In support of the Apocrypha

[thatguy]

The purpose of God's Holy Spirit is to reveal Truth to those who are sincere in seeking the Truth of God. These are the written words of Jesus from the Holy Bible:
But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: (John 15:26)

On the flipside, Satan can and does use religious deception with even the counterfeit appearance of "angels" and apparitions of "Jesus" through which false prophets have started pseudo-Christian cults and false religions as those previously mentioned.

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. (2 Corinthians 11:13-15)



The Holy Bible is the Standard for knowing God's Truth and any and all forms of religious instruction are to be analyzed and compared with the Bible to see whether there is agreement. Where there is disagreement, the Holy Bible is the most valid and reliable Truth to base one's faith in Jesus upon.

Herein is the reliance of God's Word from The Holy Bible:
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.(2 Timothy 3:16-17)

There Is Only One Truth

again, how do YOU KNOW that the voice YOU HEARD was not satan? you claim the voice or apparition others have seen are satan, and that they were lead down the wrong path. But how do YOU KNOW?

the bible certainly didn't say god was going to speak to you.

the book is true cuz it says it is true, that is a terrible argument to have to rely on, they all make the same claim, so it adds nothing to the debate to bring it up.

 

[Starman3000m]

But you are not allowing for those who have not followed through no fault of their own. You said "no Muslim", you did not qualify the statement.

By definition: A "Muslim" is a person who believes in Al'lah and believes that the Islamic prophet, Muhammad, supersedes the Authority of Jesus. A Muslim does not accept Jesus as being the Son of God. A Muslim worships the wrong God.

When a Muslim renounces the theology of Islam and accepts the Real New Testament Jesus as personal Lord and Saviour they are no longer a Muslim but they become a Child of God - same as what would be with a person who converts from any other false religion that has been denying the Deity of Jesus.

There are many ex-Muslims who have accepted Christ so they have received Salvation as promised in the New Testament.

 

[Starman3000m]

again, how do YOU KNOW that the voice YOU HEARD was not satan? you claim the voice or apparition others have seen are satan, and that they were lead down the wrong path. But how do YOU KNOW?

the bible certainly didn't say god was going to speak to you.

the book is true cuz it says it is true, that is a terrible argument to have to rely on, they all make the same claim, so it adds nothing to the debate to bring it up.

Satan does not want people to believe in nor trust in the New Testament Jesus Christ as being the True Son of God.

The Holy Spirit of God is God's Spiritual Witness and Attests to the Truth of Jesus being The Son of God. The Holy Spirit is sent to convict this world of its sin and to reveal the Truth of God.

When Peter stated "Thou art the Christ, the Son of The Living God" Jesus commended Him and said that flesh and blood did not reveal that knowledge to Peter but that it came from The Father in Heaven: (Matthew 16:16-17)

That's what I experienced in 1976 when the Holy Spirit revealed that Truth to me and it came at a time when I was desperately searching for the Truth of God.

Add: Here is the neatest part of this experience: My faltering marriage to my wife, Diana, was saved by God and she (an Atheist at the time) also received the revealed Truth of Jesus being The Son of God. Our marriage and souls were saved by the Grace of God.

That is definitely not what Satan would do in the life of people. Rather, Satan will do what he can to destroy marriages, family lives and to keep people in spiritual deception even through false religions that give people a false sense of security. A born-again believer in Christ is secure in his/her Salvation through the Promise that Christ gave:

Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
I and my Father are one. (John 10:25-30)

 

[thatguy]

Satan does not want people to believe in nor trust in the New Testament Jesus Christ as being the True Son of God.

The Holy Spirit of God is God's Spiritual Witness and Attests to the Truth of Jesus being The Son of God. The Holy Spirit is sent to convict this world of its sin and to reveal the Truth of God.

When Peter stated "Thou art the Christ, the Son of The Living God" Jesus commended Him and said that flesh and blood did not reveal that knowledge to Peter but that it came from The Father in Heaven: (Matthew 16:16-17)

That's what I experienced in 1976 when the Holy Spirit revealed that Truth to me and it came at a time when I was desperately searching for the Truth of God.

Add: Here is the neatest part of this experience: My faltering marriage to my wife, Diana, was saved by God and she (an Atheist at the time) also received the revealed Truth of Jesus being The Son of God. Our marriage and souls were saved by the Grace of God.

That is definitely not what Satan would do in the life of people. Rather, Satan will do what he can to destroy marriages, family lives and to keep people in spiritual deception even through false religions that give people a false sense of security. A born-again believer in Christ is secure in his/her Salvation through the Promise that Christ gave:

Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
I and my Father are one. (John 10:25-30)

I am sure that joseph smith and even david koresh used most or all of those passages to "prove" that it was god speaking to them too.

for all you know, you could be insane and living a lie to perpetuate the "feeling" of semidivinity that you have bestowed on yourself, OR you could have been lead away from the true path by none other than satan himself. you have no idea.

and you still dont speak to the doctrines you have created about the creator, the way he can apear to humans, and the HATE you so openly express towards other religions......

 

[Starman3000m]

I am sure that joseph smith and even david koresh used most or all of those passages to "prove" that it was god speaking to them too. for all you know, you could be insane and living a lie to perpetuate the "feeling" of semidivinity that you have bestowed on yourself, OR you could have been lead away from the true path by none other than satan himself. you have no idea.

There is no doubt that it was God's Divine Intervention that my wife and I experienced in 1976 and which saved our marriage and souls as mentioned. You may scoff and deny that it could have happened but that's your opinion. I share what happened because you asked for me to give specifics. Also, my experience does not make me any better than you or anyone else in God's eyes nor does it bestow any sense of semi-divinity at all as you remarked. It does, however, bring a greater sense of awe in the True God of Creation who would reach down to intervene and show me His Truth at a time when I was seeking Him. My experience confirmed that the True Path to Salvation is through The New Testament Jesus, not the Jesus of the Mormons nor false teachers like David Koresh whom you mentioned and who professed that he was Jesus Christ.

BTW: The experience I had is not unique to me at all. Many others have had similar and even more remarkable testimonies of when God Divinely intervened in their lives. The result is being born-again in the faith of Christ alone as Jesus said one must be.

...and you still dont speak to the doctrines you have created about the creator, the way he can apear to humans, and the HATE you so openly express towards other religions......

It is God's Holy Spirit that moves in the lives of people who are sincerely seeking God and He works any way He so chooses to reveal His Truth to the individual(s). The end result is the testimony of God's Mercy, Grace and Salvation that can only come through Christ and not through denominational membership in any organized religion. God's offer of Salvation is free to all mankind who accepts His Son. Whether you wish to believe that or not is an act of your own free will.

When I expose how the doctrines of other religions compare to what the Holy Bible states, in particular about Jesus and Salvation, you seem to think it is hate. It is not hate at all but a comparative analysis of how they differ scripturally. For example, when I post a direct quote from the Qur'an, people say that I hate Muslims. Not so. Just pointing out something that does not agree with the Holy Bible. Also, sharing the Truth of Jesus is a right and a responsibility that born-again believers in Christ should share with all others whose paths are being led by false doctrines and not leading them to the Truth.

 

[thatguy]

There is no doubt that it was God's Divine Intervention that my wife and I experienced in 1976 and which saved our marriage and souls as mentioned. You may scoff and deny that it could have happened but that's your opinion. I share what happened because you asked for me to give specifics. Also, my experience does not make me any better than you or anyone else in God's eyes nor does it bestow any sense of semi-divinity at all as you remarked. It does, however, bring a greater sense of awe in the True God of Creation who would reach down to intervene and show me His Truth at a time when I was seeking Him. My experience confirmed that the True Path to Salvation is through The New Testament Jesus, not the Jesus of the Mormons nor false teachers like David Koresh whom you mentioned and who professed that he was Jesus Christ.

BTW: The experience I had is not unique to me at all. Many others have had similar and even more remarkable testimonies of when God Divinely intervened in their lives. The result is being born-again in the faith of Christ alone as Jesus said one must be.



It is God's Holy Spirit that moves in the lives of people who are sincerely seeking God and He works any way He so chooses to reveal His Truth to the individual(s). The end result is the testimony of God's Mercy, Grace and Salvation that can only come through Christ and not through denominational membership in any organized religion. God's offer of Salvation is free to all mankind who accepts His Son. Whether you wish to believe that or not is an act of your own free will.

When I expose how the doctrines of other religions compare to what the Holy Bible states, in particular about Jesus and Salvation, you seem to think it is hate. It is not hate at all but a comparative analysis of how they differ scripturally. For example, when I post a direct quote from the Qur'an, people say that I hate Muslims. Not so. Just pointing out something that does not agree with the Holy Bible. Also, sharing the Truth of Jesus is a right and a responsibility that born-again believers in Christ should share with all others whose paths are being led by false doctrines and not leading them to the Truth.

so you have no way of proving that it wasn't satan, you just have no doubt......


you hold the false doctrine that god the creator and the subject of the old testament is somehow different than the god of the muslims. Jesus being born did nothing to change the creator and who he/she is. Jesus being born didn't change the fact that according to your own bible GOD created everything and everyone. Additioanlly, the jews and the muslims base their religions on the same creator, the only differences occur with the jesus sotry. that doesn't affect the creator story in any way.

You have deveolped this false doctrine to justify your postion of hate.

and then there is your doctrine that jesus came tot he new world before assending to heaven...... definatley not in the bible, but something you have added to the story to make it more palatable....

 

[Starman3000m]

so you have no way of proving that it wasn't satan, you just have no doubt......

No doubt at all since Satan wants to keep you deceived and would not want to let go of any soul and turn it over to Jesus nor would Satan want you to learn the Truth and be set free from religious bondage and deception that he has developed through false prophets and misguided doctrines.

...you hold the false doctrine that god the creator and the subject of the old testament is somehow different than the god of the muslims.

Don't take my word for it; I challenge you to read each teaching for yourself. If you were to study each theology and compare it to the Holy Bible, you'd see for yourself that they are different.

Jesus being born did nothing to change the creator and who he/she is. Jesus being born didn't change the fact that according to your own bible GOD created everything and everyone. Additioanlly, the jews and the muslims base their religions on the same creator, the only differences occur with the jesus sotry. that doesn't affect the creator story in any way.

Again, your charge is quite invalid. You are speaking without knowing any truth of the descriptions that other religions have of their "creator" as compared to the Creator God (Yahweh) of the Holy Bible.

You have deveolped this false doctrine to justify your postion of hate.

Hate is a strong word and is more reflected in the tone of your own posts that you direct at my responses.

and then there is your doctrine that jesus came tot he new world before assending to heaven...... definatley not in the bible, but something you have added to the story to make it more palatable....

I acknowledge that the Bible does not state that specifically, nor does it say that He did not. As mentioned to libby, the Bible states that Jesus continued to appear for forty days after His Resurrection. However, before that, He had descended into the depths of Hades to release the souls of God's Righteous. If Jesus was able to do that for Old Testament saints, He sure could have made an appearance to the righteous throughout other lands to confirm His fulfillment of Salvation through His Atoning Blood. Only God knows but with God, all things are possible.

Again, that was all in response to libby's question about how people could have known about God's Spirit and Salvation before the "Christian missionaries" arrived to the New World. However, I'm still wondering which missionaries she referred to; the ones who brought the True Word of God or the ones who killed those who did not convert to Catholicism and accept the papacy as God's Authority on earth. Or perhaps you think I'm being "hateful" again and you don't think that ever happened?

 

[thatguy]

No doubt at all since Satan wants to keep you deceived and would not want to let go of any soul and turn it over to Jesus nor would Satan want you to learn the Truth and be set free from religious bondage and deception that he has developed through false prophets and misguided doctrines.



Don't take my word for it; I challenge you to read each teaching for yourself. If you were to study each theology and compare it the the Holy Bible, you'd see for yourself that they are different.



Again, your charge is quite invalid. You are speaking without knowing any truth of the descriptions that other religions have of their "creator" as compared to the Creator God (Yahweh) of the Holy Bible.



Hate is a strong word and is more reflected in the tone of your own posts that you direct at my responses.



I acknowledge that the Bible does not state that specifically, nor does it say that He did not. As mentioned to libby, the Bible states that Jesus continued to appear for forty days after His Resurrection. However, before that, He had descended into the depths of Hades to release the souls of God's Righteous. If Jesus was able to do that for Old Testament saints, He sure could have made an appearance to the righteous throughout other lands to confirm His fulfillment of Salvation through His Atoning Blood. Only God knows but with God, all things are possible.

Again, that was all in response to libby's question about how people could have known about God's Spirit and Salvation before the "Christian missionaries" arrived to the New World. However, I'm still wondering which missionaries she referred to; the ones who brought the True Word of God or the ones who killed those who did not convert to Catholicism and accept the papacy as God's Authority on earth. Or perhaps you don't think that ever happened?

you dont know that you are not being decieved by satan because you are CLEARLY following doctrine NOT IN THE BIBLE. this is evident in both your discussion of what christ "might have done" and in your refusal to accept that the creation stories in all three religions is common, and that the creator they refer to is the same being.
you have added christian restrictions on god after the fact. christ wasn't even a twinkle in gods eye when the creation happened.
(according to the book anyway)

 

[Starman3000m]

you dont know that you are not being decieved by satan because you are CLEARLY following doctrine NOT IN THE BIBLE. this is evident in both your discussion of what christ "might have done" and in your refusal to accept that the creation stories in all three religions is common, and that the creator they refer to is the same being.
you have added christian restrictions on god after the fact.

C'mon, thatguy, you are making it more and more evident that you personally have not studied the various theologies in question. The point in contention is debatable for sure but what is not debatable is that Salvation only comes through Christ's Atoning Blood, and the fact that Al'lah and Yahweh are NOT the same deity. And, as for God's abilities, you seem to believe like many others that He is restricted to your thinking of what He can or cannot do.

Jesus said... With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. (Matthew 19:26)

Also, as stated before, it is dangerous ground for you to say that my experience was a deception of Satan and was not of the True God of Creation. That is what the Jewish priests accused Jesus of as recorded in Matthew 12:24-31 - and the danger:
Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. (Matthew 12:31)

also; Mark 3:22-30, and the danger:
But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation: Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit.

christ wasn't even a twinkle in gods eye when the creation happened. (according to the book anyway)

Really? What book are you referring to? The Holy Bible states that Jesus pre-existed with God as part of the Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) before the world was even created!

John Chapter 1, verses:

1: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2: The same was in the beginning with God.
3: All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4: In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5: And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
6: There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7: The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
8: He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9: That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
10: He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
11: He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12: But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14: And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

and;

I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. (John 17:4-5)

BTW: I'm planning to be off the boards for the next couple of days and will be glad to pick up with the discussions at that time. Until then, Wishing a Safe and Happy Thanksgiving to all.

 

[thatguy]

C'mon, thatguy, you are making it more and more evident that you personally have not studied the various theologies in question. The point in contention is debatable for sure but what is not debatable is that Salvation only comes through Christ's Atoning Blood, and the fact that Al'lah and Yahweh are NOT the same deity. And, as for God's abilities, you seem to believe like many others that He is restricted to your thinking of what He can or cannot do.

Jesus said... With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. (Matthew 19:26)

Also, as stated before, it is dangerous ground for you to say that my experience was a deception of Satan and was not of the True God of Creation. That is what the Jewish priests accused Jesus of as recorded in Matthew 12:24-31 - and the danger:
Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. (Matthew 12:31)

also; Mark 3:22-30, and the danger:
But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation: Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit.



Really? What book are you referring to? The Holy Bible states that Jesus pre-existed with God as part of the Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) before the world was even created!

John Chapter 1, verses:

1: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2: The same was in the beginning with God.
3: All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4: In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5: And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
6: There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7: The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
8: He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9: That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
10: He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
11: He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12: But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14: And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

and;

I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. (John 17:4-5)

BTW: I'm planning to be off the boards for the next couple of days and will be glad to pick up with the discussions at that time. Until then, Wishing a Safe and Happy Thanksgiving to all.

your interpretation and added doctrine says that the word refers to jesus, that is not how the jews or even many other christians belive.

as for treading on dangerous ground, i believe it is you who does this when you put yourself on the same level as Jesus, by your comparision in red above. YOU ARE NOT GODLY and people have every right, in fact they have ever responsibility to question the validity of your claim or hearing god's voice. to do so IS NOT AN ACT AGAINST GOD, is is questioning the lowly human starman

 

[Starman3000m]

your interpretation and added doctrine says that the word refers to jesus, that is not how the jews or even many other christians belive.

Again, you need to read the scriptures that were cited to see that when Jesus performed miracles the Jewish religious leaders were claiming He was doing it through the power of Beelzebub (Satan). The same happens today when people have miracles happen that brings them to the Saving Grace of God; people don't believe that it is God doing the miracles.

as for treading on dangerous ground, i believe it is you who does this when you put yourself on the same level as Jesus, by your comparision in red above. YOU ARE NOT GODLY and people have every right, in fact they have ever responsibility to question the validity of your claim or hearing god's voice. to do so IS NOT AN ACT AGAINST GOD, is is questioning the lowly human starman

Sure, I agree that I am a "lowly human" and have stated previously that I am no better than you or anyone else in God's view. And there is nothing wrong with anyone questioning my claim about God's audible voice that I heard and mentioned in my Testimony. The danger is that your repeated questions indicate that you don't really believe that I could have heard God's Voice and rather you believe it was Satan instead. That's what makes it dangerous because you cannot seem to believe that God still speaks to mankind in this way. Also, as stated, the Words I heard brought my wife and me to a born-again relationship with Christ, saved our marriage and brought a new outlook on life. It has established a personal relationship with God through placing our faith in Jesus as The Son of God that we could not have had otherwise.

The question I have is: Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the Divine Son of God, as mentioned in the New Testament, and have you accepted Him as your Lord and Saviour?

 

[Marie]

So are we talking all 14 books that make up the Apocrypha are suppose to be canonical, or are we omitting Prayer of Manases and 3rd and 4th Esdras? The Vatican manuscript #357 contains none of the Macabean books. The Alexandrian manuscript #358 has 16 books, and the Vulgate doesn't have them referring to 3rd and 4th Maccabees, and none of the Apocrypha is in the Hebrew cannon.
You put down a slew of verses, but no one in the New Testament although they used them, ever quoted them as being scripture or recognized them as such. Thats important as your post seems to suggest other wise! Aquila's Greek version 128 AD doesn't contain the Apocrypha, nor does Symmachus 200 AD version. The Syriac version 150-175 translated from the Hebrew didn't have them, although they were added much latter. They were not considered canonical by Jerome and were not added till later until the Latin Vulgate in 460, note this is after 260 AD after the church turned into the whore of Babylonian, and became a vehicle for power hungry egotist, with all of mans new measures added in.
Interestingly the Jews never added it in any copies of the Hebrew Bible. The Eastern Church was against it. The list of Melito 170 AD, Justin Martyr 164 AD, Origen 254 AD, and the council of Laodicea 363 AD excluded them.
Reasons for rejecting them:

1. They never had a place in the Hebrew Cannon
2. They are never quoted in the New Testament either by Christ or his apostles, nor any other writer as scripture!
3. Josephus expressly excludes them
4. Philo 20 BC-50 AD never quoted from them or even mentioned them
5. They are not found in any catalog of any canonical books made during the first 4 centuries
6. Jerome wanted only the Hebrew cannon and rejected the entire Apocrypha empathetically
7. Divine inspiration and authority is not claimed by any of its writers and is disclaimed by some!
8. They had no prophetic element as the prophets had ceased by then
9. They contain errors, historically, geographical, and chronological errors and distortions of old testament narratives, and they contradict themselves, the Bible and history
10. They teach doctrines and uphold practices which are contrary to scripture much like the Koran, lying is sanctioned, suicide and assassination are justified, salvation is by works and alms, magical incantations, prayers of the dead for the dead are taught and approved (no wonder RCC loves it)
11. Weakness of style, stiffness, lack of originality, artificial compared to the Bible
12. A lot of it is legendary and stories sound crazy
13. So called miracles and descriptions of peoples deeds and supernatural are gross and silly
14. The spiritual and moral levels is below that of the Old Testament when reading it it reads like fantasy fiction
15. The books were written much latter than those after the old testament and after the cannon was closed, some were written shortly before or right after the birth of Christ.
16. Some were permitted to be read for instruction but were not considered canonical or authoritative for doctrine, by any prominent man, set of men, church or council till 1546 by a small majority and then declared anyone that disagreed with them an anathematized, which is still the what the RCC catechism refers to protestants to this day!
17. The Christian church and it successor the Jewish church had the same old testament scriptures void of it
18. There is a strong presumption from the expression of Christ and his apostles when they referred to scripture with regards to the Old Testament it had long been fixed. Chris appealed to the Hebrew scriptures. Christ words in Mathew 23:35 sum it up
19. Each of the canonical books were provided with a Targum (pharase) of the original Hebrew in Aramaic but not the apocrypha Tobit is questionable
20. To place these books in the same category as the law and the Prophets is impossible for any student of history. The contents of the Apocrypha are self disqualifying

 

[thatguy]

Again, you need to read the scriptures that were cited to see that when Jesus performed miracles the Jewish religious leaders were claiming He was doing it through the power of Beelzebub (Satan). The same happens today when people have miracles happen that brings them to the Saving Grace of God; people don't believe that it is God doing the miracles.



Sure, I agree that I am a "lowly human" and have stated previously that I am no better than you or anyone else in God's view. And there is nothing wrong with anyone questioning my claim about God's audible voice that I heard and mentioned in my Testimony. The danger is that your repeated questions indicate that you don't really believe that I could have heard God's Voice and rather you believe it was Satan instead. That's what makes it dangerous because you cannot seem to believe that God still speaks to mankind in this way. Also, as stated, the Words I heard brought my wife and me to a born-again relationship with Christ, saved our marriage and brought a new outlook on life. It has established a personal relationship with God through placing our faith in Jesus as The Son of God that we could not have had otherwise.

The question I have is: Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the Divine Son of God, as mentioned in the New Testament, and have you accepted Him as your Lord and Saviour?

so jews of the time thought jesus was being mislead by satan, and you think this adds credence to your postion?

for all you know satan did mislead christ and you as well. the only thing you have to justify your postion is the book written by similarly mislead people.


BTW, if god can talk to you and preform all these other miraculous communications, then there is no reason to believe that he didn't speak to John Smith. (starman imposed limitations on god aside)

 

[Starman3000m]

so jews of the time thought jesus was being mislead by satan, and you think this adds credence to your postion?

for all you know satan did mislead christ and you as well. the only thing you have to justify your postion is the book written by similarly mislead people.

OK, thatguy, I see you find this to be most hilarious so you can pick yourself off the floor now from laughing so hard. C'mon - get up.

Yes, the Bible tells it like it is; the Jewish religious leaders were aware of their people dabbling in the occult and that's why they thought that perhaps Jesus was doing the same. However, remember that God's power is greater than Satan's and it was God's Power through which Jesus performed His Miracles. On the flip side, Jesus knew that the Jewish priests were not sincere in their religious leadership and they were not following a true worship toward God. Jesus proclaimed that Satan, not God, was their father:

John Chapter 8, verses:

42: Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
43: Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
44: Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
45: And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.
46: Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?
47: He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.

BTW, if god can talk to you and preform all these other miraculous communications, then there is no reason to believe that he didn't speak to John Smith. (starman imposed limitations on god aside)

Herein is the difference: God does not contradict His own words as recorded in the Holy Bible. If you actually have a chance to read and understand the New Testament compared to Mormon theology, you will see that the Mormon "Jesus" is not the same as the New Testament Jesus. There is only One True Son of God that has the power to save your soul while the rest of the "Jesus'" of other pseudo-Christian and Islamic religions are counterfeit accounts of the real Jesus. If there is any misleading by Satan, it is found in those religious cults who keep people from coming to the Salvation knowledge of the True Jesus, as written in the New Testament and whose Atoning Blood was shed for the sins of mankind.

Satan will keep you from knowing the Truth, thatguy, because he wants to keep your soul. Only Jesus can set you free to comprehend the Truth - that is if you really want to know the Truth. There is no doubt that Joseph Smith experienced seeing some "personages" that appeared to be God, Jesus, and the angel Moroni but that is where you can say it was a Satanic deception in order to lead millions of people away from the True Jesus. Other false religions preach a different "Jesus" as well and not the One of the Bible.

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. (2 Corinthians 11:13-14)

 

[Marie]

One of the Many Problems with JW's and Mormons!

Paul saying in Galations 1:8
"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed."

Yet they proudly proclaim just this, in their ignornace of the word of God!

<DIR>Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.
Gal 1:11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
Gal 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
</DIR>

 

[Starman3000m]

Paul saying in Galations 1:8
"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed."

Yet they proudly proclaim just this, in their ignornace of the word of God!

<DIR>Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.
Gal 1:11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
Gal 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
</DIR>

Good post, Marie!

This is the most important foundation for placing faith in the True God; believing in the True Jesus for Salvation - not the counterfeit "Jesus" that pseudo-Christian religions preach.

 

[thatguy]

OK, thatguy, I see you find this to be most hilarious so you can pick yourself off the floor now from laughing so hard. C'mon - get up.

Yes, the Bible tells it like it is; the Jewish religious leaders were aware of their people dabbling in the occult and that's why they thought that perhaps Jesus was doing the same. However, remember that God's power is greater than Satan's and it was God's Power through which Jesus performed His Miracles. On the flip side, Jesus knew that the Jewish priests were not sincere in their religious leadership and they were not following a true worship toward God. Jesus proclaimed that Satan, not God, was their father:

John Chapter 8, verses:

42: Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
43: Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
44: Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
45: And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.
46: Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?
47: He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.




Herein is the difference: God does not contradict His own words as recorded in the Holy Bible. If you actually have a chance to read and understand the New Testament compared to Mormon theology, you will see that the Mormon "Jesus" is not the same as the New Testament Jesus. There is only One True Son of God that has the power to save your soul while the rest of the "Jesus'" of other pseudo-Christian and Islamic religions are counterfeit accounts of the real Jesus. If there is any misleading by Satan, it is found in those religious cults who keep people from coming to the Salvation knowledge of the True Jesus, as written in the New Testament and whose Atoning Blood was shed for the sins of mankind.

Satan will keep you from knowing the Truth, thatguy, because he wants to keep your soul. Only Jesus can set you free to comprehend the Truth - that is if you really want to know the Truth. There is no doubt that Joseph Smith experienced seeing some "personages" that appeared to be God, Jesus, and the angel Moroni but that is where you can say it was a Satanic deception in order to lead millions of people away from the True Jesus. Other false religions preach a different "Jesus" as well and not the One of the Bible.

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. (2 Corinthians 11:13-14)

it is hilarious.
the funniest part is you that that quoting your own book adds anything to the argument, it doens't. I am sure any selfrespecting mormon or jew could quote from their book to "prove" jsut how wrong yours is, that doesn't make it so. the real quesiton here is the validity of the book. the original point of this thread was a discussion of what books MEN HAD CHOOSEN TO INCLUDE IN YOUR BIBLE and why. Obviously if men made the decision this was not an act of god. you can call it inspired by god all you want, but the reality is that the contents of the bible were decided on by a commitee of men, nothing more.


again, Claiming that god talked directly to you doesn't help either. As you have quoted many times even your own book indicates that satan can take any form to mislead you:
For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. (2 Corinthians 11:13-14)

therefor, you have no way of knowing if you really talked to god or if satan was just acting as an apostle of christ to lead you away from the one truth.

 

[Starman3000m]

it is hilarious.
the funniest part is you that that quoting your own book adds anything to the argument, it doens't. I am sure any selfrespecting mormon or jew could quote from their book to "prove" jsut how wrong yours is, that doesn't make it so. the real quesiton here is the validity of the book. the original point of this thread was a discussion of what books MEN HAD CHOOSEN TO INCLUDE IN YOUR BIBLE and why. Obviously if men made the decision this was not an act of god. you can call it inspired by god all you want, but the reality is that the contents of the bible were decided on by a commitee of men, nothing more.


again, Claiming that god talked directly to you doesn't help either. As you have quoted many times even your own book indicates that satan can take any form to mislead you:
For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. (2 Corinthians 11:13-14)

therefor, you have no way of knowing if you really talked to god or if satan was just acting as an apostle of christ to lead you away from the one truth.

Which "Truth" are you saying that I could have been led away from?

If Jesus proclaimed that He Is The Way, The Truth and The Life, and the voice I heard confirmed that He's The Son of God, I would tend to think that God's Holy Spirit was the One confirming that to me and my wife.

Satan blinds people from the Truth and controls them with false religions and secular philosophies that keep people from placing their souls in God's hands. With all the faith systems to choose from There Is Still Only One Truth. That is unless you are of the belief that "all roads lead to God" and regardless of Jesus' Words, you believe you can make it to heaven - under your own good works?

 

[onel0126]

While the Ark of the Covenant resided in the Temple, Judaic worship centered around two things: ritual Temple sacrifice and the Torah, interpreted by the priests and applied to daily life. The rise of the Persian Empire and its official language, Aramaic, along with the Babylonian Exile and the resulting D.aspora, changed things. The Exile took the Jews away from the Temple, temporarily halting ritual sacrifice, while Persian Aramaic supplanted Hebrew. The synagogue system of studying the Torah developed during the Exile, as the teachers of Israel struggled to preserve the nation's divine heritage. By 530 B.C., when a remnant of the now Aramaic-speaking Jews returned from exile, Hebrew was understood chiefly by the rabbis, not by the Jewish people-Ezra needed translators by his side as he read the Hebrew Scripture aloud to them (cf. Neh. 8:2-8, 13:24). As Hebrew fell out of use, Palestinian Jews developed Aramaic targums, translation-commentaries of sacred Hebrew books. Alexander the Great's conquest of the entire Near East about 334 B.C. added a third language, soon to be used universally in trade, to the mix: Greek. Jews in synagogues throughout the Near East began using Greek translations of Hebrew Scripture, a set of translations commonly called the "Septuagint," which means "the seventy," named for the seventy scholars who supposedly translated the sacred Hebrew books into Greek in Alexandria.

This set the stage for difficulty. Apart from the Torah, the first five books of the Bible, the teachers of Israel had never made clear distinctions about which books were or were not considered holy. By 130 B.C., Sirach attests to a tripartite structure in Hebrew Scripture-Law, Prophets, and the Writings-but only the Law and Prophets had a fixed list of books; the content of the Writings was uncertain. The Septuagint, on the other hand, arranged books not by content but by style: narrative, poetical, and prophetic. While Moses and the prophets wrote in Hebrew, post-exilic Jews preferred to write in Greek, thus Greek collections soon had books that the Hebrew lists never saw. Because the Septuagint didn't have a standard list or ordering of books, the included books varied according to collection, with no clear distinction made between earlier and later works. By the Incarnation, synagogues throughout the Near East used versions of the Septuagint that included Tobit, Judith, the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, Baruch (including the Letter of Jeremiah), 1-3 Maccabees, the Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, the Book of Jubilees, 1 Esdras, and additions to Esther and Daniel.

This situation was not considered a serious problem since Jewish religious instruction relied on oral tradition. Even the Torah was read according to oral tradition. The Torah was written as one long word without spaces, punctuation, or vowels-it was literally the word of God. Rabbinical students learned how to read the text by listening to their elders read it over and over again. Rabbis disliked targums because they encouraged private interpretation of Scripture and undermined divinely-authorized oral teaching authority (cf. Matt. 23:2-3: Christ commands the people to respect their teaching authority, but not their lived example). Oral interpretive tradition was the rule of faith for the Jews.

Jesus accepted this arrangement. He spoke Aramaic. He wrote nothing and did not instruct his disciples to write. He commanded them only to preach orally, in the ancient Judaic teaching tradition. He used the Greek Septuagint to teach. Of approximately 350 references made to the Old Testament by the New Testament writers, over 300 refer to the Septuagint. For example, Jesus, when discussing "human traditions" (Mark 7:6-8), quotes a version of Isaiah 29:13 found only in the Septuagint.

By A.D. 70 Jerusalem and the Temple were razed by the Romans, the Levitical priesthood was destroyed and the Jewish faith was hemorrhaging followers to the rapidly spreading belief that Jewish prophecy had been fulfilled in Jesus. Because this belief spread most rapidly among the Jews of the D.aspora and the Gentiles of the eastern Mediterranean, the language of trade, koine Greek, and the Greek Septuagint was the common denominator between all the communities.

Jewish Christian oral teaching competed successfully against traditional Jewish oral teaching, and it used Jewish Scripture to do it. This sparked two movements within non-Christian Judaism. First, Jewish scholars began debating whether or not the Christians' "Greek Scripture" was really Scripture. Second, around the year 200 , the rabbis began writing down Jewish religious and civil law and their commentaries on it, creating what would become the Talmud six centuries later. These Jews ultimately refused the deuterocanonical Old Testament books, probably because of theology (for example, 1 and 2 Maccabees teach the resurrection of the dead, while Wisdom chapters 1-5 contains an unsettlingly prophetic description of Christ's passion and death) and because they were written in Greek, not Hebrew.

Meanwhile, Christians had their own problems. While Jewish brethren argued that only Hebrew writings were inspired, Gentile and Jewish Christians, following the tradition of Sirach and the Maccabean authors, were writing numerous Aramaic and Greek works about God's last and greatest intervention in the life of Israel. Lives of Christ and manuals of Christian practice and belief proliferated. Unfortunately, no one was certain which of those writings should be considered sacred. Christians simply couldn't be sure of the sacredness of any of the books in the Jewish tradition after Malachi-even the Song of Songs was contested by some traditional rabbinical authorities. Although Jude 9 alludes to the Assumption of Moses, that book was not in the Hebrew canon or in the Septuagint and is not now considered part of sacred Scripture-yet some thought it should be part of the Bible. Such arguments led early Christians to distinguish between the homologoumenoi ("accepted" books) and the antilegomenoi ("contested" books), sometimes also called the amphiballomenoi ("contradicted" books).

While Old Testament arguments revolved around traditional Jewish acceptance of the books as sacred, New Testament difficulties related mostly to authorship. If the book was not clearly apostolic in origin, the Church tended to dispute or reject it. For instance, the Western Church was not convinced Hebrews was written by the apostle Paul, while the Eastern Church was. Meanwhile, the Eastern Church doubted the apostle John wrote Revelation, while the Western Church knew he had. Some New Testament works deemed apocryphal were and are recognized as essentially good-to-excellent theological works-the Didache, the Shepherd of Hermas-but uncertain authorship prevented their acceptance as inspired. Other apocryphal books were not only of uncertain or flagrantly false authorship, but also had error mixed in with otherwise acceptable theology-the Gospel of Thomas and the Acts of Pontius Pilate. Many orthodox Christians fought to include theologically sound works such as the Didache in the canon of the New Testament, arguing for their apostolic origin.

About 140 a man named Marcion exploited this problem to his own benefit. He rejected all Scripture, Old and New Testament, except for portions of the Gospel of Luke and ten Pauline epistles. He asserted that the God of the Old Testament was not the God of the New, that Christianity did not fulfill Judaism but replaced it, and that all creation was evil. Consequently, Jesus Christ, being God, could not really be a man. Denying some portion of accepted canonical Scripture soon became a common facet of heresy. Such heresy forced the Church to accelerate its work in identifying Scripture.

 

[onel0126]

Continuing......

The Scorecard: In 382 Pope Damasus convoked a synod which produced the Roman Code. The Roman Code identified a list of scriptural books identical to the Council of Trent's formally defined canon. In 393 the Council of Hippo reiterated the list, as did the First Council of Carthage four years later. In 405 Pope Innocent I wrote a letter to Exsuperius, the bishop of Toulouse, listing the same books as Scripture. The list was given again in 419 at the Second Council of Carthage.

After roughly three centuries of prayer and discussion, the Church essentially solved the problem during a forty-year burst of activity. In the Old Testament, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees, parts of Esther (chapters 11-16), and parts of Daniel (3:24-90 and 13, 14) were recognized as inspired. In the New Testament, the Church accepted Hebrews, James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and Revelation. Each of the decrees and councils provided the same list of Scripture. No council or papal decree gave a different list. While Athanasius and Jerome had some sympathy toward the Jewish unwillingness to accept the Old Testament deuterocanonical books, both bowed to the authority of the Church, accepting her definitions of Scripture. By 450 today's list of inspired books was almost universally accepted in the Western Church. Mark 16:9-20, Luke 22:43-44, and John 5:4, 8:1-11, while not in the earliest manuscripts, eventually would be accepted. Five hundred years later, Jewish scholars completed codification of their sacred writings with the production of the "Masoretic" text of Scripture. Between 800 and 925, the Jewish family Masorete added punctuation, vowels, and spacing to the Hebrew Scripture. The Masoretic version functionally replaced the original Hebrew text.

By the sixteenth century, the Latin words "protocanonical" (meaning "first canon") and "deuterocanonical" (meaning "second canon") replaced the Greek terms for "accepted" and "contested," while the Greek term "apocrypha" was kept to describe both the Septuagint books rejected by the Church and all other non-Septuagint ancient texts. "Apocrypha" means "hidden," shorthand for "these books are to be hidden from all but the wise," since the books have tended to be misunderstood by those not well-formed in the mysteries of faith.

Around the same time, the canonical status of the Christian Old Testament again was called into question, this time by Elias Levita, a Jewish contemporary of Luther. He theorized that Ezra presided over "the men of the Great Synagogue" and closed the canon in the fifth century B.C. His "proof" was Nehemiah 8 and 9, the great assembly of the people to whom Ezra publicly read the Law after the return from Exile. Though no historical evidence of a "Great Synagogue" exists, Luther popularized Levita's idea since it supported his bid to discard the Old Testament deuterocanonical books and thereby strengthened his dubious theology. Shortly after the Reformation began, Protestants began jeering the deuterocanonical books as "apocrypha" in order to disparage the inspired quality of that part of Scripture. The Rationalists of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries followed suit, since it undermined the authority of the Church.

Today, opponents present two classes of arguments against the books. These center around both the content of the books in their relationship to the rest of Scripture and the determination of who has proper authority to recognize or reject books as inspired.

Five arguments are directed against the contents of the books themselves: God forbids sorcery, yet Tobit uses sympathetic magic to drive away a demon and heal blindness. Scripture is inerrant, yet Judith and Tobit have erroneous geography and history. Similarly, Sirach and 2 Maccabees implicitly deny they are inspired Scripture, since both contain prefaces in which the authors apologize for any possible errors. God forbids lying, yet Judith and the angel Raphael provide sinful examples by giving false information (Tob. 5:5, 5:13, Jud. 9:10, 13). Lastly, none of the books are quoted in the New Testament.

Far from presenting an exercise in magic, Tobit presents the ancient Christological symbol of the fish (who is, in Tobit 6:3, literally a catcher of men) salted and roasted on coals (as Christ was scourged and roasted in the sun on the cross) in order to destroy the power of a murderous demon and drive him away from a virginal bride. The fish is used to heal a blind man (cf. John 9) by making things like scales fall from his eyes (cf. Acts 10:18).

Apparent errors are not restricted to Tobit and Judith. The book of Daniel says the Medes were a world power in the era between the neo-Babylonians and the Persians (cf. Dan. 2:31-45, 7:1-7), but no historical evidence confirms it. Belshazzar was never titled a king, despite Daniel's assertions otherwise, and he was the son of Nabonidus (556-539 B.C), not of Nebuchadnezzar (605-562 B.C.) (cf 5:1-30, 7:1-7, 17, 8:1-27). Daniel records a Darius the Mede. Darius I was really king of Persia (522-486 B.C).

Similarly, other books show dubious statements by the inspired authors. 1 Corinthians 1:15, for example, shows Paul forgetting whom he baptized, while 1 Corinthians 7:12 and 1 Corinthians 7:40 are explicitly asserted to be Paul's personal opinion, not God's word. Likewise, many books of Scripture highlight morally dubious acts. The Hebrew midwives lie to Pharaoh (Ex. 1:19), while Judges, in addition to presenting a situation similar to Judith (Judg. 4:17-22), also shows a man who offers his own daughter as a holocaust (Judg. 11:29-40) and another who gives his wife to a crowd to be raped to death in place of himself (Judg. 19:22-30), while Genesis shows Jacob being rewarded for stealing Esau's birthright (Gen. 25 and 27).

Finally, the lack of quotations applies equally well to Esther, Nehemiah, Canticles, Ecclesiastes, and Ruth-none of which is quoted in the New Testament-yet Enoch and the Assumption of Moses-two apocryphal books-are referred to in the epistle of Jude. If New Testament quotations demonstrate Old Testament canonicity, consistency demands that opponents discard the former books while adding the latter two to the canon of the Old Testament. The earliest Christians would have been amazed at this judgment: while the catacombs have frescoes depicting scenes from the deuterocanonical books-Judith with the head of Holofernes, Tobias with Raphael, Judas Maccabeus, the mother of Maccabees with her seven martyred sons, Daniel in the lion's den, and the three boys in the fiery furnace-there are no such frescoes from any apocryphal books. Besides, the New Testament does allude to the books: Matthew 22:25-26 echoes Tobit 7:11, 1 Peter 1:6-7 is reminiscent of Wisdom 3:5-6, while Hebrews 1:3 recalls Wisdom 7:26-27. The same lessons are taught in 1 Corinthians 10:9-10 and Judith 8:24-25, and valorous martyrs are provided in both Hebrews 11 and 2 Maccabees 6 and 7.

But what of the second general objection? Who has proper authority to recognize the books of Scripture, each individual Christian or ecumenical councils headed by the pope? Opponents assert that it cannot be the latter, since Trent was the first ecumenical council to use the word "canon" in its definition of inspired books. Such a late definition means Christians were left without a clearly-defined word of God for well over a millennium-a preposterous idea. Trent, they say, arbitrarily added the Old Testament deuterocanonical books to Scripture to protect flawed Catholic theology. This argument ignores history. The canon was ratified in the late fourth and early fifth centuries. The Second Council of Nicaea (787) formally ratified the African Code, which contained what Trent would name "canonical," while the Council of Florence (1441) defined a list of inspired books identical to both. Although only Trent used the words "canon" and "canonical," its list was identical with every list the Church had provided since the late 300s. Trent's Sacrosancta decree (April 8, 1546), the first formal canonical definition of Old and New Testament Scripture, was the third formal affirmation of their inspiration in ecumenical council and at least the eighth affirmation overall.