may mag puasa labina kadtong mga devoto ug wala man sila badlonga sa mga pari so mao naka ask ko kung naa bay nasulat sa bible

[Bears Grill]

The typical questions from Protestants, usually prefaced with "Can you find such and such in the Scritures...", misunderstands the essence of the Catholic tradition. To Catholics, the understanding of Scriptures is mediated to its adherents by the teaching authority of the Church. That's because the Church claims primacy over the Word. After all, the Church began as those small communities to which Paul wrote his letters. And the gospels actually evolved out of that oral tradition. The Church therefore sees itself as having "canonized" ("made a list of") the Word of God....not vice versa.

In any case, I'll let Catholics correct my line of reasoning...just couldn't help myself to put this explanation out there.

[SioDenz]

what do you mean Evolve? Change?

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

ang mga katoliko naay panahon nga magpuasa or fasting... naa bay nasulat sa bibliya nga nagpuasa ang mga apostoles?

Let me answer this with another question first and if you can answer it for me , the better we will be in course of understanding the actual answer to your question.

I believed now that your question is not about fasting anymore but rather , inquiring if the apostles did fast. Why the apostles man ang nahimo na example ?

ug naa bay masulat sa bibliya nga nagsugo ang DIOS o ang mga apostoles nga magpuasa ang mga tawo?

Yes , naa.

[Bears Grill]

what do you mean Evolve? Change?

Yes, EVOLVED...adapted for the times and religious purposes. Matthew, Luke and John came after Mark (the earliest gospel), and Matthew and Luke probably copied some of its text from Mark...maybe John too (I'm not making this up. Just read what Bible scholars say about the gospels). There's about 25 years between the earliest and the latest of these gospels. So, there's lots of room for creativity there. Why do you think there's lots of inconsistencies among their accounts of the crucifixion and resurrection?

But here's the thing about gospels from a Catholic standpoint (although I 'll definitely be the wrong representative). You don't treat the four gospels as witness accounts transcribed in a court. This is would be indeed be troubling. Gospels are "good news"... updated interpretations. So Catholics don't read Luke or Matthew and expect journalism. They expect gospel.

** I hope I do no injustice to Catholics by my honest attempt in this explanation. My apologies if I state things wrongly.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

The gospels Matthew and Luke shares the Q " quelle " rather tha being copied from Mark. That is because of the oral traditions of the early church.

Evolving ? It did not evolve , its been like that the moment it was compiled as part of the Holy Bible. What evolved are the hundreds or thousands of personal interpretations among bible scholars and fanatics alike.

Now back to the topic people.

[SioDenz]

Naay mu ingun Evolve naa say Wala ni Evolve

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

Naay mu ingun Evolve naa say Wala ni Evolve

In respect to Bear's statement , I said WALA NI EVOLVE sa pagsabot nako na the moment na compile ang books , MATTHEW , MARK , LUKE and JOHN into the Holy Bible and it keeps on changing its contents per se as evolution wise over the years . Say lahi ang contents sa 4 after Vatican II compared before sa Reformation and prior to that say during Constantines time and so on. Literal evolution baga in its contents.

It could be seen as well as " EVOLVED " to the understanding of how it was interpreted durng the course of its existence because of the different contents and to some Q ( parallel ) of the " synoptic " gospels and of John's in the hands of other non Catholic Christians. A lot of people get confused because remember , there is only 1 Gospel and 4 different gospels. At least as seen , was taught and believed by Roman Catholic faithfuls.

Though in most part , there are no issues concerning the NT compilations because Catholics and Non Catholic Christians alike holds the same list and title of books unlike the OT compilations.