Ask a Catholic

[seaofnails]

Hey there - Meriwether


Thanks for taking a quick moment to respond to my post.

You clarify your Catholic claim that ONLY some Protestant English Translations are not approved because of inaccuracies and ERRORS

I do understand what you are claiming, yet this Catholic CLAIM lacks truth and reality.

the fact is - ALL of these English translations except for the 1394 Wycliffe Bible contradict the Catholic Translations.

1394 * Wycliffe Bible. This Translation ALONE - Completely agrees with the Catholic Translations.
WHY ?

1531 Tyndale Bible.
1535 Coverdale Bible.
1537 Matthew Bible.
1539 Great Bible.
1560 Geneva Bible.
1568 Bishops' Bible.
1582 Catholic Douay Rheims Bible translation.

1611 King James Bible.

ALL OF THESE TRANSLATIONS except for the * Wycliffe Bible , - contradicts and they are all different from
the Catholic Douay Rheims Bible translation of 1582.

The 1394 * John Wycliffe Bible perfectly aligns and agrees PERFECTLY with the Catholic Translations.
The 1394 * Wycliffe Bible - also, has the heel of the woman breaking the head of the serpent.
{ her heel shall be bruised / her heel shall break the serpents head.

The reason that the John Wycliffe Bible perfectly agrees with the Catholic Translations was because he Translated the Old Testament from the Catholic Latin Vulgate. Wycliffe studied at Oxford University and learned Latin and Greek. - not Hebrew

AND Wycliffe HAD NO GREEK MANUSCRIPTS. - only the Catholic Latin was available to him.

Jerome's Latin Vulgate was the only source material to which he had access.

The FACT is - the only differences between these Protestant Translations and the Douay Rheims are ONLY / ONLY contradicting and differing upon ””“ KEY DOCTRINAL PASSAGES “”“

ONLY the - principles of faith that differ, disagree and variant between Protestant and Roman Catholics are where these Protestant Translations are different from the Catholic Translation.

The Wycliffe and Catholic Translations both do not have the Hebrew word “ BOW DOWN “ referring to all of the commandments forbidding to Bow Down to images.

Exo 20:5, Exo 23:24, Num_25:2, Lev 26:1, Deu 5:9, Jos 23:7, Jos 24:12, Jdg 2:19, Psa 22:29, Psa 22:29, Psa 72:9, Pro 14:19, Isa 10:, Isa 49:23, Isa 58:5, Isa 60:14, 2Ki 5:18, 2Ki_17:35, Job 39:3, Psa 31:2, Psa 95:6, Psa 144:5, Isa 10:4, Isa 45:23, Isa 51:23, Rom 11:10, Deut 5:9, Jos_23:7, Jos_23:16, Jdg_2:12, Jdg_2:17, Jdg_2:19, 2Ch_25:14

In over 32 verses the Hebrew manuscripts are commanding = do not bow down to Images and Idols

The Catholic Translations, never once “ NEVER ONCE “ mentions the “ “ DIRECT COMMANDMENT “ to not “ BOW DOWN “ to images and Idols - - The John Wycliffe Bible says “ do not worship images “ and the Catholic translations delete the Hebrew word BOW DOWN and remove this word and change it to the word “ adore “ saying - do not ADORE images..
The Wycliffe Bible does not contradict the Catholic Translations - Wycliffe translates “ do not worship Images “ and does not use the Hebrew word Lev 26:1 Make no idols nor graven image, ........... to bow down = שָׁחָה - shâchâh - bow down:

The Hebrew word - שָׁחָה - shâchâh - shâchâh - shaw-khaw' - Meaning = To depress, prostrate - to bow down, to crouch, fall down (flat), to stoop down.

This word is deleted nearly 40 times in the Douay Rheims Translation in every single last instance involving images and Idols, the word is deleted " bow down " is simply replaced with the word - " adore " -

But yet, the Catholic translators use and translate this same exact word as " bow down " for what it means in their translation - but they only use it as - " bow down " only when the word is not mentioned or connected with images and idols.__

Yet the Protestant translators after The Wycliffe Bible do have “ BOW DOWN “ in their translation.

The Catholic Translation deleted and literally removed “ BOW DOWN “ in the translation and Catholics simply put the word “ ADORE “ and Wycliffe translated it as WORSHIP -

There is not a single verse in the Catholic Translation that commands anyone to - NOT “ BOW DOWN “ to images or idols. Not a single verse

The Wycliffe bible perfectly agrees with the Catholic Translations. The Wycliffe bible translates Mary as being FULL OF GRACE

The Wycliffe bible translates “ GIVE US OUR DAILY BREAD “ very similar as the Catholic Translation has it ‘
Catholic Translation - Mat 6:11 Give us this day our SUPER SUBSTANTIAL bread.
Wycliffe translation - Mat 6:11 Give to us this day our bread, our other substance.

These are the “ KEY DOCTRINAL “ principles of faith, THAT ARE DIFFERENT IN THE TRANSLATIONS BETWEEN THE PROTESTANT AND ROMAN CATHOLIC TRINITARIAN TRANSLATORS.

OUTSIDE OF THESE THREE DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES

- the Catholic and Protestant Bibles are completely nearly and exactly identical - a word for word exact duplicated COPY CAT, nearly exactly and identical.

The rest of these Bible are relying upon the AVAILABLE Original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts .

These translations
1535 Coverdale Bible.
1537 Matthew Bible.
1539 Great Bible.
1560 Geneva Bible.
1568 Bishops' Bible

The reason the * The Wycliffe Bible did not contradict the Catholic Vulgate was because * The Wycliffe Bible was the Latin Vulgate, translated into English. No Greek and Hebrew manuscripts were available John Wycliffe.

The contradictions and differences between Protestant and Catholic Bibles are ONLY the “ KEY DOCTRINAL “ principles of faith, BETWEEN PROTESTANT AND ROMAN CATHOLICS

OUTSIDE OF THESE THREE DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES - - the Catholic and Protestant Bibles are nearly exactly identical - word for word, an exact duplicated COPY CAT, nearly exactly and identical.

AND BOTH PROTESTANT AND CATHOLIC TRINITARIANS TRANSLATIONS - THEY ALL ARE FILLED WITH THOUSANDS OF MISTRANSLATED PASSAGES - ADDED WORDS, - DELETED AND CHANGED WORDS AND A TOTAL CHAGING AND ALTERING OF THE NARRATIVE OF THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE OF THE BIBLE.

Remember - the Protestant translators began translating directly from the Roman Catholic Latin vulgate

they then, begin slowly changing their Translations - but they only changed these translations based upon these THREE DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES

Outside of these differences between the Catholic and Protestant faiths - the TRINITARIAN TRANSLATIONS ARE ALL BASED UPON THE LATIN VULGATE and then converted over to make final changes based upon the Roman Catholic Douay Rheims of 1582.

The KJV is an exact duplicated copy of the Roman Catholic Douay Rheims of 1582 - exactly word for word.

Only in differences between the two - are of faith and doctrines - concerning Images and idols and Mary

Look at the KJV and the Roman Catholic Douay Rheims of 1582 - you cannot tell the difference between the two - until Mary and Idols are mentioned.

I contend that Catholic and Protestant Trinitarian truly have no manuscript for their faith - and their dishonesty and lack of knowledge based upon fact only forces them to change the topic and create diversions.

Catholics and Protestants agree upon 99.9 % within their translations.

 

[ding]

And who said Jews and atheists don't evangelize.

 

[ding]

I contend that Catholic and Protestant Trinitarian truly have no manuscript for their faith - and their dishonesty and lack of knowledge based upon fact only forces them to change the topic and create diversions.

24,000 + written manuscripts say otherwise.

 

[BreezeWood]

24,000 + written manuscripts say otherwise.

.
only the 1st century religious itinerant in their own writings could make such a claim, trinity for which their are no documents available - and is proof of a fully fallacious rendering by the 4th century scribes to verify their overall mischaracterization of the 1st century events.

 

[ding]

.
only the 1st century religious itinerant in their own writings could make such a claim, trinity for which their are no documents available - and is proof of a fully fallacious rendering by the 4th century scribes to verify their overall mischaracterization of the 1st century events.

24,000 + written manuscripts say otherwise.

 

[BreezeWood]

24,000 + written manuscripts say otherwise.

.
well not one written by the 1st century religious itinerant - the others are all copies - what's your point or rather is there a better distraction to prove the hopeless point for your unfounded inaccuracy.

 

[ding]

.
well not one written by the 1st century religious itinerant - the others are all copies - what's your point or rather is there a better distraction to prove the hopeless point for your unfounded inaccuracy.

24,000 + written manuscripts

That's a lot of manuscripts.

 

[Meriweather]

You clarify your Catholic claim that ONLY some Protestant English Translations are not approved because of inaccuracies and ERRORS

Don't be silly. I did not say some Protestant English translations--I said some English translations were not approved by the Catholic Church. For all I know, many Catholics were also trying to make a quick buck with quick, but poorer translations.

 

[BreezeWood]

24,000 + written manuscripts

That's a lot of manuscripts.

.
too bad, not one original document or a single one written by the 1st century religious itinerant - a religion for deceivers - bing.

 

[Colin norris]

You're telling me that the VATICAN favors Joe Biden — an imposter who forced his way into the Oval Office with a violent coup d'état on a stolen election — over the populist president Donald Trump — who worked closely and faithfully for many years with a Catholic Advisory Committee?

A violent coup and stole the election???
There's no evidence of either.
You're just a bitter hate filled brain dead Republican.

 

[seaofnails]

I noticed that the Catholic Latin Vulgate did not delete the word " God " when translating Gen 30:8


The Latin Vulgate translates Gen 30:8 - as

Gen 30:8 For whom Rachel said: God hath compared me with my sister, and I have prevailed: and she called him Nephthali.

AND - The Protestant K.J.V translates Gen 30:8 - as

Gen 30:8 And Rachel said, With great wrestlings have I wrestled with my sister, and I have prevailed: and she called his name Naphtali.

Here, the Hebrew word “ אֱלֹהִים - el-o-heem' “ GOD “ is the word in the Hebrew manuscripts.

GEN 30:8 ותאמר SAID - רחל RACHEL,, - נפתולי ENTWINED HAS - אלהים ELOHEEM / GOD - נפתלתי ENTWINED ME - עם WITH - אחתי MY SISTER,, - גם ALSO - יכלתי I CAN - ותקרא CALL - שׁמו HIS NAME - נפתלי׃ NAFTALI.

We notice that in order to alter and change the passage, the Protestants had to delete the word " GOd "

the Catholic translation translates the word God but also changes the passage to say something different that what the original manuscript says.

 

[Meriweather]

I noticed that the Catholic Latin Vulgate did not delete the word " God " when translating Gen 30:8

Neither the Latin nor the King James translation does justice to the Hebrew.

Rachel was Jacob's preferred bride, but Rachel chose to do right by both her Father and sister and allowed Jacob to be deceived into marrying Leah, which Rachel believed was the right thing to do, and that she would be rewarded. Instead, Rachel appeared to be incurring punishment, and Rachel thought this appearance was unfair, a misconception of what truly was. She fought to change this misconception. With the birth of the second son by her handmaiden, she was considered absolved.

A better translation of the Hebrew: “A contest of God, a fateful contest I waged [naftulei … niftalti] with my sister; yes, and I have prevailed.” And so the second son was named Naphtali. We see that Rachel saw the circumstances of hers and Leah's lives as a divine contest or reckoning. She saw herself denying herself to help her sister, but she expected this sacrifice to be noted and recognized. Indeed Rachel was recognized in future scriptures (Rachel crying for her children, etc.) She became one of the matriarchs.

 

[BreezeWood]

I noticed that the Catholic Latin Vulgate did not delete the word " God " when translating Gen 30:8

Neither the Latin nor the King James translation does justice to the Hebrew.

.
just flying by the seat of their pants ... * whatever is most convenient - for their own worldviews.

not so the prescribed, spoken religion of antiquity recorded through history for true veracity from all locations of planet Earth. the great floods.

 

[danielpalos]

...does it seem that right-wingers merely; Doth protest too much?

 

[seaofnails]

The fact is - the Trinitarian translators completely rewrite the entire narrative concerning Jacob and his four wives.

The Bible never says that Jacob hated Leah - this is another Trinitarian deception. It simply says that Leah hated the fact that she was barren - and God healed her womb.

The word that Trinitarians claim is describing Jacob loving Rachel MORE than Leah - this Hebrew word has nothing to do with the word MORE

This Hebrew word simply means From or / Out Of.

And Jacob loved ALSO Rachel From / Out Of Leah, - and served another seven years.

A man has two wives, he loves ALSO the second wife from or out of the first wife

 

[danielpalos]

Is there any procedure for petitioning a Pope for a contingent of subject matter specialists who may Inquire into the veracity of any dispute among persons of morals?

 

[Meriweather]

Is there any procedure for petitioning a Pope for a contingent of subject matter specialists who may Inquire into the veracity of any dispute among persons of morals?

Do you have something specific in mind? Off hand I cannot think of why a person cannot resolve most moral issues by going to their local parish.

As a rule of thumb among disagreements (for example the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary) it all starts at the local level--"from the pew", is is often called. If there is disagreement among parishes, then it goes to the diocese (Bishop) to resolve; but when the disagreement spans more than one diocese, then it goes to the Archdiocese and the Archbishop. From there it goes to the Cardinals. All along the way (including with Cardinals) everyday parishioners are the ones who meet to discuss the issue and make their case/recommendations. Let's say at this point despite the years, decades, even a century passing, the Cardinals cannot come to an agreement either. Here it goes to the Pope, the ultimate tiebreaker. His decision becomes "infallible" meaning that it is over and done throughout time. (i.e., the next Pope cannot reverse the decision, which then again could be reversed by future popes and so on and so forth).

Most Catholics understand "infallible" refers to a decision that affects the entire Church for all time. Many non-Catholics think it means Popes are infallible--hardly the case.

Note the process. It starts with the people and continues with the people all the way through the Cardinals. When it cannot be resolved among the people, only then it goes to the Pope. I think there has only been two or three instances where this has occurred.

 

[danielpalos]

Politics.

 

[Meriweather]

Politics.

Not sure what you mean by this, because the process I outlined is from the pew, the people, not from the hierarchy. Perhaps you are thinking of something more political in nature?

 

[Meriweather]

Politics.

A current issue that does involve politics involves those in elected government positions (Pelosi and Biden for example, but by no means the only ones) who claim to be Catholic while pushing in the public square more and more for abortion and even taxpayer funded abortion.

Many Catholics believe such officials who claim to be Catholic while publicly favoring legislation that ends life through either abortion or euthanasia should be denied the Sacrament of Communion because they are clearly promoting that which is outside Catholic teaching.

The Pope has indicated he is not in favor of denying such public officials Holy Communion, which some point out is also outside Church teaching. This pope is not among the more popular popes. Still, he is not among the least popular ones, either.