The Ten Commandments and the changed Roman Catholic version

[TheWay]

Then you'd best become Catholic as soon as possible.  

Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.   Jn 6:53–54

Only the Catholic Church has the priest with apostolic succession (Acts 1:21-26, Timothy 1:6 and 4:14) ... who have the authority granted them by Heaven itself (Matthew 16:18-19) to consecrate the bread and wine changing them into the Body and Blood of Christ Himself for consumption ... per the order of Christ at the Last Supper (“This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19).)

If you do not eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ, you are lost.  That's the words of Christ.

So ... by your own words ... OBEY CHRIST .... go become Catholic and partake of the Eucharist in a worthy manner.  Considering your hatred of the Catholic church, that'll take some humility on your part to do so.   Humility, something God demands as well.

    I enjoyed this post.  Thanks for the opportunity to post it.   

Catholics do not obey the Bible. They obey the Papacy and their tradition, which is contrary to the Bible.

Which commandments should we obey, those of a man or those of God (Acts 5:29)? As Jesus once rebuked the Pharisees and scribes: “Why do you also disobey the commandment of God because of your tradition?” “You have made the commandment of God void because of your tradition.” Just as Isaiah prophesied of the people of Israel before the siege of Jerusalem, so it is today: “This people draws near with their mouth and honours me with their lips, but they have removed their heart far from me, and their fear of me is a commandment of men which has been taught.” “And they worship me in vain, teaching as doctrine rules made by men.” (Matthew 15:1-9 and Isaiah 29:13)

Some Examples:
Salvation: The Roman Catholic church teaches that salvation is by baptismal regeneration and is maintained through the Catholic sacraments unless a wilful act of sin is committed that breaks the state of sanctifying grace. The Bible teaches that we are saved by grace which is received through faith (Ephesians 2:8-9), and that good works are the result of a change of the heart wrought in salvation (Ephesians 2:10; 2 Corinthians 5:17) and the fruit of that new life in Christ (John 15).

Assurance of salvation: The Roman Catholic church teaches that salvation cannot be guaranteed or assured. 1 John 5:13 states that the letter of 1 John was written for the purpose of assuring believers of the CERTAINTY of their salvation.

Good Works: The Roman Catholic church states that Christians are saved by meritorious works (beginning with baptism) and that salvation is maintained by good works (receiving the sacraments, confession of sin to a priest, etc.) The Bible states that Christians are saved by grace through faith, apart from works (Titus 3:5;  Ephesians 2:8-9; Galatians 3:10-11; Romans 3:19-24).

Baptism: In the New Testament baptism is ALWAYS practiced AFTER saving faith in Christ. Baptism is not the means of salvation; it is faith in the Gospel that saves (1 Corinthians 1:14-18; Romans 10:13-17). The Roman Catholic church teaches baptismal regeneration of infants, a practice never found in Scripture. The only possible hint of infant baptism in the Bible that the Roman Catholic church can point to is that the whole household of the Philippian jailer was baptized in Acts 16:33. However, the context nowhere mentions infants. Acts 16:31 declares that salvation is by faith. Paul spoke to all of the household in verse 32, and the whole household believed (verse 34). This passage only supports the baptism of those who have already believed, not of infants.

Prayer: The Roman Catholic church teaches Catholics to not only pray to God, but also to petition Mary and the saints for their prayers. Contrary to this, we are taught in Scripture to only pray to God (Matthew 6:9; Luke 18:1-7). Furthermore, Catholics are taught to pray in a vain and repetitive manner, which is forbidden by God (Matthew 6:7).

Priesthood: The Roman Catholic church teaches that there is a distinction between the clergy and the “lay people”, whereas the New Testament teaches the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:9). Furthermore, Roman Catholic priests teach others to refer to them as “father”, a title that is reserved only for our earthly fathers and God; and the Pope as “Holy Father”, a title that is reserved only for God (Matthew 23:9, Exodus 20:12, James 2:21, Galatians 3:29). 

Sacraments: The Roman Catholic church teaches that a believer is infused with grace upon reception of the sacraments. Such teaching is nowhere found in Scripture.

Confession: The Roman Catholic church teaches that unless a believer is hindered, the only way to receive the forgiveness of sins is by confessing them to a priest. Contrary to this, Scripture teaches that confession of sins is to be made to God (1 John 1:9) and to our brethren (James 5:16).

Mary: The Roman Catholic church teaches, among other things, that Mary is the Queen of Heaven, a perpetual virgin, and the co-redemptress who ascended into heaven. In Scripture, she is portrayed as an obedient, believing servant of God, who became the fleshly mother of Jesus. None of the other attributes mentioned by the Roman Catholic church have any basis in the Bible. The idea of Mary being the co-redemptress and another mediator between God and man is not only extra-biblical (found only outside of Scripture), but is also unbiblical (contrary to Scripture). Acts 4:11-12 declares that Jesus is the only redeemer. 1 Timothy 2:5 proclaims that Jesus is the only mediator between God and men. Here Mary is given the same status as other believers (Matthew 12:46-50). Furthermore, worship of the “queen of heaven” is not a new concept, but was also practiced in Biblical history by pagans, provoking the LORD God to anger and wrath (Jeremiah 7:18, Jeremiah 44:25-30).

The Ten Commandments: To this day the Papacy of the Roman Catholic church claims authority to be able to change both “the times” and “the law” (see the prophecy in Daniel 7:25). This is clearly manifested in their changing of the Ten Commandments (the complete removal of 2nd commandment on idolatry, the changing of the 4th commandment to “The Lord’s Day” meaning [Sun]day, and to maintain 10, the splitting the 10th commandment in two, becoming the 9th and 10th). Scripture clearly states that you shall not add nor take away from the word that God commands (Deuteronomy 4:2, Deuteronomy 12:32, Proverbs 30:5-6).

[UltraBudgie]

I wish more people used Blue Letter Bible. It really is the best site for interlinear and comparing translations.

[TheWay]

I would recommend that you read up on textual and biblical criticism. I'm not even a neophyte in the field but I am aware of some conclusions that experts have made, and some theories that have held up over time. We don't know who wrote the Gospels (most likely not eye witnesses) and have only ranges for when they were written.

Here is a little something that I wrote:

There is a commercial that I have seen very often of late. It goes "Well I'm not a ----, but I've seen --- hours of ---- shows on ---". So what I'm saying is I am no detective but I've seen many Court room and Detective shows and movies on regular television; all the way back to Perry Mason (1957-1966). 

In order for a piece of evidence to be admissible in court it needs to have a chain of evidence. Otherwise what would prevent a prosecutor from buying a gun, bringing it into court and saying "This is the gun that the accused had in his hand when he was arrested."?

Textual critics, I believe, follow similar methods of detection when dating and attributing authorship: oldest extant manuscript, first quoted by another, first attributed to person X by person y, and etc.

Now when I was in my senior year of high school, I did a term paper with live presentation of the Philosophy of Epicurus. All that I could find was the two page entry in The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. I xeroxed those pages and studied them. It said that though Epicurus was reputed to have written 300 works, very few remain. There did seem to be a work called Principal Doctrines still around, but not in the school library. My presentation did not feature a bunch of quotes, if there were any quotes at all.  

When I first saw this oft quoted saying attributed to Epicurus a few years ago I was very skeptical of its authenticity:

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

I reasoned thus: If Epicurus (341–270 BC) had never been presented with the idea of an Omnipotent and Omnibenevolent God, why would he come up with a refutation? Well, he wouldn't. So I checked Wikiquote. Sure enough, the first known variant of that saying was written in Christian church father Lactantius's De Ira Dei(On the Anger of God) (c. 318): 587 years after the death of Epicurus.

Evidently Lactantius made the saying up himself so as to refute the problem of evil argument or that God was still just in the face of all that wrath in some way.

Here is another example of things that may be close and maybe not so close to the original:

Let's take a look at Deuteronomy 5 version of what "God spoke" about the Sabbath:
[sup] [/sup]“Observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy, as the Lord your God has commanded you. [sup]13 [/sup]Six days you shall labor and do all your work, [sup]14 [/sup]but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your ox, your donkey or any of your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns, so that your male and female servants may rest, as you do. [sup]15 [/sup]Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the Lord your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the Lord your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day." -NIV

We don't know who wrote this version of the Words, but there is clearly a change. It's possible that the  tradition from which the Exodus 20 author and the Deuteronomy 5 author drew upon didn't have a rationale for keeping the Sabbath. One went with a 6 day creation narrative and the other the release from bondage narrative.

The unknown author of Hebrews seems to be aware of both rationales in his writing as quoted above. The rest not entered into which he refers to seems to be not believing in Jesus as the giver of rest. Sabbath is used as a metaphor.

In a previous post you quoted that rather anti-Semitic passage from John 8. So: 
The Jews who Jesus was addressing were already believing Jesus. Then he seems to want to drive them away for some reason. They claim Abraham (like Christians do) rather than Moses. But then Jesus seems to claim that he can free people from sin, using the Exodus as a metaphor.

As Deuteronomy author changed the Law, what is there to prevent Christians from also changing the Law?

For instance.
"Remember the Sabbath day because Jesus has liberated us from the bondage to sin."

see Romans 14 (most agree that it was written by Paul, sometimes known as the Apostle to the Gentiles)
It seems obvious to me that there were already disputes going on about Sabbath observance in Paul's day. What exactly is his main point here? Don't go judging someone else's servant.

In Romans 14:5-6 Paul deals with the issue of disputable matters between Christians. This is not speaking of the weekly seventh day Sabbath. These are issues where the Bible does not give distinct, obvious guidance. Sexual immorality, idolatry, and profaning the weekly seventh day Sabbath, for instance, are clearly condemned. In contrast, however, are issues such as the example given by Paul: the freedom to eat meat versus abstaining from it for religious reasons. Now he introduces another example, the observance of special days (including the ceremonial holy days), as a point of disagreement between Christians.

We are free to participate or not participate in these disputed activities in honour of the Lord and with thanksgiving. We should not judge our brethren based on these disputable activities. Furthermore, we should never place a stumbling block before our brother—it is good not to eat meat, drink wine, or do anything that causes your brother to stumble. The faith that we have, we should keep between ourselves and God.

[TheWay]

Catholics didn't change it.  Protestants did.
The Catholic church is the original Christian church.
Documented in writing the word 'Catholic' used for the church as far back as 107AD.
(Ignatius of Antioch in his Letter to the Smyrnaeans - preserved by the Vatican and displayed)

The Bible was written by the Catholic church.
It was the Catholic Council of Carthedge in 397AD that decided what was going in and what wasn't.
It was that Catholic council that decided what was of God and what wasn't.
It was the Catholic council that picked Jewish text along with Catholic church documents to make the bible.

That is nonsense. I clearly showed you in my table comparison how they have infact changed them. They even tried to suppress the Bible during their 1,260 year reign (538-1798 AD) only allowing it to be available in Latin, which most laypeople couldn't read. Many Christians throughout history risked—and in some cases lost—their lives for translating the Bible into vernacular languages. The most well-known example is William Tyndale, who was executed in 1536 AD for translating the Scriptures into English. He was strangled and then burned at the stake after being condemned for heresy by the Roman Catholic Church. According to several accounts, his final words were a prayer: “Lord, open the King of England’s eyes.” This prayer is generally understood as a plea for King Henry VIII to allow the English people to have access to God’s Word in their own language. Remarkably, within just a few years of Tyndale’s death, his prayer was answered: In 1539 AD, King Henry VIII authorised the Great Bible in English to be placed in every parish church, a translation that drew heavily on Tyndale’s work.

[TheWay]

@TheWay

Since your church affiliation has been outed in another thread without being removed, I feel at some liberty to give links to material that I referred to earlier.

Sunday Laws: the Great Adventist Obsession
That's the one from a French Pastor, he links to another article about Ben Carson from Americans United for Separation of Church and State:
Ben Carson Has No Idea What Separation Of Church And State Means

As a bonus, I looked up The International Religious Liberty Association (IRLA)

Now if someone were to ask me "Well who is the enemy of religious liberty in the U.S. today?"

My reply would be, "Well it isn't the Roman Catholic Church and Traditional Protestants". No, it is a coalition of NAR (New Apostolic Restoration) and Dispensationalists.

On the one hand NAR is attempting to bring about Theocracy as new American government (replacing Constitution) and the Dispensationalists are trying to force God's hand to end the World.

Different goals yet aligned to end secular free liberal democracy. That should be your enemy, not the RCC.

I'm not a Seventh Day Adventist. Ellen G. White was a false prophet. I actually don't attend any church at present, but I was attending one before but I left after they refused to listen when I brought up the increasing sin in the church. I'm looking for one, but every church i've looked at has gone astray.

Within each Christian denomination or sect there is truth mixed with error and man-made doctrines and traditions, with some of these biblical truths often being stigmatised with a particular denomination or sect. Unfortunately, this tarnishes the credibility of these truths. Adding to their members’ deception, certain denominations and sects claim to be the only true church and the sole authority on truth, disciplining those who dissent. In some cases, this authority is vested in a single individual or group, often regarded as prophets, which further discourages their followers from exploring and embracing biblical truths that may be emphasised in other denominations and sects.

We must be very careful about what we hear and believe, verifying everything against God’s word in the Bible, for many false prophets, teachers, and brethren are in the world and among churches, like wolves in sheep’s clothing. But fear not, for God is greater and with us always.

Furthermore, I believe this is all by Satan’s design. As Christ stated, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand” (see Matthew 12:25).

[Bootless]

I wish more people used Blue Letter Bible. It really is the best site for interlinear and comparing translations.

I like Bible Hub because I'm used to it. I resist the new when I'm familiar with the old. That doesn't mean Bible Hub is better than Blue Letter Bible, just it's good enough for me.

[TheWay]

Luther aside, you can obey the 10 commandments? what about the sermon on the mount,
[sup]21 [/sup]“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,[sup][a][/sup] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ [sup]22 [/sup]But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[sup][b][/sup][sup][c][/sup] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’[sup][d][/sup] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

Adultery[sup]27 [/sup]“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’[sup][e][/sup] [sup]28 [/sup]But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. [sup]29 [/sup]If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. [sup]30 [/sup]And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.
 what about the other 617 Mosaic commands, ignore them? 
Take what you want and dismiss the other Mosaic commands as irrelevant

Hard task

Yes, all of Jesus' commands apply. You can only live this way after being born again and filled with God's Holy Spirit.

Matthew 5:17 "fulfil" = plēroō (G4137) - Jesus came to cause God's will (as made known in the Law) to be obeyed as it should be, and God's promises (given through the Prophets) to receive fulfilment (Isaiah 42:21; Matthew 5:17-48). Christ brought the Law to full expression, realization, or meaning, magnifying it and making it honourable.

Which commandments are we required to keep?
In total, there are some 613 Old Testament commandments and 1,050 New Testament commandments throughout the Bible, with some being applicable to new covenant Christians and others no longer. In essence, Christians today are no longer required to keep the ceremonial laws given through Moses, which were fulfilled by Christ; however, everything else outside of this, both Old and New Testament, still applies. Among those that still apply to Christians today are the Ten Commandments, the many commandments of Christ, and the commandments dictated by the various New Testament Apostles and Prophets.

When God delivered the children of Israel from Egyptian bondage, He also delivered to them the Ten Commandments in magnificent fiery majesty. This Law of eternal duration was spoken by God, written by God, recorded on tablets of stone, and stored on the inside of the Ark under the mercy seat. Shortly after, the temporary ceremonial law (the law of Moses) was also delivered to Israel. It was written by Moses, recorded on parchment (paper), and stored on the outside of the Ark. This law dealt with the ceremonial rites of the Jewish sanctuary service that passed away at Christ's sacrificial death on the stake. The law of Moses included sacrifices, offerings, purifications, holy days, circumcision (a religious Jewish rite), and other rites associated with the Hebrew sanctuary service.

But I implore you not to take my word for it, but to come to your own convictions. “Give diligence to present yourself approved by God, a workman who doesn’t need to be ashamed, properly handling the Word of Truth” (2 Timothy 2:15 WEBPB).

The Ten Commandments vs the Law of Moses Comparison:


The chart below highlights instances in the New Testament where each of the Ten Commandments is reiterated or emphasised:

[Bootless]

In Romans 14:5-6 Paul deals with the issue of disputable matters between Christians. This is not speaking of the weekly seventh day Sabbath. These are issues where the Bible does not give distinct, obvious guidance. Sexual immorality, idolatry, and profaning the weekly seventh day Sabbath, for instance, are clearly condemned. In contrast, however, are issues such as the example given by Paul: the freedom to eat meat versus abstaining from it for religious reasons. Now he introduces another example, the observance of special days (including the ceremonial holy days), as a point of disagreement between Christians.

Here's the thing, you will find contradictions in the Bible. How to think about that will possibly lead to compromises. It may help to consider that not only have many people written the many parts that eventually became the Bible, but there were editors, revisers, and even different strands of tradition interwoven.

For example: Ezekiel 20 seems to leave out the whole Moses killed a guy and fled to Midian for 40 years. Instead, it's as if Moses was there in Egypt teaching the Israelites that whole time. So evidently Ezekiel was not reading the same book of Exodus like we have today.

Notice this:

 25So I gave them other statutes that were not good and laws through which they could not live; 26I defiled them through their gifts—the sacrifice of every firstborn—that I might fill them with horror so they would know that I am the Lord.’
-NIV

Evidently Ezekiel's version had not yet been cleaned up so as to substitute the payment of money to redeem the first born rather than sacrificing the first born children.

I mention this passage because the Council of Jerusalem mentions this passage when deciding what burdens to place on Gentiles (those outside Mosaic Law)

10Now then, why do you test God by placing on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? 11On the contrary, we believe it is through the grace of the Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”
...
19It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not cause trouble for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20Instead, we should write and tell them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals, and from blood. 21For Moses has been proclaimed in every city from ancient times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.”

Acts 15 BSB

Then Paul turns around and tells the Corinthian Church that eating meat sacrificed to idols is no big thing, just don't go doing the temple prostitutes.

Absent a clear command in the New Testament that Gentile Christians must keep the 7th day Sabbath, it probably isn't quite right to do it based on Moses.

[Bootless]

I'm not a Seventh Day Adventist. Ellen G. White was a false prophet. I actually don't attend any church at present, but I was attending one before but I left after they refused to listen when I brought up the increasing sin in the church. I'm looking for one, but every church i've looked at has gone astray.
...
... In some cases, this authority is vested in a single individual or group, often regarded as prophets, which further discourages their followers from exploring and embracing biblical truths that may be emphasised in other denominations and sects.

But you have probably read The Great Controversy. The greatness of the U.S. being separation of Church and State; religious liberty as fought for and practiced in Roger Williams' Rhode Island colony. And how deviation from that separation and freedom leads to bad things.

Now the reason I mentioned the NAR (New Apostolic Restoration) is because I grew up in a nice peaceful town (excepting that time the two biker gangs showed up at the road house, yeah that wasn't peaceful at all. But the roadhouse was outside the town limit so that doesn't count. And the Nazi group was fringe of the fringe, so didn't run the newspaper or anything like that, and the vigilantes were patrons of one particular bar, not all three bars).

The town's Christian Churches didn't go around raiding each other for members. But then one day, a High School teacher joined an out of town cult and brought it back to town. He started spreading it amongst the youth. Kids quit their own churches to follow the Prophet who was under an Apostle. Parents were freaking.

So I joined the cult and listened to see what their message actually was. To summarize "We present day Apostles and Prophets are the chosen of God to rule over you as was Moses and Paul. If you don't accept our rulership then you will suffer the fate of Korah, Dathan and Abiram (see Numbers 16)."

So after 3 weeks I left that cult. They were NAR. That group has people in top levels of U.S. government and in top advisor roles.

[FlyersFan]

Catholics do not obey the Bible. 

Incorrect.  Catholics are the ones that actually follow the bible.   THEY WROTE IT.   I gave John 6 as an example.  You failed to address it. 

  Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.   Jn 6:53–54

Only the Catholic Church has the priest with apostolic succession (Acts 1:21-26, Timothy 1:6 and 4:14) ... who have the authority granted them by Heaven itself (Matthew 16:18-19) to consecrate the bread and wine changing them into the Body and Blood of Christ Himself for consumption ... per the order of Christ at the Last Supper (“This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19).)

If you do not eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ, you are lost.  That's the words of Christ.