• Welcome to Christianity Haven, thank you for visiting! If you have not already, we invite you to create an account and join in on the many discussions we have! 

    • Please be aware that when registering you must not register while using a VPN. Any registrations made using a VPN will be rejected.
    • Additionally, registration emails are not being sent out which is an issue that is being worked on. Your registration may go into an approval queue for admin approval. We work to send manual emails to the email on file, so please ensure the email you use is one you can readily access! 

Search results

  1. Andrew

    Ecclesiasticals VS Canonical

    It wasn't just those to guys, it was unanimous across the board save a very very few but this was concerning doctrine and not what is uninspired or not, not all of the Holy Scriptures were destined for canonization, others had a different role in the Church, you can see this practice in their...
  2. Andrew

    Ecclesiasticals VS Canonical

    Well technically it is part of the Bible because as Rufinus and Origen state (Rufinus translated from Origen) both Canon and Ecclesiasticals (Wisdom, Tobit, Maccabees etc) are the Word of God as handed down by the first fathers, the disciples of the Apostles and therefore the Apostles...
  3. Andrew

    Ecclesiasticals VS Canonical

    That's great except that according to Rufinus and Origen, todays so called "Apocrypha" are actually the "Ecclesiasticals" that Rufinus mentions (he lists Wisdom, Tobit, Maccabees etc), this list along with the canonical list are both divinely inspired "fountains of the Word of God"... Canonical...
  4. Andrew

    Ecclesiasticals VS Canonical

    Maybe he meant that the book of hermes and judgment of Peter WOULD have been read in the churches if they had appealed to doctrine (but they didnt) thus these other writings are apocrypha and not to be read in churches Does that make sense?
  5. Andrew

    Ecclesiasticals VS Canonical

    I believe at the time Rufinus wrote this the church would have included Hermes and the Judgment of Peter, or at least I think thats what he implies, unless he is referring to those two books as the other writings/apocrypha? Anyway it didn't make it into the NT yet he calls it the little book in...
  6. Andrew

    Ecclesiasticals VS Canonical

    Just to clarify what Rufinus said. All of the books he listed are the ones passed down through traditions from the church fathers for the Church for teaching the Word of God and any other books that are NOT listed are NOT from the fountains of the Word of God.
  7. Andrew

    Lighting destroys George Floyd mural

    Bingo!
  8. Andrew

    Ecclesiasticals VS Canonical

    _____________ Of the Old Testament, therefore, first of all there have been handed down five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Then Jesus Nave, (Joshua the Son of Nun), The Book of Judges together with Ruth; then four books of Kings (Reigns), which the Hebrews...
  9. Andrew

    If the prophecies in Daniel 8 cannot be understood without Maccabees, then doesn’t that prove Maccabees belongs in the Bible?

    Maccabees says that the act of atoning for the dead with a sin offering was a pious gesture in the hopes that the fallen men might obtain a better resurrection when the redeemer comes to raise the dead, the compassionate hope for a person who has passed is said to be pleasing in the eyes of God...
  10. Andrew

    If the prophecies in Daniel 8 cannot be understood without Maccabees, then doesn’t that prove Maccabees belongs in the Bible?

    1. This is the old testament 2. It was a thoughtful and "pious" act but it never suggest that it did any of the men any good.
  11. Andrew

    Ecclesiasticals VS Canonical

    BOTH are called by early Church Fathers as Sacred Scripture inspired by the Holy Spirit. BOTH are allowed to be read out loud in church as Holy Scripture. However ONLY the books deemed Canonical are to be used to establish doctrine BECAUSE they are they which hold higher rank over OTHER Holy...
  12. Andrew

    If the prophecies in Daniel 8 cannot be understood without Maccabees, then doesn’t that prove Maccabees belongs in the Bible?

    First off it WAS the body of early Christians who without a doubt gave us the OT Scripture which included Maccabees, no declaration was needed as you can find that they quote from the Apocrypha over 300 times and often even reiterating "for the scripture says" or "The Lord has spoken" before...
  13. Andrew

    Lighting destroys George Floyd mural

    don't get me wrong, if I were there with them I would be just as angry, when I saw the video the first time I was outraged! I saw a man handcuffed and pinned down like a wild beast and clearly in need of help... after the cop stayed kneeled on the dead mans neck I felt I was seeing pure evil...
  14. Andrew

    If the prophecies in Daniel 8 cannot be understood without Maccabees, then doesn’t that prove Maccabees belongs in the Bible?

    No no no, YOU are the one telling US that wherever there is secular historical documentation of events that aligns with a biblical account then the biblical account does not belong in biblical canon since the account is recorded elsewhere. In ALL prophetic accounts that came to pass we find IN...
  15. Andrew

    If the prophecies in Daniel 8 cannot be understood without Maccabees, then doesn’t that prove Maccabees belongs in the Bible?

    But Maccabees is not secular history and many secular accounts come later on.. That's like saying every historical biblical event recorded by Josephus makes the Bibles retelling obsolete and since we have Josephus' account, there really is no point in having the same accounts in the Bible.
  16. Andrew

    Apologetics

    Yes to defend the truth but also to solve dilemmas presented by critics. If I recall it was Justin the Martyr who had such a dialogue with a certain Jewish skeptic concerning similarities with Christ with other greek pagan mythology. Justin explains his case not really with proof but with logic...
  17. Andrew

    What is the most anti-semitic thing that a person could possibly do?

    So those crying "antisemitism" are actually those who exploit true Israel/Gods people/Christians by claiming that they, the modern Jew (whom Jesus calls GOATS/son of their father the devil), are actually the TRUE Jews that NEVER strayed away from true Judaism? They are far from true Israel...
  18. Andrew

    If the prophecies in Daniel 8 cannot be understood without Maccabees, then doesn’t that prove Maccabees belongs in the Bible?

    It does but unfortunately in 1816 the Bible Society made up our minds for us and ripped it out of The Holy Bible so that Protestants don't 'piously' backslide into Catholicism... oh and it saved the publishers $$ by omitting them. Marginal notes that included references to Maccabees were at one...
  19. Andrew

    Apologetics

    .
  20. Andrew

    What is the most anti-semitic thing that a person could possibly do?

    Killing the King of the Jews?
Top Bottom