Due to weather related issues, in some areas there may be delayed deliveries of your Monday issue of the NewsTribune.
If road conditions are severe enough, your delivery person may not be able to deliver your NewsTribune at all on Monday.
In this case, your Monday edition will be delivered with your Tuesday newspaper.
We ask you to be understanding for the safety of our carriers.
4/2/2013 9:25:00 AM Letters to the editor: Letter-writer says there is discrepancy in 10 Commandments
The other day I was looking through a Catholic Catechism, and was shocked when I read its 10 Commandments. They are quite different from the ones found in God’s Word. Here are the discrepancies I found: The catechism omits the 2nd commandment, which reads, “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: . . . “ Ex 20:4-5. I asked myself why was it felt necessary that this commandment be removed, and who gave this church the authority to make this change, thereby placing themselves above God? As images are very much a part of the Catholic faith it would make sense that the 2nd commandment be abolished from their Catechism. Whatever arguments the church may have for doing this, the omission of this commandment speaks for itself. There’d be no need to remove it, if it were not being violated. Also, its removal leaves a false impression that God no longer cares if we make idols, bow down, and give homage to them. What does the Word of God say about His law? Matt 5:18 says, “. . . Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled”. Ps 111:7,8 says, “. . .all his commandments are sure. They stand fast for ever and ever, . . . “ Never have I read in God’s Word that authority has been given to a man or church to remove one of God’s “holy and just and good” commandments, which He wrote with His own divine finger in stone (unchangeable). That’s where we get the phrase “written in stone.” No one on earth has a right to tamper with “God’s” divine law. It’s God’s law not man’s. Deut 4:2 says, “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.” Another discrepancy was that the 10th commandment of the Bible was divided into two commandments, thus making up for the missing 2nd commandment. This is misleading folks into thinking that the Catechism commandments are in harmony with the Scriptures — both having 10, but the truth is that the Catechism only has nine.
Karen Rahoi, Hennepin
Posted: Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Article comment by:
Yes, I do believe this discussion has been narrowing down, and I think we are going in circles. As far as Luther is concerned, I am aware that Luther had some misunderstandings. Letâ€™s keep in mind that he was a staunch Catholic, and he was pretty much alone in his discovery. Light does not come on us all at once, it shines on us gradually like the sun coming up in the morning and eventually it reaches the noon day light. This is how I look at Luther and those that followed after. So it is understandable that Luther carried some Catholic practices with him when he left the church. In answer to your important question: There are no Bible verses that list the names of all inspired books, although I believe it has been established that all the 66 books are inspired. I could belabor this point, but I think you would assent to this, so I see no reason. Here is what I wrote in my last comment: â€śNow if those writings harmonize with the Bible, fine.â€ť This comment means that I admit there may be other inspired writings not found in the Bible. I also believe that there may be more inspired writings yet to come as Joel 2:28 says that in the last days God is going to pour out His Spirit on all flesh and some will prophecy, etc. This leads me to believe that God will have some end time inspired prophets. No doubt there will be false prophets too. How will we know if a prophet is a true or a false prophet? How will we know if their teachings and practices are valid? We'll compare their writings/practices with the already established inspired Word, and ask ourselves if they are in harmony. If not, we reject them. This is how I approach your situation. I am not denying a tradition or teaching simply because itâ€™s not spelled out in the Bible, but if it contradicts the traditions of the Bible, I reject it. We have to have something by which to gauge teachings and traditions. We canâ€™t blindly accept any tradition, until it has been tested by the already established inspired Word. Sorry to say, the traditions of your church do not pass this test. Christ warned us about false traditions, which signifies that false traditions exist. They are very dangerous. They lead us into transgression, as stated in the following verses. The scribes and Pharisees were very troubled by the fact that Christâ€™s disciples did not follow the traditions of the church. These were man made traditions, which were not in harmony with the OT. Read Christâ€™s comments, etc. I capitalized what happens when we follow unbiblical traditions.
Matt 15:2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. 15:3 But he answered and said unto them, WHY DO YE ALSO TRANSGRESS THE COMMANDMENT OF GOD BY YOUR TRADITION?
Mark 7:3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. 4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brazen vessels, and of tables. 5 Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands? 6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. 7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. 8 For LAYING ASIDE THE COMMANDMENT OF GOD, YE HOLD THE TRADITION OF MEN, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. 9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. 10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: 11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me he shall be free.12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother 13 MAKING THE WORD OF GOD OF NONE EFFECT THROUGH YOUR TRADITION, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.
Col 2:8 says, â€śBEWARE lest any man SPOIL YOU through philosophy and vain deceit, after the TRADITION OF MEN, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Itâ€™s been a long, but good discussion!
Posted: Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Article comment by:
Good, you are a beliver. Good, I am a believer. Good, we both believe in a just and loving GOD! We believe indifferant ways but we belive. For me, it does not matter so much how we got there but that we did get there. Ther chapter, verse and page number is not as important as the lesson and message imparted there. A person may not have the ability to read but knows what love is and freely gives of that love. The differance between you and me is that you seem to believe that how much one knows and is able to quote the written word matters to God. That that is what we will be judged on by Him. Me, I believe that the time commiting all those facts to memory wound be better used teaching a child to live in love and peace . to help searve the hungry ad needy. So, you choose to, you can loose yourself in a dusty musty tome and I will try to bring what I have a limited knowledge of to the light of day, and so I now sign off and end this fruitless disscusion and go back to being me. Good luck in your thirst for being right. Let us just say, you are. The sun will shine, the earth will warm and there are flowers and veggies to plant. There are walks in the woods with children and friends picking mushrooms, berries, asparagus, and such. Base ball and just catch to playwith them and, Oh yes, fish to catch. God sure has made a great place to be in and enjoy. Me, one of His greatest creations is in the laughter of a child.
Posted: Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Article comment by:
Metalworker, Iâ€™ve been meaning to answer your questions, but have been getting side tracked. Iâ€™ve been trying to understand why itâ€™s so important to you that I explain how God looks. I certainly cannot answer that question by experience, because I have never seen Him. All I can tell you is what the Bible says. In Heb. 1:1 it says, â€śGod, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds 3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the EXPRESS IMAGE of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high â€ť It says, that Jesus is the â€śexpress imageâ€ť of Godâ€™s â€śperson.â€ť This would mean that God has a form like Christ. Of course God can take any form He wants, as you have rightly pointed out. Heâ€™s God. The Bible also says that we were made in Godâ€™s image. This would again imply that God has a body similar to ours. Here is another verse, Col 1:15 â€śWho [Christ] is the IMAGE OF THE INVISIBLE GOD, the firstborn of every creature:â€ť The Bible also says that God SITS upon a throne (Rev 5:7). God has a form like Christ /mankind. I donâ€™t like the word â€śheretic,â€ť so I would prefer not to use that term. I would call someone an unbeliever, if he has had ample opportunity to understand Biblical truths that pertain to salvation, and has rejected them. I believe the Bible offers some variation in belief when it comes to minor points not pertinent to our salvation, or in things not made clear. You say this world is millions of years old, but the Bible says different. You say you believe in the NT, which I have come to question, but if so, please consider these points. In Matt 1 and Luke 3 you can read the genealogy of Christ. It has been 2000 yr from Christ till now. These genealogies list the parentage from Christ down to Adam, with Luke listing 14 generations. Now if there were millions of years during that time frame, it would be impossible to list a genealogy. It would be pages and pages â€¦ long. Another point you like to make is that the stories of the OT are parables, fiction, etcâ€¦. If you believe in the NT you have to change your stance on this, because the NT writers, including Christ (example: Matt 24:38,39) point to the OT as real, and now we have Matt and Luke giving us a genealogy of real people. Are the NT writers, including Christ, confused or making up stories? I say no. These things are written so that people like you who believe in this million yr theory, etc. have nothing Biblical to stand on, and I suppose for many other reasons too. I hope that you will reconsider your position on these things. In answer to your question: â€śWould you accept Him if He looked like He looked then?â€ť I feel certain that if Jesus were here today, I would recognize Him, only because I have taken time to become familiar with His word, and have spent time in communication with Him through prayer. So, I have to believe that if He were here in person His life and teachings would harmonize with His Word. This is how I would make the judgment call, not simply by the way he looked. FYI: I also see God in the things of creation, but it may be in a different way than you do. When I see a bird, sunset, ocean, etc, I see Godâ€™s â€ścharacterâ€ť revealed. I see His wisdom, love, creativity, intelligence, and power. I also learn spiritual lessons from some of these things. After all, God is the creator, and these things should make us think about Him.
Posted: Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Article comment by:
Karen, I am still waiting for the biblical evidence of the books that made it into the Bible. If 'the bible interprets itself' as you said, there must be something in it that tells us which books are inspired and which are not. What is the verse? I do hope you'll answer this time.
The first Christians "devoted themselves to the apostlesâ€™ teaching" (Acts 2:42) long before there was a New Testament. From the very beginning, the fullness of Christian teaching was found in the Church as the living embodiment of Christ, not in a book.(C.A.)
For us it is Scripture and Tradition, the complete word of God. Here are some verses in support of Tradition.
2 Thess. 2:15: Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.
2 Tim. 2:2: And the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men, who shall be fit to teach others also.
1 Cor. 11:2: Now I praise you, brethren, that in all things you are mindful of me: and keep my ordinances as I have delivered them to you.
Karen, your words are not offensive. I admire for fervor. I do think that we have reached the end of this discussion. I also think you would be shocked to learn what Luther really believed (hint he loved Mary and the Holy Eucharist).
Posted: Tuesday, April 16, 2013
Article comment by:
Letâ€™s be honest. The reason you and I/others have been going back and forth all this time is because I believe the Bible, and you/they donâ€™t. I have listed close to 20 doctrines that your church teaches, that are nowhere to be found in the Scriptures, plus your church feels comfortable with changing and removing parts of Godâ€™s 10 commandments, when it has no authority to do so. You either need to go with the Bible, as it reads, or make the decision to go with your Churches writings, â€śhistorical factsâ€ť, and traditions. Itâ€™s that simple, but do not try to say that your church is in harmony with the Bible. This is false, and you know it, or you wouldnâ€™t be trying to promote writings, etc. outside of the Bible, as support for your churchâ€™s teachings. Now if those writings harmonize with the Bible, fine. You really have to stretch the Scriptures to get anywhere close to the doctrines of your church. You know that your church writings are all you have to support confession of a man to another man, baby baptism, Mass, immaculate conception, original sin, indulgences, Monks, Jesuits, nuns, monasteries, calling an fallible individual â€śthe Vicar of Christâ€ť, or â€śyour Holiness,â€ť using â€śreverendâ€ť and â€śfatherâ€ť as titles for church leaders, praying to Mary, praying to the dead, praying with â€śvain repetitionsâ€ť (rosary), images connected with worship, holy water, holy stairs, Sunday worship, etcâ€¦ The story goes on and on. Some of these things are directly opposed to the teachings of Christ Himself. The New Testament writings span a period of approximately 60 yr, and within that period none of the teachings listed above are ever mentioned. Catholicism is not based on the Bible. Itâ€™s based on traditions (which you admit), that are unbiblical. One is contradictory to the other. The Holy Spirit couldnâ€™t have inspired both, because He does not contradict Himself. When Luther and many other former Catholics got hold of a Bible, and studied it with an open mind they saw what I see, and they made the decision to go with the Bible, instead of the writings and traditions of the church. Their eyes were opened (at least to some degree) and they bravely came out. They could clearly see that the teachings of the church were contrary to the teachings of the Bible. These men were once whole hearted Catholics who believed the way you do. It was the BIBLE that opened their eyes, which caused them to leave. They saw the contradiction. They knew they had to choose one or the other. Here is what happened. The apostolic church which was started by Christ was the one we read about in the New Testament. The apostle Paul predicted in 2 Thess 2 that there was going to be a falling away (apostasy) in this church someday. He assured the people in verses 1-4 that Christâ€™s coming would not take place until after this apostasy. Iâ€™m not trying to offend, Iâ€™m only being honest. I believe the Catholic Church is the apostasy that Paul predicted. So, you are right in saying that the Catholic Church came from the apostolic church, but Catholicism is the apostate apostolic church, not the one in the N.T. It is a mixture of paganism with Christianity. The Christians in the time of the N.T. were trying to win over the pagans, and in so doing it compromised with the pagans thinking this would bring more pagans into the church. The church simply took pagan practices etc, and Christianized them, covering them with a Christian cloak. Again, where is our faith, is it in the Bible, or in the teachings, etc. of the church? It can't be in both for they are diametrically opposed to one another. Concerning the language of Christ I believe He spoke Greek for this was the common language at that time. The Bible says â€śthe common people heard Him gladly.â€ť In Rev 1:8 Christ says, â€śI am ALPHA and OMEGA, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.â€ť Alpha and Omega are Greek letters. The â€śPeterâ€ť issue does not have to be resolved by having an understanding of the language spoken, because the Bible is the interpreter of itself, and it explicitly says in 1 Cor 10:4 â€śand that Rock was Christ.â€ť The Bible explicitly says in Eph 5:23 that â€śChrist is the head of the church:â€ť Christ is the â€śRock,â€ť and Christ is the â€śheadâ€ť of the church, not a man. How much plainer could it have been written? Whether a word is Greek or Aramaic is not going to change these plain statements. No man was ever called to be an infallible head of the church in the N.T. times. This idea is contrary to the Bible.