Hmm … a Christian that has been washed clean in the blood of the Lamb has a “sin nature”, whatever that means.
Present it, please.
Okay. Whatever.
Historical fact: The Catholic Church set the OT and NT canon for her own members (at the time, that was all Christians) in 382, 393, 397, and 405 (naming the very same writings as “Scripture” at each council [Rome, Hippo, Carthage], affirmed by Pope Innocent I). The Church’s canon has remained unchanged down through the centuries. Martin Luther, however, as a Protestant, removed eleven (11) books from his German translation of the Bible (1522-1534) – four (4) from the NT and seven (7) plus parts of Esther and Daniel from the OT --because, he said, he considered these writings “inferior.” He placed all eleven of them in a separate appendix at the back of his Bible with the pages unnumbered so that no one could mistake them for approved scriptures. Other Lutherans – not Martin – later restored the four NT books (Hebrews, James, Jude, Revelation) to their rightful place among the Scriptures.
The real Apocrypha are the non-canonical writings associated with the OT and NT. Deuterocanonical is a term that came into use in the 16th century; it differentiates the books that Protestants wrongly called “Apocrypha” and Catholics rightly call “Scripture.”
Present it, please.
Okay. Whatever.
Historical fact: The Catholic Church set the OT and NT canon for her own members (at the time, that was all Christians) in 382, 393, 397, and 405 (naming the very same writings as “Scripture” at each council [Rome, Hippo, Carthage], affirmed by Pope Innocent I). The Church’s canon has remained unchanged down through the centuries. Martin Luther, however, as a Protestant, removed eleven (11) books from his German translation of the Bible (1522-1534) – four (4) from the NT and seven (7) plus parts of Esther and Daniel from the OT --because, he said, he considered these writings “inferior.” He placed all eleven of them in a separate appendix at the back of his Bible with the pages unnumbered so that no one could mistake them for approved scriptures. He also wrote prefaces for these writings explaining his reasons for rejecting them from the canon. Other Lutherans – not Martin – later restored the four NT books (Hebrews, James, Jude, Revelation) to their rightful place among the Scriptures.
The real Apocrypha are the non-canonical writings associated with the OT and NT. Deuterocanonical is a term that came into use in the 16th century; it differentiates the books that Protestants wrongly called “Apocrypha” and Catholics rightly call “Scripture.”
The Catholic Church canonized the OT Scriptures she inherited from Jesus and the Apostles for Christians. She speaks for Christ (Luke 10:16) and acts solely on His authority. She does not presume to tell Jews what their canon of scriptures should be.
It’s irrelevant. Tell me where any book of Scripture makes that claim. If that’s important to you, look to the Koran, which does make that claim, not to the Bible, which does not. It is the Catholic Church that says the books in her Bible are inspired by God, not the books themselves.
Please tell me what divine miracles confirm each OT and NT writer? Who knows who wrote Genesis, Exodus, and many of the other OT and NT books. The Gospels and many of the NT letters are anonymous. You either take the Catholic Church’s word for who wrote them, or you figure it out for yourself using your best psychic powers. Then, after you’re sure who the authors are, tell me the divine miracle that confirms each of them.
Let’s see now. Hmmmm. What predictive prophecy do Numbers and Philemon contain? Refresh my memory.
It suggests that you haven’t researched these questions before asking them. All of the books of the Hebrew Canon are quoted expressly in the NT except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Obadiah, and Nahum.
Luther subtracted seven books and parts of Esther and Daniel from the Christian Bible, not the Torah. (BTW, the Torah in Judaism means the Pentateuch – the first five books of the Hebrew Scriptures: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. Christians sometimes use “Torah” to mean the entire OT. The word Torah means Law.)
They were free to express their opinion, but they are not the Church. The Church is guided by the Holy Spirit in matters of faith and morals; individually, the Church Fathers are not. Origin and Athanasius were both dead by the time the canon was decided. St. Cyril died in 386, four years after the decree on the canon was issued at Rome. Jerome’s Vulgate translation, produced at the request of Pope Damusis I who presided over the Council of Rome, published in 405, contains all of the writings canonized at the Roman council. The Vulgate is still the official Bible of the Catholic Church. After the the decision was made, it was a closed issue. Roma locuta est, causa finita est. Rome has spoken, the case is closed.
Do you mean am I offended by your questions? Not at all. Thank you for the opportunity to answer them. Peace be with you,
A sin nature is the same thing as a human nature. It’s just another way of saying it and no he didn’t have a sin nature b4 eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.Hmm … a Christian that has been washed clean in the blood of the Lamb has a “sin nature”, whatever that means.
Tiffany, I have no idea what you mean by “sin nature”. Could you explain to me what a “sin nature” is? Is a “sin nature” different than our human nature? Did Adam have both a human nature and a sin nature before he ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil?
Matt16_18 said:
If Adam didn’t have a “sin nature” before he was disobedient to God, how was he capable of sinning?
redeemed1 said:
Adam didn’t have a sin nature b4 he was disobedient to God and he was not predestined by God to sin, God new that it was going to happen but he didn’t make him.
That came out clear enough, and I don’t disagree with what you have posted. You are saying that Adam had human nature before the Fall, and that because Adam had free will, he was capable of being disobedient to God.
What you are describing is the damage to our human nature as a consequence of original sin. What you are calling “sin nature” is what the Catholic Church calls “concupiscence”.CONCUPISCENCE. Insubordination of man’s desires to the dictates of reason, and the propensity of human nature to sin as a result of original sin. More commonly, it refers to the spontaneous movement of the sensitive appetites toward whatever the imagination portrays as pleasant and away from whatever it portrays as painful. However, concupiscence also includes the unruly desires of the will, such as pride, ambition, and envy. (Etym. Latin con-, thoroughly + cupere, to desire: concupiscentia, desire, greed, cupidity.)
Would you mind if I started a new thread on this topic?
I put a question to you. Say someone perhaps a young boy around the age of 10 has excepted Christ as his personal savior and then say he lies (which is a sin) to his mother about maybe that he didn’t stick his tounge out at his sister when he really did and then he dies later that day in a car accident with an unrepentant heart about what he did. Are you saying than that he would go to hell?
Katholikos:
Josephus rejected the apocryphal books as inspired and this reflected Jewish thought at the time of Jesus. “From Artexerxes to our own time the complete history has been written but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets.” … “We have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine…”(Flavius Josephus, Against Apion 1:8) The usual division of the Old Testament by the Jews was a total of 24 books: The Books of Moses (51, The Early prophets 14; Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings ~, The Late Prophets (4; Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the 12 Minor Prophets), and the Hagiagrapha (11; Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Solomon. Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Chronicles) These 24 books contain all the material in our numbering of 39.
The Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls rejected the apocrypha as inspired. The Council of Jamnia held the same view and rejected the apocrypha as inspired.
There are reputed to be 263 quotations and 370 allusions to the Old Testament in the New Testament and not one of them refers to the Apocrypha.
“Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther” were always included in the “history collection” of Jewish booksand “Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon” were always included in the “poetry collection”. By quoting one book from the collection, it verifies the entire collection. None of the apocryphal books were ever quoted in the New Testament. Not even once! This proves the Catholic and Orthodox apologists wrong when they try to defend the apocrypha in the Bible.
The books 3rd and 4th Maccabees and psalm151 are not canonized in the Roman rite but your Greek brothers claim them as inspired. Yeshua is Lord and Messiah, Shalom. P.S. The real bible reads from right to left and this is the one I will follow. No Johnny come lately Martin Luther will change my view.