Proof that Catholics revere the Old Testament

[sanabas]

2) The second, and probably more important point, is that Catholicism does not solely rest on the bible, unlike many forms of Protestantism. Thus, the idea that they pick and choose what's important in the bible is irrelevant as a criticism, because Catholics do not have the same premise as many Protestants - that is, only the bible is acceptable as a justification for Christianity.

Of course it's a valid criticism. As long as they're using 'because the bible says so' as an argument for or against anything, then the fact that they arbitrarily pick and choose when it is allowable to use 'because the bible says so' is a valid criticism. It only becomes irrelevant when they no longer give rules or arguments more weight just because they are presented in the bible, or when they give every rule & argument presented in the bible more weight. Criticising any religion for the way it uses the bible in support of its arguments is independent of any other arguments it might use.

 

[Bill3000]

Of course it's a valid criticism. As long as they're using 'because the bible says so' as an argument for or against anything, then the fact that they arbitrarily pick and choose when it is allowable to use 'because the bible says so' is a valid criticism. It only becomes irrelevant when they no longer give rules or arguments more weight just because they are presented in the bible, or when they give every rule & argument presented in the bible more weight. Criticising any religion for the way it uses the bible in support of its arguments is independent of any other arguments it might use.

Point taken, but my point is that unlike Protestantism, Catholicism isn't completely based on passages from the Bible.

As well, do you really think that the average catholic knows enough knowledge in catholic theology to answer why the Catholic position is the way it is? It's the reason why I hate "Ask a..." threads, because at the end, it's amateurs you're asking, not, say, Jesuits. It's like trying to ask a high school student what quantum mechanics is as opposed to a physicist - it's not an appropriate question that can be answered by that person. Of course, you could argue whether or not the appeal to authority is justified (It's why dogma has such an negative connotation, after all), but eh, whatever.

 

[sanabas]

As well, do you really think that the average catholic knows enough knowledge in catholic theology to answer why the Catholic position is the way it is?

No, but I expect them to be able to answer why their own position is the way it is.

It's the reason why I hate "Ask a..." threads, because at the end, it's amateurs you're asking, not, say, Jesuits. It's like trying to ask a high school student what quantum mechanics is as opposed to a physicist - it's not an appropriate question that can be answered by that person. Of course, you could argue whether or not the appeal to authority is justified (It's why dogma has such an negative connotation, after all), but eh, whatever.

I agree with you to a point, but I think the appeal to religious authority (i.e. I think this because the catholic catechism says so) is just as silly as the appeal to biblical authority by a parish priest. If you're going to accept appeal to a particular authority as valid on some points, but not others, then I think you should be criticised for it.

 

[Bill3000]

I agree with you to a point, but I think the appeal to religious authority (i.e. I think this because the catholic catechism says so) is just as silly as the appeal to biblical authority by a parish priest. If you're going to accept appeal to a particular authority as valid on some points, but not others, then I think you should be criticised for it.

Perhaps, but a lot of people stay in Catholicism because it's such a strong cohesive force, as well as more importantly that it is tradition. While it certinatly isn't anything like Judaism in which it can be considered an ethnicity where you can follow the traditions without following the religion, I believe there is a similar force which allows many Catholics to stay within the religion while having differing opinions on some manners than the orthodox belief. Some people simply don't think that schism is the right answer.

 

[sanabas]

Perhaps, but a lot of people stay in Catholicism because it's such a strong cohesive force, as well as more importantly that it is tradition. While it certinatly isn't anything like Judaism in which it can be considered an ethnicity where you can follow the traditions without following the religion, I believe there is a similar force which allows many Catholics to stay within the religion while having differing opinions on some manners than the orthodox belief. Some people simply don't think that schism is the right answer.

Fair enough. But I would expect that those who stay within catholocism despite having different opinions on some topics would be far less likely to use an appeal to religious authority as a justification. They might agree with the religious authority, but they don't automatically agree because the religious authority says so. Then there are those who disagree with the orthodox belief, but follow the orthodox belief over their own, because they do automatically accept the religious authority. I used to call bingo, one lady who was ~70, and also the mother of two of my high school teachers, was a catholic, and had been all her life. She disagreed with the catholic church's stance on contraception, but she never used contraception, because she accepted the religious authority's position as the right one, no matter what her own opinion was. So she had 9 kids.

 

[Dovster]

Judaism, even in the days of Jesus, taught that some commandments (eg: not to murder) were meant for all of mankind while others (eg: not eating pork) were binding only on Jews.

Jesus, who had no intention of starting a new religion, said that he did not come to change the Law but to fulfill it. His earliest followers considered themselves to be Jewish and obeyed all of the laws of the Old Testament.

At that point, Paul introduced a new concept to Christianity: It was possible to be a Christian without being a Jew. It was crucial to Paul to have this accepted because it meant it would be much easier for him to get converts from the non-Jewish world. Rules concerning kosher food and being circumcised, for example, could be ignored -- they applied to Jews only.

Other church leaders fought with Paul about this. Eventually, a compromise was reached: Jewish Christians would have to obey all of the laws of the Old Testament but the church would recognize a sort of "second class Christianity", composed of non-Jewish converts, and they would be exempt from these laws.

It did not take long before the non-Jewish converts greatly outnumbered the Jewish Christians and were no longer "second class Christians". They took control of the church and made their rules the rules for all Christians -- whether Jewish or not.

(Quickly following that, both Jews and Christians no longer recognized any Christians as being Jews.)

One Jewish concept that the Christianity accepted was that not all the laws of the Old Testament were applicable to non-Christians. Of course, Christianity itself decided which were, and which were not, meant for them.

The Church did, indeed, decide to keep the bans on homosexuality which were in Leviticus.

 

[bathsheba666]

Am I missing something here.

Even the catholics call it Papal Bull, don't they?

 

[GenMarshall]

Some Catholics and Christians of other denominations have actually made the bizarre statement that Christianity doesn't need to follow the Old Testament. Well, I have proof that this is false. Since I'm most familiar with Catholicism, I'll speak about that.

Cant the bashing on Catholicism ever end?

Exhibit A: Catholics shun homosexuality

No, Catholics do not shun homosexuals just because of the sin of homosexuality. The Church respects and loves the homosexual the same as it does the heterosexual. Catholicism teaches that the homosexual must be treated with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Any act, thought of hatered, violence, or persecution towards the homosexual is condemned. I dont know where you dig that BS that Catholics shun homosexuals. Ever heard of love the sinner but hate the sin? Its the same thing when I have a friend who smokes, I dont like smoking but it does not mean that I am not going to like that person just because he smokes. Even Jesus ate with sinners too.

Exhibit B: Homosexuality is proscribed explicitly in the Old Testament.

As does the New Testiment, however once again (and I am tired of constantly jamming this into ignorant minds) The Hebrew Laws that were not reaffirmed by Jesus are not in effect in the New Testiment. Plus Catholics dont adhear strictly to the Bible like Protestants do (Sola Scripture). Catholic rely on both Sacred Scripture AND Sacred Tradition.

Exhibit C: Jesus never spoke about homosexuality.

Sorry, but he did, in Mark 10:6-9 Jesus himself used the same quotations found in Genesis 1:27-28 and 2:24. Eventhough you dont see Jesus explicidly said that. Also Mark 7:20-23 (As Pug pointed out) is also statements about sexual imorality. The catholic (*Little "c" catholic) letters which in include letters written by St. Paul goes more into detail about it.

*catholic (The little "c" variant): Means universal. Not to be confused with the word "Catholic" which comes to be known as the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[JollyRoger]

It was certainly specific to the Jews. They grew up on these laws against sexual immorality, one of many laws to keep Israel pure.

So if laws regarding sexual immorality were designed for the purpose of keeping Israel pure, then why would they apply to a non-Israeli who's sexual acts have nothing to do with keeping Israel pure?

 

[Red Door]

Some Catholics and Christians of other denominations have actually made the bizarre statement that Christianity doesn't need to follow the Old Testament. Well, I have proof that this is false. Since I'm most familiar with Catholicism, I'll speak about that.

Exhibit A: Catholics shun homosexuality

Exhibit B: Homosexuality is proscribed explicitly in the Old Testament.

Exhibit C: Jesus never spoke about homosexuality.

BLAM! NAILED IT! NAILED IT! Woo woo! *does moronic dance typical of football players after making a touchdown*

Stick that in your pipe and inhale it.

Mm-mm-mm, smells like BS to me.

Exhibit A: Half True, homosexual sex is shunned only.
Exhibit B: True
Exhibit C: See CivG's scriptures.

Ah wait, you didn't tell the whole story did you? That's what I thought.

The CCC, the real source of guidance for the Catholic Church prohibits both homosexual sex and sex outside of marriage, which homosexuals cannot do (get married.) I believe you need a new pipe, I'll send it to you.

 

[Stylesjl]

Why does sexual immorality concern homosexuaity? It is only the interpretation of later religions. Find me a verse where Jesus directly condemns homosexuality

Edit: If homoseuxal sex is forcination. Then why are Catholics against gay marriage?

 

[Red Door]

Why does sexual immorality concern homosexuaity? It is only the interpretation of later religions. Find me a verse where Jesus directly condemns homosexuality

Edit: If homoseuxal sex is forcination. Then why are Catholics against gay marriage?

Because it is not natural according to the Church of Rome, the ultimate source of knowledge from God. Once again, Catholics look at more than the Bible for their rules and other stuff.

Most Catholics aren't against gay marriage (I aren't for sure), but I suppose the reason the Church is against it is that marriage is defined as a relationship between a man and a woman.

 

[warpus]

Mm-mm-mm, smells like BS to me.

Exhibit A: True.

Exhibit B: True

Exhibit C: True, as far as we can tell.

Ah wait, you didn't tell the whole story did you? That's what I thought.

The CCC, the real source of guidance for the Catholic Church prohibits both homosexual sex and sex outside of marriage, which homosexuals cannot do (get married.) I believe you need a new pipe, I'll send it to you.

So from your point of view Protestant Christians do not have a valid case against homosexuality?

 

[PrincepsAmerica]

Am I missing something here.

Even the catholics call it Papal Bull, don't they?

This is a bad joke and you should feel bad.

 

[Red Door]

So from your point of view Protestant Christians do not have a valid case against homosexuality?

Nope. I never mention Protestant Christians. I mentioned Catholics only since that's what the OP is about. If a Protestant can explain their reasoning, that'd be great.

 

[bathsheba666]

This is a bad joke and you should feel bad.

I should also feel Cameron Diaz, but I don't.

 

[PrincepsAmerica]

I should also feel Cameron Diaz, but I don't.

Now tell us how you just flew in and boy are your arms tired.

 

[bathsheba666]

Now tell us how you just flew in and boy are your arms tired.

I suspect you're missing the underlying point.

 

[puglover]

So if laws regarding sexual immorality were designed for the purpose of keeping Israel pure, then why would they apply to a non-Israeli who's sexual acts have nothing to do with keeping Israel pure?

Because with the abolition of the Old Covenant there is neither Jew nor Gentile, for all Christians are God's children, with all the mercy and responsiblities that includes.

Why does sexual immorality concern homosexuaity? It is only the interpretation of later religions. Find me a verse where Jesus directly condemns homosexuality

Because to Jesus didn't need to elaborate to a Jewish audience well-versed in law what exactly sexual immorality included. They already knew. Look back in the Old Testament if you want details.