RELIGION

[MrBiddle]

---

By the way, few are aware of it but the first Bible in print was an English translation by William Tyndale when Guttenburg invented the machine... the claims of the RCC that the first printed Bible was courtesy of the clergy can only come as close as the first Greek New Testament print by Erasmus years after Tyndale's transition. He was martyred during the Spanish Inquisition, he was a Reformist and like Guttenburg, a loyal follower of Christ (Rev. 17: 6 )

[MrBiddle]

The Church compiled the Bible, preserved it, and brought it to the people.

It was the protestant reformers (and some other small groups in history) who perverted the Bible, and removed sections of it to make it conform to their PERSONAL INTERPRETATIONS. No wonder there are over 20,000 "bible-believing" denominations with conflicting and contraditory interpretations! They can't all be right, so obviously personal interpretation of scrtipture is most unreliable.

The only way it becomes "personal interpretation" is if so-called Christians take verses out of context and distort it to their expedient ends. One of those Christian denominations is the RCC..... or the Iglesia Ni Kristo.

The "sacraments"? in the early church? NOT in the Bible. at least NOT some of the principles of the sacraments as taught in the RCC.

The Church existed way before Constantine and had ALL the basic elements of theÂ* modern Church including sacraments, the papacy, etc

You are right about the first part, indeed the RCC just like all those who believe through the message that is preached (Jn 17: 17 - 20, Eph. 2: 19 ) are offshoots of that church but they are NOT the one true Body of Christ it is absurd for any religious denomination to claim so. As all of us are offshoots of ISRAEL OF GOD; the inheritance that is everlasting. We are the spiritual Israel! Irregardless of what banner we wave (Eph. 2: 18 - 22, 2 Sam. 7: 24 (for figurative terms) and Ezek. 37: 19 )

Yes, my history is straight. The Bible is silent. History is silent as to the primacy of Rome.

[mannyamador]

The only way it becomes "personal interpretation" is if so-called Christians take verses out of context and distort it to their expedient ends.

Which is EXACTLY what you're doing. if you disagree, please show me how YOUR personal interpretation is suposed to be infallible. You CAN'T

The "sacraments"? in the early church? NOT in the Bible. at least NOT some of the principles of the sacraments as taught in the RCC.

Check your history. THERE WAS NO BIBLE in the early Apostolic Church. The canon was established by the Catholic Church nearly three hundred years after the Church was founded by Christ.

You are right about the first part, indeed the RCC just like all those who believe through the message that is preached (Jn 17: 17 - 20, Eph. 2: 19 ) are offshoots of that church but they are NOT the one true Body of Christ it is absurd for any religious denomination to claim so.

That doesn't make sense. Christ clearly established the Church, as shown in the Gospels, and gave authority to the Apostles. There is an unbroken line of succession of authorioty from the Apostles to the present Catholic Church. That line of succession has already been posted.

Yes, my history is straight. The Bible is silent. History is silent as to the primacy of Rome.

If we follow that "logic" then the Bible is silent too about the TRINITY! And even the Divinity of Christ, monogamy, and abortion. That, of course, is absurd, and so is your logic.

[mannyamador]

By the way, few are aware of it but the first Bible in print was an English translation by William Tyndale when Guttenburg invented the machine...

Another historical error.

The first printed Bible was by Gutenberg in 1456 and it was the Latin Vulgate, a Catholic Bible.

Tyndale printed his New Testament translation in Cologne, in 1525. That's 69 YEARS AFTER the Gutenberg Bible.

[MrBiddle]

Check your history. THERE WAS NO BIBLE in the early Apostolic Church. The canon was established by the Catholic Church nearly three hundred years after the Church was founded by Christ.

Goodness everything I say is historical is an error because I'm don't obey the RCC!

Did I say anything about the Bible officially called ta Biblia during the first three centuries? Nope. but certainly they were the documents and Canon was already decided then.... until the falling away of Christianity that included Gnosticism (which came very early) and Roman Catholicism ;-b

If we follow that "logic" then the Bible is silent too about the TRINITY! And even the Divinity of Christ, monogamy, and abortion. That, of course, is absurd, and so is your logic.

Have you read the Great Commision at the end of Matt. 28? The whole N.T. speaks of the Trinity, although the RCC made it an official doctrine to refute heathen distortions..... but after that, it already became much of an artifice because of the extraBiblical doctrinals being taught.

Monogamy? (1 Tim. 2: 5, Acts 4: 11, Is. 45: 9 )

As for abortion. You know the Commandments. But we aren't saved by obeying the law (Gal 5: 4, Eph. 2: 8 - 10 )

Which is EXACTLY what you're doing. if you disagree, please show me how YOUR personal interpretation is suposed to be infallible. You CAN'T

No one has the sole authority to interpret the Bible (Rev. 19: 11 - 13 ) but the Bible can be used to rebuke error and to train in righteousness (2 Tim 3: 16 )

[MrBiddle]

Plus the surest way to test one's interpretation of Scripture is to see if it fits the context of the entirety of God's Word (Ps. 119: 160 ) examples of private interpretations are:

purgatory 1 Cor. 3: 12 - 15 without the context of Jer. 23: 29 or Eph. 2: 18 - 22 or 1 Pet. 2: 4 - 8

or Once saved always saved (compare against 1 Jn 5: 3 - 5) and "easy believism"

[mannyamador]

Goodness everything I say is historical is an error because I'm don't obey the RCC!

It's that way because you don't know your history.

Tell me, WHO decided the canon of the Bible? Did God give you or anyone a list?

It was the Catholic Church that did so. Even Martin Luther and the refoprmers acknowledged the authority of the Catholic Church Cuoncils of Hippo and Carthage.

Have you read the Great Commision at the end of Matt. 28? The whole N.T. speaks of the Trinity, although the RCC made it an official doctrine to refute heathen distortions.....

You seem to forget that the word "Trinity" isn't in the Bible. Therefore it requires an interpretation, not a literal reading of the Bible. But then how can you claim YOUR interrpetation of any verse is accurate. You can't.

Monogamy? (1 Tim. 2: 5, Acts 4: 11, Is. 45: 9 )

Uh, you seem to forget many other verses that allow polygamy. If you use the Bible ALONE, the teaching is NOT definitive. But if you refer to Catholic Tradition, then it is.

[Meganda]

The Bible, the traditions, the Church heirarchy, this makes RCC different from the rest. If you claim your religion is the true church then how come it doesnt have any trace that is so. The RCC has traditions because its there for 2000 years. It has a distinct antiquity to it; a living proof that it is one continuous existence for 2000 years.


...............im sorry but even if 50000000 million years na ang tradtion it doesnt mean its always right......

[MrBiddle]

It's that way because you don't know your history.

Tell me, WHO decided the canon of the Bible? Did God give you or anyone a list?

It was the Catholic Church that did so. Even Martin Luther and the refoprmers acknowledged the authority of the Catholic Church Cuoncils of Hippo and Carthage.

God himself decided the Canon through the church he founded (1 Tim 3: 15, Eph. 3: 10 ) because God's Word is truth (Jn 17: 17, Ps. 119: 160 ) and the church is the pillar and foundation of truth. But that was long before there was ever a Bible printed.

But that doesn't make Peter the first Pope or the RCC the "One True mystical Body" not long after, the falling away began and the powers of the RCC began to preach what wasn't in the documents

I maintain, Tyndale's English translation was the first that came out of Guttenburg's machine

Anyone who goes beyond the teachings of Christ does NOT know God - 2 Jn. 9 (TEV)

I know my history. I know what Daniel has to say about the hierarchy of Rome. Or the empirical origins of the RCC (Daniel 7: 23) he said it would devour the whole earth and consume it with it's corruption.

The only ecclesias in the universal church of God today are those which adhere to the entirety of the Bible's teachings because they are consecrated in truth to Christ's powerful prayer (Jn 17: 17 - 20 ) and they are expressing truth in their assembly (Eph. 3: 10 )

[color=blue]And also, like other autonomous congregations that practice error especially hedonistic ways of easy believism, the RCC also has some oxy***** doctrinals. For instance if the 7 sacraments are indeed an assurance for salvation, especially the "viaticum" that many have taken, including the Pope before departing - nganong misahon pa man ang santopapa kung namatay? save naman kaha?

They say no one can judge "God's wonderful plan" as to where he will put a soul in the afterlife, but the RCC claims they can ascertain that any beatified "Saint" is in heaven by examining their lives? How could they know? They said no one is able to tell "God's wonderful plan?"

And it's as if the RCC doesn't practice polygamy, a dangerous abomination. The mediation of the dulia and hyperdulia is an outright denial of the all-sufficient Mediation of Christ.

Therefore He (Christ) is completely able to save those who come to God through him because He forever lives to intercede for them - Heb. 7: 25 (NAB, The New Catholic Translation)

[whiteoleander]

I maintain, Tyndale's English translation was the first that came out of Guttenburg's machine

just to clarifyÂ* ,

the first printed bible is the Gutenberg's Bible, printed in 1454 andÂ* it was in Latin .

http://www.bibles2theworld.com/page/...ted_bible.html

it was William Tyndale who first printedÂ* the New Testament in the English language in 1535 .

http://www.bibles2theworld.com/page/...ish_bible.html

so it was Gutenberg's Bible that came out first from his machine thus Gutenberg's Bible , but it was Tyndale's that first came out in English, printed in Gutenberg's machine .

little words missed out affect facts.