The Buck of Esther? My non-apocryphal Holy Bible has the Book of Esther in it.
Jesus is the Word of God. The Holy Bible is the Word of God in written form. However man revises the Scripture, the true Word of God will negate any errors made by either revisionists or printers. That which is false will not prosper. God gave us cognitive powers, and we are to use them in seeking His guidance in Holy Scripture.
Perhaps we can defuse some of the rancor by addressing not how the Word of God may have been changed or misinterpreted, but rather addressing how the very languages It has been expressed in has changed over time. As an example the word “Bald” appears numerous times in the Old Testament of several different translations. At the time the King James version was written the word meant “white”, not hairless. How else might changes to the meanings of the words used affect our understanding?
I believe it is the word of God, but it is not always to be taken literally.
For example, many people believe that John was not to be taken literally in much of what he wrote.
Such as Revelations.
There MUST be a God. Has to be a first cause.
I admit its an assumption but I assume God has some interest in humanity. There would most likely be some evidence of this interest in the early dawning of human history. In other words no religion incapable of showing roots, if not foundational components at least a few thousand years old would be valid.
Since we are assuming God contacted man thousands of years ago and did so in a significant manner we have only two possibilities to consider as late comers are out and aboriginal cults come and go like the falling leaves over the millenia . Hindu and Hebrew and their refinements are the only real choices.
So you can be a Hindu, a Hebrew, a Buddhist, a Christian, an agnostic or an atheist. Anything else is stupid.
Personally christianity makes the most sense of all of em and it offers the best deal.
Don’t let these Mormon haters get to you. They are experts at other people’s denominations, but they all belong to tiny little corner churches that fit their specific ideas of what is true worship. Most of them take God’s job of judgement upon themselves and act as prohets themselves by proclaiming that others are not true “Christians”; therefore, others will not go to heaven. They will throw scriptures at you and even tell you that “all the other churches say you are not Christian”, but remember, in the end, NOBODY HAS A RIGHT TO CALL SOMEONE ELSE A NON-CHRISTIAN.
Regardless of whether or not the JW’s and the Mormons are labeled as cults (and rightly so), it does not have much to do with the validity of the Bible, with or without the books contained in the Catholic version.
There are well presented arguments which run both ways (unlike the volumes of utter crap which try to justify the heresies of Charles Taze Russel, convicted liar - or of Joseph Smith, False prophet and fornicating profligate...) and they can be kept running in a civil vein.
We do not need, as Protestants or Catholics, to allow some moose-slime “scholar” (again, like a mormon prophet, there is no such thing) to enter the fray, for their intent is pretty easy to guess at: Divide and conquer.
As Orthodox Christian believers of Protestant and Catholic tradition, WE will set the tone and the parameters for our own debates - including when and where to hold them.
Personally, I vote for postponement of significant theological discussion until after the muzzie menace has been summarily eradicated.
Once the last of the bloodthirsty mohammadans is lying dead six feet under, then we can dissect doctrine and canonical literature until Jesus comes back to settle it once and for all.
A.A.C.
Genesis 3:1Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, `You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"
4. "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman.
5. "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
APOSTATE!!!
This disparaging title is given by the MORMON's from SLC to ANY one who is NOT a MORMON from SLC; but ESPECIALLY for THESE:
"We do not indorse the teachings of any so-called Mormons or Latter Day Saints, which are in conflict with the gospel of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, as taught in the New Testament and the Book of Mormon. They have departed in a great measure from the faith of the Church of Christ as it was first established, by heeding revelations given through Joseph Smith, who, after being called of God to translate his sacred word--the Book of Mormon--drifted into many errors and gave many revelations to introduce doctrines, ordinances and offices in the church, which are in conflict with Christ's teachings."
-- David Whitmer (an elder in the Church of Christ), 1887
Today, there are as many as 100 organizations claiming to be a part of the Latter Day Saint movement, most centered in Utah or Missouri. Most regard their own group, however small, to be the only legitimate Christian church. Most of these organizations are very small, but overall, but the second largest denomination, the Community of Christ, reports over 200,000 members.
Just a sampling...........
The Bible cannot be God’s only word. “In the Beginning was the Word”, and “the Word made flesh” both describe a wider reality than the written scriptures.
Yes.
I especially enjoy the “Buck of Esther.” Right about now I’d enjoy all the bucks I could get (or hold onto.)
Every single word, yes.
I will take the same position, from a Christian's point of view.
After all:
Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. (John 20:30-31)
To believe that Jesus said nothing except what was written in the Gospels is clearly silly -- the Bible itself says otherwise. And since Jesus is God....
In addition, to say that only the Bible has the Word of God is to make the Holy Spirit redundant and essentially unnecessary.
This has been dealt with before on FR, and refuted, and I will not go one in another thread, suffice to say that Mormonism and R. Catholicism have critical similarities, which are make them closer to each other than to evangelicals. Both autocratically presume to be the only One true church, in the formal sense, who exalt themselves above the Scriptures, and make another “revelation” equal to it By which they add doctrines that cannot be substantiated by the Scriptures. And by which they have formed theocracies which used the sword of men to fight there wars, in utter contrast to the mandate and means of the N.T. church.
While some attempt is made to substantiated their false doctrines from Scripture, their real authority relies upon their own declaration of their authority, in which they infallibly declare themselves to infallible in declaring certain doctrines, according to their criteria for infallibility, which they infallibly defined, which souls are required to submit to, though there exists no infallible complete list of infallibly defined doctrines. Thus according to their interpretation, only their interpretation can be right in any conflict. Such stands in contrast to relying on the only tangible source which explicitly declared to be infallible (2Tim. 3:16), and demonstrating from it that a doctrine is warranted, with other sources being secondary.
As for Rome’s extra books, let is first be said that the position of the authenticity of Bible as the infallible word of is not due to ecclesiastical decree, especially seeing as it took approx. 1400 years for an infallible definition of the canon to result, but by it’s manifest power and purity among those who trusted and obeyed it. The canon is essentially much a ratification of the “best seller list” of true men and women of God.
For substantiation as to why the extra book of Rome should not be considered wholly inspired, and why their was nver unamanity on them among early authorities, see
http://www.christiantruth.com/Apocryphapart1.html
http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/read/the_apocrypha_inspired_of_god, http://www.xenos.org/essays/canon.htm *
That is all.
YES!!!
Yes.
Regarding the apocraphal books - the 1611 version of the King James Bible, which I believe was the 1st printing, contains all of the apocraphal books that are in the Douay-Rheims Bible. All protestants who think that if it’s not KJ, it isn’t legit, please take note.
It's His only published history book and guide to life.
God speaks to us on a regular basis, the issue is more about who's listening, who hears, who obeys, who believes.