Search results

was going to copy and paste them individually but this page has them perfectly listed, whoever this guy was spent a lot of time qouting many early ante-nicene fathers who refer to them as divine, words of the prophets, it is written in scripture etc.. (concerning the quotes from the book one...

A few of the church fathers confirm that the Clement letters were by written by Pauls appointed Bishop

They were Holy scripture according to early Christian writings, the OT scripture they recieved was the Greek translations, the same translations that Jesus quotes Isaiah from in the Synagogue. It's very hard for some to accept that the first churches, made up of Jews and Gentiles, had no...

It's not a literal number, it's the 12 tribes that went "out and multiplied", Jesus is the suffering servant and light unto the world, he represents the fullness of Israel

Took me over an hour to compile this list for you, feel free to go over them and fact check them, and then tell me again how the "Apocrypha" books were never accepted into the Bibles. Note: "Apocrypha" and Deuterocanon are synonymous, (*Deuterocanon = Catholic translater - exception to Jerome)...

They were in every Chrisitian Bibles from the 4th Century AD to the 19th Century AD.

They were still in all Bibles regardless of what canon Protestants hold to, it was a group of businessmen in the late 19th and early 20th century that took them out... I guess you believe these men were divinely inspired by God to break the tradition of the Bible. The original 1611 KJV is a good...

Are you serious? The book of Tobit for example, was never accepted into the Bible....as a book? ...really? Hmmm. Wow! ...Okay then, well... I guess this pretty much ends the discussion.

Aren't you actually rejecting the Protestant Reformation by denouncing Luthers Bible? Is Nathan rejecting Jerome or his unbelieving ministers who tossed a wrench into Christianity? the many splits can be traced back to the post-Christian canon formed by a Rabbanic sect of Pharisees, had Jerome...

Josephus didn't even know Hebrew or at least was not fluent in it, his canon list was given to him by his sect of Pharisees, who started an entirely new version of Judaism based on Rabbanic interpretations, Rabbanic commentary, Rabbanic oral law, Rabbanic canon, hence "Rabbanic Judaism" or...

They were universal church books (ecclesiastical books) Apocrypha books were never part of the church nor the Bible... these being heretical books falsely attributed to The Apostles, Mary, Joseph etc

Ecclesiasticals, canonical scripture or not, were never removed from the Protestant bible by Protestants nor were they removed for theological reasons. They were removed to by a group of business men to market off of selling Bibles to Christians, they disregarded the entire history of the Bible...

I consider them canonical, you don't, that's a topic for another time. This is mainly about the Protestant Bible never having an issue with the "Apocrypha" books being included in their Bibles until they were, by the so called "Bible" societies, although at first Protestants were against the...

Again, this is not about canon, this is about the traditional series of books that were always in every Holy Bible of both Catholics and Protestants alike. Lutherans call them Apocrypha Catholics call them Deuterocanon Either way, they were found to be of great value to the churches and...

Thank you! Quotes from the book "The Bible Cause" "The ABS took a decidedly Protestant and American approach to the Bible. The Bible was a book of liberty. It not only taught individuals how to be free from the bonds of sin and the devil, but it was wholly compatible with the kind of...

Really? No tradition yet Jerome translated "something" and still every book kept them in the Holy Bible until an authorized Bible Society removed them in the 19th Century. [emoji848]

I have read a novels of your posts throughout more threads on this subject that I can count, you don't have to take my word for it I could care less, thanks for accusing me for altering Jeromes translation in the letter of Rufinus. You spit in the face of Holy tradition of the early Churcn...

Lutherans discourage them, you being a prime example, this subject was never about canon, but you make that your case to why we should break the Biblical tradition ever since the formation of the Christian Bible... You speak of canon and say the 66 canon is the Protestant canon. What Protestant...

I addressed all of those. He says I follow Nathan. No, I met him online and we both have our own reasons how we came to accept the so-called Apocrypha.

Wow, so much denial here.