Jesus did not write one letter of Scripture

[Bill_Pick]

Add to the above, I submit that Jesus did not come to write a book but to found a Church. He did so and that church is called, today, the Roman Catholic Church. And as He promised, it would stand for all time due to His protection. It has done so, just as He promised! THANKS BE TO GOD!

IS IT CALLED THE RCC OR JUST THE CATHLOIC CHURCH

 

[planten]

It is a figment of wish-to-be better, know more, and choose for myself, theology.:tsktsk:

No where in the bible does this claim find support. However, the very opposie is in the bible.St. John Chapter 21:" 24 "This is the disciple who is bearing witness to these things, and who has written these things; and we know that his testimony is true. 25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. "

** Sorry, I do not want to disturb the thoughts of PJM., i.e. the last sentence of the PJM quote above.

 25. But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. "**

You mean they were contained in the world if they were not written. But if written, they would not be contained in the world. This seems to be an odd declaration. How could that be true !.

 

[dawid]

You are right, Jesus didn’t write any of the Bible, but were it not for the Bible, we would know nothing about Him.

Thus Sola Scriptura.

Incorrect - the repository of the Faith is in sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture with the latter based on the former.
Through the holy Spirit’s inspiration by means of sacred Tradition, the Magesterium discerned the books of the sacred Scripture to make up what we now know as the New Testament.
In this way we know of Him in the fullness of faith.
Sola Scriptura is deficient.

 

[MelanieAnne]

IS IT CALLED THE RCC OR JUST THE CATHLOIC CHURCH

Exactly, so your point is???

I’m a Catholic myself, so I am not sure what this is all about…

 

[MelanieAnne]

Incorrect - the repository of the Faith is in sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture with the latter based on the former.
Through the holy Spirit’s inspiration by means of sacred Tradition, the Magesterium discerned the books of the sacred Scripture to make up what we now know as the New Testament.
In this way we know of Him in the fullness of faith.
Sola Scriptura is deficient.

I strongly suspect, although I have no statistics to support my contention because I am not in the habit of collecting such things (such as statistics, especially INTERNET ones!), that all manner of Protestants JUST HATE the idea about the Holy Spirit, if they actually take the time to think it through.

Oh, of course, at first, they just think that the “Holy Spirit” is “what it’s all about” i.e. just the coolest thing, cuz, yeah, the HOLY SPIRIT, after all, is what they signed up with to believe in, the HOLY SPIRIT “spoke” to them. But THEN, if ANYONE WITH A RIGHT MIND tries to think about it ~ I use “right mind” as loosely as it needs to be used ~ WHY IN THE WORLD would the HOLY SPIRIT (who is supposed to be ONE PERSON) be giving ALL THESE DIFFERENT MESSAGES to ALL THESE DIFFERENT PEOPLE? Yeah, that’s where it all breaks down.

Our GOD is not a GOD of Confusion.

HELLO… DUH… Don’t confuse the “Holy Spirit” with what you have decided to believe anyway. Or, in other words, don’t blame what you decided on the “Holy Spirit”. YOU decided. Don’t blame “your decision” on the “Holy Spirit”. Be FAITHFUL. Live with that decision. Test that decision.

THIS is the bottom line. THERE IS ONE GOD. THERE IS ONE JESUS. THERE IS ONE HOLY SPIRIT (not multiple HOLY SPIRITS GIVING MULTIPLE DIFFERENT MESSAGES to random people!)

Faith is PROPERLY reposed in the place where JESUS assigned it. DOES YOUR FAITH LIVE THERE? If not, why not?

 

[planten]

Jesus did not write one iota of a letter of Scriptures because he’s a Jew, and Jew observe the Law, not write it.

**Eucharisted, Thank you very much for your guiding words. Yes, It is a good, wise and true statement that Jesus is Jew. And may I add that he is a Jew and he is for the Jews. The law is already there (for the Jews) to be observed and never to be re-written.

Thank you very much.**

 

[Hisalone]

You reduced it to a worse caricature than anyone here. You said:

Even anti-Catholics admit that the Church wrote the Scriptures and thus, if it weren’t for the Church, you wouldn’t know anything about Jesus Christ.

Stop it Jews wrote the scriptures.

 

[Hisalone]

Jesus did not write one iota of a letter of Scriptures because he’s a Jew, and Jew observe the Law, not write it.

God used the Jews to write all of scriture.

 

[yellowbicycle]

You are right, Jesus didn’t write any of the Bible, but were it not for the Bible, we would know nothing about Him.

Thus Sola Scriptura.

For the record, I am questioning Sola Scriptura as well as Sola Fide myself and may be leaving the Lutheran church, but having said that, and even if I do leave, I hope I will retain some recollection of what Protestants actually believe rather than embracing and repeating the caricatures of Catholic ePologists.

This is not directed to the author of the OP specifically. His question does betray a lack of understanding about what Sola Scriptura really is but I have no idea whether he was ever Protestant or not. I am merely pointing out a phenomenon I see all the time around here: The persistence of Catholics in misrepresenting Protestant doctrine IN THE VERY TEETH of better representations given by ACTUAL Protestants.

It sounds like your understanding of Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide is very different than the understanding of those two terms to others around here. I’ll be honest, I don’t really get either term. I understand what they mean in a general sense, but as far as the reasoning behind them, and the history and the such, they are both things that I don’t understand.
Would you mind explaining it, if you can, briefly? If you can’t, that’s fine. I would imagine it might be akin to explaining the color blue to a blind man. Is there any book you would be able to recommend to me that would show me what the Protestant understanding of Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide are (preferably on the shorter side )? Thanks in advance!

 

[De_Maria]

Stop it Jews wrote the scriptures.

But they did not canonize the Bible. And they did not write, but reject the New Testament.

And when they learned that Christians used the Septuagint, they rejected that version and replaced it with a so-called “hebrew” version.

 

[De_Maria]

**Eucharisted, Thank you very much for your guiding words. Yes, It is a good, wise and true statement that Jesus is Jew. And may I add that he is a Jew and he is for the Jews. The law is already there (for the Jews) to be observed and never to be re-written.

Thank you very much.**

I’m glad you understand that the Catholic Church is the New Israel, and it is on the Catholic Church that all the promises to the people of the Old Testament are fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

 

[De_Maria]

God used the Jews to write all of scriture.

They wrote the Old Testament and then rejected part of what they wrote, the Deuterocanon. They rejected it because Jesus accepted it in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament.

They also rejected the New Testament because it is based on Jesus teachings. And they reject Jesus outright, so they rejected anything to do with Him.

 

[De_Maria]

** Sorry, I do not want to disturb the thoughts of PJM., i.e. the last sentence of the PJM quote above.

 25. But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. "**

You mean they were contained in the world if they were not written. But if written, they would not be contained in the world. This seems to be an odd declaration. How could that be true !.

Because Islam is so confused and illogical, you have trouble with the simplest logic in the world.

Please, sit down and write everything that you did in one day. EVERYTHING.

Obviously, that is impossible. Therefore, if it is impossible to write everything that one man does in one day, it is certainly impossible to write down everything that a man does in a lifetime. Moreso then, to write down everything which Jesus, the God/Man did while on earth.

 

[SemperReformada]

But they did not canonize the Bible. And they did not write, but reject the New Testament.

And when they learned that Christians used the Septuagint, they rejected that version and replaced it with a so-called “hebrew” version.

Hi De Maria,

I have a questions for you:

What evidence is there that the Jews rejected the books you call deuterocanonical when they learned the Christians (at least some Christians) were using them?

 

[De_Maria]

Hi De Maria,

I have a questions for you:

What evidence is there that the Jews rejected the books you call deuterocanonical when they learned the Christians (at least some Christians) were using them?

It is my own conclusion based on the facts.

1. Jesus used the Septuagint version of Scripture.
2. The Septuagint contains the Deuterocanon.
3. The Septuagint and the Deuterocanon are written in Greek and Aramaic. Not in Hebrew.
4. The Christian Church adopted the Septuagint.
5. Along the same time as the Jews kicked the Christians out of the Synagogue, they also decided against the Septuagint claiming that the books which were not written in Hebrew were not Scripture.

Therefore, I conclude that the Jews rejected the Septuagint and the Deuterocanon because they rejected anything that had to do with Christ and Christianity.

It is very interesting that Luther joined with the Jews against the Body of Christ in this regard.

 

[SemperReformada]

It is my own conclusion based on the facts.

1. Jesus used the Septuagint version of Scripture.
2. The Septuagint contains the Deuterocanon.
3. The Septuagint and the Deuterocanon are written in Greek and Aramaic. Not in Hebrew.
4. The Christian Church adopted the Septuagint.
5. Along the same time as the Jews kicked the Christians out of the Synagogue, they also decided against the Septuagint claiming that the books which were not written in Hebrew were not Scripture.

Therefore, I conclude that the Jews rejected the Septuagint and the Deuterocanon because they rejected anything that had to do with Christ and Christianity.

It is very interesting that Luther joined with the Jews against the Body of Christ in this regard.

Well, at a minimum it appears you read to much into your “facts”.

1.) Okay, you say Jesus used the Septuagint version of the scripture. Can you list for me exactly which books were included in the Septuagint Jesus used and how you know that?

2.) You say the Septuagint included the deutero’s. It appears that you are arguing for a books canonocity simply by nature of their inclusion in the septuagint. Is this what you are getting at?

3.) Where did the Jews reject the deuterocanonicals? What evidence is there that they were ever accepted by the Jews and then rejected?

 

[jimmy]

I’m not sure if you’re agreeing with me or disagreeing.

The Scripture is called the Word of God.
Tradition is called the Word of God.
The Church is called the Body of Christ.

Which are you saying would replace Jesus?

The scriptures are the word of God only in a derivative way. Jesus is the Word of God. He united the divine nature with the human nature. This is the greatest revelation man could recieve. A book does not compare to what Christ actually did. It is only through this communion with God that you can know God. Christ did everything that He came to do.

 

[De_Maria]

Well, at a minimum it appears you read to much into your “facts”.

1.) Okay, you say Jesus used the Septuagint version of the scripture. Can you list for me exactly which books were included in the Septuagint Jesus used and how you know that?

Sure. But to save time, let me just post a website with that information. I hope you don’t mind:
apostlesbible.com/esvws.htm

This does not appear to be a Catholic society. So it is unbiased in that regard.

2.) You say the Septuagint included the deutero’s. It appears that you are arguing for a books canonocity simply by nature of their inclusion in the septuagint. Is this what you are getting at?

No. The Catholic Church included the deutero’s in the canon of the Bible.

3.) Where did the Jews reject the deuterocanonicals? What evidence is there that they were ever accepted by the Jews and then rejected?

The Jews wrote the Septuagint. The Septuagint included the deutero’s. They then rejected the deutero’s in the first century ad.

 

[grampben]

Jesus is almighty God. The Bible is the word of God. Go figure.

 

[SemperReformada]

Sure. But to save time, let me just post a website with that information. I hope you don’t mind:
apostlesbible.com/esvws.htm

This does not appear to be a Catholic society. So it is unbiased in that regard.

I appreciate the link but I don’t think they answered my questions as to which books were in the septuagint that Jesus used and how we have come to know which books Jesus used.

No. The Catholic Church included the deutero’s in the canon of the Bible.

This is true but in the earlier post you said that:

1. The Septuagint contains the Deuterocanon.
2. The Christian Church adopted the Septuagint.

My issue with your post(s) is that:
a.) We have no way of knowing what version of the septuagint Jesus used and therefore do not have a way of demonstrating which books were in that version of the septuagint.

b.) We have no evidence of the Jews kicking the deuterocanonical books out of what they accepted as the canon of scripture.

The Jews wrote the Septuagint.

okay

The Septuagint included the deutero’s.

There are different versions of the LXX and all of them contain different indexes of books. For example the eastern orthodox accept 3 and 4 Maccabees and you will find that these two books were contained in at least one version of the LXX. Obviously neither you or I accept a books canonocity based soley on their inclusion in the LXX.

They then rejected the deutero’s in the first century ad.

I don’t think the Jews ever accepted the deuteros and I don’t think you will find any evidence of them (the Jews) kicking out the deutero’s in the first few centuries a.d.