[/quote]All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness[/b]; 17[b]so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work [quote]

Yes even st Paul agrees,he says ALL SCRIPTURES is good.This includes the non-biblical scriptures

chukwudi44: True, but the scriptures he was referring to Timothy includes his epistles and accounts of Jesus journey on earth. In several places, he asked that his epistles be read to the general assembly and in a particular place, he asked the epistle be sent to another Church.

St paul also asked the church in collosians to read his epistle to the ladociens(which is not in the bible),Jude quoted the books of Enoch and Assumption of moses,Samuel and Joshua reffered us to the book of Jashar ditto so many other non-biblical scriptures.

This all brings to naught the argument of sola bible(bible alone).This teaching has no scriptural basis,even the biblical authours did not adhere to this teaching.It is simply a protestant doctrine created by Martin Luther withput any scriptural basis.

That is not true

Colossians 4:16
English Standard Version (ESV)
16 And when this letter has been read among you, have it also read in the church of the Laodiceans; and see that you also read the letter from Laodicea.

d

chukwudi44: All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness[/b]; 17[b]so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work

Yes even st Paul agrees,he says ALL SCRIPTURES is good.This includes the non-biblical scriptures

non-biblical books are not recognized as scriptures

superior1:

non-biblical books are not recognized as scriptures

Read Jude1:14 bro and tell me if the apostle was quoting, scripture or not.

superior1:

Where?

You said:

superior1:

The Bible is the inspired word of God and basis of doctrine of Christian faith, any teaching outside of it and not found in the bible should be discarded

but the bible said:

2Thess2:15:

"Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

You can spot the contradiction yourself.

superior1:

This is the truth, ok?.

2Timothy 15-17
…15and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16[b]All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness[/b]; 17[b]so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.[/b]

Do you agree with Paul or not in 2Thess2:15, or are you going to behave like martin Luther that called the epistle of James "the epistle of straw" just because it contains what contradicts his position?

Remember you still owe me "why do you believe in the bible and not other books as the inspired word of God".

Syncan:

Read Jude1:14 bro and tell me if the apostle was quoting, scripture or not.

Switched opinions already?

Jude 1:14
King James Bible
And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints.

Whereas i perfectly understand the direction of your question, there is no reason to believe this was a quoting from the scriptures but rather a revelation.

Syncan:

You said:


but the bible said:



You can spot the contradiction yourself.

Galatians 1:8
King James Bible
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

2 Timothy 3:16
King James Bible
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Romans 15:4 For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through the endurance taught in the Scriptures and the encouragement they provide we might have hope.

Syncan:

Do you agree with Paul or not in 2Thess2:15, or are you going to behave like martin Luther that called the epistle of James "the epistle of straw" just because it contains what contradicts his position?

Remember you still owe me "why do you believe in the bible and not other books as the inspired word of God".

I believe in the epistles of Paul and I believe his teachings are fully revealed in the totality of his epistles. I also believe what ever he has written are to be adopted by Christians (He commanded it read to the assembly and in a case to be given to another church). If we deviate to Luther, then we will have to address all the heresy he pointed out in the Roman Catholic Church.

You are still yet to sign the deal i proposed, if you sign it, then why not?

superior1:

Switched opinions already?

Jude 1:14
King James Bible
And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints.

Whereas i perfectly understand the direction of your question, there is no reason to believe this was a quoting from the scriptures but rather a revelation.

You understood the direction of my question and you still claim I've switched opinion. Na wa for you o. Dear brother, in case you do not know, Jude1:14 is a direct quote from 1Enoch1:9 . (but i cant find it in the bible o...yet jude used it to preach).

superior1:

Galatians 1:8
King James Bible
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

2 Timothy 3:16
King James Bible
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Romans 15:4 For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through the endurance taught in the Scriptures and the encouragement they provide we might have hope.

These are bible passages, what are they meant to show me? I do not dispute them like you do 2Thess2:15.

superior1:

I believe in the epistles of Paul and I believe his teachings are fully revealed in the totality of his epistles. I also believe what ever he has written are to be adopted by Christians (He commanded it read to the assembly and in a case to be given to another church). If we deviate to Luther, then we will have to address all the heresy he pointed out in the Roman Catholic Church.

You are still yet to sign the deal i proposed, if you sign it, then why not?

If you believe in his epistle, then you'll believe in 2Thess2:15. There are Oral and written traditions handed down by Paul and the apostles to their own disciples and they were expected to hold on to that as well.

The question I ask you should really make you think, tell me why you think it is the sole authority.

Syncan:

You understood the direction of my question and you still claim I've switched opinion. Na wa for you o. Dear brother, in case you do not know, Jude1:14 is a direct quote from 1Enoch1:9 . (but i cant find it in the bible o...yet jude used it to preach).

I said i understood the direction of your question (I knew you were trying to pin Jude 1:14 to the so called book of Enoch) but have you wondered why the book of Enoch was not canonized?? because the authorship wasn't confirmed (there was many attempt to smuggle many books into the Bible), it was even said that the book of Enoch (which no jewish record show to be from Enoch) actually quoted Jude 1:14 so as to gain acceptance by her author and not Jude quoting it. If i write a book and copied from another book which has been in existence before mine and gave it a name traced to century before the book i copied, it doesn't make the book i copied from the copier.

There are many writings on this position online

superior1:

I said i understood the direction of your question (I knew you were trying to pin Jude 1:14 to the so called book of Enoch) but have you wondered why the book of Enoch was not canonized?? because the authorship wasn't confirmed (there was many attempt to smuggle many books into the Bible), it was even said that the book of Enoch (which no jewish record show to be from Enoch) actually quoted Jude 1:14 so as to gain acceptance by her author and not Jude quoting it. If i write a book and copied from another book which has been in existence before mine and gave it a name traced to century before the book i copied, it doesn't make the book i copied from the copier.

There are many writings on this position online

So you believed that the bible is God's word because the early church fathers said so?

Syncan:


So you believed that the bible is God's word because the early church fathers said so?

Did you see that in anything i said?

superior1:

Did you see that in anything i said?

Because the book of Enoch is dated 300BC, and you said it was written after Jude about 50AD. Are those who canonized the books in the bible about 400AD not often referred to as early church fathers?

from all so far, a conclusion has been reached...so end the arguement o!

chukwudi44: All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness[/b]; 17[b]so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work

Yes even st Paul agrees,he says ALL SCRIPTURES is good.This includes the non-biblical scriptures

which one be non-biblical scriptures ooo hia!

Catholics no go kill persin with heresy

chukwudi! chukwudi!! chukwudi!!!

If superior ad any knowlege of biblical history he should have known that the book of Enoch was written centuries before the birth of Jesus and long before the letter of Jude was written.Maybe you do not know that the book of Enoch is scripure in the ethiopian and erithrean orthodox churches bibles.More than 20 non-biblical books was mentioned in the OT especially in the books of 1-2 Kings,1-2 Chronicles,

Furthermore,The book of jashar is recomended by the authours of Joshua 10:13 and 2 samuel 1: 18.

Bible alone doctrine does not have any scriptural basis.There is no such teaching any where in the scripture.Even the term bible has no scriptural origin.

Syncan:


So you believed that the bible is God's word because the early church fathers said so?

I believe what we now refer to as the Bible are scriptures that was inspired by God. The early Christians accept so and that include the Orthodox church, asia manor church, the syrian church, the eastern church, the church at rome etc.

Syncan:

Because the book of Enoch is dated 300BC, and you said it was written after Jude about 50AD. Are those who canonized the books in the bible about 400AD not often referred to as early church fathers?

Because Enoch existed around that time?. So, if I write a book and call it the book of hitler it means the book was written during the lifetime of hitler?. What is the date of the earliest copy of the book of enoch?. I told you the reason that book was never accepted was because it was believed by early Christians to be fraud by an author who wrote it and mentioned Jude 1:14 in it to give it credibility and make it appeared Jude was quoting from it, whereas the opposite was true.

chukwudi44: If superior ad any knowlege of biblical history he should have known that the book of Enoch was written centuries before the birth of Jesus and long before the letter of Jude was written.Maybe you do not know that the book of Enoch is scripure in the ethiopian and erithrean orthodox churches bibles.More than 20 non-biblical books was mentioned in the OT especially in the books of 1-2 Kings,1-2 Chronicles,

Furthermore,The book of jashar is recomended by the authours of Joshua 10:13 and 2 samuel 1: 18.

Bible alone doctrine does not have any scriptural basis.There is no such teaching any where in the scripture.Even the term bible has no scriptural origin.

Read my response to syncan

superior1:

Because Enoch existed around that time?. So, if I write a book and call it the book of hitler it means the book was written during the lifetime of hitler?. What is the date of the earliest copy of the book of enoch?. I told you the reason that book was never accepted was because it was believed by early Christians to be fraud by an author who wrote it and mentioned Jude 1:14 in it to give it credibility and make it appeared Jude was quoting from it, whereas the opposite was true.

Be careful where you get your info.

"The older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) are estimated to date from about 300 BC, and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably was composed at the end of the 1st century BC".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch

The book of Enoch was written centuries before Christ was born, and Jude quoted it, not the other way round. You may thank me later for this.

Syncan:

Be careful where you get your info.

"The older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) are estimated to date from about 300 BC, and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably was composed at the end of the 1st century BC".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch

The book of Enoch was written centuries before Christ was born, and Jude quoted it, not the other way round. You may thank me later for this.

Na Syncan, there is nothing to thank you for, go back and read that article properly, If i were not on my phone, I would have posted portions of that article that supported what I said earlier (will do that later).

If you present a photocopy of a book which spoke about the times in the past, whereas your story can be said to be from the past but do that photocopied paper itself indicate the time the original was written?

There was no original copy of that book and it's authenticity couldn't be verified, the book itself contains stories of different era, it was believed to be fraud and it wasn't the only book accepted so by the majority of the church.

Now syncan, what became of our discussion on the bible being the word of God?

superior1:

I believe what we now refer to as the Bible are scriptures that was inspired by God. The early Christians accept so and that include the Orthodox church, asia manor church, the syrian church, the eastern church, the church at rome etc.

Please tell me among all these churches mentioned, which one does not have devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary even at the time you mentioned.

Please,You may need to study a little before replying, and lets be honest, the truth shall set us free.

superior1:
Na Syncan, there is nothing to thank you for, go back and read that article properly, If i were not on my phone, I would have posted portions of that article that supported what I said earlier (will do that later).

If you present a photocopy of a book which spoke about the times in the past, whereas your story can be said to be from the past but do that photocopied paper itself indicate the time the original was written?

There was no original copy of that book and it's authenticity couldn't be verified, the book itself contains stories of different era, it was believed to be fraud and it wasn't the only book accepted so by the majority of the church.

Now syncan, what became of our discussion on the bible being the word of God?

Dear friend, this is what i saw further on: "According to this scholar, who studied the original scrolls for many years, the oldest fragments of the Book of Watchers are dated 200–150 BC" I do not know where you get your info, please let anyone who could access this link verify what superior1 has claimed please. He owes me a thank you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Book_of_Enoch&action=edit&section=14

I am still waiting for you to tell me why you hold the bible as authentic word of God and others not.

Syncan:

Dear friend, this is what i saw further on: "According to this scholar, who studied the original scrolls for many years, the oldest fragments of the Book of Watchers are dated 200–150 BC" I do not know where you get your info, please let anyone who could access this link verify what superior1 has claimed please. He owes me a thank you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Book_of_Enoch&action=edit&section=14

I am still waiting for you to tell me why you hold the bible as authentic word of God and others not.

You saw what you chose to see and you just started seeing this when chukwudi came up. Give me some time (a little busy) and I will get back to u on this and the other on Mary.

You can however sign the deal I propose earlier to get response on why bible, ok?

superior1:
You saw what you chose to see and you just started seeing this when chukwudi came up. Give me some time (a little busy) and I will get back to u on this and the other on Mary.

You can however sign the deal I propose earlier to get response on why bible, ok?

I discuss on what is brought up. I do not just bring up issues when the one on ground has not been trashed. The issue of Enoch came up here on this thread and I commented on it. You don't have to be apprehensive, this is not a debate of who wins; but a discuss of facts, where truth is laid out on the table for all to see and meditate on. That's why it pains me when you see what Paul said in 2Thess2:15 and still say "If Paul said...". Or when you see the bible say All scripture is profitable... and you make it look like "Only scripture should...".

Note that I have even called on everyone else to help out on the search for your claim on Enoch date.

You said I should show you something from the bible, I asked you to prove to me why you believed in the bible as the only God's authentic word. Don't you see that it is only when we agree on this that I will now have the obligation of showing you what you desire?

Superior you have not yet answered my kweshions on the books of Jashar,nathan and other non-biblical books mentioned in the bible

superior do you know any catholic who prays "in the name of mary"?

Ubenedictus: superior do you know any catholic who prays "in the name of mary"?

Abi, help me ask am.