/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

No. Read your Bible–God didn't give Moses numbers.

CCC 2066 reads: “The division and numbering of the Commandments have varied in the course of history. The present catechism follows the division of the Commandments established by St. Augustine, which has become traditional in the Catholic Church. It is also that of the Lutheran confessions. The Greek Fathers worked out a slightly different division, which is found in the Orthodox Churches and Reformed communities.” 

>>539398

Did this need its own thread?

>>539398

First of all, your pic is judaistic in nature as its butthurt over shabbat bring change to Lord's day.

Second of all, your pic is biased for if it you look at Catechism you will see this:

"You shall have no other gods before me.

You shall not make for yourself a graven image, &c."

and "Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. &c."

and finally "You shall not covet your neighbor's house;

you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, &c."

See for yourself http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/command.htm

Third of all, version presented on left is not biblical ethier for it don't have "I am the LORD your God…" part. It's Origen's version.

Fourth of all, Catholic follow numbering of St.Augustine for good reason. As St. Thomas explains in his summa there were different ways to approach "Ten words" for there were no verses (and no spaces between words ethier iirc) in orginal Torah. Hence:

>Hesychius exludes Sabbath obligation from decaloge, gives "I am the Lord…" as first then "Thou shall not have other gods…" then "Thou shall not make greven images" then "Thou shall not take name…" and for last he gaves "Thou shall not covet"

<But it's not right since Sabbath obligation was between other percepts and first two have the same nature really

>So Origen unites two and rest is given as Hesychius

<However, the making of graven things or the likeness of anything is not forbidden except as to the point of their being worshipped as gods–for God commanded an image of the Cherubim to be made and placed in the tabernacle, as related in Exodus 25:18

>So Augustine unites "Thou shall not have other gods" with "Thou shall not make images"

>Likewise to covet another's wife, for the purpose of carnal knowledge, belongs to the concupiscence of the flesh; whereas, to covet other things, which are desired for the purpose of possession, belongs to the concupiscence of the eyes; wherefore Augustine reckons as distinct precepts, that which forbids the coveting of another's goods, and that which prohibits the coveting of another's wife.

Thus he distinguishes three precepts as referring to God, and seven as referring to our neighbor. And this is better, for Three is for Trinity while Seven is number of perfection.

Read whole article, it's great: http://www.newadvent.org/summa/2100.htm#article4

>>539417

>changed the times (Gregorian calendar)

Gregorian calendar is just Julian calendar that works. And surprise - neither is one thn Daniel used

>changed God's Laws

<Said one that focus only a subset of one commandment even though their entire belief denies their salvific value

>changed sabbath day

Sabbath is still here on Saturday. But it was ceremonial percept so it was made void and sin in Christ. Moral obligation remained, price the day of Lord, eight day of week!

>call the pope Holy Father

We call every priest and almost all monks Father and every Bishop Holy

>slaughtered Christians

Most of them were Catholic

>Catholicucks worship the antichrist.

No you :DD

>>539435

>We call every priest and almost all monks Father

"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."

- Jesus

>>539437

How do I explain this to my mother's husband?

>>539438

It probably means call no religious keader "father" sunce it cimpares it to the Father and it says "father and mother" and "father Abraham" in the Bible. He meant something by it.

>>539437

>>539438

Untranslated latin or bust.

>>539437

"Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee."

- Also Jesus

Clearly, "father" has more than one meaning.

>>539438

Father can refer to biological or spiritual. If you aren't talking about a biological father, you are talking about your spiritual Father.

>What about 1 Corinthians 4:15

That's in line with 1 Timothy 5:1 and Philippians 2:22. It's being treated as a father and treated as sons (see 1 Corinthians 4:14). It is not claiming to be that, much less presuming it as a title, which is what Jesus warned about.

>>539444

Whenever the apostles quote it, they refer to it as "thou shalt not covet,"

>What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

>For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

They are treating "thou shalt not covet" as a singular command. Makes no sense if it's actually multiple commandments

>>539467

>It is not claiming to be that, much less presuming it as a title, which is what Jesus warned about.

And you do know, that Catholics usen it in the same sense that Paul does?

Morover the same precepts is against calling someone teacher (which is what Paul calls himself, 2 Timothy 1:11) and master (which Paul tells Hebrews to be, Hebrews 5:12). Not to mention it's "call no man father" no "call no-others-than-your-father father"

The true meaning of those pasagges is that our Father in heaven is incomparably more to be regarded, than any father upon earth: and no master is to be followed, who would lead us away from Christ. But this does not hinder but that we are by the law of God to have a due respect both for our parents and spiritual fathers, (1 Corinthians iv. 15,) and for our masters and teachers.

Nothing is here forbidden but the contentious divisions, and self-assumed authority, of such as make themselves leaders and favourers of schisms and sects; as Donatus, Arius, Luther, Calvin, and innumerable others of very modern date. But by no means the title of father, attributed by the faith, piety, and confidence of good people, to their directors; for, St. Paul tells the Corinthians, that he is their only spiritual Father: If you have 10,000 instructors in Christ, yet not many Fathers. (1 Corinthians iv. 15.)

And finally this name, father, was a title of dignity: the presidents of the assembly of twenty-three judges where so called; the second judge of the sanhedrim, &c.

>>539474

Read thread before you post

Objection 3. Further, the Apostle says (Romans 7:7): "I had not known concupiscence, if the Law did not say: 'Thou shalt not covet.'" Hence it seems that this precept, "Thou shalt not covet," is one precept; and, therefore, should not be divided into two.

Reply to Objection 3. All covetousness has one common ratio: and therefore the Apostle speaks of the commandment about covetousness as though it were one. But because there are various special kinds of covetousness, therefore Augustine distinguishes different prohibitions against coveting: for covetousness differs specifically in respect of the diversity of actions or things coveted, as the Philosopher says (Ethic. x, 5). (See also 1 John 2:16)

Next time post questions like this in QTDDTOT.

>>491187

>>539493

>Morover the same precepts is against calling someone teacher (which is what Paul calls himself, 2 Timothy 1:11)

The same precepts are against calling anyone Rabbi and calling anyone master, except for Christ. Teach isn't mentioned.

>and master (which Paul tells Hebrews to be, Hebrews 5:12).

Hebrews 5:12 says teacher and it's still a different word in the originals as well.

All you're doing here is looking for an excuse to say Matthew 23:9 means nothing. Your arguments are all meant to prove Matthew 23:9 means nothing.

>a due respect both for our parents and spiritual fathers

>spiritual fathers

You do the works of your fathers then. I will continue to glorify my Father only.

>Nothing is here forbidden but […]

Yeah, the rest of what you wrote is just a filler statement that really makes no sense to the passage or its context. The passage is about not bestowing certain titles. You are merely negating Jesus' statement in Matthew 23; you are actually saying "Nothing is here forbidden." Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered.

>If you have 10,000 instructors in Christ, yet not many Fathers.

And he also says in 1 Timothy 5:1 to intreat an elder as a father. Not to call him by that title. By which titles much deception has now been brought to this world. People being called "fathers" in opposition to the words of Jesus Christ have even led away from the teachings of Paul as warned in Acts 20:30-31.

>And finally this name, father, was a title of dignity: the presidents of the assembly of twenty-three judges where so called; the second judge of the sanhedrim, &c.

Wrongly.

>>539696

He has to do what he is doing, lest he have to say the title of pope is reprehensible.