Isn't 66 an incomplete number of books in the (Protestant) Bible?

[Roman_Catholic_1]

In the BEGINNING was the WORD and the WORD was with God and the WORD was GOD. What God said in Scripture, which is the voice of God was well decided before your extra books were added to combat the reformers; for the WORD contains no error, but those extra’s do and you actually know that which begs the question; do you believe the Word is without error? If so, then why do you refer to books with error as from God. You can have it both ways with man, but never with God…right?

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God… And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Jn 1:1,14

The Word = Christ

God bless you

 

[Benadam]

If a tree falls in the woods with no one around, does it make a sound?

If there is no one who can read a book, does it have any authority?

If there is no one to exercise authority, does it really exist?

 

[Masters_Servant]

A couple of these points have been made already, but here goes.

1. The Protestant Old Testament conforms to the Hebrews scriptures ar your neighborhood synagogue.

2. Protestant Bibles often have carried the Apocryphal books between the Old and the New Testament, where they would chronologically belong.

3. In some denominational hymnals excerpts from the Apocrypha are included in the readings, often located at the back of those hymnals.

4. I don't believe that the seven books were omitted because the Reformers thought they contradicted their theologies. There had been an on-going debate within Catholicism as to the final canon. St. Jerome, creator of the Vulgate, preferred to have only the 39 books in the Old Testament.

5. This provides an issue for those whon want to wrangle. As far as I'm concerned, it's quite unimportant when we compare it to 100 other far more pressing issues. There seem to be those who will exploit nearly every difference to put down Catholicism or Protestantism, the churches of fellow Christians.

6. There is much truth in the Hebrew scriptures, but also much that I can't believe. For example, did God order Joshua to murder every resident of Jericho after the walls came down? Did our merciful Lord command Saul to kill every remaining Amalekite? If one opposes abortion, how can one believe that God would demand such atrocities?

7. One of my least favorite books, by the way, is Esther. No mention of God in it. Besides, it's a tale of bitter revenge. 75,000 (as I recall) slaughtered.

God bless all his children, of every creed, color and country.

I have a question, if you do not believe the word of God is without error, then why do you call yourself a Christian? I ask because I never have yet come acorss a Christian that believed otherwise - curious.

 

[Masters_Servant]

Though my church is of Protestant heritage, I’m not particularly stuck on the 66 book canon. It wouldn’t astonish me at all if the 73 book canon were to be correct. I have several Bibles that include the Deuterocanonical books, and though I haven’t yet read those books, I intend to.

They have known errors; does god error?

 

[StrawberryJam]

Most Protestants would agree that in the Bible, 7 is a considered to be a complete or perfect number, whereas 6 is not.

Some quotes (from Protestant and non-Catholic sites)-

"it (6) is 7 minus 1, i.e., man’s coming short of spiritual perfection. In any case, therefore, it has to do with man;** it is the number of imperfection**; the human number; the number of MAN as destitute of God, without God, without Christ. "
biblestudy.org/bibleref/meaning-of-numbers-in-bible/6.html

“Six and Seven together as combining and contrasting what is human and what is spiritual.”
biblestudy.org/bibleref/meaning-of-numbers-in-bible/6and7.html

“Six → **Man, beast, Satan **
Seven → Perfection, completeness”
christcenteredmall.com/teachings/symbolism/numbers.htm

“The most prevalent number in prophecy is the number seven. Its use is clearly related to time and a complete number of a set.”
teachinghearts.org/dre17httnumber.html

“6- represents the worship of man, and is the number of man, signifying his rebellion, imperfection, works, and disobedience.”
“7- represents perfection, and is the sign of God, divine worship, completions, obedience, and rest.”
mostamazingprophecies.com/Resources/KeysToBibleNumbers/tabid/132/Default.aspx

There are many other sites!

The point I want to make is this - Is it not bothersome to Protestants that their Bible contains 66 books? If 7 is a complete number and 6 isn’t, then 66 sounds like an incomplete number of books in the Bible.

I also read on some sites that 6 represents the works of man. As a Catholic, it seems to me that it is indeed a work of man that Protestants have 66 books in the Bible. After all, as a Catholic I would argue that Marin Luther took out 7 books from the Bible, so his “work” (Protestant Bible) had not one but two 6s in it (66 books), showing its incompleteness!

To me, it sounds reasonable that number of books in the Bible should be complete and therefore the number 73 (the number of books in the Catholic Bible) makes more sense to me, especially since 7 and 3 are both complete numbers!

I have already provided evidence for 7 being a complete number. Here’s some evidence for 3 being a complete number as well:

“Three, therefore, stands for that which is solid, real, substantial, complete, and entire.
All things that are specially complete are stamped with this number three.”
biblestudy.org/bibleref/meaning-of-numbers-in-bible/3.html

I like this one-
"The motif of the third day therefore reaches its climax in the fact of the resurrection on the third day. It is then that the emphasis of the** third day as one of spiritual activity and completeness** finds its culmination in Christ’s finished redemptive work. And yet, the motif suggests that there is still more to be seen. (Tradition? ) "
bible.org/seriespage/use-three-bible

Now before someone comes back at me and says that the number of Christ himself is 66, let me quote from that earlier cited website:

“Now the wonderful fact is that we have in the genealogy of Luke 3 exactly 77 names, with GOD at the one end, and JESUS at the other. This is indeed stamping it with the number of spiritual perfection… So that while Jesus is the 77th name in the line which comes through Nathan, it is the 66th name in the line which comes through Solomon. When we remember that six is the human number, and seven the Divine, can we doubt that we are thus pointed to the fact that Jesus was both Son of God and Son of Man?”
biblestudy.org/bibleref/meaning-of-numbers-in-bible/6and7.html

Based on this logic (using this term loosely) I can use numerology as a guide to life, and all it’s meaning.

thanks! I will stock up on tin foil today!

 

[Dancelittleewok]

They have known errors; does god error?

I don’t see any Catholic here making the claim that God has errors: it is up to you to prove that the Deurocanonical books contain errors, not the Catholic to prove that God errors since this isn’t our belief in the first place.

 

[StrawberryJam]

I don’t see any Catholic here making the claim that God has errors: it is up to you to prove that the Deurocanonical books contain errors, not the Catholic to prove that God errors since this isn’t our belief in the first place.

Well, is God (that you believe in) really what he is cracked up to be?

 

[Dancelittleewok]

Well, is God (that you believe in) really what he is cracked up to be?

SJ, I’m not sure what you mean.

 

[Masters_Servant]

This is a key. The organic component that guarantees understanding as it pertains to scripture.

Every word in Scripture expresses a memory of one of the Church. No matter who’s memory, it is nothing standing alone. The Gospels are the shared memories of those who knew Jesus. The memory of those who remembered Jesus. This is the Church’s memory. The memory of the Life of Christ long ago and active today in the lives of it’s members.The Holy Spirit reminds us of what Jesus said and did. If what is in our mind isn’t from what was remembered since the beginning the Holy Spirit cannot re-mind us of anything. In as much as the image of Christ is formed from the memory of the Church the Holy Spirit can use it and apply it to our lives today and prompt us. In as much as we hold the memory of the Church the Holy Spirit can bring to mind understanding of scripture.

One problem with that analysis; what is the “memory of the Church”; this pertains to individuals, not a magisterium.

**But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. **

What is the natural man? Is it not an individual person?

15 But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is rightly judged by no one. 16 For “who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct Him?” But we have the mind of Christ.

Now is the “he” an individual? Is the “we” a collective of individuals? Understand now the problem or flaw(s) you have with your statement or argument? This is not the only passages that can demonstrate that God reveals Himself to one individual at a time & that one of the jobs of the HS is to teach the individual. Look at Psalm 86:11 as an OT example; God always works with individuals because it is the collection of individual Christians that is the church that Jesus is building and yet to be revealed as the Scripture teaches contrary to some other teachings floating around out there.

 

[StrawberryJam]

SJ, I’m not sure what you mean.

Can you accept the view he did it perfectly? If so, you ought to ignore my question.

 

[Dancelittleewok]

Can you accept the view he did it perfectly? If so, you ought to ignore my question.

If God can error, then He cannot be God–God by definition must be perfect. Yet He used human authors, which explains the differences in the accounts.

 

[Masters_Servant]

(sorry)

All bibles from the time when the canon was set till Martin Luther contained both the Protocanonical and the Deuterocanonical books.

Can you prove otherwise???

I have a 1611 edition with those books; it is not a question if the books existed, we know they do, but if they are the WORD, if they are, then we should not believe anything God has said because these books, which were used as “devotionals”, not inspired of God, contain errors and that is easily proved. the Catholic Church allowed their priests at one time to teach then as devotionals or spiritual lessons or to treat them as Scripture; it was their choice. It was until later that it became etched in stone in order to combat the reformers on issues like praying to saints for example…:dancing:

 

[StrawberryJam]

If God can error, then He cannot be God–God by definition must be perfect. Yet He used human authors, which explains the differences in the accounts.

So, he did not use the best possible means to make his truth known to the maximum amount of lives at any given time in history, pre Christ or post Christ?

 

[Dancelittleewok]

So, he did not use the best possible means to make his truth known to the maximum amount of lives at any given time in history, pre Christ or post Christ?

I am not denying the validity of the Bible here. I’m not sure where you are going with this. The Bible is an object. While being a holy object, it cannot speak for itself, even though, it’s inspired by. Hence for this reason, a human interpreter is needed.

 

[Masters_Servant]

So, he did not use the best possible means to make his truth known to the maximum amount of lives at any given time in history, pre Christ or post Christ?

God chose before the first persons ever existed who would be redeemed; a promise made to the Son by the Father. Man is secondary in this whole deal; the relationship that exists among the Trinity is the primary. The creation is to display his attributes and character before His creation and so the creation would in return give Him the glory He deserves. But a natural person cannot understand this, for the power to understand the word of God comes from God. But id one is willing to themselves as the God sees man, as sinners and very ugly sinners at that, then realize there is nothing inside them to gain any favor with God, then the person will not only see themselves as the sinner they are but see God as the only means of escape from the penalty of sin and cry out for help; then He will open the door to eternal life. This is why Jesus said, deny yourself, pick up your cross and follow me and why the tax collector in Luke 19, beating on his chest and not willing to even look up to heaven said God be merciful to me a sinner; then Jesus said that man compared to the self righteous Pharisee, went away justified, while the Pharisee remained in his sin.

If you are interested in finding out a great deal more; I can give you some links based strictly on the Bible to checkout - send me an email if you want. No I am not trying to evangelize; god is the one who moves men to Him, not me.

 

[guanophore]

But id one is willing to themselves as the God sees man, as sinners and very ugly sinners at that, then realize there is nothing inside them to gain any favor with God, then the person will not only see themselves as the sinner they are ,,,

I think you don’t see this for the Calvanism that it is. I say that because you have said you are “non-denominational”. I am sure you believe that, but you have been heavily influenced by Calvanistic thought, whether you realize it, or not.

Perhaps you would like to explain why God loves the ugly sinners so much? when He looks at man, and sees them with no good, why is He willing to die for them?

If you think about this, you will realize that this is not a scriptural view at at all. On the contrary, God created man as the pinnacle of His work on earth. He then declared His creation “good”. He created man to be “good”. When mankind chose to disobey God, the image and likeness of God in which man was made was wounded. Jesus came to restore that image in us, so that we could be with Him in heaven for eternity. God does not want “ugly” in heaven with Him.

If you are interested in finding out a great deal more; I can give you some links based strictly on the Bible to checkout - send me an email if you want. No I am not trying to evangelize; god is the one who moves men to Him, not me.

This is considered an evangelistic invitation. It appears that you are wanting to draw members away from CAF, to your non-Catholic sources.

 

[elvisman]

In the BEGINNING was the WORD and the WORD was with God and the WORD was GOD. What God said in Scripture, which is the voice of God was well decided before your extra books were added to combat the reformers; for the WORD contains no error, but those extra’s do and you actually know that which begs the question; do you believe the Word is without error? If so, then why do you refer to books with error as from God. You can have it both ways with man, but never with God…right?

Interesting. Nor really, but at least, it’s funny.

Can you prove that what you said (in red) is true?
**I can prove that you are dead wrong.
Every once in a while, I hear this ridiculous charge, but please - enlighten me.

 

[elvisman]

Try again; here is the text you quoted and your above post changed the contextual meaning; surprise.

John 16:7-15 7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. 8 And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: 9 of sin, because they do not believe in Me; 10 of righteousness, because I go to My Father and you see Me no more; 11 of judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. 12 I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13 ***However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. 14 He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. ***15 All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you.

Quite a leap from speaking to His disciples to your church.
So was Jesus lying when He told these “uneducated and lowly disciples” the following?:

John 14:25-27 25 "These things I have spoken to you while being present with you. 26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you. 27 Peace I leave with you, My peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.

This also demonstrates who the true interpreter of Scripture is among other passages and as easily observed in the world; every place in the world this lack of knowledge of the Word of God is displayed, every place. Some place more concentrated than others.

But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because **God from the beginning chose you for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth, **

This is He who came by water and blood–Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth.

When Jesus spoke and gave instruction (i.e. the Beatitudes) to the public (apostles, disciples and the people) he spoke to ALL uf us. ****When he gave instructions only to his Apostles - he was giving them to the leaders of the Church. **

This is not nuclear physics. It doesn’t take a genius to figure this out.

Nothing I said was out of context, your limited understanding of the Scriptures notwithstanding . . .

 

[elvisman]

Masters Servant;[COLOR=black:
[QUOTE]
6518936]the Catholic Church allowed their priests at one time to teach then (Deuteros) as devotionals or spiritual lessons or to treat them as Scripture; it was their choice. It was until later that it became etched in stone in order to combat the reformers on issues like praying to saints for example…
[/QUOTE]
:dancing:
Again - put your history where your mouth is and PROVE your claims.
I can make the claime that Luther was a cross-dresser but without proof - it only makes me a liar.

**PLEASE enlighten us, MS because history tells us that the canon was agreed upon at the Councils of Rome, Hippo and Carthage in the FOURTH century. **

It was later reiterated at Trent, which was necessary at the time to remind thosee involved in the Protestant Revolt of their grave doctrinal errors based on their flawed, partial collection of the canon after having tossed out the Deuterocanonicals.**

**In short - if you cannot prove your charge - you are either a liar or REALLY ignorant of history.

 

[elvisman]

1. I don’t believe that the seven books were omitted because the Reformers thought they contradicted their theologies. There had been an on-going debate within Catholicism as to the final canon. St. Jerome, creator of the Vulgate, preferred to have only the 39 books in the Old Testament.

Guess again