Billiards Ball

As a Jewish Christian fundamentalist, I don't blindly accept appeals to authority, particularly mainline Protestant or Roman sources. As a believer in Jesus, I appreciate the Dead Sea Scrolls--I'm visiting Qumran next year in person--but I don't find ascetics who step away from my people to wait for alternate Messiahs in the desert hugely authoritative or wise, either. Let's just be Berean with the scripture. The Bible IMHO isn't "filled with ANE extra-biblical sources". It's filled with direct revelation from God to man. And I agree, to understand a 2nd Temple Jew as well as sections of the NT we should be familiar with intertestemental apocrypha like the Maccabees. For example, is Jesus alluding to Hanukkah in John, where He speaks of being the light of the world? My Jewish people have the same OT as the NT church. But in general, apocrypha, where the child Jesus slays another child because He's angry, or Daniel sets traps to lie and trick people rather than witness honestly, or reading books of wisdom that "my grandfather taught me" rather than holy scripture, that uses the tetragrammaton almost 7,000 times to "hear the word of the Lord" is garbage IMHO. As a pragmatist, I'd also say my people, Jew and Gentile, are being destroyed for lack of Bible knowledge. It's hard enough to get people to follow the 66. No one who died without reading the apocrypha missed much.

You wrote, "Have never even heard someone suggest that Septuagint is quoting NT," which I read as saying I was saying I had the Septuagint after the NT. Sorry for the confusion. The Jewish people who wrote the NT constantly quoted the Septuagint OT, hundreds of times, but not the apocrypha to even a marginal extent. The apocrypha is garbage to me. The name refers to the fact that out of thousands of sects that studied the Bible individually, only a few cultic groups, with a wrong gospel, included them, using a title meaning "of dubious origin". The apocrypha has not saved the souls of billions through Jesus or changed the world, permanently. People are saved hearing God's Word with faith/trust. I have multiple reasons to reject apocrypha, but can't one suffice? It contradicts scripture and has been used by the cults to justify false doctrines like baptism for the dead.

I didn't say the Septuagint quotes the NT. That would be a ludicrous suggestion for me to make. I do question the early dates for 1 Enoch and have trouble imagining only a century elapsing between Malachi and apocrypha during a prosperous Greek period of occupation. I don't find the quotations "direct". I did point out the 8 or 9 problems I've found with the apocrypha besides the incredibly low rate of citations in the NT,

I question the dating of 1 Enoch. It's Occam's to say Enoch was quoting the NT rather than vice versa. Tanakh is quoted hundreds of times, alluded to a thousand times in the NT, pagans and oral Talmud get more NT quotations then the Apocrypha. I question that Christ read NT apocrypha written after His ascension. My Jewish people have never held intertestamental apocrypha as authoritative. There are some demented ideas in the apocrypha (like the child Jesus killing a child, like Jesus being struck by a stone when the NT says stones could not thrown at Him before His cross time) and etc.

I apologize, I'm not trying to be contentious, or rude. I am passionate that people reach out when they see signals, sin can be prevented that way.

A "Berean Christian" studies the books for themselves and makes their own decision. However, here are some reasons I do not accept books beyond the 66. The "other books": 1) Aren't accepted by the Jewish people 2) Aren't accepted by more than 99% of groups that began new church movements, via Bible study and study of non-canon books 3) Do not say, as the Bible says over 6,000 times, "This is the Word of God", indeed, they say things like "Here's wisdom my grandfather told me" 4) Contain teachings that contradict the Bible 5) Contain impious or "dirty" passages that are more sexual or violent in nature than the Bible, the Bible already being fairly explicit 6) Were reluctantly placed in some movements to keep the peace, while adding footnotes like "of unknown origin/veracity" 7) Contain self-contradictory teachings, like Person A disagrees with Person B in the same apocryphal work ? Show a lack of character: Daniel tricking people instead of being honest, Jesus putting a child to death, etc.

No, it's not "standard" in this world to assume marrieds have coodies the second they get married, and stay constantly away from them, assuming the couple wants to spend every second of every day for the coming years in total privacy. It shows an incredible insensitivity IMO. And no, is there a Bible verse that a single brother can address an area he sees in a single brother's life but must decline to respond/reprove if the brother is married?

Are you saying "faith is trust", as in "we trust the light switch will activate the light" and "we trust God will keep His promises"?

I don't want to press you past your point of faith, but what about verses about singing to one another in Psalms and hymns, admonishing one another, confronting one another, etc.? My very point on the thread was as a newlywed and after couple, singles treated my wife and me like we had the plague.

Very respectfully, why are the people in your church that cruel? Is it time to fellowship with more loving people? And why would a married think a single who communicates with their couple is "after their spouse"?

Of course we may. "Encourage" or "exhort" or "prophesy to" or "help". You can tell a married couple today, "You are a great example to me, and I can learn from you how to be a better partner, someday when I marry." That's encouragement.

I can help you. I once spoke to someone who said, "I've lost my salvation, because I looked at porn this week." I said, "How did you feel?" "Dirty, disgusting..." "You are a brand new Christian, a few weeks ago. How did you feel when you looked at porn, before you were a Christian?" "I enjoyed it, I liked it, but now I feel dirty... HEY! I'M SAVED!" ** The feelings you have about the sin you fell into, show you that you are likely okay. If you want to be 100% sure you're okay, consider what you did to become a Christian: 1) No one is perfect, everyone sins except Jesus 2) In Heaven, everyone is morally perfect, because sin would ruin Heaven 3) Jesus died a horrible death on the cross and rose from the dead, so that anyone who trusts Him, can experience Him some now, but will become morally perfect when they meet Him, later Have you trusted Jesus, not yourself, to be saved? Then you are a born again Christian. And thanks to your openness and repentance now, you have a shot at a full, abundant, Christian life. Satan is liar, and wants you to think Jesus is done with you, a little trick he plays. Liar! Trust Jesus to help you fight the good fight.

Three English Bible words, belief, faith and trust, are used for the same Greek word. When you see faith and believe, just substitute trust in your mind. We trust Jesus for salvation. We trust elders to help our churches. We trust God was Creator and will bring us hope. Etc. The Hebrews passage above means this: "Without trusting Jesus, you cannot please God, for everyone who comes to the Father must trust He exists, and that He rewards those who seek Him." See how well this works, to use the word "trust"?

My suggestions: 1) Add to deliverance therapy a Christian physician or qualified counselor who can help wean you off meds, gradually, carefully. 2) Honor your parents mainly by working on personal growth and Bible study. Also, try not to get angry at them. All parents would be honored by children who try to be kind to them while working to be better people themselves.

How does a creationist's view that different scientists interpret the same data differently "eliminate testimony as a valid source of knowledge"? Christians interpret the scriptures, like scientists interpret forensic and biologic evidence, differently at times.

Huh? My question remains valid. Did Mr. Ham say dismissively, "Were you there?" then say nothing about dating assumptions, uniformitarian assumptions, etc.? Also, when I say "Were you there?" I'm citing God's statement to Job. Why is God's statement in the scriptures inappropriate in this context?

As to God using the argument with Job, where does your analogy fail? In other words what makes that defense of Ham a false analogy? **It doesn't. It wasn't an argument made IMHO, it was an icebreaker/grabber statement. Ken Ham said "where were you then?" and left off there, really? That's all he said at that time? I sometimes say the same thing, "Were either of us there?" to help uniformitarians focus when they say things about the past with 100% certainty, but lacking credulity. Finally, "No, Christian should tie themselves to theories counter to the scriptures," runs into "No Christian should misrepresent both scripture and science in order to maintain their false views of both!" **Did Mr. Ham misrepresent either, do you think? most Evangelical scholars and many church fathers found that when the Bible called the Earth ancient it was because it was not young! There are seven current conservative Bible-inerrantist theories of Gen. 1-2:4 currently. Ham's is not the majority thesis. But there are good exegetes that represent that view. Ham is neither a Bible scholar or a scientific scholar. He is a propagandist. So if we hold to a young-earth view then let us do so with arguments that are cogent and don't destroy all history, and testimony including the rest of the history in the Bible and testimony about Jesus coming as savior of the world. That epistemic destruction seems obviously bad to anyone trying to tell people about Jesus! **Why assume Mr. Ham's main outreach is to unbelievers or a subset of unbelievers including scientists? He has a great ministry for Christians. But speaking as a very active witness, I avoid discussing the age of the Earth or evolution "between kinds" with unbelievers. But if it comes up, I have some information to share, including some "grabbers".

Respectfully, Evolution and the BB are the current, prevalent theories. They are strong as they seem to include forensic evidence, but devoted believers know that science will always harmonize with the scriptures, especially as the science evolves. No Christian should tie themselves to theories that are counter to the scriptures or in current fashion possibly only. The "were you there?" argument comes from God's remarks to Job. Mr. Ham is capable to explain why dating of fossils to millions of years is erroneous.

I think of all things that they are sin if my conscience prompts me so and clean for me if not.

Eden is likely now under the waters of Noah's Flood. It was a real place, inside of Eden was also the special Garden, blocked from humans forever. Note the "US" in the verse you cite, God is a triunity of three persons. Adam and Eve became like God in that they knew what good and evil were (obedience and rebellion).

We are not saved by "completely surrendering to Him". Many people sincerely trust Jesus for salvation and learn to trust Him more, after. I "gave up" though and trusted Jesus based on experiences with God and reading the NT.

Enjoying a shoulder touch, when feeling poorly, is not adultery. Guilt is to be prayed over, confess to your husband if you want it lifted. Sin often has little to do with bearing a child successfully. God has His ways.

Earthquakes are to increase in frequency and intensity, like pre-birth pains for women, and they are!

Read John: 1) Ask Jesus to help you understand what you read 2) Be sure to trust Jesus personally for salvation--no one can enter a utopia behaving as they do now, Jesus died a horrible death and rose to pay our sin, guilt and shame--trust Jesus for eternal life

I must be missing something, the OP said ENCOURAGE marrieds, not rebuke them or disciple them.