The Bible Aloneâ€ÂSola Scriptura†But thats not in the bible

[Guest]

If you criticize the Catholic Church, then you are criticizing all of the apostles who set up the Catholic Church. If you are criticizing the Catholic Church then you are disrepsecting Jesus. There are many things that might seem hard to understand about the Catholic Church from a protestant view point. Trust me, I was once a protestant and then I came to the faith...God Bless

What do you mean that you were once 'a protestant and then I came to the faith'?

We are to have faith in Christ Jesus - not a denomination.

 

[Guest]

First, one must understand that the Septaugint was THE Scriptures of the Apostles, not the Hebrew canon. The Septaugint contained the Deutero's.


Regards

Who taught you this?

I might be mistaken, but the Hebrew Canon used by the Apostles was not the Septaugint - that is a mere translation from the Hebrew to the Greek. That is not the same thing as the Hebrew Canon.

Also, I do not remember the Sept. containing the Apocrypha.

 

[GMS]

francisdesales,
I totally agree with this statement of yours; "GOD is the absolute source of authority. A book CANNOT be a source of authority because a book CANNOT interpret itself." John Calvin said something simular years ago; "Let it therefore be held as fixed, that those who are inwardly taught by the Holy Spirit acquiesce implicitly in Scripture; that Scripture, carrying its own evidence along with it, deigns not to submit to proofs and arguments, but owes the full conviction with which we ought to receive it to the testimony of the Spirit. Enlightened by him, we no longer believe, either on our own judgment or that of others, that the Scriptures are from God; but, in a way superior to human judgment, feel perfectly assured as much so as if we beheld the divine image visibly impressed on it that it came to us, by the instrumentality of men, from the very mouth of God."
GMS

 

[Solo]

Jesus, nor the Apostles ever quoted from the Deuterocanonical books. Not one time. Quoting from the Deuterocanonical books is a tradition of the Roman Catholics to disguise false doctrines.

 

[biblecatholic]

Jesus, nor the Apostles ever quoted from the Deuterocanonical books. Not one time. Quoting from the Deuterocanonical books is a tradition of the Roman Catholics to disguise false doctrines.

and they didnt quote from every book in the old testament either. logically you have to use a different argument they quoted out of the septugient which contains the our old testament

 

[ÃÂoppleganger]

First of all this is a EDIT, you can't claim you alone own or are the voice for apostales, or this so-called church.

If you criticize the Catholic Church, then you are criticizing all of the apostles who set up the Catholic Church. If you are criticizing the Catholic Church then you are disrepsecting Jesus ... What we believe in and what we do is what the apostles set up for us. What makes more sense, to believe in the church that was set up by the apostles 2000 years ago, or to believe in a church that some danish guy in the 1600's made up?

Second in defense of Apocryphal texts, Esdras quotes directly from Ezra. Jasher, Jubilees and The Book or Enoch are mentioned and quoted.

I'm busy gotta go EDIT

CHECK YOUR PM....JG

 

[Guest]

First of all this is a EDIT, you can't claim you alone own or are the voice for apostales, or this so-called church.



Second in defense of Apocryphal texts, Esdras quotes directly from Ezra. Jasher, Jubilees and The Book or Enoch are mentioned and quoted.

I'm busy gotta go! EDIT

The question isn't if the Apocrypha quotes the OT, but rather why doesn't the OT or the NT quote the Apocrypha.

Now, before it is mentioned again - remember we are discussing the Apocrypha.

 

[Solo]

and they didnt quote from every book in the old testament either. logically you have to use a different argument they quoted out of the septugient which contains the our old testament

Jesus and the Apostles all quoted from all three collections of the Tanakh (Torah - Law, Nevi'im - Prophets, and Ketuvim - writings) of which contained all of the current 39 books of the Old Testament and Hebrew Scriptures.

The books contained in each of the three collections are as follows:

Torah: The Books of Genesis (Bereshit), Exodus (Shemot), Leviticus (Vayikrah), Numbers (Bamidbar) and Deuteronomy (Devarim).

Nevi'im (Prophets): The Books of Joshua, Judges, I Samuel, II Samuel, I Kings, II Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habukkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. (The last twelve are sometimes grouped together as "Trei Asar" ["Twelve"].)

Ketuvim (Writings): The Books of Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel (although not all that is included in the Christian Canon), Ezra and Nehemiah, I Chronicles, and II Chronicles.

Jesus and the Apostles quoted from each of these three collections. The Deuterocanonical books were never quoted by Jesus or the Apostles; NEVER, while both Jesus and the Apostles quoted from the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings.

The five books that are not quoted from are Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon; however, all five of these books are contained in the collections which are quoted from by Jesus and the Apostles. The deuterocanonical books are not contained in the Tanakh.

The Roman Catholics require the Deuterocanonicle books to disguise their false teachings.

 

[francisdesales]

Why would I expect that NEW TESTAMENT to be found in the OLD TESTAMENT?

I don't know what you are pulling now, but let's try it again...

Your logic states that the Jews are the definitive determinant of the Canon of Scriptures. THEIR determination of what IS the Word of God stands. That is what you are saying regarding the Hebrew Canon vs. the Septuagint. Approximately 90 AD, because of the Christian interpolations of the Septuagint which the Hebrews disapproved of, they eliminated the Septaugint as THEIR source of Sacred Scriptures. During this same "council" at Jamnia, the Jews anathema ANYONE who said that the Christian Gospels were from God. This, of course, we see even in Scriptures often enough when a Jew is kicked out of the synogogue.

In summary, you are saying that the Jews determine the Scriptures - but yet, you disregard their determination on the entire New Testament being dubbed "Scriptures"?

Your logic leads us to eliminating the New Testament. Is that what you intend on saying? We should listen to the Jews?

This is why I said "Are you really thinking what you saying"

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Who taught you this?

I might be mistaken, but the Hebrew Canon used by the Apostles was not the Septaugint - that is a mere translation from the Hebrew to the Greek. That is not the same thing as the Hebrew Canon.

Also, I do not remember the Sept. containing the Apocrypha.

It is common fact that when the Apostles quote from the Old Testament, some 80% of the quotes are from the Septaugint, not the Hebrew. Bear in mind that the Diaspora utilized the Septuagint and would have ready access to THAT version of the Old Testament.

The Septuagint was written before Christ became incarnate. It does have what we call the Deuterocanonicals (The apocrypha properly named refers to hidden books, such as the Acts of Peter or 4 Maccabees, not the book of Wisdom or Sirach. These were very well known and accepted books of Scriptures, as I have detailed above).

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Jesus, nor the Apostles ever quoted from the Deuterocanonical books. Not one time. Quoting from the Deuterocanonical books is a tradition of the Roman Catholics to disguise false doctrines.

Welcome to the party.

This has already been addressed.

Jesus did not ONCE quote from Nehemiah. Is it in YOUR Bible?

Regards

 

[Solo]

Welcome to the party.

This has already been addressed.

Jesus did not ONCE quote from Nehemiah. Is it in YOUR Bible?

Regards

You need to go back and really read my previous post. I already addressed that Nehemiah was in one of the collections of the Tanakh, and that collection is called Ketuvim (Writings). None of the Deuterocanonical books are in the Tanakh collection, nor were they quoted from in the New Testament. All of the collections of the Tanakh were quoted from by Jesus and the Apostles.

Only the Roman Catholics need the Deuterocanonical books to back up their false teachings.

 

[francisdesales]

The question isn't if the Apocrypha quotes the OT, but rather why doesn't the OT or the NT quote the Apocrypha.

Now, before it is mentioned again - remember we are discussing the Apocrypha.

First of all, the NT DOES quote the Apocrypha. Read the letter of Jude. Secondly, the NT quotes several pagan authors... Big deal.

Why doesn't the NT quote nearly a dozen books from the OT (I am speaking of your deficiently numbered OT)? Frankly, why the heck does it matter? Why must the NT quote the OT for it to be considered a canonical book?

I don't know where this nonsense idea came from, (the a book must be quoted by Scripture to be Scriptures!) but frankly, it is stupid. It utterly fails in every way you can look at it, both positively and negatively. Can we drop this already?

Regards

 

[Solo]

First of all, the NT DOES quote the Apocrypha. Read the letter of Jude. Secondly, the NT quotes several pagan authors... Big deal.

Why doesn't the NT quote nearly a dozen books from the OT (I am speaking of your deficiently numbered OT)? Frankly, why the heck does it matter? Why must the NT quote the OT for it to be considered a canonical book?

I don't know where this nonsense idea came from, (the a book must be quoted by Scripture to be Scriptures!) but frankly, it is stupid. It utterly fails in every way you can look at it, both positively and negatively. Can we drop this already?

Regards

You do not have to accept the books that Jesus and the Apostles quoted from if you do not want to; and you can listen to the pope over the Scriptures if you like. We will all know in the end who was listening to the truth of the Holy Spirit and who was listening to the lies of the enemy when it is all said and done.

Personally, I will accept the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit over the False Teachings of the Roman Catholic pope and catechism.

 

[francisdesales]

You need to go back and really read my previous post. I already addressed that Nehemiah was in one of the collections of the Tanakh, and that collection is called Ketuvim (Writings). None of the Deuterocanonical books are in the Tanakh collection, nor were they quoted from in the New Testament. All of the collections of the Tanakh were quoted from by Jesus and the Apostles.

Only the Roman Catholics need the Deuterocanonical books to back up their false teachings.

Those "collection" names are artificial. Only the Torah was accepted by all Jews as canonical during the time of Christ. There was a lot of flux about what books were considered part of the Ketuvim.

Also, it is a false assumption to think that NONE of the Deuterocanonicals were part of the "Tanakh" collection, because archeology has indeed discovered Hebrew versions of several of the Deutero's at Qumran. It is certainly feasible that some Hebrew collections included them, as well.

Not that any of this matters. The early Christians thought they were Scriptures. That's ALL that matters. I have already documented a number of examples that PROVE that these Christians thought that the OT Deutero's were indeed Scriptures. They CALL them Scriptures!

Just as they thought the Letter of James or Hebrews were Scriptures.

Did you know that these two NT books are ALSO called Deuterocanonicals? They were not universally accepted by the entire Church until the late 300's - just as the OT Deuterocanonicals. I find it interesting that you must go through these contortions to try to eliminate the OT Deutero's, while accepting the various NT Deutero's without even thinking about them...

2 John, 3 John, Hebrews, James and Revelation. NT Deutero's.

On the other hand, a number of churches accepted the letter of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians as Scriptures. It was read at Mass for over 150 years after penned - and ONLY Scripture was read during Mass.

I think you will find the story of the Christian Canon to be an interesting one. Don't let your hatred of Catholicism stop you from finding out how the Word of God came to be in the form that we have it today.

Regards

 

[jgredline]

This is just from Matthew. These bear a striking resemblance to each other, although they are not conclusive evidence that the NT writer borrowed from the OT writer.



Matthew 4:4 Wisdom 16:26
Matthew 4:15 1 Maccabees 5:15
Matthew 5:18 Baruch 4:1
Matthew 5:28 Sirach 9:8
Matthew 5:2ss Sirach 25:7-12
Matthew 5:4 Sirach 48:24
Matthew 6:7 Sirach 7:14
Matthew 6:9 Sirach 23:1, 4
Matthew 6:10 1 Maccabees 3:60
Matthew 6:12 Sirach 28:2
Matthew 6:13 Sirach 33:1
Matthew 6:20 Sirach 29:10s
Matthew 6:23 Sirach 14:10
Matthew 6:33 Wisdom 7:11
Matthew 7:12 Tobit 4:15
Matthew 7:12 Sirach 31:15
Matthew 7:16 Sirach 27:6
Matthew 8:11 Baruch 4:37
Matthew 8:21 Tobit 4:3
Matthew 9:36 Judith 11:19
Matthew 9:38 1 Maccabees 12:17
Matthew 10:16 Sirach 13:17
Matthew 11:14 Sirach 48:10
Matthew 11:22 Judith 16:17
Matthew 11:25 Tobit 7:17
Matthew 11:25 Sirach 51:1
Matthew 11:28 Sirach 24:19
Matthew 11:28 Sirach 51:23
Matthew 11:29 Sirach 6:24s
Matthew 11:29 Sirach 6:28s
Matthew 11:29 Sirach 51:26s
Matthew 12:4 2 Maccabees 10:3
Matthew 12:5 Sirach 40:15
Matthew 13:44 Sirach 20:30s
Matthew 16:18 Wisdom 16:13
Matthew 16:22 1 Maccabees 2:21
Matthew 16:27 Sirach 35:22
Matthew 17:11 Sirach 48:10
Matthew 18:10 Tobit 12:15
Matthew 20:2 Tobit 5:15
Matthew 22:13 Wisdom 17:2
Matthew 23:38 Tobit 14:4
Matthew 24:15 1 Maccabees 1:54
Matthew 24:15 2 Maccabees 8:17
Matthew 24:16 1 Maccabees 2:28
Matthew 25:35 Tobit 4:17
Matthew 25:36 Sirach 7:32-35
Matthew 26:38 Sirach 37:2
Matthew 27:24 Daniel 13:46
Matthew 27:43 Wisdom 2:13
Matthew 27:43 Wisdom 2:18-20

Of these, I think there is pretty clear evidence of the following...

Matt. 2:16 - Herod's decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 - slaying the holy innocents.

Matt. 6:19-20 - Jesus' statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 - lay up your treasure.

Matt.. 7:12 - Jesus' golden rule "do unto others" is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.

Matt. 7:16,20 - Jesus' statement "you will know them by their fruits" follows Sirach 27:6 - the fruit discloses the cultivation.

Matt. 9:36 - the people were "like sheep without a shepherd" is same as Judith 11:19 - sheep without a shepherd.

Matt. 11:25 - Jesus' description "Lord of heaven and earth" is the same as Tobit 7:18 - Lord of heaven and earth.

Matt. 12:42 - Jesus refers to the wisdom of Solomon which was recorded and made part of the deuterocanonical books.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus' reference to the "power of death" and "gates of Hades" references Wisdom 16:13.

Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.

Matt. 24:15 - the "desolating sacrilege" Jesus refers to is also taken from 1 Macc. 1:54 and 2 Macc. 8:17.

Matt. 24:16 - let those "flee to the mountains" is taken from 1 Macc. 2:28.

Matt. 27:43 - if He is God's Son, let God deliver him from His adversaries follows Wisdom 2:18.

There are dozens and dozens of other such allusions that suggest that the writers of the New Testament were aware of and apparently utilized the wisdom found in the Deuterocanonicals. Especially prominent is James, which has over 20 such allusions in such a short book.

Joe
Your right about one thing...These are nothing but ''allusions''
By this very same logic you are using to justify these books, the same logic could be used to justify the Gospel of Thomas or Judas...After all they also make ''allusions'' to the true gospels....

 

[francisdesales]

You do not have to accept the books that Jesus and the Apostles quoted from if you do not want to; and you can listen to the pope over the Scriptures if you like. We will all know in the end who was listening to the truth of the Holy Spirit and who was listening to the lies of the enemy when it is all said and done.

Personally, I will accept the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit over the False Teachings of the Roman Catholic pope and catechism.

If you can't contribute anything worthy to this thread, why are you writing this? All you are doing is name-calling. You think that will convince ANYONE on the fence that you know what you are talking about?

Go and read some history books, Mike. You will find that the Catholics may have a point...

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Joe
Your right about one thing...These are nothing but ''allusions''
By this very same logic you are using to justify these books, the same logic could be used to justify the Gospel of Thomas or Judas...After all they also make ''allusions'' to the true gospels....

Yes, they are - and I qualified that, didn't I, Javier? I think it is pretty good evidence that the writers of the NT were aware of the OT Deutero's and used them when they wrote their own Scriptures.

I never said that the allusions were conclusive evidence of anything. I myself can write something that would look like Scriptures. The point is that the CHURCH decided what was Scriptures. The individual books did not come with a cover page that said "please place me aside, I will be called Scripture in 300 years"...

Again, the proof is not in the allusions, but in the very solid evidence from the writers of Christianity that THEY considered the Deutero's as Scriptures.

NOWHERE do we find writings of Christians complaining about this utilization of the Septuagint! Why would they? The majority of Jews lived OUTSIDE of Palestine and read the Septuagint, not the Hebrew. Common sense would dictate that these men would use the Greek OT to back up what they wrote in the NT. And we find this to be the case. The majority of quotes in the NT are from the Septuagint, not the Hebrew.

It is only men from 1500 years later that thought that Christians should use the Hebrew rather than the Greek OT. What is interesting about that is that the Masoretic text is based on an 800 year old history of memorizing where the vowels went. IT IS AN ORAL TRADITION! How about that!

Regards

 

[Solo]

If you can't contribute anything worthy to this thread, why are you writing this? All you are doing is name-calling. You think that will convince ANYONE on the fence that you know what you are talking about?

Go and read some history books, Mike. You will find that the Catholics may have a point...

Regards

I have read enough of the Roman Catholic false teachings for the last 23 years. I did plenty of research and wrote a college thesis 20+ years ago entitled "Roman Catholicism: A Shadow of Christianity".

Keep your eyes on the Roman Catholic approved history books; I will keep my eyes on Scripture, and the truth of the Holy Spirit.

 

[francisdesales]

I have read enough of the Roman Catholic false teachings for the last 23 years. I did plenty of research and wrote a college thesis 20+ years ago entitled "Roman Catholicism: A Shadow of Christianity".

Keep your eyes on the Roman Catholic approved history books; I will keep my eyes on Scripture, and the truth of the Holy Spirit.

I can imagine what books you used as your bibliography.

Boetner? Salmon? Ring a bell?

I would like to hear how you come up with a viable way of determining what IS the Scripture, since you appear to disagree with the idea that the Catholic Church was empowered to set the Canon.

Regards