Protestant interpretations...

[edjco]

1. I don’t put much faith in what scholars say as I have found they are prone to give opinions which don’t always correspond to historical fact.
   Ginger

I do not respect human beings as most are either intentional or unintentional liars, IMO.Ginger

I think that right there pretty much sums everything up…

 

[edjco]

Jesus affirmed which books were indeed the Word of God.* Jesus did not include the extra books found in the Catholic Bible.

Extra books? You claim to be a self-appointed (and I suppose self-taught) Biblical scholar who does not trust scholars, yet you seem to be saying that the Protestant Bible was around and at some point the Catholic Church “added” books. Tell me, exactly which Protestant council decided the canon of Scripture? And as to your statement above, can you give me the verse where Jesus listed the books of Scripture?

Now, relying on Ginger-logic, I suppose you know that there was NO Protestant bible until the Reformation. You believe in Sola Scriptura, so let me ask: Did God simply abandon all those Christians who lived from the time of Jesus’ death to the reformation? By your logic, He must have because there was no Scripture to “solely guide” them until Martin Luther came along and “wrote” the Bible.

And hey, while we’re at it, why did the KJV include those 7 books that the Catholic Church “added”?

Also, can you explain why the New Testament quotes or references those 7 books over 300 times? If they were not Scripture, why does Jesus and Scripture refer to them?

The oldest canon of the Jewish OT I can find is 2 Esdras (Vg:4 Esdras):

It claims 24 OT books (Vulgate & Peshitta)

So you quote an apocryphal book, written way after the Septuagint, to prove your point that the Deuteros are not canononical?

*Daniel J. Harrington writes: “The work known as 2 Esdras is in fact three separate compositions. In them Ezra functions not as the architect of Israel’s return from exile but rather as a prophet and a visionary. In 2 Esdras 1-2 (also known as 5 Ezra) Ezra prophesies about God’s rejection of Israel as God’s people and its replacement by the Church. This is a Christian work composed in Greek in the mid-second century C.E. In 2 Esdras 3-14 (also known as 4 Ezra) Ezra engages in dialogue about the meaning of Israel’s sufferings and is granted visions that reveal what God is going to do in the near future on Israel’s behalf. This is a Jewish work written in Hebrew around 100 C.E. The material contained in 2 Esdras 15-16 (also known as 6 Ezra) consists of oracles of doom against the enemies of God’s people (the Church) and advice on how those enduring persecution should behave. This is a Christian work composed in Greek in the third century C.E.” (Invitation to the Apocrypha, p. 185)
*

Don’t feel too bad, though. You are following a Jewish council which not only threw out the Deuteros, but Christ and the revelation of the New Testament also (even though you believe the council never existed). By the way, explain something else to me: We know the Deuteros were in the Septuagint, but in about 90 A.D. they are no longer included by some, but not all, Jews. So if they weren’t removed at Jamnia, what happened to them?

Flavius Josephus: [37- 100 ] claims 22 books, but doesn’t name them only the categories: 5 Law, 13 History, 4 Hymns.

Are you refering to the Council of Flavius Josephus which determined the canon of Scripture?

Melito of Sardis (d 170 ad) also claims 22 books.
The Catholic Encyclopedia says: " St. Jerome, speaking of the canon of Melito, quotes Tertullian’s statement that ****he was esteemed a prophet by many of the faithful…

Also, if Melito was considered a prophet, how could he be wrong about the canon???

So if many people consider me a prophet, then I am one?

There is no evidence a council was ever held at Jamnia to decide the Jewish canon.

At least you didn’t find any in your scholarly research…

There is no evidence a council was ever held at Jamnia to decide the Jewish canon.
Josephus wrote twenty years before Jamnia* He had actually temple scrolls in his possession.
Josephus’ canon was the same canon as the Protestant Bible (some books were together counting as one )

And now you quote a Jewish apologist to prove your point?
And you do realize, don’t you, that Josephus’s second work, the “Jewish Antiquities” books I-XI are based on the text of the Septuagint? And of course you also realize, don’t you that the Septuagint contained the Deuteros?

 

[Ginger2]

…can you give me the verse where Jesus listed the books of Scripture?

I already did: “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and in the prophets and psalms must be fulfilled.”

The Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms. This corresponds with the Hebrew Bible.

You believe in Sola Scriptura, …

I do not believe in Sola Scriptura as Catholics define it.

.Also, can you explain why the New Testament quotes or references those 7 books over 300 times? If they were not Scripture, why does Jesus and Scripture refer to them?

this is a myth that has been dispalled several times, yet Catholics continue to repeat it to justify themselves. It is better to let God justify you - at least that is what the Bible says.

Usually the first example (in what is always a long list) to support the false claim Jesus and the Apostles quoted Apocrypha is:

Matthew 2:16 “Then Herod, …slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, …”
Catholics claim this was prophesied in:
Wisdom 11:7. For instead of a fountain of an ever running river, thou gavest human blood to the unjust.

However, the next verse in Matthew says it fulfills the prophesy spoken by Jeremiah:
Matthew 2:17 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying,

…You are following a Jewish council which not only threw out the Deuteros, but Christ and the revelation of the New Testament also (even though you believe the council never existed). By the way, explain something else to me: We know the Deuteros were in the Septuagint, but in about 90 A.D. they are no longer included by some, but not all, Jews. So if they weren’t removed at Jamnia, what happened to them?

Again you adhere to a myth.

There is no mention among any Church Father concerning this council. The idea of a council was first suggested by German historian Heinrich Graetz in 1871.

There is no evidence that a “Synod of Jamnia” was ever held.

In fact, Jamnia was a theological school. They engaged in theological discussions, but had no authority to do anything.

They did have a debate over the canonicity of Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes, and even took a vote. But they had no authority to do anything about those books. They were merely doing what many schools do - debating to opposing points of view.

Now, while Catholics can make all the unfounded claims the wish, the fact is Christians were not at that school and don’t know anything more about it than what they gain from Jewish sources.

Ginger

 

[whm]

Jesus affirmed which books were indeed the Word of God.* Jesus did not include the extra books found in the Catholic Bible.
(Jesus) said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and in the prophets and psalms must be fulfilled.”

The oldest canon of the Jewish OT I can find is 2 Esdras (Vg:4 Esdras):

It claims 24 OT books (Vulgate & Peshitta)

Flavius Josephus: [37- 100 ] claims 22 books, but doesn’t name them only the categories: 5 Law, 13 History, 4 Hymns.

Melito of Sardis (d 170 ad) also claims 22 books.
The Catholic Encyclopedia says: " St. Jerome, speaking of the canon of Melito, quotes Tertullian’s statement that he was esteemed a prophet by many of the faithful."* and* “St. Melito, Bishop of Sardis (c. 170), first drew up a list of the canonical books of the Old Testament While maintaining the familiar arrangement of the Septuagint, he says that he verified his catalogue by inquiry among Jews; Jewry by that time had everywhere discarded the Alexandrian books, and Melito’s Canon consists exclusively of the protocanonicals minus Esther. It should be noticed, however, that the document to which this catalogue was prefixed is capable of being understood as having an anti-Jewish polemical purpose, in which case Melito’s restricted canon is explicable on another ground (Reid G. Canon of the Old Testament. Transcribed by Ernie Stefanik. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume III. Copyright © 1908 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, November 1, 1908. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).”
*
That means Melito’s canon consisted of these books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel; Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiaste, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Chronicles.

Also, if Melito was considered a prophet, how could he be wrong about the canon???
**
NOTE: **The appearance of a discrepancy in the number of books is due to the way the books were counnted, not a difference in opinion as to which books were included.

The Old Testament existed in complete form before Jesus was born.*

There is no evidence a council was ever held at Jamnia to decide the Jewish canon.
Josephus wrote twenty years before Jamnia* He had actually temple scrolls in his possession.
Josephus’ canon was the same canon as the Protestant Bible (some books were together counting as one )

The Jews were given the OT. They would not have disposed of known inspired writings to disprove Jesus.* We know this as they acknowledge books like Isaiah. There was no need to dispose of Sacred writings as Jews demonstrated by simply rejecting the idea Jesus fit the prophesies or stating the verses pointed to by Christians are not prophecies of the Messiah. .

The apocryphal books admit that prophetic succession had already ended.
(I Macc. 9:27)* *14:41). Thus there was great distress in Israel, such as had not been since the time that prophets ceased to appear among them.
(1 Macc. 14:41)And the Jews and their priests decided that Simon should be their leader and high priest for ever, until a trustworthy prophet should arise,

The Catholic Church admits the Protestant OT, which agrees closely with the Hebrew Bible, has always been accepted and the Apocrypha were disputed at first, but later added.

Jerome separated them from the inspired books - if they were truly set in stone at that time, why was he allowed to make heretical statements and deny the apocrypha had authority?

Still more evidence is the many varying lists that followed Hippo and Carthage. No one could agree - even after Jerome completed his Vulgate.*

**
THE NEW TESTAMENT:**

First century Christians knew who the Apostles were and that they were indeed spokesmen for God and what they wrote was indeed inspired of God. There was no question as the miracles testified to the truth.

ALSO
The Apostle Paul claimed inspiration* 1Galatians 1:11-12 Now I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel preached by me is not of human origin.
For I did not receive it from a human being, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ.
1 Cor 14:37 If anyone thinks that he is a prophet or a spiritual person, he should recognize that what I am writing to you is a commandment of the Lord.

Peter acknowledges Paul’s writings are indeed God’s written Word.

2 Peter 3:15-16 …as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you: As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain
things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also
the other scriptures, to their own destruction.

I think that covers most of it.

Ginger, There are “" embedded that don’t seem to serve a purpose, what do the "” mean?? This looks and reads like it came from another thread or another website. Did you find your missing thread? If so can you link it.

 

[Ginger2]

Ginger, There are “" embedded that don’t seem to serve a purpose, what do the "” mean?? This looks and reads like it came from another thread or another website. Did you find your missing thread? If so can you link it.

I typed my last post up, then edited, then copied and pasted. The *'s I put in to help guide me in a coherent order. Seems I didn’t get them all deleted before posting.

I also had some #'s in there, too.

The missing thread was deleted by the moderator. There is no finding it. It is gone - forever. :crying:

I did take some from other Websites. The Catholic Encyclopedia is in green font and prefaced with “The Catholic Encyclopedia says:”

The Navy Blue is a quote from the Bible.

All the rest is information from various sources being checked against other sources until I am certain of which facts are accurate and which are false.

For example: When someone says, “Martin Luther said…” I locate the referenced document and read Luther’s own words to see if he really said what was claimed or if his quote was taken out of context to make him sound like he said something he did not say.

Ginger

 

[edjco]

I already did: “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and in the prophets and psalms must be fulfilled.”
Ginger

So…nothing in the New Testament is Scripture???
Let’s just call that an unanswered question for now.
You see, Ginger, you are taking the typical Protestant easy road: Nah, we won’t accept the Catholic canon, even though it predates ours by 1200 years, except for the New Testament, of course, which we will not mention… Oh, and by the way, we won’t bother to give the Catholics credit for our New Testament either because…well, just because.
Ginger2;5703664:

I do not believe in Sola Scriptura as Catholics define it.

So, enlighten us. How do you define it?

this is a myth that has been dispalled several times, yet Catholics continue to repeat it to justify themselves. It is better to let God justify you - at least that is what the Bible says.
Ginger

How do you “dispall” a myth? (Methinks you have discovered a new word, although, I’m just a dumb guy from Louisiana, not some Aramaic scholar…) Anyway, so now the argument shifts to justification? Someone may be avoiding the subject here…

Usually the first example (in what is always a long list) to support the false claim Jesus and the Apostles quoted Apocrypha is:

Matthew 2:16 “Then Herod, …slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, …”

Catholics claim this was prophesied in:
Wisdom 11:7. For instead of a fountain of an ever running river, thou gavest human blood to the unjust.

However, the next verse in Matthew says it fulfills the prophesy spoken by Jeremiah:
Matthew 2:17 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying,
Ginger

I didn’t ask you to “dispall” the FIRST (in your view) example of the New Testament referencing the Deuterocanonicals, I asked you to “dispall” all 300 examples. Apparently, another conveniently unanswered question…

Are you afraid of the answer? Can you not justify your own beliefs if in fact the New Testament repeatedly references Scripture which you do not claim to be Scripture?

Again you adhere to a myth.

Then it should be child’s play for a learned scholar such as yourself to prove me wrong.

There is no mention among any Church Father concerning this council.

How convenient you now choose to adhere to the writings of the Church Fathers, since you attempt to use them as a source. So I guess you are now ok with intercessory prayers, the Sacrament of Reconciliation, the Real Presence in the Eucharist, infant Baptism, Marian devotion, the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption, etc. Welcome to the Catholic Church!

(Hey, since you now adhere to the writings of the Early Church Fathers and the Apocrypha, tell me what you think of this one: The Account of St. John the Theologian of the Falling Asleep of the Holy Mother of God which was written in about 400 A.D. It tells about the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin.)

Now, while Catholics can make all the unfounded claims the wish, the fact is Christians were not at that school and don’t know anything more about it than what they gain from Jewish sources.
Ginger

I hate to break it to you, and I know I’m really going to hurt your feelings and I apologize in advance, but what you meant to say is that there were no “Catholics” at that school. You see Ginger, there weren’t ANY Christians other than Catholics in 90 AD. In fact, there weren’t ANY Christians other than Catholics until the 1500’s. It’s ok, take a deep breath…

Now, let me tally things up here. It seems you have conveniently left the following questions unanswered from my previous post:

Tell me, exactly which Protestant council decided the canon of Scripture? And as to your statement above, can you give me the verse where Jesus listed the books of Scripture?

You believe in Sola Scriptura, so let me ask: Did God simply abandon all those Christians who lived from the time of Jesus’ death to the reformation?

And hey, while we’re at it, why did the KJV include those 7 books that the Catholic Church “added”?

So you quote an apocryphal book, written way after the Septuagint, to prove your point that the Deuteros are not canononical?

We know the Deuteros were in the Septuagint, but in about 90 A.D. they are no longer included by some, but not all, Jews. So if they weren’t removed at Jamnia, what happened to them?

Are you refering to the Council of Flavius Josephus which determined the canon of Scripture?

So if many people consider me a prophet, then I am one?

And now you quote a Jewish apologist to prove your point?
And you do realize, don’t you, that Josephus’s second work, the “Jewish Antiquities” books I-XI are based on the text of the Septuagint? And of course you also realize, don’t you that the Septuagint contained the Deuteros?

Ginger, I haven’t seen you in a while on the forums, maybe because I just missed you, or maybe because I’ve been away. In either case, it’s the same old song and dance. You spout your position, you recognize no other sources unless of course they agree with you, and frankly, you completely ignore any question which makes you uncomfortable.

Uncomfortable in the sense that doctrine does not agree with the infallible interpretation of the Church of Ginger. Honestly, have you settled all of these issues in your head? In your heart? Somehow, I think not. I sincerely hope you keep looking, and that you indeed open your heart.

 

[panevino]

the best cross reference between the OT deutrocanonical and the NT I have found

NT Sell that ye have, and give alms: provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth. (KJV) Luke 12:33
&
**deutrocanonical **Tobit 4:~7 – 10 Give alms from your possessions to all who live uprightly, and do not let your eye begrudge the gift when you make it. Do not turn your face away from any poor man, and the face of God will not be turned away from you. If you have many possessions, make your gift from them in proportion, if few, do not be afraid to give according to the little you have. So you be laying up a good treasure for yourself against the day of necessity. For charity delivers from death and keeps you from entering the darkness. (RSV)
also aligns well with Sirach 29:~9-10

NT Matthew 22:25 “now there were with us seven bretheren; and the first having married a wife, died; and not having issue, left his wife to his brother. In like manner the second, and the third and so on to the seventh….” Same in Mark 12:20 and Luke 20:29
&
deutrocanonical Tobit 3:8 7:11
“because she had been given to seven husbands, and a devil named Asmodeus had killed them, at their first going in unto her.
“now when Raguek heard this he was afraid knowing what had happened to those seven husbands, that went in unto her…”

The book of Wisdom (deutrocanonical) contains a very strong description of the coming passion of Christ
Wisdom 2:12 Let us lie in wait for the righteous man, because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions; he reproaches us for sins against the law and acuses us of sins against our training. He professes to have knowledge of God and calls himself a child of the Lord. He became to us reporrf of our thoughts; the very sight of him is burden to us because his manner of life is unlike that of others and his ways are strange. We are considered by him as something base and he avoids our ways as unclean; he calls the last end of the righteous happy and boasts that God is his father. Let us see if his words are true and let us test what will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries. Let us test him with insults and torture that we may find out how gentle he is and make trial of his forbearance Let us condemn him to a shamefull death for according to what he says he will be protected. Thus they reasoned, but they were led astray for their wickedness blinded them….(RSV)

aligns very well with

Matt 27:39- …"And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their heads, 40 And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross. 41 Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said, 42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him. 43 He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God

 

[Ginger2]

the best cross reference between the OT deutrocanonical and the NT I have found

NT Matthew 22:25 …Mark 12:20 and Luke 20:29
&
deutrocanonical Tobit 3:8 7:11

This is another of my favorites!

Matt.22:24 Saying: Master, Moses said: If a man die having no son, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up issue to his brother. 25 Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first having married a wife, died; and not having issue, left his wife to his brother.

26 In like manner the second, and the third, and so on to the seventh. 27 And last of all the woman died also. 28 At the resurrection therefore whose wife of the seven shall she be? for they all had her.

First problem: Jesus is not quoting anything! The Pharisees are trying to trick Jesus by asking a question they think is unanswerable.

So, if you were correct about quoting apocrypha, which you are not, it is the lying pharisees who would be quoting it!!! Not Jesus.

Second, the question is about marriage in the afterlife concerning a godly woman.
Jesus responds: 29 Jesus said to them in reply, "You are misled because you do not know the scriptures or the power of God.
30 At the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in heaven.

Now let’s compare Tobit:

Tobit 3:8 For she had been married to seven husbands, but the wicked demon Asmodeus killed them off before they could have intercourse with her, as it is prescribed for wives. So the maid said to her: "You are the one who strangles your husbands! Look at you! You have already been married seven times, but you have had no joy with any one of your husbands.

7:12 Then Raguel called his daughter Sarah, and she came to him. He took her by the hand and gave her to Tobiah with the words: “Take her according to the law. According to the decree written in the Book of Moses** she is your wife**. …”

1st, This woman was demon possessed.
2nd, This women does not die, but ends up taking an 8th husband.

3rd, This story has nothing to do with marriage in the afterlife.

Conclusion:
The pharisees were not quoting Tobit. The were citing a passage from theOT law:
Deu 25:5 If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband’s brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband’s brother unto her.

Ginger

FYI

I asked you to “dispall” all 300 examples. Apparently, another conveniently unanswered question…

I have no intention of going thru all 300 false claims just to amuse you. You can amuse yourself just fine with my typos.
Just so you know, when I make mistakes, I laugh about them, too!!! Thanks for the chuckles.

 

[edjco]

I have no intention of going thru all 300 false claims just to amuse you. You can amuse yourself just fine with my typos.
Just so you know, when I make mistakes, I laugh about them, too!!! Thanks for the chuckles.

I know, I was just picking. I tend to mispel werds often myself!

Now Ginger, you didn’t answer any of the questions from my post. How about this:

Was the Catholic Church guided by the Holy Spirit when it chose the canon of the Bible?

Was Martin Luther guided by the Holy Spirit when he removed those 7 books 1200 years later?

If the Catholic Church was not guided by the Holy Spirit, then the Bible that all Christians use is invalid.

Please answer these as well as the ones in my previous post.

Unless, of course you can tell me at which council the canon of the Protestant Bible was determined.

 

[edjco]

This is another of my favorites!

Matt.22:24 Saying: Master, Moses said: If a man die having no son, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up issue to his brother. 25 Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first having married a wife, died; and not having issue, left his wife to his brother.

26 In like manner the second, and the third, and so on to the seventh. 27 And last of all the woman died also. 28 At the resurrection therefore whose wife of the seven shall she be? for they all had her.

First problem: Jesus is not quoting anything! The Pharisees are trying to trick Jesus by asking a question they think is unanswerable.

So, if you were correct about quoting apocrypha, which you are not, it is the lying pharisees who would be quoting it!!! Not Jesus.

Second, the question is about marriage in the afterlife concerning a godly woman.
Jesus responds: 29 Jesus said to them in reply, "You are misled because you do not know the scriptures or the power of God.
30 At the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in heaven.

Now let’s compare Tobit:

Tobit 3:8 For she had been married to seven husbands, but the wicked demon Asmodeus killed them off before they could have intercourse with her, as it is prescribed for wives. So the maid said to her: "You are the one who strangles your husbands! Look at you! You have already been married seven times, but you have had no joy with any one of your husbands.

7:12 Then Raguel called his daughter Sarah, and she came to him. He took her by the hand and gave her to Tobiah with the words: “Take her according to the law. According to the decree written in the Book of Moses** she is your wife**. …”

1st, This woman was demon possessed.
2nd, This women does not die, but ends up taking an 8th husband.

3rd, This story has nothing to do with marriage in the afterlife.

Conclusion:
The pharisees were not quoting Tobit. The were citing a passage from theOT law:
Deu 25:5 If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband’s brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband’s brother unto her.

Ginger

FYI

I have no intention of going thru all 300 false claims just to amuse you. You can amuse yourself just fine with my typos.
Just so you know, when I make mistakes, I laugh about them, too!!! Thanks for the chuckles.

Ginger,

I checked to see if you had responded, and you haven’t, so I thought I would answer a bit of this post.

First of all, it is the 7 spouses that is alluded to here which references the Deuteros, not that she took an 8th husband. It seems you are intentionally missing the point.

I also find it absolutely amazing that you quote the Levirate Law. The reason I find it so amazing is that I was almost convinced it did not appear in Protestant Bibles. The reason I say that is that I have never heard a Protestant mention that it even exists when arguing against the Catholic position on birth control. You know, Onan was killed because he violated the law, NOT because he spilled his seed…

Now in all honesty, that is the passage Protestants tend to quote, they just ignore the rest of the passage that tells of what happens to someone who violates the Levirate Law, i.e., they are to be publicly humiliated, not killed.

By the way, you still have not answered any of my questions…

 

[Ginger2]

Ginger,

I checked to see if you had responded, and you haven’t, so I thought I would answer a bit of this post.

First of all, it is the 7 spouses that is alluded to here which references the Deuteros, not that she took an 8th husband. It seems you are intentionally missing the point…

The point is Jesus did not quote anything concerning Matthew 22. It was the Pharisees who quoted the Old Testament law in Leviticus.

• The assertion was made that Jesus and the Apostles quoted the Apocrypha/Deuteros far more than the Torah/Prophets/Psalms.
• I said that is a myth. And gave an example from the list Catholics usually provide to prove they did not quote the Apocrypha, but rather quoted from the Old Testament.
• Someone else gave three examples to prove the apocrypha theory and I choose my favorite to once again prove their claim false.
• You said you wanted me to go through all 300 supposed verses. I said I have no intention of wasting my time.

Neither Jesus not the Apostles quoted the Apocrypha. That is just wishful thinking on the part of Catholics who desperately want to justify adding these books to the Bible.

Ginger

 

[Randy_Carson]

I was told in the past Peter went to Rome in 45 A.D. The numbers didn’t add up. Then I was told Eusebius writes Peter went to Rome in 42 A.D.

Crucified upside down in 67 minus 25 year ?pontification? in Rome equals 42 A.D. At first glance this looks correct, but when you run it against the timeline, the numbers still don’t add up.

Seriously, when you can’t come up with any sort of valid timeline of events, how can you expect me to to trust your version of history? It appears as tho Eusebius chose the year 42 to validate the RC claim.

So, can you please provide a timeline for me to verify your claims? You choose the timeline that suits your belief. I will then check it against itself and the limited info in Scriptures to see if holds up.

Before you criticize me for wanting to verify these claims, remember, not only does the Bible say we should not believe everything we hear but test everything for truth,

ALSO, I have been given 3 timelines in the past - all of which failed mathematically - and I am still willing to consider any timeline you offer. Generally two tries is enough inconsistency for me to determine all claims are simply attempts to make the facts fit the claims, when it should be the other way around. I feel I am being more than fair in considering your point of view.

Ginger

Ginger-

My apologies…I’ve been away from this thread for a few days.

Concerning these dates, the older ones should all be viewed as plus or minus a few years. We aren’t even really sure when Jesus was born after all. Try giving the dates some wiggle room and see if they don’t work out okay.

Things become a bit more sure in the second century and pretty darn good from the third on, I think.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Show me.

lol This myth has been dispelled many times.

The Catholic Church did NOT come up with the Bible???

Show me.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Jesus affirmed which books were indeed the Word of God.* Jesus did not include the extra books found in the Catholic Bible.

Hmmm…I don’t seem to find a passage or verse in which Jesus names the Books of the OT, do you?

(Jesus) said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and in the prophets and psalms must be fulfilled.”

Jesus did fulfill everything that was written about Him in the Prophets and the Psalms, but that does not mean that ONLY things written about Jesus were inspired. IOW, there is more to inspired scripture than prophecy about Jesus. Otherwise, the OT would be a very thin book.

That means Melito’s canon consisted of these books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel; Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiaste, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Chronicles.

Also, if Melito was considered a prophet, how could he be wrong about the canon?

Sorry, Ginger…the Church does not admit any prophets after John the Baptist. Remember, public revelation ended with the death of the last apostle. The presence of a latter-day prophet would violate that doctrine. No, Melito’s canon was useful but his was just one voice among many, and he was not infallible.

The Old Testament existed in complete form before Jesus was born.

Sure. The only question is: Who knew with certainty what the canon was? The Sadducees? The Pharisees? The Essenes? All had different canons. And, of course, you do know that Jesus would have used the Septuagint, right?

There is no evidence a council was ever held at Jamnia to decide the Jewish canon.
Josephus wrote twenty years before Jamnia* He had actually temple scrolls in his possession.
Josephus’ canon was the same canon as the Protestant Bible (some books were together counting as one )

The Jews were given the OT. They would not have disposed of known inspired writings to disprove Jesus.* We know this as they acknowledge books like Isaiah. There was no need to dispose of Sacred writings as Jews demonstrated by simply rejecting the idea Jesus fit the prophesies or stating the verses pointed to by Christians are not prophecies of the Messiah.

The Hebrew-speaking Jews rejected books of the Septuagint favored by Greek-speaking Jews. Seems simple enough.

Jerome separated them from the inspired books - if they were truly set in stone at that time, why was he allowed to make heretical statements and deny the apocrypha had authority?

Did Jerome accept the judgment of the Church concerning the canon? Of course he did.

(cont.)

 

[Randy_Carson]

Still more evidence is the many varying lists that followed Hippo and Carthage. No one could agree - even after Jerome completed his Vulgate.

Wrong.

Council of Rome (382 A.D.)

Convoked by Pope Damasus, this council produced the Roman Code. The Roman Code identified a list of scriptural books identical to the Council of Trent’s formally defined canon. Pope Damasus I approved the work of the first Council of Constantinople, accepting St. Athanasius’ list as divinely inspired, and indicated that if any bishop used a list of books inconsistent with the Roman canon he would need a convincing explanation.

Council of Hippo (393 A.D.)

This council reiterated the list of books established by the Council of Rome.

First Council of Carthage (397 A.D.)

This council reiterated the list of books established by the Council of Rome and also affirmed the Decree of Damasus issued in 382 A.D… Carthage*, unlike Hippo, sent its decisions to Rome for ratification. *

Pope Innocent I (405 A.D.)

In a letter to Exsuperius, the Bishop of Toulouse, Pope Innocent listed the same books established by the Council of Rome.
Pope Boniface (ca. 420 A.D.)
Pope St. Boniface I (418-422) ratified the decision of the first Council of Carthage and declared the canon settled for the Western Patriarchate. Boniface also sent the decision to the Eastern patriarchs in Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. At that point, the Catholic Canon of Sacred Scripture was informally accepted worldwide.

Second Council of Carthage (419 A.D.)

This council reiterated the list of books established by the Council of Rome.

Second Council of Nicaea (787 A.D.)

This council formally ratified the African Code which contained the same list of books that Trent would name “canonical”.

Council of Florence (1441 A.D.)

This council defined a list of inspired books identical to those defined by the African Code and the Second Council of Nicaea.

Council of Trent (1546 A.D.)

On April 8, 1546, this council produced a decree, Sacrosancta, which was the first, formal canonical definition of Old and New Testament scripture. This was the third formal affirmation of the list by an ecumenical council and at least the eighth overall.

 

[Randy_Carson]

There is no evidence a council was ever held at Jamnia to decide the Jewish canon.
Josephus wrote twenty years before Jamnia* He had actually temple scrolls in his possession.
Josephus’ canon was the same canon as the Protestant Bible (some books were together counting as one )

The Council That Wasn’t
The Myth of Jabneh and the Old Testament Canon
By Steve Ray
catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0409fea4.asp

Many myths are believed not because they are true but simply because people want to believe them. But wishful thinking is a poor substitute for truth. It is always preferable to dig deep and discover the facts and not believe things only because you want them to be true.

For instance, it is popular in some Protestant circles to claim that the Jews had a closed canon of Scripture in the first century A.D. and that the early Christians accepted this final Jewish collection of inspired writings as final and binding upon the Church. Generally, the Council of Jabneh (usually referred to in Catholic literature as Jamnia) is assumed as the “proof” for this assertion. At the “Council of Jabneh,” you see, the Jewish rabbis supposedly got together—something like an ecumenical council in the Catholic Church—to lay down specific criteria for inspired Scripture and to finally define and close the Old Testament canon.

Is this true? First, we will look at how various authors defend the Protestant exclusion of seven books based on a flawed understanding of the so-called “Council of Jabneh.” Second, did the members of this “council” actually discuss the limit of the Old Testament canon, and third, if so, did they have the authority to close the canon? Fourth, did they actually compile a final list of accepted writings, and, fifth—and importantly—if such a decision had been made, would the Christians be bound by that decision? We will conclude with the teaching of the Catholic Church and why we can trust it.

Follow the link above to continue…

 

[Randy_Carson]

There is no mention among any Church Father concerning this council. The idea of a council was first suggested by German historian Heinrich Graetz in 1871.

There is no evidence that a “Synod of Jamnia” was ever held.

In fact, Jamnia was a theological school. They engaged in theological discussions, but had no authority to do anything.

They did have a debate over the canonicity of Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes, and even took a vote. But they had no authority to do anything about those books. They were merely doing what many schools do - debating to opposing points of view.

Now, while Catholics can make all the unfounded claims the wish, the fact is Christians were not at that school and don’t know anything more about it than what they gain from Jewish sources.

Ginger

Ginger-

You are correct about Jamnia, but this strengthens the Catholic position.

The article I posted above explains why Jamnia, properly understood, supports the Catholic OT canon.

Here’s more that agrees with you…and supports the Catholic view:

The “Council” of Jamnia
By Gary Michuta
handsonapologetics.com/deuterocanon.htm

Objection- “At the end of the first century, the Jews gathered together at the Council at Jamnia (also known as Jabneh or Yabneh) to discuss the canon of Scripture. From this Council, the rabbis drew up an authoritative list of sacred books which is identical to the Jewish / Protestant canon.”

Answer: Unfortunately, this short objection suffers from so many inaccuracies and overstatements that the best way to respond is to provide here a description of the real “council” of Jamnia.

After the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in 70 AD, Rabban Jonathan ben Zakkai asked the Roman General Vespasian, who was well disposed to the Rabbi since it was known that he supported peace with the Romans, to spare the city of Jamnia and its rabbinical scholars. Permission was granted and the school set up in the “vineyards of Jamnia.” The problems that faced the new school were serious. The destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem made it impossible to continue the prescribed sacrifices required in the Old Testament. Judaism needed to make a radical change from a cultic (sacrifice and Temple centered) religion to a “religion of the Book.” This change, combined with the growth of Christianity (especially its use of the Jewish Greek Old Testament for evangelism) provided Judaism with the occasion to address the question of the canon of Scripture. The information that has come down to us about this canonical activity is fragmentary and certainly open to conjecture.

Note that our objector called this body the *council *of Jamnia. Jamnia was not a council, in the sense of the Council of Trent or the *Council of Nicaea, it was rather was an on-going rabbinical school. The idea of a “council” crept into everyone’s vocabulary via the writings of the famous Jewish historian H. Graetz who was the first to call Jamnia a “synode.” Christians interpreted Graetz’s synode to mean council. However, the word council implies quite a few features that Jamnia did not possess. For example, unlike a Christian council, there were no ballots cast, nor did this body promulgate formal decrees. Rather, Jamnia lasted for a number of years, and its significant opinions is persevered in piecemeal fashion in later Jewish writings. It is difficult to ascertain exactly what Jamnia had for Judaism as a whole. In some ways it acts much like the authoritative body of the Sanhedrin although it never took for itself that name. Therefore, it is inaccurate to speak about the *council of Jamnia. It is more accurate description would be a rabbinical school.

Jamnia never published or promulgated a list the list of books of the canon nor did it discuss the canon as a whole. Most of the debates surrounded the Book of Ecclesiastes and possibly the Song of Songs. Even so, there is no evidence that the decisions of this school were binding upon the Jewish popular at large. In fact, rabbinical disputes over the inspiration of certain books (e.g. the fringe books and Sirach) persisted throughout the first three Christian centuries. For this reason, the Protestant scholar F.F. Bruce wisely warns against stating that the assembly at Jamnia “laid down the limits” of the Old Testament canon.

Like the two-canon theory, the Jamnia theory has fallen on hard times. As the Jewish scholar Sid Leiman concludes:

“The widespread view that the Council of Jamnia closed the biblical canon, or that it canonized any books at all, is not supported by the evidence and need no longer be seriously maintained.”

If there were a candidate for an authoritative closing of the Old Testament canon in the first century AD, Jamnia would probably be it. However, there is no evidence that such a closing occurred this early in the life of this school.

 

[Randy_Carson]

New Testament References to Deuterocanonical Books

Matthew 6:14-15
14 For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

Sirach 28:2
Forgive your neighbor’s injustice; then when you pray, your own sins will be forgiven.

+++

Luke 6:31
31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

Tobit 4:15
Do to no one what you yourself dislike. Do not drink wine till you become drunk, nor let drunkenness accompany you on your way.

+++

Matthew 27:41-43
41In the same way the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders mocked him. 42 “He saved others,” they said, "but he can’t save himself! He’s the King of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. 43 He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, ‘I am the Son of God.’ "

Wisdom 2:15-18
15 Because his life is not like other men’s, and different are his ways. 16 He judges us debased; he holds aloof from our paths as from things impure. He calls blest the destiny of the just and boasts that God is his Father. 17 Let us see whether his words be true; let us find out what will happen to him. 18 For if the just one be the son of God, he will defend him and deliver him from the hand of his foes. 19 With revilement and torture let us put him to the test that we may have proof of his gentleness and try his patience. 20 Let us condemn him to a shameful death; for according to his own words, God will take care of him." 21 These were their thoughts, but they erred; for their wickedness blinded them, 22 And they knew not the hidden counsels of God; neither did they count on a recompense of holiness nor discern the innocent souls’ reward.

+++

Luke 14:13
13 But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind,

Tobit 4:7
"Give alms from your possessions. Do not turn your face away from any of the poor, and God’s face will not be turned away from you.

+++

John 10:22
22 Then came the Feast of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter,

1 Maccabees 4:59
Then Judas and his brothers and the entire congregation of Israel decreed that the days of the dedication of the altar should be observed with joy and gladness on the anniversary every year for eight days, from the twenty-fifth day of the month Chislev.

+++

Romans 9:20
20 But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’ "

Wisdom 12:12
12 For who can say to you, “What have you done?” or who can oppose your decree? Or when peoples perish, who can challenge you, their maker; or who can come into your presence as vindicator of unjust men?
+++

Romans 9:21
21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

Wisdom 15:7
For truly the potter, laboriously working the soft earth, molds for our service each several article: Both the vessels that serve for clean purposes and their opposites, all alike; As to what shall be the use of each vessel of either class the worker in clay is the judge.

+++

Romans 9:22
22 What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?

Wisdom 12:20
20 For these were enemies of your servants, doomed to death; yet, while you punished them with such solicitude and pleading, granting time and opportunity to abandon wickedness,

+++

Romans 11:34
34 “Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?”

Wisdom 9:13
For what man knows God’s counsel, or who can conceive what our LORD intends?

+++

2 Corinthians 9:7
7 Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

Sirach 35:9
Give to the Most High as he has given to you, generously, according to your means.

+++

Hebrews 1:3
3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

Wisdom 7:26
For she is the refulgence of eternal light, the spotless mirror of the power of God, the image of his goodness.

+++

Hebrews 11:35
35 Women received back their dead, raised to life again. Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection.

2 Maccabees 7:7
Do not be afraid of this executioner, but be worthy of your brothers and accept death, so that in the time of mercy I may receive you again with them."

 

[Randy_Carson]

1 Maccabees 2:52
Was not Abraham found faithful when tested [Gn 22:1ff], and it was reckoned to him as righteousness?

James 2: 21
Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar [Gn 22:1ff]? 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works, 23 and the scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”; and he was called the friend of God. 24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

 

[Ginger2]

Randy Carson,

As I have stated before, I am not going to waste my time going thru 300 verses supposed to quote the Apocrypha.

However, I will choose one from your list, also.

Isa 40:13 *
Who has understood the mind of the Lord, or instructed him as his counselor?

Romans 11:34
34 “Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?”

Wisdom 9:13
For what man knows God’s counsel, or who can conceive what our LORD intends?

Did it ever occur to a Catholic that the Apocrypha might occasionally be quoting from the Old Testament? The Old Testament was written first.

Ginger