Search results

Yes, I too believe the Scriptures are true - all of them. I assume you've read the EoB, so what did you see that you object to?

Yes, I deleted that because the Spirit checked my spirit. Sorry. I had hoped I could delete it before you saw that. LOL You also missed my comment that only the Spirit could convince you.

In the 1990's, I read a book on the history of the canon. I discovered that the EoB was nominated and appeared on 6!!! official lists of books before the final selection was made. I was intrigued to read it myself and perhaps discern why it was not ultimately chosen. So I bought it and read it...

So you believe the Roman church was guided by the Holy Spirit? That was during a period in church history that they were adding paganism to attract pagans. As I said, I'm not Roman Catholic so don't use them as my guide to what is scripture and what isn't. You believe what you want. It doesn't...

No. You were saying that the Didache, itself, wasn't scripture, as if I did. You're hysterical!

You can remain closed to the idea, Farouk. But I'm not Catholic and assume they were led by God to chose all of His Word. They believe they are infallible.

ROFL! I never said the Didache was scripture. I said it quotes scripture.

Are there any writings of Paul, Peter or John that are not scripture? They received all their teachings from the Holy Spirit. If the Epistle of Barnabas was actually written by Barnabas as the Didiche would presume, then it is scripture. He was an apostle.

The Didache contains the teachings of apostles who wrote the scriptures. But I see you are not interested in reading ALL of God's words. I am.

The Teachings of the Twelve Apostles, the Didache, written in the first century quotes it.

That sounds good to me!

I always use the New King James Version so never noticed that. 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory.

Well, they would be wrong wouldn't they! :)

Dah! I said I consider it canonical and inspired.

Yes, at the time the canon was being ratified, the prophecy it contains was not close to being fulfilled. But when Tischendorf found it, the church was going through many changes. God preserved it for when it was needed.

The Epistle of Barnabas, I believe, is canonical; however, don't know of any of today's Bibles that includes it. Do you?

Which Bible has the Shepherd of Hermas. I looked up the books in the Ethiopic Bible and it wasn't listed, but Enoch was. Which other has Enoch?

LOL No, silly. That's what it says. 23 Know ye that the brother Timotheus is released, with whom, if he may come more shortly, I will see you. 24 Salute all those leading you, and all the saints; salute you doth those from Italy: 25 the grace [is] with you all! Amen. ---------- 22 Brethren...

No, Timothy didn't write that for Paul. He wasn't there. He just got out of jail, but they hadn't seen him yet, and it wasn't known if he would arrive shortly, but if so, then Paul (or Barnabas) would go with Timothy to visit the Hebrews. The "large letters" was in the letter to the Galatians.

I don't know much about what Augustine believed, except for his statement, "Love God, then live as you please." On the surface that sounded like "greasy grace." But then I took the time to look it up and read it in context, and was impressed that his beliefs were what the apostles taught. I...