The 7 books

[believers]

Please quote me the book/chapter/verse where Jesus declares which books belong in the OT and which don’t.

I’ve already posted these verses.

Luk 24:44 And he 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.

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.

 

[believers]

Believers:

The point was that it was the CHURCH inspired by God that defined all of those doctrines which all Christians, Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant, take for granted. And, Most of these doctrines are not to be found explicitely in the Scriptires, although many were “hinted at” or implicit im many sections of Scripture.

To say things we do about Christ and the Trinity, we need the Councils of the Church which come from the Promise Christ gave:

And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate, who will never leave you. He is the Holy Spirit, who leads into all truth. John 14:16-17a NIV

The “leads” is a word that doesn’t have a termination date. It’s this Holy Spirit that Jesus sent that gives the Church the ability to define doctrines such as the Divinity of Christ and the Trinity and the ability to define the Canon of Sacred Scripture, both Old and New Testaments.

So, who do you believe, Jesus, or a Council that cursed Him and all who follow Him?

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

Hinted? Hardly. Jesus was exlicit when said Laws, Prophets, and Psalms. Then Paul said the Jews have the Oracles. You just can’t believe that there are scriptures that set the OT Canon. It completely goes against your religion’s teaching.

As for John 14:16-17, why don’t you include the other verses as well? You guys like to take verses out of context.

"He that believeth on me" does not equal the Roman Catholic Church only. To think so is arrogance.

Jhn 14:12
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

Jhn 14:13
And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

Jhn 14:14
If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do [it].

Jhn 14:15
If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Jhn 14:16
And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

Jhn 14:17
[Even] the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

 

[runandsew]

I’ve already posted these verses.

Luk 24:44 And he 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 old testament contains the following types of books:
Pentateuch (the law)
Historical Books (Joshua, Judges, Ruth ect.)
Poetical/wisdom (Psalms, Proverbs ect.)
Prophetical (the major and minor prophets)

So how does that quote from Luke rule out the deuterocanonical books and not rule out the Historical books, and the other wisdom books besides the Psalms?

 

[RNRobert]

I’ve already posted these verses.

Luk 24:44 And he 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.

In a previous post I mentioned that if you went by this, you would have to throw out 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiates and Song of Solomon, and you replied:

They too are included in the Oracles of God committed to the Jews. They are grouped along with what the Jews have called Kethuvim (writings).

So, you are contradicting yourself. If you go strictly by Luke 24:44, then you must throw out the the books I mentioned. If on the other hand, you accept them as inspired, then there is no reason not to accept the Deuterocanonicals.

 

[believers]

In a previous post I mentioned that if you went by this, you would have to throw out 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiates and Song of Solomon, and you replied:

So, you are contradicting yourself. If you go strictly by Luke 24:44, then you must throw out the the books I mentioned. If on the other hand, you accept them as inspired, then there is no reason not to accept the Deuterocanonicals.

Do you guys just read the last post of the thread? Please refer to the other posts for the answer. I have not contradicted myself. Jesus named His Words concerning Him. Then Paul says the Jews have the Oracles. If you research you’ll find the Jewish bible contains the exact same books as the Protestant OT they are just arranged differently. Now, please read the other posts. All of your questions have already been answered.

 

[believers]

The old testament contains the following types of books:
Pentateuch (the law)
Historical Books (Joshua, Judges, Ruth ect.)
Poetical/wisdom (Psalms, Proverbs ect.)
Prophetical (the major and minor prophets)

So how does that quote from Luke rule out the deuterocanonical books and not rule out the Historical books, and the other wisdom books besides the Psalms?

The Apocrypha is out. Please read the other posts.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Do you guys just read the last post of the thread? Please refer to the other posts for the answer. I have not contradicted myself. Jesus named His Words concerning Him. Then Paul says the Jews have the Oracles. If you research you’ll find the Jewish bible contains the exact same books as the Protestant OT they are just arranged differently. Now, please read the other posts. All of your questions have already been answered.

We did read your posts, and your Oracle of God verse from Luke doesn’t implies that Septuagint was not accepted in the Scripture.

I like to quote this Catholic response to your claim;

Though this is not a sound objection, it at least requires a detailed answer. (refering to Luke 24:44)

God’s written word was entrusted to the Jews, but he never provided them with an inspired table of contents. For that reason, there has been ample disagreement over the canon—especially among Jews.

The Old Testament took over one thousand years to compile, and the list of inspired books grew continuously as God’s word was revealed. This gradual accretion indicated that the Jewish people felt no need for a static canon but remained open to further revelation. They divided their sacred writings into three parts: the law, the prophets, and the writings (which were canonized in that order). By the time of Christ, the law—and most likely the prophets—was set in number, but the writings were not yet closed.

In Jesus’ time, the Samaritans and Sadducees accepted the law but rejected the prophets and writings. The Pharisees accepted all three. Other Jews used a Greek version (the Septuagint) that included the seven disputed books, known as the deuterocanonicals. Still other Jews used a version of the canon that is reflected in the Septaguint and included versions of the seven books in question in their original Hebrew or Aramaic.

When the Christians claimed that they had written new scriptures, Jews from a rabbinical school in Javneh met around year 80 and, among other things, discussed the canon. They did not include the New Testament nor the seven Old Testament works and portions of Daniel and Esther. This still did not settle the Pharisee canon, since not all Jews agreed with or even knew about the decision at Javneh. Rabbis continued to debate it into the second and third centuries. Even today, the Ethiopian Jews use the same Old Testament as Catholics.

If anything is certain, it is that there was no common canon among the Jews at the time of Christ

 

[Mannyfit75]

The Apocrypha is out. Please read the other posts.

no it isn’t. You are ignoring the facts.

 

[runandsew]

The Apocrypha is out. Please read the other posts.

I read the other posts, but I never got a response of why you accept their oracle on the canon of scripture, and not their oracle denying Jesus.

 

[Mannyfit75]

I read the other posts, but I never got a response of why you accept their oracle on the canon of scripture, and not their oracle denying Jesus.

believers seem to be ignoring the facts, and the counter we posts. I even cited quotes from the Septuagint and posted those verses in the NT, and he ignores it.

 

[JoeyWarren]

The Apocrypha is out. Please read the other posts.

No, they are in. What Paul wrote is true, but it only applies to that which has already transpired historically. It does not apply to any future action such as the council of Jamnia. If you believe otherwise…if the Jews held another council tommorrow and declared the Book of Ezekiel non-inspired and they removed it from the their canon, would you accept that as well?

Why do you not as well accept their Judgement that Jesus is the promised Messiah?

Why do you not as well accept their Judgement that the New Testament is not inspired by God?

 

[runandsew]

I’ve already posted these verses.

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

You are misinterpreting this passage.

Try this version of Romans 3:1-2 and see if it makes a little bit more sense to you.

3:1. What advantage then hath the Jew: or what is the profit of circumcision?
3:2. Much every way. First indeed, because the words of God were committed to them.

Paul is saying that it was the word of God that gave them circumcision. He is not saying that they have some authority in the future after they reject Christ to determine the Old Testament canon.
You can’t just willy nilly take scripture and then wrench it out of context to make it fit into some other unrelated argument just because it might sound like it has authority.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

I’ve already posted these verses.

Luk 24:44 And he 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.

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.

Believers:

NONE of these verses refer to the Canon of Scripture or to Jesus’ understanding of the Canon of Scripture - They both refer to those Scriptures which would be fulfilled in Christ! So, anyone who claims that He was supporting either of our Canons is putting words into His divine mouth.

As the footnote I cited earlier said, many Jews of Jesus times included the WRITINGS in with the Prophets. In Those Cases, History books such as 2 Chronicles and 1 Macabbees would have been considered to be part of the Prophets, along with Wisdom books such as Job and Wisdom.

And, As I also said earlier, the Pharisees and Jews in the Diaspora ACCEPTED ALL of the Books as inspired by God which the Council of Jamnia and the Protestant “Reformers” Rejected and which have been accepted by the Catholic and Orthodox Churches since the Apostolic Era.

In Debate, there is a rule - The Party, Or Parties, making the charge is required to prove by clear and compelling evidence that the change is both necessary and would cause no undue harm.

1. Since the Box of Scrolls that Jesus reached into would have contained the books of Tobit, Judith,1 & 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach & Baruch (& a copy of Daniel that would have included Azariah, Susannah & Bel and the Dragon), and that was the case in most Synagogues from 190 B.C. to 90 A.D.,
2. The Early Church (which is our Authority for the Canon of the N.T. and most of the doctrines accepted by almost all Christians since the 5th Century A.D.) accepted the same Canon of Scripture with the exception of Church Fathers who expressed Misgivings about some of the Books (Nothing like the Controversy over the Book of Revelation), and
3. The Catholic and Orthodox Churches continued to accept ALL of these Books (although the Orthodox have accepted the Prayer of Mannasah) since then untill until the present…without change,

You and the Protestant “Reformers” are the ones making the change.

Since part of this change involves of the change to “Solo Scriptura” from “Scriptura et Traditio”, which has given us over 30,000 different Protestant denominations where people divide over different interpretations of different verses following often charismatic leaders to form 2 & 3 enigmic congregations out of one strong one. As was idscussed in another thread, I’m pretty sure that’s at least part of what St. Paul was talking about in 1 Cor 1:10-14.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Hinted? Hardly. Jesus was exlicit when said Laws, Prophets, and Psalms. Then Paul said the Jews have the Oracles. You just can’t believe that there are scriptures that set the OT Canon. It completely goes against your religion’s teaching.

As for John 14:16-17, why don’t you include the other verses as well? You guys like to take verses out of context.

"He that believeth on me" does not equal the Roman Catholic Church only. To think so is arrogance.

Jhn 14:12
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

Jhn 14:13
And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

Jhn 14:14
If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do [it].

Jhn 14:15
If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Jhn 14:16
And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

Jhn 14:17
[Even] the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Hinted? Hardly. Jesus was exlicit when said Laws, Prophets, and Psalms. Then Paul said the Jews have the Oracles. You just can’t believe that there are scriptures that set the OT Canon. It completely goes against your religion’s teaching.

As for John 14:16-17, why don’t you include the other verses as well? You guys like to take verses out of context.

"He that believeth on me" does not equal the Roman Catholic Church only. To think so is arrogance.

Jhn 14:12-17 KJV Corrected for length

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do [it].

If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; [Even] the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

Believers:

I know that you believe you are correcting me by "placing the Scriptire I quoted in context. The Apostolic Church Fathers, the Early Church Fathers and the Early Church Councils all intepreted this Scripture as stating that the Holy Spirit (Whom the Lord would send) would show those who lead the Church Christ founded all of the Truths of the Gospel and of the Faith (Including the Canon of Scripture and the Doctrines of the Faith.

If you look at the Whole Discourse (John 14:9 -16:16)

John 16:12-15 NIV

“I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you.”

And, This Scripture is another those that have been interpreted by those listed above as referring to the Gift of Teaching and Prophecy given by the Holy Spirit to the spiritual descendents of the Apostles who occupied their positions.

So, John 14:16-17 wasn’t the only Scripture on this issue, and it wasn’t taken out of context.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

You are misinterpreting this passage.

Try this version of Romans 3:1-2 and see if it makes a little bit more sense to you.

3:1. What advantage then hath the Jew: or what is the profit of circumcision?
3:2. Much every way. First indeed, because the words of God were committed to them.

Paul is saying that it was the word of God that gave them circumcision. He is not saying that they have some authority in the future after they reject Christ to determine the Old Testament canon.
You can’t just willy nilly take scripture and then wrench it out of context to make it fit into some other unrelated argument just because it might sound like it has authority.

Runand Sew:

Well Said.

Regarding the distorting of Romans 3:2 and its misapplication to the Council of Jamnia - Those Accepting the Canons of the Council must accept ALL of the Canons, including the CURSES OF CHRIST AND HIS FOLLOWERS.

Those accepting the last 2 Canons of the Council can’t call themselves Christians.

Catholics Accept ALL of the Scriptures and ALL of the Traditions given by the Apostles and their successors. Can Believers really say the same about Prostestants given How they summarilly rejected Books of the Bible in because they didn’t like some of the “Catholic” Doctrines they supported? Can Believers really say the same about Prostestants given what Luther and many of the Other “Reformers” said about the Epistle of James and others that even they “accepted”? Can Believers really say the same about Prostestants given their refusal to accept what Jesus himself said about the need to eat and drink His Body and Blood, which even Luther understood?

Catholics don’t need to prove why we need to accept what’s been accepted by the long list of people I’ve listed previously. I think that Believers and those who agree with him should be required to demonstrate by clear and compelling evidence that Books and sections of Books which have been accepted by all of these people should now be rejected…

Why we should accept the word of a Council which not only rejected Christ, but also CURSED Him and His followers, over the word of several groups of Christian shepherds throughout the ages… And, Why people such as Believers should accept their verdict on the Canon of the Old Testament, but not their verdict on the New Testament (almost all of which had already been written by 90 A.D.) or on the Lord Jesus Christ and His followers.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[MrS]

I hold in my formerly pagan-out-of-the-Catholic-Church-for-25-years hands

a copy of the newly released

"Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger - The Untold Story Of The Lost Books Of The Protestant Bible"

Arguments about 73 or 66 usually are either ended in confusion in trying to present all the evidence, because no one (until now) has really accumulated all that evidence.

Certainly a work like this would not come from a protestant camp, lest they find themselves in error.

Gary Michuta, the author, presents over 300 pages which any serious student can check and double check. There are many footnotes, many references, many proofs that once again the Catholic position is the correct one… and it is a fairly easy read.

handsonapologetics.com/ is the website of the author, and you can link on to Grotto Press to order… a $20 reference book every “66” proponent should now consider.

Thanks Gary… but where were you 500 years ago when Luther was playing his game?

seriously, if one can afford to pick this up… it is not only a great and long overdue reference on the deutrocanonicals, but you would be supporting a darn good ministry too.

 

[crocetta]

There is a website about House of Virgin Mary where also Popes have made pilgramige. I highly recommend you.
www.traveltofaith.com

 

[onenow1]

Originally Posted by runandsew
You are misinterpreting this passage.

Try this version of Romans 3:1-2 and see if it makes a little bit more sense to you.

3:1. What advantage then hath the Jew: or what is the profit of circumcision?
3:2. Much every way. First indeed, because the words of God were committed to them.

Indeed and were sure they were committed to the Hellenist Jews also, since the council of Jamnia occured well after Romans 3:1-2 were written. Approx. 56-58AD

Peace, OneNow1