Protestants: how do you know that your interpretation of the Bible is the right one?

[josie_L]

Jesus is not referring to the example given by the Sadducees as Scripture in replying to them. He is referring to the Scriptures that deal with the resurrection as those that the Sadducees do not understand. Tobit says nothing about resurrection and so isn’t what Jesus is referring to. It should also be noted that Tobit gives no indication that the seven men were brothers.

Of all the questions that the Sadducees could have picked to trick Jesus with, is one which although is refering to the Resurrection, highlights a story (in Tobit it was a woman with 7 husbands all of whom were kinsmen), that is similar to the one written in Tobit, and you do not consider this noteworthy?

 

[BrianH]

When I start to believe the Catholic church has an argument about the Deuterocanonical books, I see a thread like this and am interested. So I followed the link and after the first three alone, either the person is lying or does not understand a single thing about literary dependence. If a seventh grader at my school attempted to pass this off as literary dependence I would flunk them, much less an adult.

Wisdom 1:6 Titus 3:4
1:6 For wisdom is a loving spirit; and will not acquit a blasphemer of his words: for God is witness of his reins, and a true beholder of his heart, and a hearer of his tongue.
Tts 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

Wisdom 1:6 1 Peter 2:25
6 For wisdom is a loving spirit; and will not acquit a blasphemer of his words: for God is witness of his reins, and a true beholder of his heart, and a hearer of his tongue.
1Pe 2:25 For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.

Wisdom 1:11 James 4:11
1:11 Therefore beware of murmuring, which is unprofitable; and refrain your tongue from backbiting: for there is no word so secret, that shall go for nought: and the mouth that belieth slayeth the soul.

Jam 4:11 Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of [his] brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.

 

[josie_L]

There are many Catholics who are born again and thus saved. Then again there are many who are not thus not saved.

Hisalone, the same can be said for any other Christian, what’s your point? Your statement of Catholics has non-believers was, if interpreted in the context above, redundant. And further more, you do not go about saying such statements (when written) without some qualifier, it is only fair to assume (like elvisman) that what you wrote was meant to insult /disparage Catholics.

 

[josie_L]

When I start to believe the Catholic church has an argument about the Deuterocanonical books, I see a thread like this and am interested. So I followed the link and after the first three alone, either the person is lying or does not understand a single thing about literary dependence. If a seventh grader at my school attempted to pass this off as literary dependence I would flunk them, much less an adult.

Wisdom 1:6 Titus 3:4
1:6 For wisdom is a loving spirit; and will not acquit a blasphemer of his words: for God is witness of his reins, and a true beholder of his heart, and a hearer of his tongue.
Tts 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

Wisdom 1:6 1 Peter 2:25
6 For wisdom is a loving spirit; and will not acquit a blasphemer of his words: for God is witness of his reins, and a true beholder of his heart, and a hearer of his tongue.
1Pe 2:25 For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.

Wisdom 1:11 James 4:11
1:11 Therefore beware of murmuring, which is unprofitable; and refrain your tongue from backbiting: for there is no word so secret, that shall go for nought: and the mouth that belieth slayeth the soul.

Jam 4:11 Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of [his] brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.

Brian, I have not read them all myself so I’ll have to restrain my judgement, however, I did mention in the list given that some examples were more concrete than others, go through the whole list if you have time, some of the deuterocanonical scriptures mentioned are similar to their NT counterpart and/or prophetic. Here’s one example:

Wisdom 2:1 For they reasoned unsoundly, saying to themselves,…(13-21) He professes to have knowledge of God, and calls himself a child of the Lord. He became to us a reproof of our thoughts; the very sight of him is a 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 happen at the end of his life; for if the righteous man is God’s son, he will help him, and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries. Let us test him with insult and torture, that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance. Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected." Thus they reasoned, but they were led astray, for their wickedness blinded them,

P.S. Don’t give up it’s worth pursuing.

 

[BrianH]

Brian, I have not read them all myself so I’ll have to restrain my judgement, however, I did mention in the list given that some examples were more concrete than others, go through the whole list if you have time, some of the deuterocanonical scriptures mentioned are similar to their NT counterpart and/or prophetic. Here’s one example:

Wisdom 2:1 For they reasoned unsoundly, saying to themselves,…(13-21) He professes to have knowledge of God, and calls himself a child of the Lord. He became to us a reproof of our thoughts; the very sight of him is a 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 happen at the end of his life; for if the righteous man is God’s son, he will help him, and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries. Let us test him with insult and torture, that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance. Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected." Thus they reasoned, but they were led astray, for their wickedness blinded them,

P.S. Don’t give up it’s worth pursuing.

The number of Deuterocanonical quotes in the NT is usually given as four. This is what every textbook, including books by a Catholic scholar give, when I was in seminary. The list is a lie. Jimmy Akin is too smart to make a mistake.
In the first 15, nothing was a quote. I am sick of this internet stuff. I would probably already be convinced if not for all these hacks on the net.

 

[josie_L]

The number of Deuterocanonical quotes in the NT is usually given as four. This is what every textbook, including books by a Catholic scholar give, when I was in seminary. The list is a lie. Jimmy Akin is too smart to make a mistake.

In the first 15, nothing was a quote. I am sick of this internet stuff. I would probably already be convinced if not for all these hacks on the net.

Has I said Brian please don’t give up, do some more research, that is what I myself am doing as I have not read all I can on the deuterocanonical references. I’ll leave you with this from the NewAdvent website,

“aside from the absence of Machabees from the Codex Vaticanus (the very oldest copy of the Greek Old Testament), all the entire manuscripts contain all the deutero writings.”

 

[josie_L]

Brian, I believe the website is valid, and this is what James Akins has to say about the list:

**"I get a lot of requests for a list of the references the New Testament makes to the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament. Unfortunately, giving a list is not such a simple affair since it is not always obvious whether something is a genuine reference. **

Hebrews 11:35 is an indisputable reference to 2 Maccabees 7, but many are not so clear as there may be only a single phrase that echoes one in a deuterocanonical book (and this may not be obvious in the translation, but only the original languages).

This is the same with New Testament references to the protocanonical books of the Old Testament. How many New Testament references there are to the Old Testament depends in large measure on what you are going to count as a reference.

**As a result, many scholarly works simply give an enormous catalogue of all proposed references and leave it to the individual interpreter to decide whether a given reference is actual or not. **

I will follow the same procedure until I have time to sit down with the following references, sort through them, and decide which I can prove to be references are to deutercanonical books. If you find any you think are indisputable, email me, as it will help with the project of producing a shorter list of indisputable references."

 

[Ginger2]

Ginger, I would understand your argument concerning wisdom, if there had been only one reference of Wisdom in the NT (taken from an earlier OT book) but there are many, how clever (or conniving) do you think the writers of the deuterocanonicals books were if they were able to decipher and write (by picking the correct references) what would be relevant or refered to in the NT. Here is just a list of examples you can verify, some may not be as concrete as others:

Wisdom 1:6 Titus 3:4

titus 3:4
But when the kindness and generous love of God our savior appeared,
wisd 6
For the spirit of wisdom is benevolent, and will not acquit the evil speaker from his lips: for God is witness of his reins, and he is a true searcher of his heart, and a hearer of his tongue.

Even if you include titus 3:5 not because of any righteous deeds we had done but **because of his mercy, he saved us through the bath of rebirth and renewal by the holy Spirit, ** …wisdom does not match up to Titus

Wisdom states God will not acquit the evil speaker, but Titus says God saved us because of His mercy.

Wisdom 1:6 1 Peter 2:25

Once again Wisdom says God will not acquit, and 1 Peter says that sheep have now returned.
1Pe 2:25 For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer [fn] of your souls.

This sounds like a fulfillment of Psa 119:176 I have gone astray like a lost sheep; Seek Your servant, For I do not forget Your commandments.

I don’t have time to go thru these one by one, but even if one appears to be quoting an apocrypha it does not in any way indicate they thought they were inspired.

Paul even quotes pagans. So quoting someone does not mean it is inspired of God.

 

[josie_L]

titus 3:4
But when the kindness and generous love of God our savior appeared,
wisd 6
For the spirit of wisdom is benevolent, and will not acquit the evil speaker from his lips: for God is witness of his reins, and he is a true searcher of his heart, and a hearer of his tongue.

Even if you include titus 3:5 not because of any righteous deeds we had done but **because of his mercy, he saved us through the bath of rebirth and renewal by the holy Spirit, ** …wisdom does not match up to Titus

Wisdom states God will not acquit the evil speaker, but Titus says God saved us because of His mercy.

Wisdom 1:6 1 Peter 2:25

Once again Wisdom says God will not acquit, and 1 Peter says that sheep have now returned.
1Pe 2:25 For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer [fn] of your souls.

This sounds like a fulfillment of Psa 119:176 I have gone astray like a lost sheep; Seek Your servant, For I do not forget Your commandments.

I don’t have time to go thru these one by one, but even if one appears to be quoting an apocrypha it does not in any way indicate they thought they were inspired.

Paul even quotes pagans. So quoting someone does not mean it is inspired of God.

Well I can’t force you to read them, so peace, Ginger and God bless.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Just a thought for this thread from the many posts;

God created that which exists with his “Word” and from his “Word” God creates those which did not exist. God entrusted his “Decalogue” with Moses, and then entrusted his “Word” with his prophets and Holy men of God. Then the “Word” of God became flesh, and the “Word” of God made flesh; his name is Jesus “God who saves”, “God who saves” entrusted his teachings and “Word” to his One Holy Catholic and Apostolic church, so that no man may boast. This body of Jesus Christ in the Catholic church is “Emmanuel” “God is with us”.

Peace be with you;

 

[josie_L]

I am confused on why the Bible is interpretated differently.

Exactly Scooter, ever since the reformation, there has been a growing multitude of biblical interpretations, all begging the question which one is right? According the Nicene creed the marks of Christ’s Church are ONE HOLY CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC. You cannot claim to be part of this Church (literally) without your Church having ALL of these distinguishing marks.

 

[josie_L]

titus 3:4

GInger what do you make of this passage taken from Wisdom:

Wisdom 2:1 For they reasoned unsoundly, saying to themselves,…(13-21) He professes to have knowledge of God, and calls himself a child of the Lord. He became to us a reproof of our thoughts; the very sight of him is a 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 happen at the end of his life; for if the righteous man is God’s son, he will help him, and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries. Let us test him with insult and torture, that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance. Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected." Thus they reasoned, but they were led astray, for their wickedness blinded them,

I know I said I can’t force you to read them, but this is too important to let go. God Bless.

 

[SyCarl]

GInger what do you make of this passage taken from Wisdom:

Wisdom 2:1 For they reasoned unsoundly, saying to themselves,…(13-21) He professes to have knowledge of God, and calls himself a child of the Lord. He became to us a reproof of our thoughts; the very sight of him is a 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 happen at the end of his life; for if the righteous man is God’s son, he will help him, and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries. Let us test him with insult and torture, that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance. Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected." Thus they reasoned, but they were led astray, for their wickedness blinded them,

I know I said I can’t force you to read them, but this is too important to let go. God Bless.

Jude quotes a prophecy from the Book of Enoch. Does that make Enoch canonical? No one says that the Apocrypha cannot contain good things but that does make them Scripture.

For example, Sirach contains much good advice but it also says:

If she walk not at thy hand, she will confound thee in the sight of thy enemies. Cut her off from thy flesh, lest she always abuse thee.
(Sirach 25:35-36 DRB)

Under Mosaic law divorce was permitted but the Book of Malachi, which is indisputably Scripture, tells us that God hates divorce. Jesus also condemns divorce. Yet Sirach actually advises divorce. How can something that contradicts recognized Scripture be considered inspired?

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Exactly Scooter, ever since the reformation, there has been a growing multitude of biblical interpretations, all begging the question which one is right? According the Nicene creed the marks of Christ’s Church are ONE HOLY CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC. You cannot claim to be part of this Church (literally) without your Church having ALL of these distinguishing marks.

Great insignt josie, it is true since the reformation; scriptural interpretation became private interpretation, and the one who can sell his interpretation gets to build a new competitive church against the one Jesus built;

IF protestants and non-catholics would take unprejudiced view of history and trace their founding founders of their “Faith base” and it was not Jesus. They will find their “freedom” to dictate scriptural private interpretations came from the “Free thinkers” who practiced mathematics and science, falsey leading them from their “enlightenments” that they were themselves god. Many heretical views stemmed from this including theories such as “Darwinism”.

“Sola Scriptura” invention derived from such thinkers, and became some form of “enlightenment”, today it is disguised as one being “spiritual”, and lay to claim that “reason” is an act of faith. When in (eternal) “reality” for one to truly have “faith” reason is suspended, thus the “Eucharist” (the body of Christ) seperates the sheeps from the goats. That is why the scripture quotes “Faith is the realization of things hoped for not seen”. This scripture from its enception gives credence to the “Eucharist”.

An “enlightenment” (protestant or non-catholic) interpretation will relate this scripture to tangible (reality) items such as money and many other things that are explained in reason not faith.

Your post I believe opens up the root of the matter of many different protestant and non catholic biblical interpretations.

Peace be with you

 

[Ginger2]

Ginger2;4941507:

titus 3:4
But when the kindness and generous love of God our savior appeared,

wisd 6
For the spirit of wisdom is benevolent, and will not acquit the evil speaker from his lips: for God is witness of his reins, and he is a true searcher of his heart, and a hearer of his tongue.

Even if you include titus 3:5 not because of any righteous deeds we had done but **because of his mercy, he saved us through the bath of rebirth and renewal by the holy Spirit, ** …wisdom does not match up to Titus

Wisdom states God will not acquit the evil speaker, but Titus says God saved us because of His mercy.

Wisdom 1:6 1 Peter 2:25

Well I can’t force you to read them, so peace, Ginger and God bless.

That’s it? So far I have taken the first example of the first, and then the first two examples of the second set and disproved the claim.

And you are disappointed I didn’t have time to go thru all of them and disprove them one at a time?

Let me give you some advice.

1. Don’t give 10,000 examples.
2. Check the examples yourself before posting to make sure they are solid
3. There is only one, maybe two references that cannot be easily explained away
   …Hint: I think it is in Jude

Even this one is not proof New Testament writers thought the Apocrypha were inspired, but it is the best evidence (not proof) they quoted I can find.

Now I’m laying this discourse to rest. But feel free to go on if you like.

 

[Ginger2]

Jude quotes a prophecy from the Book of Enoch. Does that make Enoch canonical? No one says that the Apocrypha cannot contain good things but that does make them Scripture.

For example, Sirach contains much good advice but it also says:

Under Mosaic law divorce was permitted but the Book of Malachi, which is indisputably Scripture, tells us that God hates divorce. Jesus also condemns divorce. Yet Sirach actually advises divorce. How can something that contradicts recognized Scripture be considered inspired?

Oh shucks!!! You’ve already addressed the Jude quote.

Well, I promise it would prove anything beyond being a quote from the Apocrypha.

Ginger

 

[josie_L]

josie L;4941533:

Ginger2;4941507:

titus 3:4
But when the kindness and generous love of God our savior appeared,

wisd 6
For the spirit of wisdom is benevolent, and will not acquit the evil speaker from his lips: for God is witness of his reins, and he is a true searcher of his heart, and a hearer of his tongue.

Even if you include titus 3:5 not because of any righteous deeds we had done but **because of his mercy, he saved us through the bath of rebirth and renewal by the holy Spirit, ** …wisdom does not match up to Titus

Wisdom states God will not acquit the evil speaker, but Titus says God saved us because of His mercy.

That’s it? So far I have taken the first example of the first, and then the first two examples of the second set and disproved the claim.

And you are disappointed I didn’t have time to go thru all of them and disprove them one at a time?

Let me give you some advice.

1. Don’t give 10,000 examples.
2. Check the examples yourself before posting to make sure they are solid
3. There is only one, maybe two references that cannot be easily explained away
   …Hint: I think it is in Jude

Even this one is not proof New Testament writers thought the Apocrypha were inspired, but it is the best evidence (not proof) they quoted I can find.

Now I’m laying this discourse to rest. But feel free to go on if you like.

I am not here to win a debate but I am here to see if you would consider opening your mind to the Truth. I got my answer. God bless.

P.S. Sarcasm does you no good.

 

[josie_L]

Jude quotes a prophecy from the Book of Enoch. Does that make Enoch canonical? No one says that the Apocrypha cannot contain good things but that does make them Scripture.

For example, Sirach contains much good advice but it also says:

Under Mosaic law divorce was permitted but the Book of Malachi, which is indisputably Scripture, tells us that God hates divorce. Jesus also condemns divorce. Yet Sirach actually advises divorce. How can something that contradicts recognized Scripture be considered inspired?

Sycarl, all you did was evade the question. I asked Ginger what she thought of the passage, a reflection if you will, not her reason for rejecting it. I am well aware the Apocrypha has books contained therein that are uninspired, however, the Septuagint was used by many Jews in the Diaspora has the divine word of God.

 

[josie_L]

Jude quotes a prophecy from the Book of Enoch. Does that make Enoch canonical? No one says that the Apocrypha cannot contain good things but that does make them Scripture.

For example, Sirach contains much good advice but it also says:

Under Mosaic law divorce was permitted but the Book of Malachi, which is indisputably Scripture, tells us that God hates divorce. Jesus also condemns divorce. Yet Sirach actually advises divorce. How can something that contradicts recognized Scripture be considered inspired?

God does hate divorce, but I believe that Sirach is mentioning a situation wherein divorce may be permitted without incurring the wrath of God, and look at the manner or strong wording the author has used to express the situation the husband is in:

“If she walk not at thy hand, she will confound thee in the sight of thy enemies. Cut her off from thy flesh, lest she always abuse thee.”
(Sirach 25:35-36 DRB)

Therefore, a husband is better off divorcing such a woman to avoid always being abused by her.

 

[josie_L]

Jude quotes a prophecy from the Book of Enoch. Does that make Enoch canonical? No one says that the Apocrypha cannot contain good things but that does make them Scripture.

For example, Sirach contains much good advice but it also says:

Under Mosaic law divorce was permitted but the Book of Malachi, which is indisputably Scripture, tells us that God hates divorce. Jesus also condemns divorce. Yet Sirach actually advises divorce. How can something that contradicts recognized Scripture be considered inspired?

I just realized something, if under the Mosaic law divorce is permitted but the Book of Malachi states God hates divorce then is this not a contradiction. And as such why then would Sirach be a problem (especially since it expresses an extreme situation) if it states divorce is permissible according to Mosaic law.