Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical

6/2/2017 11:15:53 AM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
brashdoc Chehalis, WA 64, joined Aug. 2008	http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm "The Jewish canon, or the Hebrew Bible, was universally received, while the Apocrypha added to the Greek version of the Septuagint were only in a general way accounted as books suitable for church (ecclesiastical) reading & thus as a middle class between canonical & strictly apocryphal (pseudonymous) writings. And justly; for those books, while they have great historical value & fill the gap between the OT & the NT, all originated after the CESSATION of prophecy & they cannot therefore be regarded as inspired, nor are they ever cited by Christ or the apostles" (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, book 3, chapter 9) 22 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired: 1. The Roman Catholic Church did not officially canonize the Apocrypha until the Council of Trent (1546 AD). This was in part because the Apocrypha contained material which supported certain Catholic doctrines, such as purgatory, praying for the dead, and the treasury of merit. 2. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians & poets of the OT. 3. Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration. 4. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jews or Jewish Church & therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord. 5. They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church. 6. They contain fabulous statements ('fables') & statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three DIFFERENT deaths in as many DIFFERENT places. 7. The Apocrypha inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead & sinless perfection. "And the day following Judas came with his company, to take away the bodies of them that were slain, and to bury them with their kinsmen, in the sepulchers of their fathers. And they found under the coats of the slain some of the donaries of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbiddeth to the Jews: so that all plainly saw, that for this cause they were slain. Then they all blessed the just judgment of the Lord, who had discovered the things that were hidden. And so betaking themselves to prayers, they besought him, that the sin which had been committed might be forgotten. But the most valiant Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, forasmuch as they saw before their eyes what had happened, because of the sins of those that were slain. And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachmas of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection, (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,) And because he considered that they who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them. It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins." (2 Maccabees 12:39-46) 8. The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God's authorship. Ecclesiasticus 25:19,24 Any iniquity is insignificant compared to a wife's iniquity. From a woman sin had its beginning. Because of her we all die. Ecclesiasticus 22:3 It is a disgrace to be the father of an undisciplined & the birth of a daughter is a loss. 9. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination & magical incantation. 10. The apocryphal books themselves make reference to what we call the Silent 400 years, where there was no prophets of God to write inspired materials. "And they laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, till there should come a prophet, and give answer concerning them." (1 Maccabees 4:46) "And there was a great tribulation in Israel, such as was not since the day, that there was no prophet seen in Israel." (1 Macc 9:27) "And that the Jews & their priests, had consented that he should be their prince & high priest for ever, till there should arise a faithful prophet." (1 Macc 14:41) 11. Josephus (37-100AD--1st-century Romano-Jewish scholar, historian & hagiographer, born in Jerusalem—father of priestly descent & mother claimed royal ancestry) rejected the apocryphal books as inspired & this reflected Jewish thought at the time of Jesus. "From Artexerxes to our own time the complete history has been written but has not been deemed worthy of EQUAL CREDIT with the earlier records because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets. We have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from & contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are JUSTLY BELIEVED TO BE DIVINE."(Flavius Josephus, Against Apion 1:8) 12. The Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls rejected the apocrypha as inspired. 13. The Council of Jamnia held the same view--they rejected the apocrypha as inspired. They took a little time to debate the canonicity of a few books (e.g., Ecclesiastes), but they changed nothing & never proclaimed themselves to be authoritative determiners of the OT/TeNakH canon. "The books which they decided to acknowledge as canonical were already generally accepted, although questions had been raised about them. Those which they refused to admit had never been included. They did not expel from the canon any book which had previously been admitted. 'The Council of Jamnia was the CONFIRMING of public opinion, not the FORMING of it.'" (F. F. Bruce, The Books & Parchments [Old Tappan, NJ.: Fleming H. Revell, 1963], p. 98]) 14. Although it was occasionally quoted in early church writings, it was nowhere accepted in a canon. Melito (AD 170) & Origen rejected the Apocrypha, (Eccl. Hist. VI. 25, Eusebius) as does the Muratorian Canon as does Josephus as does Athanasius, etc. 15. Jerome vigorously resisted including the Apocrypha in his Latin Vulgate Version (400 AD), but was overruled. As a result, the standard Roman Catholic Bible throughout the medieval period contained it. Thus, it gradually came to be revered by the average clergyman. Still, many medieval Catholic scholars realized that it was not inspired. 16. The terms "protocanonical" & "deuterocanonical" are used by Catholics to signify respectively those books of Scripture that were received by the entire Church from the beginning as inspired & those whose inspiration came to be recognized later, after the matter had been disputed by certain Fathers & local churches. 17. Pope Damasus (366-384) authorized Jerome to translate the Latin Vulgate. The Council of Carthage declared this translation as "the infallible & authentic Bible." Jerome was the first to describe the extra 7 Old Testament books as the "Apocrypha" (doubtful authenticity). Needless to say, Jerome's Latin Vulgate did not include the Apocrypha. 18. Cyril (born about A.D. 315) - "Read the divine Scriptures - namely, the 22 books of the Old Testament which the 72 interpreters translated" (the Septuagint) 19. The apocrypha wasn't included at first in the Septuagint, but was appended by the Alexandrian Jews & was not listed in any of the catalogues of the inspired books till the 4th century. [Edited 6/2/2017 11:18:16 AM ] Meet singles at DateHookup.dating, we're 100% free! Join now!
6/2/2017 1:28:15 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	All those arguments pale before the fact that our holy mother the Catholic Church assures us that Tobit, Judith, I and II Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch are indeed canonical and do belong in the Bible. The Council of Trent (late Middle Ages) re-iterated that these books are canonical, and just to clear up any possible confusion it listed all 73 books of the Bible, but the canon was fixed, not by the Council of Trent, but 12 centuries earlier by the Council of Hippo.
6/2/2017 2:30:17 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
brashdoc Chehalis, WA 64, joined Aug. 2008	(continued) 20. Hilary (bishop of Poitiers, 350 A.D.) rejected the apocrypha (Prologue to the Psalms, Sec. 15) 21. Epiphanius (the great opposer of heresy, 360 A.D.) rejected them all. Referring to Wisdom of Solomon & book of Jesus Sirach, he said "These indeed are useful books & profitable, but they are not placed in the number of the canonical." 22. Athanasius (great defender of Christ's Deity & the Trinity & 66 book Bible canon) rejected all the OT 'eccesiastical' books as canonical in his Festal Letter of 367AD but did say they should be recognized as valuable for reading, as history of the canon shows. Is the Apocrypha Inspired? Does it really belong in the Bible? Let us consider while we are at this point, the subject of the Catholic apocrypha, for which they make such great claims & because of which they deny the Bible in common use by most brethren. 2 Macc 12:38-46 seems to be the principal reason they cling to the apocrypha. There is no other doctrine that depends so heavily upon support in the apocrypha. If I were not afraid of absolute statements, I would say that their defense of the apocrypha is only because of the passage and their claims about its teachings. The Catholics have 46 OT books rather than the 39 found in Jewish (22) & Protestant Bibles. However, they have added much more material to other books which does not appear under separate titles. That material follows: The Rest of Esther added to Esther; The Song of the Three Holy Children, The History of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon added to Daniel; Baruch; 1 & 2 Maccabees; Tobias; Judith; Ecclesiasticus & the Wisdom of Sirach. The only powerful support for these books is that they appear in the Septuagint version. However, in many of our Bibles there is much material that is uninspired, including history, poetry, maps, dictionaries & other info. This may be the reason for the appearance of this material in the Septuagint. The apocrypha was not in the Hebrew canon. There are reputed to be 263 quotations & 370 allusions to the OT in the NT & not one of them refers to the Apocrypha. The usual division of the TeNakH/OT by the Jews was a total of 24 books: The Books of Moses (51, The Early prophets 14; Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, The Late Prophets (4; Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the 12 Minor Prophets) & the Hagiagrapha (11; Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Solomon. Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah & Chronicles. These 24 books contain all the material in our numbering of 39. Josephus spoke concerning the canon, but his book division combined Ruth-Judges & Lamentation-Jeremiah for a total of 22 books rather than 24: "For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, ... only 22 books. which contain the records of ail the past times; which are justly believed to be divine;...It is true, our history hath been written since Artaxerxes very particularly, but hath not been esteemed of the like authority with the former by our forefathers;...and how firmly we have given credit to these books of our own nation is evident by what we do; for during so many ages as have already passed, no one has been so bold as either to add anything to them, or to make any change in them." (Flavius Josephus Against Apion Book 1, Section 8). Plainly Josephus distinguishes between those books written BEFORE & AFTER Artaxerxes. This eliminates most of the apocrypha, especially the Maccabees. The apocrypha itself denies all notion of inspiration. Referring to the events in the Maccabees the author makes these statements: "...all such things as have been comprised in 5 books by Jason of Cyrene, we have at-tempted to abridge in one book. For considering the difficulty that they find that desire to undertake the narrations of histories, because of the multitude of the matter, we have taken care for those indeed that are willing to read,...And as to ourselves indeed, in undertaking this work of abridging, we have taken in hand no easy task, yea. rather a business full of watching and sweat. Leaving to the authors the exact handling of every particular, and as for ourselves. according to the plan proposed, studying to brief... For to collect all that is known, to put the discourse in order, and curiously to discuss every particular point, is the duty of the author of a history. But to pursue brevity of speech and to avoid nice declarations of things, is to be granted to him that maketh an abridgement." (2 Maccabees 2: 24-32). "...I will also here make an end of my narration. Which if I have done well, and as it becometh the history, it is what I desired; but if not so perfectly, it must be pardoned me. For as it is hurtful to drink always wine, or always water, but pleasant to use sometimes the one, and sometimes the other, so if the speech be always nicely framed, it will not be grateful to the readers..." 12 Maccabees 15: 39-40). This forms a bizarre contrast with passages in the NT: "Take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak. but the spirit of your Father which speaketh in you" (Mt 10: 19-20). "Now we have received. not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God, that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches"(1 Cor 2: 12-13) RCC rationale: Early Christians quote from the apocrypha proves it belongs in the Bible. They were included in the Septuagint. The Church Councils at Hippo (393) and Carthage (397, 419), listed the apocrypha as Scripture. Since these same councils also finalized the 66 canonical books which all Christians accept, they must accept them all. Early Christians quoted from all kinds of uninspired writings other than the apocrypha. Why do Catholics not include these in their Bible's? The Jews NEVER accepted the apocrypha as part of the OT canon. False. The canon of the NT was set from the 1st century. It is Catholic myth that Catholics gave the world the Bible! They did give authority from themselves to include only a part of the OT apocrypha (added some, took away others from the Septuagint historical documents) The NT never quotes from any apocryphal books within the apocryphal collection written between 400-200 BC. So the Catholic argument that "the apocryphal books cannot be rejected as uninspired on the basis that they are never quoted from in the NT because Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon are also never quoted in the NT & we all accept them as inspired." The rebuttal is: "Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther" were always included in the "history collection" of Jewish books & "Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon" were always included in the "poetry collection". By quoting one book from the collection, it verifies the entire collection. None of the apocryphal books were ever quoted in the NT. Not even once! This proves the Catholic & Orthodox apologists wrong when they try to defend the apocrypha in the Bible. Conclusion: The apocrypha does not belong in the Bible because It IS not inspired.
6/2/2017 3:52:00 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	Individual saints do not get to decide what goes in the Bible and what not. The bishops of the Church, meeting in council at Hippo in 393, and confirmed by subsequent councils, decreed that Tobit, Judith, I and II Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch are inspired of God and do belong in the Bible. Case closed.
6/3/2017 7:28:07 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
brashdoc Chehalis, WA 64, joined Aug. 2008	"Forasmuch as some have taken in hand to reduce into order for themselves the books termed Apocryphal & TO MIX THEM UP WITH the divinely inspired Scripture, concerning which we have been FULLY PERSUADED, as they who from the beginning were EYE WITNESSES & MINISTERS OF THE WORD--DELIVERED TO THE FATHERS; so it seemed good to me also, having been urged thereto by true brethren & having LEARNED FROM THE BEGINNING, to set before you THE BOOKS INCLUDED IN THE CANON--AND HANDED DOWN--AND ACCREDITED AS DIVINE; to the end that anyone who has fallen into error MAY CONDEMN THOSE WHO HAVE LED THEM ASTRAY & that he who has continued steadfast in purity may again rejoice, having these things brought to his REMEMBRANCE." [All these canonical books were already known from the beginning & handed down to the Fathers from the actual eyewitnesses & ministers of the Word (apostles & writers of Scripture & those involved in Christ's ministry]. "There are, then, of the OT, 22 BOOKS IN NUMBER; for, as I have heard, it is HANDED DOWN that this is the number of the letters AMONG THE HEBREWS." "Again, it is NOT tedious ['boring, monotonous REPETITION'] to speak of the books of the NT." [27] “These are the fountains of salvation, that he who thirsts may be satisfied with the living words they contain. IN THESE ALONE the teaching of godliness is proclaimed. LET NO ONE ADD TO THESE; LET NOTHING BE TAKEN AWAY FROM THEM. For concerning these the Lord put to shame the Sadducees & said, YE DO ERR, not knowing the Scriptures. And he reproved the Jews, saying, Search the Scriptures, for THESE ARE THEY THAT TESTIFY OF ME.” "But for the sake of greater exactness I add this also, writing under obligation. There are INDEED OTHER BOOKS BESIDES THESE, NOT RECEIVED AS CANONICAL--but having been appointed by our fathers TO BE READ: Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit & that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles & the Shepherd. But THE FORMER, my brethren, ARE INCLUDED in the Canon--THE LATTER BEING MERELY READ; NOR is there ANY PLACE of a mention of secret writings. Such are the invention of heretics." Athanasius, 376AD 39TH FESTAL LETTER Eyewitnesses & Ministers of the Word Who Handed Down To The Fathers TaNakH - 3 Divisions (Torah, Ketu'vim, Nevi'im--22 books) - Already confirmed by Jesus Himself as The Scripture, In His Day (29AD--Lk 24:25-32; 44,45) not a Roman Catholic church decision. TeNakH - Holy Oracles of God, God's very Word, Scripture, Entrusted to The Jews to Keep & Safeguard - Already Confirmed & Verified by the Apostle Paul as Scripture IN HIS DAY (56AD--Roman 3:1,2; 2 Tim 3:12-17) Not Roman Catholic church decision. TeNakH - Mt 23:35 (2 Chron 24:20-22) - From the First to the Last Murder in the Sacred Scriptures--Jesus confirms once again the 22/24 canonical Jewish books of the Tenakh, from Geneis to 2 Chronicles (29AD). Again this was not a Roman Catholic church decsion of authoritative recognition but from the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Since the year 1517, modern Hebrew Bibles divided the books into thirty-nine, but kept the three-fold division including the arrangement of the books (Genesis through 2 Chronicles) as in the ancient Hebrew Bible. In Mt 23:35, Jesus said, “that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple & the altar.” The murder Jesus spoke of is recorded in 2 Chron 24:20-22. Abel’s death is recorded in Genesis & in the Hebrew Bible, 2 Chronicles is the last book. In essence then, Christ was saying “from the first to the last murder in the Bible.” This was equivalent to saying from Genesis to Malachi & demonstrated what He confirmed as the CANON OF THE TENAKH/OT. Apostle Peter Already Confirmed that the Letters of Paul ARE GOD-BREATHED SCRIPTURE (2 Pet 3:15) IN HIS DAY. Apostolic authority passed down the verification in 65AD; not a Roman Catholic church decision to decide Paul's writings are Scripture. [most included Hebrews as the 13th, often mentioned later in history] The Apostle Paul in I Tim 5:18 (62AD) is confirming Lk 10:7 as recognized Scripture IN HIS DAY as much as Deut 25:4 is recognized as Scripture. This is apostolic authority in 56AD. Also this is quoted in Mt 10:10 verifiying that the gospel of Matthew (another apostle) is considered Scripture as well, not a Roman Catholic decision deciding on these two gospels. https://bible.org/seriespage/7-bible-holy-canon-scripture That God would provide & preserve a Canon of Scripture without addition or deletion is not only necessary, but it is logically credible. If we believe that God exists as an almighty God, then revelation and inspiration are clearly possible. If we believe in such a God, it is also probable that He would, out of love and for His own purposes and designs, reveal Himself to men. Because of man’s obvious condition in sin and his obvious inability to meet his spiritual needs (regardless of all his learning and technological advances), special revelation revealed in a God-breathed book is not only possible, logical, and probable, but a necessity. The evidence shows that the Bible is unique and that God is its author. The evidence declares that “all Scripture is God breathed & profitable…” (2 Tim. 3:16) & that “no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God” (2 Pet. 1:20-21). Prophets don’t manufacture their own speeches but only pass on what they have heard from God by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. In view of this, the logical question is: “Would it not be unreasonable for God to fail to care providentially for these inspired documents to preserve them from destruction & so guide in their collection & arrangement so that they would all be present with none missing & none added that were not inspired?” [Josh McDowell, 'Evidence That Demands a Verdict,' 1979] It is essential to remember that the Bible is self-authenticating since its books were breathed out by God (2 Tim. 3:16) & given to His servants the prophets to speak & write down. In other words, the books were canonical the moment they were written. It was not necessary to wait until various councils examined the books to determine if they were acceptable or not. Their canonicity was inherent within them; verified & confirmed by God's servants, the prophets. People & councils only recognized & acknowledged what is true because of the intrinsic inspiration of the books as they were written. Since the books were inspired when they were written & prophetic & that prophecy being fulfilled as a testimony to it being God's Holy Word, they were already canonical & possessed authority as being a part of God’s Word. The responsibility of the church was simply to attest to the fact of their inspiration.
6/3/2017 7:36:41 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
brashdoc Chehalis, WA 64, joined Aug. 2008	(continued) This process began immediately with the writers recognizing that their own writings were the Word of God (Col. 4:16; 1 Thess. 4:15). But they also recognized that other writings of the NT were Scripture & on a par with the OT. In 1 Tim 5:18 Paul quoted Deut 25:4 & Luke 10:7 & referred to both passages as Scripture. Peter likewise attested to Paul’s writings as Scripture in 2 Pet 3:15-16. Furthermore, the NT epistles were being read & circulated among the churches as authoritative, recognized revelation from God (cf. Col. 4:16; 1 Thess. 5:27). Examples were shown above plus here are others in various OT/NT books: Jer 23:16,20-22,28-32 "Thus says YHWH of hosts, "Do not listen to the words of the prophets who are prophesying to U. They are leading U into futility; They speak a vision of their own imagination, not from the mouth of YHWH. The anger of YHWH will not turn back Until He has performed & carried out the purposes of His heart. In the LAST DAYS U will clearly understand it. I did not send these prophets, but they ran. I did not speak to them, but they prophesied. But if they had stood in My council, then they would have announced My words to My people & would have turned them back from their evil way & from the evil of their deeds. The prophet who has a dream may relate his dream, but let him who has My word speak My word IN TRUTH. What does straw [chaff] have in common with wheat?" declares YHWH. Is not My word like fire?" declares YHWH, "and like a hammer which shatters a rock? "Behold, I am AGAINST the prophets," declares YHWH, "who use their tongues & declare, 'YHWH DECLARES & led My people astray by their falsehoods & RECKLESS BOASTING. Isaiah 30:8;34;16; 44:28 Now go, write it on a tablet before them & inscribe it on a scroll, that it may serve IN THE TIME TO COME as a WITNESS FOREVER...Seek ye OUT OF THE BOOK OF YHWH & read; no one of these shall be missing, none shall lack her mate; for MY MOUTH it has commanded & His Spirit has gathered them...Cyrus...he will perform all My purpose...of Jerusalem, "She will be built," & of the temple, "Your foundation will be laid." [736BC] Daniel 9:2,5-11 In the first year of his [Cyrus] reign [536BC], I Daniel understood BY BOOKS [NIV, ISV the Scriptures; NET sacred books] the number of the years, concerning which THE WORD OF YHWH CAME TO JEREMIAH THE PROPHET, that he would accomplish 70 years in the desolations of Jerusalem...we have sinned, rebelled, turning aside from Your commandments & ordinances. We have not listened to Your servants THE PROPHETS, who spoke in Your Name to our kings, princes, fathers & all the people of the land...all Israel...we have not obeyed the voice of YHWH our God, to walk in His teachings which HE SET BEFORE US THROUGH His servants the prophets. All Israel has transgressed YOUR LAW...not obeying Your Voice, so the curse has been poured out [Deut 28] ...He has confirmed His words...As it is WRITTEN IN THE LAW OF MOSES...giving attention to YOUR TRUTH. Amos 3:7,8 Surely the Lord GOD does nothing without revealing His secret counsel to His servants the prophets. A lion has roared! Who will not fear? The Lord GOD has spoken! Who can but prophesy? Micah 4:8 "As for you, tower of the flock, Hill of the daughter of Zion, to you it will come-- even THE FORMER DOMINION WILL COME, the KINGDOM of the daughter of Jerusalem. 2 Chron 36:21 To fulfill the word of YHWH by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed its sabbaths...until 70 years were complete. Thus says Cyrus...YHWH, the God of heaven...has appointed me to build Him a house. [2 Chronicles, last book of Jewish OT] Zech 7:5 When U fasted & mourned in the 5th & 7th months these 70 years, was it actually for Me that U fasted? Ezra 1:1 Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah...the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he sent a proclamation & also put it in writing, "He has appointed me to build Him a house..." Haggai 1:1,12,14 All...obeyed the voice of YHWH their God & the words of Haggai the prophet...So the LORD stirred up the spirit of Zerubbabel...Joshua the high priest & all the remnant of the people & they came & worked on the house of YHWH of hosts, their God. Isaiah 44:26 Who fulfills the ORACLES of His prophetic servants & brings to pass the announcements of His messengers. Acts 7:38 He [Moses] was in the assembly in the wilderness with THE MESSENGER who SPOKE to him on Mt Sinai & WITH our fathers. And he received--LIVING ORACLES--TO PASS ON TO US. Rom 3:2 FIRST OF ALL, the Jews were entrusted with the ORACLES OF GOD. [NIV 'the very words of God] 2 Pet 1:19-21 And we have more firm the prophetic word, to which we do well giving heed, as to a lamp shining in a dark place, till day may dawn, and a morning star may arise — in your hearts; 20Know this FIRST OF ALL, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition, 21for not by will of man did ever prophecy come, but by the Holy Spirit borne on holy men of God spake. Heb 1:1,2 In the past GOD SPOKE to our ancestors THROUGH THE PROPHETS at many times & in various ways, 2but in these last days HE HAS SPOKEN TO US THROUGH HIS SON. (to be continued)
6/4/2017 12:04:53 AM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	So why don't YOU believe in a 22-book Old Testament? Besides Tobit, Judith, I and II Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch, what other books of the Bible would you throw out? Don't most Protestants have a 39-book Old Testament?
6/6/2017 7:41:40 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
_ladybug_ Paragould, AR 66, joined Sep. 2013	Brashdoc .... Very interesting and informative read! Am looking forward to the "to be continued" posts!
6/7/2017 2:16:59 AM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
brashdoc Chehalis, WA 64, joined Aug. 2008	Thank you ladybug & thank you Lud for asking about the 22 book OT of the Jews. I do indeed believe in the three-fold Jewish TeNakH of 22/24 books safeguarded by the Jews in Palestine, as did Melito (170AD) who went there to verify it, as did Origin (210AD), as did Hilary of Poitiers (360 AD), as did Athanasius (367 AD, Festal letter #39), as did Cyril of Jerusalem, (386 AD, Catechetical Lectures), as did Jerome (390 AD, Introduction to Samuel & Kings), as did the Council of Laodicea (391 AD, Canon 60), as did Gregory of Nazianzus (390 AD, Carmina, 1.12), as did Epiphanius (400 AD, Del Nensurius et Ponderibus, 4), as did Rufinus (410 AD, Commentary in Symbols of the Apostles, 37), as did St. John Damascene, as did the 16 dissenting bishops & cardinals at the Council of Trent including Seripando, as did Cardinal Cajetan (who questioned Luther) & as did many other Middle Age supporters & the many today who have studied true historical information. "To be deep in true history is to cease to be Catholic & become catholic with Jesus Christ as the one true head of the one church, the one assembly, the one flock, the one dwelling place of God in the Spirit of both Jew & Gentile, that He is continuing to build." brashdoc These 22 books correspond exactly to the 39 books of the Christian OT.(present day Jews now say 24 due to splitting twice--2 once referred to as 1) The numbers differ only because the Jews reckoned certain groups of books as one, such as the two books of Samuel, the two books of Kings & the Twelve Minor Prophets which were originally written on a single scroll. (continuing) Rev 10:7 But in the days of the voice of the 7th angel, when he is about to sound his trumpet, the mystery of God will be fulfilled, just as He proclaimed to His servants, the prophets." God entrusted His Living Oracles, His Word to the Jews, to guard it's accuracy & transmission to the world. He spoke through His servants the prophets, who confirmed the Word & its fulfillment confirmed the accuracy & veracity of the Living God who spoke those very words. The Jews recognized the cessation of prophecy after Malachi, thus recognizing the close of the OT canon. This silence from God went on for 400 years UNTIL the prophecy of Malachi came to be fulfilled in John the Baptist & Jesus Christ. Thus Christ has spoken to us in these last days & had His apostles & their disciples verify His spoken Word written down & passed on to us, in the NT. The famous Codex Vaticanus in the Vatican Library, a Greek codex of the OT & NTs, supports Athanasius' festal letter, being a second witness of authenticity. It consists of the same books IN THE SAME ORDER as in Athanasius’s festal letter—which is particularly noteworthy given the peculiar order: Gospels, Acts, Catholic Epistles (James, 1 & 2 Peter, 1, 2 & 3 John & Jude), Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews between 2 Thess & 1 Timothy) & Revelation. The Codex Vaticanus probably was written in Rome, in 340, by Alexandrian scribes for Emperor Constanstine [who requested 50 copies OF THE SCRIPTURES ALREADY RECOGNIZED--from Eusebius], during Athanasius’s seven-year exile in the city. It would thus predate the festal letter. Even though Athanasius was probably not far away when the Codex Vaticanus was written, one realizes that the establishment of the canon was not a sudden decision made unilaterally by a bishop in Alexandria, but a process of careful investigation & deliberation, documented in a codex of the Greek Bible & 27 years later, in a festal letter. "Thus, the 'closed canon' that prevails in all Christian churches forms a consensus that prevents such eccentricities. And that canon can be traced back to Athanasius & to the year 367AD, which justly remains an important date in church history." Dr. Carsten Peter Thiede (1952 –2004--German archaeologist & NT scholar; member of PEN & a Knight of Justice in the Order of St John. He taught as Professor of NT Times & History at the STH in Basel & at the Ben-Gurion Univ. of the Negev in Beersheba, Israel) So, in continuing--contrary to the testimony of the already recognized canonical four Gospels as to what was the Sacred Scriptures of the OT & contrary to the already published 50 copies of the already recognized Scriptures, one of which was probably the Codex Sinaiticus (340AD) & contrary to Athanasius (367AD Festal Letter) & also contrary to Jerome's rejection of the OT apocryphal books as canon (390AD, greatest Biblical scholar in the original languages of his day)--Augustine (who opposed Athanasius & Jerome on verifiying the Jewish 3 fold TeNakH of 22/24 books as the verified, recognized canon of the OT) took it upon himself to orchestrate the Councils of Hippo & Carthage, to accept the Deuterocanonical ('2nd Canon') books as also canonical. Augustine WAITED UNTIL Athanasius was banished a number of times & finally died in 373AD to call these councils together & it was in those he unilaterally declared, with a small handful of bishops, what the canon was: 73 books instead of the 66 books already recognized across the Christian world. He didn't have the authority to do this but did it anyway. No Hebrew & very few scholars were present at these councils. It was Augustine who made an appeal to Rome to get official recognition of these additional 'second tier' books, since the council was not a true ecumenical one. They also unilaterally decided to delete some of the OT apocryphal books [ones which the Orthodox church retained] that had been included in the Greek Septuagint as historical, ecclesiastical books to be read but not considered canonical. So Augustine was the key person in history who with a handful of non-Hebraic bishops--& his godly opposition now removed--made an arbitary decision to ADD TO the already recognized OT canon 7 additional writings. Not only that but they also arbitarily took upon themselves to DELETE SOME OF THE ECCLESISATICAL BOOKS from the Septuagint, some ow which the Orthodox church kept. (not canonically recognized apocryphal texts) From the Torah to the book of Revelation, God has forbidden adding to or taking away from His 'God-breathed' Holy Scriptures. Deut 4:2 "U will not add to the word which I am commanding U, nor take away from it, that U may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command U. Deut 12:32 "Whatever I command U, U will be careful to do; U will not add to nor take away from it. Deut 13:31,32 "U will not behave thus toward YHWH your God, for every abominable act which the LORD hates they have done for their gods; for they even burn their sons & daughters in the fire to their gods. Whatever I command U, U will be careful to do; U will not add to nor take away from it. Joshua 1:7 "Only be strong & very courageous; be careful to do according to all the law which Moses My servant commanded U; do not turn from it to the right or to the left, so that U may have success wherever you go. Prov 30:6 Don't add to His words, or He will rebuke U & U will be proved a liar. Rev 22:18,19 I testify to everyone who hears the words of prophecy in this book: If anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes away from the words of this book of prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. http://www.ntcanon.org/authorities.shtml http://www.bible-researcher.com/canon8.html
6/7/2017 2:21:43 AM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
brashdoc Chehalis, WA 64, joined Aug. 2008	(continued) The Muratorian Fragment (170AD). This is an important ancient historical document that has within it it's own writing as to when it was written. There was a Greek original & the following manuscript copies were in Latin (one from 8th century, found in 1740 & 4 found from the 11th & 12th centuries). This shows it was an ancient document copied & distributed in the ancient world. The first part of it is missing & starts in with discussing the 'third' gospel, Luke. One can assume the part missing has already discussed the first two gospels, Matthew & Mark. The last part of the document has been damaged & one is not able to discern what is written. Key aspects in this document are the following. 1. Luke is mentioned as a close companion of Paul & wrote his gospel account (& the Acts of the Apostles) while traveling with Paul on his missionary journeys. The first was from first hand accounts of others but the second from first hand & personal eye witness. This shows one of the main criteria used in determining which books were canonical & which were not: they needed to be written by apostles or 'eye, ear & touch' witnesses and/or those closely associated with the apostles & the Lord Himself. 2. Historical info is given on how the Apostle John was the one who actually wrote the 4th gospel: through exhortation from fellow bishops, apostles (Andrew named as one) & disciples, prayer & fasting & later reviewed by the exhorters. 3. By the one guiding Holy Spirit all four WRITTEN gospels declare all that God intended us to know & pass on, about the unique life of our Lord Jesus Christ as contained in the gospel message, the good news of the Savior of the world, from his birth to his ascension. 4. Another key eschatological truth is revealed: it talks about Christ's two comings; the first despised in lowliness, which has already come & the 2nd, glorious in kingly power, still YET FUTURE , AS OF 170AD. So much for the false prognosticators that predicted His 2nd coming in 70AD & all the other false ones up until our present day. This confirms also with Paul's statement in 2 Thess 2:1-3 & that people have continually tried to deceive others in saying that the Lord has returned already. 'Let no one deceive you in ANY WAY'--however persuasive they may be. 4. It points out that the rule of the OT SCRIPTURES is found in the epistle to the Romans & that Christ is the object of these in terms of prophecy fulfilled & that the Shepherd of Hermas is NOT PLACED 'among the prophets--as their number IS COMPLETE--nor among the apostles to the end of time. In other words, the OT canon is complete--the prophets--& those books of the apostles remain the 'honey' for all time versus those spurious books which are identified as gall trying to be mingled with the honey of inspired Scripture. 5. The second identifying criteria for determining canonical books, those 'God-breathed & inspired by God Himself, is shown by identifying those written long after the time of the canonical books & the apostle's writings. The examples used are the Shepherd of Hermas & 'there are also in circulation one to the Laodiceans & another to the Alexandrians, forged under the name of Paul & addressed against the heresy of Marcion. There are also several others which cannot be received into the catholic Church, for it is not suitable for gall to be mingled with honey.' The 3 mentioned above were written in the latter part of the 2nd century & trying to be circulated as 'authentic canonical books' but were clearly shown NOT to be because of being written later & some also identified as forgeries of apostles long after the fact. It also mentions other heretics & their writings as forbidden to be read publicly in the one church & nothing whatever from them is accepted (Arsinous, Valentinus, Marcion, Basilides, etc.) 6. Another key factor that it addresses is the universal nature of the one church of Jesus Christ throughout the whole world. Though the Apostles Paul & John write specifically to 7 churches, they are applied universally to all the churches in the whole world & they were called catholic with a small 'c' NOT a capitalized C. And Pius is mentioned not as the pope but simply with the title of 'bishop' like other bishops or others of the episcolate. This is in 170AD, showing the true universal nature of all the apostolic churches--NOT being under the Roman Catholic church--at that time. And again the Apostle John writes to 7 churches in the Revelation AND ROME IS NOT MENTIONED as one of them nor having any authority OVER all other churches. Nor is Peter ever mentioned as a pope & over all other churches. None of these were taught as truth in the one recognized 'catholic' church, in 170AD. Tertullian (155-225AD) 'Of THE SCRIPTURES, we have our being before there was any other way, before they were interpolated by [heretics]. . .One man [Marcion] PERVERTS THE SCRIPTURES with his hand, ANOTHER THEIR MEANING BY HIS EXPOSITION. For although Valentinus seems to USE THEIR ENTIRE VOLUME, he has nonetheless laid violent hands on the truth only with a more cunning mind & skill than Marcion. Marcion expressly & openly used the knife, not the pen, since he made such AN EXCISION OF THE SCRIPTURES as suited his own subject-matter. Valentinus, however, abstained from such excision, because he did NOT INVENT SCRIPTURE to square with his own subject-matter...& yet he took away more & added more, by removing the proper meaning of every particular word.' (Praescriptione haereticorum, 38) In other words, in Tertullian's day, the WHOLE VOLUME of Scripture was recognized! The whole canon of biblical books was recognized! 1Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Heb 10:7 (Ps 40:7): 'In the VOLUME OF THE BOOK'--The writer of the Epistle, transferring & applying David’s words to Christ, thought doubtless of the whole OT. (comp. Lk 24:26-27, “He expounded unto them in ALL THE SCRIPTURES the things concerning Himself). (to be continued with a bump) [Edited 6/7/2017 2:24:44 AM ]
6/7/2017 5:57:32 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	According to the webisite "The Canon of St Athanasius" Athanasius accepted Baruch as canonical but not Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, I or II Maccabees, or Sirach. Athanasius also leaves out Esther, which Protestants, Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox of today all believe in. The saints are/were all very holy and very close to God. But individual saints are not infallible. In fact, throughout the history of the Catholic Church you will find many examples of contemporary saints who disagreed with each other. The authority of the Church, vested in the pope and in bishops meeting in council---these are considered infallible. True, the Council of Hippo was not a general council, it was merely a "synod" or low level, council, but the canon it compiled was ratified by subsequent general councils. Trust not individual saints, no matter how saintly. Trust not Martin Luther. Trust not your own opinion. Trust our holy mother the Catholic Church and its infallible teaching authority.
6/21/2017 1:48:40 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
brashdoc Chehalis, WA 64, joined Aug. 2008	One of the things you try & make a point on Lud, is that these were individuals making these lists when the real truth is that it wasn't the individual making them but they were simply PASSING ON what was given to them by the Jews & by the ancient fathers, such as Athanasius SAID or Melito SAID, etc. The Roman Catholic church bestowed upon itself infallibility concerning what THEY DECIDED, not what God already decreed as the truth. God never gave the RCC infallibility in deciding doctrine. He simply entrusted His infallible Word to the prophets, then the apostles & those associated with them in the various apostolic churches, who were to preserve & guard the body of faith 'once for all delivered to the saints.' [not supposed man-made doctrines of one Roman Catholic church 1000's OF YRS LATER.] We are not to add to or take away from the Scriptures. The NT canon was closed as well as the OT canon. To add doctrines or traditions that was NOT PASSED DOWN from Christ & apostolic teaching is man-made doctrines & traditions of men that negate the commandments & teachings of Christ & the apostles. The faith ONCE FOR ALL DELIVERED TO US is just that--already delivered. Done. We now have given to us 'everything we need for life & godliness through the knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory & excellence. Through these He has given us His precious & magnificent promises so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature...' (2 Pet 1:2-4) God alone is the one who is infallible, without error, who cannot lie but only speaks the truth & already spoke & ALREADY HAD WRITTEN DOWN HIS HOLY & INFALLIBLE TRUTH. It is to be faithly taught & guarded NOT ADDED TO NOR TAKEN AWAY FROM. But that is a topic for another thread. While Athanasius doesn't mention Esther--IN THE HEBREW LIST--[many combined Esther in with other of the Hebrew canonical books as I have shown & will show], he may have included it in other canonical books that were combined in the Hebrew list, just not mentioning it. He DOES ACTUALLY LIST ESTHER later WITH THE APOCRYPHAL BOOKS in his festal letter so he does indeed mention Esther. However, the Esther of the apocryphal books was not the Hebrew canonical Esther but one that had later written additions to it in Greek. I am assuming these additional Greek additions to Esther made this version of Esther not canonical as with the other apocryphal books written after the cessation of the prophets & the close of the Jewish canon at the time of the Great Assembly (more on that below). So that is why Athanasius listed Esther, with these additions added at a later time--not by the actual author of the canonical book of Esther. 7. "But for greater exactness I add this also, writing of necessity; that there are other books besides these [canonical ones] not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us & who wish for instruction in the word of godliness. The Wisdom of Solomon & the Wisdom of Sirach 'AND ESTHER' & Judith & Tobit & that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles & the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the Canon, the latter being [merely] read." Athanasius Since there were Greek additions to the book of Esther in the apocryphal books, people like Athanasius wouldn't accept the Esther with these later added additions nor did the ancient Jews; it wasn't considered canonical. That he does mention Baruch with Jeremiah could mean the Book of Baruch or that Baruch the scribe was mentioned in Jeremiah. It is not clear as he does not specifically say 'the book' of Baruch. And one must remember that this list he shows was handed down to him. And he specifically mentions a number of the apocryphal books were NOT canonical (see list above). But it seems evident that there is a consistent witness of the OT canonical books being what the Jews were entrusted with AND KEPT SACRED, their Hebrew Bible, the Tenakh, of 22/24 books. People then added all other things to them, which God said not to do. The Bryennios List (Jerusalem Codex 100AD) lists the OT Jewish canon of 22/24 books AND DOESN'T ADD any apocryphal books to it. Melito's List (170AD) also lists the Hebrew OT canon of 22/24 books & DOESN'T ADD any apocryphal books to it. See my explanation below that he does indeed include Esther though not mentioned, like he doesn't mention Lamentations though it is also included. Athanasius (367AD) also mentions the Hebrew Bible of 22 books (OT, Tenakh) but ADDS TO IT BARUCH & THE EPISTLE OF JEREMIAH, much like the Council of Laodicea 3 years earlier, of which it would be supposed with which he was familiar. But he included Revelation in the canon, which Laodicea didn't. Origen (220-240AD) also mentions the 22 books of the Hebrew OT canon, including Esther BUT SEEMS TO ADD TO IT, the Maccabees (though he doesn't specifically say whether they are canonical or not). Origen had both the Hebrew canon & the Septuagint & various early Greek manuscripts of the NT. From these he made his Hexapla. As an added thought, around 240AD, Origin was often called upon to battle heresies & a new heresy that came from Arabia: the doctrine was promulgated in Arabia that the soul died & decayed with the body, being restored to life only at the resurrection (see soul sleep). Origen journeyed to Arabia & successfully battled this false doctrine. So there is an ancient historical note on the origination of this false teaching. Josephus (95AD) mentions the 22/24 books of the Hebrew Bible, including Esther AND DOESN'T ADD TO IT any apocryphal books. He states nothing has been added nor anything taken away from them, thus closing the canon, just as the earlier rabbinical Jews of the Great Assembly wrote about. Codex Vaticanus (340AD) lists the 22/24 books of the Hebrew Bible but mixes in various apocryphal books that are ADDED TO IT & also doesn't include 1-3 Maccabees. Codex Sinaiticus (340AD) lists the 22/24 books of the Hebrew Bible but mixes in various apocryphal books that are ADDED TO IT and also doesn't include 2–3 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Baruch & Letter of Jeremiah. I can list many more but these are enough at this time to show that there was a consistent LINE OF WITNESSES of the canon of the OT being the Jewish ancient Hebrew Scriptures and NOT the later Septuagint WITH THE APOCRYPHAL BOOKS. There is only one witness concerning the writing of the Septuagint & this was a supposed letter by Aristeas to his brother, Philocrates. Others have repeated what he said but this letter has been shown by many scholars since 1522 NOT be be one actually from Aristeas but someone else later in time, having many inaccurate historical inconsistences throughout the letter. Even Jerome had some criticisms of it. See: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_of_Aristeas & https://www.scionofzion.com/septuagint1.htm and https://www.chick.com/ask/articles/septuagint.asp for more info on this) (to be continued)
6/21/2017 1:59:57 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
brashdoc Chehalis, WA 64, joined Aug. 2008	I can deal with this in another thread as well. The above letter only mentioned the translation of the Torah not the whole Tenakh. There were other Greek translations of the Hebrew OT as Origin mentions three & parts of Theodotion's translation is what is used for the Septuagint today, being more closely resembling the Hebrew OT. (book of Daniel for example) No one knows for sure who actually translated the rest of the Septuagint (prophets & writings) nor who or when the 'apocryphal' books were added to it. It is possible the 50 bibles that Constantine commissioned Eusebius to write may have been when this occurred but no real historical record has been found to confirm the writing of the Septuagint nor who ADDED the Apocryphal books WITH it. Augustine vehemently argued against Athanasius and against Jerome for wanting to use the Jewish Hebrew OT canon rather than the Septuagint with the apocryphal books (and yet excluded some of the apocryphal books listed IN THE SEPTUAGINT) in the councils of Hippo & Carthage! Something fishy was definitely going on in the choosing of the Roman Catholic canonical books that even differ from the Orthodox biblical canon. The Council of Laodicea of approximately 30 clerics from Asia Minor assembled about 363–364 AD in Laodicea, Phrygia Pacatiana (modern Turkey). They made 60 canonical decrees, two of which addressed the canon of Scripture & included anethemas, much like the Council of Trent. They included the 22/24 books of the Hebrew canon but ADDED BARUCH & THE EPISTLE OF JEREMIAH BUT DID NOT ADD ANY OF THE OTHER APOCRYPHAL BOOKS and in the 59th canonical decree forbid the reading of books not considered canonical. They also left out the book of Revelation in the NT list but did not include any NT apocryphal books nor any heretical epistles. Those in the east, like the Council of Laodicia, may have not included it due to a general reaction against this book after excessive use was made of it by the heretical Montanist cults in their day. Decree 15: "No others shall sing in the Church, save only the canonical singers, who go up into the ambo & sing from a book." Decree 24: "No one of the priesthood, from presbyters to deacons & so on in the ecclesiastical order to subdeacons, readers, singers, exorcists, door-keepers, or any of the class of the Ascetics, ought to enter a tavern." Decree 29: "CHRISTIANS must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ." Decree 44: "Women may not go to the altar." Decree 59: "No psalms composed by private individuals nor any uncanonical books may be read in the church, but only the Canonical Books of the Old & New Testaments." Decree 60: "THESE are all the books of OT appointed to be read: 1, Genesis of the world; 2, The Exodus from Egypt; 3, Leviticus; 4, Numbers; 5, Deuteronomy; 6, Joshua, the son of Nun; 7, Judges, Ruth; 8, Esther; 9, Of the Kings, 1st & 2nd; 10, Of the Kings, 3rd & 4th; 11, Chronicles, 1st & 2nd; 12, Esdras, 1st & 2nd; 13, The Book of Psalms; 14, The Proverbs of Solomon; 15, Ecclesiastes; 16, The Song of Songs;17, Job; 18, The Twelve Prophets; 19, Isaiah; 20, Jeremiah, & Baruch, the Lamentations & the Epistle; 21, Ezekiel; 22, Daniel. And these are the books of the NT: 4 Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke & John; The Acts of the Apostles; 7 Catholic Epistles, to wit, one of James, two of Peter, three of John, one of Jude; 14 Epistles of Paul, one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Galatians, one to the Ephesians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Hebrews, two to Timothy, one to Titus & one to Philemon. Cyril of Jerusalem on the Canon (Catechetical Lectures, iv. 33-37; 350AD) Cyril of Jerusalem was a bishop of Jerusalem. It appears the omission of Revelation from his list is due to a general reaction against this book IN THE EAST after excessive use was made of it by the Montanist cults. "Now these the divinely-inspired Scriptures of both the Old & the NT teach us. For the God of the 2 Testaments is One, Who in the OT foretold the Christ Who appeared in the New; Who by the Law & the Prophets led us to Christ's school. For before faith came, we were kept in ward under the law & the law hath been our tutor to bring us unto Christ. 1 And if ever thou hear any of the heretics speaking evil of the Law or the Prophets, answer in the sound of the Saviour's voice, saying, Jesus came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it. 2 Learn also diligently, and from the Church, what are the books of the OT & what those of the New. And, pray, read none of the apocryphal writings: 3 for why dost thou, who knowest not those which are acknowledged among all, trouble thyself in vain about those which are disputed? Read the Divine Scriptures, THE 22 BOOKS OF THE OT. These have been translated by the 72 Interpreters." "Of these read the two & twenty books, but have nothing to do with the apocryphal writings. Study earnestly these only which we read openly in the Church. Far wiser and more pious than thyself were the Apostles, and the bishops of old time, the presidents of the Church who handed down these books. Being therefore a child of the Church, trench 6 thou not upon its statutes. And of the OT, as we have said, study the two & twenty books, which, if thou art desirous of learning, strive to remember by name, as I recite them." "For of the Law the books of Moses are the first five, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. And next, Joshua the son of Nave & the book of Judges, including Ruth, counted as seventh. And of the other historical books, the first and second books of the Kings 8 are among the Hebrews one book; also the third and fourth 8b one book. And in like manner, the first and second of Chronicles are with them one book; and the first and second of Esdras 8c are counted one. Esther is the twelfth book; and these are the Historical writings. But those which are written in verses are five, Job, and the book of Psalms, and Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, which is the seventeenth book. And after these come the five Prophetic books: of the Twelve Prophets one book, of Isaiah one, of Jeremiah one, including Baruch and Lamentations and the Epistle; 9 then Ezekiel, and the Book of Daniel, the TWENTY-SECOND OF THE OT." "Then of the NT there are the 4 Gospels only, for the rest have false titles & are mischievous. The Manichaeans also wrote a Gospel according to Thomas, which being tinctured with the fragrance of the evangelic title corrupts the souls of the simple sort. Receive also the Acts of the Twelve Apostles; and in addition to these the seven Catholic Epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude; and as a seal upon them all, and the last work of the disciples, the fourteen Epistles of Paul . 11 But let all the rest be put aside in a secondary rank. And whatever books are not read in Churches, these read not even by myself, as thou hast heard me say. Thus much of these subjects." (to be continued)
6/21/2017 7:13:11 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
_ladybug_ Paragould, AR 66, joined Sep. 2013
6/21/2017 9:44:22 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
a_nubian Columbus, OH 53, joined Jan. 2011 online now!	Quote from ludlowlowell: So why don't YOU believe in a 22-book Old Testament? Besides Tobit, Judith, I and II Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch, what other books of the Bible would you throw out? Don't most Protestants have a 39-book Old Testament? Why don't Protestant accept those books: 1. Jesus NEVER quoted from those books. Jesus quoted from 24 OT books; 855 times He quoted from the OT and not one came from those books. 2. The APOCRYPHA is full of inaccuracies. 3. The APOCRYPHA condones sorcery. Tobit 6:4-8 (He replied, “As for the heart and liver, if a demon or evil spirit gives trouble to any one, you make a smoke from these before the man or woman, and that person will never be troubled again.) What happened to calling on the name of the Lord. 4. The APOCRYPHA teaches salvation by works. Tobit 12:9 (For almsgiving saves from death and purges away every sin. Those who give alms will enjoy a full life,) What happened confess your sins and He is faith and just to forgive you. Eph 2:8-9 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. 5. Prayers for the Dead. 2 Maccabees 12:44-45 (For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, so that they might be delivered from their sin.) Hebrews 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: 6. None of the books were written in Hebrew or Aramaic. All the other Old Testament Books were written in Hebrew or Aramaic. All but one of the Apocrypha books were written in Greek. 7. None of the Apocrypha writers claim Inspiration. Ex. Deuteronomy 18:15 The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; 8. The APOCRYPHA was rejected by the Jews. 9. Many Jews scholars reject The APOCRYPHA. 10. Athanasius called the APOCRYPHA non-conical. "There are also other books besides these, not canonized, yet set by the Fathers to be read to those who have just come up and who wish to be informed as to the word of godliness." Athanasius Jerome said, "This prologue I write as a preface to the books to be translated by us from the Hebrew into Latin, that we may know that all the books which are not of this number are apocrphyal; therefore Wisdom, which is commonly ascribed to Solomon as its author, and the book of Jesus the son of Sirach, Judith, Tobit and the Shepher are not in the Canon."
6/22/2017 11:31:32 AM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
brashdoc Chehalis, WA 64, joined Aug. 2008	Thank you ladybug and a_nubian! The more you study history, the more you become catholic in your view of the body of Christ. Mark 5:18-20 As He was getting into the boat, the man who had been possessed by the demons begged to go with Him. But Jesus would not allow him. “Go home to your own people, He said, “and tell them how much the Lord has done for U & what mercy He has shown U.” So the man went away & began to proclaim throughout the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him. And everyone was amazed. Luke 9:46-50 Then an argument started among the disciples as to which of them would be the greatest. But Jesus, knowing the thoughts of their hearts, had a little child stand beside Him. And He said to them, “Whoever welcomes this little child in My name welcomes Me & whoever welcomes Me welcomes the One who sent Me. For whoever is the least among all of you, he is the greatest.” “Master, said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in Your name & we tried to stop him, because he does not accompany us.” “Do not stop him,” Jesus replied, “for whoever is not against U is for U.” When did the church in the city of Rome first try to impose a tradition on other churches & be the final authority over all churches? Victor called a meeting of Italian bishops at Rome, which is the earliest Roman synod known. He also wrote to the leading bishops of the various districts, urging them to call together the bishops of their sections of the country and to take counsel with them on the question of the Easter festival. Letters came from all sides: from the synod in Palestine, at which Theophilus of Caesarea and Narcissus of Jerusalem presided; from the synod of Pontus over which Palmas as the oldest presided; from the communities in Gaul whose bishop of Irenaeus of Lyons; from the bishops of the Kingdom of Osrhoene; also from individual bishops, as Bakchylus of Corinth. These letters all unanimously reported that Easter was observed on Sunday. Victor, who acted throughout the entire matter as the head of Catholic Christendom, now called upon the bishops of the province of Asia to abandon their custom and to accept the universally prevailing practice of always celebrating Easter on Sunday. In case they would not do this he declared they would be excluded from the fellowship of the Church. This severe procedure did not please all the bishops. Irenaeus of Lyons & others wrote to Pope Victor; they blamed his severity, urged him to maintain peace & unity with the bishops of Asia & to entertain affectionate feelings toward them. Irenaeus reminded him that his predecessors had indeed always maintained the Sunday observance of Easter, as was right, but had not broken off friendly relations and communion with bishops because they followed another custom. (Catholic Encyclopedia) So it seems around 90-100 years after the last Apostle died, did the first historical record appear when the church of Rome tried to impose its tradition on other churches who resisted that attempt. This was around the year 195 AD. This fits in with what Melito of Sardis wrote and others. Romans 14:1-23 Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters. 2One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. 4Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand. 5One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. 6Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7For none of us lives for ourselves alone, and none of us dies for ourselves alone. 8If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. 9For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living. 10You, then, why do you judge your brother or sistera ? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11It is written: “?‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,‘every knee will bow before Me; every tongue will acknowledge God.’?” 12So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God. 13Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister. 14I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean. 15If your brother or sister is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy someone for whom Christ died. 16Therefore do not let what you know is good be spoken of as evil. 17For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and receives human approval. 19Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a person to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother or sister to fall. 22So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23But whoever has doubts is condemned if they eat, because their eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.
6/22/2017 2:35:04 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
brashdoc Chehalis, WA 64, joined Aug. 2008	(continuing) http://www.tecmalta.org/tft107.htm We have the testimony of the Jewish historian Josephus to the effect that the OT canon was closed in the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus in the time of Ezra and the Great Assembly. Ezra was peculiarly concerned with the sacred oracles. He is described as the Scribe (Nehemiah 8:1,4,9,13; 12:26,36) & a specialist in the law of Moses (Ezra 7:6), being taught in the commandments of the Lord & teaching His statutes to Israel (Ezra 7:11). Whatever Ezra & others of like mind did & contributed to the final compilation of the OT canon, it is evident that God's supervising providence brought the final result about. Ezra & others only recognised what was inspired from its very inception & the testimony of the prophets. This was the time of Great Assembly. Though unsympathetic with the infant Christian church, Josephus gives this testimony about the inherited collection of books that the church enjoyed, namely, the OT. Writing about the year 100 A.D., he states: "For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from & contradicting one another (as the Greeks have), but only 22 books, which contain the record of all time; which are justly believed to be divine...It is true our history has been written since Artaxerxes very particularly, but has not been esteemed of like authority with the former by our forefathers, because there has not been an exact succession of prophets since that time.* AND HOW FIRMLY we have given credit to those books of our own nation, it is evident by what we do; for, during so many ages as have already passed, NO ONE HAS BEEN SO BOLD as either to add anything to them, to take anything from them, or to make any change in them; but it becomes natural to all Jews, immediately & from their very birth, to esteem--THOSE BOOKS--to contain divine doctrines & to persist in them & if occasion be, willingly to die for them" (Against Apion, I.8). *In this sentence Josephus is referring to the intertestamental uninspired books known commonly as the Apocrypha. Accidentally, such an interesting testimony agrees perfectly with the Protestant position of excluding the Apocrypha from the biblical canon, as against the Roman Catholic & Orthodox & Syrian positions. http://www.aish.com/jl/h/cc/48939022.html History Crash Course of the Great Assembly by Rabbi Ken Spiro The Men of the Great Assembly (Heb. Anshei Knesset HaGedolah) was an unusual group of Jewish personalities who assumed the Jewish leadership reigns between 410-210BC. This time period follows the destruction of the 1st Temple & includes the early decades of the 2nd Temple, up until the invasion of the Greeks, led by Alexander the Great & beyond. Realizing that the Jewish people were growing weaker spiritually, a group of wise leaders came together--expanding the Sanhedrin, the Jewish Supreme Court, from 70 to 120 members -- with a special aim of strengthening Judaism. Initially gathered together by Ezra, they defined Judaism in this tumultuous time when prophecy & kingship were all but gone from the Jewish people. Today's Israeli Parliament, which is called "the Knesset," also has 120 members in imitation of the Great Assembly although the Knesset of today serves a different function. Among them we count the last of the prophets Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, as well as the sages Mordechai, (of the Purim story), Yehoshua, (the High Priest), Nechemia (the chief architect of rebuilding of Jerusalem), Shimon HaTzaddik (also a High Priest). Keep in mind that at this time the Talmud has not yet been compiled. As we see in history, to the extent that the Jews stop living according to Jewish law and tradition (i.e. that which makes them Jewish), to that extent they assimilate and disappear. Therefore, the contributions of these men can be said to account to a large measure for Jewish survival. The Mishna pays them great homage: "Moses received the Torah from Sinai & conveyed to Joshua, Joshua to the Elders, the Elders to the Prophets & the Prophets to the Men of the Great Assembly ... Shimon HaTzaddik was one of the remnants of the Great Assembly. He used to say, "The world stands on three things: on the Torah; on the service of God & upon acts of loving-kindness..." (Ethics of the Fathers, 1:1) The Men of the Great Assembly decided which of the multitude of Jewish holy writings should be in the Bible. The Jewish people have produced hundreds of thousands of prophets (both men & women). Which of their writings should be preserved for future generations & which had limited applicability? The Men of the Great Assembly make this decision & give us what is known as the Hebrew Bible today or Tanakh. (Heb. acronym which stands for Torah, Prophets, Writings.) This is what the Christians call the "OT" but traditionally Jews never call it that. "Testament" is derived from the Latin word testari meaning "to be a witness." The Hebrew Bible was named the OT by the Christians because of their belief that God cancelled the covenant he made with the Jews & made a new covenant, "NT," with the followers of Jesus. As Jews deny that God would ever "change His mind" after promising the Jews they would be His "eternal nation", they find that term insulting. The Hebrew Bible consists of the five books of the Torah, eight books of the prophets (the last of which consists of twelve short books) & 11 books of various writings, which include the Psalms (largely attributed to King David), the writings of King Solomon (Song of Songs, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes), the books of Job, Ruth, Esther & Daniel etc. Through Divine inspiration & sheer genius the Men of the Great Assembly were able to create out of the ashes of a physically destroyed nation, a spiritually thriving people. Their work defined & anchored Jewish religious & national identity & created focus, unity & uniformity for the Jewish people, no matter where in the world they might be scattered. The last surviving member of the Great Assembly was Shimon HaTzaddik. Under him, according to the ancient historian Josephus (Contra Apion 1:197), the Jews of Israel prospered & Jewish population in the land reached 350,000. (to be continued)
6/23/2017 4:03:57 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
_ladybug_ Paragould, AR 66, joined Sep. 2013
6/23/2017 4:56:37 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
cupocheer Assumption, IL 68, joined May. 2010	The Apocrapha was always included in Catholic and Christian Bibles until Bible publishers decided to stop including it in sometimes Bibles.
6/23/2017 5:09:56 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
_ladybug_ Paragould, AR 66, joined Sep. 2013	PARTIAL QUOTE .......... Quote from brashdoc: (continued) 20. Hilary (bishop of Poitiers, 350 A.D.) rejected the apocrypha (Prologue to the Psalms, Sec. 15) The Catholics have 46 OT books rather than the 39 found in Jewish (22) & Protestant Bibles. However, they have added much more material to other books which does not appear under separate titles. That material follows: The Rest of Esther added to Esther; The Song of the Three Holy Children, The History of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon added to Daniel; Baruch; 1 & 2 Maccabees; Tobias; Judith; Ecclesiasticus & the Wisdom of Sirach. You mentioned the book of Esther in this post. Forgive me, but I have to interject ..... The book of Esther in the Holy Bible is one of my MOST favorite books in the Holy Bible!! Much to be learned from this book!! Such a brave woman who God used for His purpose and all Jews while protecting her, and how God dealt with evil Haman!! I'm especially in awe of the fact that not once is God mentioned in this book, but yet, one can see God's hand at work in the entire book of Esther!! So AWESOME!!!!
6/23/2017 5:22:00 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	By the authority of the Catholic Church we know that Tobit, Judith,Wisdom, Sirach,Baruch, and I and II Maccabees are canonical. All other arguments pale before this. It is only by the authority of the Catholic Church that we know that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are canonical. If Wisdom or Tobit isn't canonical, maybe Matthew and Luke aren't either. Prayers for the dead are goid and efficacious and help the poor souls in Purgatory. And good works are necessary for salvation-- read the Epistle of James.
6/23/2017 5:36:23 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
a_nubian Columbus, OH 53, joined Jan. 2011 online now!	Quote from ludlowlowell: By the authority of the Catholic Church we know that Tobit, Judith,Wisdom, Sirach,Baruch, and I and II Maccabees are canonical. All other arguments pale before this. It is only by the authority of the Catholic Church that we know that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are canonical. If Wisdom or Tobit isn't canonical, maybe Matthew and Luke aren't either. Prayers for the dead are goid and efficacious and help the poor souls in Purgatory. And good works are necessary for salvation-- read the Epistle of James. A pope once rejected the book of Maccabees. That pope was Gregory the Great. In his commentary on Job, Book 19, chapter 34, he says that it is not irregular to quote for the church’s edification the books of the Apocrypha, as long as it is understood that they are not canonical. He then immediately retells the story from 1 Macc. 6:42-47 concerning the death of Eleazar Savaran, who killed an elephant, though being killed in the process. Gregory’s exact words are these: “De qua re non inordinate agimus, si ex libris, licet non canonicis, tamen ad aedificationem ecclesiae editis, testimonium proferamus” (emphasis added). The translation already linked renders it: “With reference to which particular we are not acting irregularly, if from the books, though not Canonical, yet brought out for the edifying of the Church, we bring forward testimony.” What immediately follows is from Maccabees. So, if Trent is correct in anathematizing all who reject the Apocrypha, then they have retroactively anathematized one of their own popes: Gregory the Great. Here is one case, at least, where the Protestant can say “I follow the Pope,” and the Roman Catholic cannot. https://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2011/01/31/a-pope-rejects-maccabees/ Pope Damasus (366-384) authorized Jerome to translate the Latin Vulgate. The Council of Carthage declared this translation as "the infallible and authentic Bible." Jerome was the first to describe the extra 7 Old Testament books as the "Apocrypha" (doubtful authenticity). Needless to say, Jerome's Latin Vulgate did not include the Apocrypha. http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm [Edited 6/23/2017 5:39:36 PM ]
6/23/2017 7:41:04 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	According to Father John Echert, who appeared on EWTN (Catholic television) in 2001, Pope Gregory sent this message in a private message. He did not declare it to be doctrine. The pope is only infallible when he declares something to be the doctrine of the Church.
6/23/2017 7:54:26 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
a_nubian Columbus, OH 53, joined Jan. 2011 online now!	Quote from ludlowlowell: According to Father John Echert, who appeared on EWTN (Catholic television) in 2001, Pope Gregory sent this message in a private message. He did not declare it to be doctrine. The pope is only infallible when he declares something to be the doctrine of the Church. Lud Doc posted a lot on this subject and I posted. Your church needs those books to justify it's ministry/it's beliefs. That's why you have to canonize them. Those books were not inspired. Your church can claim they were but they weren't. Not everyone bows to Rome just because they say so. Jerome along should be enough to help you realize that.
6/23/2017 8:53:49 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
followjesusonly Kingman, AZ 74, joined May. 2012	* Ludlow says: According to Father John Echert... And Jesus says: "Call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." (Matthew 23:9) "Why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46) "If a man love me, he will keep my words."(John 14:23) "He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings." (John 14:24)
6/23/2017 9:39:53 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
followjesusonly Kingman, AZ 74, joined May. 2012	* Pardon me please for posting this here but I'm not able to comment on it on Lud's thread where it appeared: Brash posted: Quote (TUB home page): "The Urantia Book is a new revelation of truth, not an amplification of Christianity nor of any other religion on Earth. The Urantia Book does not claim to be Christian; it does claim to be Jesusonian." I just want to point out that there is no one particular "TUB home page" really, any more than there is a "Christian home page." Anything on any Urantia Book related pages that is not a direct quote from the book is someone's OPINION. It may be right or it may not be right, just like the opinions on everything on the myriad Christian web pages.
6/24/2017 2:29:48 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	If I and II Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch are not inspired of God then no Book in the Bible is. If these seven Books are not inspired neither is Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Revelation, Romans, Galatians, or any Book. How do we know what is inspired by God and what is not? Only because of the list of Books the Catholic Church made at the Council of Hippo.
6/24/2017 3:45:37 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
followjesusonly Kingman, AZ 74, joined May. 2012	Ludlow says: If I and II Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch are not inspired of God then no Book in the Bible is. If these seven Books are not inspired neither is Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Revelation, Romans, Galatians, or any Book. How do we know what is inspired by God and what is not? Only because of the list of Books the Catholic Church made at the Council of Hippo. Jesus says: "...when thou prayest, ...pray to thy Father." Mat 6:6 Mat 6:9 "...therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven..." But Ludlow contradicts and disputes Jesus and says: "I ...recommend that people pray sometimes to Mary or one of the saints... Let the prayer life have some variety." Imagine!, contradicting Jesus and suggesting we all pray to Mary and other dead humans! That is Satanic. "...devotion to Mary is necessary for salvation." -Ludlow This is the DH Christian group. Catholics are not Christians. They should not be allowed here. Catholics are a far bigger threat to you as a Christian than Urantia Book believers are. If you are not a Catholic you might as well be dead as far as they're concerned. And that's why they killed so many. As Jesus said: "...the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service." (John 16:2) And that's exactly what the Catholics did. Ask Ludlow if he would burn you at the stake for being a heretic if the pope ordered him to do it.
6/24/2017 4:13:35 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
a_nubian Columbus, OH 53, joined Jan. 2011 online now!	"If I and II Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch are not inspired of God then no Book in the Bible is. If these seven Books are not inspired neither is Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Revelation, Romans, Galatians, or any Book. How do we know what is inspired by God and what is not? Only because of the list of Books the Catholic Church made at the Council of Hippo." Lud List of the dates these books were written: First and Second Esdras (150-100 BC) Tobit (200 BC) Judith (150 BC) Additions to Esther (140-130 BC) Wisdom of Solomon (30 BC) Ecclesiasticus, otherwise known as The Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach (132 BC) Baruch (150-50 BC) Letter of Jeremiah (300-100 BC) Song of the Three Holy Children, an addition in the Greek version of Daniel 3 (170-160 BC) Susanna (200-0 BC) Bel and the Dragon (100 BC) Additions to Daniel, or the Prayer of Azariah (200-0 BC) Prayer of Manasseh (100-0 BC) First Maccabees (110 BC) Second Maccabees (110-170 BC) Lud The Gospels (New Testament) was a record of Jesus on Earth and the other books were an expansion on Jesus's teachings. Revelation was a prophetic book. The Apocrypha was written before the New Testament. The Catholic church has "Canonized" them to make them part of the Old Testament; just as legitimate as any of the OT books. Not everyone including Jerome DID NOT see the Apocrypha as being Inspired.
6/24/2017 6:58:32 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	It doesn't matter when these books were written or which human author wrote them. The only question is, is the book in question inspired by God or not? How do we know if a particular book is inspired or not? How do we know if Exodus is, or Hebrews, or Malachi, or Acts, or Judith? Only by the authority of the Catholic Church, which judged these books and 68 others to be inspired. No Catholic Church, no Bible. If the Catholic Church says Wiinih the Pooh is inspired by God, then Winneh the Pooh is inspired by God. If the Catholic Church says Gone With the Wind is inspired by God, then Gone With the Wind is inspired by God. If the Catholic Church says I and II Maccabees is inspired by God, then I and II Maccabees is inspired by God.
6/24/2017 7:17:20 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
gdaddy47 Columbia, TN 69, joined Sep. 2009	God is laughing at y'all. Y'all worry and pick over things and all the while HE shakes HIS head and wishes y'all would just be good people who want to love HIM. Pick, Pick, Pick. I'm right, you're wrong. All the high-minded psycho-babble is of no interest to GOD. Just love him and the people.
6/24/2017 7:25:42 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	I'm not right, the Catholic Church (founded by Jesus) is right. The Lutheran denomination (founded by Luther) is wrong. The Baptist denomination (founded by John Smith) is wrong. The Episcopalian denomination (founded by King Henry VIII) is wrong. The Methodist denomination (founded by John and Charles Wesley) is wrong. The Seventh Day Adventist denomination (founded by Ellen White) is wrong. The Jehovah's Witness denomination (founded by Charles Taze Russell) is wrong. Truth. That's what's important. That's what we should be searching for.
6/24/2017 7:57:13 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
a_nubian Columbus, OH 53, joined Jan. 2011 online now!	Quote from ludlowlowell: I'm not right, the Catholic Church (founded by Jesus) is right. The Lutheran denomination (founded by Luther) is wrong. The Baptist denomination (founded by John Smith) is wrong. The Episcopalian denomination (founded by King Henry VIII) is wrong. The Methodist denomination (founded by John and Charles Wesley) is wrong. The Seventh Day Adventist denomination (founded by Ellen White) is wrong. The Jehovah's Witness denomination (founded by Charles Taze Russell) is wrong. Truth. That's what's important. That's what we should be searching for. The Church is built on the Rock which Is Jesus Christ Almighty. The Church compromised resulting in the Catholic Church. The call, *"Come Out of her My People", was heard by Martin Luther, by John Smith, by John and Charles Wesley, by Ellen White. Bible Truths were suppressed by the Catholic church and Huss, Luther, Tyndale and countless others when they learned the Truth, "Thus Saith the Lord"*, they proclaimed it, even if it cost them their lives. So when Doc presented, along with myself, why the Apocrypha are not Canonical, with sound reasoning, Lud your default is because my church says so it's true. I am not loyal to my church, but loyal to the message of the bible.
6/24/2017 8:11:57 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	What Bible truths were surpressed by these heretics, Nubian? Is it not the heretics who suppress Bible truth? Is it not the heretics who suppress the sixth chapter of John, and its talk of the Holy Eucharist? Is it not the heretics who suppress the Epistle of James, and its talk of the necessity of good works? (Martin Luther actually trued to throw the Book ofvJames out of the Bible. Did you know that?) Is it not the heretics who suppressed II Maccabees, which calls for prayers for the dead, or I Corinthians 3:13-15, which refers to Purgatory? Is it not the heretics who suppress John 20:22, where Jesus gives priests the power to forgive sins? Is it not the heretics who suppress Jesus' commandment against divorce and remarriage? I was a Protestant (Methodist) for the first 18 years of my kife. I guarantee you no preacher or Sunday School teacher ever mentioned any of the above. "Come out of her, my people" refers to coming out of the evil world, at least in spirit. It does not refer to coming out of the Catholic Church. How could it, when the author of Revelation, John, was a bishop in the Catholic Church?
6/24/2017 8:21:39 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
a_nubian Columbus, OH 53, joined Jan. 2011 online now!	What Bible truths were surpressed by these heretics, Nubian? For sure some of the things found in the apocryphal. A lot of the erroneous beliefs are supported by those books. Found no where else in the OT. Those men weren't heretics.
6/24/2017 8:37:01 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
followjesusonly Kingman, AZ 74, joined May. 2012	Quote from gdaddy47: God is laughing at y'all. Y'all worry and pick over things and all the while HE shakes HIS head and wishes y'all would just be good people who want to love HIM. Pick, Pick, Pick. I'm right, you're wrong. All the high-minded psycho-babble is of no interest to GOD. Just love him and the people. By golly, you make a lot of good points.
6/24/2017 8:41:52 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
followjesusonly Kingman, AZ 74, joined May. 2012	Quote from a_nubian: The Church is built on the Rock which Is Jesus Christ Almighty. The Church compromised resulting in the Catholic Church. The call, *"Come Out of her My People", was heard by Martin Luther, by John Smith, by John and Charles Wesley, by Ellen White. Bible Truths were suppressed by the Catholic church and Huss, Luther, Tyndale and countless others when they learned the Truth, "Thus Saith the Lord"*, they proclaimed it, even if it cost them their lives. So when Doc presented, along with myself, why the Apocrypha are not Canonical, with sound reasoning, Lud your default is because my church says so it's true. I am not loyal to my church, but loyal to the message of the bible. Good post, imo. But Ludlow can't learn. He doesn't even love God, according to Jesus. Lud refuses to obey God, putting his church sect above God. Jesus says to pray to the Father and Ludlow contradicts Him and says to pray to Mary and other dead people. Jesus says if you forgive others, God forgives you, but Ludlow says No, that's not true. "God does not forgive everyone who forgives others." -Ludlow
6/25/2017 3:32:51 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
gdaddy47 Columbia, TN 69, joined Sep. 2009	Ludlow, it sounds like religion, not Christ has driven you mad. God has a special place for you.
6/25/2017 5:07:51 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
followjesusonly Kingman, AZ 74, joined May. 2012	Quote from gdaddy47: Ludlow, it sounds like religion, not Christ has driven you mad. God has a special place for you. He's so mad that he refuses to obey God. That IS crazy. "But thou, when thou prayest, ...pray to thy Father." Mat 6:6 But Ludlow contradicts God and says: "I would recommend that people pray sometimes to Mary or one of the saints... Let the prayer life have some variety." Only Satan or an insane person would contradict God and advise people to pray to Mary and other dead humans.
6/25/2017 5:10:02 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	"Religion" is Latin for "relationship", relationship with God. How is that a bad thing?
6/25/2017 5:17:07 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	"Religion" is Latin for "relationship", relationship with God. How is that a bad thing?
6/25/2017 9:06:08 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
gdaddy47 Columbia, TN 69, joined Sep. 2009	Ludlow did your momma keep you in your bedroom closet and scream at you all the BS you're spouting. You seem disturbed there bub. Most of us pray to God thru Jesus not through Mary who has nothing to do with Salvation directly. None of the Apostles are worthy of being prayed to or through. They had their work and it's done. Jesus is it and not anyone else including a Pope or statue or anything. [Edited 6/25/2017 9:08:36 PM ]
6/25/2017 11:01:40 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	If we can ask your friends on earth to pray for you, why can't we ask our friends in Heaven, the saints, to pray for us? After all they are closer to God than we are. "Pray, one for another," says the Epistle of James. All prayers to the saints go through Christ to the Father, so Christ is still the One Mediator.
6/25/2017 11:09:19 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
gdaddy47 Columbia, TN 69, joined Sep. 2009	Prayers don't go through anyone but Jesus and Jesus alone. Who's in charge? God not Peter, Paul, John, Pope, priests, etc... . No one but Jesus.
6/25/2017 11:14:33 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	You never asked anyone to pray for you?
6/25/2017 11:45:03 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
followjesusonly Kingman, AZ 74, joined May. 2012	Ludlow says: "If we can ask your friends on earth to pray for you, why can't we ask our friends in Heaven, the saints, to pray for us? After all they are closer to God than we are. "Pray, one for another," says the Epistle of James. All prayers to the saints go through Christ to the Father, so Christ is still the One Mediator." But Jesus says: "But thou, when thou prayest, ...pray to thy Father." Mat 6:6 And Ludlow contradicts Jesus: "I would recommend that people pray sometimes to Mary or one of the saints... Let the prayer life have some variety." Jesus says: "...if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: (Matthew 6:14) But Ludlow contradicts Jesus and says: "God does not forgive everyone who forgives others." And no one in heaven is closer to God than we are, Lud. "behold, the kingdom of God is within you." (Luk 17:20-21) You can't get any closer than "within you." You don't know God, Lud, or you would know that. With or without eating Jesus flesh and drinking His blood as your sect has you believe you do, the kingdom of God is within you. You're a very sick Catholic man, Lud, arguing with Jesus, contending with Jesus, defying and disobeying Jesus. What do you say to Him? "Why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46)
6/25/2017 11:50:22 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
followjesusonly Kingman, AZ 74, joined May. 2012	Quote from gdaddy47: Ludlow did your momma keep you in your bedroom closet and scream at you all the BS you're spouting. You seem disturbed there bub. Most of us pray to God thru Jesus not through Mary who has nothing to do with Salvation directly. None of the Apostles are worthy of being prayed to or through. They had their work and it's done. Jesus is it and not anyone else including a Pope or statue or anything. Ludlow has an obsessive-compulsive disorder called "Scrupulosity" among other probable mental issues. Scrupulosity is rampant among Catholics. Scrupulosity From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article is about pathological guilt over religious or moral issues. For related terms, see Scruple (disambiguation). Scrupulosity is characterized by pathological guilt about moral or religious issues. It is personally distressing, objectively dysfunctional, and often accompanied by significant impairment in social functioning.[1][2] It is typically conceptualized as a moral or religious form of obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD),[3] although this categorization is empirically disputable.[1] The term is derived from the Latin scrupulum, a sharp stone, implying a stabbing pain on the conscience.[1] Scrupulosity was formerly called scruples in religious contexts, but the word scruples now commonly refers to a troubling of the conscience rather than to the disorder. As a personality trait, scrupulosity is a recognized diagnostic criterion for obsessive–compulsive personality disorder.[4] It is sometimes called "scrupulousness", but that word properly applies to the positive trait of having scruples.[citation needed]
6/25/2017 11:55:06 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
gdaddy47 Columbia, TN 69, joined Sep. 2009	Oh lordy, I had a girlfriend once thought all the bad stuff that happens is her punishment. I think I finally convinced her that stuff happens. And another thing, People didn't talk in all those "Thee's, Thou's, hither, doth and all that. People would've thought they'd lost their mind. [Edited 6/25/2017 11:56:32 PM ]
6/26/2017 1:46:37 AM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	God permits, and some cases actually sends, pain and suffering to persons in the state of mortal sin to chastise them, to warn them, to convert them. And He does the same to His goid and faithful followers! Why? To purify them, to make them holy, to make them more like the suffering Christ. Thee, thou, doth, and hither were once ordinary everyday words in the English language. [Edited 6/26/2017 1:47:29 AM ]
6/26/2017 3:26:53 AM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
followjesusonly Kingman, AZ 74, joined May. 2012	Ludlow says: "God permits, and some cases actually sends, pain and suffering to persons in the state of mortal sin to chastise them, to warn them, to convert them. And He does the same to His goid and faithful followers! Why? To purify them, to make them holy, to make them more like the suffering Christ." ========================================================================= You're a very sick Catholic man, Lud, lost in your obsession with sin and punishment, blaspheming God, disobeying Him, defying Him, and contending with Him. God does not send pain and suffering. You lie about God. Psa_145:9 The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works. You do not know God and Jesus says you do not love God because you refuse to obey Him. "Why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46) “Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.” (Mark 7:9) "If a man love me, he will keep my words."(John 14:23) "He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings." (John 14:24)
6/26/2017 10:39:55 AM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
brashdoc Chehalis, WA 64, joined Aug. 2008	Thanks for the posts of you that are following the forum posting rules of keeping on topic and not attacking or maligning other people. I have been busy in caregiving for my elderly father and have not monitored my thread but I am back. Qdaddy and followjesus only, you are posting off topic and attacking & harassing other people. You are breaking the forum posting rules. Please stop. If you can't post on the subject of the thread, then stop posting here and post somewhere else or make your own thread. Stop harrassing others. It is negatively detracting from the important topic of this thread. Thank you. You both have been here many years and are familiar with the forum posting rules and user agreement, so there is no excuse for your inappropriate behavior and breaking the rules. Stick to the topic and don't mention names or attack or harrass other members & posters. For a reminder once again, here are the Date Hookup posting rules for the forums and groups. At the head of EVERY THREAD, including this one are the following forum posting rules: 1) Stay on topic. If your post is not related to this discussion create a new thread. 2) Don't post crude messages, or insult or harass others. Be civil. Here is the Date Hookup User Agreement that you AGREED TO WHEN YOU SIGNED UP HERE: https://DateHookup.dating/terms-of-use This Agreement sets out the LEGALLY BINDING terms of your use of the Website and your membership in the Service. You understand and agree that it is your responsibility to use common sense when interacting. 6. Content Posted on the Site: (a) You understand & agree that DateHookup.dating may review & delete any content, messages, forum posts, blogs, photos or profiles (collectively, "Content") that in the sole judgment of DateHookup.dating violate this Agreement or which might be offensive, illegal, or that might violate the rights, harm, or threaten the safety of Members. (d) The following is a partial list of the kind of Content that is illegal or prohibited on the Website. DateHookup.dating reserves the right to investigate and take appropriate legal action in its sole discretion against anyone who violates this provision, including without limitation, removing the offending communication from the Service and terminating the membership of such violators. It includes Content that: is patently offensive to the online community, such as Content that promotes racism, bigotry, hatred or physical harm of any kind against any group or individual; harasses or advocates harassment of another person; *promotes information that you know is false, misleading or promotes illegal activities or conduct that is abusive, threatening, obscene, defamatory or libelous. (h) DateHookup can block your profile and account at any time it decides, in its sole discretion, that your use of the Service (including Content you post or send to any other member, whether in or outside of the Service) or your actions off the Website violate this Agreement or could be harmful to any person or the Website. This includes any abusive conduct shown toward customer service agents. 12. Forums: If you should decide to delete your account, your profile will be deleted along with your photos, messages, etc. However any forum posts you have made will remain. Do you want to make such inappropriate posts that will not be erased? Consider what you are posting. https://DateHookup.dating/thread-980687.htm Reminder again of the Forum Posting Rules 1. STAY ON TOPIC We encourage thoughtful, on-topic posts. These types of posts improve the quality of the forums for the entire community. We discourage really short posts, one-liners & off-topic posts. If your post is not related to the first post of a thread (i.e. the topic at hand), DO NOT POST. If you continue to post off-topic you will be permanently banned from the forums & your account may be deleted. Turning threads into a chat line is not fair to the original poster or the community. So don't do it. If you want to 'chat', post in the Chat Room forum. 2. DON'T ATTACK EACH OTHER If someone is being a jerk to you or someone else, do not reciprocate. Flag the post. If you start attacking back, you will be banned along with the offender. If you insult others you will be banned. 3. DON'T POST YOUR PRIVATE DRAMA IN A PUBLIC FORUM Having problems with a certain member? Getting harrassed? Report them. Flag offending posts. Do not create a thread on the public forum talking about your interactions with said member. It will be deleted. You will be banned. Never name names! Your inappropriate posts may cause my thread to be removed, so thus my warning and to others, to also flag these inappropriate posts which also go against the legally binding user agreement to which all people signing up here agree. You both have been here long enough to know better. Your posts have also been flagged. This website is for appropriate interaction between people & you are giving DHU a bad name or may cause people to not want to join as a member. I do not want to have to report you to the owners but if it continues I will. I have copied your posts if I should need to go further. Thank you for your cooperation & understanding. Ludlow you should know better too, not to engage others in their negative and rule breaking posts. Please flag the inappropriate ones and stop interacting with those who are maligning you and stick to the topic as well and not be drawn into off-topic issues. Thank you.
6/26/2017 11:39:40 AM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
cupocheer Assumption, IL 68, joined May. 2010	Do you believe lying in a relion based thread as opposed to any other thread will be view by God as more of a sin than not?
6/26/2017 11:48:13 AM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
iam_resurrected Reno, NV 46, joined Jul. 2014	prayers don't go through anyone but Jesus and Jesus alone. Who's in charge? God not Peter, Paul, John, Pope, priests, etc... . No one but Jesus. ***I agree about [not] being Canonical [Edited 6/26/2017 11:50:10 AM ]
6/26/2017 3:10:53 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
followjesusonly Kingman, AZ 74, joined May. 2012	@doc Ludlow says: "If we can ask your friends on earth to pray for you, why can't we ask our friends in Heaven, the saints, to pray for us? After all they are closer to God than we are. "Pray, one for another," says the Epistle of James. All prayers to the saints go through Christ to the Father, so Christ is still the One Mediator." You should not allow Ludlow to use your thread to advance his non-Christian Catholic indoctrinations and assertions. You should block him. He's all about the Catholic church and nothing more. He puts his church above God. You should not allow it on your threads. Ludlow is the problem. He's not a Christian. He's a wolf in sheep's clothing as is his entire church. This is why we why "can't we ask our friends in Heaven, the saints, to pray for us." Because Jesus said: "But thou, when thou prayest, ...pray to thy Father." Mat 6:6 Ludlow: I would recommend that people pray sometimes to Mary or one of the saints... Let the prayer life have some variety. Are those the words of a Christian? Would a Christian recommend that we pray to Mary and the "saints"? Ludlow is not a Christian. And why would you "flag" someone rather than block them? And do you believe, as Ludlow the Catholic said, that the "saints" are closer to God than we are," even though Jesus said, "behold, the kingdom of God is within you." (Luk 17:20-21) And do you believe Ludlow's non-Christian Catholic assertion that "All prayers to the saints go through Christ to the Father"? Where is the evidence for that? If you allow Ludlow to push his non-Christian Catholic indoctrination, you should allow others, real Christians who follow Jesus, to rebut him wherever he posts.
6/26/2017 3:55:57 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
ludlowlowell Panama City, FL 64, joined Feb. 2008 online now!	You never asked anyone to pray for you before?
6/26/2017 4:19:36 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
followjesusonly Kingman, AZ 74, joined May. 2012	* Ludlow says: "You never asked anyone to pray for you before?" ------------------------------------------------------------------- You're off topic again, Lud. Flag him! Flag him!
6/26/2017 4:49:24 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
iam_resurrected Reno, NV 46, joined Jul. 2014	more and more when I consider the possibilities, I am angrier each time I think of why did not Constantine not leave the entire group of manuscripts pertaining to YAH [together]. what was in it together that made a PAGAN like Constantine choose to separate and distort the truth. had it all been together, it still would appear it would be easy to separate considering some of the far fetched ideas presented alone by the Maccabees
6/26/2017 4:57:15 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
iam_resurrected Reno, NV 46, joined Jul. 2014	I think if any Book relevant to NOW is the Book of Enoch. look at this...this writing is close to 5,000 years old and he begins with TRIBULATION [like Daniel and Revelation]. 1 The words of the blessing of Enoch, wherewith he blessed the elect and righteous, who will be 2 living in the day of tribulation, when all the wicked and godless are to be removed. And he took up his parable and said -Enoch a righteous man, whose eyes were opened by God, saw the vision of the Holy One in the heavens, which the angels showed me, and from them I heard everything, and from them I understood as I saw, but not for this generation, but for a remote one which is 3 for to come. Concerning the elect I said, and took up my parable concerning them: [The Holy Great One] will come forth from His dwelling, verse 2 specifically about the living in the day of tribulation [both righteous/sinner] and the HOLY ONE: 2 living in the day of tribulation, when all the wicked and godless are to be removed. And he took up his parable and said -Enoch a righteous man, whose eyes were opened by God, saw the vision of the [Holy One] in the heavens, which the angels showed me, and from them I heard everything, and from them I understood as I saw, but not for this generation, but for a remote one which is THIS COULD BE SOMETHING Constantine WOULD WANT TO HIDE!! Enoch calling YAH The Holy Great One is interesting!! [Edited 6/26/2017 4:59:56 PM ]
6/26/2017 5:01:27 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
iam_resurrected Reno, NV 46, joined Jul. 2014	But for Enoch to be referring to TRIBULATION he is calling [YAH]shua the The Holy Great One will come forth from His dwelling... kind of indicates what is in the heavens....The Holy Great One!! like a reference to Ezekiel's [ANCIENT ONE] upon the throne like in Revelation. 4 And the eternal God will tread upon the earth, (even) on Mount Sinai, [And appear from His camp] And appear in the strength of His might from the heaven of heavens. Enoch sure is making Christ out to be the Father here for certain!! [Edited 6/26/2017 5:04:20 PM ]
6/26/2017 5:06:41 PM	Reasons Why The Ecclesiastical OT Books (Apocrypha) Not Canonical
iam_resurrected Reno, NV 46, joined Jul. 2014	[Chapter 1] 1 The words of the blessing of Enoch, wherewith he blessed the elect and righteous, who will be 2 living in the day of tribulation, when all the wicked and godless are to be removed. And he took up his parable and said -Enoch a righteous man, whose eyes were opened by God, saw the vision of the Holy One in the heavens, which the angels showed me, and from them I heard everything, and from them I understood as I saw, but not for this generation, but for a remote one which is 3 for to come. Concerning the elect I said, and took up my parable concerning them: The Holy Great One will come forth from His dwelling, 4 And the eternal God will tread upon the earth, (even) on Mount Sinai, [And appear from His camp] And appear in the strength of His might from the heaven of heavens. 5 And all shall be smitten with fear And the Watchers shall quake, And great fear and trembling shall seize them unto the ends of the earth. 6 And the high mountains shall be shaken, And the high hills shall be made low, And shall melt like wax before the flame 7 And the earth shall be wholly rent in sunder, And all that is upon the earth shall perish, And there shall be a judgement upon all (men). 8 But with the righteous He will make peace. And will protect the elect, And mercy shall be upon them. And they shall all belong to God, And they shall be prospered, And they shall all be blessed. And He will help them all, And light shall appear unto them, And He will make peace with them'. 9 And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones To execute judgement upon all, And to destroy all the ungodly: And to convict all flesh Of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, And of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him. this is YAHSHUA Enoch is speaking about...definitely something Constantine would want HIDDEN!! this chapter is like the rapture and beginning of the Tribulation. excellent read: and Christ used reference to Enoch and yet, Enoch is not in the canon. like the Book of Jasher which Samuel and Ruth direct followers of YAH to read...and is a view of the Garden of Eden. [Edited 6/26/2017 5:08:59 PM ]

completely free hookup sites

mixxxer hookup app