The 7 books

[Traditional_Ang]

Does 1 and 2 Maccabees or Tobit prefigure Christ?

Reformed:

This question is directly from the book of Tobit:

Mark12:12-23 NIV
Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. “Teacher,” they said, “Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother. Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died without leaving any children. The second one married the widow, but he also died, leaving no child. It was the same with the third. In fact, none of the seven left any children. Last of all, the woman died too. At the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?”
biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=12&version=31&context=chapter

Luke 20:27-33 NIV
Some of the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Jesus with a question. “Teacher,” they said, “Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother. Now there were seven brothers. The first one married a woman and died childless. The second and then the third married her, and in the same way the seven died, leaving no children. Finally, the woman died too. Now then, at the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?”
biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=20&version=31&context=chapter

TOBIT 3:7-9 NAB
On the same day, at Ecbatana in Media, it so happened that Raguel’s daughter Sarah also had to listen to abuse, from one of her father’s maids. 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. Why do you beat us? Because your husbands are dead? Then why not join them! May we never see a son or daughter of yours!”
vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PCD.HTM

You’ll see that no one in the Gospels questions where the story came from, because they all knew.

And, You’re still ignoring these:

WISDOM 2:12-24 NAB
*Let us beset the just one, because he is obnoxious to us; he sets himself against our doings, Reproaches us for transgressions of the law and charges us with violations of our training.

He professes to have knowledge of God and styles himself a child of the LORD. To us he is the censure of our thoughts; merely to see him is a hardship for us, Because his life is not like other men’s, and different are his ways. 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.

Let us see whether his words be true; let us find out what will happen to him. For if the just one be the son of God, he will defend him and deliver him from the hand of his foes. With revilement and torture let us put him to the test that we may have proof of his gentleness and try his patience. Let us condemn him to a shameful death; for according to his own words, God will take care of him."

These were their thoughts, but they erred; for their wickedness blinded them, And they knew not the hidden counsels of God; neither did they count on a recompense of holiness nor discern the innocent souls’ reward.

For God formed man to be imperishable; the image of his own nature he made him. But by the envy of the devil, death entered the world, and they who are in his possession experience it.*
vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PLJ.HTM

If this isn’t a prophecy relating to the conspiracy between the Pharisees, the Harodeans and the High Priests to turn our Lord Jesus Christ over to the Romans to be tortured and crucified, I don’t know what it is.

The ones in my next post are among the first Scriptures in the Old Testament that refer to the concept of Eternal Life…

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Reformed:

Continued from my Previous Post:

As I said in my previous post, these are among the first Scriptures in the Old Testament that refer to and develop the concept of Eternal Life.

WISDOM 3:1-9, 13-15 NAB
*But the souls of the just are in the hand of God, and no torment shall touch them. They seemed, in the view of the foolish, to be dead; and their passing away was thought an affliction and their going forth from us, utter destruction. But they are in peace.

For if before men, indeed, they be punished, yet is their hope full of immortality; Chastised a little, they shall be greatly blessed, because God tried them and found them worthy of himself. As gold in the furnace, he proved them, and as sacrificial offerings he took them to himself.

In the time of their visitation they shall shine, and shall dart about as sparks through stubble; They shall judge nations and rule over peoples, and the LORD shall be their King forever. Those who trust in him shall understand truth, and the faithful shall abide with him in love: Because grace and mercy are with his holy ones, and his care is with the elect.

Yes, blessed is she who, childless and undefiled, knew not transgression of the marriage bed; she shall bear fruit at the visitation of souls. So also the eunuch whose hand wrought no misdeed, who held no wicked thoughts against the LORD - For he shall be given fidelity’s choice reward and a more gratifying heritage in the LORD’S temple. For the fruit of noble struggles is a glorious one; and unfailing is the root of understanding.
*
vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PLK.HTM

WISDOM 4:7-14 NAB
*But the just man, though he die early, shall be at rest. For the age that is honorable comes not with the passing of time, nor can it be measured in terms of years. Rather, understanding is the hoary crown for men, and an unsullied life, the attainment of old age.

He who pleased God was loved; he who lived among sinners was transported - Snatched away, lest wickedness pervert his mind or deceit beguile his soul; For the witchery of paltry things obscures what is right and the whirl of desire transforms the innocent mind.

Having become perfect in a short while, he reached the fullness of a long career; for his soul was pleasing to the LORD, therefore he sped him out of the midst of wickedness. But the people saw and did not understand, nor did they take this into account.*
vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PLL.HTM

I made sure I quoted the last one because it was the one I read at a Requeum for my mother who died when she was 44. If I had listened to Calvin and Svingli and not the ECF’s, I would have been denied the comfort of that Scripture.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[lak611]

Lak611:

The readings aren’t in the book - There’s a list of readings, and then you go and find the readings in your Bible or in this Big “Honking” Altar edition that’s a KJV with the Trent Canon and 14 or 16 point type.

Very few people use the 1928 or 1662 Prayer Books now . Those who are are in the Anglican Continuum, which means they’ve resisted ordaining Women priests and most of the other garbage that the Anglican communion worldwide has been doing. Problem is that many of their congregations are also dying.

The vrsion of the Anglican communion in the US is known now as The Episcopal Church (they’ve had 3 name changes in the past 30 years), and I’d rather not have you go there.

You’re in luck. I would concentrate on the 1662 and the 1928 as they are the ones used by almost all of the Anglicans who split with the Anglican Communion (+Canterbury). The ones in America pretty much use the 1928, although many suppliment the Divine Liturgy or Mass with Propers from either the Anglican or American Missal (both translations of parts of the TLM)

Anglicans Online:
anglicansonline.org/resources/bcp.html

I have to admit that I’ve deliberately this cite and the 1979 BCP because of all of the emotions coming from the breakup in 1977.

You Brother in Christ, Michael

Actually I managed to find the readings in my 1611 KJV. The Morning and Evening Prayers are listed for each day of the year in charts. I see that Ecclesiasticus, Judith, and Baruch are used a lot for Morning and Evening Prayer.

 

[Godfollower]

The Jews rejected the Apocrypha as inspired.

Believers, here’s the point you’re missing (and, please, don’t take my word for it; check it out historically):

The Jewish people accepted the Deuterocanonical works until the year 90. When Jesus walked into a synagogue, the scrolls he found included the Deuterocanonical works. The Church, therefore, accepted them, too; because they were the inspired word of God.

After the Resurrection, the Jewish people no longer had any say over the canon (I forget the reference, but Jesus taught that the vineyard would be taken away from the workers who beat the owner’s servants and killed his son; and the priests were upset because they realized that the parable applied to them). Several decades went by, and the Diaspora occurred following the destruction of the Temple. Around the year 90, the Jewish leaders decided to change the canon and only adopted works originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic. But it was too late then! A new Church had come on the scene, and the old one lacked authority to speak about the Scriptures.

So the Christians accepted the Deuterocanonicals as well, until Luther came along and discovered that they interfered with his theology. So he dumped them.

To put it another way, the Deuterocanonicals were good enough for Jesus, so they’re good enough for us.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Believers, here’s the point you’re missing (and, please, don’t take my word for it; check it out historically):

The Jewish people accepted the Deuterocanonical works until the year 90. When Jesus walked into a synagogue, the scrolls he found included the Deuterocanonical works. The Church, therefore, accepted them, too; because they were the inspired word of God.

After the Resurrection, the Jewish people no longer had any say over the canon (I forget the reference, but Jesus taught that the vineyard would be taken away from the workers who beat the owner’s servants and killed his son; and the priests were upset because they realized that the parable applied to them). Several decades went by, and the Diaspora occurred following the destruction of the Temple. Around the year 90, the Jewish leaders decided to change the canon and only adopted works originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic. But it was too late then! A new Church had come on the scene, and the old one lacked authority to speak about the Scriptures.

So the Christians accepted the Deuterocanonicals as well, until Luther came along and discovered that they interfered with his theology. So he dumped them.

To put it another way, the Deuterocanonicals were good enough for Jesus, so they’re good enough for us.

Wel Said Godfollwer.

I had forgotten about the Parable of the Vineyard:

Luke 20:9-19 The Message

*Jesus told another story to the people: "A man planted a vineyard. He handed it over to farmhands and went off on a trip. He was gone a long time. In time he sent a servant back to the farmhands to collect the profits, but they beat him up and sent him off empty-handed. He decided to try again and sent another servant. That one they beat black-and-blue, and sent him off empty-handed. He tried a third time. They worked that servant over from head to foot and dumped him in the street.

"Then the owner of the vineyard said, ‘I know what I’ll do: I’ll send my beloved son. They’re bound to respect my son.’

"But when the farmhands saw him coming, they quickly put their heads together. ‘This is our chance—this is the heir! Let’s kill him and have it all to ourselves.’ They killed him and threw him over the fence.

“What do you think the owner of the vineyard will do? Right. He’ll come and clean house. Then he’ll assign the care of the vineyard to others.”

Those who were listening said, “Oh, no! He’d never do that!” But Jesus didn’t back down. "Why, then, do you think this was written:

That stone the masons threw out—
It’s now the cornerstone!?
“Anyone falling over that stone will break every bone in his body; if the stone falls on anyone, it will be a total smashup.”

The religion scholars and high priests wanted to lynch him on the spot, but they were intimidated by public opinion. They knew the story was about them.*

biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=20&version=65&context=chapter

There’s also one also thing there - the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem, and the statement that the Roman Legions would be doing the will of God when they did it.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[believers]

Believers, here’s the point you’re missing (and, please, don’t take my word for it; check it out historically):

The Jewish people accepted the Deuterocanonical works until the year 90. When Jesus walked into a synagogue, the scrolls he found included the Deuterocanonical works. The Church, therefore, accepted them, too; because they were the inspired word of God.

After the Resurrection, the Jewish people no longer had any say over the canon (I forget the reference, but Jesus taught that the vineyard would be taken away from the workers who beat the owner’s servants and killed his son; and the priests were upset because they realized that the parable applied to them). Several decades went by, and the Diaspora occurred following the destruction of the Temple. Around the year 90, the Jewish leaders decided to change the canon and only adopted works originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic. But it was too late then! A new Church had come on the scene, and the old one lacked authority to speak about the Scriptures.

So the Christians accepted the Deuterocanonicals as well, until Luther came along and discovered that they interfered with his theology. So he dumped them.

To put it another way, the Deuterocanonicals were good enough for Jesus, so they’re good enough for us.

Here’s where you’re religion is trying to overide what Jesus said

Luk 24:44 And Jesus said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me.

The Jewish Canon is arranged in three categories just like Jesus said in Luke 24:44 which excludes the Aprocrypha.

1. Torah - Law of Moses
2. Prophets
3. Psalms

In addition to that… Paul writes how the Jews have been committed the oracles

Rom 3:1
What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?

Rom 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

Then there are the errors in the Apocrypha.

To top it all off… your only proof is that your religion says so.

Finally, The Jews REJECTED the Apocrypha which gives credence to Romans 3:1 and Luke 24:44.

To include the Apocrypha would contradict Romans 3:1 and the Jews would not have the Oracles but the Catholic Church which is completely false.

I forgot to mention… Notice how you have absolutely no scriptural evidence.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Here’s where you’re religion is trying to overide what Jesus said

Luk 24:44 And Jesus said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me.

The Jewish Canon is arranged in three categories just like Jesus said in Luke 24:44 which excludes the Aprocrypha.

1. Torah
2. Prophets
3. Psalms

In addition to that… Paul writes how the Jews have been committed the oracles

Rom 3:1
What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?

Rom 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

Then there are the errors in the Apocrypha.

To top it all off… your only proof is that your religion says so.

Finally, The Jews REJECTED the Apocrypha which gives credence to Romans 3:1 and Luke 24:44.

To include the Apocrypha would contradict Romans 3:1 and the Jews would not have the Oracles but the Catholic Church which is completely false.

I forgot to mention… Notice how you have absolutely no scriptural evidence.

You need to read the previous threads to this where other Catholics like myself gave you Scripture verses from the Septuagint have been quoted 2/3 in the NT.

The Jews in the Council of Jamnia reject the Septuagint and the Deutro Books because they feel threatened by the Christians. The Jewish faith did not have much of there strength left when the Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D.

You misread Jesus saying about the laws of the prophet concerning him. The Scripture that was used is both the Tanakh (Hebrew Scripture) and the Septuagint. The Septuagint was written in 300 B.C. by Helenistic Jews in Alexandria.

When the Jews rejected the 7 Greek OT text, Jesus was already in Heaven. So your argument falls apart.

At the time, the Jews did not like the new Christian faith and likewise rejected the Greek OT.

 

[believers]

You need to read the previous threads to this where other Catholics like myself gave you Scripture verses from the Septuagint have been quoted 2/3 in the NT.

From the Septuagint? I gave you Jesus’ own words. You guys seriously need to listen to Jesus.

 

[Mannyfit75]

From the Septuagint? I gave you Jesus’ own words. You guys seriously need to listen to Jesus.

I do. “He who hears you, hears me.” That’s Jesus speaking through the Apostles, and the Apostles had successors.

Beside, Jesus said. If anyone of you disagree, take it the Church.

He didn’t say take it the Bible.

Second the Jews who rejected the Septuagint are not believers in Jesus Christ. Why do you give the Council of Jamnia credit to unbelieving Jews?

 

[believers]

I do. “He who hears you, hears me.” That’s Jesus speaking through the Apostles, and the Apostles had successors.

Beside, Jesus said. If anyone of you disagree, take it the Church.

He didn’t say take it the Bible.

Second the Jews who rejected the Septuagint are not believers in Jesus Christ. Why do you give the Council of Jamnia credit to unbelieving Jews?

Yes, but just as Jesus said… the Jews have the Oracles. I guess that settles it.

And no, if there’s a disagreement, check with the Word of God. You church is not the authority.

 

[Mannyfit75]

believers,

We did give you evidence you just failed to look.

I’ll show you the link again.

Septuagint in the New Testament

 

[Mannyfit75]

Yes, but just as Jesus said… the Jews have the Oracles. I guess that settles it.

Yes he did. I reread my Bible he did. You also need to look at the link.

You said you want evidence, go take a look. Like I said, you don’t have to be Catholic to acknowledge the Jesus, the Apostles, and the Jews during his time used the Deutrocanonical and the Septuagint.

The Jews continue to use it until the Council of Jamnia in 90 AD… If you read Acts, the rest of Jewish nation rejected Jesus as their Messiah. The Gentiles were converted and became the majority. The Gentiles were also Greek speaking. Greek was the common language at the time.

It is late and I must go to bed. God speed.

 

[believers]

believers,

We did give you evidence you just failed to look.

I’ll show you the link again.

Septuagint in the New Testament

That’s not proof at all. That’s just man made observations and statistics. I’ll say again, to add the Apocrypha is to contradict the Word of God. If you guys want to add it to your doctrine then that’s your choice. I’ll believe Jesus and stick with the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms.

 

[lak611]

Then there are the errors in the Apocrypha.

Where are these errors? Do you have evidence to prove the errors?

 

[Mannyfit75]

That’s not proof at all. That’s just man made observations and statistics. I’ll say again, to add the Apocrypha is to contradict the Word of God. If you guys want to add it to your doctrine then that’s your choice. I’ll believe Jesus and stick with the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms.

No it does not. It is one of the reliable guide when studying ancient Christian Scripture to include Tanakh and the Septuagint.

You failed to look at the historical facts.

Fact # 1:

The Jews at the Time of Jesus Christ used both the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) and the Septuagint.

Fact # 2:

After Penecost Sunday, many of the early Christian converts were Jews from Palestine. As seen in Acts, the Gentiles soon outnumbered the Jews who converted to Christianity.

Many of the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah.

By the 70 A.D the Holy Jewish Temple was destroyed by the Romans. The Jews priesthood ended. The Jewish leaders at the time felt threaten by the growing Christian community, and form a Council in 90 A.D and rejected the Septuagint.

There was no canon of Scripture until 382 A.D in the Council of Rome, then Council of Hippo 392 and then Carthage 396 A.D.

The list of canon of Scripture these books

Genesis Genesis
Ἔξοδος Exodus Exodus
Λευϊτικόν Leviticus Leviticus
Ἀριθμοί Numbers Numbers
Δευτερονόμιον Deuteronomy Deuteronomy

History
Ἰησοῦς Nαυῆ Jesus Nauë Joshua
Κριταί Judges Judges
Ῥούθ Ruth Ruth
Βασιλειῶν[15] Reigns
Α’ I I Samuel
Β’ II II Samuel
Γ’ III I Kings
Δ’ IV II Kings
Παραλειπομένων Omissions
Α’ I I Chronicles
Β’ II II Chronicles
Ἔσδρας Esdras
Α’ 1 Esdras —
Β’ II Ezra
ΝΕΕΜΙΑΣ Νehemias Nehemiah
Ἐσθήρ Esther Esther+
Ἰουδίθ Iudith —
Τωβίτ[16] Tobit —

Μακκαβαίων Α’ 1 Maccabees —
Μακκαβαίων Β’ 2 Maccabees —
Μακκαβαίων Γ’ 3 Maccabees —
Wisdom
Ψαλμοί Psalms , inc. Psalm 151 Psalms
Προσευχὴ Μανάσση Prayer of Manasseh —
Ἰώβ Iōb Job
Παροιμίαι ΣΟΛΟΜΩΝΤΟΣ Proverbs Proverbs 1-29
Ἐκκλησιαστής Ecclesiastes Ecclesiastes
Ἆσμα Ἀσμάτων Song of Songs Song of Solomon
Σοφία Σαλoμῶντος Wisdom of Salomon —
Σοφία Ἰησοῦ Σειράχ Wisdom of Jesus Seirach —

Prophets
Δώδεκα The Twelve
Ὡσηέ Α’ I. Osëe Hosea
Ἀμώς Β’ II. Ämōs Amos
Μιχαίας Γ’ III. Michai Micah
Ἰωήλ Δ’ IV. Ioel Joel
Ὀβδίου Ε’[17] V. Obdy Obadiah
Ἰωνᾶς Ϛ’ VI. Ionas Jonah
Ναούμ Ζ’ VII. Naum Nahum
Ἀμβακούμ Η’ VIII. Ambakum Habakkuk
Σοφονίας Θ’ IX. Sophony Zephaniah
Ἀγγαῖος Ι’ X. Ängai Haggai
Ζαχαρίας ΙΑ’ XI. Zachary Zachariah
Ἄγγελος ΙΒ’ XII. Messenger Malachi
Ἠσαΐας Hesai Isaiah
Ἱερεμίας Hieremy Jeremiah
Βαρούχ Baruch —
Θρῆνοι Lamentations Lamentations
Επιστολή Ιερεμίου Epistle of Jeremiah —
Ἰεζεκιήλ Iezekiel Ezekiel
Δανιήλ Daniel Daniel+
Appendix
Μακκαβαίων Δ’ Παράρτημα 4 Maccabees

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint

These books were finalized. The Catholics only took out 3 and 4 Maccabees and the Greek Orthodox keep those books in their Bible.

Jesus and the Apostles did use them, and that itself is historical fact.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Where are these errors? Do you have evidence to prove the errors?

believers cannot prove it. I even Google it and I find sources that supported that the 7 extra OT were used 2/3 in the NT.

They were not quoted, but some of words were used.

Our fellow Protestant brother, TradAng, posted the Parable of the Vineyard which has its background from the Septuagint.

 

[Mannyfit75]

The Value of the Septuagint

More and more Bible scholars today are recognizing the immense value of the Septuagint and its unique relationship to the New Testament. For example, Bible scholar George Howard points out:

If the writers of the NT [New Testament] were influenced by secular Greek, they were influenced more by LXX [Septuagint]. Separated from LXX the NT would have been almost unintelligible to the contemporary reader, according to B. Atkinson. … At any rate, in the past decades there has developed an appreciation for the influence which LXX vocabulary had on NT thought and the contributions in this area of Septuagintal research are still coming. Consequently, the debate over which source is more important for NT lexicography, Greek or Hebrew, will probably be resolved in terms of LXX.

Dr. Sven Soderlund of Regent College writes:

The LXX was the Bible for most writers of the NT. Not only did they take from it most of their express citations of Scripture, but their writings—in particular the Gospels, and among them especially Luke—contain numerous reminiscences of its language. The theological terms of the NT, such as “law,” “righteousness,” “mercy,” “truth,” “propitiation,” were taken over directly from the LXX and must be understood in the light of their use in that version.

 

[Godfollower]

Here’s where you’re religion is trying to overide what Jesus said

Luk 24:44 And Jesus said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me.

The Jewish Canon is arranged in three categories just like Jesus said in Luke 24:44 which excludes the Aprocrypha.

1. Torah - Law of Moses
2. Prophets
3. Psalms

In addition to that… Paul writes how the Jews have been committed the oracles

Rom 3:1
What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?

Rom 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

Then there are the errors in the Apocrypha.

To top it all off… your only proof is that your religion says so.

Finally, The Jews REJECTED the Apocrypha which gives credence to Romans 3:1 and Luke 24:44.

To include the Apocrypha would contradict Romans 3:1 and the Jews would not have the Oracles but the Catholic Church which is completely false.

I forgot to mention… Notice how you have absolutely no scriptural evidence.

What scriptural evidence would satisfy you? The fact that something is quoted in the New Testament? But Paul quoted the pagan poet Epimenides in Titus 1:12 (Liars ever, men of Crete, savage brutes that live to eat). Would you call Epimenides an Old Testament prophet? On the other hand, the New Testament never quotes from Nehemiah – which Protestants accept as canonical. So where’s your Scriptural evidence for that book (and the others never quoted in the New Testament)?

And, if you really must have a quote, read this: Jesus Himself said, "For every tree is known by its fruit. . . . For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. " (Luke 6:44-45) – clearly taken directly from Sirach 27:6, which states “Be the dressing of a tree sheweth the fruit thereof, so a word out of the thought of the heart of man.”

By your logic, do you now accept Sirach as canonical and divinely inspired (and reject Nehemiah)?

As for Paul’s comment that “the words of God were committed to them [the Jewish people],” I gotta ask, where does Paul say “except for the Deuterocanonical books”? The Jewish people accepted the Deuterocanonical works while Jesus walked the earth; it’s only later (after Saul converted to Christianity and became Paul) that they rejected them.

To accept the Jewish decision at the Council of Jamnia, you have to accept all of their decisions at that Council – which includes rejecting Christ. But the very act of rejecting Christ necessarily carries with it an inability to decide what books Christians should rely on. Your argument doesn’t make any sense.

To repeat: history (not just the Catholic Church – regular historians with no axes to grind confirm this) tells us that, when Jesus walked into a synagogue, He found (among other scrolls) the Deuterocanonical works. They were good enough for Him; what gives you the right to reject them?

Yes, it would be wrong to add books to the Bible. But it’s just as wrong to subtract them. And we’ve shown you that they were there all along. The problem isn’t that Catholics added the books; it’s that Martin Luther (and his followers) subtracted them. Please research this and pray about it.

 

[Mannyfit75]

What scriptural evidence would satisfy you? The fact that something is quoted in the New Testament? But Paul quoted the pagan poet Epimenides in Titus 1:12 (Liars ever, men of Crete, savage brutes that live to eat). Would you call Epimenides an Old Testament prophet? On the other hand, the New Testament never quotes from Nehemiah – which Protestants accept as canonical. So where’s your Scriptural evidence for that book (and the others never quoted in the New Testament)?

And, if you really must have a quote, read this: Jesus Himself said, "For every tree is known by its fruit. . . . For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. " (Luke 6:44-45) – clearly taken directly from Sirach 27:6, which states “Be the dressing of a tree sheweth the fruit thereof, so a word out of the thought of the heart of man.”

By your logic, do you now accept Sirach as canonical and divinely inspired (and reject Nehemiah)?

As for Paul’s comment that “the words of God were committed to them [the Jewish people],” I gotta ask, where does Paul say “except for the Deuterocanonical books”? The Jewish people accepted the Deuterocanonical works while Jesus walked the earth; it’s only later (after Saul converted to Christianity and became Paul) that they rejected them.

To accept the Jewish decision at the Council of Jamnia, you have to accept all of their decisions at that Council – which includes rejecting Christ. But the very act of rejecting Christ necessarily carries with it an inability to decide what books Christians should rely on. Your argument doesn’t make any sense.

To repeat: history (not just the Catholic Church – regular historians with no axes to grind confirm this) tells us that, when Jesus walked into a synagogue, He found (among other scrolls) the Deuterocanonical works. They were good enough for Him; what gives you the right to reject them?

Yes, it would be wrong to add books to the Bible. But it’s just as wrong to subtract them. And we’ve shown you that they were there all along. The problem isn’t that Catholics added the books; it’s that Martin Luther (and his followers) subtracted them. Please research this and pray about it.

It’s strange though. Many of my sources from the Septuagint are from Protestant Biblical sources. They see the value of the LXX even though they don’t consider it inspired, but acknowledge that the LXX is cited or refer 2/3 in the New Testament.

The Angelfire website. I tried looking for errors in the Septuagint to see if there was one. Instead, I found more support from both Catholic and Protestant sources that the LXX is cited more than Hebrew Text in the NT.

 

[lak611]

It’s strange though. Many of my sources from the Septuagint are from Protestant Biblical sources. They see the value of the LXX even though they don’t consider it inspired, but acknowledge that the LXX is cited or refer 2/3 in the New Testament.

The Angelfire website. I tried looking for errors in the Septuagint to see if there was one. Instead, I found more support from both Catholic and Protestant sources that the LXX is cited more than Hebrew Text in the NT.

I asked believers to show me the errors because I know that he cannot. There is no evidence to show any errors in the Septuagint or the Deuterocanonicals.