Protestants Regarding (Luke 7:48) & (John 20: 22-23)

[Joshua27]

…snip…]

Paul is clear in the above passage [sourced from the document] that the message was give to Timothy by the Holy Spirit, implying that even though Paul spoke the words to Timothy, it was not Paul giving the message but the Holy Spirit.

2 Timothy 1:13-14 (Douay-Rheims)

13 Hold the form of sound words which thou hast heard of me: in faith and in the love which is in Christ Jesus. 14 Keep the good thing **committed to thy trust by the Holy Ghost **who dwelleth in us.

****2 Timothy 1:13-14 (King James Version)

13Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.
14That good thing which was **committed unto thee keep by the Holy Ghost **which dwelleth in us.

2 Timothy 1:13-14 (New American Bible)

13Take as your norm the sound words that you heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. 14Guard this rich trust with the help of the holy Spirit [false translation] that dwells within us.

2 Timothy 1:13-14 (New International Version)

13What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. 14Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you—guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit [false translation] who lives in us.

2 Timothy 1:13-14 (Original Greek)

1. τὴν καλὴν παραθήκην [Parathēkēn = Entrusted] φύλαξον [Phulaxon= To Guard] διὰ [DIA = On account of; because of; from] πνεύματος ἁγίου = Holy Spirit] τοῦ ἐνοικοῦντος ἐν ἡμῖν.

---

Even though Paul spoke the words, it was not Paul who gave the message; It is not man who selects apostles, but God (the Holy Spirit)…I think either you - or the writer - said that.

…I just saw your last post, so one sec…I’ll prove my assertion with scripture.

 

[Joshua27]

Authority is not bound by succession but by obedience to the “image & likeness” which is conferred by the source, otherwise authority is lost.

Rhetorical: Under who’s authority did John the Baptist baptize and preach to prepare the way for Christ? Was authority given to John from man or was it given from the Father?

Was Christ authority given to him from man, or was it given to him from the Father?

There were priests, scribes and a sanhedrin who were fully described as being The Religious Authority of that age, possessing complete knowledge of the scripture and traditions of that age…and yet John - who was a voice in the wilderness - had more authority than they had…and then Christ - who was not a scribe or part of the religious authority - had more authority than all of them.

Rhetorical: Who gives authority and who is free to take back that authority (whenever he desire) to give it to another group?

If we are students of biblical history, we’d see that each time man pressumed ownership of authority (and thus assuming the right to “change” things) God actively gave the birthright (authority) to someone else to show that it is not by our will, but by God’s that authority is dispensed.

For hundreds of years, the Kingdom of Israel ruled the land…until they disobeyed the Eternal laws of God…and then God gave ruling authority to another kingdom.

Authority is not bound by succession but by obedience to the “image & likeness” which is conferred by the source, otherwise authority is lost.

Then when Christ came, he stripped authority from the Jewish Church and gave it to his apostles because the Jewish Pharisees and Religious Authority added to the Eternal Laws God originally gave.

Authority is not bound by succession but by obedience to the “image & likeness” which is conferred by the source, otherwise authority is lost.

When Christ left the Holy Spirit, the universal “catholic”] Church was given authority to spread the Kingdom (from the HS), but as always this authority was contingent on the obedience to the Eternal laws of God.

So, to determine whether or not the Church Fathers still currently has authority, we need only to look at whether the Eternal laws of God are still being obeyed…

---

“God is One…there are no others” X = Trinitarianism 325AD; Council of Nicaea]
“No idol crafting or worship” X = removed from the recorded list of commandments]
“Remember the Sabbath” X = solimnity was transferred from Saturday to Sunday]
“Keep the Sabbath” Holy X = Feast days (considered High Sabbaths) were replaced by new holidays]

and a few others…

---

Exodus 31:16 - “Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.”

Deuteronomy 4:2 - “You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.”

Deuteronomy 12:32 - “Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it. You shall not add to it nor take away from it.”

Proverbs 30:5-6 - “Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.”

Matthew 5:17-19 - “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, until heaven and earth pass [which clearly has NOT happened yet], one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, until all be fulfilled. Whatsoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of God: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the Kingdom of God.”

**Revelation 14:12 **- Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of [Christ].

Mark 7:7-8: “In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men”.

---

Many proponents argue that “authority was given to the Church by Christ himself, so then claim they have the authority to alter any laws as the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit”. But based on the only litmus test that has ever mattered (“obedience to the ETERNAL laws of God”) and based on instruction that the laws should NOT ever be altered, I would argue that authority is no longer theirs, and has not been theirs for a while now.

Authority is not bound by succession but by obedience to the “image & likeness” which is conferred by the source, otherwise authority is lost.

Here’s the proof of my assertion to support the rest of my posts.

 

[Erich]

“God is One…there are no others” X = Trinitarianism 325AD; Council of Nicaea]

John 10:30: “I and the Father are one.” Or, “He who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9). Or, “All that the Father has is mine” (John 16:15). Or, “The Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God” (John 5:18). Or, “[Jesus], though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped” (Phil. 2:6).

And of course, Matthew 28:19, “… baptizing them in the name [singular, not plural] of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit …”

Where’s the X?

“No idol crafting or worship” X = removed from the recorded list of commandments]

“You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth; you shall not bow down before them or worship them.” is in my copy of Deuteronomy 5:8-9 as well as my copy of Exodus 20:4-5, and is addressed as well in CCC 2129-2132.

BTW, did you know that Scripture commands the use of statues and icons?

In Exodus 25:18–20, God commanded: “And you shall make two cherubim of gold; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece with the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be.”

In Numbers 21:8–9, he told Moses: “‘Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live.’ So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live.” This shows the actual ceremonial use of a statue (looking to it) in order to receive a blessing from God (healing from snakebite). In John 3:14, Jesus tells us that he himself is what the bronze serpent represented, so it was a symbolic representation of Jesus. There was no problem with this statue—God had commanded it to be made—so long as people did not worship it. When they did, the righteous king Hezekiah had it destroyed (2 Kgs. 18:4). This clearly shows the difference between the proper religious use of statues and idolatry.

When the time came to build the Temple in Jerusalem, God inspired David’s plans for it, which included “his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing from the hand of the Lord concerning it, all the work to be done according to the plan” (1 Chr. 28:18–19).

In obedience to this divinely inspired plan, Solomon built two gigantic, golden statues of cherubim: “In the most holy place he made two cherubim of wood and overlaid them with gold. The wings of the cherubim together extended twenty cubits: one wing of the one, of five cubits, touched the wall of the house, and its other wing, of five cubits, touched the wing of the other cherub; and of this cherub, one wing, of five cubits, touched the wall of the house, and the other wing, also of five cubits, was joined to the wing of the first cherub. The wings of these cherubim extended twenty cubits; the cherubim stood on their feet, facing the nave. And he made the veil of blue and purple and crimson fabrics and fine linen, and worked cherubim on it” (2 Chr. 3:10–14).

You don’t have framed photos of family members/loved ones on display in your home, do you?

Where’s the X?

 

[Erich]

“Remember the Sabbath” X = solimnity was transferred from Saturday to Sunday]
“Keep the Sabbath” Holy X = Feast days (considered High Sabbaths) were replaced by new holidays]

Acts 20:7 - "And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, … "

1 Corinthians 16:2 - "Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, … "

Colossians 2:16-17 - "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come … "

Revelation 1:10 - "I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet "

and from This Rock:

Quite apart from the biblical proof of the apostolic Church’s authority to teach in God’s name (Mt 16:18–19, 18:17–18, Lk 10:16) and of God’s guarantee that this teaching would never fall into error (Mt 28:19–20, Lk 22:32, Jn 16:13), there is an impressive amount of evidence from Scripture that Christ and the apostles changed their day of corporate worship from Saturday to Sunday.

The Old Testament Sabbath commandment contains two elements. The primary element, and the one that binds Christians as it does Jews, is the moral obligation to set aside adequate time for the purpose of divine worship. This could never be abrogated, as it is rooted in the natural law.

The secondary element was ceremonial and therefore could be abolished—and was abolished by Jesus’ death on the cross (Col 2:12–17). This secondary, ceremonial element was that the particular day chosen to meet the moral obligation of the law was Saturday, so that the Jews would remember and memorialize the creation of the earth.

Jesus, during his earthly ministry, began to prepare the way for changing Sabbath worship from “the letter of the law” to “the spirit of the law.” Remember that one of his greatest arguments with the Pharisees concerned Sabbath worship. He constantly rebuked them for placing the rigid observance of mere details above the spirit of setting aside a day to rest from unnecessary servile work and to worship God. By this Jesus made it clear that the Sabbath may be changed to meet the needs of man. By effecting these changes as “the Son of Man,” Jesus used his human authority to show us that he is “Lord even of the Sabbath” (Mk 2:28).

As Frs. Rumble and Carty point out in Radio Replies, special honor is shown to Sunday throughout the New Testament. Christ rose from the dead on Sunday, and he first appeared to his disciples that Easter Sunday evening (Jn 20:19). One week later—and from the context we can see that this meant the following Sunday—Jesus appeared to them again when Thomas was present (John 20:26). Luke records that Sunday was observed by the Christian community from the very beginning: “On the first day of the week when we gathered to break bread” (Acts 20:7). To “break bread” refers to the celebration of the Eucharist (Mt 26:26, Mk 14:22). Paul ordered the Corinthians to gather their offertory collections on Sunday (1 Cor 16:2); that set the scriptural precedent we follow today of gathering our offerings on Sunday during Mass. John records in Rev. 1:10 that he was granted a vision of heaven’s own worship while he was at worship (“caught up in spirit”) on “the Lord’s day.” John’s disciple Ignatius of Antioch tells us in his Letter to the Magnesians that “the Lord’s day” is not the ancient Sabbath; therefore, “the Lord’s day” must refer to Sunday. (See This Rock, September 1994, “The Fathers Know Best.”)

Jesus, being God, knew whether or not his Church would apostatize by changing the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. If Christians are still obliged to keep Saturday as their day of corporate worship, isn’t it strange that Jesus underscored exactly the opposite by appearing to his disciples after his Resurrection nearly exclusively on *Sunday? *

Where are the X’s?

 

[Joshua27]

I think you’d agree that we could create a full thread of argument for & against each of these points. I’ve noticed we’re hoping to dig further and further into each response I post (I suppose) with the intention of disproving anything within the foundation I stand on for supporting “Holy Spirit Authority” rather than “Apostolic Authority through Succession”.

But before I address your recent challenges, let me ask you these questions in order to stay on topic:

1. Was the Holy Spirit sent to us after the Messiah left?
2. Is the Holy Spirit a real (and thus has his own will)?
3. Does the Holy Spirit have as much authority as the Messiah had (when he was here)?
4. Isn’t it God who selects his apostles, not man (proven from the document)?
5. Is the Holy Spirit bound to anyone; any person or group?

The problem I often see is while many recognize the Holy Spirit and understand that he was sent to be with us after the Messiah, most people failt ot realize that the Holy Spirit became the Head of the Church when the Messiah left. He’s free to call anyone to apostleship. There is nothing binding the Holy Spirit as he’s the Spirit of the Father.

---

Notwithstanding, this is why I say - in my previous post - interpretation of scripture must begin from a Hebrew mindset for accuracy or else wrong conclusions can be reached. Please read “Part 3” of my response to your referenced document to understand John10:30; John 14:9; especially John 16:15 & Matthew 28:19, as you clearly haven’t read it

Where’s the X?

Realize that the God you serve is the Hebrew God of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob. There has never been a view or belief that God exists as three persons in the whole of Hebrew mindset. Even with the prophecies of the coming Messiah there was NOT a belief that he was God. Not even the apostles called the Messiah God (Peter said “you are the Messiah, the son of the living God”). Infact the concept of a “man-god” is pagan and evidence of the early apostles (specifically Paul) adamantly rejecting such a concept is recorded in Acts 14:11-15:

1. 
   *]The citizens of Lystra witnessed miracles at the hand of Paul.
   *]After witnessing these miracles they began to exclaim, "The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men [in human form]. "
   
   Note: They were expressing a “god in the flesh” or “god incarnate” belief. Sound familiar?
   
   *]When Paul and Barnabas witnessed this they became incensed at such a thought, “rent their clothes and ran in among the people,” and begged them to turn from such “vanities” to the living God (of whom the Messiah is the son).
   
   The citizens were claiming “gods” can take human form, so why didn’t Paul and Barnabas simply correct them saying the only “god in the flesh” was the Messiah and not them? Seems like a great opportunity lost. No, Paul & Barnabas didn’t showed even the slightest acceptance of such a concept.
   

   “You shall not carve idols…” is in my copy of Deuteronomy 5:8-9 as well as my copy of Exodus 20:4-5, and is addressed as well in CCC 2129-2132.

   That’s good. But it’s not taught as part of the commandments in Catholic School. I know because I went to Catholic School for all my life. This commandment is removed with all others shifted up and the 10th commandment is split into a new 9th & 10th.
   

   BTW, did you know that Scripture commands the use of statues and icons?
   
   In Exodus 25:18–20…
   
   In Numbers 21:8–9…This shows the actual ceremonial use of a statue (looking to it) in order to receive a blessing from God (healing from snakebite). In John 3:14, Jesus tells us that he himself is what the bronze serpent represented, so it was a symbolic representation of Jesus. There was no problem with this statue—God had commanded it to be made—so long as people did not worship it. When they did, the righteous king Hezekiah had it destroyed (2 Kgs. 18:4). This clearly shows the difference between the proper religious use of statues and idolatry.

   Your reasoning is sound but your conclusion is incorrect. The commandment is “do not make/fashion for YOURSELVES…” You are right when you say “God commanded” for His throne seat, healing serpent, temple. But whether one believes a statue is used in proper religous ritual is beside the point; “if one was not told to make the statue by God one shouldn’t make it even if it’s for God”, right?
   

   You don’t have framed photos of family members/loved ones on display in your home, do you?
   
   Where’s the X?

   lol. I’ve heard this comeback before. I can be as equally fundamental and say ‘those aren’t “graven” images, though they are images’.
   
   <<I’ll Finish later…It’s 3:20am here, I’ve got to get some sleep>>

 

[Joshua27]

Acts 20:7 - "And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, … "

Here’s another one of those words that are confusing if not read from a Hebrew mindset. “Break bread” means to “come together to eat”. It does not mean “the last supper”. The Messiah “broke bread” upon the feeding of the multitude, The Messiah “broke bread” the night before his crucifixion day, and the Messiah “broke bread” with his desciples after his resurrection. So we have at least three different times [with at least two defined days] when bread was broken (“a day before Saturday” & Sunday), so why would we conclude that Sunday is the Official day to “break bread”?

1 Corinthians 16:2 - "Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, … "

Upon the first day of the work week, collect all the offering, so “that there be no gathering when I come.” (1 Corinthians 16:2 completed).

Colossians 2:16-17 - "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come … "

[Again, you forget to finish the passage]

Colossians 2:16-17 - “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or [in respect] of the new moon, or [in respect] of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come; but the Body of Christ”.

It says “Let no man judge you (in these matters), but the body of Christ.” Thus the Body of Christ is allowed to judge other members of the Body in respecting these things (of which the Sabbath is included).

Revelation 1:10 - "I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet "

Here, you want me to previously assume that the Lord’s day is Sunday. Outside of your assumption, this verse doesn’t determine when “the Lord’s Day” is. However, we are told in scripture which day the Messiah IS lord of; He is “Lord of the Sabbath [day]” (Matthew 12:8). So, if we base this Revelation scripture on Matthew’s scripture, John is saying he was in the spirit on the Sabbath.

and from This Rock:

Jesus, being God, knew whether or not his Church would apostatize by changing the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. If Christians are still obliged to keep Saturday as their day of corporate worship, isn’t it strange that Jesus underscored exactly the opposite by appearing to his disciples after his Resurrection nearly exclusively on *Sunday? *

Where are the X’s?

Without even getting into the sciptural proof just yet, recall the story…

Let’s say (for argument sake) that the “Lord of the Sabbath” was gasp] resurrected on the Sabbath, when is the EARLIEST the Messiah could POSSIBLY see his disciples but in the morning on the very next day? But this is my assumption…let’s get into some proof.

We MUST read the scriptures from a Hebrew mindset:

1. The High Priest (who conducts the Passover ritual was NOT supposed to be seen by anyone until the “day of the First Fruits” (the First day of the week (Sunday) following the weekly Sabbath after Passover Week). AFTER the sacrificial lamb has ALREADY been REMOVED from the DEPTS of the oven, the High Priest offers the first fruit harvest to the Father along with the prepared (sanctified) lamb.
2. The Messiah is perfectly our high Priest as well as perfectly our sacrificial lamb.
3. Thus, the ritual alone suggests that the Messiah must already be alive prior to Sunday to perform the “FirstFruits” ritual in seclusion before Sunday…this is why scripture conveys the Messiah had already risen and gone.
4. Note that scripture also says “while it was yet dark” (John 20:1) Mary Mag. and others visited the tomb only to find the tomb empty. If it’s yet dark, it’s not yet “Sunday Morning” when the Messiah was ALREADY gone.
5. The prophecy spoken by the Messiah calls for 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth…only to rise on the third day.

We know that the Hebrew reckoning of days starts with “the Night followed by the Day”. IFF Sunday is Resurrection Day, he wasn’t dead Sunday morning so let’s count backwards:

1. Sunday (Evening)
2. Saturday (Morning)
3. Saturday (Evening)
4. Friday (Morning)

…The Messiah was crucified during a “morning”, but counting from Sunday to Friday only gives us 2 days and 2 nights. Even if we count Sunday Morning (as a partial day) we still fail to cover 1 “evening he’s dead” to fulfill the prophecy.

(Short version) The Messiah died on a Wednesday = Passover Day

1. Thursday (evening) = High Sabbath = Feast of Unleavened Bread
2. Thursday (morning) = High Sabbath = Feast of Unleavened Bread
3. Friday (evening)
4. Friday (morning)
5. Saturday (evening) = weekly sabbath
6. Saturday (morning…just before Sunday evening) = weekly sabbath = Resurrection Day

As High Priest, he then stayed in seclusion to offer the “first fruits” to God on the “day of Firstfruits” (all Sunday evening) until the morning when he was allowed to be seen.

 

[Lutheranteach]

Lutheran Confession/Holy Absolution:

P: If we say we have no sins, then we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.

C: But if we confess our sins, God who is faithful and just will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

A: We confess unto you that we are in bondage to sin and cannot free ourselves. We have sinned aginst you in thought, word, and deed, by what we have done, and by what we have left undone. We have not loved you with our whole heart. We have not loved our neighbors as ourselves. We justly deserve your present and eternal punishment. For the sake of your Son, Jesus Christ, have mercy on us, renew us, and lead us, so that we may delight in your will, and walk in your ways, to the glory of your holy name. Amen

P: Almighty God, in his mercy, has given his Son to die for us, and for His sake, forgives us all our sins. As a called and ordained servant of Christ, and by His authority, I therefore forgive you all of your sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.

Suggested format of Private Confession / Holy Absolution, which appears in Lutheran service books, from Luther’s Small Catechism
can be found here:
bookofconcord.org/smallcatechism.php#confession

Lutherans recognize the power to bind and loose.

Jon

: Almighty God, in his mercy, has given his Son to die for us, and for His sake, forgives us all our sins. As a called and ordained servant of Christ, and by His authority, I therefore forgive you all of your sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.

That is not the way I see it in LBW and later worship books. It should read: “…as a called and ordained minister of the Church of Christ and by his authority I declare unto you the entire forgiveness of all your sins.” There is never “I” as the Pastor does not forgive sins, Jesus/God does.

 

[Erich]

Upon the moment of sin, we know Adam lost his “authority” thus his children and children’s children subsequently did not have it either even in succession from Adam…

My point is authority is not bound by succession but by obedience to the “image & likeness” which is conferred by the source, otherwise authorty is lost.

You’re going to have to conclusively establish when, precisely, this (supposedly) occurred.

“God is One…there are no others” X = Trinitarianism 325AD; Council of Nicaea]
“No idol crafting or worship” X = removed from the recorded list of commandments]
“Remember the Sabbath” X = solimnity was transferred from Saturday to Sunday]
“Keep the Sabbath” Holy X = Feast days (considered High Sabbaths) were replaced by new holidays]

I haven’t been able to address all your points yet, partly because each of your posts contains multiple points (each of which is worthy of its own thread), but mostly because I haven’t been able to figure out where you’re “coming from” (your having gone to Catholic School for all your life notwithstanding… FWIW, I too attended Catholic school through 12th grade).

You quibble over the “removal” of idol-crafting from the commandments… yet the Commandments are not numbered in the Bible (for that matter, the original manuscripts did not even contain the chapter and verse divisions in the numbered form familiar to modern readers). The Lord has not explicitly set out for us how they are to be numbered. If we were to number every “command” in those sections of the Bible we would have about 17 commandments or more. So, different efforts have been made to number and group them over the centuries.

From Bible-Researcher.com [except the bracketed part]:

According to Exodus 34:28 and Deuteronomy 4:13, God wrote upon the tablets “ten commandments,” and so Exodus 20:2-17 is to be divided into ten parts; but this division is done differently by different writers. The oldest method, found in the writings of Philo and Josephus (first century), takes verse 3 as the first commandment, verses 4 through 6 as the second, and so forth. This is called the Philonic division, and it was adopted by the Greek Church and by Protestants (except Lutherans). Later the Jewish Talmud (third century) treated the preface in verses 1 and 2 as the first of ten “sayings” and combined verses 3-6 as the second saying. [Note: “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery” is not a “commandment” per se… hence, the “ten sayings.”] This is called the Talmudic division, and was adopted by all Jews. In the fifth century Saint Augustine listed the ten commandments by beginning with the Talmudic second saying as the first commandment; and, following the word order of Deuteronomy 5:21, making the ninth commandment a prohibition of the coveting of a neighbor’s wife, and the tenth a prohibition of coveting his house and other property. This is known as the Augustinian division. The Roman Catholic church accepted Augustine’s method, and Luther also continued in this tradition with one modification: he preferred to follow the word order of Exodus 20, and so his ninth commandment became a prohibition against coveting the house and his tenth prohibited coveting the wife, slaves, and animals. Lutherans continue to follow this method.

Catholics have not removed the commandment “You shall not make for yourself a graven image.” It is part of the first commandment “You shall have no other god’s before me.” The Jewish people also place “you shall not make any graven image” with the commandment “thou shalt not have any strange gods before Me.”

It is perfectly acceptable for a Catholic to follow the Origen numbering system or the Augustine system. Each numbering system has its strengths and weaknesses. For example, the Origen system (that most Protestants use, except the Lutherans) lumps coveting your neighbor’s wife under the commandment of coveting his possessions. But the opening chapters of Genesis make it plain in the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden that a woman is not a man’s “possession” like a horse or livestock. He is the bone of his bones and the flesh of his flesh. (Gen 2:23).

Speaking of Adam, on the one hand you say “Adam lost his ‘authority’ thus his children and children’s children subsequently did not have it either even in succession from Adam,” yet you still haven’t given me a precise date when the Church Fathers supposedly lost their ‘authority’.

Did they lose it at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD?

Did they lose it in the fifth century when St. Augustine listed the Ten Commandments by beginning with the Talmudic second saying as the first commandment?

Or did they already lose it in the first century, in Acts 20:7 (so much for the gates of hell not prevailing) in which case they would no longer have had it in either 325 AD or the fifth century?

You list your religion as “Faithful” … but, faithful what? Given that you think the Church Fathers “lost it” at the Council of Nicaea, my guess would be “Oneness Pentecostal” (but the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement didn’t really get started until the beginning of the 20th Century). But since you also think the Church Fathers “lost it” when they started gathering on the first day of the week instead of on the seventh, my second guess would be “Seventh Day Adventist” (which traces its origins only back to the early 1800’s)

 

[JonNC]

: Almighty God, in his mercy, has given his Son to die for us, and for His sake, forgives us all our sins. As a called and ordained servant of Christ, and by His authority, I therefore forgive you all of your sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.

That is not the way I see it in LBW and later worship books. It should read: “…as a called and ordained minister of the Church of Christ and by his authority I declare unto you the entire forgiveness of all your sins.” There is never “I” as the Pastor does not forgive sins, Jesus/God does.

I believe I have the words right, at least from “Lutheran Worship.” I couldn’t quickly find it, but instead found this:

Upon this your confession, I, by virtue of my office as a called and ordained servant of the Word, announce the grace of God to all of you, and in the stead and by the command of my Lord Jesus Christ I forgive you all your sins.

lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=3826

In the SBH (pg. 248), it says “By the authority of God and of this office and minstry, I declare unto thee the gracious forgiveness of all of thy sins: In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”

EDIT: I guess I’m not seeing your point. Of course it is Christ that forgives sins, but the pastor acts in His place, using the power and authority granted to the Church,

Jon

 

[Erich]

We MUST read the scriptures from a Hebrew mindset

From Crucifixion Wednesday?

To the Jewish readers of Scripture the new day began at sunset.

When Scripture indicates that Jesus rose on the first day of the week, therefore, it means that he rose on the day that began at sunset on Saturday and lasted until sunset on Sunday. Since we are told his tomb was found empty “after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week” (Matt. 28:1), he must have risen between sunset Saturday and dawn Sunday. Whether this was before or after midnight Scripture does not say. He might have risen either Saturday night or Sunday morning before dawn, though, for purposes of determining when he was crucified, it doesn’t matter.

In the Bible, parts of time units were frequently counted as wholes. Thus a king might be said to have reigned for two years, even if he reigned for only fourteen months. In the same way, a day and a night does not mean a period of twenty-four hours. It can refer to any portion of a day coupled with any portion of a night. The expression “three days and three nights” could be used as simply a slightly hyperbolic way of referring to “three days.”

As Protestant Bible scholar R. T. France notes: “Three days and three nights was a Jewish idiom to a period covering only two nights” (Matthew, 213).

Similarly, D. A. Carson, regarded as one of the deans of conservative Protestant Bible exegesis, explains: “In rabbinical thought a day and a night make an onah, and a part of an onah is as the whole. . . . Thus according to Jewish tradition, ‘three days and three nights’ need mean no more than ‘three days’ or the combination of any part of three separate days” (Expositor’s Bible Commentary, 8:296).

If Jesus was crucified and died Friday afternoon, that would be the first day; at sundown on Friday the second day would begin; then at sundown on Saturday the third day would begin. So Jesus was indeed “raised on the third day” (Matt. 20:19).

Scripture repeatedly tells us that Jesus was crucified on “the day of preparation,” which was the first-century Jewish way of referring to Friday, the day of preparation for the Sabbath. This is why the women were not able to anoint his body before he was buried—because Jesus was hurriedly buried late in the afternoon, just as the Sabbath was beginning. The women thus had to rest until the Sabbath was over (Luke 23:56).

We are also told that the Jewish leaders asked Pilate to order the legs of the crucifixion victims broken so they would die faster (from.asphyxiation due to an inability to push themselves up on their crosses and take a breath), “in order to prevent the bodies from remaining on the cross on the Sabbath” (John 19:31).

Some advocates of a Wednesday crucifixion concede that Jesus was crucified on the day before a Sabbath, but deny that this was the regular, weekly Sabbath. In later times, the phrase “day of preparation” came to be used to refer to the day before Passover and, this argument goes, Passover counted as a Sabbath in the sense that it was a day of rest, even though it usually did not fall on the weekly Sabbath. Thus Jesus was crucified on the day before Passover and had to be buried hurriedly on that account.

But this explanation will not do. In the first century, “the day of preparation” referred to Friday, not the day before Passover. Further, we know from Scripture that the Sabbath following Jesus’ crucifixion was the regular, weekly Sabbath, the seventh day of the week: “Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the sepulcher” (Matt. 28:1).

We can thus reconstruct the chronology of the crucifixion, death, and Resurrection of Christ as follows:

Friday, the Day of Preparation: Jesus is crucified with two thieves. From noon to three in the afternoon, a darkness covers the land (Matt. 27:45). Then, “ince it was the Day of Preparation, in order to prevent the bodies from remaining on the cross on the Sabbath . . . the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away” (John 19:31). Then Joseph of Arimathea obtains Jesus’ body and buries it: “It was Preparation Day [that is, the day before the Sabbath]. So as evening approached, Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus’ body” (Mark 15:42-43, NIV).

Saturday, the Sabbath: “On the Sabbath they [the women] rested according to the commandment” (Luke 23:56b). Also on this day, “that is, after the Day of Preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered before Pilate” and asked for a guard to be placed on the tomb (Matt. 27:62).

Sunday, the first day of the week: “Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the sepulcher” and found that Jesus had risen from the dead (Matt. 28:1).

 

[JonNC]

: Almighty God, in his mercy, has given his Son to die for us, and for His sake, forgives us all our sins. As a called and ordained servant of Christ, and by His authority, I therefore forgive you all of your sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.

That is not the way I see it in LBW and later worship books. It should read: “…as a called and ordained minister of the Church of Christ and by his authority I declare unto you the entire forgiveness of all your sins.” There is never “I” as the Pastor does not forgive sins, Jesus/God does.

LT,
Just some additional information.

The following is a quote from the Small Catechism in Luther’s commentary on confession:

As thou believest, so be it done unto thee. And by the command of our Lord Jesus Christ** I forgive thee thy sins**, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. Depart in peace.

bookofconcord.org/smallcatechism.php#confession

Tappert says the same.

Jon

 

[Joshua27]

I haven’t been able to address all your points yet, partly because each of your posts contains multiple points (each of which is worthy of its own thread), but mostly because I haven’t been able to figure out where you’re “coming from”.

Meaning, “Is he Adventist, Oneness Pentecostal…which church body does he belong to?”

I am Faithful, Erich. I belong to The Way; it’s not a religion…so when did “the Way” commence?

You quibble over the “removal” of idol-crafting from the commandments… yet the Commandments are not numbered in the Bible (for that matter, the original manuscripts did not even contain the chapter and verse divisions in the numbered form familiar to modern readers). The Lord has not explicitly set out for us how they are to be numbered. If we were to number every “command” in those sections of the Bible we would have about 17 commandments or more. So, different efforts have been made to number and group them over the centuries.

To your same point, if I said, “the 3rd line from the commandments was removed”, would you know what I was talking about? I’m using the numbers most people easily know. Of course it’s not in the number but how would you know what I’m talking about otherwise?

From Bible-Researcher.com [except the bracketed part]:

Catholics have not removed the commandment “You shall not make for yourself a graven image.” It is part of the first commandment “You shall have no other god’s before me.” The Jewish people also place “you shall not make any graven image” with the commandment “thou shalt not have any strange gods before Me.”

I respect and agree with the argument about numbering, but to say the “graven images for yourselves” commandment is part of the “no other gods” commandment is missing the point of specifically stating the “graven images” commandment (though I realize that the same “end-result” occurs from disobeying both: “turning focus away from the Father to dolize other things”).

Speaking of Adam, on the one hand you say “Adam lost his ‘authority’ thus his children and children’s children subsequently did not have it either even in succession from Adam,” yet you still haven’t given me a precise date when the Church Fathers supposedly lost their ‘authority’.

Alright. It started in the second half of the 1st century…

If you’ll recall several of the later New Testament letters warn the Body of those who “say” they’re part of the Church but who promote foreign, false teachings [brackets are mine].

(Dated 63-64AD) “2 Peter” speaks of the False teachings which have corrupted the Body:

Traditional Gnostic Beliefs - (1) “Goal: To free a person’s Spirit from the body” (WINK! beginning of “immortal spirit” belief); (2) “There is a Greater God and a Lesser God” (start of a multiple godhead and eventually “trinity” belief). Peter is recorded to have been crucified by Nero in 64AD.

(Dated 75AD) “Jude” (Brother of James) speaks of False Teachings continuing to corrupt the Body:

By this time period, Judah confirms that “certain persons have crept in unnoticed” (Jude 1:4) into the body, who promote “error of Balaam [pagan beliefs]” (Jude1:11). Hopyfully you’ve notice that this is after the Fire of Rome, persecution of Nero, and the First Roman-Jewish War.

75AD is supposedly during the Reign of Pope Linus] Judah continues, saying the false teachers mouths speak “*great swelling words *[use grand, complicated language in their doctrine proofs], having men’s persons in admiration” (Jude 1:16) because of it. Judah then urges believers to “remember the words that were spoken by the Apostles” (Jude 1:17), which proves that at this point (75AD) believers were forgetting the Apostles’ teachings (distinguishes them from the Church Fathers).

(Dated 85-95AD) “1 John” & “2 John” speaks of False teachings still corrupting the Body:

Traditional Gnostic Beliefs - (3) “Matter/Physical element/body is inherently evil” ( original sin?); (4) “The Messiah wasn’t a 100% human being, but a God incarnate” (recall “man-god” concept that Paul & Barnabas denounce in Acts 14:11-15)

Ignatius of Antioch - a Church Father who (note the timeframe) supposedly lived from c 35 to c 108AD - Spoke against the Sabbath, against the traditions of Judaism, promoted the Deity of Christ, spoke of the eucharist as “medicine of immorality” (when Paul & others say the Spirit of God is), and yet he writes:

"Be not seduced by strange doctrines nor by antiquated fables, which are profitless. For if even unto this day we live after the manner of Judaism, we avow that we have not received grace… If then those who had walked in ancient practices attained unto newness of hope, no longer observing Sabbaths but fashioning their lives after the Lord’s day, on which our life also arose through Him and through His death which some men deny … how shall we be able to live apart from Him? … It is monstrous to talk of Jesus Christ and to practise Judaism. For Christianity did not believe in Judaism, but Judaism in Christianity — Ignatius to the Magnesians 8:1, 9:1-2, 10:3, Lightfoot translation.

Ignatius was alive during each of the sourced epistles, and he was also considered an Apostolic Father…in fact, he’s letters were the main source of the development of katholikos theology.

 

[Joshua27]

From Crucifixion Wednesday?

[Erich then proves a strong argument. Please post click link to read (I just needed space)…]

You make a strong argument, but your sources overlooked one major piece of the puzzle…we are specifically told that the sabbath is NOT a weekly sabbath, but a “High Sabbath”.

John 19:31 “Then the Jews, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.”

High Sabbaths are distinguished from the weekly sabbath because they are NOT at the end of the week but whenever a Hebrew Holiday occurs. We know that this Holiday was the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which many mistakenly call “Passover”, except Passover IS Preparation Day; the day before the feast (but I’ll explain this after I prove there were two Sabbaths that passed before the first day of the week: a High Sabbath and the weekly sabbath)!

Mark 15:42-47]

*42 When evening had already come, because it was the preparation day, that is, the day before the Sabbath,

43 Joseph of Arimathea came, a prominent member of the Council, who himself was waiting for the kingdom of God; and he gathered up courage and went in before Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus.

44 Pilate wondered if He was dead by this time, and summoning the centurion, he questioned him as to whether He was already dead.

45 And ascertaining this from the centurion, he granted the body to Joseph.

46 Joseph bought a linen cloth, took Him down, wrapped Him in the linen cloth and laid Him in a tomb which had been hewn out in the rock; and he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb.

47 Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses were looking on to see where He was laid. *

…So upon the evening (not yet the sabbath), Joseph buries the Messiah, but the Marys see the Messiah’s body was not annointed so they looked on to see where he was laid.

Mark 16:1-2]

*1 When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might come and anoint Him.

2 Very early on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen.*

…So when the Sabbath was over, the women “bought” (past tense of “to buy”; from a store) spices to anoint the Messiah’s body. Bought. So as fact, they obviously went to the store and bought spices to anoint the Messiah’s body…and yet - upon the first day - they were ALREADY at the tomb ready to prepare the Messiah’s body very early in the morning (the sun hadn’t even risen). So when did they venture to the spice store?

In John 19:39, we’re told that Nicodemus came with enough spices to anoint the body of the Messiah which weighted 100 pounds, and then he and Joseph anointed the body. Nicodemus obviously returned AFTER the women had already left upon presuming the body was not properly anointed before burial. The women then made plans to anoint the body on their own without knowing Nic was already on his way.

[Again **Mark 16:1]

1 When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might come and anoint Him.

They’re purchasing embalming spices, so they needed enough; about 100 pounds worth for an adult male, just like Nic bought. This amount takes time to purchase and carry. But then we read…

2 Very early on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen.

They obviously already had the anointing spices at this point …so when did they purchase the spices? In Hebrew times there are no 24hr stores (and even if there were, these women wouldn’t have bought anything on the sabbath).

Could they have bought the spices on Sunday (evening)? Maybe, but what women do you know would risk carrying money to the store at night, and then risk carrying their numerous heavy goods back to the tomb, even if they had help (which they probably had for a 100 pounds worth of goods)…all the while, we’re assuming in this scenario that neither the women nor their help, nor the spice store owner gets any sleep before the start of Sunday (daylight)?

No, this scenario is not plausible. Old businesses would wait to open after the sun rose to mark the start of the day…however, we know that by the time the women reached the tomb the sun was just starting to rise). The women already had their spices before the first day, but bought them after the Sabbath.

So when did they purchase these spices?

<<Continued in Part 2, I’ll detail how Passover is NOT the Feast Day but IS Preparation Day>>

 

[Joshua27]

Again, we MUST read scripture from a Hebrew mindset in order to get the right interpretation.

“Passover” [Peshach] is the “Day of the Slaughtering of the Lamb”; the Day when the Lamb is slaughtered and prepared for the next day; Chag HaMatzot [Feast of Unleavened Bread].

---

Leviticus 23:5 *“In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD’S passover.”
*Leviticus 23:6 “And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD seven days ye must eat unleavened bread.”

---

Many people overlook Hebrew history that shows “Passover” is a work day…again, passover is a WORK DAY; the “lamb sacrifice” day (before the High Feast/Rest day). The lamb is prepared [a task] for the feast by being slaughtered and cooked.

Exodus 12:6 “Take care of [selected lambs] until the fourteenth day of the month, when all the people of the community of Israel must slaughter them at twilight. 7 Then they are to take some of the blood and put it on the sides and tops of the doorframes of the houses where they eat the lambs.”

Exodus 12:12 “On that same night I will pass over Egypt and strike down every firstborn—both men and animals—and I will bring judgment on all the gods of Egypt.”

Passover IS Preparation Day, the day before the High Sabbath Feast of Unleavened Bread (Chag HaMatzot).

---

The Messiah was (indeed) crucified on the day before a Sabbath; He was crucified on the Preparation Day [Passover Day] before the High Sabbath Day [Feast of Unleavened Bread]…the SAME day as his last supper. In other words, Passover = Preparation Day = Last Supper Day =/= High Sabbath Feast Day.

Tying this to “part 1”, we can thus reconstruct the chronology of the crucifixion, death, and Resurrection of Christ as follows:

Wednesday (evening) - Last Supper, Betrayal [John 13:1-2]
Wednesday (daylight) - Trial & Crucifixion, Burial, Passover (Lambs sacrificed & prepared) [Luke 22:66]

Thurday (evening) - High Sabbath Feast of Unleavened Bread (night 1) [John 19:31]
Thurday (daylight) - High Sabbath Feast (day 1)

Friday (evening) - Second night of the feast, normal evening (night 2)
Friday (daylight) - Second feast day, work day (day 2); Marys bought spices AFTER Sabbath [Mark 16:1]

The women prepared spices and then rested on the Sabbath [Luke 23:56]

Saturday (evening) - Third night of the feast & weekly Sabbath (night 3)
Saturday (daylight) - Third feast day, weekly Sabbath (day 3), Resurrection (towards end of sabbath) [Matthew 28:1]

Sunday (evening) - “Day of firstfruits”; High Priest offers firstfruits to God [Leviticus 23:10-14; John 20:17-19]
Sunday (daylight) - Messiah Greets & fellowships with Apostles

 

[Joshua27]

No…Hebrew, because the Hebrews were first.

Your lack of objectivity is astounding and shameful. It would seem that in your mind the moment you read “resurrected on the Sabbath” you immediately shutdown (instead of considering the evidence) and begin to attack with labels, when the most effective thing you could do is to try to disprove my argument.

You know, many of the major Christian denominations - including Catholicism - should come together because each one - while not complete - has “a piece” of the truth. The SDA - if this is their view - has this as a truth. The “Lord of the Sabbath” taught on Sabbaths, was buried at the beginning of a Sabbath and was resurrected at the end of a Sabbath.

Maybe you can enlighten me on why the “Lord of the Sabbath” - one who, from the moment he appeared, defended and supported the Hebrew Law as “forever” (who also honored each Sabbath as part of that law) - would suddenly approve another sacred day…or will you say that it’s in the Authority of the Church to change the law (which bring us back to the topic of this thread).

 

[Joshua27]

[Note…you haven’t answered my challenge (to explain why the Lord of the Sabbath would suddenly change the day), though I will answer yours.]

Because a (false) precedent has already been established which people comprehend as a standard. I could say “the Messiah was crucified on the forth of the Sabbaton, which was on the fourtheenth of the 1st”, but not many would understand which pagan day that was. Perspective is NOT equivalent to translation. I emphasize reading from a Hebrew perpective. Reading from Hebrew language is even better but not necessary to maintain a Hebrew perspective.

Because those who wrote the New Testament were Hebrew, and even though they wrote in Greek for pagans’ benefit (just like my explaining in a similar fashion) their perspective remained Hebrew, rooted in the Old Testament and Hebrew scriptures.

What’s currently in the mind of a majority is the prevailng standard of thought by which that majority lives and operates. So the burden of “openmindness” is not concerning the prospect of accepting a standard but in accepting something new; strange; different. The onus of “openmindness” is on those who keep what’s standard in thought or belief. What I’m explaining to this thread is new, strange and different because it’s not the standard, thus it requires you to “open” your eyes and mind to what the scripture is specifically saying.

Be aware that you brought up joining another denomination (not me); and even in this last comment you would suggest that I’m trying to convert you to another Church…which proves my point that you’ve automatically shutdown and began to judge me as “this label” or “that”, instead of reading what I wrote; that all denominations should come together with their pieces of truth.

I don’t want you to join any new denomination or church. I want you to read the scriptural evidence presented. But to your comment about “not seeing any reason to join any goup at all”, have you seen my Religious description? Don’t make the mistake in believing that the CC is the only group who are members of the Body of Christ.

 

[Erich]

I want you to read the scriptural evidence presented.

You accept exactly the same books of the New Testament that Pope Damasus decreed were canonical in the year 382 at the synod of Rome – a decision which was ratified again at the councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397 and 419). You’ve never even seen the originals of the 27 books in the New Testament. Nobody today has; the earliest copies of those books we possess are centuries newer than the originals.

So, like it or not, you take the say-so of a Church which (you claim) started “derailing” in the middle of the first century, that (a) in fact those copies are accurate, and that (b) those 27 books are the inspired canonical New Testament Scriptures. You do accept the Catholic Church’s testimony as trustworthy, or else your Bible would not have those 27 books.

The question you have to ask yourself is this: ‘Where did we get the Bible?’ Until you can give a satisfactory answer, you aren’t in much of a position to rely on the authority of Scripture or to claim that you can be certain that you know how to accurately interpret it.

After you answer that question—and there’s really only one answer that can be given—you have some other important questions to ask: ‘If the Bible, which we received from the Catholic Church, is our sole rule of faith, who’s to do the interpreting?’ And ‘Why are there so many conflicting understandings among Evangelicals and Fundamentalists even on central doctrines that pertain to salvation?’

 

[Joshua27]

The question you have to ask yourself is this: ‘Where did we get the Bible?’ Until you can give a satisfactory answer, you aren’t in much of a position to rely on the authority of Scripture or to claim that you can be certain that you know how to accurately interpret it.

After you answer that question—and there’s really only one answer that can be given—you have some other important questions to ask: ‘If the Bible, which we received from the Catholic Church, is our sole rule of faith, who’s to do the interpreting?’ And ‘Why are there so many conflicting understandings among Evangelicals and Fundamentalists even on central doctrines that pertain to salvation?’

I’ll answer it, but you should answer this: ‘Where did the CC get the Old Testament for the Bible?’

You see, I can rely on the authority of the Bible because (what many call) the Old Testament is in fact the ancient Hebrew Scriptures taken from Judaism. Whenever you read a prophet or an apostle (like Paul as late as the Acts) or the Messiah referring to “Sacred Scripture” they are not referring to the Bible…I’ll repeat, they are NOT referring to the Bible but to the Hebrew Scriptures (“Torah & the Prophets” from Judaism), which the CC did NOT create. So if we want to follow this logic, who’s authority should the CC yield to by result of the material for their Bible?

The New Testament does not have a foundation without the Hebrew Scriptures. “What” is The Messiah the fulfillment of if the Hebrew Scriptures aren’t his foundation? What “scripture” did He constantly quote from and defend if the Bible wasn’t yet created? “[Paul] mightily convinced the Jews shewing by the scriptures that [Messiah] was Christ” (Acts 18:28)…but what “scriptures” did Paul use if the Bible wasn’t yet created?

Deuteronomy 4:2 - “You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.”

Deuteronomy 12:32 - “Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it. You shall not add to it nor take away from it.”

Proverbs 30:5-6 - “Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.”

These instructions were commanded in “Hebrew scripture” thousands of years before the Messiah appeared, so what came first: The Bible or the Hebrew Scriptures that it stands on?

So ‘Where did we get the Bible?’ From Hebrew Scripture because without it, the Bible would not exist; The Messiah would NOT have a testimony (as its fulfillment), The Apostles would not have a Gospel of the Messiah, and if there’s no Gospel there wouldn’t be any epistles for any churches. Faith in the Holy Father did not originate with the CC…neither did “sacred scripture”…neither did authority.

---

To answer your second question; there are so many interpretations because (mostly) everyone has FAILED to keep the Old Testament as THE foundation that the Holy Father established and commanded us to honor throughout ALL generations. So many have said that the Law [Torah & Prophetic books = Old Testament] was “nailed to the cross” and thus is no longer valid because we’ve entered into a “New Covenant” (assumed to be embodied in the New Testament), when they’re misunderstanding what the Messiah and Paul were talking about (for lack of a Hebrew mindset):

• The Messiah said we are under a new covenant; “Covenant = Contract”…and ALL contracts (even those in our day) are agreements based on the unbreakable “LAW OF THE LAND”. The Father’s Law never ended or changed, but we (indeed) entered into a new contract based on that law.
• When Paul spoke about “nailing the law to the cross” note that Paul was speaking about the Law of “sin = death” because “death” was the only way man could pay a recompense for breaking the law (i.e. for “being sinful”) but the payment was too expensive for us. Paul was saying that we who believed had a new way to pay if we broke the eternal law. Thus “the law of sin & death” was nailed to the cross.

Who’s to do the interpreting? Well…

Hebrews 8:10 - “For this is the covenant [agreement] that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws “Torah & Prophetic books”] into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people.”

…which was quoted from Jeremiah 31:33 (old testament) - “But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.”

John 14:26 - “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance [what could the Messiah possibly need his followers to remember?], whatsoever I have said unto you.”

Hebrews 10:15-16 - “Whereof the Holy Spirit also testifies to us: for he said, ‘This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws “Torah & Prophetic books”] into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them’.”

So we come full circle back to the most Holy Spirit, our Teacher our Comforter and Judge [guide]…as it is the Holy Spirit who freely selects anyone as an Apostle, and then write the law in them, whereby giving them the authority to spread the Gospel (the fulfillment of the Law [Torah & Prophetic Books = Old Testament] by the Messiah).

 

[Erich]

I’ll answer it, but you should answer this: ‘Where did the CC get the Old Testament for the Bible?’

You see, I can rely on the authority of the Bible because (what many call) the Old Testament is in fact the ancient Hebrew Scriptures taken from Judaism.

Not good enough. You’re going to have to be more specific than just “Judaism”. What branch of Judaism do you consider authoritative? The Sadducees, for example, opposed the Pharisees’ use of Oral Law and held only to the Pentateuch. They also differed with the Pharisees on many theological tenets: for example, they did not believe in resurrection and the immortality of the soul. The Essenes, on the other hand, believed in the immortality of the soul, and taught that God would punish an evil soul but set free the souls of the righteous – but no evidence yet exists that they believed in a resurrection of the body.

Whenever you read a prophet or an apostle (like Paul as late as the Acts) or the Messiah referring to “Sacred Scripture” they are not referring to the Bible…I’ll repeat, they are NOT referring to the Bible but to the Hebrew Scriptures

No argument from me there. In fact, the same holds true for 2 Timothy 3:15 “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” Some of the later epistles were not written even when Paul wrote this, and of course none of the books of the New Testament had yet been placed on the canon of the Scripture books. That said, I assume you are not relying on the authority of just the scriptures of the Old Testament as your rule of faith.

So if we want to follow this logic, who’s authority should the CC yield to by result of the material for their Bible?

The same synods and councils that canonized the 27 books of the New Testament also issued the following (i.e. the same as the list later approved by the Council of Trent):

It is likewise decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun. The list of the Old Testament begins: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book: Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Jesus Nave, one book; of Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; of Kings, four books [First and Second Books of Kings, Third and Fourth Books of Kings]; Paralipomenon, two books; One Hundred and Fifty Psalms, one book; of Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise, Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), one book;

Likewise, the list of the Prophets: Isaiah, one book; Jeremias, one book; along with Cinoth, that is, his Lamentations; Ezechiel, one book; Daniel, one book; Osee, one book; Amos, one book; Micheas, one book; Joel, one book; Abdias, one book; Jonas, one book; Nahum, one book; Habacuc, one book; Sophonias, one book; Aggeus, one book; Zacharias, one book; Malachias, one book.

Likewise, the list of histories: Job, one book; Tobias, one book; Esdras, two books; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; of Maccabees, two books.
Of the approximately 300 Old Testament quotes in the New Testament, approximately 2/3 of them came from the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) which included the deuterocanonical books that the Protestants later removed. This is additional evidence that Jesus and the apostles viewed the deuterocanonical books as part of the canon of the Old Testament. scripturecatholic.com/septuagint.html lists some examples, and scripturecatholic.com/septuagint.html lists a number of Septuagint quotes in the New Testament.

So, to make a short answer long, “if it was good enough for Jesus, it’s good enough for me.”

BTW… Protestants attempt to defend their rejection of the deuterocanonicals on the ground that the early Jews rejected them. However, the Jewish councils that rejected them (e.g., School of Javneh (also called “Jamnia”) in 90 - 100 A.D.) were the same councils that rejected the entire New Testatment canon. Thus, Protestants who reject the Catholic Bible are following a Jewish council that rejected Christ and the Revelation of the New Testament.

Which Bible are you using?

 

[Erich]

Who’s to do the interpreting?

When Philip asked the Ethiopian eunuch if he understood the prophet Isaiah, he replied, “How can I, unless some one guides me?” (Acts 8:31).

So, you would agree that the Bible does not “interpret itself?”