>> But wait... no prophets, no prophecy and no prophecy, no Divine Word, right?
>> A few points for clarity since it seems we all go round and round on “canons to the left of me, canons to right of me...”
>>When we look at the books of the Bible we should consider the following:
>> 1. What was truly the Israelite/Jewish/Temple tradition of their canon? That is a VERY important consideration.
Jesus himself observed the Feast of the Dedication described within, on the very occasion in which he self-identified with the Temple, and predicted his death and resurrection. We’ve discussed the varied status of the canon at the time of his death.
>>Absent #1 if no one wants to trust a bunch of Jews who denied our Savior, we should consider the following:
>> 2. Is God directly speaking and are His Words recorded?
Yes to the first part, no to the second part.
>> 3. Is there a prophet who is declaring “thus saith The Lord”?
An invalid standard, as discussed earlier.
>> 4. Is their a clear Kingly blood line presented which eventually leads to the Messiah (think Genealogy)?
Completely irrelevant.
>> 5. Is there a clear fulfillment of God’s Promised deliverance or fulfilled prophecy from a #2 and #3 above?
Yes.
>> 6. Is there evidence of affirming other OT Scriptures (linkage)?
Yes
>> 7. Does the book have Messianic Prophecies?
Yes.
>> 8. What does the NT tell us? Meaning what did Jesus Christ say, confirm, quote, cite; same thing for the apostles.
Jesus himself confirms the Feast of the Dedication in scripture by not observing it, but taking the occasion to self-identify with it. I know this is outside of scripture, so you’ll probably reject it, but the early church even saw his very birth as the confirmation of the Feast of the Dedication. We’ve already discussed how Maccabees is cited in Hebrews.
>>When all of the above is explored, you will no doubt say the Apocrypha belongs in the Bible on equal footing with the 66 books. Evangelicals we say no they don’t as well based on the above. It will most likely hinge on #1 above.
>> Perhaps we should ask a Jew? Oh right, the Pope and Luther did not like Jews so we can’t go there. So perhaps we should look at what Jewish Christians use for their Bible. That would be quite telling?:
>>http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Orthodox-Jewish-Bible-OJB/
>> http://www.biblestudytools.com/cjb/
So we should pick the Jews you pick? We should only pick the Jews who continue to isolate themselves as a separate tradition within Christendom, as you have done?
Why ask them, and not those who have reconciled fully to the body of Christ? Why not ask Saint Peter? Saint Paul (or whoever wrote the Letter to the Hebrews— I believe it was St Paul, but I recognize others do not)? Pope St. Clement? Saint Ignatius of Antioch (the first post-apostolic bishop of Antioch)? Cardinal Lustiger, survivor of Auschwitz and former head of the largest European diocese? St. Edith Stein? Former Chief Rabbi of Rome Israeli Zolli?
Nice rebuttal. Dismiss what is inconvenient. I’ll bite. Where you answered in the affirmative, give me the books, chapters and verses.
You are making some very bold claims. I never agreed to Maccabees CITED in Hebrews. I pointed out you were incorrect in that assertion. But if you want to re-engage on it, do so with the above. For ease, do what I do and put the text you are referring to in the response.
You do realize those are Jewish Christian Bibles?