Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | denominations. | Eph 4:3 | EdB | 149092 | ||
Doc Ranting? Have I been ranting or did I offer a question and am now doing nothing more than providing logical and accurate objections to the answers offered. I don’t see that as ranting and if others do please let them speak up and I will cease. However I do see your use of the word “ranting” as being inflammatory and uncalled for. I will not continue this discussion with you other than offer this explanation. Respond if you want but I will not continue with you sir. With the exception of Christian cult I know of no denomination that is divided over what constitutes the Gospel. If your referring to the division of Catholicism and Protestantism and the Apocrypha, I think you will find the Apocrypha is actually a very minor side issue that most people use because they don't really know what the differences are between Protestantism and Catholicism. In any case having read and studied the Apocrypha many times I see nothing in it that violates any other scripture nor do I see it making any new doctrine. The real question then becomes is it inspired or not. The answer to that has been yes then no then yes then no, presently it is yes by Catholics and no by most Protestants. However it was part of the Christian Bible for 1500 years and in some cases it still is so it has stood for 2000 years. Perhaps when we get to heaven we will no find anyone from that period having all been lead astray by the Apocrypha. We know the major early church fathers quoted from what we call the Apocrypha we can find their quotes in their writings. This suggests they used it and apparently had it included in their scriptures. One thing we have to remember the so called 'father' of the Reformation Martin Luther also called for the removal of James, Hebrews, Jude and also Revelation. His reason for James and Jude are obvious it seemed to conflict with his position of Grace alone. However his reason for Hebrews was two fold first the author was unknown and secondly it seemed to point back to the Apocrypha in chapter 11. His rational for Revelation is like nearly everyone until the last couple of hundred years it was thought to be mythical, or impossible to understand. No I don’t think the division of denominations was ever over what is gospel, but rather what is doctrine and that is based on every man’s interpretation of the Bible not hard fast evidence. EdB |
||||||
2 | denominations. | Eph 4:3 | CDBJ | 149097 | ||
Hi EdB, Did the Jewish Scribes, who were so particular about forwarding God’s Word, in every minute detail, consider the Apocrypha as Scripture or just as religious writings at that time? 2 Tim. 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: I guess what I mean to say is, do you consider the Apocrypha to be (theopneustos), or God breathed as all Scripture is! Have a great day, CDBJ |
||||||
3 | denominations. | Eph 4:3 | kalos | 149098 | ||
Apocrypha--fallible, not inspired "What is the Apocrypha? Do the Apocryphal books belong in the Bible?" 'Answer: Roman Catholic Bibles have several more books in the Old Testament than Christian Bibles. These books are referred to as the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha were written primarily in the time between the Old and New Testaments. The nation of Israel treated the Apocrypha with respect, but never accepted the Apocrypha as true books of the Hebrew Bible. The early Christian church debated the status of the Apocrypha, but almost always rejected them from being included in the Bible. Probably the most conclusive argument against the Apocrypha being included in the Bible is the fact that the New Testament nowhere quotes or alludes to any of the Apocryphal books. 'The Apocrypha teach many things that are not true and are not historically accurate. The Roman Catholic church officially added the Apocrypha to their Bible after the Protestant Reformation because it supports some of the things that the Roman Catholic church believes and practices which are not in agreement with the Bible. Some of what the Apocrypha says is true and correct, but if you read it, you have to treat it as a fallible historical document, not as the inspired, authoritative Word of God.' ____________________ http://www.gotquestions.org/apocrypha.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * www.seekfind.org Christian Search Engine The mission of SeekFind.org is to provide God-honoring, Biblically-based, and theologically-sound Christian search engine results in a highly accurate and well-organized format. |
||||||
4 | denominations. | Eph 4:3 | CDBJ | 149120 | ||
That is exactly the way I see it, but it appears that EdB sees it from a different slant and I thought it might be interesting to hear what it is. CDBJ |
||||||
5 | denominations. | Eph 4:3 | JCrichton | 149154 | ||
Hi, CDBJ! I find it interesting how you support a study made by "experts" to deny something that pre-existed them for hundreds of years as part of the Bible while still demanding of EdB to clarify his position as to the classification of "experts" who rejected Jesus and whose contemporaries still reject Jesus and the whole of the New Testament as they are awaiting the "true Messiah!" I am also curious as to your ignorance of EdB's statement on Martin Luther's additional exclusions and the reformations reintegration of some of Luther's exclusions, then the rejection... then the reintergration, then... God Bless! Angel |
||||||