M
mcq72
Guest
I thought he did not remove them, had them in his bibles, though prefacing them as “deutero/apocrypha”, as did first editions of KJV
- Status
M
mcq72
Guest
And who commissioned them to write it,and exactly what was their commission, what were they charged to write ?
S
steve-b
Guest
that is excusing the rejection of truth.steve-b:
like guilt by association. Just because they got Jesus wrong , consequently got any writ wrong after Malachi (NT), doesn’t mean they got OT books wrong. I mean it is their history, their “walk”, that breed us.
Is their anything in Deutero books that was prophetic about Jesus, more than other books they accepted, that would create hostility and bias ?
I’ll answer this at the end
The following passage from Ezekiel, describes 4 possible scenarios and consequences that I think answers you
putting this in terms of Catholic teaching
Using Ez 3:17-21 and these examples
A = Catholic,
B = someone doing wrong,
Life = heaven,
Death = hell,
Word = scripture or Church teaching
here’s 4 potential scenarios using Ezekiel. Bottom line, We don’t live in a consequence free life.
- “If I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at your hand.”
. IOW A gives B no warning. A & B are both screwed. Both die - “But if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, or from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but you will have saved your life.”
. IOW A gives B warning. B ignores the warning. A lives B is screwed. - “if a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and I lay a stumbling block before him, he shall die; because you have not warned him, he shall die for his sin, and his righteous deeds which he has done shall not be remembered; but his blood I will require at your hand.”
. IOW A gives B no warning. A is screwed. B is being B and is screwed and ALSO, his good works are not remembered - "Nevertheless if you warn the righteous man not to sin, and he does not sin, he shall surely live, because he took warning; and you will have saved your life.”
. IOW A warns B and B listens and changes, A & B live
I would do all I can to be in scenerio 2 & 4 and avoid like the plague, #s 1 & 3
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
Luther demoted scriptural books to apocrypha statussteve-b:
I thought he did not remove them, had them in his bibles, though prefacing them as “deutero/apocrypha”, as did first editions of KJV
Luther defined apocrypha as
"Apocrypha–that is, books which are not regarded as equal to the holy Scriptures, and yet are profitable and good to read.”
IOW he demoted 7 canonical books to apocrypha ( ≠ scripture ) status
Protestant bibles don’t even include the apocrypha anymore., After all, why waste paper and space, putting something that isn’t scripture to them, into a book of scripture
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
“those” followed Jesus into His Church.lanman87:
How did God’s chosen people decide ?
Last edited:
B
Benadam
Guest
Benadam:
I do believe that but don’t think it has been accomplished yet.mcq72:
I was thinking of truth marching in a historical sense. I was wondering if you would agree that it began marching at Pentecost fully true, a faith that was all truth with nothing believed that was not true.Benadam:
Yes and no. Truth marches and so does some error sometimes…doesn’t negate the truth, unfortunately not the error also…else why would one need discernment, why would one need to knock, or seek with all of ones heart.
Truth can not be partly false, just as error can not be partly true. I think what you bring up is something different altogether, where truth and error can reside together.Isn’t that one of the aspects of the battle , the challenge, to indeed walk in the Spirit, to be petfect as the Father in heaven is perfect?
If we agree on that, then does it follow that faith that didn’t believe anything not true, at some point began believing things not true. Then that faith began believing more and more untrue things. Then if you would agree that since faith started out without believing in any untrue thing it isn’t reasonable to think that truth can march on to inform our faith until we are no longer believing untrue things.
Wasn’t it accomplished at Pentecost?Benadam said:
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
And Jesus said, “Salvation is of the Jews”.
So once again, how did they determine what is Holy Writ ?
R
rcwitness
Guest
Mc, I have appreciated your points about the Deuteros!
I would like to look into your arguements/position better.
But it should have its own thread. Not that it hasnt been done to death, but we all learn new things, right?
I would like to look into your arguements/position better.
But it should have its own thread. Not that it hasnt been done to death, but we all learn new things, right?
L
lanman87
Guest
Well, the OT is supposed to be a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. If they weren’t written in Hebrew then that is a big red flag that they weren’t actually Hebrew Scriptures. The New Testament was written by Greek speakers for Greeks Speakers. You are talking apples and oranges.
Jerome’s translation also had a preface disparaging the Deutero books. It was Jerome who first used the term apocrypha, not Luther.
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
If this is the case then I would not consider those books to be scripture because they are not accepted by the vast majority of Christianity.
S
steve-b
Guest
Here’s the answersteve-b:
And Jesus said, “Salvation is of the Jews”.
So once again, how did they determine what is Holy Writ ?
At the Transfiguration, on top of Mt Tabor, when Jesus took Peter James and his brother John with Him, who else appeared with them?
God the Father, Moses and Elijah.
So on the top of this mount, all together, was OT and NT. Moses and Elijah representing the law and the prophets, Jesus who spoke in the beginning and all that is, came into existence, Peter who Jesus renames Rock, and says He will build His Church on Peter, and will give him the keys to the kingdom of God, and the apostles and brothers, James and John were also there…
And what did the Father say to Moses, Elijah, Peter, James and John?
“This is my Son, … listen to Him”.
Jesus is the one Moses and Elijah pointed to in the OT but didn’t know the specifics at the time. They were working in the shadows… And NOW they were enlightened to that here. And those who came through their line of believers, followed Jesus into His Church.
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
Well, in this case the Church made a mistake. Jerome, (and the others) had the better argument, and still do to this day.
S
steve-b
Guest
What argument?steve-b:
Well, in this case the Church made a mistake. Jerome, (and the others) had the better argument, and still do to this day.
L
lanman87
Guest
The reasons they considered the Deutero books to not be equal to that of the Hebrew Scriptures.
W
Wannano
Guest
No, it began marching at Pentecost. Then began assimilating things not true.Wannano:
Benadam:
I do believe that but don’t think it has been accomplished yet.mcq72:
I was thinking of truth marching in a historical sense. I was wondering if you would agree that it began marching at Pentecost fully true, a faith that was all truth with nothing believed that was not true.Benadam:
Yes and no. Truth marches and so does some error sometimes…doesn’t negate the truth, unfortunately not the error also…else why would one need discernment, why would one need to knock, or seek with all of ones heart.
Truth can not be partly false, just as error can not be partly true. I think what you bring up is something different altogether, where truth and error can reside together.Isn’t that one of the aspects of the battle , the challenge, to indeed walk in the Spirit, to be petfect as the Father in heaven is perfect?
If we agree on that, then does it follow that faith that didn’t believe anything not true, at some point began believing things not true. Then that faith began believing more and more untrue things. Then if you would agree that since faith started out without believing in any untrue thing it isn’t reasonable to think that truth can march on to inform our faith until we are no longer believing untrue things.Wasn’t it accomplished at Pentecost?
S
steve-b
Guest
If I gave that as an answer, I would automatically give a reference properly referenced to validate that, knowing up front I would get an automatic request for “please provide your reference”?steve-b:
Well, the OT is supposed to be a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. If they weren’t written in Hebrew then that is a big red flag that they weren’t actually Hebrew Scriptures. The New Testament was written by Greek speakers for Greeks Speakers. You are talking apples and oranges.
Jerome’s translation also had a preface disparaging the Deutero books. It was Jerome who first used the term apocrypha, not Luther.
.This appears to be a fair comment on Jerome’s positions of the deuterocanonicals
“He never either categorically acknowledged or rejected the deuterocanonical books as part of the Canon of Scripture, and he repeatedly made use of them. On the inspiration, the existence of a spiritual meaning, and the freedom of the Bible from error, he holds the traditional doctrine. Possibly he has insisted more than others on the share which belongs to the sacred writer in his collaboration in the inspired work. His criticism is not without originality.”
That said, Jerome included the 7 books. AND they have remained.
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
Answered here perhapssteve-b:
The reasons they considered the Deutero books to not be equal to that of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
From the Catholic Encyclopedia
During this intermediate age the use of St. Jerome’s new version of the Old Testament (the Vulgate) became widespread in the Occident. With its text went Jerome’s prefaces disparaging the deuterocanonicals, and under the influence of his authority the West began to distrust these and to show the first symptoms of a current hostile to their canonicity
Also, I misspoke about Jerome being the first to use the term apocrypha. That term was used early in church history. However, it was Jerome who called the Deutero books apocrypha in his preface. Luther, and later reformers, agreed with Jerome.
Last edited:
W
Wannano
Guest
Sorry Benedam, I just realized I have been misreading your statement. You are saying “it isn’t reasonable” and I having been reading it as “isn’t it reasonable” and then agreeing. I read it wrong but actually do believe that is exactly what has happened.Benadam:
No, it began marching at Pentecost. Then began assimilating things not true.Wannano:
Benadam:
I do believe that but don’t think it has been accomplished yet.mcq72:
I was thinking of truth marching in a historical sense. I was wondering if you would agree that it began marching at Pentecost fully true, a faith that was all truth with nothing believed that was not true.Benadam:
Yes and no. Truth marches and so does some error sometimes…doesn’t negate the truth, unfortunately not the error also…else why would one need discernment, why would one need to knock, or seek with all of ones heart.
Truth can not be partly false, just as error can not be partly true. I think what you bring up is something different altogether, where truth and error can reside together.Isn’t that one of the aspects of the battle , the challenge, to indeed walk in the Spirit, to be petfect as the Father in heaven is perfect?
If we agree on that, then does it follow that faith that didn’t believe anything not true, at some point began believing things not true. Then that faith began believing more and more untrue things. Then if you would agree that since faith started out without believing in any untrue thing it isn’t reasonable to think that truth can march on to inform our faith until we are no longer believing untrue things.Wasn’t it accomplished at Pentecost?
M
mcq72
Guest
I believe Catholic bible also does not have all the books contained in the Septuagint ( the Septuagint should not be considered OT Greek “bible”)
Last edited:
- Status