deuterocanonicals

[Guest shadow2b]

-I understand what you are saying, but I do not understand how one would be right in "bucking" the guidance that the Holy Spirit has given to the authority of the church, and what arguement does one have at the present to disregard the deuterocanonicals as canon?

-BUCKING THE GUIDANCE THE HOLY-SPIRIT HAS GIVEN TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH??????

-Where is the"scriptural"precedence for{the guidance the HOLY-SPIRIT gave to the authority of the

-church??}just exactly please-----chapt.& verse

[OneAccord]

I think there were books that were considered Scripture when the New Testament came about that are no longer considered 'canon'. In my last reading of the entire NT, I noticed a few places where some prophecy was cited that didn't have a reference to a Protestant Old Testament book footnoted in like all the other prophecy fulfillment verses did.

Here is one example:

Matthew 2:23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, "He shall be called a Nazarene."

As far as I know there is no scripture that says He shall be called a Nazarene in my Bible, so what scripture of prophecy does this one belong to?

Here is another example:

Matthew 22:29

Jesus answered and said to them, "You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry not are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven.

What scripture is He referring to here? I know none in the OT that speak of people neither marrying nor being given in marriage in the resurrection.

Another example:

Jude 14, 15: Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, "behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, to execute judgement on all, to convict all who are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things spoken against Him.

I have a copy of the Book of Enoch and this is a direct quote from Enoch 1:9. Apparently this was considered scripture when Jude wrote this.

There are other examples as well, but I don't have them at hand just now.

[Guest Themessenger1]

Not insulting any particualr denomination, but these deuterocanonicals were rejected because certain denominations didn't want certain information in them publicly known at the time. I have done quite a bit of studying and have found that certain books of the deuterocanonicals were forbidden to be read by anyone outside the religious leaders in charge of the books. They had even gone to the extreme of murdering those who had obtained them. One such book is the Book of Enoch. Every portion of this particular book had been obtained by the Catholic church. They didn't want people to read it because of the information that it held, particularly the reference to the fallen angels having sexual relations with the daughters of man. And the reference to the creation of their children which became giants. They then convinced us that it was not scriptural and not inspired by God. Yet Enoch is mentiuoned both in Genesis 5:21-24 and in the Book of Jude verse 14. And another reference found in our book of Canon is in Daniel 7:9 which refers to Jesus as the "Ancient of Days." I have found no other reference to using this name for Jesus, anywhere else in scripture.....accept it is found althroughout the Book of Enoch. So why was this book kept so hidden, because it revealed those things which if publicly known would make the believers of the future aware of the great delusion in 2 Thesselonians. By hiding the information, over time we have forgotten what once was known and believed by our original Christian fathers. There have been archaeological evidences found all throughout the world, which prove what Genesis chapter 6 and the Book of Enoch tell. These are now no longer books which should be ignored. These books have very much to do with the great deception that is affecting us all. After all what were Jesus' very words in Matthew 24:37-39 which says this: "But as the days of No'-e were, so shall be the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that No'-e entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." Think for a moment, what was going on in the days of Noah? Well, lets see what Genesis chapter 6 says: "And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be and hundred and twenty years. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men wich were of old, men of renown. Now many have tried to say that the phrase "sons of God" was reference to the sons of Seth or human chidren. Well, lets look at Job 1:6 & 7 which says: "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them. And the Lord said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it" Now this is repeated over and over in Job. I don't believe that the "sons of Seth" or "human children would be traveling with Satan going to and fro "in" the earth, and walking up and down in it...could they? Nor could they create giant children. The Book of Enoch also names the Fallen Angels which committed this deed by name. That was one of the reasons it was hidden for so long. Manuscripts of the Book of Enoch were found in Ethiopia and only until recently were brought out into the public for display. It was also included with the dead sea scrolls. So it must have been revered by the original church fathers as divinely inspired by God! Why post all of this? Because it has everything to do with why these books were not chosen to be put with our current Holy Bible....they are dangerous knowledge to the religious heirarchy. Think very closely to this: what exactly did Jesus mean in Matthew 24: 37 & 38? Let's break down Genesis 6 and look at it! Well it says in Gen 6:2 that the sons of God "TOOK" them wives....which denotes that their wives did not marry and give birth by choice......other words which mean the same thing as "TOOK" are : seized, held, occupied, grabbed, captured, snatched! Abducted has similar meanings: kidnap, capture, carry off, run off with, seize, steal away, rape. So in the days of Noah, these daughters of men were being taken or abducted by these sons of God. Is there anything going on today which denotes the same story...well we here of alien abductions don't we? What if the Fallen Angels of the Bible are what people are calling "aliens now?" What if they are one in the same? Is there anything else in Genesis 6 which denotes similarities to current times. Well if fallen angels were reproducing with human woman and creating giant offspring...thatwould mean they were changing the DNA of man or attempting to. Gee, aren't we currently speaking of changing DNA and cloning nowadays....sound familiar? And in Genesis 6 the world was full of violence and bloodshed....is our world today similar? If Jesus only meant that our world would be violent like the days of noah, he would of specified that, but he included that it would be "JUST AS THE DAYS OF NOAH WERE!" Most importantly put is this: That several places in scripture it denotes that these giants, nephilim are still here, but in hiding. Remember it says in Gen 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; AND ALSO AFTER THAT!".....meaning some survived the flood! Does it say anything in the New Testament which says this...YES! In Jude verses 4 which says: For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ, remember that it refered to them similarly in Gen 6:4 .....when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bar children to them, the same became mighty men which WERE OF OLD, men of renown. How do we know that these giant offspring lived after the flood, well lets look in Numbers 13:31& 32 where it says: "But the men that went up with him said, We be not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we. And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had searched unto the children of Israel, saying, The land, through which we have gone to search it, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people that we saw in it are men of a great stature. And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak , which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight. So they did live after the flood. So, the question is now where are they? Well, lets look at human genetics. We have been able over time to bring a dog the size of a german shepherd down to the size of a chuahuah...who's to say that these "Evil Beasts" haven't been able to do the same and become like we are. Daniel 2:43 says: "And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, just as iron is not mixed with clay." But why the big secret, why all the secrecy of this information..well it is found in 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12 says: "Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: " Now what could this lie and delusion be, that God shall send? Well, lets look at our society and our current obsessions. One of which is space travel and another is of UFO's. There has been a huge increase in movies involving alien contact and alien technology....etc......look at it! They portray them as friendly, as our future leaders and teachers...but are they? It's kind of funny that Israel becomes a nation in 1948 and 1 year before, the supposed Roswell New Mexico crash occured. Since then, our technology has increased three- fold for some reason. We haven't had such an increase in technology in all of modern time. All in the last 50 years this has occured. And mysteriously our government has all kinds of aerodynamic flying planes which just seem "out of this world." It was only 50 years ago or so we invented the Television, radio and telephone wasn't it. And before that our increase technology was even less. But all of a sudden since this supposed crash....our technology has sped up! What do they know that we don't? There are numerous unusual things in the skies, which I have seen myself. People claiming to have been abducted by "aliens," Talk of cloning human beings and altering DNA. All these things that seem so new are not. The Lord did say that "nothing was new under the sun," didn't he? And Jesus said that what happened in Gen 6 would happen before his appearance. So what exactly is this delusion pointing to. The idea that these aliens somehow planted us here and the the Lord is not real! They will come here sometime around when the Anti-Christ takes his seat, and will claim they are our gods and that they genetically made us. I know these Nephilim are their creation and that some people as spoken of in Jude are not exactly God's creations, but Satans. Don't think for one moment that this is improbable or impossible. The Bible does speak of all kinds of "FIERY CHARIOTS" and so on and so forth. It is merely our concept of what they were called then and what they are called now. The only difference is, with these offspring of Satan infiltrating (creeping in) our society, they have found ways to keep this knowledge hidden of their true identity. They are of Satan and always will be. They want us to believe they are gods and that they made us. Think about the prohecy of the coming of the Antichrist. Do you really think if some man came here and said I am God that everyone in the world would unite and form a New World Order and have this "man" as their leader. Do you really think that they would worship him? Or take into consideration the movie plot of "independence Day." If anyone saw this movie, remember how the whole world united against these things. It would take something simular for our world and all of our differences to wake up everybody on earth to unite in that fashion. Remember in scripture that the Anti-Christ will have all signs and lying wonders, that he will have the power to cause stars to fall from heaven. Scripture also denotes that he will not be alone when doing this. That some outside forces will be helping him. It would take something so awesome to happen that everyone on earth would stand afar off in unbelief, something almost supernatural to drive man to worship a man, or will he really appear that way? This portion may just be my opinion, but I advise everyone to study ancient cultures and their beliefs. There is something in those books which seem to be forbidden from scripture. What do children do when they don't want you to know something...THEY HIDE IT! Think about it, what could delude the entire world into accepting the antichrist as God. Our churches currently teach that Jesus is coming soon....Which he is....but! They are failing to speak of the matters which I have mentioned in this post, which is going to delude many people into believing that the AntiChrist is God.....remember where it said that he could even deceive the very elect of God? How could that be possible if we read our Bibles and know what is going to happen. Well, there has to be something more to the scriptures than what our Sunday Sermon Preachers are teaching us? Our churches are failing to speak of all the prophecies and details which happen before Jesus' return...they are extremely important for us to know, or we to could be deluded....don't think it isn't possible! I will leave this post with one note from Psalm 82:6-7 which states " I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of hte most High. But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes." Think about that! God created his angels, they were before us the sons of God, but for some reason they shall "die LIKE men" not "AS" men. The word "as" was not used, which denotes they aren't human men. The word "like" is used. Other words which mean the same thing are similar, alike, comparable, uniform, undifferentiated. So "Like" and "similar" are words meaning the same. And words which mean the same as "similar" are: like, comparable, RESEMBLING I know that much of this is opposite of what we've been taught, but it is not uncriptural. Read carefully the scriptures, and you will see what I am saying. Every word and its meaning are very important. Now I know that the Gospel is most important, but since we are in the "End Days" I beleive the meanings of the prophecies are the next important!

Please check out this websight entitled http://www.ufoartwork.com. click on the artwork from B.C. and A.D. you will find artwork depicting very supernatural things from BC and AD. Artwork from the 11th and 12th centuries, from famous artists. Some depicting Jesus on the Cross with very visible flying discs in the skies above him. There aren't just one or two, but many, many artists which depicted Jesus in this odd manner. Something inspired the artists of our ancient history and of the last 1000 years to depict Jesus in such a fashion...These aren't just oddities found in this art, it appears to be some kind of common theme. These are paintings done from all over the world, inspired by something they were seeing at the time....what could it have been? Then re-think what I posted. Is it really not scriptural to look at it this way? You Decide! It is important that you know this: I am a believer in Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior! I accepted his gift that he gave on the Cross. I Love Jesus with all of my heart, but I know that there is more to the world and its history than we are being told. That includes our churches as well. Aren't there still grey areas that you wonder about?

Matthew 7:7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: Truth is out there, and the answer lies in asking Jesus who will teach you through his Holy Spirit, not a man or a doctrine. If you have questions regarding any of this, pray to Lord as I did, and ask that the Holy Spirit reveal to you the truth. And you then can discern what is true and what isn't.

[Guest shadow2b]

-Very interesting artwork----the book of Enoch--i'm not too sure about---but we have it & I've

-started reading it several times,but haven't finished it-----yet----

[RGR]

Are we treading this parcel of land again? I thought we hashed this out once before? Oh, well, my take is still the same. The sheer absolute ignorance of an idea that the church removed books from the Bible to make them less Jewish is ludicrous.

[homebild]

No bubble burst here.

I understand what you are saying, but I do not understand how one would be right in "bucking" the guidance that the Holy Spirit has given to the authority of the church, and what arguement does one have at the present to disregard the deuterocanonicals as canon?

The hypethetical point that you have holds no precedence in the present. So what do the faithful do in the present?

This is the no spin zone! What say you? You still have failed to answer the question. Should they be included now in the present? With the facts that we now have, not with the assumptions of the facts that we may have in the future.

The fact remains that the 'Church' has NEVER been in unanimous agreement just as to which books should be contained in the 'Bible'.

So to state "but I do not understand how one would be right in "bucking" the guidance that the Holy Spirit has given to the authority of the church, " only begs the question just WHOSE Church or WHICH Church is hearing in full or in part from the Holy Spirit in the first place, or whether the Church has heard from the Holy Spirit at all in its selection of canonical literature.

Of course, the Roman Church thinks 'it' had the full inspiration of the Holy Spirit in deciding that she was the one who would decide for everyone just what was and what was not 'scripture', but the Church was far from unanimous in the Councils...

Which brings us back to the point that the 'canon' has NEVER been universally decided at all....

It has merely been ASSERTED which books should be CANON at times by some majorities of localized decisionmakers and likely NEVER with the full backing of the Holy Spirit at all.

That is NOT to say that the Scriptures as we have them are useless for doctrine or teaching.

But their degree of 'inspiration' and whether they remian inspired at all remains an ongoing an open question for most believers in the world.

Protestants use 66 books....

Ethipoian Orthodox Bibles use 83 books...

With many variations in between...

Not even the Jews ever universally adopted just what was Jewish "canon"...and recognized probably better than has the Church that the "canon of scripture" has been fluid from the beginning...

So the entire question of 'inspiration', 'canonicty' and 'scripturality' remains an open question for the Church despite protests to the contrary from every quarter.

[mobile21]

So the entire question of 'inspiration', 'canonicty' and 'scripturality' remains an open question for the Church despite protests to the contrary from every quarter.

Despite protests to the results of a valid Synod, it is what it is and if you can't believe the Holy Spirit really acts in the Church then too bad you have too little faith but that doesn't mean you can change the historical fact of a defined canon.

[homebild]

So the entire question of 'inspiration', 'canonicty' and 'scripturality' remains an open question for the Church despite protests to the contrary from every quarter.

Despite protests to the results of a valid Synod, it is what it is and if you can't believe the Holy Spirit really acts in the Church then too bad you have too little faith but that doesn't mean you can change the historical fact of a defined canon.

if you can't believe the Holy Spirit really acts in the Church then too bad you have too little faith

The REAL question is not whether the Holy Spirit acts in the Church, but whether the Catholic Church has been the ONLY means by which the Holy Spirit acts.

To that end, I would reply in the negative: the Holy Spirit is God, NOT the Catholic Church, and that whatever the Catholic Church has partially agreed upon is not the unanimous agreement of all Christians nor all Catholics and never has been.

The 'Catholic' Church has NEVER been historically 'catholic' depsite your erroneous protests tot he contrary...and never WILL be.

Christ's Church is much bigger and more Universal than what the Vatican could ever imagine nor admit to.

[mobile21]

So the entire question of 'inspiration', 'canonicty' and 'scripturality' remains an open question for the Church despite protests to the contrary from every quarter.

Despite protests to the results of a valid Synod, it is what it is and if you can't believe the Holy Spirit really acts in the Church then too bad you have too little faith but that doesn't mean you can change the historical fact of a defined canon.

if you can't believe the Holy Spirit really acts in the Church then too bad you have too little faith

The REAL question is not whether the Holy Spirit acts in the Church, but whether the Catholic Church has been the ONLY means by which the Holy Spirit acts.

To that end, I would reply in the negative: the Holy Spirit is God, NOT the Catholic Church, and that whatever the Catholic Church has partially agreed upon is not the unanimous agreement of all Christians nor all Catholics and never has been.

The 'Catholic' Church has NEVER been historically 'catholic' depsite your erroneous protests tot he contrary...and never WILL be.

Christ's Church is much bigger and more Universal than what the Vatican could ever imagine nor admit to.

What are you talking about?????? By the time the Synod who defined the Canon happened, there was no "catholic-protestant" debate going. All christians belonged to the same doctrinal body.

Now all christians still belong to the very same Church but don't uphold the very same doctrine.

The question is the same: do you believe that the Holy Spirit acted in the Synod that defined the canon or not?. If the answer is "no", then do you believe the Holy Spirit acted in the Church at least once???? (besides the first apostolic synod as depicted in the Bible of course) .

[homebild]

So the entire question of 'inspiration', 'canonicty' and 'scripturality' remains an open question for the Church despite protests to the contrary from every quarter.

Despite protests to the results of a valid Synod, it is what it is and if you can't believe the Holy Spirit really acts in the Church then too bad you have too little faith but that doesn't mean you can change the historical fact of a defined canon.

if you can't believe the Holy Spirit really acts in the Church then too bad you have too little faith

The REAL question is not whether the Holy Spirit acts in the Church, but whether the Catholic Church has been the ONLY means by which the Holy Spirit acts.

To that end, I would reply in the negative: the Holy Spirit is God, NOT the Catholic Church, and that whatever the Catholic Church has partially agreed upon is not the unanimous agreement of all Christians nor all Catholics and never has been.

The 'Catholic' Church has NEVER been historically 'catholic' depsite your erroneous protests tot he contrary...and never WILL be.

Christ's Church is much bigger and more Universal than what the Vatican could ever imagine nor admit to.

What are you talking about?????? By the time the Synod who defined the Canon happened, there was no "catholic-protestant" debate going. All christians belonged to the same doctrinal body.

Now all christians still belong to the very same Church but don't uphold the very same doctrine.

The question is the same: do you believe that the Holy Spirit acted in the Synod that defined the canon or not?. If the answer is "no", then do you believe the Holy Spirit acted in the Church at least once???? (besides the first apostolic synod as depicted in the Bible of course) .

Sorry you are so confused.

And I never made this into a 'Catholic-Protestant' debate.

But despite Trent and previous Catholic Church councils which affirmed that those books which were named were in fact 'canon' and 'inspired'...the Catholic Church never declared authoritatively nor conclusively that these were the ONLY Books that were inspired or would ever be considered 'canon'.

The official position of the Catholic Church is that 'canon' is 'open' and subject to change.

As far as 'inspiration' of the Holy Spirit goes, it is entirely possible to be 'inspired' by the Holy Spirit and still come to an entirely partial or even 'wrong' conclusion about that inspiration.

Simply because a work can be considered 'inspired' does not mean that it is perfectly comprehended, understood, or should be considered written in stone.

After all, we 'see thru a glass darkly' and none have perfect knowledge of the Holy Spirit's mind or will.

The best that can be said is that the Church has never fully agreed on just what is inspired scripture and that 'canon' has never been 'closed'....