Search results

Yes, I am aware of the Greek Septuagint (LXX). Strictly speaking, the original of what we called LXX was just the Pentateuch. It later referred to the various Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures. We know this from Aristeas a member of the royal (Ptolemy's?) court: In this way, as...

They compiled a new Septuagint? That would be a major discovery. You might want to correct that statement. The NT authors would have known the LXX as they qoute from a version of it. Jesus on the other hand would have studied and known the Hebrew. And Again, the historical evidence by those...

A reference to 2 Maccabeees does not make it part of the canon anymore than Jude's reference to Enoch and The Ascension of Moses. So that's a swing and a miss. What is said was they didn't discuss the the Apocrypha only the Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes. Ok, I'll repeat what was said...

Come on Bread, thats a leap in logic so wide Evel Knievel couldn't make that jump, lol. So you are telling us that in the section of Clement's letter where he discussed the polity of the church he assumes that corinthians already have some esoteric knowledge that enable them to come to your...

Yes, the apocyphal books are referred to but never as scripture and never with the formula "Thus saith the LORD, or It is Written". As for Eph 6:13-17 and Wisdom 5:17-20 are quoting from Isa 59:17: 17 He put on righteousness as a breastplate, and a helmet of salvation on his head...

The Jewish canon was closed in at the latest second century BC. I contend before then. There are also references to books like Enoch and pagan writers but that doesn't establish them as canon. The Apocrypha is never quoted as scripture in the NT either. This is a theory that has since been...

Let take a look at Clement of Rome and what he has to say about church offices: The apostles have preached the Gospel to us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ [has done so] from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God, and the apostles by Christ. Both these appointments,5 then, were...

Yet they agree doctrinally with the "Vicar of Christ" that is is Rome, are they not? If the answer is yes, then that is the Roman church with as you say different liturgical rites and cultural differences. The catholic church believes in the faith once delivered to the saints but you cannot...

So you can't find it either. I didn't think you could even if I spotted you the text. Thee NT books you are referring to were 2 peter, 2nd and 3rd John, James, Hebrews, Jude and Revelation. These were books that were spoken against in the early church or antilegomena. These books were in...

I agree. There is just the catholic church. This is the Roman church. All are in submission to the Roman Pontiff are they not? It is the catholic church but he is not a member of a church that won't appear for centuries (ca 700 to 1000 Ad) to come. But since you brought up Ignatius of...

Sure, -1-2 Maccabees. (3 and 4 Macc were rescinded by later canonical lists prior to Trent) -1-4 Esdras. (same deal here) -Tobit -Wisdom of Solomon -Baruch -Additions to Daniel (Song of the three children, Bel and the Dragon, Susanna) -Ecclesiasticus -Epistle of Jeremiah -Judith -Additions to...

You mean the adding superstitious and spurious books? Actually, the modern Roman church is not catholic. It does not hold to catholic doctrine. The term Roman Catholic is a contradiction. You can't be Roman and be universal (catholic).

The problem with all if this is that local councils and letters from a Pope do not make church doctrine according to the Roman church. An ecumenical council would make it doctrine such as Trent. If the matter was settled why would the council have felt a need to dogmatically define the canon...

So by using the same methodology as the author that claims there are 33k denominations would you then agree there are 242 Roman Catholic Denominations? And if so, then which is the real one that exercises the power of the keys? Are there too many fractures in the church? Absolutely. Yet, I...

We should probably permanently retire that charge as it simply isn't true. A good refutation of said charge by a RC author can be found here and its pretty convincing. https://www.ncregister.com/blog/we-need-to-stop-saying-that-there-are-33-000-protestant-denominations I would charge that as...

Yes. Every time I open my Bible and read a passage of scripture aloud. All Scripture is God-Breathed as 2 Tim 3:16 says. The word used is θεόπνευστος or theopneustos. Put your hand in front of your face and exhale. That gives you an idea of what Paul is talking about. Scripture is the...

The Lord certainly thought so. He entrusted the the OT to the Jews: To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. (Rom 3:2 ESV) And how it should be used: But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15 and...

The early christians most certainly had a bible, for the common person it was the LXX and the oral teaching of the Apostles, which as later written down. That is what the earliest christians refer to as the "Rule of Faith". Did every christian own a text of scripture? No. Yet they would have...

I reject the idea that any books of the New Testament was written after 70 AD. Given the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple you would expect some mention of this cataclysmic event. Yet not one mention of the destruction of the central locus of the worship of Israel and the fulfillment of...

This is a common. Roman polemic against scripture that has been used time and again even though it is factually false. First, there was not a large gap between the events of the NT and the writing of the contents there of. The first christians were Jews who used the Hebrew Old Testament as...