“Sola Scriptura’s” Achilles Heel

by Steve Ray on June 22, 2012

The doctrine of Sola Scriptura states that we should believe only what we find clearly taught in the Bible;  the doctrine of Sola Scriptura is found nowhere clearly taught in the Bible;  so…???

{ 102 comments… read them below or add one }

De Maria June 27, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Joel,
You said to Lolek Pugeda:
One Roman Catholic tradition names a limbo for children who die before their baptisms or die outside of the Roman Catholic religion. Ir is removed from the CCC after Ratzinger became pope. There is no biblical support for this view, however. It is merely a religious opinion (not official Catholic teaching) which has been handed down by Catholic theologians.

You’ve answered your own question. It is a theological opinion.

Read the document http://www.catholicdoors.com/courses/salvatio.htm especially what the popes infallibly stated on Salvation outside the Catholic Church and other issues.

I go by what the Church teaches:
“Outside the Church there is no salvation”

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336

The closest biblical account for a “limbo” concerns “Abraham’s bosom” and “paradise” in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31).

But didn’t you just deny that Limbo existed?

Although it is a parable to teach a truth concerning prophecies declaring the kingdom of God, the places mentioned must exist or Jesus would not have used them.

There you go. Limbo is the same as Purgatory.

Parables are not based upon imaginary objects and locations, but on things which are real.

Here are the other things which are real in that account.
1. The Saints speak.
2. The Saints are aware of the people on earth.
3. The Saints recognize the authority of other Saints.
4. The Saints are concerned for the welfare of their brethren on earth.
5. The Saints care for each other in the afterlife and have a relationship.

So before the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, there were two places souls went upon death. One place is at the side of Abraham (often described as Abraham’s bosom); this would be for people who died in faith in God’s promised Messiah, just as Abraham did, and were declared righteous by faith (Genesis 15:4-6; Romans 4:13-24).

God doesn’t change. Those places continue to exist to this day. At the Judgement, they will be cast into the Lake of Fire.

Those who died in unbelief went to a place of torment. The Greek word used is hades and probably is the best Greek word for the Jewish sheol, literally “the lowest pit.” It is clearly a place of great torment.

Yes. A temporary place of great torment. Purgatory is the other name for it.

But this is also a temporary limbo. These souls will appear at the second resurrection before the great white throne of Revelation 20:11-13. These people are not in the Book of Life because they do not have eternal life through faith in Christ, and they are cast into their final destination in the “Lake of Fire / Gehenna.”

Correct. They do not have eternal life through faith in Christ because they either did not have enough faith to submit t Baptism. Or if they did submit to Baptism, they did not believe in it (Mark 16:16). Therefore, they are not written in the book of life, unless they labored for the Kingdom of God and kept the Ten Commandments.

The idea of limbo as a realm in between heaven and hell, sort of another purgatory, is not biblical.

You just proved that it is.

If there is any sort of a limbo, it is the temporary holding place of the wicked (Hades / Sheol), which will eventually be emptied into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:11-15).

It is also a temporary holding place for the righteous. As you proved.

The tone of your post dated implied that “..Being SO many” – implied worthless and without truth and also what the popes infallibly taught.

You certainly read a great deal into those 3 little words. Lolek said there a many Protestant denominations and you interpret that to mean that he has judged them all condemned?

WOW???!!!

Sincerely,

De Maria

Joel D'Souza June 27, 2012 at 11:55 PM

De Maria:

?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Are you sure? Comes from Christ the Head – Head of what?

Joel D'Souza June 28, 2012 at 3:17 AM

If sola Scriptura cannot be the correct method of determining truth because of the religious division among churches that claim to use sola Scriptura, then does this not also disqualify the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches method of using tradition, since they are divided against themselves?

So if Catholic and Orthodox churches split – can we call it the one true church Jesus established be?

In fact, the primary aim of Jesus to come 2000 years ago as God manifest in the flesh, was to save that which are lost. He did not come to set denominations with labels.

Lolek Pugeda June 28, 2012 at 3:59 AM

To Joel:
You said “The tone of your post dated implied that “..Being SO many” – implied worthless and without truth and also what the popes infallibly taught.”

That’s funny ’cause I just emphasized that there are so many protestant churches.

How do I expect you to correctly interpret the bible when you misinterpreted me?

De Maria June 28, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Hi Joel,

Are you sure? Comes from Christ the Head – Head of what?

Head of the Body, which is the Church (Colossians 1:18).

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria June 28, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Hi Joel,
If sola Scriptura cannot be the correct method of determining truth because of the religious division among churches that claim to use sola Scriptura, then does this not also disqualify the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches method of using tradition, since they are divided against themselves?

So if Catholic and Orthodox churches split – can we call it the one true church Jesus established be?

Joel, your false assumption is leading you to error in your conclusion.
1st, Sola Scriptura is not wrong because it causes division, even Christ causes division (Luke 12:51) and He is all Truth (John 14:6).
2nd, Sola Scriptura is wrong because it contradicts Scripture (Matt 18:17; 1 Thess 2:13; 2 Thess 2:15; Heb 13:7; 17).
3rd, Sola Scriptura is also wrong because it is illogical. It contradicts itself because it claims that all valid doctrines must be explicit in Scripture. Yet, Sola Scriptura is not only absent from Scripture, but contradicts Scripture.

Having said that, is following Tradition a bad method to follow in order to ensure unity in the Church? I’d say that the proof of the pudding shows that it is far better than Sola Scriptura. There are more than 20,000 divisions in 500 years of Sola Scriptura. There are only, possibly 10 in 2000 years amongst the Ancient Churches which follow the Traditions of Jesus Christ.

Scripture says, “you will know them by their fruits”. Which is producing more unity and thus better fruit? “Sola Scriptura” or “Church, Tradition and Scripture”?

You be the judge.

In fact, the primary aim of Jesus to come 2000 years ago as God manifest in the flesh, was to save that which are lost.

Amen!

He did not come to set denominations with labels.

In order to save that which was lost, Jesus Christ established ONE Church (Matt 16:18) and commissioned that Church to teach that which He commanded (Matt 28:19-20). Jesus didn’t write even one word of Scripture.

It is Protestants who wrested authority from the Church (Matt 18:17) and proceeded to teach every wind of doctrine (Eph 4:14) against the clear teaching of Scripture.

It is ironic, that in the guise of loving Scripture, they defied its power and authority.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Joel D'souza June 28, 2012 at 12:59 PM

De Maria:

Head of the Body, which is the Church (Colossians 1:18).
Contradictions!! When lay Catholics are questioned who is the Head of the Church – the reply it is the pope. The pope also dons the self-ordained title – “vicar of Christ” which means Christ Representative. Scripture teaches in the New Testament Church we are all “ambassadors or Representative’s of Christ”. So why this merry go round the bush?

Joel D'souza June 28, 2012 at 1:11 PM

De Maria:

Having said that, is following Tradition a bad method to follow in order to ensure unity in the Church? I’d say that the proof of the pudding shows that it is far better than Sola Scriptura. There are more than 20,000 divisions in 500 years of Sola Scriptura. There are only, possibly 10 in 2000 years amongst the Ancient Churches which follow the Traditions of Jesus Christ.

Please don’t simply look at the numbers. A division or a split is well.. just that and nothing else. A split takes place when there is disagreements on contentious issues. Again Christ came to establish his Church – a church comprising of spiritually born again believers, given the gift of salvation by God’s Grace through faith in Christ Jesus. I know it personally that I have been saved the Biblical way and not through works based salvation that denies the atonement of Christ redemption for mankind on the cross of calvary,

De Maria June 28, 2012 at 8:30 PM

Joel,

Contradictions!! When lay Catholics are questioned who is the Head of the Church – the reply it is the pope.

You were probably speaking to ex-Catholics like seven who left the Catholic Church because they didn’t understand the true Catholic Teaching.

The Church teaches that Christ is the head:
792 Christ “is the head of the body, the Church.” He is the principle of creation and redemption. Raised to the Father’s glory, “in everything he [is] preeminent,” especially in the Church, through whom he extends his reign over all things.

The pope also dons the self-ordained title – “vicar of Christ” which means Christ Representative.

That is from Scripture. Jesus assigned Simon as the Shepherd over the Church; John 21:17.

Scripture teaches in the New Testament Church we are all “ambassadors or Representative’s of Christ”.

That is true. And that confirms the principle that a man can represent God.

So why this merry go round the bush?

Because Jesus named Simon, the Rock, after Himself, thus designating him in authority over the Church. Read more.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria June 28, 2012 at 8:42 PM

Hello again, Joel,

Please don’t simply look at the numbers. A division or a split is well.. just that and nothing else.

If that were true, you wouldn’t be here trying to convince us that you are right and we are wrong. Besides, I am a regular poster in one of the most virulent anti-Catholic, evangelical Protestant sites. That site also opposes every flavor of Protestant that differs with their Calvinistic bias. They frequently condemn each other as much as they condemn Catholics.

So, in reality, it is not a simple, friendly “split” as you say. It is establishment of separate and opposing religions.

A split takes place when there is disagreements on contentious issues. Again Christ came to establish his Church – a church comprising of spiritually born again believers, given the gift of salvation by God’s Grace through faith in Christ Jesus.

Giving the gift of salvation to those who keep the Commandments (Matthew 19:17; John 14:21-23) and the Sacraments of Jesus Christ (Mark 16:16; Rom 2:13).

I know it personally that I have been saved the Biblical way

The Biblical way is the Catholic way. Your way is not found in Scripture.

and not through works based salvation that denies the atonement of Christ redemption for mankind on the cross of calvary,

It is because Christ died on the Cross that we are now permitted to approach the Throne of God and be saved by the mercy of God in the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Spirit, which occurs with every Sacrament (Titus 3:5).

Sincerely,

De Maria

Lolek Pugeda June 29, 2012 at 5:04 AM

Faith is fruitless without good works. Good works are meaningless without faith. We need both to lead a WHOLESOME Christian life.

Joel D'souza June 29, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Hi Lolek:

Genuine faith in Christ will surely produce a changed life and good works. A person who is truly justified by faith will have good works evident in his/her life. Good works is a product of genuine faith in Christ and not a means of it.

Joel D'souza June 29, 2012 at 1:00 PM

De Maria:

Besides, I am a regular poster in one of the most virulent anti-Catholic, evangelical Protestant sites. That site also opposes every flavor of Protestant that differs with their Calvinistic bias. They frequently condemn each other as much as they condemn Catholics.

I am happy to be a Bible believing Christian and I know the Lord loves me irrespective of my short-comings. He accepts me just as I am. I post on this blog with the intention of sharing the truth. The war is not against the flesh, but against spiritual wickedness in high places. I oppose doctrinal teachings that are anti-biblical. I am not against or condemn an individual as a person – Catholic or Protestant.

Its understandable the differences do exist between Catholic and Protestants, but you say numbers of Protestant are huge. Ok fine. But they all agree that the scriptures being God breathed are the sole rule of faith, and sufficient for all matters of faith, doctrine and practice – leaving aside differences in interpretation among themselves. Catholics say scripture ‘plus’ tradition. So here we have 50,000+ Protestant denominations versus just one Catholic who oppose submission to only scripture. So Protestants are in majority and they are right to oppose adding of un-biblical traditions to scripture, as the CC does.

De Maria June 29, 2012 at 8:54 PM

Joel,

Genuine faith in Christ will surely produce a changed life and good works.

Very good. Faith which does not produce a changed life and good works is dead (James 2:14; 17; 24).

A person who is truly justified by faith will have good works evident in his/her life.

Again, that is perfectly true (Romans 2:1-13; James 2:21-26).

Good works is a product of genuine faith in Christ and not a means of it.

Absolutely. And without that genuine faith which produces obedience to the Commandments of God, we are nothing (Matt 7:21; John 14:21-23; Romans 6:16; Heb 5:9; Rev 22:12-15).

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria June 29, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Hi Joel,

I am happy to be a Bible believing Christian and I know the Lord loves me irrespective of my short-comings.

That is true.

He accepts me just as I am.

He placed the Church here in order to teach you how to achieve the perfection which He would like you to achieve (Matt 5:48; 2 Cor 13:9).

I post on this blog with the intention of sharing the truth.

I thank you for your good intention. However, I assure you that you only have a partial truth and if you want to have the fullness of the truth, you need to come to the Catholic Church (1 Tim 3:15; Eph 3:10).

The war is not against the flesh, but against spiritual wickedness in high places. I oppose doctrinal teachings that are anti-biblical.

Then you should be opposed to Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide and you should embrace every teaching of the Catholic Church.

I am not against or condemn an individual as a person – Catholic or Protestant.

Good for you. But it wouldn’t matter if you condemned or commended a Catholic or a Protestant. God is judge of all.

Its understandable the differences do exist between Catholic and Protestants, but you say numbers of Protestant are huge. Ok fine. But they all agree that the scriptures being God breathed are the sole rule of faith,

And that is the main reason that they differ with each other on so many other doctrines. Because they each interpret the Scriptures differently and rely upon their own understanding (Proverbs 3:5; 2 Pet 1:19-21).

and sufficient for all matters of faith, doctrine and practice –

The Catholic Church does not deny that the Scriptures are materially sufficient for all matters of faith, doctrine and practice. The difference is the addition of the word, “sole”. Scripture is clear that one can learn their faith, doctrine and practice from the Church (Eph 3:10), from one’s parents (2 Tim 1:5), and from one’s teachers (Heb 13:7). Scripture nowhere even suggests that one must discard all other sources of learning and hold “only” to Scripture.

Sola Scriptura is a deceptive doctrine which must have been born of Satan, because with the guise of loving Scripture, one is convinced to disobey the commandments of God recorded therein.

leaving aside differences in interpretation among themselves.

By what authority do you set those differences aside? Scripture doesn’t permit it (Titus 1:9).

Catholics say scripture ‘plus’ tradition.

You have that backwards. Scripture says Traditions, by word and epistle. Scripture is the written form of Tradition (2 Thess 2:15; 2 Pet 20-21).

So here we have 50,000+ Protestant denominations

Correct. The proof is in the pudding. 50,000 plus beliefs. A showcase of confusion. Who is the author of confusion, Joel? Is it God (1 Corinthians 14:33)?

versus just one Catholic who oppose submission to only scripture.

Yes. What does Scripture say? Ephesians 4:5

So Protestants are in majority

If this were a democracy, even that wouldn’t help you. There are many Protestant denominations. But the one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church has more adherents than all Protestant denominations put together.

and they are right to oppose adding of un-biblical traditions to scripture, as the CC does.

The Catholic Church does not do that Joel. The Protestants do. All I can do is repeat the evidence. It was long ago proven to me, that it is God who causes the growth. If you are not able to receive the Spiritual message, my arguments and words will not convince you (1 Corinthians 2:14; John 6:44).

Sincerely,

De Maria

Lolek Pugeda June 30, 2012 at 12:06 AM

To Joel
“Genuine faith in Christ will surely produce a changed life and good works. A person who is truly justified by faith will have good works evident in his/her life. Good works is a product of genuine faith in Christ and not a means of it.”

Exactly! The Catholic church teaches Faith AND good works, NOT Faith OR good works. Which is precisley why Sola Fide is contradictory! How can faith alone save you if you acknowledged that it must INEVITABLY be followed by good works?

Also, The Catholic Church teaches Faith and good works, NOT good works and Faith, because the Church knows that the former must precede the latter.

With the best intentions,
Lolek

Lolek Pugeda June 30, 2012 at 12:12 AM

To Toel
The protestants are not in the majority, their are 1 billion Catholics and only 600 million Protestants. (more or less)

Also, why be satisfied with half of what God intended? Being a Catholic implies that you believe in all God has revealed through out the ages. Being a protestant means you believe only up to the end of revelations. Yes, a protestant is a Christian but if Jesus still loves a muslim then whats the point of him converting to Christianity?

With the best intentions
Lolek

Lolek Pugeda June 30, 2012 at 12:14 AM

ERRATA : Sorry I meant Joel, not Toel.

Lolek Pugeda June 30, 2012 at 12:27 AM

To Joel
Another point, How can you believe the Bible alone as authority, when it was the Catholic church that codified all the books into the single book we recognize today? (I.e. The CC, by the grace of God, recognized all the books which are divinely inspired.)

The Bible didn’t just appear out of nowher, especially since all the books were written in different time periods

With the best intentions,
Lolek

Joel D'souza July 1, 2012 at 11:04 AM

To Lolek Pugeda:

Another point, How can you believe the Bible alone as authority, when it was the Catholic church that codified all the books into the single book we recognize today? (I.e. The CC, by the grace of God, recognized all the books which are divinely inspired.)

What do you mean “Catholic Church codified the books of the Bible?” You mean the CC wrote the Bible?

Joel D'souza July 1, 2012 at 11:07 AM

To Lolek Pugeda:
Exactly! The Catholic church teaches Faith AND good works, NOT Faith OR good works. Which is precisley why Sola Fide is contradictory! How can faith alone save you if you acknowledged that it must INEVITABLY be followed by good works?

So the question is : “Is salvation by faith alone, or by faith plus works?” Can you produce evidence vis-a-vis what CCC officially teaches and what the scriptures say, are one and the same?

De Maria July 1, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Hi Joel,

What do you mean “Catholic Church codified the books of the Bible?” You mean the CC wrote the Bible?

The Old Testament Septuagint was written by Jews. It is the version of the Old Testament which Jesus used. The Catholic Church uses the Septuagint version of the Old Testament. It includes those books which Protestants call “Apocrypha”.

The New Testament was written by Catholics. Sts. Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, James, and Jude were all Catholic Bishops. St. Peter was the first Pope.

The Apostles, however, did not codify the Bible. It was not until the Third Century, that St. Jerome sorted out all the books which were claimed to be canonical and put them in the Latin Vulgate. It is this Latin Vulgate, which the Catholic Church declared canonical in the Council of Trent, 12 Centuries later.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria July 1, 2012 at 5:26 PM

Hi Joel,

So the question is : “Is salvation by faith alone, or by faith plus works?” Can you produce evidence vis-a-vis what CCC officially teaches and what the scriptures say, are one and the same?

I don’t want to make this too long, so please read this..

I’ll try to summarize it this way. You ask:
Is salvation by faith alone, or by faith plus works?

It’s not a question of either/or; it’s a question of both/and. It is both “faith alone” and “faith plus works”.

Faith plus works is the model which we inherited from the Jews. It can be summarized in the words “keep the Commandments”. (Deuteronomy 7:11; John 14:21).

Faith alone (i.e. faith apart from works) is the Sacramental model. It can be summarized in the words, “Baptism now saves you” (Mark 16:16; Acts 22:16; 1 Pet 3:21).

In Catholic Teaching, unless one converts from sin and intends to keep the Commandments, one should not be Baptized. (Mark 16:16). In order to show that one understands the nature of sin and the necessity of avoiding it, one must study to show oneself approved (2 Tim 2:15). This is done by undergoing the Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults (RCIA).

Can you produce evidence vis-a-vis what CCC officially teaches and what the scriptures say, are one and the same?

Certainly. The Catholic Church refers all teachings to the Scriptures. In this case, the official teaching on “justification” is from the Council of Trent, session VI.

CHAPTER VI
THE MANNER OF PREPARATION

Now, they [the adults] are disposed to that justice when, aroused and aided by divine grace, receiving faith by hearing,[21] they are moved freely toward God, believing to be true what has been divinely revealed and promised, especially that the sinner is justified by God by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus;[22] and when, understanding themselves to be sinners, they, by turning themselves from the fear of divine justice, by which they are salutarily aroused, to consider the mercy of God, are raised to hope, trusting that God will be propitious to them for Christ’s sake; and they begin to love Him as the fountain of all justice, and on that account are moved against sin by a certain hatred and detestation, that is, by that repentance that must be performed before baptism;[23] finally, when they resolve to receive baptism, to begin a new life and to keep the commandments of God.

Of this disposition it is written:
He that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him;[24] and, Be of good faith, son, thy sins are forgiven thee;[25] and, The fear of the Lord driveth out sin;[26] and, Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost;[27] and, Going, therefore, teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you;[28] finally, Prepare your hearts unto the Lord.[29]

If you go to that link and follow the references down to the footnotes, they will indicate which Scripture verse or Catholic doctrine is referred.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Joel D'souza July 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM

De Maria:

I’d appreciate you to please refrain from responding to questions I have posed to Lolek Pugeda. Are you the “official” spokesman for everyone?. Your response to the questions I have raised to Lolek Pugeda is not justified, full of errors that are un-biblical.

Joel D'souza July 1, 2012 at 9:40 PM

De Maria:

Your response to faith alone and faith plus works as per the Catholic teaching is in error. The links you have provided conveniently skip certain verse because you did not interpret the book of the Bible as a whole to get its contextual meaning.

On you blog article you quote Galatians 2:16, but you conveniently forgotten to interpret contextually Galatians chapter 3 which is subsequent after chapter 2. Refer to Galatians 3:23-28. It is by faith alone and is applicable to all – Jew or Gentiles.

Also you rely on Romans 2:13, but you conveniently forgot Romans 3:28 – “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law”.

The question of faith alone or faith plus works is made difficult by some hard-to-reconcile Bible passages. Compare Romans 3:28 5:1and Galatians 3:24 with James 2:24. Some see a difference between Paul (salvation is by faith alone) and James (salvation is by faith plus works). Paul dogmatically says that justification is by faith alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), while James appears to be saying that justification is by faith plus works. This apparent problem is answered by examining what exactly James is talking about. James is refuting the belief that a person can have faith without producing any good works (James 2:17-18). James is emphasizing the point that genuine faith in Christ will produce a changed life and good works (James 2:20-26). James is not saying that justification is by faith plus works, but rather that a person who is truly justified by faith will have good works in his/her life. If a person claims to be a believer, but has no good works in his/her life, then he/she likely does not have genuine faith in Christ (James 2:14, 17, 20, 26).

Paul says the same thing in his writings. The good fruit believers should have in their lives is listed in Galatians 5:22-23. Immediately after telling us that we are saved by faith, not works (Ephesians 2:8-9), Paul informs us that we were created to do good works (Ephesians 2:10). Paul expects just as much of a changed life as James does: “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come” (2 Corinthians 5:17). James and Paul do not disagree in their teaching regarding salvation. They approach the same subject from different perspectives. Paul simply emphasized that justification is by faith alone while James put emphasis on the fact that genuine faith in Christ produces good works.

De Maria July 1, 2012 at 9:58 PM

Hi Joel,

De Maria:

I’d appreciate you to please refrain from responding to questions I have posed to Lolek Pugeda.

I apologize if I upset you. The reason I responded is because I have approximately 20 years experience responding to Protestant objections to Catholic doctrine. I have heard almost everyone of them and I have everything bookmarked and ready. Poor Lolek might have to research everything from scratch.

Are you the “official” spokesman for everyone?.

No. But I see no rule against answering all your questions. So, until I am told that I am not permitted to do so, I will. Oh, and I mean by the author of this blog. Steve Ray. Not by you.

Your response to the questions I have raised to Lolek Pugeda is not justified, full of errors that are un-biblical.

Joel, the only one providing unbiblical responses full of errors in these exchanges has been you.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Lolek Pugeda July 2, 2012 at 5:59 AM

To Joel:
I don’t mind De Maria speaking for me, after all we defend the same faith. Something I doubt a Protestant-Calvinist would do for you.

Also, The Catholic church codified the Bible in a sense that it was The CC that organized and “united” all the books into the single book we know today. If not for the Catholic church, the protestants would not even know what books to base sola scriptura from.

Second, you need genuine faith which is accompanied by good works, thus you NEED BOTH. In a sense, it’s not choosing between blue or yellow, but rather green, wherein you need both blue AND yellow.

Also, If you reject something just because it’s un-biblical, well here you go,
“As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.” James 2:26

Lastly, If you’re an adamant protestant well,
“Reason is the enemy of faith.” – Martin Luther (Founder of protestantism) The same man who divided Faith and good works

Joel D'souza July 2, 2012 at 8:17 AM

De Maria:
Poor Lolek might have to research everything from scratch.
That is creme of the pudding. That is why we have the “cradle-Catholic” tag always there. I know i was myself at one time. However we have to learn the hard-way as the devil is always at play. Besides Lolek will not be justified if you spoon feed him you faulty theological views which brain wash him. Steve has been kind to allow these posts for educational purposes. So we better be like the Bereans who diligently searched the truth in scripture.

Joel D'souza July 2, 2012 at 8:23 AM

De Maria:

The Old Testament Septuagint was written by Jews. It is the version of the Old Testament which Jesus used. The Catholic Church uses the Septuagint version of the Old Testament. It includes those books which Protestants call “Apocrypha”.
This means the RC Church is not the one true church established by Jesus as you have rightly pointed out that it does not use books of the OT which Jesus used but “spurious” ones to support un-biblical teachings. Most likely because of ego problems caused by the reformation.

Joel D'souza July 2, 2012 at 11:58 AM

To Lolek Pugeda:

I don’t mind De Maria speaking for me, after all we defend the same faith. Something I doubt a Protestant-Calvinist would do for you.
It’s easier said than done. Adolph Hitler also brain-washed his Germany army to defend his view what he thought and held was the truth. As far as defending the faith is concerned, faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God – Romans 10:17. Faith does not come by abiding in (Dog)mas nor (Catmas).

Also, The Roman Catholic church codified the Bible in a sense that it was The RCC that organized and “united” all the books into the single book we know today. If not for the Catholic church, the protestants would not even know what books to base sola scriptura from.
The early Christians knew which books of the Bible were inspired (part of the canon of scripture), so it doesn’t matter if the RCC went ahead to recognise it and as De Maria rightly pointed out that the CC did not use the Old Testament Jesus used but chose instead to use the Septugiant containing the spurious Deutrocanonical books an act to support its un-biblical doctrines and counter the reformation. Thus the RCC is not the one true Church established by Christ because it does bnot use the Old Testament books used by Christ. In fact the RCC went ahead to codify the books of the Bible just to make a “show of it”. The CC should have called for an ecumenical dialog among the Churches, but it did not do so.

Second, you need genuine faith which is accompanied by good works, thus you NEED BOTH. In a sense, it’s not choosing between blue or yellow, but rather green, wherein you need both blue AND yellow.

I have elaborated here in above on the topic of faith alone or faith plus works. See my post on July 1, 2012 at 9:40 PM.

Lastly, If you’re an adamant protestant well,
“Reason is the enemy of faith.” – Martin Luther (Founder of protestantism) The same man who divided Faith and good works

I am a Bible believing Christian and NOT a protestant because Protestant being ex-Catholics and Catholics are one and the same side of the coin. Luther only rebelled against the papacy because he held to” certain” biblical views. I don’t support Luther either (he too was a heretic) for he broke away from the RCC and brought along with him into the protestant Church several un-biblical practices of the RCC. Call it a massive hangover that happens after a late night booze party.

De Maria July 2, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Hi Joel,

Thank you! This is what I love. Actual, nitty gritty comparisons to Scripture.

Your response to faith alone and faith plus works as per the Catholic teaching is in error. The links you have provided conveniently skip certain verse because you did not interpret the book of the Bible as a whole to get its contextual meaning.

Let us proceed and see if this assessment of yours is true.

On you blog article you quote Galatians 2:16, but you conveniently forgotten to interpret contextually Galatians chapter 3 which is subsequent after chapter 2. Refer to Galatians 3:23-28. It is by faith alone and is applicable to all – Jew or Gentiles.

Let’s look at that contextually. Let’s take just one more verse. Instead of starting at Gal 3:23, let’s start at Gal. 22-28. Note how he speaks of the faith OF Jesus Christ:

22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. 23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. 24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. 26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Faith, like many other words, has many meanings. One of them is “trust”. The other is “religion”.
The faith OF Christ Jesus, THAT faith, is Christianity. Specifically Catholic Christianity. Sacramental Christianity. Wherein, we have faith ALONE in the works of God. The proper disposition for a believer is to have faith, to believe, that God can do what He promised to do. And He promised to renew us in the bath of regeneration that we might walk with the Saints in this life (Titus 3:5; Heb 12:21-24). Yeah, He promised to give us the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38) and wash away our sins (Acts 22:16). We do nothing, He does it all in the Sacraments. But, unless we keep the Commandments, we are not properly disposed to receive the Sacraments (Rom 2:13).

Also you rely on Romans 2:13, but you conveniently forgot Romans 3:28 – “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law”.

Rom 3:28 does not somehow nullify Rom 2:13. They are both true. How can they both be true when they seem to contradict each other? The only way they can both be true is the way the Catholic Church teaches. The Sacrametns JUSTIFY. In order to receive the Sacraments, we must be in a state of grace. In order to be in a state of grace, we must keep the Commandments. The Commandments are the Law. Therefore, DOERS OF THE LAW ARE JUSTIFIED. BY GOD.

The question of faith alone or faith plus works is made difficult by some hard-to-reconcile Bible passages. Compare Romans 3:28 5:1and Galatians 3:24 with James 2:24. Some see a difference between Paul (salvation is by faith alone) and James (salvation is by faith plus works). Paul dogmatically says that justification is by faith alone (Ephesians 2:8-9),

Again, you are doing your best to dispense with many Pauline passages. Foremost among them is Romans 2:1-13. But there are so many that I can’t list them all in this little space. I’ll give you five, that should suffice. Rom 13:10; Gal 5:6; 1 Thess 1:3; Heb 6:10; Heb 10:24

while James appears to be saying that justification is by faith plus works. This apparent problem is answered by examining what exactly James is talking about. James is refuting the belief that a person can have faith without producing any good works (James 2:17-18).

THAT IS THE CATHOLIC TEACHING!!! Can Satan have blinded you so much? Faith produces good works. That is faith AND works. Or faith PLUS works. That is the Catholic Teaching. What is your problem?

You need to pray that God may open your eyes to something which Satan has blinded you. You are here explaining Catholic doctrine and at the self same time claiming that it is Protestant doctrine. Whereas, this is precisely what Protestants decry.

James is emphasizing the point that genuine faith in Christ will produce a changed life and good works (James 2:20-26).

Catholic doctrine.

James is not saying that justification is by faith plus works,

Yes, he is.

but rather that a person who is truly justified by faith will have good works in his/her life.

Not true. Let us examine James 2:24.

James 2:24
King James Version (KJV)
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

Wiggle yourself out of that. Twist the Scripture all you want. The only one who will be destroyed is YOU (2 Pet 3:16).

If a person claims to be a believer, but has no good works in his/her life, then he/she likely does not have genuine faith in Christ (James 2:14, 17, 20, 26).

Catholic doctrine.

Paul says the same thing in his writings. The good fruit believers should have in their lives is listed in Galatians 5:22-23. Immediately after telling us that we are saved by faith, not works (Ephesians 2:8-9), Paul informs us that we were created to do good works (Ephesians 2:10). Paul expects just as much of a changed life as James does: “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come” (2 Corinthians 5:17). James and Paul do not disagree in their teaching regarding salvation. They approach the same subject from different perspectives. Paul simply emphasized that justification is by faith alone while James put emphasis on the fact that genuine faith in Christ produces good works.

You have misunderstood completely.

Sts. Paul and James both explain salvation by faith and works, which is the keeping of the Commandments (Roman 2:1-13; James 2: 14-24). But St. Paul also goes into detail about salvation by faith apart from works, which only happens in the Sacraments (Romans 3:28; Titus 3:5). St. Mark touched upon it (Mark 16:16), St Peter touched upon it (1 Pet 3:21); St. Luke touched upon it (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16). But only St. Paul goes into detail over and over again (Romans 3:28; Gal 2:16; Titus 3:5).

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria July 2, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Hi Joel,

That is creme of the pudding. That is why we have the “cradle-Catholic” tag always there. I know i was myself at one time. However we have to learn the hard-way as the devil is always at play. Besides Lolek will not be justified if you spoon feed him you faulty theological views which brain wash him. Steve has been kind to allow these posts for educational purposes. So we better be like the Bereans who diligently searched the truth in scripture.

When will you begin to search the Scriptures? You have been spoon fed by the Protestants and are playing the devil’s game. It is you who are here espousing the faulty theological views of the Protestants.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria July 2, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Hi Joel,

I said:

The Old Testament Septuagint was written by Jews. It is the version of the Old Testament which Jesus used. The Catholic Church uses the Septuagint version of the Old Testament. It includes those books which Protestants call “Apocrypha”.

You responded:
This means the RC Church is not the one true church established by Jesus as you have rightly pointed out that it does not use books of the OT which Jesus used but “spurious” ones to support un-biblical teachings. Most likely because of ego problems caused by the reformation

Read what I said again Joel. The Septuagint is the version of Scripture which Jesus used. And it includes the Deuterocanonicals, which the Protestants call apocryphal because they adopted the view of the enemies of Christ. Yes, the enemies of Christ, the Jews, denied the Deuterocanonicals because they were accepted by Christ.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Lolek Pugeda July 2, 2012 at 8:06 PM

To Joel:
Faith does not come by abiding in (Dog)mas nor (Catmas).
That’s not even funny.

The early Christians knew which books of the Bible were inspired
Those early Christians were considered Catholic.

I have elaborated here in above on the topic of faith alone or faith plus works
The answer is Faith plus works. JAMES 2:26

I am a Bible believing Christian and NOT a protestant
Protestants believe in The Bible alone and Faith alone, how are you different?

I don’t support Luther either (he too was a heretic)
Luther believed in Faith alone and that the Bible was the only source of authority.

LASTLY, Tell me where in the Bible does it say Faith alone. NOT about “Faith” or about “alone” but FAITH ALONE?

Lolek Pugeda July 2, 2012 at 8:12 PM

To Joel
Do you believe that adam and eve existed?

De Maria July 2, 2012 at 8:17 PM

Hi Joel,

Lolek said:
I don’t mind De Maria speaking for me, after all we defend the same faith. Something I doubt a Protestant-Calvinist would do for you.

And you responded:
It’s easier said than done. Adolph Hitler also brain-washed his Germany army to defend his view what he thought and held was the truth. As far as defending the faith is concerned, faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God – Romans 10:17. Faith does not come by abiding in (Dog)mas nor (Catmas).

What in the world? Does that make sense to anybody? Joel, that just sounds like Satan inspired invective. Calm down and speak rationally. Lolek made two points which you simply ignored.

1. Because we are Catholic, it is valid that we can speak one for the other.
2. Because you espouse Protestantism, it is doubtful that any other Protestant can speak for you. Because you don’t hold the same faith.

Can you address those points?

Also, The Roman Catholic church codified the Bible in a sense that it was The RCC that organized and “united” all the books into the single book we know today. If not for the Catholic church, the protestants would not even know what books to base sola scriptura from.

The early Christians knew which books of the Bible were inspired (part of the canon of scripture), so it doesn’t matter if the RCC went ahead to recognise it and as De Maria rightly pointed out that the CC did not use the Old Testament Jesus used but chose instead to use the Septugiant containing the spurious Deutrocanonical books an act to support its un-biblical doctrines and counter the reformation.

Jesus used the Septuagint. That is what I pointed out. The reason we use the Septuagint is because Jesus used it.

Thus the RCC is not the one true Church established by Christ because it does bnot use the Old Testament books used by Christ.

Yes, it does. So, if not using the version of the Old Testament proves which is the true Church, you have just proved that the Protestants are not the true Church.

In fact the RCC went ahead to codify the books of the Bible just to make a “show of it”. The CC should have called for an ecumenical dialog among the Churches, but it did not do so.

All the Churches used the Latin Vulgate up until the time of the Protestants. That is a simple fact. Look it up.

Second, you need genuine faith which is accompanied by good works, thus you NEED BOTH. In a sense, it’s not choosing between blue or yellow, but rather green, wherein you need both blue AND yellow.

I have elaborated here in above on the topic of faith alone or faith plus works. See my post on July 1, 2012 at 9:40 PM.

Lol! Who are you? Have you crowned yourself pope? We have debunked all your messages. Go ahead, elaborate some more. And we will debunk you some more.

Lastly, If you’re an adamant protestant well,
“Reason is the enemy of faith.” – Martin Luther (Founder of protestantism) The same man who divided Faith and good works

I am a Bible believing Christian

You CLAIM to believe the Bible. But the Bible does not teach Scripture alone (Matt 16:18-19; Matt 18:17; 1
Thess 2:13; 2 Thess 2:15; Heb 13:7; 17). The Bible does not teach faith alone (Rom 2:1-13; Gal 5:6; Rev 22:12-15).

and NOT a protestant because Protestant being ex-Catholics and Catholics are one and the same side of the coin.

Hm? Tell the truth. Didn’t you claim to be an ex-Catholic? You said, and I quote:
That is why we have the “cradle-Catholic” tag always there. I know i was myself at one time.

Are you an ex-Catholic or not?

Luther only rebelled against the papacy because he held to” certain” biblical views.

Because he held to certain biblical errors.

I don’t support Luther either (he too was a heretic) for he broke away from the RCC and brought along with him into the protestant Church several un-biblical practices of the RCC. Call it a massive hangover that happens after a late night booze party.

YOU are still suffering from theta hangover.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Joel D'Souza July 3, 2012 at 1:39 AM

De Maria:
Read what I said again Joel. The Septuagint is the version of Scripture which Jesus used
Another contradiction and a lie. Jesus never used the Septuagint. Mathew 5:18 (KJV) states otherwise.

Your argument for the Septuagint collapses like a pack of cards. The NABRE even mutilates Matthew 5:18 beyond recognition, because all Catholic Bibles are powered by the same corrupted Alexandrian codices.

In addition, Jesus only mentioned the scripture text in two ways, (1) “The Law and the Prophets” and (2) “The Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms”:

“And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.” Luke 24:44.

The Hebrews divide their Bible into three parts: the Law, the Prophets and the Writings. Jesus clearly referred to this. The Septuagint had no such division. In fact, it contains Apocryphal books interspersed throughout the Old Testament. The sequence is so hopelessly mixed up that Jesus could not possibly have been referring to it!.

And yes, of course Christ was literate, read the things he said and you will clearly see.

The type of Jesus that established the one true Roman Catholic church is a counterfeit Jesus and not the true Biblical Jesus. In fact it is the false prophet called Bar-Jesus found in Acts 13:6.

Joel D'Souza July 3, 2012 at 1:51 AM

To Lolek Pugeda:

To Joel
Do you believe that adam and eve existed?

That is the question you must first ask your pope (John Paull II and Benedict XIV). They have repeatedly stated in the press that Genesis was a “myth” and are open to scientific data on the origins of man. They would really do justice to themselves if they follow http://www.answersingenesis.org/ and http://www.creationtoday.org/.

Lolek Pugeda July 3, 2012 at 2:01 AM

To De Maria:
I doubt Joel would read your entire post, which is why he would probably pose the same questions and arguments.

Lolek Pugeda July 3, 2012 at 2:11 AM

To Joel
What church do you even belong to? That is assuming everyone in your church holds the same interpretation of every biblical verse.

Lolek Pugeda July 3, 2012 at 8:51 AM

To Joel:
You did not answer my question do YOU believe adam and eve existed?

Lolek Pugeda July 3, 2012 at 8:53 AM

To Joel:
You did not answer my question, do YOU believe adam and eve existed?

Lolek Pugeda July 3, 2012 at 9:17 AM

To Joel:
If you take the bible literally, then do tell me, where is the dome up in the sky separating the the upper waters from the lower waters (i.e. the oceans)

De Maria July 3, 2012 at 5:03 PM

Hi Joel,

You said:
Another contradiction and a lie. Jesus never used the Septuagint. Mathew 5:18 (KJV) states otherwise.

Your argument for the Septuagint collapses like a pack of cards. The NABRE even mutilates Matthew 5:18 beyond recognition, because all Catholic Bibles are powered by the same corrupted Alexandrian codices.

In addition, Jesus only mentioned the scripture text in two ways, (1) “The Law and the Prophets” and (2) “The Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms”:….

Really? Do you think, that I said, that because the Old Testament was written in Greek, Jesus did not also use the Hebrew? Or do you think, that because the Old Testament existed in Hebrew, that Jesus did not also use the Greek?

Why would He use one only? Did He not encounter people who spoke only Greek and people who spoke only Aramaic and people who spoke only Hebrew?

Certainly, Jesus used the Hebrew Scriptures. Why not!? But He also used the Septuagint Scriptures. And that is easily proven:

….Perhaps one of the most important instances of the New Testament writers’ use of the Septuagint is Matthew 1.23, in which the Gospel writer quotes Isaiah 7.14. The Hebrew word almah, argued by some in our day to indicate a young woman of marriageable age but one not necessarily a virgin, is translated in the Septuagint as parthenos. This Greek word means virgin, indicating that the Jewish translators before the time of Christ understood the prophecy correctly. Other Jews after the advent of the Christian era translated the word into Greek as neanis, ‘young woman’, in order to distance the prophecy from fulfilment in Jesus. Matthew quotes the Septuagint, applying it to Jesus….

See this website for more proof that Jesus used The Septuagint

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria July 3, 2012 at 5:07 PM

Hi Joel,

You said:

That is the question you must first ask your pope (John Paull II and Benedict XIV). They have repeatedly stated in the press that Genesis was a “myth” and are open to scientific data on the origins of man. They would really do justice to themselves if they follow http://www.answersingenesis.org/ and http://www.creationtoday.org/.

Joel, please make coherent arguments. Please quote that which you claim the Pope’s said, in context, so that we can make out to what you are objecting.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria July 3, 2012 at 5:11 PM

Hi Lolek,

You said:
I doubt Joel would read your entire post, which is why he would probably pose the same questions and arguments.

I agree. But also, he needs to get past his presuppositions. He is still arguing with that which he thinks the Catholic Church teaches. Not with that which the Catholic Church actually teaches.

And he still believes that the doctrines he holds are in the Bible. But the doctrines which he holds are not in the Bible.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Joel D'souza July 4, 2012 at 2:29 PM

De Maria:

Some dosier on the Septuagint

If you look in the preface of a modern Bible, you will probably find a reference to the Septuagint, or LXX for short. The translators of all modern Bibles, including the New King James, use the Septuagint along with other texts in translating the Bible. They claim that the Septuagint contains true readings not found in the preserved Hebrew text. Thus they give it great importance. But what is the Septuagint? Here’s how the legend goes:

The Septuagint is claimed to have been translated between 285-246 BC during the reign of Ptolemy II Philadelphus of Alexandria, Egypt. His librarian, supposedly Demetrius of Phalerum, persuaded Philadelphus to get a copy of the Hebrew Scriptures. Then the Scriptures (at least Genesis to Deuteronomy) were translated into the Greek language for the Alexandrian Jews. This part of the story comes from early church historian Eusebius (260-339 AD). Scholars then claim that Jesus and His apostles used this Greek Bible instead of the preserved Hebrew text.

The Letter of Aristeas
The whole argument that the Hebrew scriptures were translated into Greek before the time of Christ rests upon a single document. All other historical evidence supporting the argument either quotes or references this single letter.

In this so-called Letter of Aristeas, the writer presents himself as a close confidant of king Philadelphus. He claims that he persuaded Eleazar, the high priest, to send with him 72 scholars from Jerusalem to Alexandria, Egypt. There they would translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, forming what we now call the Septuagint.

Jewish historian Josephus, Jewish mystic Philo (both first century AD) and others add to the story. Some say the 72 were shut in separate cells and “miraculously” wrote each of their versions word-for-word the same. They say that this proves “divine inspiration” of the entire Septuagint.

Thus, the Septuagint is claimed to exist at the time of Jesus and the apostles, and that they quoted from it instead of the preserved Hebrew text. This story has been passed around for centuries. But is it the truth? Was this Septuagint really written before the earthly ministry of the Lord Jesus and His apostles? Did they quote it? Was it really inspired by God? And if the story is a fake, why make up the story? Is there another reason to get people to use (or believe in) the Septuagint?

The verifiable facts:
The writer of this letter, Aristeas, claims to have been a Greek court official during the time of Philadelphus’ reign. He claims to have been sent by Demetrius to request the best scholars of Israel to bring a copy of the Hebrew scriptures to Alexandria to start the Septuagint translation project. He even goes so far as to give names of Septuagint scholars, yet many of the names he gives are from the Maccabean era, some 75 years too late. Many of them are Greek names, definitely not the names of Hebrew scholars. There are many other evidences that this letter is from a different time period, and is thus a fake. The writer is lying about his identity.

The supposed “librarian,” Demetrius of Phalerum (ca. 345-283) served in the court of Ptolemy Soter. Demetrius was never the librarian under Philadelphus.

The letter quotes the king telling Demetrius and the translators, when they arrived, how wonderful it was that they came on the anniversary of his “naval victory over Antigonus” (Aristeas 7:14). But the only such recorded Egyptian naval victory occurred many years after Demetrius death, so the letter is a fraud!

The Letter of Aristeas is a hoax that doesn’t even fit the time period in which it claims to have been written. And since the other ancient writers merely add to this story, it is clear that the story itself of a pre-Christian Septuagint is a fraud. Even critical textual scholars admit that the letter is a hoax. Yet they persist in quoting the Letter of Aristeas as proof of the existence of the Septuagint before Christ.

New Testament Evidence
Many scholars claim that Christ and his apostles used the Septuagint, preferring it above the preserved Hebrew text found in the temple and synagogues. But if the Greek Septuagint was the Bible Jesus used, he would not have said,

“For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” (Matthew 5:18)

Why would Jesus not have said this? Because the jot is a Hebrew letter, and the tittle is a small mark to distinguish between Hebrew letters. If Jesus used the Greek Septuagint, His scriptures would not have contained the jot and tittle. He obviously used the Hebrew scriptures!

In addition, Jesus only mentioned the scripture text in two ways, (1) “The Law and the Prophets” and (2) “The Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms”:

“And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.” Luke 24:44

The Hebrews divide their Bible into three parts: the Law, the Prophets and the Writings. Jesus clearly referred to this. The Septuagint had no such division. In fact, it contains Apocryphal books interspersed throughout the Old Testament. The sequence is so hopelessly mixed up that Jesus could not possibly have been referring to it!

Who is pushing the Septuagint?
So why do we still hear the story? Why do people give it a second thought? Are there other reasons why they still try to use the Septuagint to find “original readings” that were supposedly “lost from the Hebrew”?.

Roman Catholics Need It
According to the Roman Catholic Douay Bible:

“…the Septuagint, the Greek translation from the original Hebrew, and which contained all the writings now found in the Douay version, as it is called, was the version used by the Saviour and his Apostles and by the Church from her infancy, and translated into Latin, known under the title of Latin Vulgate, and ever recognized as the true version of the written word of God” —Preface,1914 edition.

So Roman Catholics desperately want the Septuagint to be genuine —even inspired! You see, the so-called Septuagint is where they got the Apocrypha (books that are not inspired and have no place in our Bibles). If the Septuagint goes, then the Apocrypha goes with it!

Ecumenical Textual Critics Need It
The supposed text of the Septuagint is found today only in certain manuscripts. The main ones are: Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph); Codex Vaticanus (B); and Codex Alexandrinus (A). That’s right. The Alexandrian manuscripts are the very texts we call the Septuagint!

In his Introduction to The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English (1851) Sir Lancelot Brenton describes how some critical scholars have attempted to call the Septuagint by its real name, the Alexandrian Text, but the name never stuck. Thus he admits that they are one and the same.

So we have textual critics who believe desperately in the 45 Alexandrian manuscripts (against more than 5,000 copies favoring the Textus Receptus). They use these to translate all modern New Testaments. But these Alexandrian manuscripts also include the Septuagint Old Testament (with the Apocrypha). They have fallen for a trap.

Catholics now argue the following: If you accept the Alexandrian text (which modern scholars use as the basis for all new translations) for your New Testament, then you also have to accept the rest of the Alexandrian text (Septuagint) , which includes the Apocrypha. What we are seeing is the development of an ecumenical Bible, including the Apocrypha. Some versions have already gone this way. For many Protestants, all roads are truly leading to Rome.

We Don’t Need It
But do we Christians need the Alexandrian manuscripts? Not at all! For the Old Testament we have the Preserved Words of God in the Hebrew Masoretic text. For the New Testament we have the 5,000-plus manuscripts in Greek, plus the many early translations spread abroad, to witness to the actual words of Christ and His apostles.

So the Septuagint story is a hoax. It was not written before Christ; so it was not used by Jesus or His apostles. It is the only set of manuscripts to include the Apocrypha mixed in with the books of the Bible, so as to justify the Roman Catholic inclusion of them in their Bibles. And it is just those same, perverted Alexandrian codices —the same ones that mess up the New Testament —dressed up in pretty packaging.

De Maria July 4, 2012 at 5:23 PM

Hi Joel,
You said,

Some dosier on the Septuagint

If you look in the preface of a modern Bible, you will probably find a reference to the Septuagint, or LXX for short. The translators of all modern Bibles, including the New King James, use the Septuagint along with other texts in translating the Bible. They claim that the Septuagint contains true readings not found in the preserved Hebrew text. Thus they give it great importance. But what is the Septuagint? Here’s how the legend goes:….

Obviously, you don’t care for the Septuagint. And you want to convince me that the Septuagint is not worth the paper upon which it is written. Fair enough. Let me explain something to you. You have given me a choice. I should believe YOU. Or I can believe the Church about which Scripture says:

1 Tim 3:15; Eph 3:10

I’m not going to ask you. I’ll ask the readers. Whom do you believe? Joel, a man who admits he is fallible. Or the Church which Scripture describes as infallible?

I’ll tell you who I believe. The Catholic Church.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Joel D'souza July 6, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Hello De Maria ..:

I’ll tell you who I believe. The Catholic Church.

What I find truly amazing about you is you have the audacity to even brush aside what Jesus the Son of the living God incarnate in the flesh said in Matthew 5:18 explicitly. Instead you preferred to believe wholeheartedly on the article written by a woman and posted on http://www.trinitarianbiblesociety.org/site/articles/lxx.html.

Now i really don’t know what you believe in the Catholic church, when a Church is supposed to be a pillar of truth and be a shining beacon for the ordinary faithful. Many times I day-dream on remembering fondly former greats US Presidents George Washington and Abraham Lincoln who always stood for the truth’s in the Bible. I am sure will remember their famous quotes without a shadow of doubt. These men were truly geniuses the world has ever know,

God Bless you and all who have been readings the posts.

De Maria July 6, 2012 at 7:23 PM

Hi Joel,

You said:
What I find truly amazing about you is you have the audacity to even brush aside what Jesus the Son of the living God incarnate in the flesh said in Matthew 5:18 explicitly.

I believe and accept Matt 5:18. Here is what Matt 5:18 says:
Matthew 5:18
King James Version (KJV)
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

That says nothing about the Greek Septuagint unless someone twists it completely out of context and forces their own agenda into it.

Here’s what I find amazing about you. You have the audacity to claim to believe in the Bible, but when the Bible says, “hold the Traditions” (2 Thess 2:15), you say, “Scripture Alone!”. And when the Bible says, “not by faith only” (James 2:24), you say, “Faith Alone!”. When the Bible says, “according to their works” (Rev 22:12-15), you say “not according to their works”. And many other things we have shown that you force your Protestant agenda into the Word of God, twisting it completely out of context.

Instead you preferred to believe wholeheartedly on the article written by a woman

You have something against women?

and posted on http://www.trinitarianbiblesociety.org/site/articles/lxx.html.

You have something against believing in the Trinity?

The article which I posted showed that the Jews took offense at Jesus and altered their Hebrew Scriptures in order to void some of the Old Testament prophecies of the coming of the Messiah. But I guess that doesn’t make any difference to you. You would rather take the side of the enemies of Christ than the side of the Church which Christ established.

Now i really don’t know what you believe in the Catholic church, when a Church is supposed to be a pillar of truth and be a shining beacon for the ordinary faithful. Many times I day-dream on remembering fondly former greats US Presidents George Washington and Abraham Lincoln who always stood for the truth’s in the Bible. I am sure will remember their famous quotes without a shadow of doubt. These men were truly geniuses the world has ever know,

Sure. But I follow Christ through the Church He established to teach what He Commanded (Matt 28:19-20

God Bless you and all who have been readings the posts.

And you as well.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Leave a Comment

 

Previous post:

Next post: