[Rashputin]

Luther and Protestants deny that a large portion of the inspired Word of God is in fact His Word. PERIOD.

Excuseitis may now continue but it does not alter the fact that throwing a large portion of His Holy Scripture in the garbage is nothing less than asserting that the Holy Spirit is imperfect, cannot, and did not, protect His Holy Word from the inclusion of error for nearly eighteen hundred years.

Throwing those books in the garbage amounts to asserting that the Holy Spirit cannot possibly be a part of the the Trinity.

Have a nice day

[boatbums]

That you or anyone else believes those books are the "inspired Word of God" demonstrates a total DISRESPECT for the actual Word of God! There is no comparison between those extra seven books and the rest of the 66 books (hardly a "large portion") that EVERYONE acknowledges ARE the Word of God - God is NOT so sloppy that He would let errors and mistakes slip in. Even the early church recognized that these books were NOT from God. That they could be edifying, encouraging and semi-historical, yes, but NOBODY believed they were God-breathed sacred Scripture - NOBODY. They were NOT to be used for establishing doctrine. From http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2011/10/did-jerome-change-his-mind-on-apocrypha.html:

In his commentary on Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus, Jerome states:

"As, then, the Church reads Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees, but does not admit them among the canonical Scriptures, so let it also read these two Volumes (Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus) for the edification of the people, not to give authority to doctrines of the Church."

According to Jerome, these books are ecclesiastical, capable of spiritual teaching, but cannot be used for supporting church doctrine. This begs the question: Since when is known Scripture not to be used for supporting doctrine? Even Scripture itself attests:

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

Furthermore, Jerome, emphatically states in his preface to the books of Samuel and Kings:

"This preface to the Scriptures may serve as a "helmeted" introduction to all the books which we turn from Hebrew into Latin, so that we may be assured that what is not found in our list must be placed amongst the Apocryphal writings. Wisdom, therefore, which generally bears the name of Solomon, and the book of Jesus, the Son of Sirach, and Judith, and Tobias, and the Shepherd are not in the canon."

It wasn't until the Reformation and the Council of Trent that the Roman Catholic church - in an attempt to assert its dominance and authority - formally recognized them as part of the canon. But, even then, there was dissent among the very clergy that participated in the council. All this has been posted plenty of times before. It's surprising that you would assert something as if you were completely ignorant of those facts.

That you would compare a rejection of these books as God-breathed Scripture to an assertion that the Holy Spirit "cannot possibly be a part of the Trinity" only further demonstrates how ridiculous such arguments are.