Search results

It sounds to me that Jerome wanted to exclude the books that he called apocrypha, because the Jews told him that these books don’t belong. But the church authorities required him to include them, apparently because they had reason to believe the council of Nicaea accepted those books as...

Exactly. Oh, it was just the west. Oh, wait, no, the east still has them. Oh, and so does the south, down in the Coptic church in Egypt. Oh, and even further south in Ethiopia, they still have them. But it was just the west. Yea.

Yet for some reason Jerome stated that the council of Nicaea found Judith to be holy scripture. Why did he think that? St. Jerome, The Preface on the Book of Judith: English translation

Yes, you’re right. Pope Damascus presided over the council of Rome in 382, not Nicaea. He’s the one who commissioned Jerome to make a new latin translation. I believe Jerome wanted to remove the books he called apocrypha, but the church leadership required him to include them, so he submitted...

The council of Nicaea said nothing of the canon of scripture. But 3 other local councils later in the same century declared those books to be divine canonical scripture. Is it therefore logical to assume that the whole entire council at Nicaea rejected the apocryphal books? And is it logical to...

Yes, I know the council of Nicaea didn’t discuss the canon of scripture. Thank you for pointing that out. I was saying that Eusebius attended the council, and he would have a fairly good grasp on what the early church believed. So when Eusebius said that the churches around the world used the...

Actually my personal beliefs have nothing to do with it. The Bible says Abraham was old and full of years. FULL of years. That’s not my opinion. That’s what the Bible says. But if Heber was still chugging away at 460 at the time of Abraham’s death, then that would mean that Abraham did not...

Go ahead and think that if you want. The point I was making is that Augustine’s quote that you provided is not representative of all the rest of the early church. The fact that so many in the early church defended the LXX chronology, this shows that it’s not just a loony conspiracy theory from...

Nope. Wrong again. Incredulity has nothing to do with it. It has to do with believing what the Bible says. The Bible says Abraham died Old and full of years. This means that 175 really is an old age in Abraham’s day. But if there’s a 460 year-old man still alive at this time, then 175 is not an...

But it wasn’t just Eusebius who defended the Septuagint’s chronology in Genesis 11, in regards to the inclusion of the 650 years. Africanus also agreed with the Septuagint. He lived in the 3rd century. Theophilus also agreed with the Septuagint’s numbers. He lived in the 2nd century. And then...

Did you say that Origen affirms the SAME Old Testament list that we know today? If that’s the case, then why does Origen call 2 Maccabees “holy scripture”? Origen de Principiis book 2 ch 1.5 (185- 254ad) "But that we may believe on the authority of holy Scripture that such is the case, hear...

If my grandpa died at 84, and I died at 35, you would not say I died “old and full of years.” Abraham was less than half the age of Heber. Heber died at 464. Abraham died at 175. Half of 464 is 232. Abraham wasn’t even that old. But he died Old and FULL of years???

I don’t think Athanasius commented on the genealogies of Genesis 11. So there’s no way for me to agree or disagree with him on that point. As for Athanasius’ list of canonical books, it would be difficult for me to accept his list, since he excludes Esther and calls it non-canonical. I really...

Actually it has nothing to do with incredulity. But rather, it has to do with the fact that the Bible is telling us that 175 was an old age for men living in Abraham’s generation. If there were 460 year-old men living at the time of Abraham’s death, then it would not be a true statement that...

Exactly. Augustine wasn’t even born yet. He wasn’t at the Council of Nicaea. He couldn’t be. Ask yourself if it makes sense if Abraham was “old and full of years” at 175 while Heber is still living at 460. The timeline in the Septuagint makes a lot more sense. Even the Samaritan Bible and...

I find it interesting that you prefer Augustine, who did NOT attend the Council of Nicaea, but you reject Eusebius who DID attend the Council of Nicaea. I tend to think that Eusebius probably had a better grasp on what the early church fathers at the Council of Nicaea believed, since…HE WAS THERE.

How do you suppose that Abraham was “old and full of years” at 175 while his great great great great grandfather Heber was still chugging away at 460?

One thing that I find to be really fascinating is that God chose to reach the Gentiles through a Bible translation that the Jews had made.

And yet, Josephus says that his Hebrew text included the extra 100 years on 6 generations.

Latin ones? Ok, well the eastern GREEK Orthodox also accept the books of the Maccabees. What’s your point? Why don’t we get back to the original question? How to Apocryphal books point to Christ? Like The ones in the King James. Any ideas?