Is this a contradiction?

[eric]

Fiosh,

It's people like you that made me stop hating catholics.

eric

[Arthur Durnan]

Ah, yes, Brigham Young! Wasn't he the gentleman with, what, twenty-seven wives or so? Great individual to emulate, yes? NOT! His continual additions & alterations re his own Book of Mormon would tend to confuse even a pretzel! Whatever, I didn't bring the subject up; somebody earlier did.

As for the Holy Bible, one supposes that if it's "kept open" for everybody to add to it, we'd have a great hodge-podge of whims & nostrums elevating practically everything from Kaffeeklatsch to lycanthropy, not to mention the 'joy' of drinking wet cement in order to get stoned! Far too many freaks strive Bible-alterations and end up with their very own circuses. Do their trains of thot ever have a caboose? Personally, I like Isaiah 8:20 right about here best of all. The language is hard & direct as sprung steel.

Now my Significant Other recommends we trip on over to beautiful San Jose Del Cabo (where Hernando Cortez landed in 1535) and experience perfect Mexian-European patisserie, serving flaky croissants & chocolate confections alongside jalapeno-filled crepes. Donchajustluvit? Excellent idea.

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

[MrSealedEternal]

I believe the 66 books we now have were inspired and preserved by divine intervention. The Catholic Church used to hold to the same 66 books, but later included some uninspired history books that had been around, mostly Jewish in origin. The Jewish people always regarded them as being unscriptural and treated them as such.

The Catholic Church believes that it has the authority to add or subtract from God's Word, because they believe that they are His true "church." The title of the Pope, "Vicarious Christi" means that he believes he is vicariuosly Christ on earth, and has the authority of Christ to add or subtract from His Word at will. That's why they added those books, and believe they are justified to do so.

They are not scriptural, and are actually a combination of some accurate and some inaccurate history. We know this because sometimes it confirms the Bible and other times directly contradicts it. I think it's dangerous to study these books, because they aren't authoratative and could mislead us.

I also wouldn't listen to Brigham Young, a man that believes that he is a god right now, but is actually awaiting the Lake of fire.

[Pax]

I believe the 66 books we now have were inspired and preserved by divine intervention. The Catholic Church used to hold to the same 66 books, but later included some uninspired history books that had been around, mostly Jewish in origin. The Jewish people always regarded them as being unscriptural and treated them as such.

The Catholic Church believes that it has the authority to add or subtract from God's Word, because they believe that they are His true "church." The title of the Pope, "Vicarious Christi" means that he believes he is vicariuosly Christ on earth, and has the authority of Christ to add or subtract from His Word at will. That's why they added those books, and believe they are justified to do so.

They are not scriptural, and are actually a combination of some accurate and some inaccurate history. We know this because sometimes it confirms the Bible and other times directly contradicts it. I think it's dangerous to study these books, because they aren't authoratative and could mislead us.

I also wouldn't listen to Brigham Young, a man that believes that he is a god right now, but is actually awaiting the Lake of fire.

SealedEternal,

You're interpretation of Church history is simply not correct. At the Council of Rome in 382, the Church (Catholic Church, the only Christian Church in existance at the time) decided upon a canon of 46 Old Testament books and 27 in the New Testament. This decision was ratified by the councils at Hippo (393), Carthage (397, 419), II Nicea (787), Florence (1442), and Trent (1546).

I'm not sure when you are saying the Catholic Church added these books, but Martin Luther (Father of the Protestant Movement, which all Protestants on this board could trace their roots back to), included these books in his first German translation. They can also be found in the first King James Version Bible (1611) and in the first Bible ever printed, the Guttenberg Bible (a century before the Council of Trent). In fact these books were included in almost every Bible until the Edinburgh committee of the British Foreign Bible Society excised then in 1825. Until then, they had been included at least in an appendix of Protestant Bibles. This historically proves that Catholics did not add the books, Protestants took them out.

I would also direct all of you to look up Rev. 22:19 "And if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the Holy City, and from the things which are written in this book."

[John3;16]

SealedEternal,

You're interpretation of Church history is simply not correct. At the Council of Rome in 382, the Church (Catholic Church, the only Christian Church in existance at the time)

This is not an accurate statement, their are Anabaptists recorded in the early second century (also called Waldenses), and from the Anabaptists we have the Baptists, and the Mennonites of today, and others that have splintered from them. See- schaff, History of the Christian Church, this was shortly after the bible was completed, and during this time the disciples of the Apostles were alive and well, just one generation removed, and trained directly by the Apostles, such as Polycarp, a disciple of the Apostle John.

decided upon a canon of 46 Old Testament books and 27 in the New Testament. This decision was ratified by the councils at Hippo (393), Carthage (397, 419), II Nicea (787), Florence (1442), and Trent (1546).

One of the strongest arguments against the Apocrypha is that they were not written by Apostles or Prophets, also at council of Nicaea they did not adopt books into the Canon, or reject books into the Canon, check this web page: http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/nicaea.html there are numerous references that show the books of the Apocrypha were not accepted by any major denomination even the Roman Catholic

[MrSealedEternal]

I believe the 66 books we now have were inspired and preserved by divine intervention. The Catholic Church used to hold to the same 66 books, but later included some uninspired history books that had been around, mostly Jewish in origin. The Jewish people always regarded them as being unscriptural and treated them as such.

The Catholic Church believes that it has the authority to add or subtract from God's Word, because they believe that they are His true "church." The title of the Pope, "Vicarious Christi" means that he believes he is vicariuosly Christ on earth, and has the authority of Christ to add or subtract from His Word at will. That's why they added those books, and believe they are justified to do so.

They are not scriptural, and are actually a combination of some accurate and some inaccurate history. We know this because sometimes it confirms the Bible and other times directly contradicts it. I think it's dangerous to study these books, because they aren't authoratative and could mislead us.

I also wouldn't listen to Brigham Young, a man that believes that he is a god right now, but is actually awaiting the Lake of fire.

SealedEternal,

You're interpretation of Church history is simply not correct. At the Council of Rome in 382, the Church (Catholic Church, the only Christian Church in existance at the time) decided upon a canon of 46 Old Testament books and 27 in the New Testament. This decision was ratified by the councils at Hippo (393), Carthage (397, 419), II Nicea (787), Florence (1442), and Trent (1546).

I'm not sure when you are saying the Catholic Church added these books, but Martin Luther (Father of the Protestant Movement, which all Protestants on this board could trace their roots back to), included these books in his first German translation. They can also be found in the first King James Version Bible (1611) and in the first Bible ever printed, the Guttenberg Bible (a century before the Council of Trent). In fact these books were included in almost every Bible until the Edinburgh committee of the British Foreign Bible Society excised then in 1825. Until then, they had been included at least in an appendix of Protestant Bibles. This historically proves that Catholics did not add the books, Protestants took them out.

I would also direct all of you to look up Rev. 22:19 "And if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the Holy City, and from the things which are written in this book."

These 66 books had always been regarded as scripture, and the Catholic councils had no authority to change that. Martin Luther was a Catholic and the King James translators were all Catholics or Anglicans as well. Real Christianity does not trace itself back to the Catholics or the Reformers (who are simply Catholics with fewer sacraments and without a pope or indulgences) Christ's true "ekklesia" or "assembly of called out ones" has always existed outside of pagan pseudo-christian religeosity.

The apocrapha was added by the catholic Church in the fourth century, and their wayward brethren (the protestants) continued in the tradition of the mother church at first, and then took them out later. They were never quoted from by the apostles or Jesus, nor were they in the original Catholic Bible, and the Jews who preserved them never regarded them as part of their inspired writings either. They are full of errors and contradictions which proves they are counterfeit.

.

[RGR]

The apocrapha was added by the catholic Church in the fourth century, and their wayward brethren (the protestants) continued in the tradition of the mother church at first, and then took them out later.

Ah, yes, anyone disagreeing with your point of view is by necessity wayward. I don't need you to speak on behalf of God for me; I have His Word and His leading to guide me.

[huuf]

Since the beginning man has added to the Word of God (Scriptures and commands) and paid a heavy price...

Adam told Eve not to EAT nor even TOUCH the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God never said that in fact he told Adam to TEND ALL the trees in the garden. Yet when Eve was deceived she says "we are not to EAT of it nor even TOUCH it..."

Read it (Genesis account of Adam and Eve's fall) carefully and you will see that Adam added to God's command and thereby made null the command Given by God by telling her "nor even touch it".

The Jewish people had added to the Torah by way of all the labrious ways to do it the scribes and pharisees required of them via rituals and requirements/traditions not commanded in the law of Moses. Jesus accused them of this time and time again. They further added to God's Word in the Talmud and Oral Tradition by making them not only equal to Scripture but even claiming superiority to scripture.

The roman catholic church as done exactly the same as Adam and the roman catholic church. They have added the apocrypha (non canonized writings) and built doctrine of them (purgatory). They have elevated the oral traditions of "the church fathers" to being equal to scripture in authority.

One last thing comes to mind as a pitfall for mankind and that is our willingness to want to put an intermediary between God and ourselves be it priests - pastors - rabbi's as explainers and intercessors and even "saviors". There is only one Priest-Rabbi-Intercessor and thats Jesus (God Himself in the flesh) who is the very living Word of God.

Yours in Yeshua, David

[RGR]

There is only one Priest-Rabbi-Intercessor and thats Jesus (God Himself in the flesh) who is the very living Word of God.

[EricH]

Here is what Revelation 22:18-19 says:

I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God shall add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

Revelation 22:18-19 NASB

John limits his warning to the "prophecy of this book". It is actually a warning against anyone changing the contents of the revelations He has just received. It was not intended to be a statment regarding the limits of the canon.