Search results

We already pointed to the evidence. Did I not mention the letter of Clement? Did I not mention the writings of Ignatius and Polycarp? They can be found in the Ante-Nicene fathers. Did I not mention the councils of Rome, Hippo, and Carthage? Yes, we already pointed to the evidence.

Looks helpful. I’ll check it out when I get time

Any 3rd grader can understand context. The context of Hebrews 11 is Old Testament Biblical history. You must think I’m dumber than a 3rd grader.

Substantiated, substantiated. It’s not substantiated. substantiated substantiated substantiated substantiated. You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means. The church has known for centuries that Hebrews 11:35 is referencing 2 Maccabees 7. You’re ignoring church...

More evidence on our side than yours

The entire church history is unsubstantiated???? The church knew for centuries that Hebrews 11:35 is a reference to Maccabees. Just because you’re ignorant of church history doesn’t make it unsubstantiated.

Jesus didn’t have the book of Maccabees in his Bible! Jesus and the disciples never heard of the Book of Maccabees! They weren’t familiar with that book! Maccabees was made up by Catholics in the 1500’s! Maccabees is Fiction!

These New Testament verses are referencing the Apocrypha.

“Back up your claim with facts” That’s all you people have. You shift the burden of proof because you can’t defend your own position. We’ve already shown you the “facts” that THREE early church councils accepted the Apocryphal books and declared them to be scripture. THREE! Rome, Hippo, and...

That logical fallacy is put forth by Protestant teachers who say, “Jesus and the disciples quoted the Old Testament, but never the Apocrypha! See, that proves it!” I’ve heard this from numerous Bible teachers.

Obviously an inspired book doesn’t need to be quoted by an Apostle in order to be accepted as inspired, since numerous Old Testament books are never quoted in the New Testament. It’s just another one of their double standards. And it’s not even true since the Apocryphal books ARE referenced and...

Notice how the Latin Vulgate has 1, 2, 3, and 4 Esdras. The King James changes the name of 1 and 2 Esdras to Ezra and Nehemiah. Then the KJV also changed 3 and 4 Esdras to 1 and 2 Esdras. This causes people to confuse 1 and 2 Esdras in the KJV with the 1 and 2 Esdras in the Latin Vulgate. But...

When I said 1 Esdras, I was talking about 1 Esdras in the KJV, which Catholics deem 3 Esdras. What Catholics call 1 Esdras is actually just Ezra.

Hebrews 11:35 is to me the most obvious example. But then there’s also Hebrews 13:2 and John 10:22.

It’s crazy confusing because Protestants, Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox all number them 3 different ways.

1 Esdras in the KJV is called 3 Esdras by Catholics. But yea, the EOC just calls it Ezra. That’s what the Orthodox Study Bible calls it, Ezra.

Is there a point you’re trying to make? Most New Testament quotes of the Old Testament don’t mention the book. Like 2 Peter 2 mentions Balaam and how his donkey spoke with a man’s voice. Peter doesn’t mention the BOOK of Numbers. But we know that story comes from Numbers chapter 22. That’s the...

I care about what the EARLY Christians said. I care about the councils in the 300’s. I care about what the author of Hebrews said. I care about what the Apostolic fathers said who knew the disciples. Let me clarify: I don’t care about what 6th century heretics said.

Besides trusting God, wouldn’t you also want to take some precautions, so as not to let the living part of the tree get infected with whatever diseases the dead branch might be carrying?

What do you do with a branch that has been decaying for 2000 years?