Search results

  1. N

    A P O C R Y P H A : Included in every Holy Bible from the 4th century AD to the 19th Century AD

    All that and more. EOC accept 3 Maccabees and 1 Esdras which Catholics don’t.
  2. N

    A P O C R Y P H A : Included in every Holy Bible from the 4th century AD to the 19th Century AD

    Trent was in response to the Reformation. But Rome, Hippo, and Carthage were NOT, due to being over 1,000 years before the Reformation. Trent merely affirmed the SAME books that Rome, Hippo, and Carthage already confirmed over a thousand years earlier. So no, the Apocryphal books were not ADDED...
  3. N

    A P O C R Y P H A : Included in every Holy Bible from the 4th century AD to the 19th Century AD

    Well, whatever the case, you’re talking about the 6th century. I’m talking about books that were declared scripture in the 300’s, were quoted as scripture by the 1st/2nd generation of Christians who knew the disciples, and referenced as scripture by the disciples themselves in Hebrews 11:35 and...
  4. N

    Since there’s evidence that 1 Maccabees was probably written in Hebrew originally…

    Peter didn’t quote the book of Deuteronomy! Peter just quoted the PERSON Moses! That explains why Acts 3 is slightly different from what Deuteronomy says!! Uhuh, yea. Right. Sure. Because that explains it.
  5. N

    Why do you think the Bible says that tattoos are wrong?

    Yea, it was the fine print, like on a warning label. Weird for a tattoo.
  6. N

    Since there’s evidence that 1 Maccabees was probably written in Hebrew originally…

    Hahaha!!!!! The very thing they use to discredit the Apocrypha is that the New Testament never quotes from it. And yet here we find it quotes from it. So many double standards. Just hilarious.
  7. N

    Since there’s evidence that 1 Maccabees was probably written in Hebrew originally…

    Produce Peter’s copy of Deuteronomy. Double standard.
  8. N

    What are some reasons why dead branches should be cut off a living tree?

    Is there any reasons to get rid of them?
  9. N

    A P O C R Y P H A : Included in every Holy Bible from the 4th century AD to the 19th Century AD

    Isn’t Gregory the one who changed when New Years takes place?
  10. N

    Since there’s evidence that 1 Maccabees was probably written in Hebrew originally…

    The point though is the double standard. They use this as a way of saying the Apocrypha doesn’t belong: “Because the New Testament doesn’t quote it with one of these phrases” And then we find that Jude quotes Enoch with one of those phrases. And the quote matches up better than most New...
  11. N

    Since there’s evidence that 1 Maccabees was probably written in Hebrew originally…

    Moot point. Jude is quoting HIS copy word for word. Next!
  12. N

    TOBIT -by NathanH83

    Red fish Blue fish Organs heal two fish
  13. N

    TOBIT -by NathanH83

    I am Antiochus. Antiochus I am. Will you eat my Sacrificed ham? - “I will not eat sacrificed ham. I will not eat it, Antiochus I am.” - “Will you eat my unclean pork? Will you eat it with a fork?” - “I will not eat your unclean pork. I will not eat it with a fork. I will not eat it in a house I...
  14. N

    USA Have you seen 2000 Mules?

    As they say, “Beware the sound of one hand clapping.”
  15. N

    Since there’s evidence that 1 Maccabees was probably written in Hebrew originally…

    “And behold! He cometh with ten thou- sands of His holy ones to execute judge- ment 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...
  16. N

    Since there’s evidence that 1 Maccabees was probably written in Hebrew originally…

    You’re completely missing the point. They say that the New Testament quotes the Old Testament, but never quotes the Apocrypha. Why does Peter’s quote of Deuteronomy provide evidence that he accepts Deuteronomy as scripture, but Jude’s quote of Enoch doesn’t provide evidence he accepts Enoch as...
  17. N

    Catholic Church definition of the canonical scriptures.

    That’s right. They’re Jewish books, not Roman Catholic books.
  18. N

    TOBIT -by NathanH83

    Nothing but mocking. You don’t even WANT to care about the legitimate concerns that we’ve raised.
Top Bottom