The Canon of Scripture

Fisheaters.com ^ | not given | Fisheaters.com

[Salvation]

---

Scripture mentioned in the above article

Tobit 12:15
I am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels who present the prayers of the saints and enter into the presence of the glory of the Holy One. [see Revelation 1:4 and 8:3-4 below]

2 Maccabees 7:29
[A mother speaking to her son:] Do not fear this butcher, but prove worthy of your brothers. Accept death, so that in God's mercy I may get you back again with your brothers. [see Hebrews 11:35 below]

2 Maccabees 12:44
For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. [see 1 Corinthians 15:29 below]

2 Maccabees 15:14
And Onias spoke, saying, "This is a man who loves the brethren and prays much for the people and the holy city, Jeremiah [bodily dead], the prophet of God."

1 Corinthians 15:29
Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf? [see 2 Maccabees 12:44 above]

Hebrews 11:35
Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection. [see 2 Maccabees 7:29 above]

Revelation 1:4
...Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne. [see Tobit 12:15 above]

Revelation 8:3-4
And another angel came and stood at the altar with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God. [see Tobit 12:15 above]

---

Further Reading

Canon of the Old Testament

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Religion Moderator,
How can you post an Ecumenical Thread that contains oppositional language and attacks in the main article?

For example, this quote:

“In the 16th c., Luther, reacting to serious abuses and clerical corruption in the Latin Church, to his own heretical theological vision (see articles on sola scriptura and sola fide), and, frankly, to his own inner demons”

I suggest the Ecumenical tag be removed or the thread removed. People should follow the rules on the Religion Moderator home page...

[Salvation]

Canon of Scripture Ping!

[Salvation]

Facts are facts.

[muawiyah]

I see what you mean ~ but it may not be possible to find an article that covers this particular topic WITHOUT assorted bromides and insults.

it is interesting ~ can't say it's not ~

Salvation, BTW, our religion moderator may not be prepared for this one.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

From the Religion Moderator's home page:

Ecumenical threads are closed to antagonism.

To antagonize is to incur or to provoke hostility in others.

Unlike the “caucus” threads, the article and reply posts of an “ecumenical” thread may discuss more than one belief, but antagonism is not tolerable.

Religion Moderator - if someone cannot post anything that provokes hostility, how can you post a hostile article that is antagonistic and then discuss it without being labeled antagonistic?

[GGpaX4DumpedTea]

“Facts are facts.”

Just because the Roman Church says so does not make it fact.

[Mercat]

I love this stuff. It’s a spectator sport for me but I’m happy that there are people at work figuring it out.

[jjotto]

For example, the claim that the “Jewish canon” was determined at “Jamnia” is at very best, a “hypothetical”. It’s a Roman Catholic fantasy or worse.

[what's up]

"and, frankly, to his own inner demons”

Agree. This is not antagonistic language? Really?

[Lee N. Field]

Protestants, Catholics, and most Orthodox agree now 1 that the New Testament should consist at least of the 27 Books (Matthew through Revelation/Apocalypse) that the Catholic Church determined were canonical, but the Protestant Old Testament is lacking 7 entire books 2 (Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus/Sirach, Baruch, I Maccabees, and II Maccabees), 3 chapters of Daniel and 6 chapters of Esther, leaving them with 66 incomplete books while Catholic Bibles have 73 books. How did this come to be?

Notice the assumption that got slipped in.

[Mr Rogers]

What is the difference between the Apocrypha and the Deuterocanonical books?

[muawiyah]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2973419/posts We actually covered some of this same material last year ~ Has there been a change in the ECUMENTAL rules? I’ve read them here, and in the reference above, and they seem different.

[dartuser]

Roman Catholic mythology ...

[bonfire]

Your opinion and flame bait.

[fidelis]

"How can you post an Ecumenical Thread that contains oppositional language and attacks in the main article?

For example, this quote:

“In the 16th c., Luther, reacting to serious abuses and clerical corruption in the Latin Church, to his own heretical theological vision (see articles on sola scriptura and sola fide), and, frankly, to his own inner demons”

I don't see how this can be construed as an attack on anyone in this Forum (unless Martin Luther is a FReeper).

In fact the historical record is clear: Martin Luther suffered from terrible scrupulosity-- the belief that he could never be good enough to go to heaven. His personal solution to the problem was to invent the "faith alone" doctrine which is contradictory to the Scriptures and was never believed by any Christian in the previous 1500 years of Christianity. He then tried to promote his personal solutions into doctrine. When the Church didn't go along, he rebelled. Simple as that. As someone has already said, facts is facts.

[fidelis]

"Roman Catholic mythology ..."

Well then...I guess that settles it. ;)

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“I don’t see how this can be construed as an attack on anyone in this Forum (unless Martin Luther is a FReeper).”

I did not say it was an attack on a FReeper. It is an attack on one side of an ecumenical discussion in the very article by the other side. In other words, on a thread that prohibits antagonism, the article stacks the deck, skirting the historic rules and practices of ecumenical threads.

Historically, FreeRepublic Religion Forum rules and moderator decisions have thrown out antagonistic articles when posted as ecumenical. I’m asking for a response from the RM - and I accept his or her decision.

Even your statement that I am responding to is antagonistic toward one side and is by definition, not ecumenical and should be removed by the RM.

[fidelis]

"For example, the claim that the “Jewish canon” was determined at “Jamnia” is at very best, a “hypothetical”. It’s a Roman Catholic fantasy or worse."

Note that the article contains the following footnote:

5 There is debate as to whether the Council of Jamnia actually "closed" the Jewish canon because debate continued among Jews for hundreds of years afterward as to which books should be included or excluded. Even into the 3rd century A.D., controversy surrounded Ezekiel, Proverbs, Ruth, Esther, and others

The point is that the Jewish canon was not fixed until well into the Christian area--possibly even after the Christian canon (consisting of all 74 books) was fixed in the 4th century. At Jamnia, the Jews there were mostly concerned with identifying and rejecting what was NOT Scripture-- including some writings that are now part of the New Testament. The Christian Church, already in existence, could not be bound by Jewish teaching authority.

[Iscool]

The truth is: the position put out by your religion on its canon is completely false...Your earliest church fathers disagree with your religion’s current position...

So in the spirit of ecumenicism, I would encourage you to study the earliest church fathers to find more accurate information so that we all could agree...