Sola Scriptura defined....

[Major1]

I have long hair and beard and walk with a limp

Dadgummed, I do too. The limp is getting better but do not let anyone tell you that knee replacements are a piece of cake!

 

[Major1]

Exactly how is it that you know the 66 books are authored by God? How is it that you know the other books are not?

The doctrine of canonicity ultimately comes back to the lordship of Jesus Christ. If we believe in Him and submit to His authority, then we will simultaneously believe in and submit to His Word. Because He affirmed the Old Testament canon, we also affirm it. Because He authorized His apostles to write the New Testament, we likewise embrace it as well.

It was not the Catholic church that determined the canon. Constantine did not determine the canon. Joseph Smith certainly did not determine the canon. No, it is the authority of Christ Himself, the Lord of the church and the incarnate Son of God, on which the canon of Scripture rests.
https://www.tms.edu/preachersandpreaching/why-these-66-books/

The first century Jews did not consider the Apocryphal books to be canonical. And neither did Jesus. He accepted the canon of the Jews as being the complete Old Testament. He never affirmed or cited the Apocryphal books – and neither do any of the other writers of the New Testament.

 

[PeaceB]

The doctrine of canonicity ultimately comes back to the lordship of Jesus Christ. If we believe in Him and submit to His authority, then we will simultaneously believe in and submit to His Word.

Well you don't submit to 7 books of his word, so what does that tell us about you believing in him and submitting to his authority?

The first century Jews did not consider the Apocryphal books to be canonical.

You are basing your argument on a group of people who reject Christ as lord and who reject the entire new testament canon. The OT canon was not closed at the time of our Lord's passion. Surely you can do better.

He never affirmed or cited the Apocryphal books – and neither do any of the other writers of the New Testament.

And there I thought that you were a King James man. Kindly pick up your 1611 and tell us what you find at the note to Hebrews 11:35.

 

[tulipbee]

Well you don't submit to 7 books of his word, so what does that tell us about you believing in him and submitting to his authority?

You are basing your argument on a group of people who reject Christ as lord and who reject the entire new testament canon. The OT canon was not closed at the time of our Lord's passion. Surely you can do better.


And there I thought that you were a King James man. Kindly pick up your 1611 and tell us what you find at the note to Hebrews 11:35.

theomatics and Ivan pain proved the extra books were not inspired. it was your Roman denomination that told you they were inspired. what are you going to do about that?

 

[PeaceB]

theomatics and Ivan pain proved the extra books were not inspired.

Nah.

what are you going to do about that?

Well I will be happy to answer your question as soon as you answer mine.

 

[tulipbee]

Exactly how is it that you know the 66 books are authored by God? How is it that you know the other books are not?

read up on Ivan panin. he discovered something

 

[tulipbee]

Nah.

Well I will be happy to answer your question as soon as you answer mine.

i'm not surprise. roman denomination is in denial ever since they thought peter was Jesus2

 

[PeaceB]

read up on Ivan panin. he discovered something

Well read up on this. You may discover something:

12 “Let us lie in wait for the righteous man,
because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions;
he reproaches us for sins against the law,
and accuses us of sins against our training.
13 He professes to have knowledge of God,
and calls himself a child of the Lord.
14 He became to us a reproof of our thoughts;
15 the very sight of him is a burden to us,
because his manner of life is unlike that of others,
and his ways are strange.
16 We are considered by him as something base,
and he avoids our ways as unclean;
he calls the last end of the righteous happy,
and boasts that God is his father.
17 Let us see if his words are true,
and let us test what will happen at the end of his life;
18 for if the righteous man is God’s child, he will help him,
and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries.
19 Let us test him with insult and torture,
so that we may find out how gentle he is,
and make trial of his forbearance.
20 Let us condemn him to a shameful death,
for, according to what he says, he will be protected.”
21 Thus they reasoned, but they were led astray,
for their wickedness blinded them,
22 and they did not know the secret purposes of God,
nor hoped for the wages of holiness,
nor discerned the prize for blameless souls;
23 for God created us for incorruption,
and made us in the image of his own eternity,
24 but through the devil’s envy death entered the world,
and those who belong to his company experience it.

 

[PeaceB]

i'm not surprise. roman denomination is in denial ever since they thought peter was Jesus2

Don't you mean Mary?

 

[tulipbee]

Well read up on this. You may discover something:

12 “Let us lie in wait for the righteous man,
because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions;
he reproaches us for sins against the law,
and accuses us of sins against our training.
13 He professes to have knowledge of God,
and calls himself a child of the Lord.
14 He became to us a reproof of our thoughts;
15 the very sight of him is a burden to us,
because his manner of life is unlike that of others,
and his ways are strange.
16 We are considered by him as something base,
and he avoids our ways as unclean;
he calls the last end of the righteous happy,
and boasts that God is his father.
17 Let us see if his words are true,
and let us test what will happen at the end of his life;
18 for if the righteous man is God’s child, he will help him,
and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries.
19 Let us test him with insult and torture,
so that we may find out how gentle he is,
and make trial of his forbearance.
20 Let us condemn him to a shameful death,
for, according to what he says, he will be protected.”
21 Thus they reasoned, but they were led astray,
for their wickedness blinded them,
22 and they did not know the secret purposes of God,
nor hoped for the wages of holiness,
nor discerned the prize for blameless souls;
23 for God created us for incorruption,
and made us in the image of his own eternity,
24 but through the devil’s envy death entered the world,
and those who belong to his company experience it.

we're not on the same page here. you can't auto-deny. We were talking about the original word of the bible. the word they used to write the bible were also used to represent numbers. they didn't have a number system when the bible was written. they used letters instead of numbers. the discovery was that we didn't know that those numbers tells us something else. since you're not interested in God's words, let me leave you with the original letters they used to write the bible. if you believe the bible then you'll believe the words themselves.

 

[tulipbee]

Don't you mean Mary?

We wouldn't be surprised if you believe Mary was Jesus2. don't you mean Mary can save you?

 

[PeaceB]

we're not on the same page here. you can't auto-deny. We were talking about the original word of the bible. the word they used to write the bible were also used to represent numbers. they didn't have a number system when the bible was written. they used letters instead of numbers. the discovery was that we didn't know that those numbers tells us something else. since you're not interested in God's words, let me leave you with the original letters they used to write the bible. if you believe the bible then you'll believe the words themselves.

Thank you for the math lesson.

 

[PeaceB]

We wouldn't be surprised if you believe Mary was Jesus2. don't you mean Mary can save you?

Yes, yes, my good friend Jack Chick.

 

[tulipbee]

Yes, yes, my good friend Jack Chick.

the 66 book bible isn't jack chick booklets. Given the quality or rather, the lack of quality to your argument, I have reason to believe that your response will be a waste of my time

 

[PeaceB]

the 66 book bible isn't jack chick booklets. Given the quality or rather, the lack of quality to your argument, I have reason to believe that your response will be a waste of my time

Friend, you are basing your determination of canon on Ivan Panin's numerics, so you obviously have plenty of time to waste.

 

[Meowzltov]

So then, I am assuming that you are referring to the doctrine of Grace introduced by Martin Luther in 1560 or so.

You do realize that what he brought out was from the Scriptures which were written 1500 years before and just sat there in the Popes office waiting to be taught.......right?

What about the church? The church was not in existence until Paul brought it forth in the Scriptures.
Until Paul told us what the church was, it was a mystery.......unknown!

Do you reject the doctrine of salvation by grace alone because Luther expounded it or because the Catholic Popes did NOT expound it. Either way, it is still found in the very same place of Ephesians 2:8-9.

Em, the Catholic Church also teaches grace alone, a free gift.

 

[Meowzltov]

May I say to you that a "church" as seen in the NT comes from the Greek term ekklesia which is formed from two Greek words meaning "an assembly" and "to call out" or "called out ones."

I didn't use "church" with a small c, but 'Church" with a Capital C. Meaning the entire body of Christ. When we speak as a group, there is a truth about our interpretations. When we are divided, who knows what the truth is?

 

[Meowzltov]

What is the difference???? Both "groups" are SINNERS!

One is called a church and the other is called a "bunch of people."

The one called the Church is promised by Christ that the gates of hell shall not prevail against her.

 

[Meowzltov]

What you said is true.

Actually the Bible itself says in 1 Peter 1:20..........
"knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation."

So then, allow me to ask you if what YOU believe is because of what the Scriptures actually say or do you believe the Roman Catholic Church is the one true church and have given the meaning to you?
I think that the second question is probably the one that fits from reading your opinion and If so, then I have some questions for you.

1). By what authority do you interpret the word of God?
2). How do you know your interpretations of the Scriptures are correct?
3). Are you giving a private interpretation of the word of God?
4). Are you interpreting these verses for yourself without the authority of the Roman Catholic Church?5). Are you subjecting the entire Roman Catholic Church to your interpretation of Scripture and thereby concluding it is true?

So now answer this..........If you reply that you were just reading what the Scriptures say, then when I do the same thing and conclude that the Roman Catholic Church is not the true church, then you can't argue with me since I also am interpreting the Scriptures the same as you.
But, if you say that I am wrong and you are right, then how do you know without asserting your own authority??????? THINK!

But, if you believe the Roman Catholic Church is the one true church and it has the authority to interpret Scripture, then you don't have the authority to interpret it in a manner different from what they tell you it means--which is the same as not being able to interpret at all without it being your own "private interpretation."

Do you understand the box that the RCC has placed you in?????

Let me go on. If you believe what the Scriptures say and your conclusion is that the Roman Catholic Church is true, then you are subjecting the entire Roman Catholic Church to the validity of your own interpretations.

Do you see the problem from your perspective?

You and ALL Catholic believers are required to subject yourself to whatever the Roman Catholic Church tells you is true, yet you do the opposite when you look at Scripture to judge the Roman Catholic Church to be true.

I used prayer, reasoning, the Bible, and the guidance of the HS when I was first evaluating the Catholic Church back when I was an evangelical. But becoming a Catholic meant giving up that freedom and submitting to the authority of the Church. And it was a good thing, because in the past, I have made far too many mistakes that I've had to correct later on.

 

[tulipbee]

Five reasons the Apocrypha is not inspired of God….

Reason #1 – The author of Second Maccabees admitted that his writings were not inspired. (2 Maccabees 2:23 and 15:38)

Reason #2 – The Doctrine of Purgatory contradicts scripture. Roman Catholics believe that Purgatory is a place where some people will spend a little time before they enter Heaven. Purgatory is mentioned in 2 Maccabees 12:41-46 (The writer who admited his writings were not inspired of God.) Another problem with purgatory is the thief who died on the cross, (Luke 23). He would have been the perfect man for purgatory, but after he repented Jesus told him, "Truly Truly I say to you, TODAY you will BE WITH ME in paradise. (Luke 23:43). He didn't go to purgatory. Roman Catholics have no evidence for purgatory.

Reason #3 - Reason #5 – There are no prophecies, divine miracles, and the Apocrypha never claims to be inspired. The Old and New Testament writings claim to be inspired, ( 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21; 2 Peter 3:16). The Apocrypha never made such a claim to be inspired. The Old Testament and New Testament writings also say things over and over like, "Thus say the Lord" or "The word of the LORD came unto him." The Apocrypha never says anything like this.

Reason #4 – The Apocrypha contradicts the Bible. The Apocrypha commands to use magic. (Tobit 6:5-7). The Bible commands not to use magic. (1 Corinthians 6:9-10) The Apocrypha encourages us to pray for the dead. (2 Maccabees 12:41-46) The Bible does not encourage us to pray for the dead. (Luke 16:25, 26 and Hebrews 9:27)
The Apocrpha has God assisting Judith with a lie. (Judith 9:10-13) The Bible condemns liars. (Exodus 20:16) There are many other examples of contradictions but these must do for now. If God inspired the Old Testament, the New Testament, and the Apocrypha, they would all have to agree with each other, but they don't. The Apocrypha is not inspired of God.

Reason #5 – There are historical errors in the Apocrypha. A clear historical error the Apocrypha has is in the book of Judith. Judith says that Nebuchadnezzar reigned in the city of Ninevah. History, and the book of Daniel teaches that Nebuchadnezzar was the king of Babylon.

Reason #6 - Apocrypha teaches that people are saved by good works and not grace. This is a major disagreement among Catholics and Protestants today. The Catholics will use the Apocrypha to justify their believe of being saved by good works and not grace. found at Online Debate: The Apocrypha (Deuterocanonical) is not inspired of God | Debate.org