Books Outside the Bible

[BreadOfLife]

You can keep on claiming that sad excuse "The priests and church officials are the ones who actually did it, not "the Church", itself." all you want.... but that doesn't change the truth of what we both know was an ongoing practice, for years, of fleecing the people.

Really??
It went on for "YEARS"??

Ummmmm, can you tell me HOW MANY years? Just a ballpark number will do but I want you to provide documented, Historical proof . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

I can't tell if you are talking about the infallible counsel of LATERAN IV calling for the "extermination of heretics and Jews" or not. What exactly is this about??

Don't get me wrong on that infallability thing - I am not saying they are never right about something. For example when Clement XIV decreed the abolishing "forever" of the Jesuit order "by all the fullness of the apostolic succession" power available to the Pope at the time - the reasons he gave for it may indeed have been valid.

Canon issued at the IV Lateran Council in 1213 regarding Heretics:
Canon 3:
Procedure and penalties against heretics and their protectors. If those suspected of heresy should neglect to prove themselves innocent, they are excommunicated. If they continue in the excommunication for twelve months they are to be condemned as heretics. Princes are to be admonished to swear that they will banish all whom the Church points out as heretics. This canon mandates that those pointed by the Church as heretics shall be expelled by the secular authorities or they will be excommunicated if failing to do so.

Ummmmm, WHERE do you get “extermination” from “Excommunication”??

As for Clement XIVand the Jesuits – Clement didn’t have anything against them personally. The Jesuits had been expelled from Brazil, Portugal, France andSpain.

From a SECULAR source (Wikipedia):
The pressure kept building up to the point that Catholic countries were threatening to break away from the Church. Clement XIV ultimately yielded "in the name of peace of the Church and to avoid a secession in Europe" and suppressed the Society of Jesus by the brief Dominus ac Redemptor of the 21 July 1773.

Anyway – this had NOTHING to do with Papal Infallibility. Papal Infallibility only pertains to what the Pope TEACHES as binding on Catholics regarding matters of faith and morals.
You need to get your history as well as your Catholic doctrine straight . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

I won't argue the definition of "lie" at this point. Let's stick to the thread:
Why are the documents that Jude references not canon and yet other documents referenced in Holy Scripture included in canon?

My point is that you are not convincing me. I may be Protestant, but I do think the original set of documents was founded by concensus through the Holy Spirit. You are undermining the Truth with your zealousness. Why should I listen to you when your attitude is so irritating? You are not 'stomping out lies'. If I can't accept what you say and I--partially--agree with you, what makes you think you are "making disciples" and promoting the Word of God? You give me cause to think they may be right!

First of all – your claim is absolutely FALSE.
NOT all documents referenced in Scripture are “Scripture”.

Case in point: In Col. 4:16, Paul references a letter that he wrote to the Laodiceans. This letter is NOT part of the Canon of Scripture.

Secondly – WHERE does Jude mention “other” documents??
WHAT Bible are YOU reading??

Finally – it doesn’t matter ONE BIT what you think of me – YOU are not my judge.
It is the Lord who judges me – not YOU. I’m just here to squash lies . . .

 

[Willie T]

Really??
It went on for "YEARS"??

Ummmmm, can you tell me HOW MANY years? Just a ballpark number will do but I want you to provide documented, Historical proof . . .

You are a sad little man, trying so hard to rationalize a religion you worship as a god.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You are a sad little man, trying so hard to rationalize a religion you worship as a god.

TRANSLATION:
"I stuck my foot in my mouth by making a historical claim I CANNOT substantiate."

That's what I thought, Willie . . .

 

[Uisdean]

First of all – your claim is absolutely FALSE.
NOT all documents referenced in Scripture are “Scripture”.

Case in point: In Col. 4:16, Paul references a letter that he wrote to the Laodiceans. This letter is NOT part of the Canon of Scripture.

Secondly – WHERE does Jude mention “other” documents??
WHAT Bible are YOU reading??

Finally – it doesn’t matter ONE BIT what you think of me – YOU are not my judge.
It is the Lord who judges me – not YOU. I’m just here to squash lies . . .

I am not 'judging' you: I was trying to let you know that your efforts to 'squash lies' are backfiring on you. I was attempting to offer some help, since you do have some really interesting things to say.

But now you have misrepresented what I had to say. I asked a question. You refuse to answer the question, but accuse me of making a claim that I did not make. How do you even think for a second that I would be willing to accept what you say as true when you do not treat me with respect?

OH, yeah, Jude verse 6 and verses 8 & 9. The Roman Catholic translators of my copy of The Jerusalem Bible even give notes explaining in detail what these verses mean and the source material Jude used. My question remains unanswered. It is in post #114.

Finally, did you even read what I had to say in that post? I was offering support for including the Deuterocanonical Documents in Scripture. But now I think I'll just hand you some rope and let you make your own noose.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I am not 'judging' you: I was trying to let you know that your efforts to 'squash lies' are backfiring on you. I was attempting to offer some help, since you do have some really interesting things to say.

But now you have misrepresented what I had to say. I asked a question. You refuse to answer the question, but accuse me of making a claim that I did not make. How do you even think for a second that I would be willing to accept what you say as true when you do not treat me with respect?

OH, yeah, Jude verse 6 and verses 8 & 9. The Roman Catholic translators of my copy of The Jerusalem Bible even give notes explaining in detail what these verses mean and the source material Jude used. My question remains unanswered. It is in post #114.

Finally, did you even read what I had to say in that post? I was offering support for including the Deuterocanonical Documents in Scripture. But now I think I'll just hand you some rope and let you make your own noose.

Again - HOW I expose lies is not the question. It is whether or not lies were exposed – and they were.
It only “backfired” on those telling the lies.

Secondly – your claim that ALL works referenced in Scripture should be considered inspired is NOT up to you. It is up to the God-given Authority of the Church (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

Anyway – The Book of Enoch wasn’t referenced. It is exegeted by the commentator of that particular translation that it came from the Book of Enoch. For all we know – it was oral tradition that was repeated in the Book of Enoch.

There are several instances of this in the NT:
For instance - the names of Pharoah’s magicians (Jannes and Jambres) is found NOWHERE in the OT – yet we read about them in 2 Tim. 3:8.

Thirdly - if you WANT some respect - then SHOW some respect.

Finally – the decision as to whether or not you should listen to me about the Canon of Scripture is irrelevant. I’m not making anything up – it’s ALL historically documented. Whether you like me or hate me – this is the truth of history and it cannot be “changed” to suit Protestant sensibilities.

Again – I’m just a messenger . . .

 

[ScottA]

No, I've exposed YOU . . .

You accused me of "hypocrity", which is a lie:

First, tell me what Biblical term YOU would apply to your hypocrisy.

...but you cannot site any offence, and resort to name-calling and rudeness more times than not. You have provided nothing factual to back your accusations.

So you have exposed me, but only as one of the recipient of your own lies and rudeness. Which is great, because you can't help but discredit yourself. If you want to actually quote me as I have just quoted you - go ahead, keep digging that hole, go for it!

 

[BreadOfLife]

You accused me of "hypocrity", which is a lie:

...but you cannot site any offence, and resort to name-calling and rudeness more times than not. You have provided nothing factual to back your accusations.

So you have exposed me, but only as one of the recipient of your own lies and rudeness. Which is great, because you can't help but discredit yourself. If you want to actually quote me as I have just quoted you - go ahead, keep digging that hole, go for it!

YOUR hypocrisy lies in the fact that you don't defend the Catholic Church against the lies of your fellow anti-Catholics - while brow-beating ME for exposing them

That's hypocrisy and it's pathetic . . .

 

[BobRyan]

Canon issued at the IV Lateran Council in 1213 regarding Heretics:
Canon 3:
Procedure and penalties against heretics and their protectors. If those suspected of heresy should neglect to prove themselves innocent, they are excommunicated. If they continue in the excommunication for twelve months they are to be condemned as heretics. Princes are to be admonished to swear that they will banish all whom the Church points out as heretics. This canon mandates that those pointed by the Church as heretics shall be expelled by the secular authorities or they will be excommunicated if failing to do so.

Ummmmm, WHERE do you get “extermination” from “Excommunication”??

exterminate | Definition of exterminate in English by Oxford Dictionaries



verb (used with object), exterminated, exterminating.

1. to get rid of by destroying; destroy totally; extirpate:
to exterminate an enemy; to exterminate insects.

Origin of exterminate
1535-45; < Latin exterminātus, past participle of extermināre to extermine; see -ate1


hence: Jesuit university - Fordham
http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran4.asp

CANON 3
“Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and to the best of their ability to exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church; so that whenever anyone shall have assumed authority, whether spiritual or temporal, let him be bound to confirm this decree by oath. But if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province. If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff [the Pope], that he may declare the ruler's vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action. The same law is to be observed in regard to those
who have no chief rulers (that is, are independent). Catholics who have girded themselves with the cross for the extermination of the heretics, shall enjoy the indulgences and privileges granted to those who go in defense of the Holy Land.”



Catholic Digest 11/1997 pg 100
"16th century Anabaptists rejected Catholic doctrine on infant Baptism and Lutheran justification by faith, among other things, and intended to substitute a new “Kingdom of God” for the social and civil order of their time. John Leyden was proclaimed King of New Sion at Munster where museums and libraries were destroyed and polygamy was introduced. This group AND Many others were Exterminated during the Peasants Wars by a Combination of civil and religious authority. Whether they were persecuted or punished depends on your point of view”

 

[ScottA]

YOUR hypocrisy lies in the fact that you don't defend the Catholic Church against the lies of your fellow anti-Catholics - while brow-beating ME for exposing them

That's hypocrisy and it's pathetic . . .

Still not able to produce any actual facts or quotes.

But look at how you treat people, me in this case. And this you do after I have told you many times I am not anti-Catholic, and after I have even included Protestants together with Catholics in some of my criticisms.

Do I speak against the Catholics? Yes, because they are doctrinally off the rails. Does that mean I am against them? No, it means I am for them. For who warns someone who they are really against.

I am here to help. But you are here to destroy.

Thanks for nothing.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Still not able to produce any actual facts or quotes.

But look at how you treat people, me in this case. And this you do after I have told you many times I am not anti-Catholic, and after I have even included Protestants together with Catholics in some of my criticisms.

Do I speak against the Catholics? Yes, because they are doctrinally off the rails. Does that mean I am against them? No, it means I am for them. For who warns someone who they are really against.

I am here to help. But you are here to destroy.

Thanks for nothing.

Ummmmm, my "proof" is YOUR complete silence when your fellow anti-Catholics regurgitate their tired old myths and lies.

Not ONCE have I seen a single post from you correcting or reproving your fellow Catholic-haters when they accuse Catholics of:
"Cannibalism"
"Sun Worship" . . .
"Pagan" origins . . .
"Worshiping" Mary . . .
"Worshiping" statues . . .
"Worshiping" the Pope as a god, and so on . . .

When I see a post from you condemning such attacks - maybe THEN you'll have some credibility.
Until then, however, consider yourself just another ignorant, hypocritical anti-Catholic . . .

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Ummmmm, my "proof" is YOUR complete silence when your fellow anti-Catholics regurgitate their tired old myths and lies.

Not ONCE have I seen a single post from you correcting or reproving your fellow Catholic-haters when they accuse Catholics of:
"Cannibalism"
"Sun Worship" . . .
"Pagan" origins . . .
"Worshiping" Mary . . .
"Worshiping" statues . . .
"Worshiping" the Pope as a god, and so on . . .

When I see a post from you condemning such attacks - maybe THEN you'll have some credibility.
Until then, however, consider yourself just another ignorant, hypocritical anti-Catholic . . .

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

@BreadOfLife , I'm sure you've been wronged by people spouting anti lies at you. I also have a long history seeing people spouting lies about what I believe. I relate to you there all too well. But we can't go around constantly crusading and assuming everyone is a hater. Rather, to promote Christ's love, the best course of action is to turn the other cheek and forgive those that trespass us, even 70x7 times.

 

[BreadOfLife]

exterminate | Definition of exterminate in English by Oxford Dictionaries

verb (used with object), exterminated, exterminating.

1. to get rid of by destroying; destroy totally; extirpate:
to exterminate an enemy; to exterminate insects.

Origin of exterminate
1535-45; < Latin exterminātus, past participle of extermināre to extermine; see -ate1

hence: Jesuit university - Fordham
http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran4.asp

CANON 3
“Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and to the best of their ability to exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church; so that whenever anyone shall have assumed authority, whether spiritual or temporal, let him be bound to confirm this decree by oath. But if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province. If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff [the Pope], that he may declare the ruler's vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action. The same law is to be observed in regard to those
who have no chief rulers (that is, are independent). Catholics who have girded themselves with the cross for the extermination of the heretics, shall enjoy the indulgences and privileges granted to those who go in defense of the Holy Land.”

Catholic Digest 11/1997 pg 100
"16th century Anabaptists rejected Catholic doctrine on infant Baptism and Lutheran justification by faith, among other things, and intended to substitute a new “Kingdom of God” for the social and civil order of their time. John Leyden was proclaimed King of New Sion at Munster where museums and libraries were destroyed and polygamy was introduced. This group AND Many others were Exterminated during the Peasants Wars by a Combination of civil and religious authority. Whether they were persecuted or punished depends on your point of view”

Interesting . . .

Not sure where you got this text - nut it is NOT the official text of the document and seems to have been doctored.
HERE is the actual text of Canon 3 from the IV Lateran Council of 1215.
Notice that where YOUR text says "exterminate" - the ACTUAL text says "Expel" or "Expulsion" . . .

3. On Heretics
We excommunicate and anathematize every heresy raising itself up against this holy, orthodox and catholic faith which we have expounded above. We condemn all heretics, whatever names they may go under. They have different faces indeed but their tails are tied together inasmuch as they are alike in their pride. Let those condemned be handed over to the secular authorities present, or to their bailiffs, for due punishment. Clerics are first to be degraded from their orders. The goods of the condemned are to be confiscated, if they are lay persons, and if clerics they are to be applied to the churches from which they received their stipends. Those who are only found suspect of heresy are to be struck with the sword of anathema, unless they prove their innocence by an appropriate purgation, having regard to the reasons for suspicion and the character of the person. Let such persons be avoided by all until they have made adequate satisfaction. If they persist in the excommunication for a year, they are to be condemned as heretics.

Let secular authorities, whatever offices they may be discharging, be advised and urged and if necessary be compelled by ecclesiastical censure, if they wish to be reputed and held to be faithful, to take publicly an oath for the defence of the faith to the effect that they will seek, in so far as they can, to EXPEL from the lands subject to their jurisdiction all heretics designated by the church in good faith. Thus whenever anyone is promoted to spiritual or temporal authority, he shall be obliged to confirm this article with an oath. If however a temporal lord, required and instructed by the church, neglects to cleanse his territory of this heretical filth, he shall be bound with the bond of excommunication by the metropolitan and other bishops of the province. If he refuses to give satisfaction within a year, this shall be reported to the supreme pontiff so that he may then declare his vassals absolved from their fealty to him and make the land available for occupation by Catholics so that these may, after they have EXPELLED the heretics, possess it unopposed and preserve it in the purity of the faith — saving the right of the suzerain provided that he makes no difficulty in the matter and puts no impediment in the way. The same law is to be observed no less as regards those who do not have a suzerain.

Catholics who take the cross and gird themselves up for the EXPULSION of heretics shall enjoy the same indulgence, and be strengthened by the same holy privilege, as is granted to those who go to the aid of the holy Land.

 

[BreadOfLife]

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

@BreadOfLife , I'm sure you've been wronged by people spouting anti lies at you. I also have a long history seeing people spouting lies about what I believe. I relate to you there all too well. But we can't go around constantly crusading and assuming everyone is a hater. Rather, to promote Christ's love, the best course of action is to turn the other cheek and forgive those that trespass us, even 70x7 times.

It's not about revenge - it's about exposing hypocrisy and lies. There is absolutely no need for it - and lying is an offense to God.
Jesus performed no "vengeance" on the pharisees when He repeatedly exposed their hypocrisy.

I'm not here for ANY other reason than to expose anti-Catholic lies.
Yet, as you can see by my continual presence here - it is unfortunately a full-time job.

You would do better to counsel your anti-Catholic brothers and sisters here to stop violating God's commandment against bearing FALSE witness - instead of condemning ME for exposing their lies . . .

 

[ScottA]

Ummmmm, my "proof" is YOUR complete silence when your fellow anti-Catholics regurgitate their tired old myths and lies.

Not ONCE have I seen a single post from you correcting or reproving your fellow Catholic-haters when they accuse Catholics of:
"Cannibalism"
"Sun Worship" . . .
"Pagan" origins . . .
"Worshiping" Mary . . .
"Worshiping" statues . . .
"Worshiping" the Pope as a god, and so on . . .

When I see a post from you condemning such attacks - maybe THEN you'll have some credibility.
Until then, however, consider yourself just another ignorant, hypocritical anti-Catholic . . .

Your's may be a war of words, but mine is not, but of salvation. I did not come for them, but for you. It's ironic that you call me ignorant.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

It's not about revenge - it's about exposing hypocrisy and lies. There is absolutely no need for it - and lying is an offense to God.
Jesus performed no "vengeance" on the pharisees when He repeatedly exposed their hypocrisy.

I'm not here for ANY other reason than to expose anti-Catholic lies.
Yet, as you can see by my continual presence here - it is unfortunately a full-time job.

You would do better to counsel your anti-Catholic brothers and sisters here to stop violating God's commandment against bearing FALSE witness - instead of condemning ME for exposing their lies . . .

I'm trying to be reasonable and Christ-like here, and just feel like I'm getting attacked for not attacking others....

 

[Kristen Davis]

Ive read Matthew unless you mean one outside of the Bible.

The spiritual leader by Ulf Elkman, What's so amazing about grace by Phillip Yancey What on Earth am I hear for by Rick Warren, Battlefield of the mind by Joyce Meyer and The Power of a Praying Woman by Stormie Omartian

 

[BreadOfLife]

Your's may be a war of words, but mine is not, but of salvation. I did not come for them, but for you. It's ironic that you call me ignorant.

The only irony here is YOUR hypocrisy.
I have exposed your Achille's Heel, so to speak . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

I'm trying to be reasonable and Christ-like here, and just feel like I'm getting attacked for not attacking others....

Why do you feel I'm "attacking" you??
All I said is that you would do better to counsel your anti-Catholic Protestant brethren to stop lying instead of attacking ME for exposing them.

I didn't accuse YOU of anything . . .