R
Rightlydivide
Guest
My point was just posted. I do not need to make a point initially. I will present my case as I see fit. I wanted to see how people would respond. It helps me to know how to proceed.
- Status
R
Rightlydivide
Guest
Your questions reflect a presupposition that people form a canon as opposed to recognizing it. They (your questions) suffer from Catholic anachronistic thinking that humans have more authority than what God gave them. So I will present facts from history to show that the Jews and early Christians adhered to a different canon that based upon the data can be shown to be closed. I frame my case as I see fit. I do not let others frame my case.
E
elvisman
Guest
**More powers than what God gave them? Are you kidding? God gave the Church Supreme Authority on earth to make decisions that would also be retified in heaven:
Matt. 16:19
**"I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." **
Matt:18:18
"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will have been bound in heaven, and whatever you release on earth will have been released in heaven."
Luke 10:16
"Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me."
John 16:13-15
"But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming. He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you. Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you."
John 20:21-23
***“Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.” ***
**And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained." **Authority doesn’t get ANY more supreme than that, my friend. This is *precisely *why Augustine said:
“I would not believe the Gospel itself, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.”
**
P
Poco
Guest
Which you continually fail to do! Which is understandable as there was no “canon”, Judaic or Christian prior to the first “list” created at the Council of Rome 382 A.D. or at least the Council of Hippo 393 or even the Council of Carthage 397. The same list ratified by every succeeding council that addressed the issue until finally closed at Trent in 1546. But I’m repeating myself.
P
peeteyg
Guest
The council of jamnia (jewish) saw new christians using the books so they removed them from their OT books. So the later protestants saw the decree of the jewish council (that rejects jesus as the messiah) as authoratative.
B
Byzman
Guest
Rightly,
Sadly you are ignoring what the Talmud says of Sirach. Sadly you are also not reading the Prologue “rightly.” Look at what comes from reading the Law, the Prophets and the other books of the fathers…the translator says instruction(learning) and Wisdom. Look also at what the translator says the reason why his grandfather did his work…for instruction and wisdom. He also mentions that the “rest of the other books,” as distinguished from the Law and the Prophets but along with them are hard to read when translated. I think the translator here is counting the Book of Sirach among the “rest of the other books.” Why else was this work translated if others of Scripture were being translated? Because of it containing the same criteria as the Law, the Prophets, and the other books of our fathers as having instruction and wisdom.
Now back to you ignoring the Talmud calling the book of Sirach as among the writings. Why do you ignore this? This is evidence of the Writings not being officially closed yet by the Jews for they did once consider the writings to be an uncertain number of books.
They rejected Sirach later because of this book becoming the “Church’s Book,” Ecclesiasticus.
N
Nicea325
Guest
Of course because it is more convenient for you. Here is your approach: I will answer only what suits me,but I’ll ignore something I cannot answer.
A clear sign you have no evidence-defeat is tough for some to swallow. Hang in there Rightlydivide.
N
Nicea325
Guest
And you sufffer from a fundamentalist novelty-a closed OT canon before Jesus. No offense,but your whole line about ‘recoginizing’ and ‘determining’ the canon is the biggest-COP-OUT! Plain and simple!
Yes, we all can see how you frame your arguments-Present my evidence and IGNORE others evidence and TOUGH questions. It is so obvious you are drowning in your own desparation to prove your bogus belief.
Furthermore,your presupposition that Catholics believe humans have more authority than what God them is absurd! Christ founded His church with AUTHORITY-read your Bible in its proper context.
R
Rightlydivide
Guest
Byzman-The Talmud was compiled at a much later date and includes passages that support and refute my view. As such, its contradictory and unreliable. If we start using the Talmud, we give it credence in the other things it says as well. If someone wants to cherry pick the Talmud, go right ahead. I could too…as you well know.
I also need to know who is staying. Nicea and Salvatore are worse than Urban Meyers. Are you in or out?
I also need to know who is staying. Nicea and Salvatore are worse than Urban Meyers. Are you in or out?
N
Nicea325
Guest
They taught us something important when I served the Air Force: Integrity and Accountability. Where is your integrity and accountability Rightlydivded to admit your failure to answer mine and Salvatore’s questions?
B
Byzman
Guest
Rightly,
Let’s knit and pick than! The Talmud is a reliable resource as to what was used as references for the Jewish people. The fact is the Talmud quotes the Book of Sirach quite a bit…after you say the canon was supposedly closed. Not reliable? Is is not from the Talmud that we receive what took place at Jamnia? Is it not from the Talmud that the Jews receive their lists of what the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings consists of?
In fact what is interesting is that the Talmud mentions the Book of ben Sira as among the Writings, than later it mentions that this book does not render the hands unclean. Hmmm…possilbly showing the process of the “writings” developing? Oh wait a sec…the book of ben Sira is mentioned as not rendering the hands unclean after it mentions the Gospels do not render the hands unclean. Quite strange to mention a Jewish book right after Christian Books? Could it possibly be that they saw the Christians using this book?
If you would like references I will be happy to supply them…right now I am out and about using my iPod.
P
Poco
Guest
Rightly cannot come up with any evidence of a “closed” Judaic canon because… there is none! The only thing close to any “canon” are the lists of books named in the Christian councils of the late 4th century. And these, by the way, are the same 73 books in the current Catholic Bible.
B
Byzman
Guest
Also I just realized you didnt mention what I said about “instruction and wisdom” of Sirach.
R
Rightlydivide
Guest
No. Trent passed over 1st Esdras.
P
Poco
Guest
Are you claiming that 1st Esdras was included in earlier councils and then removed at Trent? What are you trying to say?
B
Byzman
Guest
Yeah, he is. This argument is nothing new. This argument ignores the fact that what was called 2 Esdras in the Septuagint became known as Ezra and Nehemiah, or as the early Councils called it, 1 and 2 Esdras. This again can be shown from the early Church. If he is trying to go this way, than again he is doing what it called a red herring, a illogical fallacy that sways the attention of the argument to focus on something else, all the while trying to diminish what was being argued at that moment.
R
Rightlydivide
Guest
Protestant and Catholic side, including the wiggle out of this from the Catholic site
aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=1948
catholic-legate.com/Apologetics/Scripture/Articles/EsdrasRe-examined.aspx
At least get our argument right Byzman
B
Byzman
Guest
Every Vulgate manuscript contains Ezra and Nehemiah as 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras…if this isnt evidence as to what the councils of Hippo and Carthage meant, than should a Protestant take the words of the Fathers and twist them around, or a council for that matter?
I will say this, if 1 and 2 Esdras of the Septuagint came down in the Vulgate as 1 and 2 Esdras(the second book containing Ezra and Nehemiah), and than after the Council of Trent there were a change, than I would say this argument does have some credence.
But as I said, the Vulgate has 1 and 2 Esdras as Ezra and Nehemiah. Again…that website you listed shows Origen noted this difference early on. Do you look at as a wiggling out of an argument when we have the Fathers as our witness?
Shall I say all of antiquity!
B
Byzman
Guest
Oh and does 1 Esdras of the LXX being considered Scripture by some of the Fathers shake my foundations?..No, because I am Byzantine Catholic…the LXX is part of our tradition. I have the OSB and I read 1 Esdras, 3 Maccabees, Psalm 151, and, most importantly, the Prayer of Manasseh(which I pray), as (name removed by moderator)sired Scripture. The Fathers at Trent passed over on voting these books…why? Possibly because these books are not part of their tradition. Hippo and Carthage were not Ecumenical Councils, therefore only bound to western Churches.
S
Salvatore123
Guest
Rightly says in response to my questions, after I specifically stated as a “given” that God/Holy Spirit were the authors of sacred scripture and that sacred scripture came FROM God/Holy Spirit:
“Your questions reflect a presupposition that people form a canon as opposed to recognizing it. They (your questions) suffer from Catholic anachronistic thinking that humans have more authority than what God gave them. So I will present facts from history to show that the Jews and early Christians adhered to a different canon that based upon the data can be shown to be closed. I frame my case as I see fit. I do not let others frame my case.”
I retire, but am somewhat annoyed that you are, according to you, in a position where you “grade papers”, which I assume means you are a teacher.
I hope MY tax dollars are not going to the school where I teach . . .
“Your questions reflect a presupposition that people form a canon as opposed to recognizing it. They (your questions) suffer from Catholic anachronistic thinking that humans have more authority than what God gave them. So I will present facts from history to show that the Jews and early Christians adhered to a different canon that based upon the data can be shown to be closed. I frame my case as I see fit. I do not let others frame my case.”
I retire, but am somewhat annoyed that you are, according to you, in a position where you “grade papers”, which I assume means you are a teacher.
I hope MY tax dollars are not going to the school where I teach . . .
- Status