But this is the very basis for scientific understanding.
And the Earth isn't round.
Anything and everything should be called into question.
Divisions
- Thread starter journeymanisnothing
- Start date
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
And the Earth isn't round.
Anything and everything should be called into question.
Not on the basis of a single person questioning something. A person may not be a rational thinker; they may not have relevant expertise or experience; they may have any number of biases; they may have an agenda; etc. We simply cannot conclude on the basis of one person questioning that a matter is not settled.
You think it's flat?
And, yet, at some point, we must come to an understanding of a matter and consider it settled. We then question only if there is need to.
But sometimes the one person is the correct one.
oblate spheroid... and a flat earth could still be round.
And two branches of the Church have different Bibles... So that looks to me like a reason to question.
You know what I referring to. My point stands.
Yet, the Catholic Bible still has the same 66 books that comprise the entire Protestant Bible. The only books in question are the Apocryphal ones; the Jews rejected them, which is in large part why the Protestants do.
You know, Christians down through the centuries have walked with God coming to know and understand Him to varying degrees depending upon their obedience to Him and it never mattered whether Maccabees was in their Bible or not. The point was not which books are there but the reader obeying the teaching in the books he does read.
All Books in the King James Version are Scriptures.
Now as to your question about the books you mentioned, are they Scriptures? First you have to ask yourself, why did God NOT ALLOW them into His Word? There is a reason, and it is because something written in it, is NOT what God wants in His Word, therefore did not allow it into His Word.
Can we glean some Truths from these OTHER BOOKS? Sure, but never take what they say as the WORD OF GOD. And read everything with a grain of salt.
But this is Better to do. NOT read any of them at all. Even though i have read most (if not all) of them. The reason is, is Because satan will have another whole set of tools to use against you, by believing in those OTHER BOOKS.
Are these OTHER BOOKS evil, if they teach something contrary to what is in the Word of God, then i would say YES they are, hence the reason God did not allow them into His Word. Can we learn something in them, That is possible too. But why give satan more tools to use against you? These Books will only cause more confusion, which God is NOT the author of. So then it is best to just stay away from all of them.
Even the Bible itself mentions Books that are not in the Word of God. Would these then be accepted, if the Word of God testifies of them?
Jos_10:13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.
2Sa_1:18 (Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.)
Mal_3:16 Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name.
i know not.
It would seem to me then that God has ordained it to happen this way .
Did there come a point where God's chosen people did not endure sound doctrine as well ?
And these are people who had been witness to the physical appearing of God in the form of a cloud .
More than anything it just amazes me that we have endured as long as we have .
God's will is in this as well.
Heb 11:27
By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible.
I do all the time... the questions are never ending, as they should be.
And who says I am questioning the Bible in this thread?
The Protestants have their Bible and the Catholics have their Bible, which contains the entire the Protestant Bible. The NT is in agreement between both and was determined 1600+ years ago. As far as Christianity as a whole goes, it’s settled. The point being, there are no other books to be considered by either side.
So, when the NT refers to Scripture or the Scriptures, it is most often referring to the Protestant OT. There is one instance of a quote from Luke referred to as Scripture, Paul’s writings being equated with OT Scripture, and one which is considered to imply the entire NT is Scripture.
Actually he said his books are complete fiction with no connection to the truth and as fiction he sees no reason to use the truth.
What a sad thing to accuse God of, that he ordained some for hell and to be deceived and so on. Says he does not weep or sorrow over those but decided they would be like that. Can anyone imagine a heart harder than that?
Of course. Paul wrote about this. The atheists don't care about any doctrine, sound or otherwise. Only believers care about doctrine.
It is settled for the Catholics and it is settled for the Protestants. There are no other writings which Christians would refer to as Scripture, which makes the issue settled. When the Bible uses "Scripture" or "Scriptures," we know exactly which writings it is referring to. That is the point.
Not settled. Because two different main factions have different texts.
So by definition... not settled.
You have to try a different tack if you want to make your point.
No, my point is made. When the Bible refers to "Scripture" or "Scriptures," we know exactly which writings it is referring to. There are no other books out there to which the Bible would be referring to. That is what matters.
Glad you think so. But I know many people who are not as settled as you appear to be.
And I don't think your point was very persuasive.
50% of the body of Christ think the Bible has x number of books.
50% of the body of Christ think the Bible has y number of books.
So we are in agreement.
Sounds like a hung jury to me.