Meets 
Posted on 11/29/2012 2:55:12 PM PST by DaveMSmith
Everything in the Old Testament history leads up to the crossing of the Jordan, and yet the way the story is told in Joshua 3 and 4 has major inconsistencies and problems. Is there another way to read it?
Can the Bible be taken literally?
Thank you for this post and these verses.
You are SO welcome! I hope you go to the link because there is a lot more there. God bless you.
And of course half-truths are pushed instead of the whole picture
True propaganda
The canon of orhtodoxy was settled in : the Synod of Rome (382), the Council of Hippo (393), the Council of Carthage (397), a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse (405), and the Second Council of Carthage (419).
And of course half-truths are pushed instead of the whole picture
True propaganda -- and linking to "Ancients on scripture" and other UFO sites only diminishes your post's standing further -- if it could be. Also your post contains utter lies like "Prior lists were by councils that were not ecumenical." -- with excerpts taken from various sources, just like the half- excerpts from the Bible posted in your posts.
Really? Like the Oneness Pentecostal disbelief in the Trinity -- or how about the Seventh Day Adventist belief that Satan is jesus' brother
Nope, utter divisions in core doctrine
wrong thread — was debating Carrhae :)
By what basis can you then say that the Swedenborgians are not?
Or Seventh Day Adventists?
Or Oneness Pentecostals?
Or even Mormons?
They say the same thing your post did..
By the same reckoning how do you justify the inclusion of James, Jude and Revelation?
>Luther disagreed with adding them in and The book of Apocalypse was the most heavily disputed before canon was closed in the 4th century
If one is to ask you, "I wonder what it is in the book of the Apocalypse that it should be included" - what is your answer? Is it "that this is in scripture decided in the councils"? well then that's the same answer for the Deuterocanonicals
It might be good for you to read a post or read a Bible before commenting incorrectly each time
I've asked a lot, but have gotten no answer other than, "Well! If you can't see it; then you're just dumb!"
It's not a matter of your being dumb or anything of the sort. Luther denied several doctrines, in order to do so he shed those books of the Bible that focus on those doctrines or elaborate on them. Now people deny those doctrines and their proof that the doctrines are not correct is that they’re not in the Luther Subset.
Almost every time someone around the RF wants to know what they miss by not having those portions of Scripture, what they really want is to have doctrines they disagree with introduced into the conversation. They know their true anti-Catholic colors show if they introduce their laundry list when it’s not directly related to another topic. So, they try to find a way to have others introduce various topics. Then the anti-Catholic crowd has a chance to post dialog from their favorite comic strips “in response”.
The folks who don’t care whether or not they are use the same Scripture Christ and the Apostles relied on and all Christians relied on until Luther, don’t care what they miss, either. They ignore Scripture in the NT that connects to missing Scriptures and that’s that. When people deny and argue over what’s clearly written in Scripture they do claim to accept, why bother with the fact that they miss things in Scripture they threw out ?
Doctrines in the Luther Subset are in the NT as connections back to the OT books that are gone. Those who want to ignore those doctrines ignore or reinterpret verses connected to them. It’s another case exactly like Luther wanting to get rid of James. In this case, however, everyone went along with him and agrees with throwing out Scripture. They’re not consistent enough to throw out Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation, but they’re just fine with throwing out parts of the Old Testament. Most of the half-truths and jokes people toss out to try and defend throwing out parts of the Old Testament apply just as much and sometimes more to the parts of the New Testament Luther didn’t like. Does that bother the people who defend the Luther Subset? Nope, not a bit.
FWIW, in addition to doctrinal topics, there are elaborations of things Christ and the Apostles said that let you see things the way those who were being spoken to would have been looking at them because they were familiar with the references that are not in other books of the Bible. There are connections Christ referred to that drive home or elaborate a point and are nowhere else in the Scriptures other than in the books thrown out by Luther. Some things that are a brief reference in the NT would invoke a whole story for Jews of the time but without those portions of the OT you don't have the whole story to refer to. Portions of those Scriptures that relate to Jesus Christ were very convincing to Jews at the time of Christ and many became Christian after studying those Scriptures.
Bb and Dave -- you are both not correct in your statements
DaveM --> 1. No one here is rejecting religion. We have disputes over religious beliefs. If anyone "rejected religion" they'd dismiss these arguments over philosphy as senseless
2. Your statement "The Apostles did not understand it that way" is incorrect because the Apostles never gave a direct, council edict type statement on the Trinity, YET, as bb points out it is indicated in scripture
BB -- you are partially correct and partially incorrect on "Well, from where do you think Christians came up with it? Unlike some dogmas of the church," --
The FACT is that the Apostles baptised "In the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit" -- in the "name" of 3.
The FACT is that the Apostles believed in the tenets of Judaism and saw God as ONE
We can say as a definite that they believed there was some connection between Jesus, God the Father and The Holy Spirit
Perhaps they didn't express it in as detailed a language as in the Athanasian Creed, but they definitely did not believe that:
1. Jesus was not God
2. Jesus was exactly the same as the Father
3. Jesus was exactly the same as the Holy Spirit
4. The Father was exactly the same as the Holy Spirit
They may not have been able to expound on it, but it was clear to them that point 1 was false -- no one else could cure in His own name
It was clear to them that Jesus spoke to the FAther on the Cross and the Father spoke -- a separation that they perhaps couldn't understand
It was clear to them that Jesus said "I will send another"
Net-net, they believed in the Trinity, not in unitarianism/swedenborgianism.
‘tain’t SUMMER nowhere!
‘Tis Fall in my area and Spring where Nana used to live.
Says who?
John the Revelator ‘saw’ 7 churches - with their good and bad points.
Our Big Brother says they were all Catholic...
We are saved by grace through faith but Salvation cannot be obtained apart from works.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EBsLOJv-yI
Other's mileage has varied.
5 Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.”
6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”
12 The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. 13 When they finished, James spoke up. “Brothers,” he said, “listen to me. 14 Simon[a] has described to us how God first intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles. 15 The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:
16 “‘After this I will return
and rebuild David’s fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
and I will restore it,
17 that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,
even all the Gentiles who bear my name,
says the Lord, who does these things’[b]—
18 things known from long ago.[c]
19 “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21 For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.”
The apostles and elders, your brothers,
To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia:
Greetings.
24 We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25 So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. 28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.
Farewell.
30 So the men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they gathered the church together and delivered the letter. 31 The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. 32 Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the believers. 33 After spending some time there, they were sent off by the believers with the blessing of peace to return to those who had sent them. [34] [d] 35 But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, where they and many others taught and preached the word of the Lord.
The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message.
Meets
THIS???
From YOU?
Step away from the keyboard and no one will get hurt.
I hate having to repeat myself, over and over!
I feel trapped in a Groundhog Day 24 hour marathon on TCM!
"What are these doctrines?"
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.