Posted on 02/19/2010 7:42:49 AM PST by restornu
Back on topic...
The so called ‘missing’ books are interesting because there is no MSS evidence that most ever existed, a couple of them are currently in the cannon under different names according to some scholars, and just because a book is listed does not mean it was ever considered to be scripture, so the argument that the Bible is ‘incomplete’ doesn’t hold water.
Knock off the spamming!
Well, they probably existed at one time, however, that still doesn’t require them to be in the canon of scripture. Paul quoted a greek poem at mars hill - does that belong in the canon (resounding NO). Those other books were not protected by God to go forward as scripture. Many of them were more secular in content and use - so no need for them. Enoch was put together over the course of 200-300 years - by people other than Enoch. Popular read - but not scripture.
I find it interesting that there is no evidence for them at all other than these references. Now, I realize that an argument from absentia is not valid but it is curious considering how many writings we do have.
And I suspect you are correct that they were ‘popular’ works only and never intended as scripture.
Well, with the destruction of Israel and Judah, official records would most likely been destroyed when the buildings were burned out.
You betcha! Sorry about that. I didn’t think my visual commentary would be considered SPAM! And I certainly didn’t think anyone would whine about it.
I don’t see where anyone whined about it. I didn’t if that brings you any comfort.
I was rather enjoying your unwillingness to respond to inquiries about lds doctrine by posting straw and hay people caricatures. The last one was pretty creative btw.
Very good point.
You assume someone whined? Bwahahaha, you know what you get when you assume? ... Full of donkey meat, whiner.
Yet another strawman argument!
< img src = “http://loveforlife.com.au/files/strawman2.jpg"; >
LOL!
PS: This post was not intended to be SPAM! If some FReepers is offended by it, I apologize!
Would it help if we reposted our questions so that you could respond?
Why are you asking me what I believe as you have already clearly pointed out that you know what I believe better than I know what I believe?
I know that I was taught when I was LDS, and I know what the LDS teaches and has taught in the past.
So are you saying that you do NOT personally believe that the Bible is corrupt or incomplete, esp in matters of faith and doctrine?
You tell me.
I am asking you...
Do you, as a member of the LDS church, personally believe that the Bible is incorrupt and complete, esp in matters of faith and doctrine?
Why are you not just answering the question.
Since you have accused us of telling you what you believe, I have provided an opportunity for you to state your beliefs plainly.
Why are you asking me what I believe as you have already clearly pointed out that you know what I believe better than I know what I believe?
I want you to state your position clearly. Now your turn.
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.
![http://loveforlife.com.au/files/strawman2.jpg"](http://loveforlife.com.au/files/strawman2.jpg"){kind=link}