Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
 
Old 11-23-2021, 06:20 AM
 
9,895 posts, read 1,264,560 times
Reputation: 769

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenWhiteBlue View Post
And so do you. There is nothing in the Scriptures that tells you which books are inspired, and which are not. Catholics and Orthodox at least can say that we know the list of inspired books because we rely on unwritten apostolic tradition. However, since you reject that tradition, how do you know which books constitute scripture? It is sheer hypocrisy to say that you believe only those things that are in the Bible, when the Bible itself is never mentioned in the Bible, and the scriptures do not provide any list of the books that should be included as "the scriptures".

You can parrot 2 Timothy 3 until you are blue in the face, but WHY do you say that 2 Timothy is inspired scripture at all? Paul never said it was, and he clearly indicates that the scripture Timothy was to read had been written years before. Why do you pick and choose to regard 2 Timothy as scripture, but not (for example) Wisdom, or 1 Maccabees? Admit it -- you are basing your beliefs regarding which books should be regarded as scripture not on anything in scripture itself, but on what you have picked and chosen to regard as scripture.
The books you mentioned have errors, therefore they cannot be from God. If you’d like, you can start a new thread on whether or not those books are inspired. I’d be happy to participate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-23-2021, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Wonderland
67,650 posts, read 60,875,858 times
Reputation: 101078
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenWhiteBlue View Post
And so do you. There is nothing in the Scriptures that tells you which books are inspired, and which are not. Catholics and Orthodox at least can say that we know the list of inspired books because we rely on unwritten apostolic tradition. However, since you reject that tradition, how do you know which books constitute scripture? It is sheer hypocrisy to say that you believe only those things that are in the Bible, when the Bible itself is never mentioned in the Bible, and the scriptures do not provide any list of the books that should be included as "the scriptures".

You can parrot 2 Timothy 3 until you are blue in the face, but WHY do you say that 2 Timothy is inspired scripture at all? Paul never said it was, and he clearly indicates that the scripture Timothy was to read had been written years before. Why do you pick and choose to regard 2 Timothy as scripture, but not (for example) Wisdom, or 1 Maccabees? Admit it -- you are basing your beliefs regarding which books should be regarded as scripture not on anything in scripture itself, but on what you have picked and chosen to regard as scripture.
Actually she's basing her opinion on what a council of men decided around 400 ad. Sort of.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2021, 07:57 AM
 
Location: Alabama
13,611 posts, read 7,918,254 times
Reputation: 7098
Quote:
Originally Posted by KathrynAragon View Post
Actually she's basing her opinion on what a council of men decided around 400 ad. Sort of.
No, that's what we do.

She's basing her opinion on what a group of Apostate Catholics decided in the 16th century.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2021, 07:59 AM
 
18,976 posts, read 7,009,498 times
Reputation: 3584
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike View Post
No, that's what we do.

She's basing her opinion on what a group of Apostate Catholics decided in the 16th century.
It's a much better idea to base our opinions off what the apostles wrote 2000 years ago than either of those 2 options.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2021, 08:04 AM
 
Location: TEXAS
3,824 posts, read 1,378,692 times
Reputation: 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie View Post
It's a much better idea to base our opinions off what the apostles wrote 2000 years ago than either of those 2 options.
And so do you use the Septuagint as they did?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2021, 08:06 AM
 
18,976 posts, read 7,009,498 times
Reputation: 3584
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCCyou View Post
And so do you use the Septuagint as they did?
Nope. Why? The Gospels and the Epistles are not part of it.

I use a good word-for-word translation such as the ESV or NASB. And I can also read some Greek. We do have a good idea of what 99% of the original manuscripts say.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2021, 08:15 AM
 
Location: TEXAS
3,824 posts, read 1,378,692 times
Reputation: 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie View Post
Nope. Why? The Gospels and the Epistles are not part of it.

I use a good word-for-word translation such as the ESV or NASB. And I can also read some Greek. We do have a good idea of what 99% of the original manuscripts say.
The writers of the NT clearly used/quoted the Septuagint in many passages - and since 'ALL scripture is God-Breathed' then clearly both the Hebrew AND the Greek Septuagint must be treated as such and not 'discarded' as Luther and HIS followers did/do.

Last edited by CCCyou; 11-23-2021 at 08:28 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2021, 08:20 AM
 
Location: Alabama
13,611 posts, read 7,918,254 times
Reputation: 7098
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie View Post
It's a much better idea to base our opinions off what the apostles wrote 2000 years ago than either of those 2 options.
The Apostles did not write a list of which books are canonical.

They did, however, quote the Septuagint often in their writings
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2021, 08:24 AM
 
1,799 posts, read 561,895 times
Reputation: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie View Post
It's a much better idea to base our opinions off what the apostles wrote 2000 years ago than either of those 2 options.
How do you think your NT came to be? Who decided what books to include? Who decided the Gospel of Peter shouldn’t be in the Bible ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2021, 08:56 AM
 
Location: Wonderland
67,650 posts, read 60,875,858 times
Reputation: 101078
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike View Post
No, that's what we do.

She's basing her opinion on what a group of Apostate Catholics decided in the 16th century.
Well, to be fair, that's why I said "sort of."
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top