If you could rewrite the Bible what would you change?

[thereselittleflower]

2 minutes ago, the_patriot2015 said:

If he changed his mind later on, it was only under duress or pressure from the church, and none of your evidence (wikipedia, first off is not the best of sources, second off does not prove what you are claiming) shows that the entirety of the early church was in agreement. the links I showed above did prove they were not. The changing of his mind, does not make him right-nor does it mean that everyone else thought that those books were inspired.Your evidence, has come up short, but I do thankyou for actually presenting it, and since we are at an impass here, let us move on to the next point. 

 

Which is the obvious, and blatant, contradictions between the apocraphyl books and the Bible, some of which, I listed earlier.

Under duress?    That would be convenient for your claims, but I have to ask, were you there?   Do you have some kind of first hand knowledge?

I don't think so.

I am sorry but these statements assume much both about Jerome and some unknown "other churches."

Assumptions are not a very good foundation for one's arguments or claims.

 

He was very clear in his words. 

 

At this point I think it is best to leave it at agreeing to disagree.

 

[The_Patriot21]

Just now, thereselittleflower said:

Under duress?    That would be convenient for your claims, but I have to ask, were you there?   Do you have some kind of first hand knowledge?

I don't think so.

I am sorry but these statements assume much both about Jerome and some unknown "other churches."

Assumptions are not a very good foundation for one's arguments or claims.

 

He was very clear in his words. 

 

At this point I think it is best to leave it at agreeing to disagree.

 

well, you make a good point that I wasnt there-I dont know why he changed his mind, but the fact is, if he changed his mind, which it appears he did, he was wrong to do so. But, you are right, I dont know why.

 

As far as the other churches, as I have already proven beyond any shadow of a doubt, there was opposition in that period, if you had actually clicked on some of my earlier links you would see that.

 

You still have not addressed the contradictions. perhaps, it is because you dont have an answer for them?

[thereselittleflower]

10 minutes ago, the_patriot2015 said:

well, you make a good point that I wasnt there-I dont know why he changed his mind, but the fact is, if he changed his mind, which it appears he did, he was wrong to do so. But, you are right, I dont know why.

 

As far as the other churches, as I have already proven beyond any shadow of a doubt, there was opposition in that period, if you had actually clicked on some of my earlier links you would see that.

 

You still have not addressed the contradictions. perhaps, it is because you dont have an answer for them?

 

I saw claims there was opposition -  I didn't see the actual proof.  Can you point me to the post that has the evidence you're speaking of?

Which contradictions are you saying I haven't addressed?

 

 

[The_Patriot21]

I guess youll have to go back and look, wont you.

[thereselittleflower]

12 minutes ago, the_patriot2015 said:

I guess youll have to go back and look, wont you.

I literally don't have the energy to do that right now, and most likely I will completely forget later.   If you want to be gracious and point me to exactly where it is, I would appreciate it. If not, then we can let this end here with no hard feelings.

Bless you.

 

 

 

 

[The_Patriot21]

well if you dont want to thats your call. I actually listed them a couple times-get tired of going back and repeating myself.

[thereselittleflower]

5 minutes ago, the_patriot2015 said:

well if you dont want to thats your call. I actually listed them a couple times-get tired of going back and repeating myself.

I wasn't asking  you to repeat yourself, but to link a post that you are referring to.  That's all.  But it's ok.

 

[Retrobyter]

23 hours ago, coheir said:

Oh I am well aware it is not part of the cannon and is NOT scripture. That alone does not make say it can not be read. It is not scripture but it can be read as a book. That is what my post said. thanks though for watching out for me.

 

23 hours ago, coheir said:

When I read it I knew it was not part of the Bible. I would not tell anyone to put it above the Bible. But I did get some understanding out of it the Bible did not share.

Shalom, coheir.

Good. I'm glad you see the difference between the books of the Bible and the book of Enoch. Just be careful not to believe everything you read in the book of Enoch that "the Bible didn't share." Sometimes, there are good reasons why the Bible doesn't "share" some things that other books would "include."

[The_Patriot21]

1 hour ago, thereselittleflower said:

I wasn't asking  you to repeat yourself, but to link a post that you are referring to.  That's all.  But it's ok.

 

Well, for the purpose of discussion, ive rethought it, and answer me this-do you think your a mistake, or a bad thing? Do you think your a disgrace? furthermore, do you think that the Bible would say your a disgrace? because the book of Ecclesiasticus says that it is a disgrace to have a daughter. Chapter 22:3. IT also says, in 25:19 that a womans sin is worse then any other sin. Now, lets look at that-nowhere in the Bible does it say daughters are a disgrace, and the Bible does say that all sin is equal-it doesnt matter who commits it.

Theres magic, Tobit 6:5-7 lists a command to use magic, which is consistently listed as satanic throughout the Bible, and we are instructed not to do so.

Tobit 4:11 and 12:9 teaches forgiveness of sins by almsgiving, which while being a popular catholic doctrine, is in direct contradiction of the Bible which specifically states that grace is freely given to those who ask

2 Maccabees 12:43-45 teaches the offering of money for the sins of the dead, again, direct contradiction-if your forgiven when you die, then your going to heaven, if not your going to hell. At the point of death its to late, and theres nothing anyone can do about it.

 

These are just a few. I can go on, but these are pretty blatantly contrary, the contradictions are even more obvious then in the book of enoch.

[coheir]

1 hour ago, Retrobyter said:

 

Shalom, coheir.

Good. I'm glad you see the difference between the books of the Bible and the book of Enoch. Just be careful not to believe everything you read in the book of Enoch that "the Bible didn't share." Sometimes, there are good reasons why the Bible doesn't "share" some things that other books would "include."

Thanks Retrobyter, there are times when I need help to further my walk, there are things I do not know it would be nice to count you as one that will care and help.