Apparitions of "Mary"

[lionroar0]

Sorry.. Don't buy it.

What he said is accurate. The CC the EOC and the OO have those books in the Bible.

Peace

 

[Hentenza]

Tobit 6 :5-7 is not about magic, is it magic when Moses strikes the rock and water comes out? no it is God telling people what to do (or in this case an angel of God) and miiracles happening as a result.
Who was the king of assyria at the time? could King Nebuchadnezzar have been ruling over both kingdoms, Babylon was an empire right?

Tobias 6:5-7, "Then the angel said to him: Take out the entrails of this fish, and lay up his heart, and his gall, and his liver for thee: for these are necessary for useful medicines. 6 And when he had done so, he roasted the flesh thereof, and they took it with them in the way: the rest they salted as much as might serve them, till they came to Rages the city of the Medes. 7 Then Tobias asked the angel, and said to him: I beseech thee, brother Azarias, tell me what remedies are these things good for, which thou hast bid me keep of the fish? 8 And the angel, answering, said to him: If thou put a little piece of its heart upon coals, the smoke thereof driveth away all kind of devils, either from man or from woman, so that they come no more to them."

It contains magic.

Bible accounts in Daniel contradicts your conclusions about Nebuchdnezzar.

 

[Hentenza]

According to some there are about some 600 errors in the Bible.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html

Peace

There are also several websites that explain those "errors". The scriptures are inerrant.

 

[ScottBot]

There are also several websites that explain those "errors". The scriptures are inerrant.

Exactly, all 73 books.

 

[Axion]

Patently false.

The books in question have been considered the canon of Scripture since the councils of Carthage, Rome, and Hippo at the end of the 4th century.

The books were not included in the list that was promulgated by the Council of Jamnia by a group of diasporate Pharisees under the leadership of Rabii Yohanan ben Zakkai not some 30 years after Roman Emperor Titus laid seige to Jerusalem and raised Solomon's Temple to the ground. It is speculated that at this council, the canon of the Hebrew scriptures was closed. The canon includes all of the books now popular in most Protestant bibles, by setting a someone arbitrary set of qualifications to what was considered acceptable.

However, once Christ breathed life into His church just prior to His acsension, there was no longer a need to follow the leadership of the Pharisees. The wine was new (The Gospel) and the skins were old (the law of the Pharisees) So Jesus put the new wine into new wineskins (The Church), who now had Christ's authority to determine Scripture. It is this canon of Scripture that we are to follow, not anything determined by a group of xenophobic hebrew scholars who were more interested in preserving Jewish tradition than the good news of Christ.

 

[Hentenza]

Exactly, all 73 books.

You killing me.

 

[TheDivaAngel]

Exactly, all 73 books.

are you saying God's word is inerrant? Please clarify.

 

[ScottBot]

are you saying God's word is inerrant? Please clarify.

Yes, The Scriptures, as penned in the original languages by the original authors are inerrant. Most modern translations leave out much of the important linguistic context that conveys they true intended meaning of the words.

 

[TheDivaAngel]

Yes, The Scriptures, as penned in the original languages by the original authors are inerrant. Most modern translations leave out much of the important linguistic context that conveys they true intended meaning of the words.

:o um...yeah. Ok. I admit, some translations aren't good, but I wouldn't say what God said to put in there is inerrant. After all, He does say His word is infallable.

 

[ScottBot]

:o um...yeah. Ok. I admit, some translations aren't good, but I wouldn't say what God said to put in there is inerrant. After all, He does say His word is infallable.

I agree. God never said that translations of his word were inerrant (cannot be infallible). IF so, you have to give the Jehovah's Witnesses a pass on their New World Translation.

 

[TheDivaAngel]

well, we have to work with what we have. I WISH I had the original, but since we don't...well. But still HIS word is inerrant.

 

[Rhamiel]

Amen DivaAngel, God is faithful and He has sent His Word to dwell with His people.

 

[Merciel]

If you will see how things are recorded in Genesis then you would have no doubt. We go to Genesis 1 and we have the outline of the beginning. Then we go to Genesis 2 and it goes into much detail of the outline that we have. Very easy reading.

And, we could be "true skeptics" harden our hearts to such apologetics that make sense of the Bible (whether the Protestant version or the RC/EO/OO version) and keep insisting that things that aren't contradictions really are.

 

[IamAdopted]

And, we could be "true skeptics" harden our hearts to such apologetics that make sense of the Bible (whether the Protestant version or the RC/EO/OO version) and keep insisting that things that aren't contradictions really are.

In your opinion of course.

 

[GrannieAnnie]

Jesus is Lord.....personally...I don't need visions of saints or spirits to make me love Him.....why do people want to look to others for inspiration when Jesus stands before you...what greater inspiriation is there....but Jesus......

And my view of these visions....I think they are satanic....

 

[Merciel]

In your opinion of course.

Just like it is your opinion that the Bible contains no contadictions. Well, it's my opinion that it doesn't either, but then, again, I don't have a hard heart against the Bible, whether it be the Protestant version of the RCC/EOC/OOC version, and so I won't immediately disregard the defense of either.

 

[Merciel]

Jesus is Lord.....personally...I don't need visions of saints or spirits to make me love Him.....

I don't need miracles to make me love Jesus. Does that mean that the miracles that happen to others are satanic or wrong?