There is more than one set of apocryphas.

[Ezra]

gave you several Scripture verses that support Purgatory - and you have not explained them away.

macabees is not inspired ( your using your cathloic teaching..thats is straw man] only historical in nature why would you pray for the dead? false DOCTRINE i want scripture that says there is a purgatory .if you can not provide a scripture that has the WORD PURGATORY . then have nothing nothing at all..it is nice to see you grasping for air praying for the dead is mormon only they baptize .. keep posting your false theolgy so everyone can see .what false taeching is .. you might ought to check your sould you may not be as saved as you think.... not judging just saying

 

[BreadOfLife]

macabees is not inspired ( your using your cathloic teaching..thats is straw man] only historical in nature why would you pray for the dead? false DOCTRINE i want scripture that says there is a purgatory .if you can not provide a scripture that has the WORD PURGATORY . then have nothing nothing at all..it is nice to see you grasping for air praying for the dead is mormon only they baptize .. keep posting your false theolgy so everyone can see .what false taeching is .. you might ought to check your sould you may not be as saved as you think.... not judging just saying

WHO told you that Maccabees is not inspired??
Can you answer that??

Do you KNOW your history? Do you know WHEN when the 7 Deuterocanonical Books were jettisoned from the OPEN Jewish Canon of Scripture??
Do you know WHO made that decision?

As for the word "Purgatory" - why do you require the WORD??
Where is the word "Trinity" in the Bible?
Where is the word "Incarnation" in the Bible??
Where is the inspired list of Books that belong in the Bible??
These are BASIC tenets of the Christian faith - yet the actual WORDS are not in Scripture.

For that matter - where is the word "Bible" in the Bible??
Do your HOMEWORK and answer these questions . . .

 

[1stCenturyLady]

It's a big mess. The number of books in the Bible depends on which Bible is being referenced. Protestant and Catholic churches recognize 27 New Testament books. Protestants recognize 39 books of the Jewish canon in the Old Testament. Roman Catholics hold 46 books of the Old Testament as canon, along with expanded versions of Esther and Daniel. In addition to the 73 books of the Catholic Bible, the Orthodox Church adds three more books to their canon. By far, the largest canon of all is found in the Ethiopic Church, whose Bible totals 81 books. One Apocryphal volume of interest (where I got all this information) contains the books of the Catholic, Orthodox, and Ethiopic Bibles, which include: 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, Letter (Epistle) of Jeremiah, The Prayer of Azariah, Baruch, Prayer of Manasseh (Manassas), Bel and the Dragon, Wisdom of Sirach, Wisdom of Solomon, Additions to Esther, Tobit, Judith, Susanna, Psalm 151, Enoch, Jubilees, 1 Clements, Shepherd of Hermas.

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?

 

[BreadOfLife]

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?

The Shepherd of Hermas, along with many other Books such as the Epistles of Barnabas the the Epistle of Clement were read aloud from pulpits - as Scripture for the first 300 years of the Church.

The Canon was not settled until the Synod of Rome in 382 AD.
11 years later, it was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo (393).
4 years later, at the Council (or Synod) of Carthage (397), it was yet again confirmed.
8 years later, in 405, in a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, he reiterated the canon.
14 years after that, at the 2nd Council (Synod) of Carthage (419) the canon was again formally confirmed.

The Canon of Scripture was officially closed at the Council of Trent in the 16th century

 

[1stCenturyLady]

The Shepherd of Hermas, along with many other Books such as the Epistles of Barnabas the the Epistle of Clement were read aloud from pulpits - as Scripture for the first 300 years of the Church.

The Canon was not settled until the Synod of Rome in 382 AD.
11 years later, it was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo (393).
4 years later, at the Council (or Synod) of Carthage (397), it was yet again confirmed.
8 years later, in 405, in a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, he reiterated the canon.
14 years after that, at the 2nd Council (Synod) of Carthage (419) the canon was again formally confirmed.

The Canon of Scripture was officially closed at the Council of Trent in the 16th century

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

 

[Enoch111]

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

Do you really think the epistle of Barnabas would have been EXCLUDED from the New Testament canon if it was divinely inspired? Do you not believe that God watched over His written Word to ensure that only the canonical books were included?

This epistle is found in Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph), which had actually been consigned to a wastebasket for kindling by the Orthodox monks on Mount Sinai, until the scholar Tischendorf grabbed it and made an idol out of it. But Aleph is one of the most corrupt Greek manuscripts around, and the epistle of Barnabas was excluded from Scripture long ago.

 

[BreadOfLife]

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

Actually - it's not considered inspired Scripture.

 

[farouk]

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

I think the word is Deuterocanonical.

 

[farouk]

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?

It's been the custom for most Protestant Bibles from the early 19th century onwards to exclude Apocryphal books.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

Do you really think the epistle of Barnabas would have been EXCLUDED from the New Testament canon if it was divinely inspired? Do you not believe that God watched over His written Word to ensure that only the canonical books were included?

This epistle is found in Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph), which had actually been consigned to a wastebasket for kindling by the Orthodox monks on Mount Sinai, until the scholar Tischendorf grabbed it and made an idol out of it. But Aleph is one of the most corrupt Greek manuscripts around, and the epistle of Barnabas was excluded from Scripture long ago.

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.

 

[farouk]

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.

There are those who would argue that a wastebasket is where that Codex really belongs! (Although interesting from an antiquarian perspective.)

 

[1stCenturyLady]

Actually - it's not considered inspired Scripture.

Dah! I said I consider it canonical and inspired.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

There are those who would argue that a wastebasket is where that Codex really belongs! (Although interesting from an antiquarian perspective.)

Well, they would be wrong wouldn't they!

 

[farouk]

Well, they would be wrong wouldn't they!

It's interesting that Sinaiticus diverges from the Byzantine manuscripts quite substantially. It is also faded at 1 Timothy 3.16, yet some ppl have chosen to use the faded appearance of "God" at that verse as a "reason" to omit the word "God" in translation.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

It's interesting that Sinaiticus diverges from the Byzantine manuscripts quite substantially. It is also faded at 1 Timothy 3.16, yet some ppl have chosen to use the faded appearance of "God" at that verse as a "reason" to omit the word "God" in translation.

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.

 

[farouk]

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.

The NKJV follows the Received/Byzantine majority Greek text.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Dah! I said I consider it canonical and inspired.

Based on what, exactly?
Also - how do you determine the Canonicity of all of the other Books of Scripture?

 

[BreadOfLife]

I think the word is Deuterocanonical.

It's not even that . . .

The Deuterocanonical Books are:
Tobit
Judith
1 & 2 Maccabees
Baruch
Sirach
Wisdom
Portions of Daniel and Esther

 

[1stCenturyLady]

The NKJV follows the Received/Byzantine majority Greek text.

That sounds good to me!

 

[1stCenturyLady]

Based on what, exactly?
Also - how do you determine the Canonicity of all of the other Books of Scripture?

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