R
Rosie11
Guest
This is what a Protestant said to I’ll copy and paste it
When it comes to the extra 7 books they are called the apocrypha so when I came to formulating the Bible it related not to the apocrypha books or what we recognise as the New Testament which of those books are inspired of God which resulted in a list of 27 books which we now have the apocrypha was always treated separately from the old and the New Testament the apocrypha consists Jewish traditions historical writings it was never recognised as scripture
As we were it was never recognised and scripture by the Jews it predates the time of Christ and we do not see Christ reference these books so that should give polls furthermore when you read the books and you see a number of things that contradicts the rest of scripture both in message and in spirit you realise that there is problematic messages that are within so you have witchcraft in some of the books sorcery suicide things that are spoken of as there is nothing wrong with them although it clearly contradicts scripture
Anyway that aside a bit of history seems to be in order as well she says the first Catholic Bible was in the 300 reality is the Catholic Church exist as such until the 10 hundred around 1056 you have something called the great schism in which those church institution the West and the church institution in the east divided and split
There had already been a smaller but significant split with churches elsewhere in East Africa so all of that is likewise inaccurate
Luther had nothing to do with that process as she should know Luther come centuries after the old and the New Testament were agreed if Martin Luther had decided it’s not a matter of adding books it’s a matter of taking away there books that Jews has accepted as scripture and Christians have accepted as scripture such as Esther and James that he was not as Keen on even though he had good things to say he was far from a perfect man we do not idolize him in prodatism at least we should not well that’s just some sort of a summary let me also say the book that she alleges were accepted as scripture all along were not again jerome translated the Bible into Latin bolgate wrote very clearly disagreed with the inclusion of those books in the Bible as they were not canonical as they were not part of scripture that they were not inspired of God either Jew or the early Christian recognise them as scripture it was only after the protestant reformation well into the 1500s mid 1500s that the Roman Catholic Church held what is the council of Trent and it was then and there when they decided that these books were scripture
When it comes to the extra 7 books they are called the apocrypha so when I came to formulating the Bible it related not to the apocrypha books or what we recognise as the New Testament which of those books are inspired of God which resulted in a list of 27 books which we now have the apocrypha was always treated separately from the old and the New Testament the apocrypha consists Jewish traditions historical writings it was never recognised as scripture
As we were it was never recognised and scripture by the Jews it predates the time of Christ and we do not see Christ reference these books so that should give polls furthermore when you read the books and you see a number of things that contradicts the rest of scripture both in message and in spirit you realise that there is problematic messages that are within so you have witchcraft in some of the books sorcery suicide things that are spoken of as there is nothing wrong with them although it clearly contradicts scripture
Anyway that aside a bit of history seems to be in order as well she says the first Catholic Bible was in the 300 reality is the Catholic Church exist as such until the 10 hundred around 1056 you have something called the great schism in which those church institution the West and the church institution in the east divided and split
There had already been a smaller but significant split with churches elsewhere in East Africa so all of that is likewise inaccurate
Luther had nothing to do with that process as she should know Luther come centuries after the old and the New Testament were agreed if Martin Luther had decided it’s not a matter of adding books it’s a matter of taking away there books that Jews has accepted as scripture and Christians have accepted as scripture such as Esther and James that he was not as Keen on even though he had good things to say he was far from a perfect man we do not idolize him in prodatism at least we should not well that’s just some sort of a summary let me also say the book that she alleges were accepted as scripture all along were not again jerome translated the Bible into Latin bolgate wrote very clearly disagreed with the inclusion of those books in the Bible as they were not canonical as they were not part of scripture that they were not inspired of God either Jew or the early Christian recognise them as scripture it was only after the protestant reformation well into the 1500s mid 1500s that the Roman Catholic Church held what is the council of Trent and it was then and there when they decided that these books were scripture