*["...It is sad that you take the opinion of the Jews in 90AD that rejected your own Lord and Saviour as superior to that of Christ Himself."]
***You are an ignorant papist. The Apostle Paul destroys your argument and declares that the Jews KNEW the OT canon and DID NOT include the Apocrypha in it. Paul says the following: "...then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? Great in every respect. First of all, that THEY were ENTRUSTED with the ORACLES of God,..." [Romans 3:1-2]. God gave the scriptures to His Chosen people to GUARD AGAINST CORRUPTION...and Jesus recognized this in His words in [Luke 11:50-51] which reflected the SETTLED CHARACTER of the Jewish canon (with its peculiar order) already in His day. Your words are a crock...and reveals your anti-semitic papist bias.
Marchello
***You are an ignorant papist. The Apostle Paul destroys your argument and declares that the Jews KNEW the OT canon and DID NOT include the Apocrypha in it. Paul says the following: "...then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? Great in every respect. First of all, that THEY were ENTRUSTED with the ORACLES of God,..." [Romans 3:1-2]. God gave the scriptures to His Chosen people to GUARD AGAINST CORRUPTION...and Jesus recognized this in His words in [Luke 11:50-51] which reflected the SETTLED CHARACTER of the Jewish canon (with its peculiar order) already in His day. Your words are a crock...and reveals your anti-semitic papist bias.this only reflect to someone who cant think for himself
God gave the scriptures to His Chosen people to GUARD AGAINST CORRUPTION...guess all the christian denominations are ****ed then, cause your lot couldnt guard your own ass if your life depended on it
Originally posted by MarchelloYou are a liar in the first degree. First, I can empirically proven not be a papist. God knows, you know, you will be judged accordingly. Second, I am not anti-semitic and have a deep respect for Rabbinical tradition and was at one time religiously Jewish. Perhaps you should not accuse out of ignorance, you have only achieved sin through the spreading of deceit and slander.
[B]*["...It is sad that you take the opinion of the Jews in 90AD that rejected your own Lord and Saviour as superior to that of Christ Himself."]***You are an ignorant papist. The Apostle Paul destroys your argument and declares that the Jews KNEW the OT canon and DID NOT include the Apocrypha in it. Paul says the following: "...then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? Great in every respect. First of all, that THEY were ENTRUSTED with the ORACLES of God,..." [Romans 3:1-2]. God gave the scriptures to His Chosen people to GUARD AGAINST CORRUPTION...and Jesus recognized this in His words in [Luke 11:50-51] which reflected the SETTLED CHARACTER of the Jewish canon (with its peculiar order) already in His day. Your words are a crock...and reveals your anti-semitic papist bias.
Marchello [/B]
Website arguments are fail especially when you fail to realize that the canon you are trying to support was created after Paul wrote the text which can only refer to the Septuagint.
And your very long and pointless post speaks nothing of what the canon should be. You have proven yourself ignorant. The OT canon is the same set of scriptures that Jesus taught from. The Septuagint. Whether it was accepted as canon at the time does not matter. Jesus found the Septuagint acceptable, therefore we find the Septuagint acceptable.
Your address has nothing to do with anything I said. Sadly, I recognize that you do not think for yourself on these matters. It smelled of ignorance and thus I find it copied and pasted.
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/apocrypha.html
etc.
= fail.
A) Paul used the Septuagint as did all the apostles. He acknowledges that the Septuagint is inspired by God because it is very scripture that he uses.
So your argument fails.
By your logic of what established as scripture at the time of Christ we must exclude all the Ketuvim. Ruth, Song of Songs, Esther, Daniel, Psalms and Job are not to apart of your false canon as they were not considered authoritative until the same time that the whole New Testament was rejected.
So we find that you agree with the council of Jamnia that rejected the canon of Jesus, Jesus as Saviour and included a curse on all Christians.
Basically you invalidate your entire faith.
B) You will find many reasons why Zechariah was mentioned last, much of it having to do with his importance and significance. Some more to do with the insignificance of the order of books and whatnot. But since you are fond of copy and paste arguments I'll let you find a website to satisfy your intellectually suicidal tendencies.
C) Simply answered, the writings have no messianic prophecies to speak of hence why Jesus would not mention them in the above context. Furthermore, by your silly logic only the prophets, the law and the Psalms should be considered canon, meaning that you should throw out Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon.
The fact is that Jesus was clearly referring to the Septuagint because it was the compilation that placed the books in distinct groups that were outlined by Jesus, although Psalms was the only book in the 'writings' to contain messianic prophecy.
D) I did not mention the church fathers and never considered their testament viable on the matter. Using Jerome as evidence against it is pointless as there many more church fathers that would attest to it being canonical. It's a non-point.
Sidenote: Your citation is incredibly vague and I can only assume it refers to whatever website you actually dragged this horribly ignorant, overused and false argument from.
So a suggestion would be that you stop using websites and start thinking for yourself. It is embarrassing that you assumed that the website you used was actually credible in the matter. It ignored history and fact and twisted the reality of Jewish canon development to serve it's purpose. Hopefully you do not do the same in the future.
I grew up with the Protestant Bible, wondered why they were rejected and then did REAL research on it. The Protestant canon does not stand against scrutiny. God did not lie when He said His word would be preserved forever. Jesus used the Septuagint because He, as our Lord, knew it to contain only His inspired Word.
We also find many allusions to the books of the deuterocanon within the NT.
Wisdom of Solomon:
Matthew 2:16 - This murder of children was prophesied in 11:7
Matthew 6:18 - The power of death and the gates of Hades are from 16:13
Matthew 27:43 - Is from 2:18
John 5:18 - from 2:16
John 15:6 - from 4:5
Romans 1:18-25 - from 13:1-10
Romans 1:20 - from 13:1
Romans 9:21 - from 15:7
1 Corinthians 10:1 - from 19:7
Ephesians 1:17 - from 7:7
James 5:6 - from 2:10-20
Etc. for all the books of the deuterocanon.
Originally posted by Nellinator
You are a liar in the first degree. First, I can empirically proven not be a papist. God knows, you know, you will be judged accordingly. Second, I am not anti-semitic and have a deep respect for Rabbinical tradition and was at one time religiously Jewish. Perhaps you should not accuse out of ignorance, you have only achieved sin through the spreading of deceit and slander.Website arguments are fail especially when you fail to realize that the canon you are trying to support was created after Paul wrote the text which can only refer to the Septuagint.
And your very long and pointless post speaks nothing of what the canon should be. You have proven yourself ignorant. The OT canon is the same set of scriptures that Jesus taught from. The Septuagint. Whether it was accepted as canon at the time does not matter. Jesus found the Septuagint acceptable, therefore we find the Septuagint acceptable.
Your address has nothing to do with anything I said. Sadly, I recognize that you do not think for yourself on these matters. It smelled of ignorance and thus I find it copied and pasted.
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/apocrypha.html
etc.
= fail.A) Paul used the Septuagint as did all the apostles. He acknowledges that the Septuagint is inspired by God because it is very scripture that he uses.
So your argument fails.
By your logic of what established as scripture at the time of Christ we must exclude all the Ketuvim. Ruth, Song of Songs, Esther, Daniel, Psalms and Job are not to apart of your false canon as they were not considered authoritative until the same time that the whole New Testament was rejected.
So we find that you agree with the council of Jamnia that rejected the canon of Jesus, Jesus as Saviour and included a curse on all Christians.
Basically you invalidate your entire faith.
B) You will find many reasons why Zechariah was mentioned last, much of it having to do with his importance and significance. Some more to do with the insignificance of the order of books and whatnot. But since you are fond of copy and paste arguments I'll let you find a website to satisfy your intellectually suicidal tendencies.
C) Simply answered, the writings have no messianic prophecies to speak of hence why Jesus would not mention them in the above context. Furthermore, by your silly logic only the prophets, the law and the Psalms should be considered canon, meaning that you should throw out Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon.
The fact is that Jesus was clearly referring to the Septuagint because it was the compilation that placed the books in distinct groups that were outlined by Jesus, although Psalms was the only book in the 'writings' to contain messianic prophecy.
D) I did not mention the church fathers and never considered their testament viable on the matter. Using Jerome as evidence against it is pointless as there many more church fathers that would attest to it being canonical. It's a non-point.
Sidenote: Your citation is incredibly vague and I can only assume it refers to whatever website you actually dragged this horribly ignorant, overused and false argument from.
So a suggestion would be that you stop using websites and start thinking for yourself. It is embarrassing that you assumed that the website you used was actually credible in the matter. It ignored history and fact and twisted the reality of Jewish canon development to serve it's purpose. Hopefully you do not do the same in the future.
I grew up with the Protestant Bible, wondered why they were rejected and then did REAL research on it. The Protestant canon does not stand against scrutiny. God did not lie when He said His word would be preserved forever. Jesus used the Septuagint because He, as our Lord, knew it to contain only His inspired Word.
***You are a Roman Catholic.
Marchello
I am not Roman Catholic and you know it. If I were you could provide empirical evidence that I was. You cannot and I can prove that I am not. Therefore, you are a liar. You called me so once out of ignorance. You have since been corrected and now lie and slander willfully in knowledge of the saving grace of Jesus. Your sin is your own head now.
Originally posted by Nellinator
I am not Roman Catholic and you know it. If I were you could provide empirical evidence that I was. You cannot and I can prove that I am not. Therefore, you are a liar. You called me so once out of ignorance. You have since been corrected and now lie and slander willfully in knowledge of the saving grace of Jesus. Your sin is your own head now.
***You can deny it...but you are a Roman Catholic.
Marchello
Page 1:
*["You are a liar in the first degree. First, I can empirically proven not be a papist..."]
***You have proven nothing and recrimination seems to be your forte.
************************************************
*["... God knows, you know, you will be judged accordingly. Second, I am not anti-semitic and have a deep respect for Rabbinical tradition and was at one time religiously Jewish..."]
***I will be judged only if I flagrantly lie [knowing that I lie]...but I can only judge you by your words...and what you say is ALWAYS in line with what Roman Catholic doctrine dictates. Your are EITHER a Roman Catholic or a Catholic apologist and I apologize NOT for my accusation.
As for your having respect for Rabbinical tradition...that is NOT a plus for you...for the Lord Jesus Christ said the following to the Pharisees who boasted of their respect for tradition: "Full well ye reject the commandments of God, that ye may keep your own tradition..." [Mark 7:9] and again, "...Making the Word of God of none effect through your traditions, which ye have delivered and many such like things do ye" [Mark 7:13]. The Pharisees sanctioned religious donations at the expense of violating God's command regarding one's duty to parents and set human tradition ABOVE God's Word. The "Corban" vow was a scribal tradition that distorted and nullified the OT.
As for your "being at one time religiously Jewish"...that is not a PLUS either...I was BORN a Jew! My dad was an Italian-Jew from Palermo, Sicily and my Mom's parents were from Caccamo, Sicily. But in due time God sent His son Jesus.
****************************************************
*["Perhaps you should not accuse out of ignorance, you have only achieved sin through the spreading of deceit and slander."]
***Your DENIAL of what I post is NOT proof of deceit or slander...it is ONLY denial. Recrimination is your forte.
****************************************************
*["Website arguments are fail especially when you fail to realize that the canon you are trying to support was created after Paul wrote the text which can only refer to the Septuagint."]
***Paul tells us that the Jews were entrusted with the Oracles of God. The canon was already settled in Jesus' day and the apocrypha was NOT in it. The Jews DID NOT accept the apocrypha. Jesus and the apostles NEVER quoted it...so deal with it. Your pet doctrine does NOT fly here.
****************************************************
*["And your very long and pointless post speaks nothing of what the canon should be. You have proven yourself ignorant."]
***N/A...recrimination is your forte.
****************************************************
*["The OT canon is the same set of scriptures that Jesus taught from. The Septuagint. Whether it was accepted as canon at the time does not matter. Jesus found the Septuagint acceptable, therefore we find the Septuagint acceptable."]
***The argument is NOT about the Septuagint being acceptable...that is a smokescreen that you are throwing up. The point in question here is the acceptance of the apocrypha as INSPIRED scripture and acceptable in the canon of scripture. The FACTS are that it is NOT scripture and NEVER was accepted as scripture by the Jews in Jesus' time...and is NOT accepted by the Jews or Protestant Christians TODAY. 2 Macabees is NOT nor EVER was INSPIRED scripture and CANNOT be used as VALID evidence for purgatory...PERIOD!
*****************************************************
*["Your address has nothing to do with anything I said. Sadly, I recognize that you do not think for yourself on these matters. It smelled of ignorance and thus I find it copied and pasted.
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/apocrypha.html
etc.
= fail."]
***There is nothing wrong with citing a website as long as I cite the reference that is posted on the website so as not to violate the law. Too,
the person that I am citing is of like faith and he is not saying anything that I do not concur with. BTW, you are in error because you used the wrong url. I cited CARM [www.carm.org/catholic/apocrypha.htm]. Recrimination seems to be your forte.
***************************************************
*["Paul used the Septuagint as did all the apostles. He acknowledges that the Septuagint is inspired by God because it is very scripture that he uses.
So your argument fails..."]
***Paul does valid the canon of the Septuagint...but the apocrypha was NOT part of the canon of the septuagint. Too, he NEVER cited them nor validated them in any way. Your assertion that he cited the septuagint does NOT mean that he gave any validity to the apocrypha and is only an assumption on your part. It was NEVER accepted by the Jews and is NOT to this day...nor by Protestant Christians. The canon was settled in Jesus' day and the apocrypha was NOT part of that canon!!
****************************************************
*["By your logic of what established as scripture at the time of Christ we must exclude all the Ketuvim. Ruth, Song of Songs, Esther, Daniel, Psalms and Job are not to apart of your false canon as they were not considered authoritative until the same time that the whole New Testament was rejected..."]
***My logic has nothing to do with this...it is only the facts of history which will prove or disprove the validity of my statements. I will not engage in words of recrimination as you do. Jesus referenced the Jewish OT canon from beginning to the end and did NOT include the apocrypha in His reference [Luke 11:51]...so that excludes the book of 2 Macabees as being a valid criteria for the doctrine of purgatory [which is the real issue here...and one you are trying to avoid].
(Continued)
Page 2:
*["So we find that you agree with the council of Jamnia that rejected the canon of Jesus, Jesus as Saviour and included a curse on all Christians.
Basically you invalidate your entire faith."]
***Despicable.
***************************************************
*["You will find many reasons why Zechariah was mentioned last, much of it having to do with his importance and significance. Some more to do with the insignificance of the order of books and whatnot."]
***It is not listed last because of its lack of importance. It is a very important book and the most Messianic, Apocalyptic and Eschatological book of the OT. Zechariah is also the most Christ-centered prophet who speaks more about Christ, His work and glory than all the other minor prophets combined.
****************************************************
*["But since you are fond of copy and paste arguments I'll let you find a website to satisfy your intellectually suicidal tendencies."]
***How nice of you.
****************************************************
*["Simply answered, the writings have no messianic prophecies to speak of hence why Jesus would not mention them in the above context. Furthermore, by your silly logic only the prophets, the law and the Psalms should be considered canon, meaning that you should throw out Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon."]
***The EXACT answer given by the Roman Catholic Church. You say that you are not a Catholic and/or not an apologist for them...I say you are NOT telling the truth. When you post on this board, it's like watching EWTN the Catholic network on TV.
Marchello
I did not claim they were pluses, that is your own incorrect assumption of my motivations. You claimed I am anti-Semitic, however, I am not in any way. Point and case. Second, I am far from being in line with the Roman Catholic church at all and disagree with many of their doctrines. The fact that you only see in dichotomies is an example of your incredible ignorance. If you were informed upon the Septuagint you would realize that my argument actually disagrees with the Roman Catholic canon.
Also, note I did not use Maccabees as support of Purgatory, a doctrine I do not believe in as the Roman Catholics would teach it. Therefore, there is no need to distract from the point that you are wrong.
The canon was not set. Canonical scripture in Jesus's time was not settled, hence the council of Jamnia. You'd need to provide proof of this fallacious statement. The canon was constantly in debate and the only books settled upon were the five books of law and the prophets. The argument of them not quoting it fails miserably and only proves my point about the above. Few of the writings outside the Psalms were quoted and yet nearly all quotes are directly from the Septuagint, something you fail to able to deal with. You are ignorant of the history.
Them not quoting does not matter when Jesus clearly refers to it. Deny the evidence all you want, but at least you are aware of your own delusions about the validity of the Protestant canon.
Indeed the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. They preserved them for us very well and the Word of God endures forever in the canon of the Septuagint. The Word of God was no longer preserved by the Jews when they rejected Jesus, followed by their rejection of the Septuagint canon. The Jewish canon that you follow was set somewhere in the late first century AD, not before Christ as you fallaciously allege.
I never said Zechariah was unimportant, you assume too much. I agree that Zechariah contains many important Messianic prophecies and is personally one of the books I read most often.
Your last paragraph is not a rebuttal at all. If it was incorrect you could correct it, but you cannot because you are wrong.
*["I did not claim they were pluses, that is your own incorrect assumption of my motivations. You claimed I am anti-Semitic, however, I am not in any way. Point and case. Second, I am far from being in line with the Roman Catholic church at all and disagree with many of their doctrines. The fact that you only see in dichotomies is an example of your incredible ignorance. If you were informed upon the Septuagint you would realize that my argument actually disagrees with the Roman Catholic canon.
Also, note I did not use Maccabees as support of Purgatory, a doctrine I do not believe in as the Roman Catholics would teach it. Therefore, there is no need to distract from the point that you are wrong.
The canon was not set. Canonical scripture in Jesus's time was not settled, hence the council of Jamnia. You'd need to provide proof of this fallacious statement. The canon was constantly in debate and the only books settled upon were the five books of law and the prophets. The argument of them not quoting it fails miserably and only proves my point about the above. Few of the writings outside the Psalms were quoted and yet nearly all quotes are directly from the Septuagint, something you fail to able to deal with. You are ignorant of the history.
Them not quoting does not matter when Jesus clearly refers to it. Deny the evidence all you want, but at least you are aware of your own delusions about the validity of the Protestant canon.
Indeed the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. They preserved them for us very well and the Word of God endures forever in the canon of the Septuagint. The Word of God was no longer preserved by the Jews when they rejected Jesus, followed by their rejection of the Septuagint canon. The Jewish canon that you follow was set somewhere in the late first century AD, not before Christ as you fallaciously allege.
I never said Zechariah was unimportant, you assume too much. I agree that Zechariah contains many important Messianic prophecies and is personally one of the books I read most often.
Your last paragraph is not a rebuttal at all. If it was incorrect you could correct it, but you cannot because you are wrong."]
***Tsk...tsk. Take two aspirin...get a good night's sleep...you'll feel better in the morning.
Marchello
Marchello, you're pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. You literally are too unintelligent to form a cogent rebuttal. Then, when pwned, you write some nonsense...
I have two suggestions for you.
1. Get a brain.
2. Learn to use the "quote" function.
I hope the latter doesn't put too much strain on your mental faculties. Furthermore, if I were Nellinator, I would simply spam my posts at you. Kind of like this:
Originally posted by Nellinator
I did not claim they were pluses, that is your own incorrect assumption of my motivations. You claimed I am anti-Semitic, however, I am not in any way. Point and case. Second, I am far from being in line with the Roman Catholic church at all and disagree with many of their doctrines. The fact that you only see in dichotomies is an example of your incredible ignorance. If you were informed upon the Septuagint you would realize that my argument actually disagrees with the Roman Catholic canon.Also, note I did not use Maccabees as support of Purgatory, a doctrine I do not believe in as the Roman Catholics would teach it. Therefore, there is no need to distract from the point that you are wrong.
The canon was not set. Canonical scripture in Jesus's time was not settled, hence the council of Jamnia. You'd need to provide proof of this fallacious statement. The canon was constantly in debate and the only books settled upon were the five books of law and the prophets. The argument of them not quoting it fails miserably and only proves my point about the above. Few of the writings outside the Psalms were quoted and yet nearly all quotes are directly from the Septuagint, something you fail to able to deal with. You are ignorant of the history.
Them not quoting does not matter when Jesus clearly refers to it. Deny the evidence all you want, but at least you are aware of your own delusions about the validity of the Protestant canon.
Indeed the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. They preserved them for us very well and the Word of God endures forever in the canon of the Septuagint. The Word of God was no longer preserved by the Jews when they rejected Jesus, followed by their rejection of the Septuagint canon. The Jewish canon that you follow was set somewhere in the late first century AD, not before Christ as you fallaciously allege.
I never said Zechariah was unimportant, you assume too much. I agree that Zechariah contains many important Messianic prophecies and is personally one of the books I read most often.
Your last paragraph is not a rebuttal at all. If it was incorrect you could correct it, but you cannot because you are wrong.
Originally posted by Nellinator
I did not claim they were pluses, that is your own incorrect assumption of my motivations. You claimed I am anti-Semitic, however, I am not in any way. Point and case. Second, I am far from being in line with the Roman Catholic church at all and disagree with many of their doctrines. The fact that you only see in dichotomies is an example of your incredible ignorance. If you were informed upon the Septuagint you would realize that my argument actually disagrees with the Roman Catholic canon.Also, note I did not use Maccabees as support of Purgatory, a doctrine I do not believe in as the Roman Catholics would teach it. Therefore, there is no need to distract from the point that you are wrong.
The canon was not set. Canonical scripture in Jesus's time was not settled, hence the council of Jamnia. You'd need to provide proof of this fallacious statement. The canon was constantly in debate and the only books settled upon were the five books of law and the prophets. The argument of them not quoting it fails miserably and only proves my point about the above. Few of the writings outside the Psalms were quoted and yet nearly all quotes are directly from the Septuagint, something you fail to able to deal with. You are ignorant of the history.
Them not quoting does not matter when Jesus clearly refers to it. Deny the evidence all you want, but at least you are aware of your own delusions about the validity of the Protestant canon.
Indeed the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. They preserved them for us very well and the Word of God endures forever in the canon of the Septuagint. The Word of God was no longer preserved by the Jews when they rejected Jesus, followed by their rejection of the Septuagint canon. The Jewish canon that you follow was set somewhere in the late first century AD, not before Christ as you fallaciously allege.
I never said Zechariah was unimportant, you assume too much. I agree that Zechariah contains many important Messianic prophecies and is personally one of the books I read most often.
Your last paragraph is not a rebuttal at all. If it was incorrect you could correct it, but you cannot because you are wrong.
Originally posted by Nellinator
I did not claim they were pluses, that is your own incorrect assumption of my motivations. You claimed I am anti-Semitic, however, I am not in any way. Point and case. Second, I am far from being in line with the Roman Catholic church at all and disagree with many of their doctrines. The fact that you only see in dichotomies is an example of your incredible ignorance. If you were informed upon the Septuagint you would realize that my argument actually disagrees with the Roman Catholic canon.Also, note I did not use Maccabees as support of Purgatory, a doctrine I do not believe in as the Roman Catholics would teach it. Therefore, there is no need to distract from the point that you are wrong.
The canon was not set. Canonical scripture in Jesus's time was not settled, hence the council of Jamnia. You'd need to provide proof of this fallacious statement. The canon was constantly in debate and the only books settled upon were the five books of law and the prophets. The argument of them not quoting it fails miserably and only proves my point about the above. Few of the writings outside the Psalms were quoted and yet nearly all quotes are directly from the Septuagint, something you fail to able to deal with. You are ignorant of the history.
Them not quoting does not matter when Jesus clearly refers to it. Deny the evidence all you want, but at least you are aware of your own delusions about the validity of the Protestant canon.
Indeed the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. They preserved them for us very well and the Word of God endures forever in the canon of the Septuagint. The Word of God was no longer preserved by the Jews when they rejected Jesus, followed by their rejection of the Septuagint canon. The Jewish canon that you follow was set somewhere in the late first century AD, not before Christ as you fallaciously allege.
I never said Zechariah was unimportant, you assume too much. I agree that Zechariah contains many important Messianic prophecies and is personally one of the books I read most often.
Your last paragraph is not a rebuttal at all. If it was incorrect you could correct it, but you cannot because you are wrong.
Originally posted by Nellinator
I did not claim they were pluses, that is your own incorrect assumption of my motivations. You claimed I am anti-Semitic, however, I am not in any way. Point and case. Second, I am far from being in line with the Roman Catholic church at all and disagree with many of their doctrines. The fact that you only see in dichotomies is an example of your incredible ignorance. If you were informed upon the Septuagint you would realize that my argument actually disagrees with the Roman Catholic canon.Also, note I did not use Maccabees as support of Purgatory, a doctrine I do not believe in as the Roman Catholics would teach it. Therefore, there is no need to distract from the point that you are wrong.
The canon was not set. Canonical scripture in Jesus's time was not settled, hence the council of Jamnia. You'd need to provide proof of this fallacious statement. The canon was constantly in debate and the only books settled upon were the five books of law and the prophets. The argument of them not quoting it fails miserably and only proves my point about the above. Few of the writings outside the Psalms were quoted and yet nearly all quotes are directly from the Septuagint, something you fail to able to deal with. You are ignorant of the history.
Them not quoting does not matter when Jesus clearly refers to it. Deny the evidence all you want, but at least you are aware of your own delusions about the validity of the Protestant canon.
Indeed the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. They preserved them for us very well and the Word of God endures forever in the canon of the Septuagint. The Word of God was no longer preserved by the Jews when they rejected Jesus, followed by their rejection of the Septuagint canon. The Jewish canon that you follow was set somewhere in the late first century AD, not before Christ as you fallaciously allege.
I never said Zechariah was unimportant, you assume too much. I agree that Zechariah contains many important Messianic prophecies and is personally one of the books I read most often.
Your last paragraph is not a rebuttal at all. If it was incorrect you could correct it, but you cannot because you are wrong.
Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Marchello, you're pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. You literally are too unintelligent to form a cogent rebuttal. Then, when pwned, you write some nonsense...I have two suggestions for you.
1. Get a brain.
2. Learn to use the "quote" function.I hope the latter doesn't put too much strain on your mental faculties. Furthermore, if I were Nellinator, I would simply spam my posts at you. Kind of like this:
***N/A
Marchello
Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Marchello, you're pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. You literally are too unintelligent to form a cogent rebuttal. Then, when pwned, you write some nonsense...I have two suggestions for you.
1. Get a brain.
2. Learn to use the "quote" function.I hope the latter doesn't put too much strain on your mental faculties. Furthermore, if I were Nellinator, I would simply spam my posts at you. Kind of like this:
***Feceman:
It must have gotten too dark and lonely at the bottom of the toilet bowl...eh?
Marchello
An excellent rebuttal.
I did not claim they were pluses, that is your own incorrect assumption of my motivations. You claimed I am anti-Semitic, however, I am not in any way. Point and case. Second, I am far from being in line with the Roman Catholic church at all and disagree with many of their doctrines. The fact that you only see in dichotomies is an example of your incredible ignorance. If you were informed upon the Septuagint you would realize that my argument actually disagrees with the Roman Catholic canon.Also, note I did not use Maccabees as support of Purgatory, a doctrine I do not believe in as the Roman Catholics would teach it. Therefore, there is no need to distract from the point that you are wrong.
The canon was not set. Canonical scripture in Jesus's time was not settled, hence the council of Jamnia. You'd need to provide proof of this fallacious statement. The canon was constantly in debate and the only books settled upon were the five books of law and the prophets. The argument of them not quoting it fails miserably and only proves my point about the above. Few of the writings outside the Psalms were quoted and yet nearly all quotes are directly from the Septuagint, something you fail to able to deal with. You are ignorant of the history.
Them not quoting does not matter when Jesus clearly refers to it. Deny the evidence all you want, but at least you are aware of your own delusions about the validity of the Protestant canon.
Indeed the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. They preserved them for us very well and the Word of God endures forever in the canon of the Septuagint. The Word of God was no longer preserved by the Jews when they rejected Jesus, followed by their rejection of the Septuagint canon. The Jewish canon that you follow was set somewhere in the late first century AD, not before Christ as you fallaciously allege.
I never said Zechariah was unimportant, you assume too much. I agree that Zechariah contains many important Messianic prophecies and is personally one of the books I read most often.
Your last paragraph is not a rebuttal at all. If it was incorrect you could correct it, but you cannot because you are wrong.