It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by jhill76
reply to post by NOTurTypical
Lets not get too cute. The Holy Spirit was the real author of the text, the Biblical "authors" only held the writing utensils. The "fingerprint" of the Author is the heptadic structure underlying the text.
I understand that. Actually, some writings were given by the Chief Angel as well to the author. Of course, signed off by Father. But, these minor details are not important. (Man wouldn't have known the difference, as him and Fathers spirit feel about the same when coming down here, to man, and voice is just as strong.)
I am trying to say, how did man decide which ones were inspired or not? Did they ask the Holy Spirit which ones to include or remove?edit on 9-7-2012 by jhill76 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by jhill76
reply to post by adjensen
1) A text needed an Apostolic connection - it needed to be written by an Apostle, or sourced directly from one
May I ask, how did the authorities decide that God wouldn't come to another who was not an apostle to give to write?
Why was God impotent to prevent man from excluding works He willed to be included in the canon we hold today? Gotta love the inversion principle!
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by jhill76
Paul was an apostle, personally anointed and taught by Christ. And I gave the NT authors who were not apostles because you asked for such. The OT was penned by either kings or prophets of YHVH.
1) A text needed an Apostolic connection - it needed to be written by an Apostle, or sourced directly from one
Originally posted by jhill76
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by jhill76
Paul was an apostle, personally anointed and taught by Christ. And I gave the NT authors who were not apostles because you asked for such. The OT was penned by either kings or prophets of YHVH.
So, is the below invalid?
1) A text needed an Apostolic connection - it needed to be written by an Apostle, or sourced directly from one
It wasn't a matter of God not coming to someone -- if you look at the Catholic Church, they're still open to non-private revelation. Rather, it was a matter of establishing standards and closing the Canon, since the essentials of salvation needed to be included in the texts. And it's tough to argue that one needed to have personally interacted with Christ to have the authority to speak for him.
Originally posted by jhill76
reply to post by NOTurTypical
Why was God impotent to prevent man from excluding works He willed to be included in the canon we hold today? Gotta love the inversion principle!
This same question can be applied to almost anything in the world. Why world hunger, why wars, why rape? This is of mans doing. Does that say God is not capable to move his hand to correct these things, no.edit on 9-7-2012 by jhill76 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by jhill76
Understood. Was there ever a debate on let's include something in between the OT, and the NT, for the ones that were deemed not inspired?
Originally posted by jhill76
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by jhill76
Paul was an apostle, personally anointed and taught by Christ. And I gave the NT authors who were not apostles because you asked for such. The OT was penned by either kings or prophets of YHVH.
So, is the below invalid?
1) A text needed an Apostolic connection - it needed to be written by an Apostle, or sourced directly from one
Originally posted by adjensen
Originally posted by jhill76
Understood. Was there ever a debate on let's include something in between the OT, and the NT, for the ones that were deemed not inspired?
Do you mean the period between the Old Testament and the New? Or do you mean just in general?
If you mean the former, I don't know. If you mean the latter, I don't know, lol.
Actually, there was a fair bit of debate, we know, but one of the first Canon lists that we have has most of the books of the New Testament listed on it. Iranaeus listed everything, except for Philemon (which a lot of people still wish wasn't include, lol,) 2 Peter, 3 John and Jude, and included one of Clement's letters and the Shepherd of Hermas, which a lot of people seemed to favour, but lost out in the end (too much of a story, in my mind.)
All those things are not His Word. He values His Word even above His own Name. Not even in the same ballpark bro.
Originally posted by jhill76
reply to post by NOTurTypical
All those things are not His Word. He values His Word even above His own Name. Not even in the same ballpark bro.
Understood. I don't want to derail this thread, we will touch on this topic later.
Originally posted by adjensen
And as for the Old Testament, the Catholic Bible includes a number of books that are not in the Protestant Bible (the subject of this very thread) and I think that the sole argument for their exclusion was that they were Greek texts, not Hebrew, so whether they were truly "Jewish" was called into question. Catholics like the missing books (Macabees has a bit that figures prominently into the Doctrine of Purgatory, and the additional prayers in 3 Daniel are used quite often in the rotation of the Liturgy of the Hours) but I suspect most people aren't missing much in the Apocrypha.
This is Christ speaking directly to Peter, and possibly, by extension, to the whole of Apostles. 19b should read: "whatever you bind on earth has been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth has been loosed in heaven." Tense is wrong in English. It's not Peter that makes the law, but that the Law already set comes out of him. If we take Christ's word as Authoritative, from Him, then by this, we have to accept Peter.
18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Peter vouches for Paul, through the authority given to him by Christ.
15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.
originally posted by: Screwed
Ohhh boy, you have just opened up a can of worms.
Christians are not GENERALLY a group who are open to their holy book or religion being challenged with facts
and logic.
So, you have undoubtedly brought up a subject inspired by the devil to test their faith in God.
I am sorry for all of these facts being exposed.
I have known this for some time now and am poilte enough not to bring it up because
I don't want the devil working thru me in order to mislead the God fearing Christians.
Praise Allah.