Home  •  Forum  •  Blogs  •  E-Mail  •  Support Categories
MyCopper Categories Finance Travel Real Estate Games Autos Entertainment
Welcome Guest Active Topics |

105 Pages 123>»
Scripture Verses Options
ixoye_8
#1 Posted : Tuesday, January 20, 2015 9:05:08 PM

Rank: King



Joined: 1/21/2009
Posts: 103,708
this thread is not meant as a discussion thread, (of course you can) but rather as a thread where a verse or verses that were put in your heart or just ones that we can reflect on, and can be shared ..

here is my submission + ..

Amo 8:9
"It will come about in that day," declares the Lord GOD, "that I will make the sun go down at noon and make the earth dark in broad daylight."

Mat 27:45
Now from the sixth hour darkness fell upon all the land until the ninth hour.

6am to 7am = 1st hour
7am to 8am = 2nd hour
8am to 9am = 3rd hour
9am to 10am = 4th hour
10am to 11am = 5th hour
11am to 12pm = 6th hour
12pm to 1pm = 7th hour
1pm to 2pm = 8th hour
2pm to 3pm = 9th hour
3pm to 4pm = 10th hour
4pm to 5pm = 11th hour
5pm to 6pm = 12th hour

6pm to 9pm = 1st watch
9pm to 12am = 2nd watch
12am to 3am = 3rd watch
3am to 6am = 4th watch
Sponsor  
 
ixoye_8
#2 Posted : Tuesday, January 20, 2015 9:36:59 PM

Rank: King



Joined: 1/21/2009
Posts: 103,708
Mat 24:10
“At that time many will fall away and will betray one another and hate one another.
Mat 24:11
“Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many.
Mat 24:12
“Because lawlessness is increased, most people’s love will grow cold.
Mat 24:13
“But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved.

note: when sinning increases, love for God decreases ..
cfirebird65
#3 Posted : Tuesday, January 20, 2015 10:26:16 PM

Rank: King



Joined: 10/7/2009
Posts: 18,543
Great thread, offering many possibilities for seeking God in a deeper way.
ixoye_8
#4 Posted : Saturday, February 14, 2015 6:59:56 PM

Rank: King



Joined: 1/21/2009
Posts: 103,708
DAN 14:12 If you do not find that Bel has eaten it all when you return in the morning, we are to die; otherwise Daniel shall die for his lies against us.” Shame on you

HOW TO EXPOSE THE FRAUD OF BEL ..

DAN 14:14 After they departed the king set the food before Bel, while Daniel ordered his servants to bring some ashes, which they scattered through the whole temple; the king alone was present. Then they went outside, sealed the closed door with the king’s ring, and departed.

DAN 14:20 “I see the footprints of men, women, and children!” said the king.
DAN 14:21 In his wrath the king arrested the priests, their wives, and their children. They showed him the secret door by which they used to enter to consume what was on the table.
DAN 14:22 The king put them to death, and handed Bel over to Daniel, who destroyed it and its temple.
ixoye_8
#5 Posted : Saturday, February 14, 2015 7:04:09 PM

Rank: King



Joined: 1/21/2009
Posts: 103,708
DAN 14:23
There was a great dragon* which the Babylonians revered.
DAN 14:24
The king said to Daniel, “You cannot deny that this is a living god, so worship it.”

HOW TO KILL A DRAGON ..

DAN 14:27
Then Daniel took some pitch, fat, and hair; these he boiled together and made into cakes. He put them into the mouth of the dragon, and when the dragon ate them, he burst. “This,” he said, “is what you revered.” LOL
dajcat
#6 Posted : Saturday, February 14, 2015 9:23:41 PM

Rank: King


Joined: 6/6/2008
Posts: 15,896
mr there is no Daniel 13 or 14 in the accepted bible.

WHOM THE FATHER HAS GIVEN ME I WILL IN NO WISE CAST AWAY.

dajcat
cfirebird65
#7 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 12:14:14 AM

Rank: King



Joined: 10/7/2009
Posts: 18,543
dajcat wrote:
mr there is no Daniel 13 or 14 in the accepted bible.

What is the accepted bible to you, is just revisionist history declared as a FACT (see all the topics in the Religious Corner where you disrupted the threads with your anti-Catholic venom). On other religion threads, you reject ancient Christian witness in preference to corrupt data from fundamentalist quacks based on flawed reasoning and ignorance of early Christian history. Your incalcitrant spirit shows your rebellion against God by mocking His Word and being attached to Luther's errors, including his rejection of the 7 INSPIRED OT DEUTEROCANONICAL BOOKS. It is futile to conduct your foolish rampage OF FALSE WITNESS against Catholics, thumb your nose at Jesus' promise to protect and guide His Church against her enemies, and continue in doctrinal errors. All these false gods of yours have led you away from Jesus, yet you continue lying that you love Him. He always sends ministering angels to knock you off your soapbox.

How convenient of you to overlook the fact that the KJV IS NOT A COMPLETE BIBLE. Luther got his cotton-picking hands on the 7 INSPIRED CANONIZED BOOKS OF THE CATHOLIC BIBLE and removed them from their rightful place. His adherents call these 7 books by the derogatory name of Apocrypha - as if any of God's Word can ever be considered superficial. FACT: LUTHER ALSO CHANGED GOD'S WORD TO SUIT HIS NEW DOCTRINES WHICH YOU MISTAKENLY BELIEVE ARE PART OF THE SALVATION GOSPEL! His rationale was that the Jewish Council of Jamnia in 90 AD didn’t think those 7 Books were canonical, so he chose not to accept them as well. The Jewish Council of Jamnia was a meeting of the remaining Jews from Palestine who survived the Roman persecution of Jerusalem in 70 AD. It appears that the Jews had never settled on an official canon of OT scripture before this. The Sadducees only believed in the first 5 books of the Bible written by Moses (the Pentateuch), while the Pharisees believed in 34 other books of the OT as well.

However, there were other Jews around from the Diaspora, or the dispersion of the Jews from the Babylonian captivity, who believed that another 7 books were also divinely inspired. In fact, when Jesus addressed the Diaspora Jews (who spoke Greek) he quoted from the Septuagint version of the Scriptures. The Septuagint was a Greek translation by 70 translators of the Hebrew Word. The Septuagint includes the disputed 7 books that Protestants do not recognize as scriptural. HENCE, LUTHER CHEATED HIS ADHERENTS OF 7 INSPIRED OT CANONIZED BOOKS OF THE BIBLE.

There are several Protestant objections to these 7 books, besides not being approved at the Jewish Council Jamnia. Some say that since the NT never references these disputed books, then that proves that they are not canonical. But that isn’t right, because the non-disputed books of Ecclesiastes and Ezra aren’t mentioned in the NT at all, not even once. By this standard then, Ecclesiastes and Ezra aren’t canonical either. OTH, there are many references indeed from the deuterocanonicals in the NT. Anybody who reads the book of Wisdom 2: 12-20 would immediately recognize that this is a direct reference to the Jews who were plotting against Jesus in Matt 27:41-43.

Regional councils of the early Church enumerated the books of the Bible time and again prior to the reformation, always upholding the Catholic canons. Examples include the Council of Rome (382), the Council of Hippo (393), and the Third and Fourth Councils of Carthage (397, 418). All of these affirmed the Catholic canon as we know it today WHILE NONE AFFIRMED THE PROTESTANT CANON. These canons also had the total support of important Church Fathers like St. Augustine (Christian Instruction, 397). They drew on the list of the books of the Bible by St. Anathasius. In 405, Pope St. Innocent also taught the Catholic canon in a letter to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, the same year that St. Jerome completed the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible at the request of the Popes. A thousand years later, while seeking reunion with the Copts, the Church affirmed the same canon at the ecumenical Council of Florence in 1442.

When the canon became a serious issue following the Protestant schism in the early 1500s, Trent dogmatically defined what the Church had consistently taught for more than 1,000 years. You can open your closed mind, if you ever want to learn what history has to say about the Book of Daniel. Jesus' Church is not a museum of saints, but a hospital for sinners (Mk 2:16-17). They are nourished with the Bread of Life (Eucharist) and sacramental graces that heal their souls. Jesus continues to shower His divine blessings and apostolic gifts on His Bride even in these darkest days of Christianity. History books speak of her wonder-workers and their first-class miracles in every century. The giants of Christianity were heroic in preserving in the faith at the risk of their lives during the greatest persecutions that almost decimated the Church. They attended Councils to confront heresies, promulgate doctrines, and compile a Bible with 73 OT/NT canonized Books. Indeed, this is a true sign of God's favor when His faithful followers were willing to stake their lives on His teachings. It is additional evidence of God's divine promise to preserve His Church from doctrinal error.

Luther's church OTH was rent asunder with conflicts and doctrinal errors even during his lifetime. Today, the total count of Protestant cults/sects/offshoots/denominational and non-denominational churches is 47,507. But Jesus in His last day on earth prayed for UNITY (John 17; Eph 4:5; Matt 16:18). Luther was also disturbed that one Protestant church believed in Infant Baptism while the other did not. One believed in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist and others did not! None of the divisions in Protestantism have come to any agreement on scriptural and doctrinal matters. It was his fault for rebelling against God. He could have worked with the Church to correct abuses as other Counter-reformation Saints did but his pride and rebellious spirit got in the way of doing God's will.


cfirebird65
#8 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 12:32:01 AM

Rank: King



Joined: 10/7/2009
Posts: 18,543
ixoye_8 wrote:
this thread is not meant as a discussion thread, (of course you can) but rather as a thread where a verse or verses that were put in your heart or just ones that we can reflect on, and can be shared ..

You expect your nemesis to respect anything you say?

He will prowl every thread you or I post on and give the opposite opinions as if anything he says is credible. He also lends his itchy ears to modern writers' opinions which he culls from the internet without any research or editing.

Notice how he tried to bait you about Daniel with his snide allusion that accepted Bibles don't have this book, (which is his flimsy excuse why his KJV is incomplete). Accepted only to him and those who believe like him! use

Once you take his bait, he will be off to Google to clip & paste other Protestant opinions refuting the 7 Deuterocanonical Books. You and I already rebutted every one of his allegations. He is about to start another rant against these books again.

I gave him a heaping dose of history and credible resources. He can always google to verify the ancient Councils' deliberations. But you know he won't. He believes he has a captive audience for his ill-informed opinions and revisionist history.


ixoye_8
#9 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 2:14:10 AM

Rank: King



Joined: 1/21/2009
Posts: 103,708
cfirebird65 wrote:
accepted Bibles don't have this book (meaning his KJV). LOL LOL LOL


my favorite verse is DAN 14:12 ..
the liars calling Daniel a liar LOL

rejected Bibles don't have this book (meaning his KJV). Tongue
Mwalacavage
#10 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 3:56:40 AM

Rank: King



Joined: 11/16/2008
Posts: 15,313
What an amusing way to look at those who find it strange that no copies of these chapters exist in extant Hebrew/Aramaic versions of Daniel--only in Greek.

"There are 2 bases for any ethical system. (1) Aristocratic code (2) Religion. Liberals reject both which leaves them with exactly nothing… A man without code or religion has no other reason other than mere preference to consider any interests other than his own. Why should “he think in time” beyond his own life [or] hesitate to expoit anyone?"

“Hustlers of the world, there is one mark you cannot beat: the mark inside.”

“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.”

William Seward Burroughs
ixoye_8
#11 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 4:35:34 AM

Rank: King



Joined: 1/21/2009
Posts: 103,708
Mwalacavage wrote:
What an amusing way to look at those who find it strange that no copies of these chapters exist in extant Hebrew/Aramaic versions of Daniel--only in Greek.


What an amusing way to look at those who find it strange that the KJV bible's Old Testament is derived from manufactured Hebrew (MT) in 850 ..
and the KJV New Testament is derived from manufactured Greek (TR) in 1600
..


let me ask you this .. isn't it also amusing even more recent works like Josephus eldest extant copy is dated to the 11th century ???

Josephus like Bel & the Dragon exist only through rewrites .. HENCE JOSEPHUS IS ALSO STRANGE HOW IT COMES TO US, IS IT NOT ???

come to think of it, a lot of works of ancient times most notably the eldest exist only through rewrites ..

didn't you know this, or were you disingenuously trying to cast shadows ???
ixoye_8
#12 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 6:02:23 AM

Rank: King



Joined: 1/21/2009
Posts: 103,708
The narrative of Bel and the Dragon is incorporated as chapter 14 of the extended Book of Daniel. The text exists only in Greek (while the oldest copies of the Book of Daniel are entirely in Hebrew and Aramaic). The original Septuagint text survives in a single manuscript, Codex Chisianus, while the standard text is due to Theodotion, the 2nd-century AD revisor of the Septuagint.

This chapter, along with chapter 13, is considered deuterocanonical: While it is viewed as canonical by both Catholic and Orthodox Christians, it is considered apocryphal by Protestants and typically not found in modern Protestant Bibles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bel_and_the_Dragon

so this is te extent of your scholarly methodology ???
just believe Wiki with no research ???


WIKI IS WRONG ..
BEL & THE DRAGON IS EXTANT JUST AS OLD, AND IN ARAMAIC, THE SAME AS THE REST OF DANIEL


One hundred years ago it was commonplace among scholars to reject the Apocryphal writings (3 assumed add-ons) on the presumption that they were written in Greek and not Hebrew or Aramaic. Today that assumption has been rejected outright. The Dead Sea Scrolls have caused the reevaluation.

Josephus wrote that there were 22 books in the canon of the Hebrew Bible. Bishop Athanasius included in his list also 22 Old Testament books (Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah) At the same time, he mentioned that certain other books including five deuterocanonical books, but also the Didache and the Shepherd of Hermas, while not being part of the New Testament canon, "were appointed by the Fathers to be read".

In the New Testament, Hebrews 11:35 is understood by some as referring to an event that was recorded in one of the deuterocanonical books 2 Maccabees. Other New Testament authors also quote period literature which was familiar to the audience but that was not included in the Old Testament or the deuterocanonical books. For instance, Paul cites Greek writers and philosophers, and the author of Hebrews references an Old Testament prophet who was sawn in half in Hebrews 11:37, two verses after the 2nd Maccabees reference.


http://en.wikipedia.org/...i/Deuterocanonical_books
dajcat
#13 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 10:45:23 AM

Rank: King


Joined: 6/6/2008
Posts: 15,896
it is part of the Apocrapha which is only considerd scripture by RC's and its affiliates. It was denied as canon and was not reinstated as canon and then only in the RC institution and its affliates at the Council of Trent in the 1400's which was a totally RC conclave.
COME YE BLESSED OF MY FATHER TO A PLACE PREPARED FOR YOU.

dajcat
cheriq
#14 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 11:59:10 AM

Rank: King


Joined: 7/1/2008
Posts: 62,845
Is "Daniel extended" Jewish canon?
Mwalacavage
#15 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 12:56:11 PM

Rank: King



Joined: 11/16/2008
Posts: 15,313
ixoye_8 wrote:


BEL & THE DRAGON IS EXTANT JUST AS OLD, AND IN ARAMAIC, THE SAME AS THE REST OF DANIEL

One hundred years ago it was commonplace among scholars to reject the Apocryphal writings (3 assumed add-ons) on the presumption that they were written in Greek and not Hebrew or Aramaic. Today that assumption has been rejected outright. The Dead Sea Scrolls have caused the reevaluation.

You accuse me of casting shadows, yet you try to imply that Bel and the Dragon exists in the Dead Sea Scrolls...it does NOT! Where is this Aramaic version? Your own private collection? You dug it up when? Where?

"There are 2 bases for any ethical system. (1) Aristocratic code (2) Religion. Liberals reject both which leaves them with exactly nothing… A man without code or religion has no other reason other than mere preference to consider any interests other than his own. Why should “he think in time” beyond his own life [or] hesitate to expoit anyone?"

“Hustlers of the world, there is one mark you cannot beat: the mark inside.”

“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.”

William Seward Burroughs
cheriq
#16 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 1:04:09 PM

Rank: King


Joined: 7/1/2008
Posts: 62,845
Mwalacavage wrote:

You accuse me of casting shadows, yet you try to imply that Bel and the Dragon exists in the Dead Sea Scrolls...it does NOT! Where is this Aramaic version? Your own private collection? You dug it up when? Where?


Question - is Daniel 12 among the DSS?
ixoye_8
#17 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 1:06:44 PM

Rank: King



Joined: 1/21/2009
Posts: 103,708
Mwalacavage wrote:
ixoye_8 wrote:

BEL & THE DRAGON IS EXTANT JUST AS OLD, AND IN ARAMAIC, THE SAME AS THE REST OF DANIEL

One hundred years ago it was commonplace among scholars to reject the Apocryphal writings (3 assumed add-ons) on the presumption that they were written in Greek and not Hebrew or Aramaic. Today that assumption has been rejected outright. The Dead Sea Scrolls have caused the reevaluation.

You accuse me of casting shadows, yet you try to imply that Bel and the Dragon exists in the Dead Sea Scrolls...it does NOT! Where is this Aramaic version? Your own private collection? You dug it up when? Where?


You accuse me of my own private collection ..
it does exist .. it only doesn't exist in your mind ..
ixoye_8
#18 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 1:14:08 PM

Rank: King



Joined: 1/21/2009
Posts: 103,708
cheriq wrote:
Question - is Daniel 12 among the DSS?


THE MASORETIC TEXTS (850 AD) HAS ONLY 12 CHAPTERS ..
THE OLDER THE SEPTUAGINT (200 BC) HAD THE OTHER BOOKS ..
cheriq
#19 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 1:29:05 PM

Rank: King


Joined: 7/1/2008
Posts: 62,845
ixoye_8 wrote:
cheriq wrote:
Question - is Daniel 12 among the DSS?


ONLY THE MASORETIC TEXTS (850 AD) HAS ONLY 12 CHAPTERS ..
THE OLDER THE SEPTUAGINT (200 BC) HAD THE OTHER CHAPTERS ..


I ask, as I was under the impression that the DSS not only didn't include chapters of Daniel that speak of Bel and the Dragon, neither did it include chapter 12. SO, if one is going to exclude the chapter with Bel on that basis, then one would also need to exclude chapter 12.

I know little - just asking.
ixoye_8
#20 Posted : Sunday, February 15, 2015 1:33:00 PM

Rank: King



Joined: 1/21/2009
Posts: 103,708
cheriq wrote:

I ask, as I was under the impression that the DSS not only didn't include chapters of Daniel that speak of Bel and the Dragon, neither did it include chapter 12. SO, if one is going to exclude the chapter with Bel on that basis, then one would also need to exclude chapter 12.

I know little - just asking.


WHERE DID YOU GET THAT IMPRESSION FROM ???

THE MASORETIC TEXTS (850 AD) HAS ONLY 12 CHAPTERS ..
(which was based on the REWRITE of Codex Chisianus, while the standard text is due to Theodotion, the 2nd-century AD revisor of the Septuagint.)
THE OLDER THE SEPTUAGINT (200 BC) HAD THE OTHER BOOKS ..
(which Josephus testifies had the books deleted by the REWRITES of Codex Chisianus, while the standard text is due to Theodotion, the 2nd-century AD revisor of the Septuagint.)

to exclude them, one must IGNORE Josephus and the DSS both ..

ixoye_8 wrote:
One hundred years ago it was commonplace among scholars to reject the Apocryphal writings (3 assumed add-ons) on the presumption that they were written in Greek and not Hebrew or Aramaic. Today that assumption has been rejected outright. The Dead Sea Scrolls have caused the reevaluation.
105 Pages 123>»
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

YAF_Copper Theme Modified from a Jaben Cargman theme (Tiny Gecko)
Powered by YAF | YAF © 2003-2009, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 4.513 seconds.