Help! Questions regarding Apocrypha

[Luke1_48]

http://www.jobmonkey.com/alaska/assets/images/04troller.gif


%between%

 

[Witness]

Lisa4Catholics:

I do not see an address number 1,number two we Roman Catholics don’t run away from Jesus:whacky: We certainly did not run away from YAQUBOS,you are very prideful and vain and you might want to work on that humility is a virtue or is that another part of scripture you chose to ignore?

It’s your problem if you cannot see the address of that site. Quote the post of Luke1:48, and you will see it clearly, unless you look with RC eyes
As you see, Luke1:48 is still putting pictures… He doesn’t have anything serious to do in the RC Church.

This is for number 1

Number two: RCs do not run away from Jesus, just like the Jews were proud of being children of Abraham and they were proud of knowing the Law. According to them, they were not running away from Moses.

You certainly didn’t run away from YAQUBOS: you ( represented by your blind leaders ) just disabled his account, because he was showing you your errors, just as the Jews killed Stephen because they couldn’t answer his wise arguments.

And last: You don’t know the difference between humility and lack of boldness. Go tell John to be humble, because he says in a bold manner:

**“They are of the world; for this reason they speak [as] of the world, and the world hears them. We are of God; he that knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. From this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.” ** ( 1 John 4:5-6 )

This verse is also easy to keep in mind: 4:5-6.

So take this verse and go tell John that he is not humble.

:tiphat:

 

[st_felicity]

Witness:

It’s your problem if you cannot see the address of that site. Quote the post of Luke1:48, and you will see it clearly, unless you look with RC eyes
As you see, Luke1:48 is still putting pictures… He doesn’t have anything serious to do in the RC Church.

This is for number 1

Number two: RCs do not run away from Jesus, just like the Jews were proud of being children of Abraham and they were proud of knowing the Law. According to them, they were not running away from Moses.

You certainly didn’t run away from YAQUBOS: you ( represented by your blind leaders ) just disabled his account, because he was showing you your errors, just as the Jews killed Stephen because they couldn’t answer his wise arguments.

And last: You don’t know the difference between humility and lack of boldness. Go tell John to be humble, because he says in a bold manner:

**“They are of the world; for this reason they speak [as] of the world, and the world hears them. We are of God; he that knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. From this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.” **( 1 John 4:5-6 )

This verse is also easy to keep in mind: 4:5-6.

So take this verse and go tell John that he is not humble.

:tiphat:

I see no denial that Witness and YAQUBOS are one and the same…"**…there is nothing hidden except to be made visable; nothing secret except to come to light." (Mk 4:22) ** If you are such a pillar of Christian light, why do hide under that bushel basket?

"In the Lord I take my refuge;
** how can you say to me,**
** Flee like a bird to the mountains!**
See how the wicked string their bows,
** fit arrows to the string**
** to shoot from the shadows at the upright…" (Ps. 11:1-2)**

You, Witness (or rather “Wicked”), hide in the shadow of your new name and pretend you are righteous while you shoot arrows at God-loving Christains–you do not build up the Church–you seek to attack the foundations (and rather uncovincingly so). We do not “Flee” from you or your alter egos, we take refuge and comfort in the Lord. We Christians interested in building up the church try to help dispel some of the false teachings, such as yours, because “One may deceive you by specious arguments” (Col. 2:4) and “Odious to the Lord and to men is arrogance” (Sir. 10:7), but when it become clear that “the fool peddles folly” (Pr. 13:16), we “take refuge in Him” (Pr. 30:6).

Please see the post below that you were asked (as YAQUBOS). Why don’t you answer them here since the BIBLE thread was closed…?

 

[st_felicity]

OH–Silly me, It was posted to WITNESS! I’m having trouble keeping who is whom straight…One may need a “spirit of divination” to understand where you’re coming from. (and don’t go getting self-righteous on me saying “See, you “RCs” are from the devil” --it was a JOKE!)

martino* vbmenu_register(“postmenu_412497”, true); *
Senior Member

Join Date: June 9, 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
*Posts: 616 *

*http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon1.gif Re: Bible *
Quote:
Originally Posted by Witness
God speaks to me through the Church??? :yup: It’s evident! You don’t know what is the Church. You think it’s just the Bishops. So you think I am something OUTSIDE the Church, and God will use the Church to talk to me…

*If you are not Catholic then your are “outside” The Church! You may very well be a member of “a” church, but there is only one True Church and that be the Catholic Church. God does speak to us through the Church, why else to you think Jesus spent so much time establishing His Church before He left? *

Do you really think that Jesus chose Apostles and called them His Church only so that His Church would cease to exist as soon as the Apostles died? If there is no difference between you, me and the bishops, why did Jesus pick the 12 Apostles when He clearly had thousands of disciples? Why were only the 12 gathered around Jesus at the Last Supper?

*I know exactly what the Church is and what it isn’t. I have no idea what sort of non Catholic you are, Protestant or otherwise, but what is apparent is that you do protest against the Church exactly as the Protestant Reformers did. You make the same argument that there is no hierarchy but you cannot point to a time in Christianity when there was no hierarchy. You claim that the Bible is your only rule of faith but you cannot point to a single time before the Reformation where that was taught. You claim that God speaks directly to you and directs you in matters of Christian Doctrine but your interpretations differ from all the others that claim the same thing. *

*I appreciate your zeal for the faith and I do not doubt your sencerity, but you are mistaken if you do not believe that Christ established a Church to carry on His mission after he was to leave and that the authority given to the Apostles was passed on to their successors throughout the generations. We can prove this historically. *

*Tell me what Church you belong to, who founded it and when. *

As for the Catholic Church, it is evident that it was founded by Jesus Christ, around the year 33A.D.

God Bless!
__________________
The TRUTH shall set you free!

C’mon–Let’s hear it Witness–or will you “flee” to the shadows, or give some inane enigmatic reply that says nothing as you have done so many times before when asked for solid information…

P.S. Lisa he’s LYING about the picture–there is no way he can know the address (if you do, Witness,…POST it for us idiots )

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

OH–Silly me, It was posted to WITNESS! I’m having trouble keeping who is whom straight…One may need a “spirit of divination” to understand where you’re coming from. (and don’t go getting self-righteous on me saying “See, you “RCs” are from the devil” --it was a JOKE!)

martino* vbmenu_register(“postmenu_412497”, true); *
Senior Member

Join Date: June 9, 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
*Posts: 616 *

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon1.gif Re: Bible
Quote:
Originally Posted by Witness
God speaks to me through the Church??? :yup: It’s evident! You don’t know what is the Church. You think it’s just the Bishops. So you think I am something OUTSIDE the Church, and God will use the Church to talk to me…

*If you are not Catholic then your are “outside” The Church! You may very well be a member of “a” church, but there is only one True Church and that be the Catholic Church. God does speak to us through the Church, why else to you think Jesus spent so much time establishing His Church before He left? *

Do you really think that Jesus chose Apostles and called them His Church only so that His Church would cease to exist as soon as the Apostles died? If there is no difference between you, me and the bishops, why did Jesus pick the 12 Apostles when He clearly had thousands of disciples? Why were only the 12 gathered around Jesus at the Last Supper?

*I know exactly what the Church is and what it isn’t. I have no idea what sort of non Catholic you are, Protestant or otherwise, but what is apparent is that you do protest against the Church exactly as the Protestant Reformers did. You make the same argument that there is no hierarchy but you cannot point to a time in Christianity when there was no hierarchy. You claim that the Bible is your only rule of faith but you cannot point to a single time before the Reformation where that was taught. You claim that God speaks directly to you and directs you in matters of Christian Doctrine but your interpretations differ from all the others that claim the same thing. *

*I appreciate your zeal for the faith and I do not doubt your sencerity, but you are mistaken if you do not believe that Christ established a Church to carry on His mission after he was to leave and that the authority given to the Apostles was passed on to their successors throughout the generations. We can prove this historically. *

*Tell me what Church you belong to, who founded it and when. *

As for the Catholic Church, it is evident that it was founded by Jesus Christ, around the year 33A.D.

God Bless!
__________________
The TRUTH shall set you free!

C’mon–Let’s hear it Witness–or will you “flee” to the shadows, or give some inane enigmatic reply that says nothing as you have done so many times before when asked for solid information…

P.S. Lisa he’s LYING about the picture–there is no way he can know the address (if you do, Witness,…POST it for us idiots )

Yes, I know the truth is not in him about the picture That is another desperate attempt to try to elevate himself Witness feels like he is above all others in holiness and knowledge and has stooped to fibbing to further try to convince himself he is on the “straight and narrow”.It would do well for witness to notice that Jesus was most intollerant of the self-righteous type.Thanks St.FelicityThanks Luke 1:48 God Bless
PS Maybe you should find a picture of sponge Bob I heard Sponge Bob is a threat to all fundementals of bad will

 

[copland]

Witness,

Yes. As Jerome was not a RC so he called them Apocrypha.

By the waaaay: what does “Deuterocanonical” mean?? Does this mean that God talked less in the Apocrypha than in the canonical Books???

Was Jerome the “universial church?” Does the Church solely exist under St. Jerome’s consent? Is each Church Father the universial magesterium? Augustine lined Jerome out concerning this topic, along with many other Church Fathers. What is your point?

If it was defined at the Council of Hippo, then what was the need to finilize it at the Council of Trent? Were the RC not sure about the canon of Hippo?

Do your homework. Learn about Creeds and how they work. Many times there were things defined and later on a final definition was given when it came neccessary to clear all room for doubts,

 

[copland]

Witness,

You are zero in Hebrew, and you are just quoting what others are saying. Do you know what is the Hebrew word translated as “like a lion” or “they have pierced” ???

Hehe… RC philosophers! You are even doubting about the fact that God can keep His Scripture from human corruption!!!

I have debated enough Orthodox Jews on this verse to know exactly how they translate it. I know that the Masoretic Text clearly syas exactly what I said. And I know that the Dead sea Scrolls also read a different reading that agrees with the LXX. Do you want to challenge me on this? Or just rely on knee jerk answers to respond to me?

The Virgin Mary, Peter and all the Apostles were Jews. And they didn’t reject Jesus. All of them were using the Scripture of Palestine. And Jesus didn’t blame them for not accepting some pagan books.

Give me a break!!! The LXX is quoted by the authors of the NT 90% of the time! Please, don’t let your ignorants on this subject cause you to lose all credibility!

 

[st_felicity]

Lisa4Catholics:

PS Maybe you should find a picture of sponge Bob I heard Sponge Bob is a threat to all fundementals of bad will

Funny!:bounce:

As my final word on this thread…I must say, the readings at Mass today were very enlightening and made me recognize that perhaps my vehemence was not necessary because God is rightly above all and knows the hearts of all–what purpose does frustration or anger serve in such a case as this**…“for the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom; and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength…God chose the foolish of the world to shame the wise, and God chose the weak of the world to shame the strong, and God chose the lowly and despised, those who count for nothing, to reduce to nothing those who are something.” (1Cor. 1:25,27-28)**

Indeed, to Witness, we are foolish RCs.
To that accusation, I say THANK YOU!

God Bless you, Witness, I hope someday you become as foolish as those you despise!

Peace.

 

[anon50111284]

Witness was suspended due to actions under one of his other forum identities.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

Administrator:

Witness was suspended due to actions under one of his other forum identities.

Thankyou, for your wisdom and justice:bowdown: God Bless

 

[Psalm45_9]

Witness:

**“They are of the world; for this reason they speak [as] of the world, and the world hears them. We are of God; he that knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. From this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.” **( 1 John 4:5-6 )

This verse is also easy to keep in mind: 4:5-6.

So take this verse and go tell John that he is not humble.

:tiphat:

“Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.” (Acts 20:28)

 

[SFH]

It doesn’t look like anyone ever answered all your questions so my answers are in all caps below:

adurian:

Hi all! The peace of Christ be with you all! I’m new here. Direct to my question:

A Protestant friend is asking me why the Catholic Bible contains some Apocrypha books. I did some minimal research, but I still need to address these issues:

1. Why are the 7 apocrypha books in the Catholic Canon? THE APOCRYPHAL BOOKS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CATHOLIC CANON BECAUSE TRADITIONALLY THESE BOOKS WERE INCLUDED IN CHRISTIAN BIBLES AND CITED BY THE CHURCH FATHERS AS CANONICAL TEXTS. THE COUNCIL OF TRENT OFFICIALLY STATED THAT THESE BOOKS WERE INCLUDED IN THE CANON, BUT THE REGIONAL COUNCILS OF HIPPO AND CARTHAGE, PRESIDED OVER BY ST. AUGUSTINE, ALSO INCLUDED THESE BOOKS IN THE CANON.
2. I heard that there were 2 canons to the Old Testament – the one by the Alexandrian Jews and also by the Palestinian Jews. Which did the Catholic follow and why? ACCORDING TO TRADITION, THE PHAROAH OF EGYPT REQUESTED A GROUP OF SEVENTY SCHOLARS TO TRANSLATE THE HEBREW OLD TESTAMENT INTO GREEK. THIS GREEK TRANSLATION INCLUDED THE CANONICAL BOOKS AND WAS USED BY THE JEWS DISPERSED THROUGHOUT THE ROMAN EMPIRE AT THE TIME OF CHRIST. SCHOLARS HYPOTHESIS THAT A SHORTER CANON WAS USED BY THE PALESTINIAN JEWS AND THAT THIS CANON DID NOT INCLUDE THE APOCRYPHAL BOOKS. DISCOVERIES AT QUMRAN AND OTHER ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS CALL INTO QUESTION THIS TWO CANON THEORY. MANY SCHOLARS NOW BELIEVE THAT THERE WERE MORE THAN TWO CANONS USED BY JEWS. AROUND 100 YEARS AFTER CHRIST’S DEATH, JEWISH RABBIS HELD A COUNCIL AT JAMNIA AND DEFINED THE HEBREW CANON, WHICH DID NOT INCLUDE THE APOCRYPHAL BOOKS. BY THAT TIME, USE OF THE SEPTUAGINT, WHICH DID INCLUDE THE APOCRYPHAL BOOKS, HAD BEGUN TO TAKE HOLD IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
3. The 7 books are referred to as the ‘Deuterocanonicals’. What does the word mean, in what language? DEUTEROCANONICAL MEANS A SECOND LIST FROM THE GREEK DEUTERO “SECOND” AND CANON “LIST.”
4. When was the Catholic Canon finalized, by whom/in which council? Were there a few Councils before a final Canon was adopted? THERE HAVE BEEN OVER 20 ECUMENICAL COUNCILS AND EVEN MORE REGIONAL COUNCILS. THE CATHOLIC CANON WAS DEFINITIVELY DEFINED AT THE ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF TRENT ALTHOUGH EARLIER COUNCILS HAD DEFINED THE CATHOLIC CANON TO INCLUDE THE DEUTERO-CANONICAL BOOKS.
5. When did Protestants come up with their own canon? Is it directly at the beginning of the reformation? Why did this happen (why are the 7 books excluded)? And who was responsible for this? MARTIN LUTHER LED THE CHARGE. 2 MACHABEES CONFLICTED WITH HIS DENIAL OF PURGATORY, TOBIT GAVE HIS JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH ALONE PROBLEMS TOO. MARTIN LUTHER ACTUALLY WANTED TO EXCLUDE THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES BECAUSE IT GAVE HIS JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH ALONE THEORY TOO MANY PROBLEMS AS WELL, BUT THAT ATTEMPT MET WITH TOO MUCH OPPOSITION. NOTE THAT SOME PROTESTANTS STILL ACCEPT THE DEUTERO-CANONICAL BOOKS TO A CERTAIN DEGREE (E.G., ANGLICANS, GOD LOVE THEM!).

Another thing. I opened my Catholic bible and saw the list of Deut. books as follows:

1. Tobit
2. Judith
3. Esther (Greek)
4. Wisdom of Solomon
5. Sirach
6. Baruch
7. Letter of Jeremiah
8. Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the 3 Young Men
9. Susanna
10. Bel and the Dragon
11. 1 Maccabees
12. 2 Maccabees

How come there are 12 books as opposed to the 7 always claimed? Which ones are actually are the 7 books? ESTHER ISN’T A WHOLE BOOK, ITS THE PORTIONS OF ESTHER THAT ARE FOUND IN THE GREEK SEPTUAGINT THAT AREN’T FOUND IN THE HEBREW. THE SAME GOES FOR THE PRAYER OF AZARIA, SUSANNA, AND BEL AND THE DRAGON. THE LETTER OF JEREMIAH IS USUALLY INCLUDED AS PART OF THE BARUCH, WHICH GIVES YOU THE SEVEN BOOKS YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT.

I need proofs (citations) to each claim, because it will be very helpful to make a strong stance. If there is a website explaining this, I would be most grateful if you can give me the link. Thank you and God bless.

 

[Psalm45_9]

Now Apologists both Catholic and Non-Catholic are skeptical about if the “council” of Jamnia really did define the Palestinian Canon that the European Jews use today.

It is uncertain about how the current European Jewish canon was determined, but it seems that it was a process that contiuned until the 200s.

 

[jusher7281]

There are already very good replies to this question, to which I cannot add. I would just like to point out that almost every Protestant friend of mine (that I’ve talked to about the deuterocanonical books) had no idea that they are even in Catholic Bibles and that they had been removed at the time of the Reformation. They simply had no idea there were two different canons out there. Also, when I try to explain why that is, they simply say, “Huh, I never knew that” and go on their way, like nothing is wrong. If someone is going to stake their salvation on the Bible alone, wouldn’t they want to know everything they possibly could about it?

JU

 

[Psalm45_9]

Witness:

Is it true that there are at least four different sets of apocrypha in the different traditional churches?

Catholic: 1 and 2 Maccabees, Baruch, Daniel additions, Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), Esther additions, Judith, Letter of Jeremiah in Baruch, Tobit, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus).

Slavonic Orthodox: Same as the Catholic Apocrypha plus 2 Esdras, 3 Esdras, and 3 Maccabees, Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151.

Why don’t RC accept the Slavonic Orthodox Apocrypha?

Because the Slavonic Orthodox are not in union with the Catholic Church.

**

Witness:

Greek Orthodox:

Same as Slavonic Orthodox Apocrypha plus 4 Maccabees in the appendix.**

Actually it is the Slavonic Orthodox that have it in the appendix. However, appendix means it is not accepted as scripture.

Witness:

Oh, why not accept then the Greek Orthodox?

The same reason as the Slavonic Orthodox (who are not in full union with the Patriarch of Constantinople).

**

Witness:

Historical Coptic:

1, 2, 3 Maccabees, Baruch, Daniel additions, Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), Esther additions, Judith, Letter of Jeremiah, Psalm 151, Tobit, Wisdom of Solomon. However, under Cyril V (1874-1927), The Coptic church later rejected these books as part of the Bible. See The Coptic Encyclopedia vol.1 p.161 for more info.

Oh! Those Coptics seem to be protestant!!! Excommunicate them right now!!! **

The Coptic Orthodox were excommunicated, looooooooong ago.

:tiphat: When you wanna talk about history and facts, please don’t be hypocrite. Because you will stand before the HOLY and RIGHTEOUS Judge.

Ditto.

The Saducees only believed the Torah was scripture.

The Pharisees had a larger canon.

The Alexandrian Jews had an even larger canon. (The Ethiopian Jews still use it today.)

Yet all who read and made these canons were under the Old Covenant.

 

[Coptic]

Whoever is speaking of the Coptic Orthodox Church should do their research before they make such statements.

For one thing, we do accept the deuterocanonical books, just let me know if you need a little proof. I can provide a link for a Coptic Orthodox Church posting an article defending those books. As well as a second link, about the courses of a Coptic Orthodox Seminary, one of which is about the deuterocanonical books.

Second, we seem Protestant??? That is the most obsured, uneducated thing I’ve ever heard anyone say of the Coptic Church. We are a fully Sacramental, Apostolic Church. Our current Pope/Patriarch is the 117th successor os St. Mark and we follow the exact same 7 sacraments as any othe Catholic or Orthodox Church. Many of your highly regarded Church fathers: St. Anthony (the father of Monastacism) St. Cyril of Alexandria, and St. Athanasius were all Copts, and the two latter ones were each Popes in my church.

Finally, we were excommunicated?? I think it was more of a mutual seperation, which at the time was over the Nature of Christ, and which, since then your late Pope John Paul, and my current Pope/Patriarch Shenouda III, signed a mutual statement that we hold the same belief. Granted we have our differences now, but what seperated us at the time is no longer an issue.

So please, think before you post.

God Bless,
Elizabeth