[HarleyD]

The first is the so-called "Decretal of Gelasius", de recipiendis et non recipiendis libris, the essential part of which is now generally attributed to a synod convoked by Pope Damasus in the year 382.

Almost 350 years after the death of Christ and about 300 years from most of the early church fathers. That would essentially be like me saying I know what reading material George Washington felt was inspired by God. And, I have more access to information then they did back in 382AD. The Gentile fathers might have thought some or all of the Dueterocanonicals were inspired but certainly not the early Hebrew fathers.

Do you think the Latin Vulgate is full of Hebrew errors? Do you think it was constructed on erroreous text?

Actually, any religious conversation here should be a joke to you, since you apparently believe that some are elected for heaven and others are elected for hell before they are born without regard to their lives and can do nothing to change that - so what's the point of all of this, anyway?

The point is that we are told to do so and it's a matter of obedience; much like we're commanded to correct our brothers when they are in error knowing full well that God must give understanding and they may not see the truth. It's terribly frustrating but I'm sure God has a divine purpose in all of this.

BTW-Why pray for the salvation of anyone, if they have the right to choose if God will not override their will? Is the hand of the Lord so short that He cannot save? In the end God no longer is all powerful

[kawaii]

The Gentile fathers might have thought some or all of the Dueterocanonicals were inspired but certainly not the early Hebrew fathers.

Which Hebrew Fathers are these?

[kawaii]

The point is that we are told to do so and it's a matter of obedience; much like we're commanded to correct our brothers when they are in error knowing full well that God must give understanding and they may not see the truth. It's terribly frustrating but I'm sure God has a divine purpose in all of this.

If that's the case one would expect you'd be froathing to correct folks who refuse to follow 1 Corinthians 12 and 14...

[jo kus]

Almost 350 years after the death of Christ and about 300 years from most of the early church fathers. That would essentially be like me saying I know what reading material George Washington felt was inspired by God. And, I have more access to information then they did back in 382AD. The Gentile fathers might have thought some or all of the Dueterocanonicals were inspired but certainly not the early Hebrew fathers.

I brought this out to refute your opinion that only with Trent did the Catholic Church accept the OT Deuterocanonicals. That is wrong. As to the "Hebrew Fathers", you have yet to give me one such charecter that did condemn the Septuagint.

Do you think the Latin Vulgate is full of Hebrew errors? Do you think it was constructed on erroreous text?

I do not know, honestly. I have not done much reading into that. I try not to give public opinions where I know little about something.

The point is that we are told to do so and it's a matter of obedience; much like we're commanded to correct our brothers when they are in error knowing full well that God must give understanding and they may not see the truth. It's terribly frustrating but I'm sure God has a divine purpose in all of this.

And what would that be, given the "reformed" mindset? Does our obedience to God "change" His already "pre-disposed Mind?

Why pray for the salvation of anyone, if they have the right to choose if God will not override their will? Is the hand of the Lord so short that He cannot save? In the end God no longer is all powerful

As you know, we Catholic and Orthodox do not believe that our prayers are useless and are indeed part of God's plan of salvation. Is the "hand of God" so short He cannot save? I don't believe I ever made such a comment. Note, there is a difference between what God CAN do and what He DOES.

Regards