U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-20-2015, 07:51 AM
 
Location: Canada
6,913 posts, read 4,231,092 times
Reputation: 402

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy View Post
When Paul said that, the only texts considered Scriptural were Jewish.
Paul was referring to the Septuagint, and the Septuagint has whole books in it that are not in most bibles today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-20-2015, 07:54 AM
 
Location: Canada
6,913 posts, read 4,231,092 times
Reputation: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galileo2 View Post
Why do you think that both the Jewish and Christians rejected the book of Enoch as either inspired or canonical?

That is incorrect.

it was Jews that kept the dead sea scrolls and the book of enoch was found there. Also many early church fathers quoted from the 1 book of enoch, thus indicating that many of them believed it was inspired. That is how it ended up in the Ethiopian bible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2015, 08:04 AM
 
Location: Canada
6,913 posts, read 4,231,092 times
Reputation: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
Paul was referring to the Septuagint, and the Septuagint has whole books in it that are not in most bibles today.
P.S. Paul even quoted from some of those book not considered inspired today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2015, 09:30 PM
 
40,051 posts, read 26,730,521 times
Reputation: 6049
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
I assume it was God who chose the canonical ones, right Vizio???? Don't Catholics use 73??? Was God confused about which ones to canonize???
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
Correct Mystic, if it is not in THEIR bible it is NOT considered scripture. As you pointed out the RCC has more canonical books then the protestant bible and the Ethiopian bible contains the 1 book of Enoch.
The irony is vizio and those like him always quote where Paul says all scripture is inspired by God, then turn around and reject many of the books that were in the bible at that the time Paul made that statement.
But of course Paul was not correct according to them, the canonisation of the 66 books in the 1500 by a bunch of men were.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy View Post
When Paul said that, the only texts considered Scriptural were Jewish.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
Paul was referring to the Septuagint, and the Septuagint has whole books in it that are not in most bibles today.
What we should take from this ridiculous process is that God had nothing to do with what is in the bible, men did. There were and are inspired works written by men that have just as much provenance as the ones currently selected first by the RCC and then subsequently culled by Luther, et al. It is simply preposterous to continue to proclaim that ANY version of the Bible in ENGLISH represents the word of God . . . let alone 100% of it. To revere the Bible as if it were the word of God is the worst kind of idolatry. It supplants Christ who abides with us as the LIVING Word of God. It corrupts Christ's unambiguous message of agape love and reconciliation. And it distorts the understanding of God egregiously. The 100% inerrant Bible as God's word is the preeminent "doctrine of demons."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2015, 03:48 AM
 
Location: Canada
6,913 posts, read 4,231,092 times
Reputation: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
What we should take from this ridiculous process is that God had nothing to do with what is in the bible, men did. There were and are inspired works written by men that have just as much provenance as the ones currently selected first by the RCC and then subsequently culled by Luther, et al. It is simply preposterous to continue to proclaim that ANY version of the Bible in ENGLISH represents the word of God . . . let alone 100% of it. To revere the Bible as if it were the word of God is the worst kind of idolatry. It supplants Christ who abides with us as the LIVING Word of God. It corrupts Christ's unambiguous message of agape love and reconciliation. And it distorts the understanding of God egregiously. The 100% inerrant Bible as God's word is the preeminent "doctrine of demons."
Amen Tis hard to get others to see this brother, being brainwashed into believing something year after year and then finally facing evidence that what they have been told was a lie is a hard pill to swallow. Most people's faith is so tied up in the thought that the bible is the unadulterated, inerrant word of God that they reject the true before their eyes or they lose their faith in God if they do accept the true. tis a very dangerous doctrine to believe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2015, 10:41 AM
 
350 posts, read 486,648 times
Reputation: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
What we should take from this ridiculous process is that God had nothing to do with what is in the bible, men did. There were and are inspired works written by men that have just as much provenance as the ones currently selected first by the RCC and then subsequently culled by Luther, et al. It is simply preposterous to continue to proclaim that ANY version of the Bible in ENGLISH represents the word of God . . . let alone 100% of it. To revere the Bible as if it were the word of God is the worst kind of idolatry. It supplants Christ who abides with us as the LIVING Word of God. It corrupts Christ's unambiguous message of agape love and reconciliation. And it distorts the understanding of God egregiously. The 100% inerrant Bible as God's word is the preeminent "doctrine of demons."
Ok, having though on this for a bit, this is a good argument. My only question is, do you then think it's foolish to turn to the Bible for guidance (in addition to the Holy Spirit or through prayer) at all? Even if the Bible, in any modern form, is not "inerrant", isn't it still a good tool to bring us into a closer relationship with God? Even Jesus, who is the Word, knew the scripture of his time and quoted it/elaborated on it in his teachings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2015, 11:04 AM
 
Location: Canada
6,913 posts, read 4,231,092 times
Reputation: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopefish View Post
Ok, having though on this for a bit, this is a good argument. My only question is, do you then think it's foolish to turn to the Bible for guidance (in addition to the Holy Spirit or through prayer) at all? Even if the Bible, in any modern form, is not "inerrant", isn't it still a good tool to bring us into a closer relationship with God? Even Jesus, who is the Word, knew the scripture of his time and quoted it/elaborated on it in his teachings.
That is exactly what the bible is Dopefish, tis a treasure map to lead us to Christ.

Jesus stated as much when he said that they searched the scriptures thinking to find life but they will not come to me to obtain it. There is much good in the bible, but we must learn to discern what is of God and what is of man.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2015, 08:33 PM
 
8,671 posts, read 3,103,465 times
Reputation: 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeshuasavedme View Post

Fact checks are important.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_o...eudo-Jasher%29

Still an interesting read.

Last edited by pinacled; 08-21-2015 at 08:46 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2015, 08:46 PM
 
40,051 posts, read 26,730,521 times
Reputation: 6049
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
What we should take from this ridiculous process is that God had nothing to do with what is in the bible, men did. There were and are inspired works written by men that have just as much provenance as the ones currently selected first by the RCC and then subsequently culled by Luther, et al. It is simply preposterous to continue to proclaim that ANY version of the Bible in ENGLISH represents the word of God . . . let alone 100% of it. To revere the Bible as if it were the word of God is the worst kind of idolatry. It supplants Christ who abides with us as the LIVING Word of God. It corrupts Christ's unambiguous message of agape love and reconciliation. And it distorts the understanding of God egregiously. The 100% inerrant Bible as God's word is the preeminent "doctrine of demons."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopefish View Post
Ok, having though on this for a bit, this is a good argument. My only question is, do you then think it's foolish to turn to the Bible for guidance (in addition to the Holy Spirit or through prayer) at all? Even if the Bible, in any modern form, is not "inerrant", isn't it still a good tool to bring us into a closer relationship with God? Even Jesus, who is the Word, knew the scripture of his time and quoted it/elaborated on it in his teachings.
Of course. That is what I have been saying at every opportunity. We are to test the Spirit of everything in the Bible to find what is in agreement with the standard of God's truth . . . the Spirit of agape love (who IS God). Those things in the Bible that are compatible with and/or consistent with the Spirit of agape love are of God and Jesus. Anything that is NOT compatible is NOT from God or Jesus. It is a simple test and all are capable of it because God has "written in our hearts" and given us the Comforter in Christ's name to guide us to the truth. Who does not know when something is loving and when it is not? It is not complicated. Test the Spirit of everything in the Bible and you cannot get it wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2015, 09:31 PM
 
8,671 posts, read 3,103,465 times
Reputation: 408
22 And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils.
23 And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan?
24 And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
25 And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.
26 And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top