The book of Judith should not be in scripture at all. Though a woman slashing off a man's head is a great idea.read his prologue on the book of judith.
The book of Judith should not be in scripture at all. Though a woman slashing off a man's head is a great idea.read his prologue on the book of judith.
false: the assumption of Mary is NOT found in the Bibleall catholic doctrine is found explicitly and implicitly in the bible.
You have nothing, as usual.read his prologue on the book of judith.
There is no parallel between Isa 22 and Matt 16. There is a parallel with Isa 22, its just not in Matt its Rev 3.verses please to support your point. i suggest reading the verses in isaiah22 and see the parallel in matt16 for the meaning of the 'keys'.
None of it is in the bible. Where is this 'office' of the papacy? I can find deacon, elder and overseer but where is the highest office in the land, allegedly? Of course you won't answer. You just plop down claims you can't back up then go missing for two weeks.all catholic doctrine is found explicitly and implicitly in the bible.
The Catholic Church has the OT Canon wrong:we have the original bible (73 books) while you took out 7 books which you think is not in line with your theology.
You're asking for proof from the wrong person. You'll never get it. They make claims, they never back them up.The Catholic Church has the OT Canon wrong:
The Catholic Church has added Greek writings to the OT that neither Jesus, the Apostles, or the NT authors considered God-breathed.
Prove me wrong!!
Show us anywhere where Jesus, the Apostles, or the NT authors referenced your deuterocanonical books as Theopnuestros
(And if you don't believe them, just ask them!)all catholic doctrine is found explicitly and implicitly in the bible.
Using a tent peg like Jael (Jdg 4) is a lot less messy!The book of Judith should not be in scripture at all. Though a woman slashing off a man's head is a great idea.
fyi, the originals were long gone that even the scrolls are just copies of the original writings and the dead sea scrolls include copies of the deuterocanonicals like sirach, tobit, and baruch.Who cares. No need for a book of the writings at all. The scrolls will do. We know the books Jesus and the apostles referred to. I am surprised you do. Your institution couldn't give us anything at all. It is a false church.
even martin luther have the deuterocanonicals in his first german translation of the bible. it is also in the first bible to be printed, the gutenburg bible. it was the Edinburgh Committee of the British Foreign Bible Society that excluded the deuterocanonicals in 1825.You have the original nothing. You don't own the word of God. Your book includes non scriptural writing.s.
not really. if you go to the catechism footnotes, you will find the bible verses that explain the doctrine/teaching.(And if you don't believe them, just ask them!)
Implicitly and explicitly? If all catholic doctrine is found explicitly in the bible why do you RCs have so much trouble pointing it out?
because you already assume that your interpretaions are always correct and ours are always wrong.then you should be able to post the verses, so go ahead and do that here.
all the catholic's 'we can assumes', perhaps, might be, could be, possibly, blah, blah, blah do not count. no verbal mutilations of the RCC count either.
as mentioned several times, only god is infallible but it does not mean he cannot give the gift of infallibility to men. an example are the writers of the bible. if they were not given the gift of infallibility, for sure the bible will have errors on faith and morals.it's only infallible if it is God's word. the RCC does not believe or teach God's word. No man anywhere at any time is or was infallible.
it was scripture always but not the bible old and new testament books in one volume) as we have it today.it was still scripture before it was put together in book form.
or do you think it wasn't scripture prior to that?
the RCC had nothing to do with what is written in scripture.
the Dead Sea Scrolls also include marriage records, land ownerships , and recipes.fyi, the originals were long gone that even the scrolls are just copies of the original writings and the dead sea scrolls include copies of the deuterocanonicals like sirach, tobit, and baruch.
the dogma of the assumption of mary is implicitly found in john’s description of the woman in revelation 12.false: the assumption of Mary is NOT found in the Bible
we have been through this:the dogma of the assumption of mary is implicitly found in john’s description of the woman in revelation 12.
yes, 25% are jewish biblical texts; 27% are general jewish texts; 38% are sectarian texts; 11% are unclassified. we owe jewish and catholic scholars for the publication of the dead sea scrolls.the Dead Sea Scrolls also include marriage records, land ownerships , and recipes.