Protestant canon

[Standing Up]

Ok, now we look at the verse in Psalms:

7All who see me sneer at me;
They separate with the lip, they wag the head, saying, 8“Commit yourself to the LORD; let Him deliver him;
Let Him rescue him, because He delights in him.”

Again, what is their criteria here? He trusted on the Lord. If he God delights in Him, then God will rescue him. That is the criteria that the scoffers applied towards Jesus. If he is truly the Son of God, then he will be able to come down off the cross. Since Christ didn't save himself (or God didn't save him), they rejected Him as the Messiah. Can you not see how this verse and the one in Wisdom are saying precisely the same thing?

Sure. Or look at those who wagged their heads walking by the cross. But would you say that they were prophets? If not, then either is Wisdom.

 

[Standing Up]

those men do not have the spirit of God, they have the spirit of the devil. they are mocking Christ. God pointed that out. if you continue to show all of us that you can not even understand this scripture, then you highly discredit yourself. which is great for us, because we at least will know that you are in error. people have explained it much better than me and I just do not get why you do not understand.

Finally. We seem to be getting somewhere.

Again, I am not the one asserting that Wisdom was prophetical. EO/RC/some P were. That we agree it was not prophetical (do not have the Spirit of God) is spot on.

 

[Kristos]

Sure. Or look at those who wagged their heads walking by the cross. But would you say that they were prophets? If not, then either is Wisdom.

Wisdom is part of the Writings not the Prophets.

 

[Standing Up]

Wisdom is part of the Writings not the Prophets.

Fabulous. Maybe by now they will drop the assertion that it was prophetical.

 

[Kristos]

Fabulous. Maybe by now they will drop the assertion that it was prophetical.

Like the Psalms?

 

[Standing Up]

Interestingly enough, it can also be translated like this:

Melito's canon is found in Eusebius EH4.26.13–14[3]:

Accordingly when I went East and came to the place where these things were preached and done, I learned accurately the books of the Old Testament, and send them to thee as written below. Their names are as follows: Of Moses, five books: Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy; Jesus Nave, Judges, Ruth; of Kings, four books;[4] of Chronicles, two; the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon, Wisdom also, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job; of Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah; of the twelve prophets, one book ; Daniel, Ezekiel, Esdras. From which also I have made the extracts, dividing them into six books.

~wiki

There are several mainline scholars who think that Melito includes Wisdom in his canon, regardless of what ccel.org says. Go convince them, and then get back to us about this.
And until you reconcile why he missed Esther, you cannot use him to support your canon either.


​

the Proverbs of Solomon, or Wisdom,18

18Whether Melito, in his catalogue, by the word Wisdom, meant to designate a distinct book; or whether it was used as another name for Proverbs, seems doubtful. The latter has generally been understood to be the sense; and this accords with the understanding of the ancients; for Rufin, in his translation of this passage of Eusebius renders παροιμιαι η σοφάα Salomonis Proverbia, quæ est sapientia; that is, The Proverbs of Solomon, which is Wisdom. Pineda, a learned Romanist, says, “The word Wisdom should here be taken as explicative of the former, and should be understood to mean, The Proverbs.”
Canon of the Old and New Testaments Ascertained, or The Bible Complete without the Apocrypha and Unwritten Traditions. | Christian Classics Ethereal Library

 

[Noxot]

Finally. We seem to be getting somewhere.

Again, I am not the one asserting that Wisdom was prophetical. EO/RC/some P were. That we agree it was not prophetical (do not have the Spirit of God) is spot on.

stop twisting my words. it is prophesy and those men did not speak truly. why do you keep saying those wicked men are the ones speaking the prophesy? it was God showing the prophesy.

you are confusing God with wicked mens hearts.

how can you not discern the spirit of God? can you not tell that you are trying to impose your own interpretation on the Words of God? you do not believe they are the Words of God? then I will say this, further more you are imposing your own interpretation on reality, because you are not even reading the text how reality would tell you how to read them.

what is giving you this interpretation? where do you get it from?

 

[SummaScriptura]

True - it is a bit artificial, but I think it puts the disparity in context. We are not talking about relegating a "minor" prophet, but a "major" one. It's a bigger demotion

So, how about that hymn of the three youths? Why was that so threatening to the Jews that they decided to exclude it? And even demote the rest of the book to the Writings?

There is no defintive pre-Christian source to sort this one out as far as I have found, but I will share with you my educated conjecture:

1. It was not excluded by the Jews. Rather, it was included by the Greek-speaking Jews. That is why it survives for us today in the Septuagint.
2. Different editions of the books were in circulation in different Jewish centers. Not all books and parts of books had a uniform circulation in all the major Jewish centers in ancient times. There were somewhat different collections in Babylon, Israel, Egypt and Ethiopia.
3. I think a good case can be made that certain sections of Esther and Daniel had a different provenance at first and were coalesced in different versions at a later time.
4. In the case of Daniel, the book we have in Hebrew and Chadee was a complete compostion which was sealed and not studied and read in Daniel's generation. Daniel had other writings though. These circulated independently for some time until the Book of Daniel was finally unsealed and entered into circulation as well. A later copyist, probably in Egypt decided it would be good if all of Daniel's writings were together, and so a "different", longer, edition of Daniel came into being.

 

[Standing Up]

Eusebius, in giving a catalogue of the leaders of the Jews, denies that he can proceed any lower than Zerubbabel, “Because,” says he, “after the return from captivity until the advent of our Saviour, there is no book which can be esteemed sacred.”

Anyone know where Eusebius says this?

 

[Montalban]

Eusebius, in giving a catalogue of the leaders of the Jews, denies that he can proceed any lower than Zerubbabel, “Because,” says he, “after the return from captivity until the advent of our Saviour, there is no book which can be esteemed sacred.”

Anyone know where Eusebius says this?

So you don't know?

I cannot find a direct link to Eusebius saying this. I only find yourself and CCEL claiming that he says this

Canon of the Old and New Testaments Ascertained, or The Bible Complete without the Apocrypha and Unwritten Traditions. | Christian Classics Ethereal Library

 

[Montalban]

BUMP

There's more errors:

1) I dealt with that too - I cited the Psalm regarding predicting Jesus' wish not to be delivered unto his enemies. Selective addressing of points doesn't help

Directly related to this point is the next...
2) The statement you quote is conditional. It doesn't say "Jesus was delivered". It suggests that he's taunted and that if he is truly God he will be, as he was tempted when he was on the Cross. The thief said to him that if he truly was God he could get them down off the cross.

Luke 23:39 One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: “Aren’t you the Messiah? Save yourself and us!”

The soldiers also mocked him
Luke 23:36 The soldiers also came up and mocked him. They offered him wine vinegar 37 and said, “If you are the king of the Jews, save yourself.”

This doesn't help your case either.

And Jesus himself asked to be freed from this burden.

And it's predicted in Psalms...

And in that Psalm it says

Psalm 22: 19 But you, LORD, do not be far from me.
You are my strength; come quickly to help me.
20 Deliver me from the sword,
my precious life from the power of the dogs.
21 Rescue me from the mouth of the lions;
save me from the horns of the wild oxen

If you can cite where they say that Jesus didn't die, that would be great. But you've not done so in the several weeks you've denied this prophecy. If you bring your evidence away from Christ-deniers like Josephus and Islam you'd be better able to understand this prophecy.

You don't have any verse that says he was freed from this. You have a verse predicting people will challenge him on this - to prove that he is God.

It's in Psalms too, the same predictions.

And it came to pass in Luke 23

 

[Montalban]

I think that one or two are confused by the fact that the OT is divided into "Prophets" and historical books and also into "writings"

It would make them think that there's no prophecies in the other books.

Psalms has prophecy in it

I think people might want to pick up a copy of Christ in the Psalms by Patrick Henry Reardon

 

[Rick Otto]

Eusebius, in giving a catalogue of the leaders of the Jews, denies that he can proceed any lower than Zerubbabel, “Because,” says he, “after the return from captivity until the advent of our Saviour, there is no book which can be esteemed sacred.”

Anyone know where Eusebius says this?

"Catalogue of the Leaders of the Jews" by Eusebius?

 

[Montalban]

"Catalogue of the Leaders of the Jews" by Eusebius?

Protestant Apologetics - Pop-Up Version ?

 

[SummaScriptura]

Sure. Or look at those who wagged their heads walking by the cross. But would you say that they were prophets? If not, then either is Wisdom.

Wisdom is part of the Writings not the Prophets.

Fabulous. Maybe by now they will drop the assertion that it was prophetical.

Like the Psalms?

Like Daniel and Chronicles?

 

[Standing Up]

stop twisting my words. it is prophesy and those men did not speak truly.

What's your definition of prophecy? Orthocat cited Deut (must come to pass and if it does come to pass, not lead you to different gods). I agree, of course. What's your definition?

This the prophecy? God will deliver Him before death?

 

[Rick Otto]

Protestant Apologetics - Pop-Up Version ?

lol

 

[Noxot]

What's your definition of prophecy? Orthocat cited Deut (must come to pass and if it does come to pass, not lead you to different gods). I agree, of course. What's your definition?

They spoke the truth (God will deliver Him) (it is prophesy). Did God deliver Him from the cross, from death? We know of the resurrection, but that's not the prophecy.

you are missing the entire point. we are all telling you that you are not reading/understanding the prophesy correctly.

and then you tell us from your messed up reading of the prophesy, that it is false.

really, it is a good thing to admit when you are wrong. it is a great concern to me that you can not even properly understand this prophesy. I mean, if you can not understand that one, then how are you going to understand the other things that the Lord says? this error you have could turn up to be a good witness to you in the end, when you realize your understanding was wrong. God can use this to humble you and you will be all the better for it. and everyone will rejoice and thank God.

 

[Rick Otto]

Eusebius, in giving a catalogue of the leaders of the Jews, denies that he can proceed any lower than Zerubbabel, “Because,” says he, “after the return from captivity until the advent of our Saviour, there is no book which can be esteemed sacred.”

Anyone know where Eusebius says this?

OK,... seriously. I guess his Church History.

 

[SummaScriptura]

SU, were the mockers of Jesus on the cross fulfilling a prophetic passage of Scripture from Psalms 22:8?