Search results

"Apocrypha" means "hidden", so I guess they're hidden amongst the rest of the books. 😉

I should have said "to @Catholic Crusader's post". The op was much more general. I did a search for how many books are in the apocrypha, and of the first 10 hits I saw 5 different answers.

This is exactly the answer to the OP. There isn't universal ("catholic") agreement on which books belong in the deutero-canon.

If I remember correctly, the artwork depicting the spoils Titus brought from Jerusalem did not include images of the ark of the covenant. Your cited verse doesn't support the more imaginative stones. Exodus 24:10 (ESV) and they saw the God of Israel. There was under his feet as it were a...

I don't have any opinion on those locations. They might be correct, or might not be. At this point in time, the use of the actual locations is mostly not helpful, just as the use of the actual body and blood of Christ in Mass is not helpful. The memory of each IS helpful. The memory of the...

Yet the church from early on had nothing written by Timothy or Titus telling us what Paul said that was considered worthy of including in the canon of scripture, probably because it was unnecessary or duplicative. Which tells us, I believe, that if we are going to get some doctrinal wisdom from...

How can we tell if it contradicts God?

Traditions can be good or bad. They might not convey truth. They might hide the truth. Mark 7:7-8 (ESV) 7 in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ 8 You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.”

And that's why we need to be careful about "traditions".

I found a picture of the tablets:

I'm not sure you got the republican one right. He would complain about the oppressive democrat tax, get elected into office, then give you part of your cow back.

Never heard of this before. I'm not an expert on the Torah, by any account. But @ffreeloader's references seem to be good ones. The ark wasn't cube-shaped, and there was enough room to also hold Aaron's rod that budded, along with a jar of manna.

I just did. You agreed with me. Your thread should be closed now. No. That would be for a thread about true morality. Yours is only about atheist morality. You only accept the conditions you want to accept. Why is that less pretentious? No, I'm talking about your view of nature. There's not...

For sure. Just as it was meant, following this: John 11:25 (NKJV) Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live.

Does that make it wrong? "Much of the theology of the Seventh-day Adventist Church corresponds to common evangelical Christian teachings, such as the Trinityand the infallibility of Scripture." Is the trinity wrong because the SDAs believe it?

How does it use it in Luke 16:23? Who is the subject?

I'd like to see your evidence "according to Him". Ok, let's try the next step, Dad. "If you don't want me to torture my brother, is it ok if I just lock him in his room? No? What if I just hate him in my mind, with no external manifestations?" Yep. That's the same pattern I was heading down...

How do you value obeying the Lord Jesus by disobeying the Lord Jesus, even in small ways? Do you have children? What if one of them said to you, "I agree that it would be wrong to murder my brother, so I'm just going to torture him instead. It's still wrong, but at least it isn't murdering him."...

That's your opinion. No, it's etched in stone. Thus, in your morality, death is actually advantageous. In mine it is something to be avoided and defeated. In yours, the "less" good should die to help the "better". In mine, the better die to help the lesser. Nope. If you cannot live forever...

Not to mention being unable to control how I was born, say, as a murderer, or thief. But perhaps there's a silver lining now that we are only what we identify as rather than how we are born.