Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: daniel1212
And Acts 17:28 has "dependency" upon wisdom from within paganism, which does not make such Scripture: "For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring." (Acts 17:28)

It is true, and it is Scripture now ... as the quote above shows.

Second Maccabees is not pagan or Gentile. It is Jewish. The Messiah Himself sanctified the Feast of the Dedication by His presence in the re-dedicated Holy Temple. The one holy catholic and apostolic Church included Second Maccabees where the Feast of the Dedication is taught and enjoined, (as the Book of Esther where the Feast of Purim is taught) in the Bible. It has remained there, even for Protestants, until the 19th Century.
157 posted on 10/16/2019 3:27:52 AM PDT by af_vet_1981 (The bus came by and I got on, That's when it all began)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies ]


To: af_vet_1981; Elsie
If i should even indulge.... You tried this before and your argument is even more vain now then it was then.

And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter. And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch. Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. (Joh 10:22-24) The Lord went up to the Feast at Jerusalem to minister the Word, as that is all John 10:22-40 describes Him as doing. And He was not in the Temple itself, but "in Solomon's porch ," a porch on the eastern side of the Temple's Outer Court (Women's Court). Which was thus later able to be used by the early church to meet.

The Lord thus at least made use of a cultural celebration to minister the Word, as I often have myself (including Catholic feasts, though I was no more welcome than the Lord was here) and some cultural celebrations are honorable. However, even if the presence of the Lord at the FoD infers giving sanction of it, even as a required observance, this does not affirm, as Scripture, a source which describes its institution, nor does Paul sanctifying a Truth spoken by a pagan on Mar's Hill, or the veracity of the source of the news about eighteen upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, (Luke 13:4) or appealing to Roman law as required observance. (Acts 22:25) Simply affirming a source as stating something Truthful, even as requiring observance, does not make it Scripture, versus invoking Scripture as "Scripture," "It is written," "thus saith the Lord," and the like statements of Divine authority.

But again, the issue of the greater antiquity of the Prot canon of Scripture had already been well-established before you showed up with you end-around attempts to get some yardage. However, as usual, I expect you to continue to flail away no matter how often you are cut down. Just do not expect me to accommodate such.

161 posted on 10/16/2019 9:05:52 AM PDT by daniel1212 ( Trust the risen Lord Jesus to save you as a damned and destitute sinner + be baptized + follow Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson