A Church like the early Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter ralphinal
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Influence of the Septuagint

The large majority of Old Testament references in the New Testament are taken from the Greek Septuagint—which includes the deuterocanonical books, as well as apocrypha—both of which are called collectively anagignoskomena (things that are read).

Several appear to have been written originally in Hebrew, but the original text has long been lost. Archaeological finds in the last century, however, have provided a text of almost ⅔ of the book of Sirach, and fragments of other books have been found as well.

The Septuagint was widely accepted and used by Jews in the first century, even in the region of Roman Iudaea Province, and therefore naturally became the text most widely used by early Christians.

In the New Testament, Hebrews 11:35 refers to an event that was only explicitly recorded in one of the deuterocanonical books (2 Maccabees 7).

Even more tellingly, 1 Cor 15:29 “Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?”, is an allusion to 2 Maccabees 12: 44, “for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been useless and foolish to pray for them in death”.

1 Cor 15:29 is an obvious reference to suffering to help the dead be loosed from their sins. (Baptism also means salvific suffering for others in the New Testament, cf. Mat 20:22-23, Mk 10:38-39 and Lk 12:50)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterocanonical_books#Influence_of_the_Septuagint
 
That’s why I said “I believe”. In America, when one is not “sure” about something, they state that they believe something just in case they aren’t 100% accurate.

I knew that verse you chose to quote, but I wasn’t sure as to how many of the Apostles were married.
Is it that difficult to open up another window, go to www.BibleGateway.com and confirm what the Word of God actually says before putting in writing a belief that is contrary to His Word, especially when you “knew that verse” ???
But anyway, Peter and The Apostles left their wives (those that had wives) to serve Jesus.

What Peter said to Jesus…
Matthew 19:27
Then Peter said to Him,
“Behold, we have left everything and followed You; what then will there be for us?”
This cannot mean what you think it means, First - it says everything not everyone or everybody, people are not “things” but that may be just nit picking. I think the more powerful argument against your position is the timeline of the two pasages quoted against each other 1 Corinthians 9:4-6 stating Peter’s wife is along for the journey comes after Matthew 19:27 which you imply has Peter having left his wife already. This also seems to contradict the admonition to Christians they are to remain married even to unbelievers should the unbelieving spouse not abandon them.

1 Corinthians 7:13-15 (New International Version)
13And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. 14For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.
15But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace.

Let’s take a closer look at just one of your “powerful” quotes in another of your lengthy posts shall we…
Just “some” of the 300 quotes:

*DEUTEROCANONICAL BOOKS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

1 Macc. 2:52
Was not Abraham found faithful in trial, and it was reputed to him as uprightness?
James 2:23
And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend.
*

Again www.BibleGateway.com to the rescue

New International Version (NIV)
James 2:23
23And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”[a] and he was called God’s friend.

Footnotes:
a James 2:23 Gen. 15:6

Genesis 15:6
6 Abram believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness.

Whoops ! Maccabes and James were quoting from the original earliest source found in the writings of Genesis, kinda makes me question the accuracy of the original claim that the new testament writers believed the Apocrypha to be Scripture. That puts me in good company with many early christians. I have not the time you obviously have, looking over the vastness of your posts, but in the small time I have, I have quickly found some of the weaknesses in your arguments.

Communicating error is easy, correcting error takes way too much time.
 
It was to 2ndGen…but Hebrews412 is taking care of it well.
 
The greatest support for this theory is Jesus Christ’s own words on men being called to serve God who choose celibacy once called to serve God.

You talk about what was said years later, but look at “when” Peter said that they left everything…in the exact same chapter where Jesus said the following and “after” Jesus said it:

Matthew 19:
11. He told them, however,“This manifestation does not go down well* for everyone, except for the ones that it applies.”
.*
12. “For there are celibates that were born from their mother’s womb like this, and there are celibates who became celibate from humanity, and there are celibates who became celibate of their own free will,* for the sake of the Kingdom of heaven. Whoever can do without it, let them be without it.”

I’m sure, you’re one of those persons that Jesus was talking about when He said “This manifestation does not go down well* for everyone, except for the ones that it applies.”

On top of that, Jesus clearly stated the price that one had to pay to become a leader in The Church (one of His Apostles…notice that by the mention of the 12 Chairs in Heaven, this teaching is a requisite for them specifically and then there are those who “choose” to follow The Apostles example):

Now, keep in mind that Jesus said this to Peter “after” Peter told Him that they left everything for Him and watch what Jesus calls “everything” in the red text:

Matthew 19: (again)
28. Jesus told them, "Amen, I am telling you, that you who followed me, in the new realm*, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious Throne, there also you will sit on twelve chairs, and you will judge the twelve tribes of Israel.
29. "And every person who leaves his house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or fields, for the sake of my name, shall receive one hundred fold and attain Life everlasting*.
30. “Thus many who were first shall be last, and the last shall be first.”

Those are all “people” which is a direct response to Peter’s proclaimation to Him.

My original verse to you (Matthew 19: 27 Then Keepa [Peter] replied and told him, “Behold, we left everything and followed you. What are we getting?”) is in complete context to what I said (all within the same moment of conversation between Jesus and Peter.

To pull a verse here and a verse there to create a new belief is something that Satan himself tried to do when he tried to mislead Jesus with truthful verses, but in out of context combinations.

If you stick to Matthew 19 from beginning to end, what do you see there?

You see men called serve Jesus who forego all material possessions and personal relationships to devote themselves to doing His will.

In other words, you see The Priesthood.
1 Corinthians 7:13-15 (New International Version)
.
The NIV Bible is published by the publishers of The Satanic Bible.

Now that I know your source, I know “you”.

No wonder “this manifestation does not go down well” for you.
I have not the time you obviously have, looking over the vastness of your posts, but in the small time I have, I have quickly found some of the weaknesses in your arguments.
Communicating error is easy, correcting error takes way too much time.
I understand. You need all the time you can spare correcting your own.
  1. First, your definitions of words don’t agree with general society’s definitions?
  2. Next, you comprise beliefs by mixing scriptures because you cannnot find a complete passage (as I have) to support your theories?
  3. And finally, you quote from a bible that didn’t exist until the late 1900’s and that is produced by Satan’s Bible’s publisher?
That’s 3 strikes.

And you know what they say about 3 strikes.

👋

Assalam Alaikum
 
2ndGen;3265844:
Your vanity is disgusting. Your pride gives away your spiritual immaturity.
Yes, I am spiriturally immature.

But correct.

And my thread proved it.

And you say nothing to the he who insulted me?

Oh, but of course not…you’re about to jump ship and join his team.

Birds of a feather…

👋
 
2ndGen;3265844:
Pardon me VARC but could you edit your post to properly credit
“2nd Gen” for the words contained in the quoted text section of your post. Your post implies I (Hebrews_4_12) stated what you have qouted from “2nd Gen” above.

Thankyou
 
VARC;3265883:
Yes, I am spiriturally immature.

But correct.

And my thread proved it.

And you say nothing to the he who insulted me?

Oh, but of course not…you’re about to jump ship and join his team.

Birds of a feather…

👋
I’ll be quite honest with you. I didn’t even have time to read the thread to figure out what you were arguing about before your vain comments turned me off. I don’t even care if you are right because there are more important things in life than being “right”
 
My goodness how immature these posts have gotten.

Honestly, I quit this website. the only thing CAF does is further the split between Christians. I thank God most catholics are not as mean spirited as some who post here. I don’t blame the non-Catholics here for being even more turned off to the Church by coming here. Sure, they are getting answers…but most of the time it is given in the most uncharitable of ways and if Catholic churches acted like many here on CAF do I wouldn’t be bothering either, fullness of truth or not.

I have yet to meet a non-Christian as mean as everyone here is towards each other. Esp those who call themselves Catholic…as I know I have been guilty of myself at times of being uncharitable…what a poor pooor poor witness of faith we are for Christ. Its sickening. At this moment I actually feel ashamed for aligning myself with tis website, ever. i refuse to sin anymore against God by participating in such debates.
 
2ndGen;3265902:
I’ll be quite honest with you. I didn’t even have time to read the thread to figure out what you were arguing about before your vain comments turned me off. I don’t even care if you are right because there are more important things in life than being “right”
How’s about being “nice” for one?

You have an attitude yourself to feel that you can come here and call my response “disgusting” without having read your future compadres words to me (which is a one sided judgement).

Now, if I had been arrogant without call, I couldn’t argue with your assertion. But, since I was responding to an insult, then I was not out of line.

I can’t expect someone who takes things out of context to understand that however.

So, my peace I give unto you because you seem to have a genuine heart in responding back to me as you did.

🙂
 
Trust me. I’m the last one you want to try to make look dumb.
If I want to, I can humiliate you into exile.
So consider this your first warning.

I’ve been taking a lot of insults here from debate losers, but I’m running out of my “turn the other cheek” quota and seriously considering spending an extra year in Purgatory for the wrath I’m about to unleash on the next person that attempts to insult me.

I like to play games as well as the next man, but I’ve no qualms about putting another cyber notch on my computer of all the other Psuedo-Intellecutal Google Scholars that I’ve soundly trounced.

Now Mr. “Communicating error is easy, correcting error takes way too much time.” Prepare to be corrected in, well, not much time at all. 😃
I humbly beg your forgiveness, I should not have been so cheeky in my replies, it is unbecoming of a follower of Christ. I stand corrected on the the nit picking “everything” word argument, I should have left that out, I was wrong to include that.

Having said the above, sincerely, I see nothing in your replies that deals with the real substantive part of my argument that Peter’s wife is with him after the point in time you say he has left her, that is a plain contradiction, that must be dealt with, he has either left her or he has not. Matthew 19 cannot be read in isolation. 1 Corinthians 9:4-6 is quite clear Peter’s wife is with him after his statments in Matthew 19 and after Jesus has returned to his thone in heaven.

Additionally I see no response as yet to the Apocrapha vs Genesis quote in James, would you be willing to concede at least for that one quote that my explanation of those words in James coming from Genesis not Maccabes is superior given the time factors of Genesis before Maccabes?

As to publishers of the NIV being “produced by Satan’s Bible’s publisher”, I admit I’m at loss…, I have no clue as to what your talking about. I am told by sources I find trustworthy and much more learned than I that the ESV is better for it’s literality but I like the modern english readability of the NIV but understand it has it’s limitations. Which english language version shall I quote to you in any further replies so as move beyond this issue?

Good Night
 
A CATHOLIC calling the NIV Satan’s Bible…my world is turned upside down…in a good way mind you!
Amen to that.
 
A CATHOLIC calling the NIV Satan’s Bible…my world is turned upside down…in a good way mind you!
Amen to that.
👍

Well, I’m kind of jealous for His Word.

Being the traditionalist that I am,
I want it “as” written.

I think that there’s a place for simplifying scripture so that it could reach more people, but I’m in no way for “inclusionary language” that cares more about being politically correct than just being “correct”.

Besides, the best “easy” read for scriptures is The Good News Bible (both Protestant and Catholic versions).

Pax.
 
Here’s a Protestant website that reveals the origins of The NIV bible. It has external links to secular sources where you can confirm what it proclaims (apparently, it’s from a movement of Christians called “King James Only” Believers).
av1611.org/niv.html

As for which version should you use?
I use two when debating with Protestants.
The King James Version at “BibleGateway”
King James Onlyism is a view I do not share nor do I believe they give a Spirit filled reasoned argument for having the KJV be the only legimate english version of the Bible.

Let me just repeat one of their proof texts on the “bloodless” NIV from your above recommended website
The NIV removes the blood of Jesus Christ!
COLOSSIANS 1:14: The KJB reads, “In whom we have redemption THROUGH HIS BLOOD, even the forgiveness of sins:” The NIV reads, “In whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.” The NIV rips out the precious words “THROUGH HIS BLOOD”! …"

If the NIV was really attempting to remove “the Blood of Jesus” why do I find it still in these verses —
Ephesians 1:7 (NIV)
In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace
Ephesians 2:13 (NIV)
But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.
Colossians 1:20 (NIV)
and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

My Point = KJVO is filled with illegimate criticism of some modern translations and it is not a very discerning group to be quoting.
I fully agree with you. I never said that Peter didn’t have his wife with him “after” permanently after Matthew 19, but I believe wholeheartedly that he left his wife when commissioned by Christ to evangelize The Gospel. …

At some point, yes Peter did bring along his wife for it’s stated in Corinthians, but while Jesus was alive, he left his wife behind.

Kind of like Peter being a traveling salesman with the little wife at home. …
So we violently agree, Peter did not abandon or leave his marriage to a woman as a priest leaves a life of possible marriage to a woman. Peter was married and remained married to a woman till death and this in no way takes away from his commitment to the early church.
Repeat it to me and I’ll respond to it. I know of at least 300 quotes that are referred to from The Deuterocanonial Books.
Just “some” of the 300 quotes:

*DEUTEROCANONICAL BOOKS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

1 Macc. 2:52
Was not Abraham found faithful in trial, and it was reputed to him as uprightness?
James 2:23
And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend.*

BTW Your post was first between us to use the NIV Version, becareful when “poisoning the well” that we both seem to be drinking from …

New International Version (NIV)
James 2:23
23And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”[a] and he was called God’s friend.

Footnotes:
a James 2:23 Gen. 15:6

Genesis 15:6
6 Abram believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness.

Maccabes and James were quoting from the original earliest source found in the writings of Genesis which eliminates this verse from consideration, 1 down 299 to go!
2ndGen;3266210:
“Rome has spoken; the case is closed”
(Saint Augustine, Sermon 131:10)

I’m sorry to burst your bubble but Augustine never said those words nor did his words of that sermon taken as a whole mean to convey that thought when read objectively, Thankyou for giving the reference that makes it easier to let August speak for himself.

From the EWTN site
ewtn.com/library/PATRISTC/PNI6-13.TXT
  1. What then was said of the Jews, the same altogether do we see in these men now. “They have a zeal of God: I hear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.”[4] What is, “not according to knowledge”? “For being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and wishing to establish their own, they have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.”[5] My Brethren, share with me in my sorrow. When ye find such as these, do not hide them; be there no such misdirected[6] mercy in you; by all means, when ye find such, hide them not. Convince the gainsayers, and those who resist, bring to us. For already have two[7] councils on this question been sent to the Apostolic see; and rescripts also have come from thence. The question has been brought to an issue; would that their error may sometime be brought to an issue too!Therefore do we advise that they may take heed, we teach that they may be instructed, we pray that they may be changed. Let us turn to the Lord, etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top