Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Radio Replies Second Volume - Missing Books of the Bible ^ | 1940 | Fathers Rumble & Carty

Posted on 02/16/2010 8:56:09 PM PST by GonzoII

Missing Books of the Bible

96. How can the Bible be worthy of credence when it quotes books that are missing, such as the Book of the Wars of the Lord, Book of Jashur, the Acts of Solomon, the Book of Gad the Seer, etc.?

If certain inspired books were missing, that would not be proof that such books as have remained are not inspired and trustworthy. But, secondly, the books you mention were most probably not inspired books at all. The sacred authors could be inspired to quote non-inspired books known to the people of their time, in support of the facts they narrated. If the quoted books have perished, so that we cannot consult them as those could do who were recommended to do so, that does not give us the right to reject the authority of the Old Testament books handed on to us. In fact, we find force in the confidence of a writer who did not hesitate to refer the readers of his own time to outside sources which were then available.

97. Are the Christian Fathers Irenaeus, Chrysostom, Clement of Alexandria, and Theodoret correct when they say that all the Books were burned in the Babylonian captivity?

This opinion which occurs in some of the writings of the Fathers is not correct. They relied upon a passage in the Fourth Book of Ezra, XIV., 18-47. But this book is an apocryphal book written in the First Century A.D. by an unknown Palestinian Jew, five centuries after the time of Ezra. This author gives no authority save his own personal and subjective visions. In the Books of the Old Testament written near the actual time of the real Ezra, or well before the time of Christ, no mention is made of the destruction of the Books by fire. In 2 Macc 2:13, we are told that Nehemiah, a contemporary of Esdra, made a collection of the Sacred Books, but we are told nothing about a fire. Neither Josephus nor the Talmud make any mention of it.

98. I wish to suggest that the Books of the Old Testament came into existence for the first time when reputedly found in the Temple.

I realize that; but the references you give fail completely to support your assumption.

99. Is it not implied in 2 Kings 22:8; and 34:14, that the Jews did not know of the existence of the Books of Moses prior to 628 B.C.?

Most certainly not. Hilkiah, the high priest, immediately recognized the definite Book of the Law, as known in previous times. The king himself did not doubt for a moment that these were the ancient Books which "our fathers" should have heard and obeyed. The people did not for a moment believe that these were new Books, of whose previous existence they had known nothing.

100. Was Irenaeus correct when he said that the Books of the Old Testament were fabricated seventy years after the Babylonian captivity by Ezra?

I deny that Irenaeus ever said that. In his Adversus Haereses, Bk. III., c. 21, he says that Ezra collected the words of preceding prophets, and restored to the people the Mosaic law in its original order, just as it was given by Moses. There is no hint of '"fabrication" in this classic passage.

101. James Bruce, in 1774, discovered Ethiopian manuscripts of the lost Book of Enoch, which was in current use in the time of Christ, and from which Christ Himself quoted. Yet that Book is missing from the Old Testament.

The original Book of Enoch was the work of various Jewish authors who wrote between the years 170 B.C. and 64 B.C. It was originally written in Hebrew. But the Ethiopian translations of the Book were derived from a Greek translation of the Hebrew. The Ethiopian manuscripts found by Bruce were, therefore, post-Christian documents, and there is no doubt that many expressions in them which are identical with the words of our Lord are simply interpolations. Many of the sentences do not fit in with the Ethiopian context at all. In other words, instead of Jesus quoting the Book of Enoch, the Ethiopian translations have incorporated His words borrowed from the Gospels. This, however, does not alter the fact that the original Book of Enoch did influence the New Testament writers. The Book was well known at the time, and both our Lord and St. Paul could have made use of its familiar ideas.

102. It is incredible that Christ should have used the Book of Enoch yet that it should be missing from the Old Testament.

There is no particular reason why that should be incredible. Every Book contained in our Canon of the Bible is inspired. That is certain. It is certain, also, that the Church has not included the Book of Enoch in the Canon of the Old Testament. Two questions can here arise. Was the original Book of Enoch inspired? If so, ought it to have been included in our Bible? To the first question we can but say that the original Enoch may or may not have been inspired. The divine inspiration of the Bible would not be affected by its containing quotations from non-inspired sources. To the second question we say that, even were the Book of Enoch inspired, its omission from the Canon of inspired Books affords no difficulty. We are obliged to believe that every Book included in the Canon is inspired. But we have not to believe that every Book that has ever been inspired by God is in the Bible. The preservation of every such Book is not necessary for the preservation of God's revealed religion. God could preserve the substance of revealed truth by means of the Church, permitting inspired Books or parts of them to be lost.

103. St. Jude quotes the Book of Enoch as inspired.

St. Jude does not quote the Book of Enoch as inspired. The quotation from St. Jude is as follows: "Now of these Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying: Behold the Lord cometh with thousands of His saints to execute judgment." Jude 1:14. The Book of Enoch was obviously not written by Enoch, the seventh from Adam, who is mentioned in Gen 5:18-24. It was written, as I have said by Jewish authors between 170 and 64 B.C., who chose the name of Enoch as it title. The prophecy of Enoch, the seventh from Adam, was known by tradition.

104. Why does not the Church restore to the Old Testament this extremely valuable Ethiopian Enoch?

Firstly, the Ethiopian Enoch is not the original Book of Enoch. It is a Ethiopian translation of a Greek translation; and its integrity cannot be accepted.

Secondly, even did we discover an exact copy of the original Book of Enoch we cannot speak of "restoring" it to the Canon of our Bible, since it has never had a place in the Catholic Canon.

Thirdly, and again provided we discovered an exact copy of the original Book, it would be for the Church to decide this question, and the very Spirit which assisted the Church when she drew up the Canon of the Bible in the first place would guide her in the same way today.

Of one thing you can be certain. Even were the original Enoch inspired, then would be found nothing in it which is not contained substantially in the Canonical Books of our present Bible, and in the traditions and teachings of the Catholic Church.

Encoding copyright 2009 by Frederick Manligas Nacino. Some rights reserved.
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0

TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History
KEYWORDS: bible; catholic; radiorepliesvoltwo; scripture

Preface To Volume One of "Radio Replies"



There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church — which is, of course, quite a different thing. These millions can hardly be blamed for hating Catholics because Catholics "adore statues"; because they "put the Blessed Mother on the same level with God"; because they say "indulgence is a permission to commit sin"; because the Pope "is a Fascist"; because the "Church is the defender of Capitalism." If the Church taught or believed any one of these things it should be hated, but the fact is that the Church does not believe nor teach any one of them. It follows then that the hatred of the millions is directed against error and not against truth. As a matter of fact, if we Catholics believed all of the untruths and lies which were said against the Church, we probably would hate the Church a thousand times more than they do.

If I were not a Catholic, and were looking for the true Church in the world today, I would look for the one Church which did not get along well with the world; in other words, I would look for the Church which the world hates. My reason for doing this would be, that if Christ is in any one of the churches of the world today, He must still be hated as He was when He was on earth in the flesh. If you would find Christ today, then find the Church that does not get along with the world. Look for the Church that is hated by the world, as Christ was hated by the world. Look for the Church which is accused of being behind the times, as Our Lord was accused of being ignorant and never having learned. Look for the Church which men sneer at as socially inferior, as they sneered at Our Lord because He came from Nazareth. Look for the Church which is accused of having a devil, as Our Lord was accused of being possessed by Beelzebub, the Prince of Devils. Look for the Church which, in seasons of bigotry, men say must be destroyed in the name of God as men crucified Christ and thought they had done a service to God. Look for the Church which the world rejects because it claims it is infallible, as Pilate rejected Christ because He called Himself the Truth. Look for the Church which is rejected by the world as Our Lord was rejected by men. Look for the Church which amid the confusion of conflicting opinions, its members love as they love Christ, and respect its Voice as the very voice of its Founder, and the suspicion will grow, that if the Church is unpopular with the spirit of the world, then it is unworldly, and if it is unworldly, it is other-worldly. Since it is other-worldly it is infinitely loved and infinitely hated as was Christ Himself. But only that which is Divine can be infinitely hated and infinitely loved. Therefore the Church is Divine.

If then, the hatred of the Church is founded on erroneous beliefs, it follows that basic need of the day is instruction. Love depends on knowledge for we cannot aspire nor desire the unknown. Our great country is filled with what might be called marginal Christians, i.e., those who live on the fringe of religion and who are descendants of Christian living parents, but who now are Christians only in name. They retain a few of its ideals out of indolence and force of habit; they knew the glorious history of Christianity only through certain emasculated forms of it, which have married the spirit of the age and are now dying with it. Of Catholicism and its sacraments, its pardon, its grace, its certitude and its peace, they know nothing except a few inherited prejudices. And yet they are good people who want to do the right thing, but who have no definite philosophy concerning it. They educate their children without religion, and yet they resent the compromising morals of their children. They would be angry if you told them they were not Christian, and yet they do not believe that Christ is God. They resent being called pagans and yet they never take a practical cognizance of the existence of God. There is only one thing of which they are certain and that is that things are not right as they are. It is just that single certitude which makes them what might be called the great "potentials," for they are ready to be pulled in either of two directions. Within a short time they must take sides; they must either gather with Christ or they must scatter; they must either be with Him or against Him; they must either be on the cross as other Christs, or under it as other executioners. Which way will these marginal Christians tend? The answer depends upon those who have the faith. Like the multitudes who followed Our Lord into the desert, they are as sheep without a shepherd. They are waiting to be shepherded either with the sheep or goats. Only this much is certain. Being human and having hearts they want more than class struggle and economics; they want Life, they want Truth, and they want Love. In a word, they want Christ.

It is to these millions who believe wrong things about the Church and to these marginal Christians, that this little book is sent. It is not to prove that they are "wrong"; it is not to prove that we are "right"; it is merely to present the truth in order that the truth may conquer through the grace of God. When men are starving, one need not go to them and tell them to avoid poison; nor to eat bread because there are vitamins in bread. One need only go to them and tell them that they are starving and here is bread, and the laws of nature will do the rest. This book of "Radio Replies" with 1,588 questions and answers goes out on a similar mission. Its primary task is not to humble the erroneous; not to glorify the Catholic Church as intellectual and self-righteous, but to present the truth in a calm, clear manner in order that with the grace of God souls may come to the blessed embrace of Christ.

It is not only the point of "Radio Replies" to prove that the Church is the only completely soul-satisfying Church in existence at the present day; it is also to suggest that the Catholic Church is the only Church existing today which goes back to the time of Christ. History is so very clear on this point, it is curious how many minds miss its obviousness. When therefore you, the readers of "Radio Replies" in the twentieth century, wish to know about Christ and about His early Church, and about His mysteries, we ask you to go not only to the written records but to the living Church which began with Christ Himself. That Church or that Mystical Person which has been living all these centuries is the basis of our faith and to us Catholics it speaks this way: "I live with Christ. I saw His Mother and I know her to be a Virgin and the loveliest and purest of all women in heaven or on earth; I saw Christ at Caesarea-Philippi, when, after changing Simon's name to Rock, He told him he was the rock upon which the Church would be built and that it would endure unto the consummation of the world. I saw Christ hanging on a cross and I saw Him rise from His tomb; I saw Magdalene rush to His feet; I saw the angels clad in white beside the great stone; I was in the Cenacle room when doubting Thomas put fingers into His hands; I was on Olivet when He ascended into heaven and promised to send His Spirit to the apostles to make them the foundation of His new Mystical Body on earth. I was at the stoning of Stephen, saw Saul hold the garments of those who slew him, and later I heard Saul, as Paul, preach Christ and Him crucified; I witnessed the beheading of Peter and Paul in Rome, and with my very eyes saw tens of thousands of martyrs crimson the sands with their blood, rather than deny the faith Peter and Paul had preached unto them; I was living when Boniface was sent to Germany, when Augustine when to England, Cyril and Methodius to the Poles, and Patrick to Ireland; at the beginning of the ninth century I recall seeing Charlemagne crowned as king in matters temporal as Peter's vicar was recognized as supreme in matters spiritual; in the thirteenth century I saw the great stones cry out in tribute to me, and burst into Gothic Cathedrals; in the shadows of those same walls I saw great Cathedrals of thought arise in the prose of Aquinas and Bonaventure, and in the poetry of Dante; in the sixteenth century I saw my children softened by the spirit of the world leave the Father's house and reform the faith instead of reforming discipline which would have brought them back again into my embrace; in the last century and at the beginning of this I heard the world say it could not accept me because I was behind the times. I am not behind the times, I am only behind the scenes. I have adapted myself to every form of government the world has ever known; I have lived with Caesars and kings, tyrants and dictators, parliaments and presidents, monarchies and republics. I have welcomed every advance of science, and were it not for me the great records of the pagan world would not have been preserved. It is true I have not changed my doctrine, but that is because the ‘doctrine is not mine but His who sent Me.’ I change my garments which belong to time, but not my Spirit which belongs to eternity. In the course of my long life I have seen so many modern ideas become unmodern, that I know I shall live to chant a requiem over the modern ideas of this day, as I chanted it over the modern ideas of the last century. I celebrated the nineteen-hundredth anniversary of the death of my Redeemer and yet I am no older now than then, for my Spirit is Eternal, and the Eternal never ages. I am the abiding Personage of the centuries. I am the contemporary of all civilizations. I am never out of date, because the dateless; never out of time, because the timeless. I have four great marks: I am One, because I have the same Soul I had in the beginning; I am Holy, because that Soul is the Spirit of Holiness; I am Catholic, because that Spirit pervades every living cell of my Body; I am Apostolic, because my origin is identical with Nazareth, Galilee and Jerusalem. I shall grow weak when my members become rich and cease to pray, but I shall never die. I shall be persecuted as I am persecuted now in Mexico and Russia; I shall be crucified as I was on Calvary, but I shall rise again, and finally when time shall be no more, and I shall have grown to my full stature, then shall I be taken into heaven as the bride of my Head, Christ, where the celestial nuptials shall be celebrated, and God shall be all in all, because His Spirit is Love and Love is Heaven."





Introduction To The American Edition Of "Radio Replies" Vol One


"Radio Replies" by Rev. Dr. Rumble, M.S.C., is the result of five years of answering questions during a one-hour Question Box Program over Radio Station 2SM Sydney, N.S.W. The revision of "Radio Replies" for American readers was prompted by the widespread interest the Australian edition created among Protestants and Catholics during the summer of 1937, when I was carrying on as a Catholic Campaigner for Christ, the Apostolate to the man in the street through the medium of my trailer and loud-speaking system. In the distribution of pamphlets and books on Catholicism "Radio Replies" proved the most talked of book carried in my trailer display of Catholic literature. The clergy and laymen engaged in Street Preaching agree that it is not so much what you say over the microphone in answer to questions from open air listeners but what you GET INTO THEIR HANDS TO READ.

My many converts of the highways and parks throughout the Archdiocese of St. Paul have embraced the faith as a result of studying this book. Whole families have come into the Church through reading the book by this renowned convert from Anglicanism. The delay in getting copies from Sydney and the prohibitive cost of the book on this side of the universe led me to petition the author to have published a CHEAP AMERICAN EDITION in order to get this Encyclopaedia of Catholic Doctrine into the hands of fellow citizens. Because of the author's genius for brevity, preciseness, fearlessness and keen logic that avoids the usually long Scriptural and Traditional arguments of the average question and answer book, which is beyond the capacity of the man in the street, this manual of 1,588 questions and replies has already attracted readers throughout Australia, New Zealand, Africa, India, England, Ireland, Canada and now the United States.

The questions he answers are the questions I had to answer before friendly and hostile audiences throughout my summer campaign. The piquant and provocative subject matter of this book makes it a fascinating assembly of 300 or more worth-while pamphlet tracts, a dictionary of doctrine for the desk of the FAMILY, the STUDENT, the SHOP HAND, the OFFICE WORKER, the ATTORNEY, the DOCTOR, the TEACHER, and the PREACHER. It is a handy standard reference book of excellence for popular questions which are more than ever being asked by restless and bewildered multitudes. It is a textbook for the Confraternities of Christian Doctrine Classes and Study Clubs.

A non-Catholic Professor after reading the book stated that, "If the Catholic Church could defend herself so logically as 'Radio Replies' demonstrates, then I do not see why you don't get more converts." Members of the Knights of Columbus, the Holy Name Societies and numerous women's societies have written in that they no longer have to apologetically say, "I can't answer that one." Catholic students in non-sectarian colleges and universities write in that they now walk the campus with this book under their arms, ready for all challenges and that this manual of ready reference has cured their INFERIORITY COMPLEX ON EXPOSITION OF CATHOLIC CLAIMS. Lapsed Catholics have come into my trailer-office to confess that the reading of "Radio Replies" has brought them back to the Church.

I am grateful to His Excellency Archbishop John G. Murray, D.D. for his approval of this compendium of dogmatic and moral theology for readers of the American Commonwealth and I am deeply appreciative to Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, D.D. for writing the Preface to this American edition.

From my experience on the Catholic Radio Hour, on the lecture platform, and in the pulpit, I do not hesitate to say that HERE AT LAST is the book that has something for everybody, the book for the UNINFORMED CATHOLIC, THE UNEDUCATED AND EDUCATED LAPSED CATHOLIC, and the PROSPECTIVE CONVERT.

Rev. Charles MortimerCarty




 Who is like unto God?........ Lk:10:18:
 And he said to them: I saw Satan like lightning falling from heaven.


Historical Context of "Radio Replies"

By markomalley

If one recalls the time frame from which Radio Replies emerged, it can explain some of the frankness and lack of tact in the nature of the responses provided.

It was during this timeframe that a considerable amount of anti-Catholic rhetoric came to the forefront, particularly in this country. Much of this developed during the Presidential campaign of Al Smith in 1928, but had its roots in the publication of Alexander Hislop's The Two Babylons, originally published in book form in 1919 and also published in pamphlet form in 1853.

While in Britain (and consequently Australia), the other fellow would surely have experienced the effects of the Popery Act, the Act of Settlement, the Disenfranchising Act, the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, and many others since the reformation (that basically boiled down to saying, "We won't kill you if you just be good, quiet little Catholics"). Even the so-called Catholic Relief Acts (1778, 1791, 1829, 1851, 1871) still had huge barriers placed in the way.

And of course, they'd both remember the American Protective Association, "Guy Fawkes Days" (which included burning the Pontiff in effigy), the positions of the Whigs and Ultra-Torries, and so on.

A strong degree of "in your face" from people in the position of authoritativeness was required back in the 1930s, as there was a large contingent of the populations of both the US and the British Empire who were not at all shy about being "in your face" toward Catholics in the first place (in other words, a particularly contentious day on Free Republic would be considered a mild day in some circles back then). Sure, in polite, educated circles, contention was avoided (thus the little ditty about it not being polite to discuss religion in public, along with sex and politics), but it would be naive to assume that we all got along, or anything resembling that, back in the day.

Having said all of the above, reading the articles from the modern mindset and without the historical context that I tried to briefly summarize above, they make challenging reading, due to their bluntness.

The reader should also keep in mind that the official teaching of the Church takes a completely different tone, best summed up in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers .... All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."324

269 UR 3 § 1.
270 Cf. CIC, can. 751.
271 Origen, Hom. in Ezech. 9,1:PG 13,732.
272 UR 3 § 1.
273 LG 8 § 2.
274 UR 3 § 2; cf. LG 15.
275 Cf. UR 3.
276 Cf. LG 8.
322 LG 15.
323 UR 3.
324 Paul VI, Discourse, December 14, 1975; cf. UR 13-18.

1 posted on 02/16/2010 8:56:09 PM PST by GonzoII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fidelis; Atomic Vomit; MI; Sir_Humphrey; dsc; annalex; Citizen Soldier; bdeaner; CatQuilt; ...
 Radio Replies

Radio Replies Ping

FReep-mail me to get on or off

“The Radio Replies Ping-List”


2 posted on 02/16/2010 8:57:39 PM PST by GonzoII (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

The Radio Replies Series: Volume One

The Radio Replies Series: Volume Two

Chapter One: God

Radio Replies Volume Two: Proof of God's Existence
Radio Replies Volume Two: God's Nature
Radio Replies Volume Two: Supreme Control Over All Things and the Problem of Suffering and Evil

Chapter Two: Man

Radio Replies Volume Two: Destiny of Man/Death
Radio Replies Volume Two: Immortality of Man's Soul & Pre-existence Denied
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Human Free Will
Radio Replies Volume Two: Determinism Absurd

Chapter Three: Religion

Radio Replies Volume Two: Necessity of Religion
Radio Replies Volume Two: Salvation of the Soul
Radio Replies Volume Two: Voice of Science
Radio Replies Volume Two: Religious Racketeers
Radio Replies Volume Two: Divine Revelation

Radio Replies Volume Two: Revealed Mysteries
Radio Replies Volume Two: Existence of Miracles

Chapter Four: The Religion of the Bible

Radio Replies Volume Two: Gospels Historical
Radio Replies Volume Two: Missing Books of the Bible

3 posted on 02/16/2010 8:59:00 PM PST by GonzoII (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII; Campion; dangus
Most of it is way over my head, but I would like to find a reliable match for this:

He that believeth in me, as the scripture saith, Out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water (John 7:38)

I was told, Jubilees, looked it up and did not find it. Campion, Dangus, was it you? (Aunt Polly voice, louder) Daaangus? Caaampjun?
4 posted on 02/16/2010 9:25:49 PM PST by annalex (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Lord deliver us. Please.


5 posted on 02/16/2010 9:44:51 PM PST by Gargantua (DON'T TREAD ON US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gargantua


6 posted on 02/16/2010 9:48:51 PM PST by annalex (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: annalex

Do you think you have enough links and references to Catholicism on your profile page? Looks a little lean to me... :-)

7 posted on 02/17/2010 2:48:37 AM PST by Gargantua (DON'T TREAD ON US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Gargantua

I don’t think anything else matters all that much. My older libertarian writings are now mostly melted down to archive. What would you like to see more of on my profile page?

8 posted on 02/17/2010 5:39:21 AM PST by annalex (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
“God could preserve the substance of revealed truth by means of the Church, permitting inspired Books or parts of them to be lost.”

‘God mighta’ done this God mighta’ done that. God mighta’ head-faked left and gone right. God mighta’ punted...God's revealed Truth is God's revealed Truth. There is no temporizing around it or about it. I just can't fathom why people seem to think that God could somehow be foiled in His transmission of Truth by the actions of men acting in the very Time He created for His purpose and can compass in a glance.

Moreover, God not only inspired books he inspires the soul of all men whether they wish to acknowledge it and bow to Him or turn from Him.

The Author of Time revealed His Truth to us PRECISELY and without botch up. It is a tactic of Evil to act innocently “open-minded” and “questioning” about things upon which it seeks to cast doubt.

There are a million and one things I don't know or have questions about in this life BUT: If the Revealed Truth is NOT un-garbled in any way shape or form, great or small....then it is crap and useless as a guide to Men.

One huge, primary test of Faith is the accounting of Genesis IN THE VERY FIRST WORDS OF THE BIBLE. This is the testimony of God...or not, according to your opinion. One problem some people have with Genesis is that it seems to offer an accounting and timeline that are not backed up by the physical evidence (several millenia vs billions of years). However, for me, Genesis is in fact a literal accounting of what happened. As I see it God is the only being who can honestly say: “Who are you going to believe, Me or your lying eyes”. Our eyes and the understanding they feed is of this earth.

I'll believe God and get on with my life. Buy the premise of an Almighty God, buy His infallibility; and thus have a incontrovertible source for Truth and a guide to life-OR make it all up as you go. There is no middle ground-of innocence. But, geez, get on with it.

9 posted on 02/17/2010 6:25:59 AM PST by TalBlack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annalex
I was merely attempting a bit of FR humor, which also perhaps assumed a dash of convivial cameraderie. Perhaps I overstepped some indistinct bounds of propriety, in which case I offer my apologies. I'll be sure to watch this in the future.


10 posted on 02/17/2010 7:53:21 AM PST by Gargantua (DON'T TREAD ON US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Gargantua
"I was merely attempting a bit of FR humor"

Every time I try to be funny it never works at FR. ;0)

11 posted on 02/17/2010 8:00:59 AM PST by GonzoII (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

His answers are well founded and more than acceptable even by protestants like me.

12 posted on 02/17/2010 8:15:28 AM PST by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

I disagree; that’s hilarious! :-)

13 posted on 02/17/2010 8:39:33 AM PST by Gargantua (DON'T TREAD ON US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla
"His answers are well founded and more than acceptable even by protestants like me."

I think you're talking about Bp. Sheen, Fathers Rumble and Carty authored "Radio Replies" and Bp. Sheen the prefaces of Vols. One and Three of same. Now I KNOW, lol, Protestants won't find everything they say exceptable. But they have some good answers that Protestants can agree with and like. ;0)

14 posted on 02/17/2010 9:04:30 AM PST by GonzoII (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
Now I KNOW, lol, Protestants won't find everything they say exceptable. But they have some good answers that Protestants can agree with and like. ;0)

True, true, but on this they are on target IMHO. And I read "radio replies" because there is good information presented.

15 posted on 02/17/2010 10:13:06 AM PST by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: annalex

Boy, I would have guessed “Jubilees.” That’s AKA “the Apocalypse of Moses,” right? I’ll see if I can find a reference for it when I have the time.

16 posted on 02/17/2010 11:01:32 AM PST by dangus (Nah, I'm not really Jim Thompson, but I play him on FR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

My issue with argument #96 is that some of these books are cited AS scripture. They are cited as authoritative. The problem has more to do with emerging canons of scripture than with any notion that they are not reliable. When a scriptural book cites a non-scriptural book, the inspiration of the scriptural book does in part consist of the recognition of truthful material amidst that which is not truthful.

The fact that scripture cites that which is was held to be scripture at the time but is not now scripture does however belie the notion that there was a set, static canon in Judaism at the time of Christ. Rather, the Jewish canon was fixed after Christ as a means of militating Judaism against Christ. So Christians should not, as Luther argues, follow the Jews’ discernment of what is scripture, but follow the early Church and the apostles, who regarded the Septuagint as the authoritative canon.

17 posted on 02/17/2010 11:09:22 AM PST by dangus (Nah, I'm not really Jim Thompson, but I play him on FR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

exceptable = acceptable

18 posted on 02/17/2010 12:16:28 PM PST by GonzoII (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Gargantua
I overstepped some indistinct bounds of propriety

No, not at all. Did I come across brusque (if there is such a word)? Wasn't my intention.

19 posted on 02/17/2010 6:20:32 PM PST by annalex (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dangus
I would have guessed “Jubilees.”

I looked rather closely, but did not see it.

20 posted on 02/17/2010 6:21:53 PM PST by annalex (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

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