Re: Jesus is God
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2021 12:34 am
Paidion wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 3:45 pmHow do you know the 66 books of the Protestant Bible are the correct ones?Dwight you wrote:Dwight - I think the 66-book Bible was existent and accepted long before the words "Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox" were, so why call it any of these? As for the "Catholic" and the "Orthodox" Bibles - the very fact that you have to call it a name that is a denomination vs. just the Bible or the word of God, implies that something has been added (or subtracted), to fit that particular denomination, so I reject them, just on that basis alone.
Dwight - The 66 books of the Bible are widely claimed to be inspired, written either by Prophets or inspired people in the Old Testament, and Apostles or close associates in the New Testament. and therefore, they are part of the canon of Scripture.
The Catholic Bible contains these 66 books as well as the following ones: Baruch, Tobit, Ecclesiasticus, and Wisdom of Solomon.
Dwight - Online information tells me that there are 7 additional books in the "Catholic" Bible, not just 4. This totals 73 books.
Dwight - Virtually no one has claimed that any of the apocryphal books are inspired, or part of the canon of Scripture. None were written by Prophets or inspired people. Why should any non-inspired books be part of our Bible? They might be edifying to read, but they are not inspired.
The Orthodox Bible contains all the books of the Catholic Bible plus Psalm 151 and 3 Maccabees.
Dwight - The same truth applies here. These books are not inspired, and therefore not part of scripture.
These books have not been "added to fit that particular denomination": they have been in existence as long or longer than the 66 books of the Protestant Bible.
Dwight - This is incorrect. The Septuagint was a translation from Hebrew to Greek at around 285 B.C. I don't believe any of the apocryphal books, (many of which were added to the Septuagint, which violated the Septuagint authors warning of a curse on anyone who added to or subtracted from it) existed before the 39 books of the Old Testament. Some may think they existed before that - like the book of Enoch, for example, who was the seventh generation after Adam, but the REAL Enoch did not write that book - It was written by someone who claimed to be Enoch, that is, an impostor, which gives you an idea of how little that book can be trusted. I believe some of them existed before the 27 books of the New Testament and some came later. There were other books written who claimed a famous Christian from the Bible, or from history, wrote them, such as Barnabas, Peter, Mary Magdalene, etc., very likely also written by impostors.
So why have you chosen to accept only the 66 books of the Protestant Bible?
Dwight - Because they were written by Prophets or inspired people and Apostles and close associates, and many have acknowledged their inspiration and placement in the canon of Scripture. Also Jesus and the New Testament authors quoted from the 39 books of the Old Testament numerous times, but virtually never quoted from the other books - with one exception - Jude quoted from Enoch.
On what basis do you reject the others?
Dwight - Because the were not written by Prophets or Apostles and they do not claim to be inspired. Virtually no one has claimed that they belong in the canon. Also, I believe only one New Testament writer, Jude, ever even quoted from them, not saying that they were inspired, but offering information that may be edifying. Jesus never quoted from them, nor did Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, the author of Hebrews, or James.
Do they not "fit" your particular denomination?
Dwight - I am not part of a denomination. I am a Christian who accepts the inspired word of God, the Bible, i.e. the 66 books, all of which have been affirmed as being written by Prophets or other inspired people, and Apostles and their close associates.